Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Se está descargando tu SlideShare. ×

The perceptionofawardwinningathletesontheeffectsofcoachingandpsychologicalbehaviourontheirperformance

Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio

Eche un vistazo a continuación

1 de 8 Anuncio

Más Contenido Relacionado

Presentaciones para usted (20)

Similares a The perceptionofawardwinningathletesontheeffectsofcoachingandpsychologicalbehaviourontheirperformance (20)

Anuncio

Más reciente (20)

The perceptionofawardwinningathletesontheeffectsofcoachingandpsychologicalbehaviourontheirperformance

  1. 1. The Perception of award-winning athletes on the effects of coaching and psychological behaviour on their performance Alonzo L. Mortejo 1 College of Education, Bataan Peninsula State University, Central Luzon, Philippines Correspondence: Alonzo L Mortejo, College of Education, Bataan Peninsula State University, Central Luzon,Philippines. Tel: 63-935-0045 E-mail: almortejo@bpsu.edu.ph The Perception of award winning athletes on the Role of coaching and psychological behavior in their performance Abstract The purpose of this study is to explore the factors affecting the award-winning athlete’s perception of coaching and psychological behavior in relation to their sports performance. Study focused on 49 award winning athletes and nine coaches in select State University in the Philippines a member of State colleges and Universities Athletic Association (SCUAA). A none-experimental survey research design was employed by administrating coaching behaviour scale for sport (CBS-S) and a psychological performance inventory (PPI) . The coaching behaviour as perceived by the student athletes included coaching motivation, coaching style and communicating skills. Psychological behaviour included anxiety, mental toughness and stress. Data revealed that all the variables in coaching behaviour and mental toughness greatly affect the winning athlete’s performance in competition. Slight results differences were determined among two groups of respondents. . Under the light of the study results furtherexploration of the factors for winning should be done through qualitative design. Keywords: coaching behaviour, athletes, sport management Introduction Many factors were investigated among athletes in terms of winning in sport competition (Mata & Da Silva Gomes, 2013). While some investigations mentioned variables significantly affecting athletes performances such as home court advantage (Arruda et al., 2014) considerable amount of experiment significantly correlatingthe amount of enjoyment, effort exerted and achievement of athletes associated to coaching behavior(Wang et al 2009, . According to Bali (2014), sports performance is not simply a product of physiology (for example stress and fitness) and biomechanical (for example technique factors) but psychological factors also play a crucial role in determining performance. On the other hand, North (2017), stated that athletes perceive and interpret their athletic experience based on the leadership they receive, as well as their ability to perform well. Most people consider a coach’s primary job to be encouraging individual athletes, as well as the team. Coaches can havea huge impact on athletes’ personal lives and goals and how they perceive themselves and their community. Individual athletes look to coaches for leadership and encouragement beyond the sports environment, and this also carries over to athletic achievements. However previous studies also ask for adding psychological variables measures in the existing body of knowledge. Due to some conflicts in some studies confirmatory in the statistical results in terms of connection of coaching
  2. 2. behavior and athletes performance also emerge as one of the recent recommendation in thefield of coaching management (Aleksic Veljkovic et al., 2019) Methods This chapter presents the method of research that will be utilized in the collection, analysis,and interpretation of the data related to the study. Specifically, it includes methods and techniques of the study, population and sample, research instruments, construction and validation of the instruments, data gathering procedures and data processing and statisticaltreatment. The researchers used the quantitative method study. It involves the research forrelationships between variables through the use of various measures of statistical association. It is a procedure in which subjects’ scores on two variables are simply measured, without manipulation of any variables to determine whether there is a relationship. Population and sample of the study Table 1 Sample of the study Respondents Number Student-athletes 41 Coaches 9 Total: 50 Forty one (41) student athletes and nine (9) coaches respondents from select state university in the Philippines were selected including the 6 Arnis players, 2 Badminton players, 2 Beach Volleyball players, 2 Chess Players, 6 Dance sports players, 4 Karate do players, 1 Lawn Tennis player, 13 Swimming players, 5 Taekwondo players and 9 coaches per mentioned sport event. The research population for this study comprised team and individual sport athletes and coaches of select state university in the Philippines Purposive sampling technique was utilized in selecting the respondents. The researchers collected all of the names of coaches, elite athletes and their specific sport. The researchers utilized two sets of questionnaires. The kind of questionnaire of thepresent study is closed-ended questionnaire, five and seven Likert scale items that would provide data relevant to the question. The coaching behavior scale for sport (CBS-S) is the Coaching Model by Cote, in which he defines all important variables that affect the coaches’ work with his athletes and it has a seven likert scale items. These variables include the behaviors and strategies during training,competition and organizational settings (Cote 1999, 85.): coaching style, coaching motivation, mental toughness and communicating skill. The general weighted mean was analysed and interpreted using the seven-point Likert scale shown below: Scale Interval Descriptive Equivalent Descriptive Interpretation 7 6.17 – 7.00 Always Extremely High 6 5.31 – 6.16 Very Often High 5 4.45 - 5.30 Often Slightly High
  3. 3. 4 3.59 - 4.44 Fairly Often Moderately 3 2.73 - 3.58 Sometimes Slightly Low 2 1.87 - 2.72 Rarely Low 1 1 - 1.86 Never Extremely Low The psychological performance inventory (PPI) is the Psychological model by Golby that defines the important variables that affect the coaches’ work with his athletes. It consists ofanxiety and stress. The general weighted mean was analysed and interpreted using the five-point Likert scale shown below: Scale Interval Descriptive Equivalent Descriptive Interpretation 5 4.21 - 5.00 Almost Never Extremely Low 4 3.41 - 4.20 Seldom Low 3 2.61 - 3.40 Sometimes Moderately The significant difference between the perception of the student-athletes and coaching behavior of the coaches . Test Statisticsa Perception of the students and coaching behaviour ofthe coaches Mann-Whitney U 95.000 Exact Sig. (2-tailed) .101 The table shows the significant difference between the perception of the student-athletes in the coaching behaviour of the their coaches The statistical treatment that was used is Mann-Whitney U test with an average of .101. This only shows that there is no significant difference between the perception of the student-athletes and coaches in the coaching behavior of the trainers. Meanwhile, Veljkovic (2016), stated that the behavior of the coachdirected towards improving the performance of athletes was higher evaluated by athletes inindividual sports. This table presents the variables that are taken singly or in combination greatly affects theathletic achievement of the student-athletes. The variables that are taken singly or in combination greatly affect the athletic achievementof the student-athletes. Model Standardized Coefficients Sig. Significance
  4. 4. Beta Coaching style .331 .040 Significant Coaching motivation .033 .001 Significant Communication skills .073 .030 Significant Mental toughness .259 .029 Significant Psychological behavior -.194 .185 Not Significant The table 11 reflects that coaching style greatly affects the athletic achievement compared toother variables. The beta coefficient value of psychological behavior is not significant since its correlation is not significant. The coaching style has the highest contribution in predicting the values of the athletic achievement compared to the other given variables. According to, Defreese and Smith (2013), here is evidence to show that coaching styles andbehaviors have a strong influence on motivation and wellbeing of athletes. Studies have shown that athlete burnout is negatively related to positive social support. Discussion This chapter presents the summary of findings of the study, the conclusions that were arrived at based on the research output, as well as the recommendations forwarded in thelight of the conclusion drawn. Summary of findings The major findings of the study are summarized as follows: 1. The coaching behavior be described in terms of perception of the coaches themselvesregarding coaching motivation is “extremely high” with the grand mean of 6.5469 while students’ perception to their coaches is “high” with the grand mean of 6.0311. This only shows that there is a slight difference between how the coach perceives his coaching motivation compare to the perception of student-athletes. On the other hand, the perceptionof the coaches themselves regarding their coaching style is “extremely high” with the grand mean of 6.6339 while students’ perception regarding to their coaches is “high” with the grand mean of 5.8189. This only shows that there is a slight difference between how the coach perceives his coaching style compare to the perceptions of student- athletes. Lastly, theperception of the coaches themselves regarding their communicating skills is “slightly high” with the grand mean of 4.6154 while students’ perception to their coaches is “slightly high” with the grand mean of 5.2932. This only shows that there is no significant difference between how the coach perceives his communicating skills compare to the perceptions of student-athletes. 2. The psychological behavior be described in terms of perception of the coachesthemselves regarding anxiety is “low” with the grand mean of 3.9792 while students’
  5. 5. perception to their coaches is “moderately” with the grand mean of 3.0811. This only shows that there is a slight difference between how the coach perceives his communicating skills compare to the perceptions of student-athletes. On the other hand, the perception of the coaches themselves regarding their mental toughness is “extremely high” with the grand mean of 6.5500 while students’ perception regarding to their coaches is “high” with the grand mean of 6.1947. This only shows that there is a slight difference between how the coach perceives his mental toughness compare to the perceptions of student-athletes. Lastly,perception of the coaches themselves regarding their stress is “high” with the grand mean of4.1042 while students’ perception regarding to their coaches is “moderately” with the grandmean of 2.9385. This only shows that there is a slight difference between how the coach perceives his stress compare to the perceptions of student-athletes. This only shows that there is a slight difference between how the coach perceives his stress compare to the perceptions of student-athletes. 3. The significant difference between the perception of the student-athletes and the coaches in the coaching behavior of the trainers was tested. The statistical treatment that was used is Mann-Whitney U test with an average of .101. This only shows that there is no significant difference between the perception of the student-athletes and coaches in the coaching behaviour of the trainers. 4. The coaching style has the highest contribution in predicting the values of the athleticachievement compared to the other given variables. Therefore, it concludes that coaching style greatly affects the athletic achievement of the student-athletes compared to other variables. Recommendation In conclusion, the finding of this study suggests perceptions of award winning athletes towards their views on the role of coaching behaviour and psychological behaviour in their sports performance variables such as motivation, coaching style, and communicating skills which are all under coaching behaviour parameters significantly affected the athletes sportsperformances in playing. For psychological behaviour, perceptions also suggested that onlythe mental toughness of the winning athletes significantly influenced their performances, further exploration of other contributing factors in winning should be investigated trough qualitative approach to validate the results of this research design. References Aleksic Veljkovic, A., Herodek, K., Djurovic, D., Živkovic, M., & Arsic, N. (2019). the Impact of the Coaches’ Behavior on the Perfectionism of Athletes. 255–259. https://doi.org/10.37393/icass2019/48 Arruda, A. F. S., Aoki, M. S., Freitas, C. G., Drago, G., Oliveira, R., Crewther, B. T., & Moreira,
  6. 6. A. (2014). Influence of competition playing venue on the hormonal responses, state anxiety and perception of effort in elite basketball athletes. Physiology and Behavior, 130, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.03.007 Bali, a. (2014, june 20). psychological factors affecting sports performance. international journal of physical education, sports and health, 92. Horn. (2010, May 7). International Journal of Sports Science. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from School Of Sports Exercise and health Science: www.believeperform.com Castillo. (2014, May 3). Centry for Policy. Retrieved from Coaching Style - Centre for Policy on Ageing: www.cpa.org.uk/information/reviews/CPA-Rapid-Review-Health-Coaching- Styles.pdf Defreese, & Smith. (2013, May 13). Athlete burnout: an individual and organizational phenomenon. Retrieved from Research PUb: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281535620_Athlete_burnout_an_individual_an d_organizational_phenomenon Diangco, L.F.S., Mortejo, J.C., & Mortejo, A. (December, 2017). Towards the development of a support program for athletes. Journal of Physical Education Research, Volume 4, Issue IV, 37- 54. Pennanen. (2012, June). Frontiers in Psychology. Retrieved from NCBI: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5481396/ Rapp. (2010, february 3). Fostering Prosocial Behavior. Retrieved from Early Childhood news: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4485612/ Tanis. (2017, april 10). The effect of trait anxiety on success in individual athletes. Retrieved may 15, 2018, from dergipark.gov: dergipark.gov.tr/download/article- file/345317
  7. 7. Mata, R. T., & Da Silva Gomes, A. R. (2013). Winning or not winning: The influence on coach- athlete relationships and goal achievement. Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, 8(4), 986–995. https://doi.org/10.4100/jhse.2013.84.09 Mortejo, A. L. & Mortejo, J. C. (September, 2018). Correlates of effectiveness of sports program of state university in central, Luzon Philippines, basis for policy enhancement in collegiate sports. Journal of Physical Education Research, Volume 5, Issue III, 14- 19. Vermont, U. O. (2018, May 13). Vermont Athletic Performance. Retrieved from Athletic Performance: https://uvmathletics.com/sports/2014/8/5/ap_0805144938.aspx?path=ap Wang CKJ, Koh KT, Chatzisarantis N. An Intra-Individual Analysis of Players’ Perceived Coaching Behaviours, Psychological Needs, and Achievement Goals. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching. 2009;4(2):177-192. doi:10.1260/174795409788549472
  8. 8. View publication stats

×