essay on athletes motivation

Sports: What Motivates Athletes?

How can athletes maximize their motivation.

Posted October 30, 2009 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

• What Is Motivation?
• Take our Burnout Test
• Find a therapist near me
• Motivation in sports is important because one must work hard in the face of fatigue, boredom, and pain.
• Motivation is the only contributor to sports performance over which one has control.
• A big part of staying motivated involves generating positive emotions associated with one's efforts.

Motivation is the foundation of all athletic effort and accomplishment. Without your desire and determination to improve your sports performance, all of the other mental factors, confidence , intensity, focus, and emotions, are meaningless. To become the best athlete you can be, you must be motivated to do what it takes to maximize your ability and achieve your goals.

Motivation, simply defined, is the ability to initiate and persist in a task. To perform your best, you must want to begin the process of developing as an athlete and be willing to maintain your efforts until you have achieved your goals. Motivation in sports is so important because you must be willing to work hard in the face of fatigue, boredom , pain, and the desire to do other things. Motivation will impact everything that influences your sports performance: physical conditioning, technical and tactical training, mental preparation, and general lifestyle including sleep, diet , school or work, and relationships.

The reason motivation is so important is that it is the only contributor to sports performance over which you have control. There are three things that affect how well you perform. First, your ability, which includes your physical, technical, tactical, and mental capabilities. Because ability is something you are born with, you can't change your ability so it is outside of your control.

Second, the difficulty of the competition influences performance. Contributors to difficulty include the ability of the opponent and external factors such as an "away game" crowd and weather such as temperature, wind, and sun. You have no control over these factors.

Finally, motivation will impact performance. It is also the only factor over which you have control. Motivation will directly impact the level of success that you ultimately achieve. If you are highly motivated to improve your performance, then you will put in the time and effort necessary. Motivation will also influence the level of performance when you begin a competition. If they're competing against someone of nearly equal skill, it will not be ability that will determine the outcome. Rather, it will be the athlete who works the hardest, who doesn't give up, and who performs his or her best when it counts. In other words, the athlete who is most motivated to win.

In training and competitions, you arrive at a point at which it is no longer fun. I call this the Grind, which starts when it gets tiring, painful, and tedious. The Grind is also the point at which it really counts. The Grind is what separates successful athletes from those who don't achieve their goals. Many athletes when they reach this point either ease up or give up because it's just too darned hard. But truly motivated athletes reach the Grind and keep on going.

Many sports psychologists will say that you have to love the Grind. I say that, except for a very few hyper-motivated athletes, love isn't in the cards because there's not much to love. But how you respond to the Grind lies along a continuum. As I just mentioned, loving the Grind is rare. At the other end of the continuum is "I hate the Grind." If you feel this way, you are not likely to stay motivated. I suggest that you neither love nor hate the Grind; you just accept it as part of the deal in striving toward your goals. The Grind may not be very enjoyable, but what does feel good is seeing your hard work pay off with success.

Effort = Goals?

When I speak to groups of young athletes, I always ask how many have big goals, like going to the Olympics or playing pro ball. About 90 percent raise their hands. I then ask how many are doing everything they can to achieve their goals. Only one or two tentative hands go up. What this tells me is that there is often a big gap between the goals athletes have and the effort they are putting into those goals. It's easy to say that you want to be a successful athlete. It is much more difficult to actually make it happen. If you have this kind of disconnect, you have two choices. You can either lower goals to match your effort or you can raise your effort to match your goals. There is no right answer. But if you're truly motivated to be successful, you better make sure you're doing the work necessary to achieve your goals.

Signs of Low Motivation

There are several signs of low motivation:

• A lack of desire to practice as much as you should.
• Less than 100 percent effort in training.
• Skipping or shortening training.
• Effort that is inconsistent with your goals.

Prime motivation means putting 100 percent of your time, effort, energy, and focus into all aspects of your sport. It involves doing everything possible to become the best athlete you can be.

Prime motivation begins with what I call the three D's. The first D stands for direction . Before you can attain prime motivation, you must first consider the different directions you can go in your sport. You have three choices: stop participating completely, continue at your current level, or strive to be the best athlete you can be.

The second D represents decision . With these three choices of direction, you must select one direction in which to go. None of these directions are necessarily right or wrong, better or worse, they're simply your options. Your choice will dictate the amount of time and effort you will put into your sport and how good an athlete you will ultimately become.

The third D stands for dedication . Once you've made your decision, you must dedicate yourself to it. If your decision is to become the best athlete you can be, then this last step, dedication, will determine whether you have prime motivation. Your decision to be your best and your dedication to your sport must be top priorities. Only by being completely dedicated to your direction and decision will you ensure that you have prime motivation.

Developing Prime Motivation

Focus on your long-term goals . To be your best, you have to put a lot of time and effort into your sport. But, as I noted above, there are going to be times, the Grind, when you don't feel that motivated.

When you feel this way, focus on your long-term goals. Remind yourself why you're working so hard. Imagine exactly what you want to accomplish and tell yourself that the only way you'll be able to reach your goals is to continue to work hard.

Try to generate feelings of inspiration and pride that you will experience when you reach your goals. This technique will distract you from the discomfort of the Grind, focus you on what you want to achieve, and generate positive thoughts and emotions that will get you through the Grind.

Have a training partner . It's difficult to be highly motivated all of the time on your own. There are going to be some days when you just don't feel like getting out there. Also, no matter how hard you push yourself, you will work that much harder if you have someone pushing you. That someone can be a coach, personal trainer, or parent. But the best person to have is a regular training partner, someone at about your level of ability and with similar goals. You can work together to accomplish your goals. The chances are on any given day that one of you will be motivated. Even if you're not very psyched to practice on a particular day, you will still put in the time and effort because your partner is counting on you.

Focus on the greatest competitor . Another way to keep yourself motivated is to focus on your greatest competitor. Identify who your biggest competitor is and put his or her name or photo where you can see it every day. Ask yourself, "Am I working as hard as him/her?" Remember that only by working your hardest will you have a chance to overcome your greatest competitor.

Motivational cues . A big part of staying motivated involves generating positive emotions associated with your efforts and achieving your goals. A way to keep those feelings is with motivational cues such as inspirational phrases and photographs. If you come across a quote or a picture that moves you, place it where you can see it regularly such as in your bedroom, on your refrigerator door, or in your locker. Look at it periodically and allow yourself to experience the emotions it creates in you. These reminders and the emotions associated with them will inspire and motivate you to continue to work hard toward your goals.

Set goals . There are few things more rewarding and motivating than setting a goal, putting effort toward the goal, and achieving the goal. The sense of accomplishment and validation of the effort makes you feel good and motivates you to strive higher. It's valuable to establish clear goals of what you want to accomplish in your sport and how you will achieve those goals. Seeing that your hard work leads to progress and results should motivate you further to realize your goals.

Daily questions . Every day, you should ask yourself two questions. When you get up in the morning, ask, "What can I do today to become the best athlete I can be?" And before you go to sleep, ask, "Did I do everything possible today to become the best athlete I can be?" These two questions will remind you daily of what your goals are and will challenge you to be motivated to do your best.

The heart of motivation . A final point about motivation. The techniques I've just described are effective in increasing your short-term motivation. Motivation, though, is not something that can be given to you. Rather, motivation must ultimately come from within. You must simply want to participate in your sport. You just have to want it really bad.

Jim Taylor, Ph.D. , teaches at the University of San Francisco.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Motivation in Sports Psychology

Dwight D Eisenhower, once said that ‘motivation is the art of getting people to do what you want them to do because they want to do it’. And as Dr Costas Karageorghis explains, recent research suggests that he wasn’t far wrong. Even better, changing your attitude towards training and competition can significantly enhance motivation.

Different types of motivation

One of the most popular and widely tested approaches to motivation in sport and other achievement domains is self-determination theory 1,2,3 . This theory is based on a number of motives or regulations, which vary in terms of the degree of self-determination they reflect. Self-determination has to do with the degree to which your behaviours are chosen and self-initiated. The behavioural regulations can be placed on a self-determination continuum (see Figure 1 below). From the least to the most self-determined they are amotivation, external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, integrated regulation and intrinsic motivation. Amotivation represents a lack of intention to engage in a behaviour. It is accompanied by feelings of incompetence and a lack of connection between one’s behaviour and the expected outcome. For example, an amotivated athlete might be heard saying, ‘I can’t see the point in training any more – it just tires me out’ or ‘I just don’t get any buzz out of competition whatsoever’. Such athletes exhibit a sense of helplessness and often require counselling, as they are highly prone to dropping out. External and introjected regulations represent non-self-determined or controlling types of extrinsic motivation because athletes do not sense that their behaviour is choiceful and, as a consequence, they experience psychological pressure. Participating in sport to receive prize money, win a trophy or a gold medal typifies external regulation. Participating to avoid punishment or negative evaluation is also external. Introjection is an internal pressure under which athletes might participate out of feelings of guilt or to achieve recognition. Identified and integrated regulations represent self-determined types of extrinsic motivation because behaviour is initiated out of choice, although it is not necessarily perceived to be enjoyable. These types of regulation account for why some athletes devote hundreds of hours to repeating mundane drills; they realise that such activity will ultimately help them to improve. Identified regulation represents engagement in a behaviour because it is highly valued, whereas when a behaviour becomes integrated it is in harmony with one’s sense of self and almost entirely self-determined. Completing daily flexibility exercises because you realise they are part of an overarching goal of enhanced performance might be an example of integrated regulation. Intrinsic motivation comes from within, is fully self-determined and characterised by interest in, and enjoyment derived from, sports participation. There are three types of intrinsic motivation, namely intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to accomplish and intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation. Intrinsic motivation is considered to be the healthiest type of motivation and reflects an athlete’s motivation to perform an activity simply for the reward inherent in their participation.

Motivational techniques for coaches and athletes

1. goal setting.

Athletes should be encouraged to set a few ambitious but achievable long-term goals; perhaps to represent their country in a major championship in three or four years. Through empowering athletes to set their own goals, they are more likely to accept the challenges that lie ahead and pursue the goals with enthusiasm 13 ;

To keep athletes on track with their long-term goals, they should also set appropriate medium-term goals. For example, following a bronze medal-winning performance at the 2004 Athens Olympics, UK heptathlete Kelly Sotherton set herself the medium-term goal of winning the 2006 Commonwealth title in Melbourne (which she achieved) en route to pursuing her long-term goal to be crowned Olympic champion at the 2008 Beijing Games;

By far the most important goals in practical terms are those for the short-term, as it is these that keep athletes focused on the checkmarks which are seminal to achieving superior performance. Therefore, short-term goals should be predominantly process-oriented. For example, when Manchester United’s Wayne Rooney injured a metatarsal six weeks before the start of the soccer World Cup, he set a series of process goals in his race to regain full fitness. These included daily physiotherapy sessions, remedial exercises in an oxygen chamber, non weight-bearing aerobic activities, monitoring of nutritional intake and so on;

Goals need to be monitored and revised on a regular basis. One of the biggest mistakes that coaches make in setting goals is that they are often too rigid in their approach. The goal setting process works best when there is some flexibility and the individual athlete or team take ownership of each goal. Thus, coaches and managers are better off exercising some democracy when setting goals, particularly if working with more experienced athletes.

2. Using extrinsic rewards

According to SDT 1 , the key aspect in using extrinsic rewards effectively is that they reinforce an athlete’s sense of competence and self-worth. Thus, a reward should be informational in nature rather than controlling. If a reward comes to be controlling, it can significantly undermine intrinsic motivation. For a reward to be informational, it is advisable that it has relatively little monetary worth (ie it is a token reward), such as a ‘woman of the match’ or ‘athlete of the tour’ title. Also, the reward should be presented to an athlete in front of all potential recipients with some emphasis placed on the prestige associated with it. Other popular ways of using token rewards include etching athletes’ names on annual honours boards for their contributions, or awarding a special item of clothing.

3. Motivational music

A particularly good way to motivate athletes in training and prior to competition is through the use of music they perceive to be inspirational. Sydney Olympics rowing gold medallist, Tim Foster, now a respected coach, uses music to punctuate all of the indoor training sessions that he leads. Specifically, during circuit training or rowing ergometer intervals, he puts on loud/fast music, while during recovery periods he plays soft/slow music.

Therefore, work and recovery times are regulated by music. Research from Brunel University indicates that this approach increases work output, reduces perceived exertion and improves in-task affect – the pleasure experienced during the activity 14,15 .

4. Positive self-talk

Positive self-talk is a technique that can be used to enhance motivation across a wide range of achievement domains. It makes use of an athlete’s powerful inner voice to reinforce their self-esteem or important aspects of their performance. With appropriate repetition, self-talk can positively alter an athlete’s belief system. I use three types of self-talk in my work with athletes and will illustrate each with an example to assist you in coming up with your own. The first type is known as task-relevant self-talk, which serves to focus an athlete’s attention on the task at hand. A karateka I worked with used the mantra ‘pillar of power’ to reinforce his strong posture. The second type is known as mood-related self-talk, which impacts on how athletes feel. An international water skier came up with ‘butterflies in formation’ to represent how the butterflies in her tummy would work for her rather than against her. The third type is known as a positive self-affirmation statement and the most famous exponent of these was the legendary boxer Mohammed Ali who repeated the claim, ‘I am the greatest’ so many times that even his opponents believed it.

‘I figured that, if I said it enough, I would convince the world that I really was the greatest.’ Mohammed Ali

Each and every one of us has an untapped energy source that can be drawn upon to bring about superior results. Enhancing motivation is fundamentally about a change of attitude, developing a positive ‘can do’ mindset and engaging in systematic behaviours – the short-term process goals – that facilitate improvement.

If you have a leadership role in sport you will have considerable influence on how motivated your athletes or team might feel. You can instil a good work ethic, recognise individual effort and instigate transparent reward structures that reinforce people’s sense of competence.

To work best, the techniques mentioned in this article need to be moulded around specific circumstances and the needs of individual athletes. Always strive to be original and innovative in the application of motivational techniques.

1. Deci E, Ryan R (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior, New York: Plenum 2. J Personality Social Psych 1987; 53:1024-1037 3. AmPsych 2000; 55:68-78 4. Csikszentmihalyi M (1975) Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass 5. Csikszentmihalyi M (1990) Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, New York: Harper and Row 6. J Sports Sci 2001; 19:397-409 7. Brit J Educ Psych 1994; 64:253-261 8. Proceedings of the 2001 World Congress on Sport Psychology, Skiathos, Greece 2001; 3:321-323 9. J Sport Exerc Psych 2004; 26:396-411 10. Psych Sport Exerc 2004; 5:183-200 11. Res Quart Exerc Sport 2000; 71:387-397 12. Vlachopoulos S and Karageorghis C (under review) 13. Advances in Sport Psychology (2nd ed), Champaign IL: Human Kinetics, 2002: 459-499 14. J Sport Behav 1997;20:54-68 15. Aus J Psych; in press

Costas Karageorghis

Dr Costas Karageorghis is a reader in sport psychology at Brunel University, west London where he also manages the athletics club. He has published extensively in the field of sport and exercise psychology and has been a BASES accredited sport psychologist for 11 years.

Register now to get a free Issue

Latest Issue

• Endurance Training
• Sports Supplements
• Sports Health
• Strength Training
• Dietary Basics

Subscribe Today

• Unlimited Access
• Monthly Magazine
• Back Issue Library
• Email Newsletter

More on this

Sports psychology: self-confidence in sport – make your ego work for you, sports psychology: maintaining emotional control in competitions, sport psychology: the importance of attributions, sports psychology: stress management in sport, newsletter sign up, testimonials, dr. alexandra fandetti-robin, back & body chiropractic, elspeth cowell msch dpodm srch hcpc reg, william hunter, nuffield health, further reading, editor's picks, endurance and strength: have the best of both worlds, training intensity: is higher better, even for beginners, endurance performance: can a short, sharp shock work wonders, high-intensity training: are sprint intervals overhyped, mass with class: why sleep matters, further reading.

Mental overload: can it harm your quality of movement?

Eating problems in athletes: light at the end of the tunnel

Enduring love or destructive addiction?

Competition performance: five techniques to help you control anxiety

Coaches Testimonials

• Weekly Magazine
• Online Library

• Rehabilitation
• Diagnosis and Treatment
• Knee Injuries

Keep up with latest sports science research and apply it to maximize performance

Today you have the chance to join a group of athletes, and sports coaches/trainers who all have something special in common... 

They use the latest research to improve performance for themselves and their clients - both athletes and sports teams - with help from global specialists in the fields of sports science, sports medicine and sports psychology.

They do this by reading Sports Performance Bulletin, an easy-to-digest but serious-minded journal dedicated to high performance sports. SPB offers a wealth of information and insight into the latest research, in an easily-accessible and understood format, along with a wealth of practical recommendations.

*includes 3 coaching manuals

Get Inspired

All the latest techniques and approaches

Sports Performance Bulletin helps dedicated endurance athletes improve their performance. Sense-checking the latest sports science research, and sourcing evidence and case studies to support findings, Sports Performance Bulletin turns proven insights into easily digestible practical advice. Supporting athletes, coaches and professionals who wish to ensure their guidance and programmes are kept right up to date and based on credible science.

More from us

© 2023 sports performance bulletin, part of green star media ltd. company number: 3008779.

Download this guide to optimizing athletic performance for success in sports.

Motivation for Athletes: The Science Behind Sports Motivation

What is motivation.

Motivation is a key factor in any sport. It impacts an athlete’s performance, whether it’s positive or negative. But what exactly is motivation? Motivation is the driving force of behavior and actions. It can be intrinsic or extrinsic, meaning that the motivation can come from within or from external sources such as rewards and punishments. Studies show that athletes with higher levels of motivation are more likely to succeed in competition compared to those who lack it.

The science behind sports motivation investigates how athletes stay motivated and strive for success while facing physical and psychological pressures on a daily basis. Different motivational theories study why people choose certain behaviors as well as how they become committed to them over time; these theories provide insight into what motivates athletes during their training sessions, competitions, and recovery periods.

Types of Motivation for Athletes

Motivation is an important part of any athlete’s success. It can be the difference between reaching a goal and giving up halfway through. But what types of motivation help an athlete reach their goals? This article explores the science behind sports motivation, looking at different types of motivation and how they can help athletes achieve their goals.

Athletes often use intrinsic motivation to increase their performance. Intrinsic motivation is when someone has an internal drive to do something because they find it enjoyable or meaningful. Self-satisfaction, joy, and progress are all incentives that can provide intrinsic motivation for athletes. Additionally, extrinsic motivators like awards or recognition from peers can also act as strong motivators for athletes to keep pushing forward no matter how hard the challenge may seem.

Psychology of Motivation

The psychology of motivation is one of the most important aspects in understanding how and why athletes are able to become successful. It is essential for coaches, parents, and athletes alike to understand what motivates an athlete to work hard and strive for excellence on the court or field. With a better understanding of the science behind sports motivation, coaches can provide athletes with a sense of purpose that motivates them to push themselves further than ever before.

Motivation for athletes has both internal and external components that can vary depending on individual goals, interests, and environment. Internal motivation comes from within an athlete’s mind while external motivation may come from coaches, peers or even family members. Coaches should be aware how different motivational strategies affect individuals differently as this will help create a positive environment where players feel encouraged to reach their goals.

Defining Sports Motivation

Every athlete needs motivation to reach their full potential. It can be difficult to find the drive necessary to stay focused and work hard every practice, but understanding the science behind sports motivation can make a big difference in an athlete’s success.

Motivation is a combination of factors that influence someone’s behavior and performance; it is often specific to the individual in terms of what drives him or her. Intrinsic motivation comes from within an individual, while extrinsic motivation comes from outside factors such as rewards or recognition. Understanding how both types of motivation work together will help athletes stay motivated and reach their goals.

In order to be successful, athletes need a clear purpose for why they are playing and training, so they can focus on developing their skills with passion and dedication.

Psychological Benefits of Motivation

The physical benefits of sports and exercise are well-known, but there is a lesser known side to the positive effects that come from participating in sports: the psychological benefits. Training and competing in sports can lead to improved mental health, which is just as important as physical health. It’s no wonder that many athletes focus on maintaining their motivation levels – after all, it has far-reaching impacts on their performance and wellbeing.

Motivation comes in two forms: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is self-generated and comes from within an individual; extrinsic motivation involves external rewards or recognition that gives an athlete short-term boosts of enthusiasm. Studies have shown both types of motivation lead to better performance, but more importantly they also bring about long lasting effects on overall mental health.

Strategies to Increase Motivation

Motivation is the key to success in any sport. Without it, athletes will not be able to perform at their best. However, motivation can often be hard to come by and can vary from athlete to athlete. This article will explore the science behind sports motivation and outline some strategies that athletes can use to increase their motivation levels.

The first step for any athlete looking to increase their motivation is understanding what motivates them personally. Different athletes have different motivations, so it’s important for each individual person to identify what resonates with them and build on those factors. A key part of this process is identifying both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators, as these two types of motivations have been found to be strong drivers of performance in sports according to multiple research studies.

Social Benefits of Motivation

Motivation is an essential element of any successful sports team, and its importance should not be underestimated. It’s the key to fostering a competitive spirit in athletes, helping them push their limits and achieve their athletic goals. But what many don’t realize is that motivation has social benefits as well.

The group dynamic of a motivated team helps create strong relationships between players, which can help foster a sense of community and camaraderie among teammates. This can lead to improved trust, communication and collaboration among athletes throughout the season. Studies have even suggested that motivation levels within teams can influence overall performance on the field or court.

Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Rewards

Motivation is an essential factor when it comes to athletes striving for success in their respective sport. It’s the drive that pushes them to keep going, even when they feel like giving up. While there are many different types of motivation, intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are two major forms of motivation for athletes. In this article we will discuss the differences between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards and how they affect an athlete’s performance. Intrinsic rewards come from within an individual; these include feeling a sense of accomplishment, satisfaction or pride after achieving a goal. Extrinsic rewards come from outside sources such as praise from coaches or recognition from peers; these serve to encourage further action towards desired goals.

Role of Coaches & Peers in Motivation

The role of coaches and peers in motivating athletes has become increasingly important for achieving success in sports. Coaches have the unique ability to motivate athletes to reach their full potential, while peers can provide additional support and encouragement. Understanding the science behind sports motivation is essential for any coach or athlete looking to unlock their competitive spirit.

Coaches serve as motivators by providing feedback and guidance that help athletes stay focused on their goals. They also demonstrate the behaviors they expect from their players, which can inspire them to do more than they thought possible. Peers, on the other hand, can create an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual support among teammates that helps all players stay motivated during difficult times. Together, these two groups are essential for helping athletes stay positive and achieve peak performance levels.

How to Build Motivation

If you’re a competitive athlete, it’s no surprise that motivation is an essential factor in helping you achieve your goals. But what does the science say about sports motivation? This article delves into the psychology behind sports motivation and reveals how athletes can build their own level of motivation to become better competitors.

We all know that having a positive attitude towards sport and competition is important, but did you know that there are certain strategies athletes can use to boost their drive and performance? We look at choice of activities, goal setting, self-talk and rewards to see how they can be used as tools for improvement. With this knowledge, athletes can learn how to build their own sources of motivation for even greater success on the field.

Stress and Performance

Stress is an inevitable part of any athlete’s life, as it can both hinder and help performance. Studies have found that when athletes experience moderate levels of stress, they often perform better than when not feeling stressed at all. This article will discuss the science behind sports motivation and how stress can influence athletic performance.

On one hand, chronic stress can be damaging to athletes by causing fatigue and impairing focus, which can lead to poor performances. On the other hand, acute stress has been found to increase alertness, reduce pain perception and create a heightened sense of urgency; these physiological effects may boost an athlete’s performance in competition or during practice. To reach peak performance or maintain high levels of motivation, athletes must learn how to manage their stress in order to optimize physical and mental readiness.

Science Behind Sports Motivation

Sports motivation is a key factor for many athletes and can make or break a career. But what is the science behind sports motivation? In this article, we will explore how neuroscience and psychology research can be applied to help athletes stay motivated and reach their goals.

Recent studies have shown that the brain’s reward system plays a critical role in an athlete’s motivation. When an athlete experiences success, the reward system is triggered, releasing dopamine which bolsters feelings of confidence and encourages further effort. This reinforces positive behaviors that help an athlete stay focused on long-term goals. Additionally, understanding one’s psychological profile can provide valuable insight into why certain techniques are more effective than others when it comes to staying motivated.

Ultimately, sports motivation isn’t just about willpower; there are physiological components at play as well.

Benefits of Staying Motivated

Staying motivated is an integral part of any athlete’s journey. Without motivation, it can be hard to stay focused on the task at hand and reach peak performance. But what exactly is motivating someone? According to experts in the field of sports science, motivation for athletes comes from a combination of internal and external factors. Internal drivers are things like ambition, passion, and pride while external sources include group dynamics, rewards, and feedback from coaches or teammates. In this article we explore the science behind sports motivation and highlight some of the key benefits to staying motivated as an athlete.

Motivation plays a critical role in an athlete’s success; it helps them set goals for themselves, strive for excellence and push through challenging times when progress seems slow or non-existent.

Overcoming Challenges to Staying Motivated

Staying motivated as an athlete isn’t always easy. The demands of training and competing can be overwhelming and lead to feelings of burnout or frustration. But there are ways to stay motivated even when the going gets tough. Understanding the science behind sports motivation can help athletes overcome challenges and keep pushing toward their goals.

Modern research into sports psychology has identified several key components necessary for effective motivation in athletes, such as a clear sense of purpose, having achievable goals, understanding your strengths and weaknesses, developing self-discipline, setting rewards for yourself and staying positive in the face of adversity. For athletes looking to increase their motivation levels, these components can provide a strong foundation upon which they can build more successful performances on the field or court.

Dan O'Connell

Skip to Content

Current Students

Interested in more? Search Courses

• Search Input Submit Search

How can coaches influence players and motivate athletes?

Lindsay kibler.

Women’s Lacrosse Coach, Linfield University, DU Alumna, 2017

It may be one of the most common questions coaches strive to answer.

I’ll explore this topic using 5 simple steps. But first …..

What is motivation? A quick Google search might tell you that it’s, ‘the reason one has for acting or behaving in a particular way.’ Other terms that come to mind may be inspiration , ambition , or determination .

I did a quick survey of athletes in my own community, asking them how they’ve been influenced or motivated by coaches and mentors. Here are a few responses I received:  

Athlete 1 : I had an assistant coach in high school who was the Pastor at my church and the dad of another player, but someone I didn’t know all that well. He made a big difference for me during my very first practice freshman year of high school. We were doing full field sprints, just down and back, nothing else to it. It was my first time doing full field sprints, and I was really struggling to make it and felt like I needed my inhaler. Next thing I know, he’s running alongside me, holding my inhaler. He finished my sprints with me, no words said, no pity, no nothing. He simply knew I needed support, and he provided it.  

Athlete 2 : In one of our individual meetings, my coach told me that she admired that I never quit even when it took me way longer than everyone else. I always finish. Now, when I feel like I can’t finish, I remember how many times I’ve finished before when it was hard. Basically, when coaches see things and intentionally point them out, they influence you to stay positive, or even to just keep going.  

Athlete 3 : One of my middle school coaches used to bribe us with those sugar cookies with the frosting, which I think works really well on young athletes.  

Athlete 4 : I think the pregame speech holds a lot of weight for me as I’ve gotten older. If my coach is hyped up before the game, then I feel like the hype carries over to me and my teammates.  

What phrases come to mind when you’re trying to motivate an individual or a team in the moment?

These are some of mine:

Dig deep! You’re strong! I believe you can do this! I want you to aim ‘here’ or move ‘here’ next time you’re on the field. What else can you give to the team? Leave it all on the field!  

These phrases that we throw out to our team on game day are simple, quick, in-the-moment reminders of motivation. Motivation is something built over time. We may find motivation from someone or something else, but ultimately, it’s your own body and mind that discover the will to move forward.

It’s rare that we are instantaneously motivated to do something. There’s usually a predetermined factor that moves us to take action. A coach or mentor may say something or give an example that resonates with you, which sparks that motivation.  

This brings us back to the question at hand.  

How can coaches motivate athletes?

I find that the simplest answer to this, is reminding athletes of their why . What do they want, and why do they want to achieve it?  

If coaches can help athletes answer their why , and better understand their reason for showing up to practice every day, then we can discover their innate motivation. I believe coaches are a vehicle for bringing the puzzle pieces together to show athletes their purpose, which creates motivation. To build off Eleanor Roosevelt who stated that, ' no one can make you feel inferior without your consent ,' I apply this to motivation in that, ‘ no one can motivate you without your consent .’  

Here’s a quick recap from Psych 101. You may be familiar with motivational theories from psychologists such as B.F. Skinner and Abraham Maslow ( Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs ). In short, Skinner delineates behavior and consequence focusing on positive reinforcement, positive punishment, negative reinforcement, and negative punishment (more on that HERE ) better known as Extrinsic motivation. While Maslow is known for his Intrinsic motivational theory (more on that HERE ).  

Imagine a time when you were struggling to overcome an obstacle. It may have been physically difficult, mentally difficult, or overwhelming both mentally and physically. Why did you lack motivation? Was it fear of failure? Lack of preparation? Perhaps lack of confidence? Lack of reward? Lack of basic needs?  

What helped you become motivated? Was it an extrinsic reward such as money? Was there a self-fulfillment need (a personal accomplishment)? Or, were you motivated by a basic need like food or water?  

As you realize that you may have a preference or need for motivation, it’s important to realize that each athlete has a different need as well. Here’s my process for motivating athletes:  

5 steps for coaches to motivate athletes:  

Step 1 : Identify what the athlete wants

Step 2 : Identify why the athlete wants what they want

Step 3 : Develop an action plan to achieve their wants (or goals)

Step 4 : Utilize tools and resources such as speakers, books, stories, quotes, reflection and/or visualizations to remind, re-establish and encourage them to pursue their intention.

Step 5 : On game-day, remind athletes of their why

See how Coach Kibler kept her team motivated throughout the COVID pandemic.

I love serving as a coach because I find it most rewarding to see the potential in athletes and to watch them realize their potential as they grow. That’s how I approach motivating my athletes. I build off the skills they have, and I’m fueled by what they could achieve. I study my athletes and build relationships with them. I help them identify what they want to achieve. I openly share with my athletes the potential I see in them.  

Motivation is built over time. Theodore Roosevelt said, ‘They don’t care about how much you know, until they know how much you care.’ This concept can be seen as a building block to motivating athletes. They need to know you believe in them, so they believe in themselves.  

Building motivation over time can look like many different things. I suggest that you, as a coach, ask your athletes what motivation means to them and how they prefer to be motivated. Some athletes want a coach that will push them, and they respond well to a more intense tone. Others prefer routine check-ins to keep them on track. You may have athletes who prefer to hear stories and examples that they can relate to. Some are better motivated by their peers, while others prefer visualization. And in some cases, an athlete may not know what is most motivating for them. Everyone is different, and it’s important for coaches to realize that you can’t treat all athletes the same.  

The work you do as a coach to build motivation over time, is what allows you to have a bigger impact during those in-the-moment, game-day and pre-game talks. Once you’ve built the foundation, you’ve helped instill the confidence as fuel for motivation because they will feel prepared. And in those short bursts where you need to motivate athletes in their pregame, it simply becomes the extra kick into gear, because we fall to the level of our training.  

I’m not here to tell you what’s right or wrong. Based on my own experience, I correlate intrinsic motivation with athletes and those who seek to achieve success for something bigger than their self.  

Imagine that you are the athlete, and your coach shouts the below phrases to you during a game. Which one causes you to feel more motivated, phrase 1 or phrase 2?  

Phrase 1) “You’re doing great!” Phrase 2) “The way you flipped your hips in transition to slow the ball down was exactly what we worked on! Did you feel that? It looked great!”  

Phrase 1) “Make smarter decisions!” Phrase 2) “During that interception you threw, you had a teammate wide open on the left side. Next time, try to scan for more options and I’ll tell your teammate to call louder for the ball when she’s open. Sound good?”  

Phrase 1) “We need to stop dropping the ball…” Phrase 2) “If you drop the ball again, try to remember to box out so you can have more space to pick it back up! Remember how we positioned our feet in practice to establish our space?”  

Would you agree that Phrase 2 adds more value to the athlete’s understanding? Would this perhaps better motivate them to improve?  

To expand on the 5 steps mentioned earlier, here are a few tips and reminders:

• Identify, and then continually remind athletes of their why .
• Build a relationship. Find out what motivation tactics an athlete finds helpful.
• Remember: They don’t care about how much you know until they know how much you care .
• Prepare every day. Use different resources and challenges so that on game day, you can flip on the switch and remind them of what they’re capable of because they’ve already done it before.
• Be grateful. Release whatever stress you’re feeling, and allow room for growth and opportunity.

I’m not a motivational speaker, and sometimes I struggle to articulate the impact I hope to have on the team. Here are some books I recommend for coaches who want to have a meaningful impact on the athletes they serve:  

The Inner Game of Tennis by W. Timothy Gallwey Extreme Ownership by Jocko Willink Can’t Hurt Me by David Goggins PUSH by Jon Willis

Meet Lindsay Kibler:

Lindsay is currently the head women’s lacrosse coach at Linfield University. She earned her Master of Arts in Sport Coaching degree from the University of Denver in 2017.

Connect with Lindsay on Instagram @CoachKibs_45

See more Videos from DU Sport Coaching Alumni

Find us on social media.

Interested in becoming a guest writer for DU Sport Sense? Contact Brittany Kahl, Blog Editor, at [email protected] . 

• Mission & Values
• About Sport & Performance Psychology
• Membership Benefits
• Membership Types
• Executive Board
• Special Interest Groups
• CMPC Emeriti
• In Memoriam
• Strategic Plan
• Privacy Policy
• Civility and Anti-Harassment Policy
• Contact AASP
• Certification
• Benefits of Certification
• Certification Program Candidate Handbook
• How to Apply
• Application Forms
• Exam/Study Resources
• Registry of Approved Mentors
• Professional Ethics & Standards in Sport Psychology Course: K1
• Diversity & Culture Course: K8
• CMPC Course Options (Outside AASP)
• Recertification
• Certification Program Updates
• Find a Certified Mental Performance Consultant® (CMPC)
• Liability Insurance for Member CMPCs
• Ethics Code
• Contact the CMPC Certification Council
• Publications
• Journal of Applied Sport Psychology
• Journal of Sport Psychology in Action
• Case Studies in Sport and Exercise Psychology
• Journal for Advancing Sport Psychology in Research
• Journal Awards for JASP, JSPA, and CSSEP
• Essential Guide for Mental Performance Consultants
• Directory of Graduate Programs in Applied Sport Psychology
• Annual Conference
• In-Person Schedule
• 2024 Virtual Content
• Registration
• Hotel & Travel
• Accessibility
• For Presenters
• Featured CE Workshops
• Meet the Professionals
• CEUs for CMPC
• Graduate Program & Career Fair
• Student Abstract Awards / Young Researcher Award
• Student Diversity Travel Grant
• Upcoming Conferences & History
• Knowledge Areas
• Required CE Areas
• Dissertation Award
• Distinguished Applied Practitioner Award
• Distinguished International Scientist-Practitioner Award
• Distinguished Scientist-Practitioner Award
• Distinguished Public Communication, Awareness, and Outreach Award
• Dorothy V. Harris Memorial Award
• Early Career Applied Practitioner Award
• Inclusion, Diversity, and Excellence in Advocacy and Social Justice (IDEAS) Student Award
• Kate F. Hays Distinguished Mentor Award
• Ken Ravizza Performance Excellence Award
• Master's Thesis Award
• Outstanding Student Practice Award
• Teaching Excellence Award
• AASP Past Award Recipients
• Research Grants
• Collaborative Research Grants
• Community Outreach Grant
• Gualberto Cremades International Research Grant - AASP Foundation
• Oglesby-Snyder Grant for Equity and Cultural Diversity
• Seed Grants - AASP Foundation
• AASP Past Grant Recipients
• Students Center
• Initiatives
• Video Resources
• Student Delegates
• Regional Conferences
• Student Awards
• Undergraduate Programs in Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology
• Graduate Training
• Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Belonging & Justice (DEIBJ)
• AASP Position Statement on Human Diversity
• Events, Institutes, and Initiatives
• Resources and References
• Grants and Awards
• International
• Past Diversity Lectures
• AASP Foundation
• Foundation Honor Roll
• Donation Form
• Media Center
• News Releases and Association Updates
• Media Inquiries
• AASP Members in the News
• Featured Podcast Library
• CMPC Directory
• About Sport & Performance Psychology
• AASP Blog for Athletes, Coaches, and Parents
• CMPC Certification Updates
• Related Organizations

Extrinsic Rewards and Motivation

Stephanie Hatch, Danielle Thomsen, Jennifer J. Waldron University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA

Athletes compete in and practice sport for a variety of reasons. These reasons fall into the two major categories of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Athletes who are intrinsically motivated participate in sports for internal reasons, such as enjoyment, whereas athletes who are extrinsically motivated participate in sports for external reasons, such as material rewards. Extrinsic rewards are central to competitive sports; athletes receive publicity, awards, and money, among other things, and college level athletes obtain scholarships for their talents. Extrinsic rewards, when used correctly, can be beneficial to athletes. However, athletes in highly competitive levels of sport may experience decreases in their intrinsic motivation because of the increasing use of extrinsic rewards offered by the media, coaches, and parents.  As a coach, you can help increase or maintain the intrinsic motivation of college athletes even with the presence of extrinsic rewards, such as scholarships.

Intrinsic Motivation Intrinsically motivated athletes participate in sport for internal reasons, particularly pure enjoyment and satisfaction, and intrinsically motivated athletes typically concentrate on skill improvement and growth. Behaviors Related to Intrinsic Motivation

• Better task-relevant focus
• Fewer changes (ups and downs) in motivation
• Less distraction
• Less stress when mistakes are made
• Increased confidence and self-efficacy
• Greater satisfaction

Extrinsic Motivation Extrinsic motivation may come from social sources, such as not wanting to disappoint a parent, or material rewards, such as trophies and college scholarships. Extrinsically motivated athletes tend to focus on the competitive or performance outcome. An over-emphasis on extrinsic motivation may lead athletes to feel like their behavior is controlled by the extrinsic rewards.  On the other hand, athletes may continue to feel like they control their own behavior even with the presence of extrinsic rewards. These two major types of extrinsic motivation are highlighted here.

Behavior controlled by the extrinsic rewards

• Motivation Based on
• Extrinsic rewards
• Avoiding punishment or guilt
• “Should” do something
• Less interest, value, and effort towards achievement
• Difficulty coping with failure

Behavior controlled by the athlete

• Internal control of behaviors
• Choice to participate even with extrinsic rewards
• Behaviors (Similar to intrinsic motivation)
• Greater interest, enjoyment, and effort towards achievement
• Desire to learn new skills or strategies
• Positive coping styles

Extrinsic Rewards: Weakening or Strengthening Intrinsic Motivation Based on the two types of extrinsic motivation, extrinsic rewards may weaken or strengthen the intrinsic motivation of athletes. Under the following situations, it is likely that extrinsic rewards will weaken intrinsic motivation.

• The extrinsic reward controls the behaviors of the athlete (e.g.., I’m playing to keep my college scholarship).
• The extrinsic reward provides negative information about the athlete’s ability. (e.g., there is only one reward and I didn’t get it)
• The extrinsic reward is not directly connected to a specific behavior or performance level
• The extrinsic reward is given for a behavior that is already intrinsically rewarding.

Extrinsic rewards can also be used to maintain or strengthen intrinsic motivation. If a reward is viewed as informing athletes about their ability in a positive manner, then the rewards will likely foster internal satisfaction and intrinsic motivation. What Can You Do To Maintain Or Increase Intrinsic Motivation? Your behaviors, as a coach, can influence the intrinsic motivation of your athletes and helping athletes feel like they control their own behavior even with the presence of extrinsic rewards. Following are some tips: Give nonverbal and verbal positive reinforcement based on the specific behaviors of your athletes. Recognize athletes’ specific contribution to practice or the team; you will be positively informing athletes about their ability. Work together with your athletes to set individual and team goals that are challenging and realistic. The more athletes experience competence and success due to their own actions and skills, the great their intrinsic motivation. Even with extrinsic rewards, athletes who feel like they are in control of their behaviors, will be more satisfied and more likely to continue participating.

Association for Applied Sport Psychology 8365 Keystone Crossing, Suite 107 Indianapolis , IN 46240 USA

Phone: (317) 205-9225 Fax: (317) 205-9481 Email: [email protected]

• What is Applied Sport Psychology

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

UniversalEssays

Essay Writing Tips, Topics, and Examples

Motivation in Sports Essay

This sample Motivation in Sports Essay is published for informational purposes only. Free essays and research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality essay at affordable price please use our custom essay writing service .

Motivation is continually changing in sports. Sports psychologists often characterize motivation as including direction of effort, intensity of effort, persistence of behavior, and the extent to which an athlete returns on a regular basis to the behavior (referred to as “continuing motivation”). To recognize how individual motivation is developed and to discover the most effective ways to influence motivation, coaches and sports psychologists acknowledge not only characteristics of an athlete but also the social environmental and physical environmental conditions in which the athlete participates. Hence, no single strategy or view is used to explain motivation. The best approach incorporates individual, social environmental, and physical environmental influences on motivation.

Sports psychologists attempt to account for both individual and situational variables that influence an athlete’s motivation. The individual athlete (with his or her gender, race/ethnicity, religion/spirituality, etc.) and his or her interaction with the sports environment (social and physical factors) have a major influence on motivation. Personal factors involved in the interaction of athletes with the sports environment may include physical fitness, physical skill, perceptual skill, and psychological skill.

Furthermore, sports are often rooted in cultural traditions. Where an athlete lives and plays influences motivation. Hence, social factors associated with sports, including the athlete’s roles and responsibilities at work and home, surroundings in which an athlete participates, and family, friends, teammates, and coaches influence motivation. Accordingly, economic conditions, socioeconomic status, and educational and family structures also influence motivation. Moreover, research in sports psychology has identified an athlete’s experiences with cooperation and competition as well as with coaching behavior as additional social factors influencing motivation. Physical environmental factors, including convenient and accessible training facilities, enjoyable scenery, and weather, may also influence motivation.

In order to discuss principles of motivation, we must assume that athletes are actively involved in decision making about what behavior they will engage in. Athletes can choose to behave through the exercise of self-influence. Those actions done intentionally are referred to as “agency.”

To be an agent is to intentionally make things happen by one’s actions. Agency embodies the endowments, belief systems, self-regulatory capabilities and distributed structures and functions through which personal influence is exercised, rather than residing as a discrete entity in a particular place. The core features of agency enable people to play a part in their self-development, adaptation, and self-renewal with changing times. (Bandura 2001, 2)

Behavioral intention is a strong influence on motivation. Intention represents an athlete’s immediate behavioral orientation toward engaging in a sport and reflects the athlete’s motivation toward that sport. Intentions reflect a decision to enact a particular behavior (e.g., attending practice). Intentions for sports summarize an athlete’s motivation to be involved in sports.

An intention is a representation of a future course of action to be performed. It is not simply an expectation or prediction of future actions but a proactive commitment to bringing them about. Intentions and actions are different aspects of a functional relation separated in time. It is, therefore, meaningful to speak of intentions grounded in self-motivators affecting the likelihood of actions at a future point in time. (Bandura 2001, 7)

Hence, we can view intention as a convincing predictor of behavior and influence on motivation.

Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Self-efficacy is a theoretical construct that has received a great deal of support as a significant influence on motivation. Self-efficacy represents a form of situation-specific self-confidence. Self-efficacy is an athlete’s perception of her ability to perform a given task. An athlete’s belief in her capability to exercise some measure of control over her own functioning and over environmental events is central to the athlete’s personal agency. Efficacy beliefs are at the foundation of this personal agency. The likelihood that an athlete will participate in a given sport depends on her beliefs about whether she can perform the skills necessary for that sport. Unless the athlete believes she can produce chosen results by her actions, she has little incentive to act or to persevere in the face of hardship.

Other factors may operate as motivators in sports but must be rooted in the core belief that the athlete has the power to produce effects by her own actions. Athletes with high levels of self-efficacy persevere when faced with obstacles or negative circumstances. In contrast, athletes with low levels of self-efficacy fail to overcome similar obstacles. Efficacy beliefs play a pivotal role in motivation and also influence whether athletes think optimistically or pessimistically. Therefore, efficacy beliefs may enhance or hinder sports motivation.

In addition to self-efficacy, outcome expectations influence motivation. The likelihood that athletes will engage in a behavior (e.g., physical training) depends on their self-efficacy and their outcome expectations (e.g., winning in competition). In examining any theory related to motivation, we must understand the relative importance of the activity to the athlete. In the self-efficacy model a strong relationship exists between doing something and seeing the results. However, the model itself excludes the relative importance of the outcome to the athlete. The expectancy theory proposes that expectations can influence motivation. The first element of expectancy theory is valence or the relative importance of the outcome of the situation.

Knowing what an athlete wants to gain from a certain situation and understanding the relative importance of the outcome are significant parts of the athlete’s motivation. Self-efficacy and outcome expectations are powerful influences on an athlete’s motivation. An expectancy-valence model depends on the athlete’s expectations of reward. Positive expectations

for success produce subsequent positive effects. An athlete’s motivation to achieve something depends on the product of his estimation of his chance of success and the value he places on success. Note that if an athlete does not value the outcome or believes that his probability of success is zero, then his motivation will be insignificant. In addition, under certain circumstances an overly high probability of success can be detrimental to motivation. Athletes form outcome expectations from observing the sports environment in which they participate as well as the outcomes from the actions they take. Athletes pursue courses of action that are likely to produce positive outcomes and avoid courses of action that are likely to produce negative outcomes.

Athletes who believe they have control over events in their lives are more likely to behave in accord with expectancy theory. However, athletes who believe that they are pawns of fate do not. These alternative beliefs are subjective and are referred to as the athletes’ “locus of control.” Locus of control explains how each athlete generally views the source of her outcomes, positive or negative. “Internal locus of control” means that an athlete’s reinforcements and punishments are the result of her resources and own efforts. “External locus of control” means that an athlete’s reinforcements and punishments are the result of outside forces over which she has no control. How she perceives the source of control determines an athlete’s locus of control. An athlete’s subjective locus of control affects how she behaves.

According to expectancy theory, athletes are motivated not only by their goals but also by how attainable they think these goals are. Within this theory three factors help determine an athlete’s motivation: valence, instrumentality, and expectancy. Valence is the satisfaction the athlete anticipates from an outcome. Instrumentality is the perception of that outcome’s relationship to the current performance. Expectancy is the expectation that effort will affect performance. According to this theory, motivation is high when valence is high, instrumentality is clear, and expectancy is strong.

Self-Determination

Athletes with a self-determined motivational profile engage in sports because of personal choice or because they derive pleasure and satisfaction from the experience. Deci and Ryan describe self-determination as a person’s “capacity to choose and to have those choices be the determinants of one’s actions” (Deci and Ryan 1985, 38). To further develop self-determination theory, Valler and proposed the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In the model motivation may be intrinsic, extrinsic, or amotivated. “Intrinsic motivation” refers to engaging in sports for the pleasure derived from simply participating. This type of motivation comes from within the athlete regardless of outside influences.

Intrinsically motivated athletes possess greater perceptions of physical competence or participate in sports for the feelings of self-determination, perceptions of control, and satisfaction that the sports provide. Intrinsic motivation is fostered when feelings of competence are increased or perceptions of self-determination and internal control are prominent. Furthermore, sports activity that is perceived to be interesting or challenging, that provides feelings of pleasure and satisfaction, or that is performed for its own sake rather than for external reward induces intrinsic motivation. When the sports activity is perceived to be under one’s internal control, intrinsic motivation is high. Extrinsic motivation, however, results from behavior performed to gain some substantial reward or to avoid negative consequences rather than to reap the inherent pleasure it provides. “Extrinsic motivation” refers to a wide range of behaviors considered to be a means to an end. Extrinsic motivation comes from outside the athlete, most commonly from others through either positive support or negative reinforcements. The fundamental goal of such behaviors is to receive something positive and to avoid something negative. Amotivation is the complete lack of motivation. Feelings of incompetence and lack of control often characterize amotivation.

Enjoyment (a form of intrinsic motivation) is an important influence on sports motivation. Enjoyment based in part on feelings of competence and perceived control is essential for enhancing motivation and continued participation. Athletes continue to participate because they enjoy what they are doing. Feelings of enjoyment clearly play an important role in sports motivation. Athletes who enjoy their chosen sport will stick with it longer than those who do not.

Goal Setting

Goal setting has long been a part of the study of motivation and coaching in sports psychology. Many studies during the last thirty years have supported the effectiveness of goal-setting theory in various sports settings. Goals can be divided into outcome goals, performance goals, and process goals. Research in goal setting indicates that subjects with easy goals usually have higher expectations for reaching their goals but perform worse than do subjects assigned to difficult goals. A relationship between probability of success and incentive value of success appears to exist in that success in an easy task is not valued as highly as success in a difficult one.

Additionally, multiple-goal strategies are advantageous for sports performance when compared with strategies that do not combine different types of goals. Specifically, the benefit of developing a process orientation toward goal setting has been well documented. Process goals are most beneficially used within a hierarchy of goals that should also include performance and outcome goals. The key to this type of goal setting is for the athlete to focus on what she needs to do as opposed to what she wants to happen. Performance and outcome goals can be set with process goals as the means to achieving the desired outcome. Process goals are simply the means chosen to implement performance and outcome goals.

The function of goal setting is to institute and give direction to action. Goals serve as a motivational tool by engaging self-evaluation in the activity itself. Athletes often use journals or training logs as a means of self-evaluation, feedback, and continued motivation. Technological and computer advances allow athletes to record, share, and analyze training information (i.e., heart rates, power output, mileage) with coaches via spreadsheets, databases, and e-mail. Monitoring an athlete’s pattern of performance (e.g., actual physical training) and the cognitive (e.g., mood during training) and environmental conditions (e.g., heat and humidity) under which the training occurs is one step toward affecting performance. Current actions influence future actions through performance comparisons. With this immediate information and feedback available, evaluation based on individual and coaching guidelines gives further direction to athletic pursuits. This evaluation helps athletes sustain their efforts toward further goal achievement and continued motivation. Intentional behavior, such as sports participation, must center on a plan of action. Intentions and goals must be revised and even reconsidered, depending on new information or changes in the sports environment (e.g., level of competition).

Attention to Action

To increase motivation, athletes must use a here-and-now focus. Athletes do well over time when they use a task-oriented approach toward training and competition. Task orientations are associated with intrinsic motivation. Although the past may influence reasons for current behavior (e.g., previous lack of physical conditioning), the past cannot be changed. Furthermore, when an athlete is cognitively focused in the present, expected future events are transformed into current motivators of behavior. When focused in the present, behavior (e.g., daily physical training) is motivated and directed by specific performance and process goals and anticipated outcomes. Athletes must choose to behave and focus in the present (e.g., process goals). One key to reaching full athletic potential is to develop the skill to keep previous successes and failures in perspective and to view things with a here-and-now focus. This here-and-now focus must involve effective concentration on the task at hand.

Having adopted an intention and an action plan, one cannot simply sit back and wait for the appropriate performances to appear. Agency thus involves not only the deliberative ability to make choices and action plans, but the ability to give shape to appropriate courses of action and to motivate and regulate their execution. This multi-faceted self-directedness operates through self-regulatory processes that link thought to action. (Bandura 2001, 9)

Implication

Motivation in sports is continually changing. We must recognize the complexity of individual, social environ-mental, and physical environmental influences on motivation. Agency and the core belief that the athlete has the power to produce effects by his or her own actions are strong influences on motivation. Knowing what an athlete wants to gain from his or her sport and understanding the relative importance of the outcome are significant parts of the athlete’s motivation. To maintain and enhance motivation, the athlete must understand the degree of effort necessary (e.g., training time, intensity) and the relationship among process goals, performance goals, and outcome goals. Understanding how and why each goal can be achieved will aid in motivating the athlete. Motivation is high when valence is high, instrumentality is clear, and expectancy is strong. Athletes are motivated not only by their goals but also by how attainable they think these goals are. An emphasis on establishing realistic and achievable process goals focusing on specific task accomplishments will further enhance the athlete’s feeling of self-confidence and motivation. Constant monitoring with corrective feedback based on goal attainment is also recommended. The combination of knowing what direction the athlete is heading in, what performance level is needed, and what effort is needed often results in high motivation.

References:

• Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
• Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Reviews of Psychology, 52, 1-26.
• Biddle, S. (Ed.). (1995). European perspectives on exercise and sport psychology. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Bootzin, R. (1986). Psychology today—An introduction. New York: Random House.
• Brannigan, G. G. (Ed.). (1999). The sport scientists: Research adventures. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
• Cox, R. H. (2002). Sport psychology: Concepts and applications (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
• Deci, E. L.,Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325-346.
• Filby,W., Maynard, I., & Graydon, J. (1999).The effect of multiple-goal strategies on performance outcomes in training and competition. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 230-246.
• Horn, T. S. (Ed.). (2002). Advances in sport psychology (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Kowal, J., & Fortier, M. S. (2000). Testing relationships from the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation using flow as a motivational consequence. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71, 171-181.
• Martens, R. (1987). Coaches’ guide to sport psychology. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Murphy, S. (1997). The achievement zone. New York: Berkeley Publishing Group.
• Orlick, T. (1990). In pursuit of excellence: How to win in sport and life through mental training. Champaign, IL: Leisure Press.
• Sheeran, P., & Orbell, S. (1999). Augmenting the theory of planned behavior: Roles for anticipated regret and descriptive norms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 2107-2142.
• Slavin, R. (1988). Educational psychology theory into practice. Engle-wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Theodorakis, Y. (1996). The influence of goals, commitment, self-efficacy and self-satisfaction on motor performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 8, 171-182.
• Tubbs, M., Boehne, D., & Dahl, J. (1993). Expectancy, valence, and motivational force functions in goal-setting research: An empirical test. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 78, 361-373.
• Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 271-360). New York: Academic Press.
• Vealey, R. S. (1994). Knowledge development and implementation in sport psychology: A review of The Sport Psychologist, 1987-1992. The Sport Psychologist, 8, 331-348.
• Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2003). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Sports Essay
• Sociology Essay
• Sociology Essay Topics
• Sociology Research Paper

Free essays are not written to satisfy your specific instructions. You can use our professional writing services to order a custom essay, research paper, or term paper on any topic and get your high quality paper at affordable price. UniversalEssays is the best choice for those who seek help in essay writing or research paper writing in any field of study.

• Terms of Use
• Cookie Policy
• Revision Policy
• Fair Use Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Money Back Guarantee
• Quality Evaluation Policy
• Frequently Asked Questions

Athletes’ Performance Essays

Impact of motivation on athletes’ performance and mental health, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Affective Science
• Biological Foundations of Psychology
• Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
• Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational/School Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems of Psychology
• Individual Differences
• Methods and Approaches in Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational and Institutional Psychology
• Personality
• Psychology and Other Disciplines
• Social Psychology
• Sports Psychology
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Coaching behavior and effectiveness in sport and exercise psychology.

• Ronald E. Smith Ronald E. Smith Department of Psychology, University of Washington
•  and  Frank L. Smoll Frank L. Smoll Department of Psychology, University of Washington
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.188
• Published online: 19 December 2017

Coaches occupy a central role in sport, fulfilling instructional, organizational, strategic, and social relationship functions, and their relationships with athletes influence both skill development and psychosocial outcomes of sport participation. This review presents the major theoretical models and empirical results derived from coaching research, focusing on the measurement and correlates of coaching behaviors and on intervention programs designed to enhance coaching effectiveness.

A strong empirical literature on motor skill development has addressed the development of technical sport skills, guided in part by a model that divides the skill acquisition process into cognitive, associative, and autonomous phases, each requiring specific coaching knowledge and instructional techniques. Social-cognitive theory’s mediational model, the multidimensional model of sport leadership, achievement goal theory, and self-determination theory have been highly influential in research on the psychosocial aspects of the sport environment. These conceptual models have inspired basic research on the antecedents and consequences of defined coaching behaviors as well as applied research on coach training programs designed to enhance athletes’ sport outcomes. Of the few programs that have been systematically evaluated, outcomes such as enjoyment, liking for coach and teammates, team cohesion, self-esteem, performance anxiety, athletes’ motivational orientation, and sport attrition can be influenced in a salutary fashion by a brief intervention with specific empirically derived behavioral guidelines that focus on creating a mastery motivational climate and positive coach-athlete interactions. However, other existing programs have yet to demonstrate efficacy in controlled outcome research.

• coaching behaviors
• leadership measurement
• behavioral assessment
• motor skill development
• social cognitive theory
• multidimensional leadership model
• achievement goal theory
• self-determination theory
• coaching behavior interventions
• psychosocial outcomes

Introduction

Coaches occupy a central role in sport, fulfilling instructional, organizational, strategic, and social relationship functions. Athletes’ skill acquisition, success, enjoyment, continued participation, and physical and psychological well-being are all strongly influenced by coaching behaviors. Not surprisingly, therefore, research on coaching behaviors and their consequences have been a strong focus of research in sport and exercise psychology. This body of scientific literature illustrates important reciprocal linkages between theory, research, and practice. This review focuses on three central facets of this research literature: measurement of coaching behaviors; relations between coaching behaviors and other variables, and interventions designed to enhance coaching practices.

Measurement and Correlates of Coaching Behaviors

Theory and measurement are intimately related. Theoretical models cannot be tested without measures that provide operational definitions of the model’s constructs, and the constructs provide the basis for the content of the measures, whether the measurement model involves questionnaire items completed by coaches and athletes or systematic observation and coding of actual coaching behaviors. Within sport and exercise psychology, several theoretical models have guided research on coaching behaviors. They are considered in their historical order of appearance.

Social-Cognitive Learning Theory: The Mediational Model

Direct observation of behavior is a hallmark of behavioral approaches, including social cognitive learning theory (Mischel, 1973 ; Bandura, 1986 ). The fact that coaching behaviors occur in a public context where they can be directly observed, categorized, and quantified inspired the development of behavioral coding systems beginning in the 1970s. An early example was the use of a ten-category system to assess the coaching behaviors of legendary University of California, Los Angeles basketball coach John Wooden (Tharp & Gallimore, 1976 ). Based on more than 30 hours of observation during team practices, the data showed that Wooden spent approximately 50% of his time giving verbal instruction, 12.7% in admonitions to hustle, and about 7% giving either encouragement and compliments or scolds, respectively. They also described stylistic aspects of his coaching, such as giving very brief and specific instructions and demonstrations that seldom lasted more than 5 seconds.

At about the same time, the Coaching Behavior Assessment System (CBAS) was developed as a research tool to permit the direct observation and coding of coaches’ actions during practices and games (Smith, Smoll, & Hunt, 1977 ). The CBAS contained 12 categories divided into two major classes of behaviors. Reactive (elicited) behaviors are responses to immediately preceding athlete or team behaviors, while spontaneous (emitted) behaviors are initiated by the coach and are not a response to a discernible preceding event. Reactive behaviors are responses to either desirable performance or effort (i.e., reinforcement, nonreinforcement), mistakes and errors (i.e., mistake-contingent encouragement, mistake-contingent technical instruction, punishment, punitive technical instruction, ignoring mistakes), or misbehaviors on the part of athletes (i.e., keeping control). The spontaneous class includes general technical instruction, general encouragement, organization, and general communication (unrelated to the current situation). The system thus involves basic interactions between the situation and the coach’s behavior. Use of the CBAS in observing and coding coaching behaviors in a variety of sports has shown that (a) the scoring system is sufficiently comprehensive to incorporate the vast majority of overt leader behaviors, (b) high interrater reliability can be obtained, and (c) individual differences in behavioral patterns can be discerned (Smith, Smoll, & Christensen, 1996 ).

The CBAS was developed within a cognitive-behavioral mediational model that involved interactions between the situation, coaching behaviors, the athlete’s perceptions of the behaviors, and the athlete’s reactions to the behavior (Smoll & Smith, 1989 ). The athlete’s reactions are assumed to be mediated by the athlete’s encoding and perception of the coach’s behavior. This assumption led to the development of a questionnaire (CBAS Perceived Behaviors sScale) for athletes, asking them how frequently their coach engaged in each of the CBAS categories. The latter consists of definitional items that provide examples of prototypic categorical behaviors. For example, the preface to a question on mistake-contingent encouragement may include the following: “A coach may say: ‘Sometimes players goof and make mistakes.’ Some coaches give their players support and encouragement after they make a mistake. For example, they may say, ‘That’s OK. Don’t worry about it; you’ll get ‘em next time.’ Other coaches don’t give much encouragement after mistakes.” Then the survey follows with “How often did your coach encourage you after you made mistakes?” In a study involving 51 youth baseball coaches, 542 athletes, and 57,213 coded behaviors, team-level bivariate correlations between observed and perceived behaviors were variable, with the highest levels of agreement occurring for the categories involving the coaches’ responses to mistakes (+.54 for punishment, +.37 for punitive technical instruction, and +.31 for mistake-contingent technical instruction). Canonical correlation analyses of the observed and perceived behaviors revealed dimensions that correlated +.89 with one another and were both related to attitudes toward the coach, assessed at the end of the season. Both behavioral and perceived dimensions had their highest loadings on the supportive (i.e., positive reinforcement and mistake-contingent encouragement) and the punitive behavioral categories. Notably, however, although the level of agreement reflects as much as 30% common variance, the level of agreement allows for substantial lack of correspondence between observed behaviors and athlete perceptions, and for variation in athletes’ perceptions of a particular coach. Also in accord with the mediational model, athlete-perceived coaching behaviors were more highly and consistently related to their attitudes toward the coach than were observed behaviors. Five behaviors (i.e., mistake-contingent encouragement, general encouragement, punishment, punitive technical instruction, and general technical instruction) were correlated with positive evaluations of the coach at values between .34 and .43, with the punitive categories being negatively correlated with attitudes toward the coach (Smith, Smoll, & Curtis, 1978 ).

A companion self-report CBAS questionnaire modeled on the athlete perception form was also created for coaches. Research showed that, consistent with the mediational model, athlete-perceived coaching behaviors were more strongly related to outcome variables than were the observed behaviors. Furthermore, athletes’ reports were more strongly related to the observed behaviors than were the coaches’ self-reports, indicating that except with regard to punitive behaviors, coaches have limited awareness of how they behave (Smith et al., 1978 ).

Factor analyses of the CBAS revealed three major factors that account for approximately 75% of the behavioral variance: (a) supportiveness (comprised of reinforcement and mistake-contingent encouragement), (b) instructiveness (general technical instruction and mistake-contingent technical instruction versus general communication and general encouragement), and (c) punitiveness (punishment and punitive technical instruction). Relations between coaches’ scores on these behavioral dimensions and athletes’ postseason attitude measures indicated that players responded most favorably to coaches who engaged in higher percentages of supportive and instructional behaviors (Smith et al., 1978 ). Athletes on teams whose coaches created a supportive environment also liked their teammates more. A somewhat surprising finding was that the team’s win-loss record was essentially unrelated to how well the players liked the coach and how much they wanted to play for the coach in the future. This finding that coaching behaviors were far more important predictors of liking for the coach than was win-loss record was replicated in another study involving youth basketball (Cumming, Smoll, Smith, & Grossbard, 2007 ). Notably, however, winning assumed greater importance beyond age 12, although it continued to be a less important attitudinal determinant than coaching behaviors.

As the mediational model predicts, athlete’s reactions to coaching behaviors are influenced by both athlete and situational characteristics. For example, athletes with low in self-esteem are especially responsive to variations in supportive and instructional behaviors in terms of their liking for coaches, preferring coaches who are high on both dimensions, whereas children with high self-esteem are less influenced by how supportive or instructive the coach is (Smith & Smoll, 1990 ). Situational characteristics also matter. In one study in which score of the baseball games were assessed each half inning, factor scores on the supportiveness, punitiveness, and instructiveness dimensions revealed that the rate of supportive behaviors that coaches delivered while their team was winning correlated highly with athlete’s postseason liking, whereas supportive behaviors that occurred while the team was losing bore no relation to liking for the coach. The opposite occurred for punitive behaviors, which were strongly and negatively related to liking when delivered in losing situations, but were only weakly related when given during winning situations. Instructiveness was not differentially affected by the score at the time it occurred (Smith, Shoda, Cumming, & Smoll, 2009 ).

The CBAS has been used in many studies, particularly within youth sports, to develop behavioral profiles of coaches, to assess relations between coaching behaviors and other variables, such as evaluative reactions to the coach, team cohesion, and sport attrition, as well as athletes’ anxiety and self-esteem. It has also been used to measure behavioral changes that occur as a result of coach training (e.g., Smith, Smoll, & Curtis, 1979 ; Conroy & Coatsworth, 2004 ; Lewis, Groom, & Roberts, 2014 ). The CBAS has given impetus to the development of other behavioral coding systems containing similar or related behavioral categories (Morgan, Muir, & Abraham, 2014 ). One recent example, the Coach Analysis and Intervention System (Cushion, Harvey, Muir, & Nelson, 2012 ) uses computer technology to code a wide variety of verbal and nonverbal behaviors and the circumstances under which they occur, to whom they are directed, and how they are combined when a coach exhibits several behaviors simultaneously. Another valuable tool allows for the coding of both coach and athlete behaviors, permitting an analysis of coach-athlete interaction patterns (Erickson, Cộté, Hollenstein, & Deakin, 2011 ). These recent developments promise to build upon the research base derived from the CBAS over the past four decades.

Multidimensional Model of Sport Leadership

The study of leadership has a long history in mainstream psychology, spanning social psychology, industrial-organizational psychology, and military psychology (VanVactor, 2013 ). Drawing upon the many theories of leadership, Chelladurai ( 1993 , 2012 ) advanced a multidimensional model of leadership that includes situational characteristics, leader characteristics, and member characteristics. To measure leader characteristics, Chelladurai focused on five dimensions of coaching behavior: (a) training and instruction; (b) democratic behavior (allowing athletes a voice in team decisions); (c) autocratic behaviors (decisions restricted to the coach); (d) social support (expressing personal concern for individual athletes); and (e) positive feedback for good performance. These dimensions are measured by a 40-item leadership scale for sports (LSS), which assesses athletes’ preferences for specific behaviors, their perceptions of their coach’s behaviors, and coaches’ perceptions of their own behavior. The scale has acceptable psychometric properties and has been used in many studies of coaches.

The multidimensional model predicts that athlete performance and satisfaction will be greatest when required (situationally elicited) behaviors, preferred leader behaviors, and actual leader behaviors are aligned. Although support has been found for this hypothesis (Chelladurai, 1984 , 2012 ), results have been inconsistent, with congruent findings for some subscales and not for others, and with inconsistent patterns across studies. In general, however, low discrepancies between training and instruction, social support, and positive feedback tend to be more often related to satisfaction, while autocratic behaviors that exceed preferences are aversive and related to dissatisfaction.

Clearly, other variables interact with the congruence measure in ways as yet undetermined. Of particular interest in this regard is the fact that preferred leader behaviors can vary among athletes. For example, athletes with high anxiety prefer more social support and positive feedback behaviors than do athletes with low anxiety, and athletes with low levels of motivation prefer autocratic behaviors that apparently substitute for internal motivation (Horn, Bloom, Berglund, & Packard, 2011 ). Older and more accomplished athletes prefer coaches who are both autocratic and socially supportive. Males prefer training and instructional and an autocratic style more than women do, whereas women tend to prefer a more democratic style. Studies have also shown marked differences across different nations and cultures (Chelladurai & Reimer, 1998 ). Thus, within this model, there is no “one size fits all” preferred coaching pattern. Rather, coaches who are flexible and can adapt their coaching behaviors to the situation and to the preferences of individual athletes are likely to be most successful.

Given the substantial amount of research involving the LSS, it is puzzling that although many positive findings have occurred in terms of differences between groups of athletes and support has been found for the importance of alignment between preferred and actual coach behaviors, relations between hypotheses derived from the multidimensional model and objective measures of performance have proven to be weaker than expected, and at times inconsistent with expectations (Chelladurai & Reimer, 2012 ). Objective performance is an understandably challenging target variable, as it is affected by many factors beyond leadership style, including athletic talent, unforeseen injuries, strength of opponents, and an array of psychological factors that are largely beyond the coach’s influence. Also, quantitative measures of broad classes of behavior, whether coded with the CBAS or reported, do not necessarily reflect important qualities of the behavior (e.g., instructional adequacy or encouragement delivered in a sarcastic fashion), a fact that can reduce relations to performance. Moreover, there is evidence that coaches are perceived as responding differentially to more and less successful athletes. In a study of collegiate football players, for example, higher-performing athletes (starters) rated their coaches as engaging in significantly higher levels of training and instruction, as having a more democratic and a less autocratic decision-making style, as being more socially supportive, and as offering more positive feedback than did lower-status athletes labeled “survivors” by their coaches. The latter perceived their coaches as more autocratic and as low on the other four behavioral dimensions. Additionally, longitudinal evidence exists that LSS behaviors are not stable over the course of a season, with instructional, democratic, and positive feedback showing the largest changes (Fletcher & Roberts, 2013 ). Temporal invariance could therefore affect perceived behavior scores on the LSS and cloud relationships of the LSS with other variables across studies.

Finally, the multidimensional model is complex, with many “moving parts.” It is possible that complex and as yet undiscovered interactions among mediating factors remain hidden, as in the mediation model, where nonsignificant overall relations between CBAS observed behaviors and attitudes toward the coach when behaviors were aggregated across game situations suddenly became highly significant when the game situation variable was taken into account.

Given the degree of conceptual overlap between the mediational and multidimensional models of coaching behavior, it is interesting to assess relations between the CBAS and the LSS. A study of high school athletes that related LSS scores to scores on the CBAS athlete form revealed strong relations between scores on the two scales, and both LSS and CBAS scores accounted for substantial and similar amount of variance in positive attitudes toward the coach (Cumming, Smith, & Smoll, 2006 ). For example, the CBAS categories accounted for 39% of the variance, and the LSS scales accounted for 37% of the variance in the amount of enjoyment experienced while playing for the coach. In accord with predictions made by Chelladurai ( 1993 ), the LSS positive feedback scale was highly correlated with the CBAS categories of reinforcement and general encouragement and negatively related to nonreinforcement. However, the same pattern was shown for the LSS social support scale and, in general, all of the positively toned CBAS behaviors correlated well with all of the LSS scales, except autocratic, the only scale that correlated positively with the punitive CBAS categories. In general, therefore, convergent validity greatly exceeded discriminant validity in the LSS-CBAS relations. High positive correlations among the training, democratic, positive feedback, and social support scales of the LSS add to the discriminant validity issue.

Achievement Goal Theory

No theory has had a greater impact on sport psychology over the past two decades than achievement goal theory (AGT). Originally developed to study motivation within the educational domain (Nicholls, 1989 ; Ames, 1992 ), the relevance of the theory to motivational issues in sport soon became apparent, inspiring a substantial amount of sport psychology research.

Achievement goal theory focuses on the function and the meaning of goal-directed actions, based on how participants define success and how they judge whether or not they have demonstrated competence. The two central constructs in the theory are individual goal orientations that guide achievement perceptions and behavior, and the motivational climate created within achievement settings. The theory posits two separate conceptions of success represented in mastery (task) and ego achievement goal orientations. In mastery orientation, success is self-referenced, defined in terms of personal improvement, enjoyment, effort, and learning from mistakes. In ego orientation, success is other-referenced, achieved through besting others or equaling their level of performance using minimal effort (Ames, 1992 ; Roberts, 2001 ).

According to AGT, how an individual defines success and competence is influenced by interacting dispositional and environmental factors. Environmental conditions that emphasize and reinforce mastery or ego success criteria comprise the motivational climate. Achievement goal theory posits two types of motivational climates that promote either mastery or ego conceptions of success. A mastery climate emphasizes enjoyment, giving maximum effort, and personal improvement as indicators of success, stresses the importance of each team member and promotes mutual support and cooperative learning. Mistakes are viewed not as something to be dreaded but as a natural consequence of learning and as providing the feedback needed to improve performance; coaches provide encouragement and corrective instruction when they occur.

In an ego climate, there is a strong emphasis on outcome. Success is defined as winning out over others; differential attention is focused on the best athletes; intrateam rivalry is promoted by comparing athletes favorably or unfavorably with one another; and mistakes are negatively evaluated and often punished (Ames, 1992 ; Roberts, 2001 ).

Achievement goal theory has inspired the development of sport-specific measures designed to assess differences in both achievement goal orientations and in motivational climates created by coaches, parents, and peers. The most widely employed coach-initiated motivational climate scale is the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire-2 (PIMCSQ-2; Newton, Duda, & Yin, 2000 ), which is appropriate by its reading level for adolescents and adult populations. An adaptation designed for children down to ages 8 or 9 is the Motivational Climate Scale for Youth Sport (MCSYS; Smith, Cumming, & Smoll, 2008 ). Both scales have separate mastery (task) and ego-climate subscales, but the PIMCSQ-2 also measures underlying facets of the task climate (i.e., cooperative learning, effort-improvement emphasis, and an important role for all participants) and ego climate (i.e., intrateam rivalry, unequal recognition, and punishment for mistakes). Most studies use the superordinate task and ego scales. The MCSYS mastery and ego scales correlate −.38, indicating that coaches engage in both classes of behavior. Sample mastery scale items are (a) “The coach told players to help each other get better,” (b) “The coach made players feel good when they improved a skill,” and (c) “Coach said that all of us were important to the team’s success.” Sample ego-scale items are (a) “Winning games was the most important thing for the coach,” (b) “Players were taken out of games if they made a mistake,” and (c) “The coach paid most attention to the best players.”

The motivational climate created by coaches has been shown to be related to a wide array of sport outcomes (Duda & Treasure, 2015 ; McArdle & Duda, 2002 ). As in educational settings, a strong body of empirical evidence shows that a mastery climate is linked to a wide array of positive outcomes, including enhanced enjoyment and satisfaction, higher levels of perceived competence and performance, lower performance anxiety, higher levels of self-esteem, and higher levels of intrinsic motivation for sport participation. A mastery environment fosters the belief that effort, which is controllable, is the key to sport success, whereas athletes in an ego climate place greater emphasis on ability. A mastery climate promotes greater goal persistence and sustained effort, and athletes tend to adopt adaptive achievement strategies such as selecting challenging tasks, giving maximum effort, persisting in the face of setbacks, and taking pride in personal improvement. In contrast, an ego-involving climate promotes social comparison as a basis for success judgments, whereas an ego environment yields discouragement when a positive outcome is not achieved. In a mastery climate, athletes show more positive and prosocial moral attitudes, whereas an ego climate is associated with greater willingness to cheat or do whatever is necessary to win. Finally, a mastery climate fosters greater team cohesion, attraction among team members, positive evaluations of the coach, and lower rates of sport attrition compared with an ego climate. Consistent with AGT, a large body of research shows that mastery and ego climates promote and strengthen corresponding goal orientations (Duda & Treasure, 2015 ). Over the course of a sport season, youth athletes exposed to a mastery climate exhibit increases in mastery goal orientation scores and decreases in ego goal orientation, whereas those in an ego climate show increases in ego goal orientation (Smith, Smoll, & Cumming, 2009 ).

Notably, behaviors associated with mastery and ego climates are not mutually exclusive; rather, they are a matter of emphasis. Most coaches engage in a mixture of mastery- and ego-oriented behaviors, particularly during competition, when the orientation is likely to shift the outcome. The same is true of athletes’ goal orientations. Highly successful athletes often have an overall mastery orientation but shift into an ego-oriented state during competition, when the focus is on winning.

One indicator of the influence of the motivational climate comes from studies comparing its effects on athletes’ reactions to their sport experience with team success (win-loss record). In a study of 10- to 15-year-old athletes, their team’s winning percentage was positively related to athletes’ judgments of their coaches’ perceived knowledge and teaching ability, but motivational climate accounted for far more variance than did winning percentage in terms of how much they liked playing for the coach and wished to do so in the future (Cumming et al., 2007 ). In a later study of adolescent basketball players, motivational climate exhibited stronger and more pervasive relations to the athletes’ attitudes toward the coach, teammates, and the sport experience than did winning (Breiger, Cumming, Smith, & Smoll, 2015 ). For both boys and girls, winning percentage was related to enjoyment derived from playing the sport and intention to continue participation the following season. Likewise, for both boys and girls, mastery climate scores were positively and significantly related to enjoyment playing on the team, liking for the coach, and perceived liking by the coach. However, the results also showed that gender influences athletes’ responses to both winning and to the motivational climate. An ego climate clearly had a more negative impact on girls, with ego climate scores being negatively related to how much girls liked the sport, how much fun they had playing on their teams, and how much they believed the coach liked them.

An ego climate also affected the importance of win-loss record in ways a mastery climate did not. For both boys and girls, significant relations were found between winning percentage and liking for the sport, personal importance of winning, and intention to return the following year. Nonetheless, gender differences also occurred. In an ego climate, liking for and desire to again play for the coach, liking for teammates and enjoyment playing on the team were positively related to winning record for boys, but not for girls. Enjoyment playing on the team and desire to play for the coach again were positively and significantly related to winning record for boys, but not for girls. It thus appears that winning within an ego climate is more important than it is in a mastery climate, but that winning may affect different attitudes and aspects of the experience for boys than for girls.

Motivational climate research has focused attention on the coach-athlete relationship. Building upon this foundation, several new conceptual models have appeared that focus on the quality of the relationship that is to be found particularly within a mastery climate. Relational coaching (Jowett, 2009 ) focuses on four important aspects of the coach-athlete relationship: (a) mutual closeness, (b) commitment to the relationship, (c) complementarity (ability to work cooperatively), and (d) co-orientation (the ability to view the relationship from both one’s own and the other’s perspective). The Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire is used to measure these aspects of the relationship, and research using this measure shows that relationships that are high on these factors produce the most enjoyable and productive coach-athlete climate.

Another derivative conception, again related to the mastery climate but not identical with it, is the caring environment, where individuals are made to feel a sense of belonging and in which participants treat one another with kindness and mutual respect. Research on the caring environment has shown that the positive emotions produced by such an environment mediate positive well-being in athletes (Fry, Guivernau, Kim, Newton, Gano-Overway, & Magyar, 2012 ).

All of the AGT results cited so far are based on athlete perceptions of the motivational climate, using either the PMCSQ or the MCSYS instruments. This is an entirely defensible approach, for as the mediational model described earlier emphasizes, it is the athlete’s perceptions of the climate that mediate the effects of coach behaviors on outcome variables. Nonetheless, the need to assess the actual climate-relevant behaviors of coaches from both methodological and theoretical perspectives has repeatedly been cited (N. Smith et al., 2015 ). A new theoretical advance integrating AGT and self-determination theory, described in the following section, has inspired the development of a new observation system tied to the expanded model.

Self-Determination Theory

A recent theoretical advance integrates AGT with another prominent motivational theory that has special relevance to sport-related motivation (Duda, 2013 ). Self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 2000 ) focuses on factors that influence the development of motivation, particularly intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The relative strength of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation determines an individual’s sense of autonomy, the extent to which behavior is viewed as self-governed. Together with competence (the perceived mastery over behavior) and relatedness (the perceived sense of belonging), autonomy is considered a basic need that facilitates psychological well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). SDT proposes that the social environment influences the extent to which these basic needs are satisfied.

SDT holds that internal and external behavioral goals are distributed on a continuum of self-determination. On the self-determined end lies intrinsic motivation, where actions are performed in the service of inherent enjoyment of the activity. The continuum also contains three different variants of extrinsic motivation. From higher to lower self-determination, these are termed (a) identified regulation (in which behavior is related to other goals, such as engaging in the sport to lose weight or improve conditioning), (b) introjected regulation (in which behavior functions to avoid a negative emotion or for ego enhancement), and (c) external regulation (in which the behavior is performed for external reasons, such as tangible rewards or the avoidance of punishment). SDT also retains the concept of amotivation, in which behavior loses all reinforcement value and occurs largely out of habit (e.g., “I’m not sure why I swim any more.”). Generally, because behavior is guided more by external incentives or becomes amotivated, positive qualities of human nature are hindered, whereas greater self-determination or autonomy allows positive qualities to flourish (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). An imposing literature both within and outside of sport supports this contention and demonstrates superior well-being (i.e., high feelings of autonomy, competence and relatedness) under conditions that foster high intrinsic motivation (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 2000 ; Duda, 2013 ; Amorose & Anderson-Butcher, 2015 ).

The integration of AGT and SDT was inspired by clear conceptual overlap between a mastery motivational climate and situational factors identified in SDT research that promoted the satisfaction of autonomy, relatedness, and competency needs, as well as strong evidence that a mastery motivational climate had salutary effects on the need variables within SDT. Moreover, in the prediction of meaningful sport outcomes, concurrently applying AGT and SDT measures as predictor variables accounted for overlapping but also independent sources of variance (Quested & Duda, 2010 ), and they also related differentially to important aspects of athlete well-being and quality of functioning. Duda ( 2013 ) advanced a hierarchical multidimensional model of empowering and disempowering motivational climates. An empowering environment is mastery-oriented, socially supportive, and autonomy supportive of internal self-regulation. A disempowering climate is ego oriented, punitive, nonsupportive, and controlling.

Although applications of the model are in their relative infancy, both perceived and behavioral-observation measures of the integrated motivational climate have been developed. A 30-item Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire-Coach (EDMCQ-C; Appleton, Ntoumanis, Quested, Viladrich, & Duda, 2016 ) allows athletes to rate their coach’s climate relevant behavior on an agree-disagree scale and is used to measure five dimensions of the perceived motivational climate: (a) task involved, (b) ego involved, (c) controlling, (d) autonomy supportive, and (e) socially supportive.

A behavioral observational system, the Multidimensional Motivational Climate Observation System (MMCOS; N. Smith et al., 2015 ) provides a measure used to rate the measure the coach’s observed behaviors in relation to the theoretical model. It is a complex system, consisting of two superordinate dimensions (empowering and disempowering) seven environmental dimensions (autonomy support, controlling, task-involving, ego-involving, relatedness support, relatedness thwarting, and structure), and 32 lower-order coaching strategies that are checked off and used to rate the higher-order dimensions. The system is used to code temporally or event-defined segments (e.g., 5-minute segments in a soccer match). The MMCOS is clearly more complex than the CBAS and provides a more nuanced behavioral profile. However, unlike the CBAS and other behavioral coding systems, it is not a quantitative measure of the frequency with which observed behaviors actually occur; rather, it is a set of observer ratings.

Initial assessment of the construct validity of the perceived and observed behavior measures have been conducted with large multinational samples of athletes representing a variety of sports. One study that assessed relationships between athlete-perceived (EDMCQ-C) and observed (MMCOS) behaviors as well as the relations of both measures to athlete indices of autonomous (internal), externally controlled motivation, and amotivation (N. Smith, Tessier, Tzioumakis, Fabra, Quested, Appleton et al., 2016 ). None of the correlations between athlete-perceived and observed behaviors providing indices of the five empowering and disempowering dimensions exceeded .09, reflecting less than 1% common variance, a figure far lower than that obtained with the CBAS categories derived from social learning theory in a youth sport sample similar in age. Likewise, relationships between the MCCOS behavior measures and the theoretically related athlete motivation measures were quite low, ranging from −.01 to .09 and accounting for less than 1% of the motivational outcome variance. Correlations of the athlete-perceived EDMCQ-C measures with the athlete motivation variables were more favorable, with correlations exceeding .30 found between coach controlling and ego-oriented behaviors and athletes’ externally controlled motivation and amotivation. These results lend stronger evidence for the construct validity of the athlete-perceived measure than those reported for the observational measure. In another study, empowering climate scores on the EDMCQ-C were positively related to enjoyment and self-esteem and negatively related to reduced accomplishment, devaluation, and physical health symptoms, whereas a disempowering climate was negatively related to enjoyment and self-esteem, and positively related to athlete burnout and negative health symptoms (Appleton & Duda, 2016 ). However, a more sophisticated analysis that simultaneously assessed the interactive effects of empowering and disempowering motivational climates accounted for only about 1% of the variance in these targeted outcome variables. Buffering the effects of disempowering coach behaviors required a very high level of empowering behaviors. This result is consistent with CBAS findings that although punitive behavior categories occur with far less frequency than do the positive behaviors (also shown in the observational data of N. Smith et al., 2016 ), they have a disproportionate negative impact on athletes by creating an aversive sport environment.

Enhancing Coaching Effectiveness

There has never been any question that coaches occupy a central role in sports, exerting key influence on sport outcomes through their roles as teachers and strategic planners, and in the relationships they form with athletes and parents. Understandably, therefore, enhancing their pedagogical, strategic, and interpersonal capabilities has long been a focus within sport and exercise psychology. Two lines of emphasis are evident that, historically, have occurred along relatively independent tracks. The first involves instruction in motor learning principles and strategic techniques designed to develop athletes’ physical skills and optimal strategic decision making by coaches. The second emphasis, of more recent origin, is focused on helping coaches to create a psychosocial sport environment that enhances outcomes for athletes. As empirical evidence, such as that reviewed in the previous section, has accumulated showing consistent relationships between coaching behaviors and their impact on athletes and team functioning, coach interventions addressing this domain have been developed.

Enhancing Strategic and Instructional Capabilities

Motor skill learning is highly sport specific, but a strong science base has emerged on general principles involved in learning, maintaining, and improving such skills (Coker, 2013 ; Magill, 2013 ). The dominant model divides the motor learning process into three phases: the cognitive, associative, and autonomous phases. Each of these requires different coaching techniques. In the cognitive phase, explanations and demonstrations by the coach allow athletes to develop a motor program, a set of internal representations, and self-instructions to guide the movement. With practice and feedback, both from the athlete’s sensory systems and from the coach, the motor program is revised, corrected, and refined so that the skill is executed in an increasingly synchronized fashion. The coach designs exercises and practice routines, adjusts instruction depending on the progress being shown, gives corrective feedback, and provides encouragement to facilitate the process.

Once the athlete can execute the skill in the way it was demonstrated, the associative phase begins. In this intermediate phase of learning, the learner has moved from having a general idea of how to perform the skill to being able to perform it accurately and consistently. Speed, accuracy, coordination, and consistency improves even further and the athlete develops an implicit “feel” for the activity based on a more autonomous motor program and the ability to self-correct when errors occur. The coach’s role is now to utilize the skill in actual sport situations and to plan strategy, largely by designing effective practices that allow the athlete to apply the skill to simulated or real competitive situations. Error correction requires the ability to detect increasingly subtle errors and to provide demonstrations and feedback in a manner that can be used for further refinement and skill application. In closed skills (e.g., bowling or free throw shooting), the environment is fairly constant, and consistency of movement is the primary focus. In open skills, where the environment is diverse and unpredictable (e.g., in golf), the coach must help the athlete diversify the movement to meet environmental demands and teach the athlete which environmental cues are key to planning and making adjustments. The provision of effective feedback continues to be an important function of the coach during this phase.

In the autonomous or advanced phase of skill learning, the motor program is run off with little conscious thought or attention to the movement. Indeed, conscious attention to the movement can degrade performance by disrupting the automaticity of the highly developed skill sequence. As Baseball Hall of Famer Yogi Berra once said, “You can’t think and hit at the same time.” The phrase “paralysis by analysis,” popular among coaches and athletes, captures the phenomenon. Performance slumps are perpetuated by cognitive interference with the normal flow of skill execution. During this phase, the major demands on the coach involve highly refined practice routines, subtle error correction, and encouragement and motivational overtures where needed. At this level, exquisite understanding of the skill and ability to communicate effectively are prime requisites for effective coaching. Excellent resources are available to help coaches at all levels of sport refine their sport-specific teaching and strategic skills (e.g., Coker, 2013 ; Martens, 2012 ). Among the newer additions to the coach’s performance enhancement tool kit is instruction in utilizing and teaching athletes not only motor and strategic skills, but also empirically supported psychological skills such as systematic goal setting, attention control, stress management, self-talk, confidence, and mental rehearsal procedures (e.g., Burton & Raedeke, 2008 ).

Enhancing Psychosocial Outcomes in Athletes

Increased awareness of the manner in which the coach-athlete relationship can positively or adversely affect not only skill development but also a wide range of psychosocial outcomes in athletes of all ages is attributable to an enormous body of empirical research. Coaching behaviors have been shown to influence athletes’ self-esteem, motivation, performance anxiety, attitudes toward their sport experience, peer relationships, burnout, psychological skills development, physical well-being, and sport attrition. Concerns about athletes’ well-being, an alarming sport dropout rate exceeding 30% per year in young athletes (Gould, 1987 ) and, in some cases, formal legislation requiring training for youth sport coaches, has stimulated the development of many training programs for coaches over the past four decades. Unfortunately, development has far outstripped systematic evaluation of their effects.

Coach Effectiveness Training/Mastery Approach to Coaching

Widespread concerns about adult-created problems in youth sports prompted the Youth Enrichment in Sports program of research and application. The aims of the project, carried out in two phases were (a) to study relations between coaching behaviors and young athletes’ reactions to their youth sport experience and (b) to use the empirical results as the basis for an evidence-based intervention for coaches (Smith et al., 1978 ). Cognitive social learning theory (Bandura, 1986 ; Mischel, 1973 ) formed the basis for instrument development (e.g., the CBAS) and the intervention procedures, which involved modeling and role playing of desirable behaviors and coach self-monitoring of their behaviors to enhance awareness. A more comprehensive discussion of cognitive-behavioral principles and techniques used in conducting psychologically oriented coach training programs appears elsewhere (Smoll & Smith, 2015 ). Essentially, however, the intervention is designed to influence observed and athlete-perceived coaching behaviors, and these changes, are thought to mediate other effects of the training on young athletes.

Data derived from two large-scale phase 1 studies provided clear links between the CBAS dimensions of supportiveness, instructiveness, and punitiveness and athletes’ reactions to their coach, their teammates, and other aspects of their experience. Phase 2 involved the development and evaluation of a brief and highly focused intervention for youth sport coaches based on the evidence-based phase 1 findings. The intervention initially was called Coach Effectiveness Training (CET). With the development of AGT a decade later, it became clear that the CET guidelines (particularly its conception of success) were entirely consistent with the mastery motivational climate described by AGT, and a later version of the intervention formally introduced motivational climate content. The 75-minute intervention was therefore renamed the Mastery Approach to Coaching (MAC).

The MAC program incorporates two major themes. First, it strongly emphasizes the distinction between positive versus aversive control of behavior (Smith, 2015 ). In a series of coaching “do’s and don’ts” derived from the foundational phase 1 research on coaching behaviors and their effects, coaches are encouraged to increase four specific behaviors: (a) positive reinforcement, (b) mistake-contingent encouragement, (c) corrective instruction given in a positive and encouraging fashion, and (d) sound technical instruction. Coaches are urged to avoid nonreinforcement of positive behaviors, punishment for mistakes, and punitive technical instruction following mistakes. They are also instructed how to establish team rules and reinforce compliance with them to avoid discipline problems, and to reinforce socially supportive behaviors among team members. These guidelines, which are summarized in Table 1 , are designed to increase positive coach-athlete interactions, enhance team solidarity, reduce fear of failure, and promote a positive atmosphere for skill development.

The second important MAC theme is a conception of success as giving maximum effort and becoming the best one can be, rather than an emphasis on winning or outperforming others. Derived from Coach John Wooden’s definition of success as “the sense of self-satisfaction from knowing that you did your best to become the best that you are capable of becoming,” (Wooden & Carty, 2005 , p. 12), MAC-trained coaches are thus encouraged to adopt a four-part philosophy of winning (Smith & Smoll, 2012 , pp. 27–28):

Winning isn’t everything, nor is it the only thing . Young athletes cannot get the most out of sports if they think that the only objective is to beat their opponents. Although winning is an important goal, it is not the most important objective.

Failure is not the same thing as losing . It is important that athletes do not view losing as a sign of failure or as a threat to their personal value.

Success is not equivalent to winning . Neither success nor failure need depend on the outcome of a contest or on a win-loss record. Winning and losing pertain to the outcome of a contest, whereas success and failure do not.

Athletes should be taught that success is found in striving for victory (i.e., success is related to commitment and effort). Athletes should be taught that they are never “losers” if they give maximum effort.

This philosophy, which is highly congruent with a mastery motivational climate, is designed to maximize young athletes’ enjoyment of sport and their chances of deriving the benefits of participation, partly as a result of combating competitive anxiety. Although seeking victory is encouraged as inherent to competitive sports, the ultimate importance of winning is reduced relative to other participation motives. In recognition of the inverse relation between enjoyment and postcompetition stress (Smith, Smoll, & Passer, 2002 ), fun is highlighted as the paramount objective. The philosophy also promotes separation of the athlete’s feelings of self-worth from the game’s outcome, which serves to help overcome fear of failure. The mastery-oriented coaching guidelines and philosophy of winning are thus consistent with the procedures successfully designed by Ames ( 1992 ) and Epstein ( 1988 ) to create a mastery learning climate in the classroom. The behavioral guidelines that form the core of the MAC intervention are shown in Table 1 . The MAC workshop, together with supporting materials, is now available online at www.y-e-sports.org .

Table 1. Summary of Mastery Approach to Coaching Guidelines

Note . Excerpted from the manual given to MAC workshop participants (Smoll & Smith, 2009 ).

A notable finding from observational studies is that coaches have very limited awareness of how they behave, as indicated by low correlations between observed and coach-rated behaviors (N. Smith et al., 2016 ; R. Smith et al., 1978 ). Because behavior change does not occur without awareness of one’s behavior, MAC coaches are taught the use of two proven behavioral-change techniques, namely, behavioral feedback and self-monitoring. To obtain feedback, coaches are encouraged to work with their assistants as a team and share descriptions of each others’ behaviors. Another feedback procedure involves coaches soliciting input directly from their athletes. With respect to self-monitoring, the workshop manual includes a brief Coach Self-Report Form, containing nine items related to the behavioral guidelines that coaches complete after practices and games (Smoll & Smith, 2009 , p. 25). On the form, coaches are asked how often they engaged in the recommended behaviors in relevant situations.

The CET/MAC intervention has been evaluated numerous times in experimental and quasi-experimental studies since its development (for more detailed reviews, see Smith & Smoll, 2011 ; Smoll & Smith, 2015 ). The outcomes supporting the efficacy of the coach-training program are summarized here:

Differences between experimental and control group coaches occurred in both observed and athlete-perceived coach behaviors in accordance with the behavioral guidelines (Smith et al., 1979 ; Smoll, Smith, & Cumming, 2007 ; Lewis et al., 2014 ).

Trained coaches were better liked and rated as better teachers; and their athletes reported more fun playing the sport, and a higher level of attraction among teammates. Increases in athletes’ perceptions of both task-related and social group cohesion have also been reported for youngsters who played for trained versus untrained coaches (Smith et al., 1979 ; McLaren, Eys, & Murray, 2015 ).

Athletes’ reports of their team’s coach-initiated motivational climate clearly supported the efficacy of the intervention. In this regard, trained coaches received significantly higher mastery-climate scores and lower ego-climate scores on the MCSYS climate measure compared with untrained coaches. Moreover, in accord with AGT, male and female athletes who played for trained coaches exhibited increases in mastery goal orientation scores and significant decreases in ego orientation scores. In contrast, athletes who played for control group coaches did not change in their goal orientations from preseason to late season. Paralleling the significant difference between intervention and control groups in sport-related mastery scores, a significant group difference was found on the mastery score of an academic achievement goal scale as well, suggesting generalization of achievement goals (Smoll et al., 2007 ).

Consistent with a self-esteem enhancement model, children with low self-esteem who played for trained coaches show significant increases in feelings of self-worth. Youngsters with low self-esteem in the control group did not change (Smith et al., 1979 ; Smoll, Smith, Barnett, & Everett, 1993 ; Coatsworth & Conroy, 2006 ).

Athletes who played for trained coaches showed significant decreases in sport performance anxiety over the course of the season (Smith, Smoll, & Barnett, 1995 ; Conroy & Coatsworth, 2004 ; Smith, Smoll, & Cumming, 2007 ).

Attrition in youth sports is a pervasive concern that has negative health and psychosocial implications. With the win-loss record controlled, children who played for untrained youth baseball coaches dropped out of all sports the following season at a rate of 26%, whereas those who played for trained coaches had only a 5% dropout rate (Barnett, Smoll, & Smith, 1992 ).

Traditionally, CET/MAC training has been offered in a workshop format. However, many sport psychologists work with individual coaches. A recent and promising adaptation is the Individualized Program for Counseling Coaches (Sousa, Smith, & Cruz, 2008 ; Cruz, Mora, Sousa, & Alcaraz, 2016 ). This individualized intervention combines MAC principles and behavioral guidelines with behavioral feedback and systematic goal setting to help coaches modify their behavior in accordance with their own behavioral objectives.

The intervention occurs in six steps. First, the CBAS is used to code the coach’s behaviors during a series of practices and matches to provide an average of 250–400 coded behaviors, thereby providing baseline data to help coaches become more aware of their coaching pattern and to assess postintervention changes. Next, a 60-minute session is held to go over basic principles concerning the motivational climate and its effects on athletes. In a second 60-minute session, the behavioral guidelines shown in Table 1 are presented in an interactive fashion. In the following session, the coach is presented with his or her behavioral profile derived from the CBAS observations, summarized in terms of the three factorial dimensions of supportiveness, punitiveness, and instructiveness, together with feedback on which behaviors would best be increased or decreased to optimize the coach’s effectiveness. The coach is then asked to select three CBAS categories that they want to increase or decrease. Finally, role playing is used to help the coach rehearse the target behaviors with the guidance of the trainer. The coach is encouraged to self-monitor during subsequent practices and matches and are given guidelines and reminders. CBAS data as well as athlete and coach reports are then collected during two subsequent practices and two matches as at baseline.

The results of the intervention have been very encouraging. In separate single-subject studies involving a total of 5 coaches, the trained coaches have exhibited behavior changes in accordance with their goals in most instances, increasing desirable behaviors and reducing negative ones (Sousa et al., 2008 ; Cruz et al., 2016 ). Of additional interest, generalization effects have been shown in behavior categories that were not specifically targeted by the coach, yielding a more positive behavioral profile overall following the intervention. For example, coaches who chose to increase positive reinforcement and encouragement showed a concomitant drop in punitive behaviors. These behavior changes were in most cases consistent with athlete’s perceptions of the coach’s behaviors on the athlete perception CBAS questionnaire. The encouraging results obtained in these single-coach studies indicate that this adaptation is worthy of further investigation and that its use of feedback and individualized goal setting, both of which have strong empirical support, is a significant feature of the training program.

Despite the rapid proliferation of coach education programs since the early 1970s, almost all of the systematic outcome research on the efficacy of coach training has been done with the CET/MAC program (Langan, Blake, & Lonsdale, 2013 ). Evidence for the efficacy of the intervention has now been provided by five different research groups. Based on the outcome studies, it appears that the empirically derived behavioral principles can be readily applied by coaches and that their application has salutary effects on a range of psychosocial outcome variables in young male and female athletes. However, there is a need for further research, particularly follow-up studies to assess the longer-term impact of the intervention on both coaches and athletes.

Empowering Coaching

The integration of AGT with SDT (Duda, 2013 ) is a major theoretical advance that has resulted in the concept of empowering and disempowering motivational climates. In an empowering climate, athletes strive for mastery goals, feel a sense of belonging, and believe they have a choice over how they behave. In a disempowering environment, the emphasis is on ego goals, punishment is applied, and athletes feel controlled by their coach.

Based on this model, an Empowering Coaching TM intervention was developed, applied, and evaluated in five European countries. The intervention is of 6 hours duration and educates coaches about the tenets of AGT and SDT relating to task and ego climates and intrinsic-extrinsic motivation and offers guidelines for increasing the empowering climate and reducing its disempowering aspects. Video clips and reflective exercises are designed to engage coaches in the content of the workshop (for a more detailed descriptions of the project and the intervention, see Duda, 2013 ; Project PAPA, 2016 ). The program’s emphasis differs somewhat from the CET/MAC empirically based behavioral guidelines approach:

Furthermore, this education programme is not about providing coaches with a “laundry list” of strategies or responses they can and should employ when interacting with their athletes . . . Rather, . . . the aim is to develop coaches’ conceptual understanding of motivation, motivation processes and their consequences. It is assumed that this enhanced “working knowledge” will make it more likely that a more empowering approach to coaching will be adopted, maintained, and generalized to different situations (Duda, 2013 , p. 315).

The intervention was tested in the largest experimental trial undertaken to date, involving 175 clubs, 854 teams, and 7,769 children in five European countries. Outcome variables involved athletes’ perceptions of empowering and disempowering aspects of the motivational climate using the behavioral EDMCQ-C measure, as well as measures of self-esteem, enjoyment, anxiety, and intentions to drop out. Some children wore accelerometers to record activity level during the week, and a subset of coaches was filmed so that their behaviors could be coded using the MCCOS observational instrument.

Several positive results were obtained. Behavioral observations in a subset of trained coaches revealed a more empowering and less disempowering climate over the course of the season. Children who played for trained coaches viewed their motivational climate as less disempowering (but not more empowering) and rated themselves as less likely to drop out of their program. However, no statistically significant positive outcomes have been reported for other important athlete variables, including autonomy, competence, and relatedness need satisfaction, enjoyment, self-esteem, anxiety, athlete burnout, and increased physical activity (Project PAPA, 2016 ). Possibly, the Empowering Coaches TM programs’ heavy emphasis on theoretical and conceptual content interfered with the development of the kind of rule-governed behavior that has been shown to result from adherence to specific behavioral guidelines (Baldwin & Baldwin, 2001 ). A more focused approach with greater emphasis on clear and specific behavioral guidelines may prove more efficacious while at the same time resulting in a more time-limited intervention.

Undoubtedly, coaches play a vital role in the athletic environment, and their behaviors influence the technical, cognitive, strategic, and psychosocial development of athletes. There is a wealth of empirical support for methods of teaching technical skills. The same is not the case in the psychosocial domain. Despite the substantial number of coach intervention programs developed over the past 30 years designed to enhance psychosocial outcomes, it is rather astounding that only a few of these programs have undergone any evaluation of efficacy. Coach training, particularly in the area of youth sports, has become a large-scale commercial enterprise in the United States. The American Sport Education Program , the National Youth Sports Coaches Association , and the Positive Coaching Alliance are among the most visible. Unfortunately, however, although their content does not deviate from what has been established empirically as producing a positive athletic climate, virtually nothing is known about what effects these specific programs actually have on coaches and athletes and how well they achieve their objectives. This absence of empirical attention is understandable, as developers of existing programs have been focused primarily on development, marketing, and dissemination rather than evaluation, and they have not had the benefit of research grants to support evaluation research. However, evaluation research is not only desirable, but essential to providing coaches with the quality of evidence-based training that will have the most salutary impact on their athletes. In the words of Lipsey and Cordray ( 2000 ), “the overarching goal of the program evaluation enterprise is to contribute to the improvement of social conditions by providing scientifically credible information and balanced judgment to legitimate social agents about the effectiveness of interventions intended to produce social benefits” (p. 346).

• Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation . Journal of Educational Psychology , 84 , 261–271.
• Amorose, A. J. , & Anderson-Butcher, D. (2015). Exploring the independent and interactive effects of autonomy-supportive and controlling coaching behaviors on adolescent athletes’ motivation for sport . Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology , 4 , 206–218.
• Appleton, P. R. , & Duda, J. L. (2016). Examining the interactive effects of coach-created empowering and disempowering climate dimensions on athletes’ health and functioning . Psychology of Sport & Exercise , 26 , 61–70.
• Appleton, P. R. , Ntoumanis, N. , Quested, E. , Viladrich, C. , & Duda, J. L. (2016). Initial validation of the coach-created Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ-C) . Psychology of Sport & Exercise , 22 , 53–65.
• Baldwin, J. D. , & Baldwin, J. I. (2001). Behavior principles in everyday life . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Barnett, N. P. , Smoll, F. L. , & Smith, R. E. (1992). Effects of enhancing coach-athlete relationships on youth sport attrition . Sport Psychologist , 6 , 111–127.
• Breiger, J. , Cumming, S. P. , Smith, R. E. , & Smoll, F. L. (2015). Winning, motivational climate, and young athletes’ competitive experiences: Some notable sex differences . International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching , 10 , 395–411 .
• Burton, D , & Raedeke, T. D. (2008). Sport psychology for coaches . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Chelladurai, P. (1984). Discrepancies between preferences and perceptions of leadership behavior and satisfaction of athletes in varying sports . Journal of Sport Psychology , 6 , 27–41.
• Chelladurai, P. (1993). Leadership. In R. N. Singer , M. Murphy , & K. L. Tenant (Eds.), Handbook of research in sport psychology (pp. 647–671). New York: Macmillan.
• Chelladurai, P. (2012). Models and measurement of leadership in sports. In G. Tennenbaum , R. C. Eklund , & A. Kamata (Eds.), Measurement in sport and exercise psychology (pp. 433–442). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Chelladurai, P. , & Reimer, H. A. (1998). Measurement of leadership in sport. In J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 227–253). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
• Chelladurai, P. , & Reimer, H. A. (2012). Models and measurement of leadership in sports. In G. Tennenbaum , R. C. Eklund , & A. Kamata (Eds.), Measurement in sport and exercise psychology (pp. 433–442). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Coatsworth, J. D. , & Conroy, D. E. (2006). Enhancing the self-esteem of youth swimmers through coach training: Gender and age effects . Psychology of Sport & Exercise , 7 , 173–192.
• Coker, C. A. (2013). Motor learning and control for practitioners . Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb Hathaway.
• Conroy, D. E. , & Coatsworth, J. D. (2004). The effects of coach training on fear of failure in youth swimmers: A latent growth curve analysis from a randomized, controlled trial . Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology , 25 , 193–214.
• Cruz, J. , Mora, A. , Sousa, C. , & Alcaraz, S. (2016). Effects of an individualized program on coaches’ observed and perceived behavior. Revista de Psicologia del Deporte , 25 , 137–144.
• Cumming, S. P. , Smith, R. E. , & Smoll, F. L. (2006). Athlete-perceived coaching behaviors: Relating two measurement traditions . Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology , 28 , 205–213.
• Cumming, S. P. , Smoll, F. L. , Smith, R. E. , & Grossbard, J. R. (2007). Is winning everything? The relative contributions of motivational climate and won-lost percentage in youth sports . Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 19 , 322–336.
• Cushion, C. , Harvey, S. , Muir, B. , & Nelson, L. (2012). Developing the Coach Analysis and Intervention system (CAIS): Establishing validity and reliability of a computerized systematic observation instrument . Journal of Sport Sciences , 30 , 201–216.
• Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior . Psychological Inquiry , 11 , 227–268.
• Duda, J. L. (2013). The conceptual and empirical foundations of Empowering Coaching: Setting the state for the PAPA project . International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 11 , 311–318.
• Duda, J. L. & Treasure, D. C. (2015). The motivational climate, athlete motivation, and implications for the quality of sport engagement. In J. M. Williams & V. Krane (Eds.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (7th ed., pp. 57–77). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Epstein, J. (1988). Effective schools or effective students? Dealing with diversity. In R. Haskins & B. MacRae (Eds.), Policies for America’s schools (pp. 89–126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Erickson, K. , Cộté, J. , Hollenstein, T. , & Deakin, J. (2011). Examining coach-athlete interactions using state space grids: An observational analysis in competitive youth sports . Psychology of Sport & Exercise , 12 , 645–654.
• Fletcher, R. B. , & Roberts, M. H. (2013). Longitudinal stability of the leadership scale for sports . Measurement in Physical Education & Exercise Science , 17 , 89–104.
• Fry, M. D. , Guivernau, M. , Kim, M. , Newton, M. , Gano-Overway, L. A. , & Magyar, T. M. (2012). Youth perceptions of a caring climate, emotional regulation, and psychological well-being . Sport, Exercise, & Performance Psychology , 1 , 44–57.
• Gould, D. (1987). Understanding attrition in children’s sport. In D. Gould & M. R. Weiss (Eds.), Advances in pediatric sport sciences (pp. 61–85). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Horn, T. S. , Bloom, P. , Berglund, K. M. , & Packard, S. (2011). Relationship between collegiate athletes’ psychological characteristics and their preferences for different types of coaching behavior . Sport Psychologist , 25 , 190–211.
• Jowett, S. (2009). Factor structure and criterion-related validity of the metaperspective version of the Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q) . Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, & Practice , 13 , 163–177.
• Langan, E. , Blake, C. , & Lonsdale, C. (2013). Systematic review of the effectiveness of interpersonal coach education interventions on athlete outcomes . Psychology of Sport & Exercise , 14 , 37–49.
• Lewis, C. J. , Groom, R. , & Roberts, S. J. (2014). Exploring the value of a coach intervention process within women’s youth soccer: A case study . International Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology , 12 , 245–257.
• Lipsey, M. W. , & Cordray, D. S. (2000). Evaluation methods for social intervention . Annual Review of Psychology , 51 , 345–376.
• Magill, R. A. (2013). Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Martens, R. (2012). Successful coaching (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• McArdle, S. , & Duda, J. K. (2002). Implications of the motivational climate in youth sports. In F. L. Smoll & R. E. Smith (Eds.), Children and youth in sport: A biopsychosocial perspective (2d ed., pp. 409–434). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
• McLaren, C. D. , Eys, M. A. , & Murray, R A. (2015). A coach-initiated motivational climate intervention and athletes’ perceptions of group cohesion in youth sport . Sport, Exercise, & Performance Psychology , 4 , 113–126.
• Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality . Psychological Review , 80 , 252–283.
• Morgan, G. , Muir, B. , & Abraham, A. (2014). Systematic observation. In L. Nelson , R. Groom , & P. Potrac (Eds.), Research methods in sport coaching (pp. 122–131). New York: Routledge.
• Newton, M. , Duda, J. L. , & Yin, Z. (2000). Examination of the psychometric properties of the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire-2 in a sample of female athletes . Journal of Sport Sciences , 18 , 1–16.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Project PAPA (2016). Available online .
• Quested, E. , & Duda, J. L. (2010). Exploring the social-environmental determinants of well- and ill-being in dancers: A test of basic needs theory . Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology , 32 , 39–60.
• Roberts, G. C. (2001). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in physical activity. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 1–50). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Smith, N. , Tessier, D. , Tzioumakis, Y. , Fabra, P. , Quested, E. , Appleton, P. , . . . Duda, J. L. (2016). The relationship between observed and perceived assessments of the coach-created motivational climate and links to athlete motivation . Psychology of Sport & Exercise , 23 , 51–63.
• Smith, N. , Tessier, D. , Tzioumakis, Y. , Quested, E. , Appleton, P. , Sarrazin, P. , . . . Duda, J. L. (2015). Development and validation of the multidimensional motivational climate observation system . Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology , 37 , 4–22.
• Smith, R. E. (2015). A positive approach to coaching effectiveness and performance enhancement. In J. M. Williams & V. Krane (Eds.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (7th ed., pp. 40–56). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
• Smith, R. E. , Cumming, S. P. , & Smoll, F. L. (2008). Development and validation of the Motivational Climate Scale for Youth Sports . Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 20 , 116–136.
• Smith, R. E. , Shoda, Y. , Cumming, S. P. , & Smoll, F. L. (2009). Behavioral signatures at the ballpark: Intraindividual consistency of adults’ situation-behavior patterns and their interpersonal consequences . Journal of Research in Personality , 43 , 187–195.
• Smith, R. E. , & Smoll, F. L. (1990). Self-esteem and children’s reactions to youth sport coaching behaviors: A field study of self-enhancement processes . Developmental Psychology , 26 , 987–993.
• Smith, R. E. , & Smoll, F. L. (2011). Cognitive-behavioral coach training: A translational approach to theory, research, and intervention . In J. K. Luiselli & D. D. Reed (Eds.), Behavioral sport psychology: Evidence-based approaches to performance enhancement (pp. 227–248). New York: Springer.
• Smith, R. E. , & Smoll, F. L. (2012). Sport psychology for youth coaches: Developing champions in sports and life . Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Barnett, N. P. (1995). Reduction of children’s sport performance anxiety through social support and stress-reduction training for coaches . Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology , 16 , 125–142.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Christensen, D. S. (1996). Behavioral assessment and intervention in youth sports . Behavior Modification , 20 , 3–44.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Cumming, S. P. (2007). Effects of a motivational climate intervention for coaches on children’s sport performance anxiety . Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology , 29 , 39–59.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Cumming, S. P. (2009). Motivational climate and changes in young athletes’ achievement goal orientations . Motivation & Emotion , 33 , 173–183.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Curtis, B. (1978). Coaching behaviors in Little League Baseball. In F. L. Smoll & R. E. Smith (Eds.), Psychological perspectives in youth sports (pp. 173–201). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Curtis, B. (1979). Coach Effectiveness Training: A cognitive-behavioral approach to enhancing relationship skills in youth sport coaches . Journal of Sport Psychology , 1 , 59–75.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Hunt, E. B. (1977). A system for the behavioral assessment of athletic coaches. Research Quarterly , 48 , 401–407.
• Smith, R. E. , Smoll, F. L. , & Passer, M. W. (2002). Sport performance anxiety in young athletes. In F. L. Smoll & R. E. Smith (Eds.), Children and youth in sport: A biopsychosocial perspective (2d ed., pp. 501–536). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
• Smoll, F. L. , & Smith, R. E. (1989). Leadership behaviors in sport: A theoretical model and research paradigm . Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 19 , 1522–1551.
• Smoll, F. L. , & Smith, R. E. (2009). Mastery approach to coaching: A leadership guide for youth sports . Seattle, WA: Youth Enrichment in Sports.
• Smoll, F. L. , & Smith, R. E. (2015). Conducting evidence based coach-training programs: A social-cognitive approach. In J. M. Williams & V. Krane (Eds.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (7th ed., pp. 359–382). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Smoll, F. L. , Smith, R. E. , Barnett, N. P. , & Everett, J. J. (1993). Enhancement of children’s self-esteem through social support training for youth sport coaches . Journal of Applied Psychology , 78 , 602–610.
• Smoll, F. L. , Smith, R. E. , & Cumming, S. P. (2007). Effects of a psychoeducational intervention for coaches on changes in child athletes’ achievement goal orientations . Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology , 1 , 23–46.
• Sousa, C. , Smith, R. E. , & Cruz, J. (2008). An individualized behavioral goal-setting program for coaches: Impact on observed, athlete-perceived, and coach-perceived behaviors . Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology , 2 , 258–277.
• Tharp, R. G. , & Gallimore, R. (1976). What a coach can teach a teacher. Psychology Today , 9 , 74–78.
• VanVactor, J. D. (Ed.) (2013). Perspectives in leadership . New York: Nova Science.
• Wooden, J. R. , & Carty, J. (2005). Coach Wooden’s pyramid of success . Grand rapids, MI: Revell.

Related Articles

• Developing Athletes in the Context of Sport and Performance Psychology
• Psychological Aspects of Athletic Training
• Humanistic Theory in Sport, Performance, and Sports Coaching Psychology
• Exercise and Mental Health Benefits

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Psychology. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 25 August 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [109.248.223.228]
• 109.248.223.228

Character limit 500 /500

Home — Essay Samples — Psychology — Motivation — Life as a Student-Athlete

Life as a Student-athlete

• Categories: Motivation Student Athletes

About this sample

Words: 528 |

Updated: 5 December, 2023

Words: 528 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Works Cited

• Coakley, J. J. (2018). Sports in Society: Issues and Controversies (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Ballantine Books.
• Elliot, A. J., & Dweck, C. S. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of Competence and Motivation. The Guilford Press.
• Faull, A., Cropley, B., & Gorman, A. (2015). Managing Stress in Academic Life: Personal, Social and Institutional Resources. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gould, D., & Weinberg, R. (2013). Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology (6th ed.). Human Kinetics.
• Harwood, C., Keegan, R., & Smith, J. (2015). Sport Psychology: Theory, Applications and Issues. Wiley-Blackwell.
• Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The Coach-Athlete Relationship: A Motivational Model. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21(11), 883-904.
• Orlick, T., & Partington, J. (1988). Mental Links to Excellence. Sports Dynamics.
• Papageorgiou, A., & Goudas, M. (2011). The Coach-Athlete Relationship in Youth Sport: Coach and Parent Perceptions. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 23(2), 213-227.
• Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2018). Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology (7th ed.). Human Kinetics.

Video Version

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Psychology Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1000 words

6 pages / 2762 words

5 pages / 2206 words

1 pages / 474 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Motivation

Delving into the heart of why I want to be a mental health counselor is an extension of my educational journey, which includes an impending graduation on December 15, 2018, with a Bachelor of General Studies. My academic [...]

Brief introduction of the author Background in a lower-class family and education Completed Bachelor of Science in Computer Science Worked as an IT Instructor in vocational training institutes Currently [...]

Motivation is something that is sought out by everyone in some form or another. It is a driving force that causes us to want to do better or to change something that we might be doing. Motivational speaker Nick Vujicic talks [...]

Throughout history, individuals and communities have been motivated to struggle for change in various aspects of society, from civil rights and social justice to environmental protection and political reform. Understanding the [...]

Self-motivation or inspiration is the thing that pushes us to accomplish our objectives, feel more satisfied and enhance the general quality of our lives. Self-motivation is a long way from being a basic point; there are [...]

In Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible, the character of John Proctor is a complex and compelling figure whose actions are driven by a multitude of motivations. From his desire to preserve his reputation to his determination to [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol
• PMC10800670

The role of parents in the motivation of young athletes: a systematic review

Zhendong gao.

1 Department of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Chen Soon Chee

Mohd rozilee wazir norjali wazir, xiaojian zheng.

2 Department of Foundations of Education, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Parents are one of the main social agents that shape young athletes’ experiences and participation in sports, but they are also the least explored group in the literature. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of research on the role of parents in the motivation of young athletes.

The systematic literature review consisted of four electronic databases from which 29 articles published in English and in full-text form in peer-reviewed journals between 1999 and 2023 were retrieved.

A total of 29 studies met the eligibility criteria. These studies collectively surveyed 9,185 young athlete participants and 2,191 parent participants. The sample comprised 26 quantitative studies and 3 qualitative studies. The findings underscore that parents play both unique and synergistic multidimensional roles in motivating young athletes. Parents’ positive goals and values, autonomy-supportive parenting styles, moderate parental involvement, positive parent–child relationships, and a parent-initiated task climate are identified as optimal parenting strategies.

While parents undeniably play a crucial role in motivating young athletes, the manner and extent of their involvement are key.

Introduction

Motivation is generally considered to involve the onset, direction, intensity, and persistence of individual behavior ( Robbins et al., 2013 ). As a complex construct, it is not an observable entity, making it challenging to accurately conceptualize and measure ( Lavallee et al., 2012 ). For a long time, motivation has been a critically important factor in the field of sports ( Rodrigues et al., 2020 ), and has continuously attracted widespread attention from researchers in contemporary sports and sports psychology ( Rodrigues et al., 2020 ; Borg and Willoughby, 2022 ; Castillo-Jiménez et al., 2022 ). The motivation of young athletes refers to the internal or external factors that drive them to participate, continue participating, or show enthusiasm and effort in a particular sporting activity ( Roberts and Treasure, 2012 ). It encompasses psychological, social, and environmental factors that contribute to the initiation, maintenance, and intensity of athletes’ participation. In summary, motivation plays a crucial role in shaping the attitudes, behaviors, and perseverance of young athletes in their participation in sports ( Teixeira et al., 2012 ; Martins et al., 2017 ; Mallia et al., 2019 ).

Within the framework of social ecological theory, adolescent development is a complex system influenced by multiple layers of the surrounding environment ( Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2007 ). Although parents, coaches, and peers all contribute to the outcomes of young athletes in this context, parents remain the primary social agents shaping adolescent experiences and participation in sports throughout childhood and adolescence ( Harwood and Knight, 2015 ). As early as 2004, Fredricks and Eccles (2004 , p. 145) posited that “parents play a significant role in children’s early sports socialization.” Parents provide essential material, emotional, organizational, and financial support to ensure their children can engage in sports activities ( Wolfenden and Holt, 2005 ; Holt and Knight, 2014 ). Critical literature reviews also reveal that the type of support provided by parents, their parenting styles, self-emotional needs, relationships with others, involvement in organizational management, and meeting the dynamic needs of young athletes at different stages of their sports journey are all aspects that a successful sports parent should address ( Harwood and Knight, 2015 ). Thus, it is evident that parents have a significant influence on youth sports in various aspects.

In research exploring the impact of parents on youth sports, there has been an increase in the understanding and application of motivation theories. These include Harter’s (1978) Competence Motivation Theory (CMT); Achievement Goal Theory (AGT) by Nicholls (1984) ; Self-Determination Theory (SDT) by Deci and Ryan (1985) ; and Expectancy-Value Theory by Eccles et al. (1983) .

Competence Motivation Theory (CMT) suggests that an individual’s perception of their ability in any achievement domain is a key component of their motivation to achieve in that domain ( Harter, 1978 ), meaning that the internal drive of an individual is the pursuit of a sense of ability. Moreover, Harter (1978) noted that feedback and behavior from significant others could play a vital role in the socialization and cognitive development of children and adolescents. For example, if parents have a strong belief in their own sporting abilities, their children are likely to have a higher evaluation of their own sporting abilities ( McCullagh et al., 1993 ). Studies show that parents’ role modeling in sports, positive feedback on children’s sports performance, and belief in their children’s sports abilities can significantly influence children’s perceptions of their abilities ( Babkes and Weiss, 1999 ).

Achievement Goal Theory (AGT) posits that individuals develop either a fixed or incremental cognition of their abilities in achievement domains. These differing perceptions, in turn, affect their motivation ( Nicholls, 1989 ), manifesting as either a task-oriented or ego-oriented goal. When motivation is derived from a task-involved climate, it leads to higher levels of effort and enjoyment in practice ( Bardach et al., 2020 ), whereas when it is ego-oriented, it indicates participation for greater social recognition and value ( González Valero et al., 2017 ). In recent years, Achievement Goal Theory has evolved from its initial simple dichotomy model (mastery goals vs. performance goals) to a more complex multidimensional model, such as the 3×2 model, which further subdivides goals into six types based on the focus of the goal (task, self, others) and approach (approach, avoidance) ( Elliot and McGregor, 2001 ; Elliot et al., 2011 ). Research has found that parents (and other significant individuals) can create or initiate a motivational climate that influences children ( Chan et al., 2012 ).

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) emphasizes the types of motivation behind individual behaviors and how these motivations affect a person’s actions and psychological health ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 ; Deci and Ryan, 2008 ). It is a motivational process theory about human self-determined behavior, explaining the extent to which people reflect an identification with their actions and an understanding of their choices. It underscores the role of social and environmental factors in influencing individual motivation ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 ; Deci and Ryan, 2008 ). SDT helps establish a theoretical understanding of the influence of parents on children’s autonomous motivation ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 ). This framework identifies three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Research shows that athletes experience satisfaction when they feel the source of their actions, effectiveness in achievement, or proficiency and satisfying interpersonal relationships. Conversely, they experience frustration when they feel pressured, alienated, or face unattainable tasks ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 ).

Expectancy-Value Theory suggests that individuals choose and persist in tasks based on their expectations of success (confidence in accomplishing a task) and the value of the task (the task’s attractiveness and importance to the individual) ( Eccles et al., 1983 ; Eccles and Wigfield, 2002 ). The theory particularly emphasizes the intrinsic value of tasks (interest and enjoyment), utility value (practicality for future goals), achievement value (personal satisfaction from completing the task), and costs (effort and sacrifices required to complete the task) ( Leaper, 2011 ). In the context of youth sports, Expectancy-Value Theory is used to understand how parents’ attitudes and beliefs relate to their children’s attitudes, beliefs, and values in sports ( Fredricks and Eccles, 2004 ; Horn and Horn, 2007 ). The theory mentions that children’s behavioral choices are based on their expectations of success in a task and its perceived importance and value, and the perception of significant others’ (like parents) beliefs can influence their expectations and values ( Eccles et al., 1983 ). Research indicates that there is a link between children’s perceptions of the value their parents place on sports and the children’s perceived competence and value attributed to the activity ( Eccles and Harold, 1991 ; Fredricks and Eccles, 2002 ).

In previous research, we observed that most studies on adolescent sports focusing on Achievement Goal Theory (AGT) ( Harwood et al., 2015 ) and Self-Determination Theory (SDT) ( Chu and Zhang, 2019 ) primarily concentrate on the motivational climate created by coaches, with scant attention given to the atmosphere fostered by parents. Although coaches are undeniably key social agents in sports, it seems that in some aspects, parents’ influence on the motivation of young athletes has surpassed that of coaches ( O’Rourke et al., 2014 ; Atkins et al., 2015 ; Amorose et al., 2016 ). These findings highlight the critical and unique role of parents in youth sports. Currently, there is a lack of focused attention and analysis on the impact generated by parents as social agents. Therefore, we believe that a targeted systematic review of the literature on the influence of parents as a subject is necessary. With this in mind, the purpose of this study is to systematically review and analyze the correlation between parental influence variables (such as the motivational climate created by parents, goals and values, parenting styles, and parenting behaviors) and young athletes’ motivational variables (achievement goals, self-determination motivation, competence, values) based on the four motivational theory frameworks. The aim is to identify the best parental intervention strategies in sports and to provide directions for future research and practice for coaches, sports psychologists, organizations, and researchers.

This review is reported under the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Evaluation and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) ( Moher et al., 2015 ).

Search strategy

The literature search was conducted across four internationally recognized databases: Web of Science, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and PsycINFO. These databases have gained academic credibility and have been utilized in previous systematic reviews concerning sports and sports psychology ( Norris et al., 2017 ; Tessitore et al., 2021 ). The systematic literature search was carried out in February 2023. Given that prior research has indicated that earlier studies largely lacked theoretical grounding and a nuanced understanding of outcomes, the search was restricted to peer-reviewed journal articles published in English between January 1999 and February 2023. Excluded from the search were abstracts, conference proceedings, dissertations, book chapters, and articles published in non-peer-reviewed journals. The search level for each database encompassed title, abstract, and keywords.

In consultation with co-authors, the following combination of keywords and Boolean operators was formulated: “sport*” OR “youth-sport*” OR “youth athlete*” AND “motivat*” OR “psychological-need*” AND “famil*” OR “parent*” OR “father*” OR “mother*.”

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

The research question of this study is the association between parents and the motivation of young athletes. Therefore, the a priori eligibility criteria include: (a) Focus on the relationship between parents and youth sports (Yes/No); (b) Inclusion of current or former young athletes with competitive sports experience (Yes/No); (c) Exclusion of participants from special populations (e.g., physical or mental illness); (d) Focus on the motivation of young athletes; (e) The study must use quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods designs (not reviews) and be able to provide information on the influence of parents on at least one type of motivation of young athletes (quantitative: e.g., correlations; qualitative: e.g., categories). The subjects of this review are young athletes, but the included studies must primarily involve athletes in the adolescent stage (10–19 years old) to emphasize the association between parents and the motivation of young athletes during adolescence.

Sifting of retrieved citations

This study adheres to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) ( Moher et al., 2015 ). The search process, as illustrated in Figure 1 , involves a hierarchical assessment. Initially, the literature retrieved from the search was downloaded to Zotero for study selection based on titles and abstracts, after removing duplicates. Subsequently, the full texts of the remaining studies were retrieved and assessed for eligibility. If necessary, both abstracts and full texts were screened. Any discrepancies regarding the inclusion of specific studies were resolved through consensus meetings. In cases where consensus was not reached, a third researcher made the final decision on inclusion or exclusion. The first author conducted each search, and basic information (i.e., authors, publication year, and article title) of each retrieved article was recorded in a Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet to ensure comprehensive audit tracking. The initial search yielded 2,574 published papers, and after removing duplicates, 934 papers remained. A total of 445 papers were further excluded for being published in different disciplines. Another 339 papers were excluded for not focusing on the relationship between parents and youth sports. Thirty-six papers were excluded due to lack of competitive sports experience, participation of special population groups, and primary subjects not being adolescents. Of the remaining 114 papers, 85 were further excluded because they did not focus on the motivation of young athletes, did not provide results about motivation, or did not have the full text available. As a result, 29 papers were included in this systematic review.

PRISMA flowchart showing how the final sample of 29 studies was obtained (applying inclusion/exclusion criteria).

Data extraction and quality assessment

Upon completion of the data search, data were extracted from eligible studies using a predetermined form that included: (1) authors and publication year; (2) study design and methodology (e.g., longitudinal, cross-sectional, quantitative, qualitative); (3) participant characteristics (gender, age, and type of sport for both parents and young athletes); (4) modes of parental influence (Parent-initiated motivational climate, goals and values, participation behavior, parenting style); (5) theoretical framework; (6) key findings. We employed a narrative synthesis approach to review and amalgamate the results of each study, a technique conducive to presenting the relevant information, connections, and structure of the research findings effectively ( Popay et al., 2006 ). The first author abstracted the data into a standardized form, which was then checked by the fourth author (see Table 1 ).

Study characteristics of studies included in final sample.

Quant, Quantitative; Qual, qualitative; M, Male; F, Female; Mage, Mean Age; SD, Standard Deviation; AR, Age Range; N/a, Not available; CMT, competence motivation theory; AGT, achievement goal theory; SDT, self-determination theory; EVT, expectancy value theory.

Quality assessment of each article was conducted individually using the criteria proposed by Kmet et al. (2004) . An assessment checklist was used for both qualitative and quantitative articles. For quantitative studies, a 14-item checklist was used to score each article based on the extent to which it met each criterion (2 = fully meets the standard, 1 = partially meets the standard, 0 = does not meet the standard). Items not applicable to specific research objectives were marked “n/a.” Quality assessment for qualitative studies was based on a 10-item checklist, using the same scoring scheme as for quantitative articles. The total quality score for each article was calculated using the relevant criteria and then converted to a percentage for standardization purposes. Scores of ≤55%, 55–75%, and ≥ 75% were considered low, medium, and high quality, respectively. Any low-quality studies were excluded from the systematic review ( Kmet et al., 2004 ). The fifth and sixth authors assessed a random sample of both quantitative and qualitative studies along with their respective quality scores and deemed the results to be appropriate. The outcomes of our quality assessment procedures are presented in Tables 2 , ​ ,3 3 .

Quality assessment of included quantitative studies.

(1) Question/objective sufficiently described? (2) Study design evident and appropriate? (3) Method of subject/comparison group selection or source of information/input variables described as appropriate? (4) Subject (and comparison group, if applicable) characteristics sufficiently described? (5) If interventional and random allocation was possible, was it described? (6) If interventional and blinding of investigators was possible, was it reported? (7) If interventional and blinding of subjects was possible, was it reported? (8) Outcome and (if applicable) exposure measure(s) well defined and robust to measurement/misclassification bias? means of assessment reported? (9) Sample size appropriate? (10) Analytical methods described/justified and appropriate? (11) Some estimate of variance is reported for the main results? (12) Controlled for confounding? (13) Results reported in sufficient detail? (14) Conclusions support the by results? Y, yes; P, partial; N, no; n/a, not applicable.

Quality assessment of included qualitative studies.

(1) Question/objective sufficiently described? (2) Study design evident and appropriate? (3) Context for the study clear? (4) Connection to a theoretical framework/wider body of knowledge? (5) Sampling strategy described, relevant, and justified? (6) Data collection method clearly described and systematic? (7) Data analysis clearly described and systematic? (8) Use of verification procedure(s) to establish credibility? (9) Conclusions supported the by results? (10) Reflexivity of the account? Y, yes; P, partial; N, no.

Study characteristics

Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the 29 papers that met the criteria for inclusion in this review. The final sample consisted of 26 quantitative papers and 3 qualitative papers. The studies employed cross-sectional (82.8%) and longitudinal (17.2%) research designs, collectively involving 9,185 young athlete participants and 2,191 parent participants. In assessing the gender of these athlete and parent participants, it was observed that there were 6,055 (65.9%) male and 3,074 (33.5%) female young athlete participants, with 56 (0.6%) not reporting gender; among parent participants, 1,175 (53.6%) were male, 695 (31.7%) female, and 321 (14.7%) did not report gender. Qualitative studies involved a total of 91 young athlete participants and 12 parent participants, whereas quantitative studies involved 9,094 young athlete participants and 2,179 parent participants. Out of all the studies, 8 (28%) included data collection through parents, with quantitative ( n  = 6) and qualitative ( n  = 2) approaches. The remaining 21 (72%) studies collected data solely through athletes. The ages of the young athletes ranged from 8 to 22, with 15 (51.7%) studies focusing solely on early to mid-adolescents (up to 16 years old). Fourteen (48.2%) studies covered late adolescence or the entire adolescent period. The young athletes were recruited from various levels of sports clubs ( n  = 17), school sports teams ( n  = 5), specific competitive sports programs ( n  = 4), national training centers ( n  = 2), and one study did not report the source ( n  = 1).

Among the 29 studies, some investigated single sports, including basketball ( Schwebel et al., 2016 ; Souza et al., 2020 ), soccer ( Babkes and Weiss, 1999 ; Ullrich-French and Smith, 2006 ; De Muynck et al., 2021 ; McCann et al., 2021 ; Krommidas et al., 2022 ), baseball ( De La Cruz et al., 2021 ), swimming ( Given, 2001 ; O’Rourke et al., 2014 ; Alvarez et al., 2021 ), softball ( Waldron and Krane, 2005 ), and gymnastics ( Gagne, 2003 ), among others. The other 16 studies explored a variety of sports ranging from individual sports (e.g., athletics, tennis, swimming, gymnastics, tennis, judo) to team sports (e.g., basketball, football, volleyball, baseball, softball, soccer). The competition levels of the athletes varied within and between studies, including recreational, regional, state, national, and international levels. Most studies were conducted in the United States ( n  = 9), followed by the United Kingdom/France/Spain ( n  = 3), Greece/Canada/Portugal ( n  = 2), and Brazil/Belgium/Mexico/Estonia/Netherlands ( n  = 1).

Parental goals and values

A total of six quantitative studies discussed the relationship between Parental Goals and Values and the motivation of young athletes. These studies highlight that under the Achievement Goal Theory, both Task orientation and Ego orientation of young athletes are highly correlated with their parents’ goal orientations, regardless of whether the evidence comes from athletes’ reports ( Given, 2001 ) or parents’ subjective reports ( Sánchez-Miguel et al., 2013 ). Additionally, the belief that parents’ efforts lead to sports success ( White et al., 2004 ) and perceived parent mastery success standards were significantly related to young athletes’ Task orientation ( Schwebel et al., 2016 ). The belief that parental ability, external factors, and deception lead to sports success ( White et al., 2004 ) and Perceived parental ego success standards ( Schwebel et al., 2016 ) were significantly related to Ego orientation. Moreover, parental success standards moderated the relationship between the motivational climate initiated by coaches and achievement motivation ( Schwebel et al., 2016 ).

Under the framework of Self-Determination Theory, fathers’ self-reported intrinsic aspirations are related to the satisfaction of basic psychological needs, while their self-reported extrinsic aspirations are related to the frustration of these needs ( De La Cruz et al., 2021 ).

According to Competence Motivation Theory, more positive parental beliefs about a child’s abilities are positively correlated with higher perceived competence and intrinsic motivation in athletes ( Babkes and Weiss, 1999 ).

Overall, parents’ positive beliefs and values are associated with positive motivational variables in athletes, and parents’ goals and values influence young athletes’ motivation in conjunction with coaches.

Parenting styles

Eight quantitative studies and one qualitative study have discussed the relationship between parental parenting styles and the motivation of young athletes. In the realm of Achievement Goal Theory, perceived parental psychological control positively influences adolescents’ task orientation, while perceived parental responsiveness yields opposite results ( Weltevreden et al., 2018 ). Moreover, perceived parental behavioral control correlates positively with ego orientation, while perceived parental autonomy support has an inverse effect ( Weltevreden et al., 2018 ).

In the context of Self-Determination Theory, parental autonomy support is a focal point of current research. Both the perceived autonomy support from parents ( Hein and Jõesaar, 2015 ) and the individual autonomy support from each parent have shown significant correlations with the Self-Determined Motivation Index ( Amorose et al., 2016 ). Additional evidence also underscores a notable relationship with the index of autonomous regulation and self-determined sport motivation ( Gagne, 2003 ; Gaudreau et al., 2016 ; O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ). Regarding basic psychological needs, perceived parental autonomy support positively impacts the fulfillment of these needs ( Gaudreau et al., 2016 ), although earlier studies only provided evidence concerning relatedness ( Gagne, 2003 ). Moreover, strong autonomy support from both parents represents the optimal parenting approach for fostering adaptive motivational outcomes in young athletes ( O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ). This relationship underscores the importance of parents’ supportive behavior in fostering self-determined motivation in young athletes.

In considering the influence of coaches, interactive effects have also been observed. Amorose et al. (2016) found that autonomy support from significant social agents independently predicts self-determined motivation and can also synergistically enhance this prediction. Gaudreau et al. (2016) discovered that parental autonomy support modulates the impact of coach autonomy support. Hein and Jõesaar (2015) also noted that autonomy support from parents is a stronger predictor of self-determined motivation than that from coaches. Overall, a parenting style centered on autonomy support correlates positively with motivational variables, but it’s crucial to consider the interactive effects between other significant social agents and both parents.

In contrast, the perceived controlling styles of both fathers and mothers are significantly related to controlled motivation (introjected and external regulation) and amotivation. However, the mother’s controlling style is offset by the father’s interpersonal control ( Alvarez et al., 2021 ). O’Neil and Amorose (2021) reported that weak control from both parents represents the most detrimental parenting style. Parental control can coexist with autonomy support without diminishing its positive impact on self-determined motivation ( O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ).

Qualitative research has yielded similar findings, indicating that autonomy support is generally considered to have a positive impact on motivation. Conversely, a controlling style is often associated with feelings of depression, anger, diminished motivation, and even the breakdown of relationships ( Keegan et al., 2010 ).

Parental involvement behaviors

A total of 12 quantitative studies and 3 qualitative papers have discussed the relationship between parental involvement behaviors and motivational variables. In the realm of Achievement Goal Theory, parents’ self-reported supportive and understanding behaviors ( Sánchez-Miguel et al., 2013 ), as well as perceived maternal sports support and both maternal and paternal sports expectations ( Gomes et al., 2019 ), are significantly correlated with Task Orientation. Interestingly, perceived maternal competition attendance shows an inverse relationship with Task Orientation ( Gomes et al., 2019 ). Additionally, parents’ self-reported directive behaviors and pressure ( Sánchez-Miguel et al., 2013 ), along with perceived paternal and maternal performance pressure and sports expectations (Rui Gomes et al., 2019 ), are significantly related to Ego Orientation. Moreover, research indicates that athletes’ cognitions may modulate the impact of parental behaviors ( Gomes et al., 2019 ).

In line with Self-Determination Theory, athletes’ perception of parental need-supportive behaviors is significantly associated with self-determined sport motivation ( De Muynck et al., 2021 ). Conversely, perceived parental need-thwarting behaviors and parental pressure are strongly linked to controlled motivation ( Lienhart et al., 2019 ). It is worth noting that moderate parental involvement has an inverse relationship with controlled motivation ( Lienhart et al., 2020 ). Moreover, research indicates that positive parental behaviors, such as perceived involvement, praise, and understanding, robustly correlate with intrinsic motivation ( Gagne, 2003 ; Teques et al., 2019 ; Krommidas et al., 2022 ). In contrast, negative parental behaviors, including self-reported pressure and perceived need-thwarting actions, are significantly related to amotivation ( Sánchez-Miguel et al., 2013 ; Amado et al., 2015 ; De Muynck et al., 2021 ). Notably, a counterintuitive finding suggests that perceived maternal pressure can positively predict intrinsic motivation and identified regulation ( Lienhart et al., 2019 ).

Similar findings are also evident in the context of Basic Psychological Needs. For instance, self-reported parental pressure negatively predicts athletes’ satisfaction of Basic Psychological Needs ( Amado et al., 2015 ). Perceived parental praise and understanding ( Lienhart et al., 2019 ), as well as moderate parental involvement ( Lienhart et al., 2020 ), positively predict satisfaction in the domains of competence and relatedness. Conversely, perceived parental pressure yields negative predictions for these outcomes ( Lienhart et al., 2019 ). Additionally, moderate parental involvement is inversely correlated with the thwarting of basic psychological needs for autonomy ( Lienhart et al., 2020 ).

Some specific differences have been emphasized in the research. In terms of gender differences, Lienhart et al. (2019) found that the direction of the relationship between introjected regulation and perceptions of paternal guidance and maternal pressure varies between boys and girls. More significant relationships were observed between boys and their same-sex parents, with boys’ outcomes primarily related to parental behavior. Negative predictions from parents were also found to be stronger than positive ones ( Lienhart et al., 2019 ). Similar results were reflected in male athletes experiencing greater parental pressure ( Amado et al., 2015 ; O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ). Regarding athlete-level differences, significant variations were found in the impact of perceived parental encouragement and role-modeling on intrinsic motivation between elite and sub-elite athletes ( Teques et al., 2019 ). In considering the differential impact of coaches and parents, supportive coaching, rather than parenting, was positively correlated with soccer players’ autonomous motivation and engagement, while thwarting coaching and parenting were positively correlated with amotivation ( De Muynck et al., 2021 ).

Research based on Expectancy-Value Theory suggests that maternal directive behavior negatively impacts athletes’ perceived competence, while maternal praise and understanding are positively correlated with intrinsic motivation. Additionally, perceived praise and understanding from mothers and positive involvement from fathers are positively associated with value ( Boiché et al., 2011 ). Studies grounded in Achievement Motivation Theory indicate that parents perceived as athletic role models, who offer frequent positive contingent responses to successful performance, are positively correlated with athletes’ higher perceived competence and intrinsic motivation ( Babkes and Weiss, 1999 ).

Qualitative research emphasizes that parental autonomy-supportive behavior can provide young athletes with a sense of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. In contrast, controlling behavior is considered to inhibit psychological needs. Mixed parental behavior is thought to both satisfy and frustrate some of the children’s basic psychological needs ( Felber Charbonneau and Camiré, 2019 ). McCann et al. (2021) highlight that parental supportive behavior enhances athletes’ intrinsic motivation. Various forms of support, such as tangible, effort-based, social support, parental evaluation (supportive reflection and prospective planning), and feedback (praise), also maintain and protect athletes’ motivation. Keegan et al. (2010) stress that positive feedback (constructive feedback) is considered to generate more adaptive motivation, while negative feedback (summative feedback) is more likely to destroy motivation and induce frustration. Unconditional praise from parents positively impacts motivation, and parents’ pre-competition motivational behavior promotes effort/mastery, stress/avoidance, and confidence/approach motivations ( Keegan et al., 2010 ).

In summary, parents’ positive involvement—comprising support, praise, understanding, and attendance at competitions—facilitates favorable motivational outcomes in young athletes. Conversely, negative involvement, characterized by directive behavior, pressure, and performance expectations, correlates with adverse motivational outcomes. Moderate parental involvement is considered the optimal level of engagement.

Parent-initiated motivational climate

In summary, three quantitative studies have discussed the impact of the motivational climate initiated by parents on adolescent athletes’ motivation. Under the framework of Achievement Goal Theory, it is emphasized that a parental atmosphere focusing on learning and enjoyment ( Waldron and Krane, 2005 ), as well as a task climate initiated by parents ( Weltevreden et al., 2018 ), positively correlates with Task Orientation. An ego climate initiated by parents shows a positive correlation with Ego Orientation ( Weltevreden et al., 2018 ). Notably, the motivational climate initiated by parents can mediate the relationship between general parenting behavior and achievement motivation ( Weltevreden et al., 2018 ).

In the context of Self-Determination Theory, a perceived task climate from parents is positively correlated with the index of autonomous regulation, while a perceived ego climate offers an inverse relationship ( O’Rourke et al., 2014 ).

Overall, the task climate initiated by parents significantly influences young athletes’ achievement motivation and self-determined motivation.

Parent–child relationships

A quantitative study by Ullrich-French and Smith (2006) discussed the relationship between parent–child relationships and motivational outcomes. Under Self-Determination Theory, they discovered that perceived positive mother–child and father–child relationship quality is significantly related to the Self-determined Motivation Index. This suggests a strong correlation between positive parent–child relationships and autonomous motivation. Both mother–child and father-child relationships significantly predict self-determined motivation, and it has also been found that parents and peers may influence self-determined motivation in both additive and collective ways ( Ullrich-French and Smith, 2006 ). This highlights the multifaceted nature of influences on young athletes’ motivation, where the roles of both familial and peer relationships are crucial. In the context of Competence Motivation Theory, perceived positive father–child relationship quality was significantly related to athletes’ perceived competence ( Ullrich-French and Smith, 2006 ). However, the quality of father-child or mother–child relationships alone could not predict athletes’ perceived competence. Overall, positive parent–child relationships are key in fostering positive motivational outcomes in young athletes.

The objective of this systematic review is to summarize the empirical evidence on the role of parents in the motivation of young athletes and to provide practical insights and recommendations for future research. A total of 29 studies, both quantitative and qualitative, were reviewed. A comprehensive review of the literature reveals the unique and synergistic multi-dimensional roles that parents play in the motivation of young athletes. Optimal parenting strategies are identified as those that incorporate positive goals and values, an autonomy-supportive parenting style, moderate levels of parental involvement, positive parent–child relationships, and a parent-initiated task climate.

Current evidence consistently shows a significant correlation between parents’ goal orientations and athletes’ goal orientations ( Given, 2001 ; Papaioannou et al., 2008 ; Sánchez-Miguel et al., 2013 ). However, earlier studies indicated that young athletes’ goal orientations were only related to athletes’ self-reported perceptions of their parents’ goal orientations ( Given, 2001 ). This may be attributed to factors such as smaller sample sizes or specific sports types (swimming) and possibly specific socioeconomic backgrounds of the samples. In contrast, broader sports types and larger sample sizes produced consistent results between parents’ reported goal orientations and athletes’ self-reported goal orientations ( Sánchez-Miguel et al., 2013 ). Additionally, the possibility of adults not explicitly conveying their value systems related to goals to adolescents, or making false statements about their goals, could also contribute to discrepancies in smaller sample studies. Future research could provide more detailed explanations from aspects like socioeconomic status and types of sports (individual or collective). This would further our understanding of the impact of parents’ words and actions.

In summary, this aligns with previous findings in the field of parenting, where parents are seen as primary role models for their children ( Wiese and Freund, 2011 ). Their goals and values are often internalized by children (i.e., imitating parents’ behaviors and values), thereby influencing their motivation ( Anderson and Cavallaro, 2002 ). Additionally, parents’ expectations can shape children’s intrinsic motivation ( Yamamoto and Holloway, 2010 ). That is, if parents have high expectations for a certain behavior in their child, this can further promote effective parental involvement and also foster the child’s intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy ( Yamamoto and Holloway, 2010 ). Lastly, parents’ values have a significant impact on the socialization process of children ( Barni et al., 2017 ). The values held by parents often influence their parenting styles, which in turn affect the motivational behavior of children ( Bouissou and Tap, 1998 ).

The findings of this review emphasize that parents’ goals and values do not always have a positive impact on their children ( Babkes and Weiss, 1999 ; Schwebel et al., 2016 ; De La Cruz et al., 2021 ). This could be because excessive expectations or pressure may undermine children’s sense of self-efficacy, leading to decreased motivation ( Yamamoto and Holloway, 2010 ). Similarly, if parents’ values conflict with children’s self-perceptions, it may affect their motivation ( Knafo and Assor, 2007 ; Moed et al., 2015 ). Therefore, understanding and balancing parents’ goals and values are crucial for fostering positive motivation in children.

Furthermore, parents’ success standards have been found to moderate the relationship between the motivational climate initiated by coaches and motivation ( Schwebel et al., 2016 ). This indicates that the most important social agents for athletes can collaboratively create an environment through their motivational climates, thereby influencing the quality of their sports experiences and well-being ( Henriksen et al., 2020 ). However, further exploration is needed regarding the potential interactive influences of other significant social agents, such as siblings, peers, and teachers ( Garcia Bengoechea and Strean, 2007 ).

The results of this review emphasize that parental autonomy support promotes positive motivational outcomes and is particularly relevant in the context of self-determination ( Gagne, 2003 ; Keegan et al., 2010 ; Hein and Jõesaar, 2015 ; Amorose et al., 2016 ; Gaudreau et al., 2016 ; O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ). Research from a number of parenting fields supports our results that pro-autonomous parenting is characterized by the provision of a supportive environment in which parents understand, acknowledge and support their adolescents’ feelings and perspectives ( McCurdy et al., 2020 ). Parents who adopt this approach encourage autonomous action and decision-making, fostering intrinsic motivation in their children ( Soenens et al., 2007 ; Zhou et al., 2019 ). Parental autonomy support enhances self-confidence, enjoyment of exercise, and determination and perseverance to overcome challenges ( Furusa et al., 2021 ; Gao et al., 2021 ; Du et al., 2023 ). Additionally, parental autonomy support mitigates reactions to maladaptive outcomes and promotes emotional regulation skills, thereby promoting children’s psychological well-being, resilience, and long-term engagement ( Cheung and Pomerantz, 2011 ; Simon, 2021 ; Zeng et al., 2022 ).

In contrast, a controlling parenting style has been shown to yield negative motivational outcomes ( Keegan et al., 2010 ; Alvarez et al., 2021 ). Such parents dictate behaviors and outcomes, exerting pressure and criticism, which disrupts adolescents’ needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence ( Soenens and Vansteenkiste, 2010 ). This high level of intrusion into the personal domain of adolescents inevitably leads to adverse psychological outcomes ( Nucci et al., 2005 ). This approach often violates adolescents’ self-perception, making them feel as if they are fulfilling others’ expectations rather than pursuing their own interests ( Barber and Harmon, 2002 ). Moreover, a controlling parenting style may cultivate a maladaptive focus on outcomes rather than the learning process ( Aunola et al., 2000 ; Hibbard and Walton, 2014 ), which could hinder skill development and enjoyment in sports ( Mallinson-Howard et al., 2019 ; Morano et al., 2022 ).

Parental autonomous support can interact with coaching styles in ways such as synergy, compensation, and moderation ( Hein and Jõesaar, 2015 ; Amorose et al., 2016 ; Gaudreau et al., 2016 ). This aligns with the principles of positive youth development, which emphasize that when young athletes in sports environments receive appropriate support from others, it ensures more positive developmental outcomes and sustained participation in youth sports ( Holt et al., 2017 ). However, the interactive effects between parental autonomous support and other significant social agents remain an area with research gaps. Additionally, the simultaneous occurrence of parental control alongside parental autonomous support ( O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ) and its role in the overall motivational climate for young athletes warrant further exploration. This line of inquiry could provide deeper insights into the complex dynamics of parental influence in the context of youth sports.

Parental involvement in the sports environment is one of the most direct and profound ways to influence the psychological and social development of young athletes ( Knight, 2019 ). The results of this review emphasize that positive parental involvement behaviors (such as support, praise, understanding actions, and competition participation) can promote positive motivational outcomes in young athletes. In contrast, negative involvement (such as directive behavior, pressure, and expectations related to sports) can lead to adverse outcomes ( Babkes and Weiss, 1999 ; Gagne, 2003 ; Keegan et al., 2010 ; Boiché et al., 2011 ; Sánchez-Miguel et al., 2013 ; Felber Charbonneau and Camiré, 2019 ; Gomes et al., 2019 ; Lienhart et al., 2019 ; Teques et al., 2019 ; Lienhart et al., 2020 ; De Muynck et al., 2021 ; McCann et al., 2021 ; O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ; Krommidas et al., 2022 ). Positive parental involvement helps young athletes build stronger self-confidence, enhances their ability to cope with competitive stress, and fosters a love for and commitment to the sport (; Furusa et al., 2021 ; Rouquette et al., 2021 ). In our research findings, Lienhart et al. (2020) discovered that a moderate level of parental involvement is most beneficial for the development of athletes throughout the sports season, particularly in sub-elite and elite athletes. However, this result may have limited applicability in different sports contexts or demographic groups due to the specific level of sports (sub-elite and above) and cultural background (France) of the study. Nevertheless, as other studies have shown, excessive positive involvement and pressure from parents can cause stress and discomfort in children, and adolescents tend to prefer parental involvement characterized by praise and understanding ( Bonavolontà et al., 2021 ; Coutinho et al., 2021 ). Future research could further explore this in different cultural contexts and among young athletes at various stages of their sports careers.

Additionally, our review yielded some counterintuitive findings regarding perceived maternal involvement in competitions ( Gomes et al., 2019 ) and perceived pressure from mothers ( Lienhart et al., 2019 ). These anomalies could be attributed to mothers’ lack of sports knowledge or to the unpredictable factors during competitions ( Clarke et al., 2016 ). Gender differences in the outcomes of parental involvement ( Amado et al., 2015 ; Lienhart et al., 2019 ; O’Neil and Amorose, 2021 ) may be rooted in the traditional roles fathers and mothers play in various cultures ( Wall and Arnold, 2007 ; Waters et al., 2022 ). In youth sports, mothers are more inclined to offer nurturing and emotional support, while fathers are more likely to engage in physical activities and provide opportunities for exploration and adventure ( Lindstrom Bremer, 2012 ). Fathers may have higher expectations for their children’s athletic success, particularly for boys, whereas mothers may prioritize their children’s physical health and safety ( Coakley, 2006 ; Gottzén and Kremer-Sadlik, 2012 ; Lindstrom Bremer, 2012 ). Further research could examine the dynamics of the relationship between athletes of different genders and their parents in a wider sporting context.

Moreover, our results indicate that negative parental behaviors have a stronger predictive power than positive ones ( Lienhart et al., 2019 ; De Muynck et al., 2021 ). In a sports context, negative parental actions can indeed lead to highly unsettling and hard-to-ignore phenomena, such as conditional respect and off-field anger ( Goldstein and Iso-Ahola, 2008 ; Ross et al., 2015 ). Future research on interventions to optimize parental education in sports may need to pay additional attention to this aspect ( Knight et al., 2017 ).

The results of this review emphasize that parent-initiated task climate is associated with positive motivational outcomes ( Nucci et al., 2005 ; O’Rourke et al., 2014 ; Weltevreden et al., 2018 ). The term ‘motivational atmosphere’ was coined by Keegan et al. (2011) to reflect the intricate complexity of the social environment in shaping athlete motivation. Parents create a motivational climate that is shaped by parental behaviors, words, expectations and feedback, which together determine the level of support and pressure a child feels ( O’Rourke et al., 2012 ; Harwood et al., 2015 ; Frydrychová et al., 2017 ). Task climate emphasizes the importance of characteristics (e.g., effort, enjoyment, proficiency) that are more susceptible to the athlete’s personal control than an ego climate that emphasizes winning, losing, or being superior to others ( Granero-Gallegos et al., 2017 ). In summary, when children take pride in non-normative progress, internal self-reinforcement processes may be engaged and amplified, thereby fostering positive motivational outcomes ( Rourke and Smith, 2013 ). However, current research has not explored more complex multidimensional models of achievement goals, such as the 3 × 2 model ( Elliot et al., 2011 ), which warrants further investigation.

Based on our systematic review, a positive parent–child relationship significantly enhances the motivational outcomes in adolescent athletes ( Ullrich-French and Smith, 2006 ). Interpersonal relationships are a crucial factor in influencing an athlete’s motivation ( Garcia Bengoechea and Strean, 2007 ). The closeness and security in parent–child relationships provide a stable foundation for young athletes, making them feel supported and understood ( Lisinskiene et al., 2018 ). Furthermore, a positive parent–child relationship is associated with better communication ( Lippold et al., 2016 ), which not only increases positive sports feedback from parents but also encourages a more autonomy-supportive parenting style ( Azimi and Tamminen, 2022 ). Additionally, strong parent–child relationships cultivate a sense of competence and autonomy in athletes, thereby increasing intrinsic motivation and enjoyment in sports ( Rouquette et al., 2020 ). The review also found that parents and peers could influence self-determined motivation in a cumulative and collective manner ( Ullrich-French and Smith, 2006 ). This is because the social influences in sports can come from multiple sources, including parents, peers, siblings, coaches, and fans, affecting choices, attitudes, and behaviors in sports ( Partridge, 2011 ). Furthermore, in the interpersonal environment of youth sports, the relationship between coaches and parents is also considered an important factor and warrants further comprehensive consideration ( Harwood et al., 2019 ).

Limitations

The limitations of this systematic review include its focus on English-language articles, potentially overlooking studies in other languages. The majority of the reviewed literature comes from Western cultures, limiting the applicability of findings to diverse cultural contexts. Since each parent can have a different impact on motivation depending on their relationship with the child, sports experience, or emotional style, and this relationship may provide contextual background for the child’s motivation ( Holt et al., 2008 ). Many studies used cross-sectional designs, which cannot establish causality, and relied on surveys and interviews, possibly leading to response bias or recall errors. Despite a comprehensive literature search, it’s still possible that some studies relevant to the topic were missed due to selection criteria or other factors. Furthermore, as the included studies did not distinguish between stages of sports participation and age groups, the review does not differentiate how the relationship between parents and young athletes’ motivation may vary dynamically at different stages. The stages of sports participation also differ between different sports, posing a challenge to distinguish parental influence on young athletes by age.

Proposals for future research

Future research should broaden the sample scope to include populations from diverse cultural and socio-economic backgrounds and encompass a variety of sports, including adventure, extreme, and winter sports among youth athletes. It is recommended to use longitudinal, experimental, and mixed-methods research designs to delve into the dynamics of parental influence over time. Comprehensive studies on parental influence methods should also be conducted, considering the implementation of parental education and intervention programs, such as utilizing modern technology (mobile apps, online platforms). Moreover, future studies should evaluate the effectiveness of different parenting attitudes, styles, and behaviors, which may vary according to the child’s developmental stage, gender, type of sport, and level of competition. Particularly at different developmental stages of children (e.g., from childhood to adolescence), parental influence may change with the increasing impact of coaches, teammates, and peers. Considering the functionality of sports types (individual vs. team) and levels of competition (recreational, competitive, elite), parental influence may also differ. These research directions will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamic relationship between parents and young athletes’ motivation and provide guidance for the development of effective parental involvement and support strategies in sports.

This systematic review synthesizes research evidence from four theoretical backgrounds to explore the pivotal role parents play in shaping the motivation of young athletes. Our findings underscore the impact of parental goals and values, parenting styles, involvement behaviors, created motivational climates, and parent–child relationships on the motivational outcomes of young athletes. In summary, while parents undeniably play a crucial role in motivating young athletes, the manner and extent of their involvement are key.

Data availability statement

Author contributions.

ZG: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Formal analysis, Supervision. CC: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. MN: Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Writing – original draft. JW: Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – review & editing. XZ: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing. TW: Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing.

Funding Statement

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Alvarez O., Tormo-Barahona L., Castillo I., Moreno-Murcia J. A. (2021). Examining controlling styles of significant others and their implications for motivation, boredom and burnout in young swimmers . Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18 :5828. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18115828, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amado D., Sánchez-Oliva D., González-Ponce I., Pulido-González J. J., Sánchez-Miguel P. A. (2015). Incidence of parental support and pressure on their children’s motivational processes towards sport practice regarding gender . PLoS One 10 :e0128015. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128015, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amorose A. J., Anderson-Butcher D., Newman T. J., Fraina M., Iachini A. (2016). High school athletes’ self-determined motivation: the independent and interactive effects of coach, father, and mother autonomy support . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 26 , 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.05.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson K. J., Cavallaro D. (2002). Parents or pop culture? children’s heroes and role models . Child. Educ. 78 , 161–168. doi: 10.1080/00094056.2002.10522728 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Atkins M. R., Johnson D. M., Force E. C., Petrie T. A. (2015). Peers, parents, and coaches, oh my! The relation of the motivational climate to boys’ intention to continue in sport . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 16 , 170–180. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.10.008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aunola K., Stattin H., Nurmi J. (2000). Parenting styles and adolescents’ achievement strategies . J. Adolesc. 23 , 205–222. doi: 10.1006/jado.2000.0308 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Azimi S., Tamminen K. A. (2022). Parental communication and reflective practice among youth sport parents . J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 34 , 109–132. doi: 10.1080/10413200.2019.1705433 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Babkes M. L., Weiss M. R. (1999). Parental influence on children’s cognitive and affective responses to competitive soccer participation . Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 11 , 44–62. doi: 10.1123/pes.11.1.44 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barber B. K., Harmon E. L. (2002). Violating the self: parental psychological control of children and adolescents . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association eBooks; (pp. 15–52). [ Google Scholar ]
• Bardach L., Oczlon S., Pietschnig J., Lüftenegger M. (2020). Has achievement goal theory been right? A meta-analysis of the relation between goal structures and personal achievement goals . J. Educ. Psychol. 112 , 1197–1220. doi: 10.1037/edu0000419 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barni D., Ranieri S., Donato S., Tagliabue S., Scabini E. (2017). Personal and family sources of parents’ socialization values: a multilevel study . Avances En Psicología Latinoamericana 35 :9. doi: 10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.3468 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boiché J., Guillet E., Bois J., Sarrazin P. (2011). Antecedents, accuracy and consequences of parents’ behaviours. A cross sectional study based on Eccles expectancy value model . Int. J. Sport Psychol. 42 , 368–389. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bonavolontà V., Cataldi S., Latino F., Carvutto R., De Candia M., Mastrorilli G., et al.. (2021). The role of parental involvement in youth sport experience: perceived and desired behavior by male soccer players . Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18 :8698. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18168698, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Borg M. E., Willoughby T. (2022). Affinity for solitude and motivations for spending time alone among early and mid- adolescents . J. Youth Adolesc. 51 , 156–168. doi: 10.1007/s10964-021-01520-1, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bouissou C., Tap P. (1998). Parental education and the socialization of the child: internality, valorization and self-positioning . Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 13 , 475–484. doi: 10.1007/BF03173099 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U., Morris P. A. (2007). “ The bioecological model of human development ” in Handbook of child psychology . eds. Damon W., Lerner R. M. (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.), 793–828. [ Google Scholar ]
• Castillo-Jiménez N., López-Walle J. M., Tomás I., Tristán J., Duda J. L., Balaguer I. (2022). Empowering and disempowering motivational climates, mediating psychological processes, and future intentions of sport participation . Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19 :896. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19020896, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chan D. K. C., Lonsdale C., Fung H. H. (2012). Influences of coaches, parents, and peers on the motivational patterns of child and adolescent athletes . Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports 22 , 558–568. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01277.x, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheung C. Y., Pomerantz E. M. (2011). Parents’ involvement in children’s learning in the United States and China: implications for children’s academic and emotional adjustment . Child Dev. 82 , 932–950. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01582.x, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chu A., Zhang T. (2019). The roles of coaches, peers, and parents in athletes’ basic psychological needs: a mixed-studies review . Int. J. Sports Sci. Coach. 14 , 569–588. doi: 10.1177/1747954119858458 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clarke N. J., Harwood C. G., Cushion C. J. (2016). A phenomenological interpretation of the parent-child relationship in elite youth football . Sport Exerc. Perform. Psychol. 5 , 125–143. doi: 10.1037/spy0000052 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Coakley J. (2006). The good father: parental expectations and youth sports . Leis. Stud. 25 , 153–163. doi: 10.1080/02614360500467735 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Coutinho P., Ribeiro J., da Silva S. M., Fonseca A. M., Mesquita I. (2021). The influence of parents, coaches, and peers in the long-term development of highly skilled and less skilled volleyball players . Front. Psychol. 12 :667542. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.667542, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• De La Cruz M., Zamarripa J., Castillo I. (2021). The father in youth baseball: a self-determination theory approach . Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18 :4587. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18094587, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• De Muynck G., Morbée S., Soenens B., Haerens L., Vermeulen O., Broek G. V., et al.. (2021). Do both coaches and parents contribute to youth soccer players’ motivation and engagement? An examination of their unique (de)motivating roles . Int. J. Sport Exer. Psychol. 19 , 761–779. doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2020.1739111 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: self-determination in personality . J. Res. Pers. 19 , 109–134. doi: 10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: a macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health . Can. Psychol. 49 , 182–185. doi: 10.1037/a0012801 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Du W., Li Z., Xu Y., Chen C. (2023). The effect of parental autonomy support on grit: the mediating role of basic psychological needs and the moderating role of achievement motivation . Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 16 , 939–948. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S401667, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eccles J. S., Adler T. F., Futterman R., Goff S. B., Kaczala C. M., Meece J. L., et al.. (1983). “ Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors ” in Achievement and achievement motivation . ed. Spence J. T. (New York: W. H. Freeman; ), 75–146. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eccles J. S., Harold R. D. (1991). Gender differences in sport involvement: applying the eccles’ expectancy-value model . J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 3 , 7–35. doi: 10.1080/10413209108406432 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eccles J. S., Wigfield A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals . Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53 , 109–132. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot A. J., McGregor H. A. (2001). A 2 X 2 achievement goal framework . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 80 , 501–519. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.501 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot A. J., Murayama K., Pekrun R. (2011). A 3 x 2 achievement goal model . J. Educ. Psychol. 103 , 632–648. doi: 10.1037/a0023952 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Felber Charbonneau E., Camiré M. (2019). Parental involvement in sport and the satisfaction of basic psychological needs: perspectives from parent–child dyads . Int. J. Sport Exer. Psychol. 18 , 655–671. doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2019.1570533 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fredricks J. A., Eccles J. S. (2002). Children’s competence and value beliefs from childhood through adolescence: growth trajectories in two male-sex-typed domains . Dev. Psychol. 38 , 519–533. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.38.4.519, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fredricks J. A., Eccles J. S. (2004). “ Parental influences on youth involvement in sports ” in Developmental sport and exercise psychology: A lifespan perspective (Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology; ), 145–164. [ Google Scholar ]
• Frydrychová Z., Bartošová K., Hutečková S. (2017). The role of parent-initiated motivational climate in the development of overtraining syndrome in adolescent elite athletes: a review study . Studia Sportiva 11 , 269–284. doi: 10.5817/StS2017-1-44 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Furusa M. G., Knight C. J., Hill D. M. (2021). Parental involvement and children’s enjoyment in sport . Qual. Res. Sport Exer. Health 13 , 936–954. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2020.1803393 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gagne M. (2003). Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-being of gymnasts . J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 15 , 372–390. doi: 10.1080/714044203 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gao D., Liu J., Bullock A., Chen X. (2021). Children’s interpretation moderates relations of maternal autonomy support with sociability and assertiveness in China . Soc. Dev. 30 , 449–462. doi: 10.1111/sode.12491 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garcia Bengoechea E., Strean W. B. (2007). On the interpersonal context of adolescents’ sport motivation . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 8 , 195–217. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.03.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaudreau P., Morinville A., Gareau A., Verner-Filion J., Green-Demers I., Franche V. (2016). Autonomy support from parents and coaches: synergistic or compensatory effects on sport-related outcomes of adolescent-athletes? Psychol. Sport Exerc. 25 , 89–99. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.04.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Given K. B. (2001). Goal orientations of adolescents, coaches, and parents: is there a convergence of beliefs? J. Early Adolesc. 21 , 228–248. doi: 10.1177/0272431601021002005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldstein J. D., Iso-Ahola S. E. (2008). Determinants of parents’ sideline-rage emotions and behaviors at youth soccer games . J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 38 , 1442–1462. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00355.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gomes A. R., Gonçalves A. M., Dias O., Morais C. (2019). Parental behavior, cognitive appraisal, and motivation in young athletes . Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 90 , 80–94. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2018.1563278, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• González Valero G., Zurita Ortega F., Martínez Martínez A. (2017). Panorama motivacional y de actividad física en estudiantes: Una revisión sistemática. [motivational panorama and physical activity in students: A systematic review]. Available at: https://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/48961
• Gottzén L., Kremer-Sadlik T. (2012). Fatherhood and youth sports: a balancing act between care and expectations . Gend. Soc. 26 , 639–664. doi: 10.1177/0891243212446370 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Granero-Gallegos A., Gómez-López M., Rodríguez-Suárez N., Abraldes J. A., Alesi M., Bianco A. (2017). Importance of the motivational climate in goal, enjoyment, and the causes of success in handball players . Front. Psychol. 8 :2081. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02081, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harter S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered toward a developmental model . Hum. Dev. 21 , 34–64. doi: 10.1159/000271574 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harwood C., Keegan R., Smith J., Raine A. (2015). A systematic review of the intrapersonal correlates of motivational climate perceptions in physical . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 18 , 9–25. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.11.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harwood C. G., Knight C. J. (2015). Parenting in youth sport: a position paper on parenting expertise . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 16 , 24–35. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.03.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harwood C. G., Knight C. J., Thrower S. N., Berrow S. R. (2019). Advancing the study of parental involvement to optimise the psychosocial development and experiences of young athletes . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 42 , 66–73. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.01.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hein V., Jõesaar H. (2015). How perceived autonomy support from adults and peer motivational climate are related with self-determined motivation among young athletes . Int. J. Sport Exer. Psychol. 13 , 193–204. doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2014.947304 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Henriksen K., Schinke R., Moesch K., McCann S., Parham W. D., Larsen C. H., et al.. (2020). Consensus statement on improving the mental health of high performance athletes . Int. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 18 , 553–560. doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2019.1570473 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hibbard D. R., Walton G. E. (2014). Exploring the development of perfectionism: the influence of parenting style and gender . Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 42 , 269–278. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2014.42.2.269 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holt N. L., Black D., Tamminen K., Fox K., Mandigo J. (2008). Levels of social complexity and dimensions of peer experiences in youth sport . J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 30 , 411–431. doi: 10.1123/jsep.30.4.411, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holt N. L., Knight C. J. (2014). Parenting in youth sport: from research to practice . New York: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Holt N. L., Neely K. C., Slater L. G., Camiré M., Côté J., Fraser-Thomas J., et al.. (2017). A grounded theory of positive youth development through sport based on results from a qualitative meta-study . Int. Rev. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 10 , 1–49. doi: 10.1080/1750984X.2016.1180704, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Horn T. S., Horn J. L. (2007). “ Family influences on children’s sport and physical activity participation, behavior, and psychosocial responses ” in Handbook of sport psychology . eds. Tenenbaum G., Eklund R. C.. 1st ed (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; ), 685–711. [ Google Scholar ]
• Keegan R., Spray C., Harwood C., Lavallee D. (2010). The motivational atmosphere in youth sport: coach, parent, and peer influences on motivation in specializing sport participants . J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 22 , 87–105. doi: 10.1080/10413200903421267 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Keegan R., Spray C., Harwood C., Lavallee D. (2011). “ From ‘motivational climate’ to ‘motivational atmosphere’: a review of research examining the social and environmental influences on athlete motivation in sport ” in Sport psychology . ed. Geranto B. D. (Hauppauge, NJ: Nova Science Publishers Inc.), 1–69. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kmet L. M., Cook L. S., Lee R. C. (2004). Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields . Edmonton, AB: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR). [ Google Scholar ]
• Knafo A., Assor A. (2007). Motivation for agreement with parental values: desirable when autonomous, problematic when controlled . Motiv. Emot. 31 , 232–245. doi: 10.1007/s11031-007-9067-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Knight C. J. (2019). Revealing findings in youth sport parenting research . Kinesiol. Rev. 8 , 252–259. doi: 10.1123/kr.2019-0023 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Knight C. J., Berrow S. R., Harwood C. G. (2017). Parenting in sport . Curr. Opin. Psychol. 16 , 93–97. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.011 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krommidas C., Papaioannou A. G., Comoutos N., Kouali D., Galanis E., Chroni S. (2022). Effects of parental support and coach-initiated motivational climate on young athletes’ psychosocial behaviors and well-being . Asian J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 2 , 140–150. doi: 10.1016/j.ajsep.2022.06.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lavallee D., Kremer J., Moran A. (2012). Sport psychology: Contemporary themes . London: Bloomsbury Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leaper C. (2011). More similarities than differences in contemporary theories of social development?: a plea for theory bridging . Adv. Child Dev. Behav. 40 , 337–378. doi: 10.1016/b978-0-12-386491-8.00009-8 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lienhart N., Nicaise V., Martinent G., Guillet-Descas E. (2020). Perceived parental behaviours and motivational processes among adolescent athletes in intensive training centres: a profile approach . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 49 :101708. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101708 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lienhart N., Nicaise V., Martinent G., Guillet-Descas E., Bois J. (2019). Relationships between elite adolescent athletes’ perceptions of parental behaviors and their motivational processes: does sex matter? Int. J. Sports Sci. Coach. 14 , 639–650. doi: 10.1177/1747954119873988 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lindstrom Bremer K. (2012). Parental involvement, pressure, and support in youth sport: a narrative literature review . J. Fam. Theory Rev. 4 , 235–248. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-2589.2012.00129.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lippold M. A., Davis K. D., Lawson K. M., McHale S. M. (2016). Day-to-day consistency in positive parent–child interactions and youth well-being . J. Child Fam. Stud. 25 , 3584–3592. doi: 10.1007/s10826-016-0502-x, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lisinskiene A., Guetterman T., Sukys S. (2018). Understanding adolescent–parent interpersonal relationships in youth sports: a mixed-methods study . Sports 6 :41. doi: 10.3390/sports6020041 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mallia L., Lucidi F., Zelli A., Chirico A., Hagger M. (2019). Predicting moral attitudes and antisocial behavior in young team sport athletes: a self-determination theory perspective . J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 49 , 249–263. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12581 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mallinson-Howard S. H., Hill A. P., Hall H. K. (2019). The 2 × 2 model of perfectionism and negative experiences in youth sport . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 45 :101581. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.101581 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martins P., Rosado A., Ferreira V., Biscaia R. (2017). Personal and social responsibility among athletes: the role of self-determination, achievement goals and engagement . J. Hum. Kinet. 57 , 39–50. doi: 10.1515/hukin-2017-0045, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McCann B., McCarthy P. J., Cooper K., Forbes-McKay K., Keegan R. J. (2021). A retrospective investigation of the perceived influence of coaches, parents and peers on talented football players’ motivation during development . J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 34 , 1227–1250. doi: 10.1080/10413200.2021.1963013 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McCullagh P., Matzkanin K. T., Shaw S. D., Maldonado M. (1993). Motivation for participation in physical activity: a comparison of parent–child perceived competencies and participation motives . Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 5 , 224–233. doi: 10.1123/pes.5.3.224 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McCurdy A. L., Williams K. N., Lee G. Y., Benito-Gomez M., Fletcher A. C. (2020). Measurement of parental autonomy support: a review of theoretical concerns and developmental considerations . J. Fam. Theory Rev. 12 , 382–397. doi: 10.1111/jftr.12389 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moed A., Gershoff E. T., Eisenberg N., Hofer C., Losoya S., Spinrad T. L., et al.. (2015). Parent–adolescent conflict as sequences of reciprocal negative emotion: links with conflict resolution and adolescents’ behavior problems . J. Youth Adolesc. 44 , 1607–1622. doi: 10.1007/s10964-014-0209-5 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moher D., Shamseer L., Clarke M., Ghersi D., Liberati A., Petticrew M., et al.. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement . Syst. Rev. 4 :1. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morano M., Robazza C., Ruiz M. C., Bortoli L. (2022). Sport participation in early and middle adolescence: the interplay between self-perception and psychobiosocial experiences in predicting burnout symptoms . Front. Psychol. 13 :855179. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.855179, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nicholls J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance . Psychol. Rev. 91 , 328–346. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.91.3.328 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nicholls J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Norris L. A., Didymus F. F., Kaiseler M. (2017). Stressors, coping, and well-being among sports coaches: a systematic review . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 33 , 93–112. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.08.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nucci L., Hasebe Y., Lins-Dyer M. (2005). Adolescent psychological well-being and parental control of the personal . New Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2005 , 17–30. doi: 10.1002/cd.125 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Neil L., Amorose A. J. (2021). Autonomy support and control within mother-father parenting structures: a person-centered approach in youth sport . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 53 :101854. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101854 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Rourke D. J., Smith R. E., Smoll F. L., Cumming S. P. (2012). Parent-initiated motivational climate, self-esteem, and autonomous motivation in young athletes: testing propositions from achievement goal and self-determination theories . Child Dev. Res. 2012 , 1–9. doi: 10.1155/2012/393914 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Rourke D. J., Smith R. E., Smoll F. L., Cumming S. P. (2014). Relations of parent- and coach-initiated motivational climates to young athletes’ self-esteem, performance anxiety, and autonomous motivation: who is more influential? J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 26 , 395–408. doi: 10.1080/10413200.2014.907838 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Papaioannou A. G., Ampatzoglou G., Kalogiannis P., Sagovits A. (2008). Social agents, achievement goals, satisfaction and academic achievement in youth sport . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 9 , 122–141. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.02.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Partridge J. A. (2011). Current directions in social influence: parents and peers . Revista Iberoamericana De Psicología Del Ejercicio Y El Deporte 6 , 251–268. [ Google Scholar ]
• Popay J., Roberts H., Sowden A., Petticrew M., Arai L., Rodgers M., et al.. (2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews . A product from the ESRC methods programme Version 1 :b92 [ Google Scholar ]
• Robbins S., Judge T. A., Millett B., Boyle M. (2013). Organisational behaviour . Melbourne, VIC: Pearson Higher Education AU. [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts G. C., Treasure D. (2012). Advances in motivation in sport and exercise . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodrigues F., Teixeira D. S., Neiva H. P., Cid L., Monteiro D. (2020). The bright and dark sides of motivation as predictors of enjoyment, intention, and exercise persistence . Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports 30 , 787–800. doi: 10.1111/sms.13617, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ross A. J., Mallett C. J., Parkes J. F. (2015). The influence of parent sport behaviours on children’s development: youth coach and administrator perspectives . Int. J. Sports Sci. Coach. 10 , 605–621. doi: 10.1260/1747-9541.10.4.605 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rouquette O., Knight C., Lovett V., Heuzé J.-P. (2020). Parent-athlete relationships: a central but underexamined consideration within sport psychology . Sport Exerc. Psychol. Rev. 16 , 5–23. doi: 10.53841/bpssepr.2020.16.2.5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rouquette O. Y., Knight C. J., Lovett V. E., Heuzé J.-P. (2021). Effect of parent responsiveness on young athletes’ self-perceptions and thriving: an exploratory study in a Belgian French-community . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 52 :101801. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101801 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rourke D. J. O., Smith R. E. (2013). Parent-initiated motivational climate and young athletes intrinsic-extrinsic motivation: cross-sectional and longitudinal relations . J. Child Adolescent Behav. 1 :109. doi: 10.4172/2375-4494.1000109 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan R. M., Deci E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being . Am. Psychol. 55 , 68–78. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sánchez-Miguel P. A., Leo F. M., Sánchez-Oliva D., Amado D., García-Calvo T. (2013). The importance of parents’ behavior in their children’s enjoyment and amotivation in sports . J. Hum. Kinet. 36 , 169–177. doi: 10.2478/hukin-2013-0017 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwebel F. J., Smith R. E., Smoll F. L. (2016). Measurement of perceived parental success standards in sport and relations with athletes’ self-esteem, performance anxiety, and achievement goal orientation: comparing parental and coach influences . Child Dev. Res. 2016 , 1–13. doi: 10.1155/2016/7056075 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simon P. D. (2021). Parent autonomy support as moderator: testing the expanded perfectionism social disconnection model . Personal. Individ. Differ. 168 :110401. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110401 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Soenens B., Vansteenkiste M. (2010). A theoretical upgrade of the concept of parental psychological control: proposing new insights on the basis of self-determination theory . Dev. Rev. 30 , 74–99. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2009.11.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Soenens B., Vansteenkiste M., Lens W., Luyckx K., Goossens L., Beyers W., et al.. (2007). Conceptualizing parental autonomy support: adolescent perceptions of promotion of independence versus promotion of volitional functioning . Dev. Psychol. 43 , 633–646. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.633, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Souza L. A., Jr., Falconi C. A., Dias H. M., Brandão M. R. F., Zanetti M. C. (2020). Motivation, parental style and psychological well-being of female basketball school player . Cuadernos de Psicologia Del Deporte 20 , 201–216. Scopus. doi: 10.6018/cpd.343681 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Teixeira P. J., Carraça E. V., Markland D., Silva M. N., Ryan R. M. (2012). Exercise, physical activity, and self-determination theory: a systematic review . Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 9 :78. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-78, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Teques P., Calmeiro L., Rosado A., Silva C., Serpa S. (2019). Perceptions of parenting practices and psychological variables of elite and sub-elite youth athletes . Front. Psychol. 10 :1495. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01495, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tessitore A., Capranica L., Pesce C., De Bois N., Gjaka M., Warrington G., et al.. (2021). Parents about parenting dual career athletes: a systematic literature review . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 53 :101833. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101833, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ullrich-French S., Smith A. L. (2006). Perceptions of relationships with parents and peers in youth sport: independent and combined prediction of motivational outcomes . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 7 , 193–214. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2005.08.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Waldron J. J., Krane V. (2005). Motivational climate and goal orientation in adolescent female softball players . J. Sport Behav. 28 , 378–391. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wall G., Arnold S. (2007). How involved is involved fathering?: an exploration of the contemporary culture of fatherhood . Gend. Soc. 21 , 508–527. doi: 10.1177/0891243207304973 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Waters G. M., Tidswell G. R., Bryant E. J. (2022). Mothers’ and fathers’ views on the importance of play for their children’s development: gender differences, academic activities, and the parental role . Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 92 , 1571–1581. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12520 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weltevreden G. M., Van Hooft E. A. J., Van Vianen A. E. M. (2018). Parental behavior and adolescent’s achievement goals in sport . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 39 , 122–131. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.08.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• White S. A., Kavussanu M., Tank K. M., Wingate J. M. (2004). Perceived parental beliefs about the causes of success in sport: relationship to athletes’ achievement goals and personal beliefs . Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports 14 , 57–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2003.00314.x, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiese B. S., Freund A. M. (2011). Parents as role models: parental behavior affects adolescents’ plans for work involvement . Int. J. Behav. Dev. 35 , 218–224. doi: 10.1177/0165025411398182 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wolfenden L. E., Holt N. L. (2005). Talent development in elite junior tennis: perceptions of players, parents, and coaches . J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 17 , 108–126. doi: 10.1080/10413200590932416 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yamamoto Y., Holloway S. D. (2010). Parental expectations and children’s academic performance in sociocultural context . Educ. Psychol. Rev. 22 , 189–214. doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9121-z [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zeng L., Peng X., Zeng X., Wang H., Xiao S., Chen Y. (2022). Parental autonomy support and future-oriented coping among high school students: serial mediation of future time perspective and meaning in life . Front. Psychol. 13 :895003. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.895003, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhou L., Ntoumanis N., Thøgersen-Ntoumani C. (2019). Effects of perceived autonomy support from social agents on motivation and engagement of Chinese primary school students: psychological need satisfaction as mediator . Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 58 , 323–330. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.05.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]