Methods/Approach

PARTICIPANTS

Originally, 160 coaches were asked to participate in this study, of that, 22 agreed to participate. Out of the 22 coaches, 11 were female coaches and 11 were male coaches. Coaches were questioned about their coaching experience: how many years have they been coaching throughout their lifetime. Results were then analyzed by viewing them either over or under 10 years of coaching experience. More than half (59%) of coaches surveyed had been coaching for a minimum of 20 years. The majority of participants perceived their coaching technique to be assertive (61%) with the remaining stating passive (33%) or aggressive (4%). Of the 22 participants, 16 coach(ed) a ‘team sport’ and 6 coach(ed) an ‘individual sport’. 

 

PROCEDURE

Participants were asked to fill out the Motivational Climate Questionnaire (MCQ). This survey included seven demographic questions, followed by nine questions (using a Likert Scale structure) regarding motivational climate. The Likert Scale being analyzed was based off a coach’s perception on the importance of certain coaching style characteristics with five levels (1=Unimportant, 2=Fairly Important, 3=Important, 4= Very Important, 5= Extremely Important). The last nine questions investigated multiple characteristics precedingly proven, through other studies, to be effective in a well-rounded and excellent coaching technique. These characteristics include: relatedness, competence, autonomy, the encouragement of intrinsic motivation, team cohesiveness, caution to injury, positivity, the implementation of pre-performance meditation, and goal setting. 

 

FORMATION OF QUESTIONNAIRE

This survey was comprised  based on previously validated questionnaires testing motivational climate, coaching styles, and/or the self-determination theory. A few of the inspirational validated surveys include: EDMCQ-C, MCSYS, AGSYS, and PMCSQ-2. These questionnaires focused specifically on an athlete's perception of his/her coach. Although an athlete's perspective is important, a coach's view is of equal necessity. The MCQ’s questions are based off the structure and topic of questions from the surveys above, but altered into how a coach perceives his own technique.

 

DATA-ANALYSIS PROCESS

All data was collected and inserted into SPSS (an advanced computerized statistical software) to correlate and differentiate multiple variables using a quantification method of quantitative statistical analysis. This software helped correlate certain variables of the data together and to further our knowledge about how much these variables were correlated. If there was a significant correlation, the software would produce a number closer to 1 (.05>x>.1). If there was a trending correlation but not quite significant, the software would produce a number closer to 1 (0<x<.05). Any number produced over .1, was considered insignificant. In addition, G*Power Software was used to calculate how many participants are needed to make the study as reliable as possible. 

 

LIMITATION

Unfortunately, time was limited when conducting this research study. 5 weeks were given to validate my questionnaire, send it out to an assortment of coaches, then analyze the data given. Within that short time span, coaches were reluctantly responding to the email sent. Overall, a lack of participants was the largest limitation in this research study. In spite of this challenge, the G*Power Software showed that with 22 participants, there is an 82% efficacy level. This percentage would prefer to be enlarged but based off the efficacy level, this research study can still be considered reliable.