Motivational climate is inherently a group-level construct so that longitudinal, multilevel designs are needed to evaluate its effects on subsequent outcomes. Based on a large sample of physical education classes (2,786 students, 200 classes, 67 teachers), we evaluated the effects of classroom motivational climate (task-involving and ego-involving) and individual goal orientations (task and ego) on individual students’ outcomes (intrinsic motivation, attitudes, physical self-concept, and exercise intentions) collected early (T1) and late (T2) in the school year. Using a multilevel approach, we found significant class-average differences in motivational climate at T1 that had positive effects on T2 outcomes after controlling T1 outcomes. Although there was no support for a “compatibility hypothesis” (e.g., that task oriented students were more benefited by task-involving motivation climates), the stability of goal orientations was undermined by incompatible climates.
Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :
- Author: Yannis Theodorakis x
- Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
A Multilevel Approach to Motivational Climate in Physical Education and Sport Settings: An Individual or a Group Level Construct?
Athanasios Papaioannou, Herbert W. Marsh, and Yannis Theodorakis
A Multimethod Examination of the Relationship Between Coaching Behavior and Athletes’ Inherent Self-Talk
Nikos Zourbanos, Antonis Hatzigeorgiadis, Nikos Tsiakaras, Stiliani Chroni, and Yannis Theodorakis
The aim of the present research was to investigate the relationship between coaching behavior and athletes’ inherent self-talk (ST). Three studies were conducted. The first study tested the construct validity of the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ) in the Greek language, and provided support for its original factor structure. The second study examined the relationships between coaching behavior and athletes’ ST in field, with two different samples. The results showed that supportive coaching behavior was positively related to positive ST (in one sample) and negatively related to negative ST (in both samples), whereas negative coaching behavior was negatively related to positive ST (in one sample) and positively related to negative ST (in both samples). Finally, the third study examined the relationships experimentally, to produce evidence regarding the direction of causality. The results showed that variations in coaching behavior affected participants’ ST. Overall, the results of the present investigation provided considerable evidence regarding the links between coaching behavior and athletes’ ST and suggested that coaches may have an impact on athletes’ thoughts.
