Search Results

This research aimed to (a) determine whether mastery and intrateam performance achievement goals predicted prosocial and antisocial teammate behavior, (b) explore whether effects of intrateam performance goals were mediated by moral disengagement, and (c) examine whether any effects (Study 2 only) were moderated by cohesion. In Study 1, team athletes (N = 282) from Australia completed questionnaires assessing the aforementioned variables. Structural equation modeling indicated that prosocial teammate behavior was positively predicted by mastery-approach goals, and negatively predicted by mastery- and intrateam performance-avoidance goals, whereas antisocial teammate behavior was positively predicted by intrateam performance-approach and -avoidance goals; these latter effects were mediated by moral disengagement. In Study 2, team athletes (N = 452) from the United Kingdom completed a measure of cohesion in addition to the Study 1 instruments; the analyses largely confirmed the Study 1 findings. However, the undesirable effect of mastery-avoidance goals on prosocial behavior seen in Study 1 was only apparent in Study 2 when individuals held strong perceptions of team cohesion. In sum, this investigation makes a novel contribution to the literature on team functioning in sport, being the first to explore how athletes’ normative goals relative to their teammates might shape effective interaction processes.

A sport-specific measure of moral disengagement was developed in 2 studies. In Study 1, a 59-item questionnaire was developed and tested with 308 athletes from 5 team sports. A series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) testing different models suggested the model that best fitted the data had 6 first-order factors that could be represented by 1 second-order factor. Study 2 involved 305 athletes from the same 5 sports. CFA confirmed the 6-factor, second-order structure for the final 32-item measure. Results from Study 2 supported the construct validity of the scale, providing evidence for the factorial, concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity. The Moral Disengagement in Sport Scale (MDSS) is proposed as a valid and reliable measure of moral disengagement for use in the sport context.

This research aimed to (a) develop a measure of prosocial and antisocial behavior in sport, (b) examine its invariance across sex and sport, and (c) provide evidence for its discriminant and concurrent validity. We conducted two studies. In study 1, team sport athletes (N = 1,213) recruited from 103 teams completed questionnaires assessing demographics and prosocial and antisocial behaviors in sport. Factor analyses revealed two factors representing prosocial behavior and two factors representing antisocial behavior. The model had a very good fit to the data and showed configural, metric, and scalar invariance across sex and sport. The final scale consisted of 20 items. In Study 2, team-sport athletes (N = 106) completed the scale and measures of empathy and goal orientation. Analyses provided support for the discriminant and concurrent validity of the scale. In conclusion, the new scale can be used to measure prosocial and antisocial behaviors in team sport.

This research aimed to investigate (a) the effect of golfers’ perceptions of coach motivation efficacy on golfers’ precompetition task self-efficacy, (b) the effect of performance on pre-to-postround changes in self-efficacy, (c) the effect of pre-to-postround changes in self-efficacy on pre-to-postround changes in affect and emotion, and (d) whether any effects of performance on pre-to-postcompetition changes in affect and emotion were mediated by pre-to-postcompetition changes in self-efficacy. In Study 1, a scale measuring golf self-efficacy was developed and validated using data from 197 golfers. In Study 2, 200 golfers completed this measure alongside measures of coach motivation efficacy, and positive and negative affect before a golf competition; all measures (except coach motivation efficacy) were again completed following the competition. Structural equation modeling showed that coach motivation efficacy positively predicted precompetition self-efficacy, performance positively predicted pre-to-postcompetition changes in self-efficacy, which had positive and negative effects, respectively, on pre-to-postcompetition changes in positive and negative affect; mediation analyses demonstrated that pre-to-postcompetition changes in self-efficacy mediated effects of performance on pre-to-postcompetition changes in positive and negative affect. In Study 3, the Study-2 procedures were replicated with a separate sample of 212 golfers, except measures of excitement, concentration disruption, somatic anxiety, and worry replaced those for positive and negative affect. Structural analyses showed the findings from Study 2 were largely replicated when specific emotions were investigated in place of general indices of affect. This investigation makes novel contributions regarding the potential importance of perceptions of coach efficacy for golfers’ own efficacy beliefs, and the role personal efficacy beliefs may play in facilitating the effects of performance on affective outcomes.

This study examined the relationships between athletes’ perceptions of coaching effectiveness, based on the coaching efficacy model, and their effort, commitment, enjoyment, self-efficacy, and prosocial and antisocial behavior in rugby union. Participants were 166 adult male rugby-union players (M age = 26.5, SD = 8.5 years), who completed questionnaires measuring their perceptions of four dimensions of coaching effectiveness as well as their effort, commitment, enjoyment, self-efficacy, and prosocial and antisocial behavior. Regression analyses, controlling for rugby experience, revealed that athletes’ perceptions of motivation effectiveness predicted effort, commitment, and enjoyment. Further, perceptions of technique effectiveness predicted self-efficacy, while perceptions of characterbuilding effectiveness predicted prosocial behavior. None of the perceived coaching effectiveness dimensions were related to antisocial behavior. In conclusion, athletes’ evaluations of their coach’s ability to motivate, provide instruction, and instill an attitude of fair play in his athletes have important implications for the variables measured in this study.

This research aimed to investigate whether athletes’ perceptions of their coach’s effectiveness on dimensions of coaching efficacy (i.e., motivation, technique, character building) predicted indicators of their competence, confidence, connection, and character in athletes from the UK and Malaysia. Athletes from team (volleyball, UK n = 46, Malaysia n = 49; hockey, UK n = 34, Malaysia n = 47; and basketball, UK n = 50, Malaysia n = 50) and individual (squash, UK n = 47, Malaysia n = 44; table tennis, UK n = 48, Malaysia n = 47; and golf, UK n = 44, Malaysia n = 47) sports completed questionnaires assessing the study variables. Multiple-regression analyses controlling for athletes’ sex, sport experience, and sport type showed in both samples that perceived motivation effectiveness positively predicted athletes’ connection and sport confidence, perceived technique effectiveness positively predicted their sport competence, and perceived character-building effectiveness positively predicted their moral identity. Thus, athletes’ perceptions of their coach may have important implications for athletes’ sport experiences in team and individual sports even in divergent cultures. Results are discussed in terms of their relevance for the coaching efficacy model and the athlete-level outcomes resulting from effective coaching.

The concept of bracketed morality has received empirical support in several sport studies (e.g., Bredemeier & Shields, 1986a, 1986b). However, these studies have focused on moral reasoning. In this research, we examined bracketed morality with respect to moral behavior in sport and university contexts, in two studies. Male and female participants (Study 1: N = 331; Study 2: N = 372) completed questionnaires assessing prosocial and antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents in sport and toward other students at university. Study 2 participants also completed measures of moral disengagement and goal orientation in both contexts. In most cases, behavior in sport was highly correlated with behavior at university. In addition, participants reported higher prosocial behavior toward teammates and higher antisocial behavior toward opponents in sport than toward other students at university. The effects of context on antisocial behavior were partially mediated by moral disengagement and ego orientation. Our findings extend the bracketed morality concept to prosocial and antisocial behavior.

Research on the conceptual model of coaching efficacy (Feltz, Chase, Moritz, & Sullivan, 1999) has increased dramatically over the past few years. Utilizing this model as the guiding framework, the current study examined: (a) coaching experience and sex as predictors of coaches’ coaching efficacy; (b) sport experience, sex, and the match/mismatch in sex between coach and athlete as predictors of athletes’ perceptions of their coach’s effectiveness on the four coaching efficacy domains; and (c) whether coaches’ reports of coaching efficacy and athletes’ perceptions of coaching effectiveness differed. Coaches (N = 26) and their athletes (N = 291) from 8 individual and 7 team sports drawn from British university teams (N = 26) participated in the study. Coaches completed the Coaching Efficacy Scale (CES), while athletes evaluated their coach’s effectiveness using an adapted version of the CES; coaches and athletes also responded to demographic questions. Results indicated that, in coaches, years of coaching experience positively predicted technique coaching efficacy, and males reported higher game strategy efficacy than females. In athletes, sport experience negatively predicted all perceived coaching effectiveness dimensions, and the mismatch in sex between athletes and their coach negatively predicted perceived motivation and character building coaching effectiveness. Finally, on average, coaches’ ratings of coaching efficacy were significantly higher than their athletes’ ratings of coaching effectiveness on all dimensions. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for coaching effectiveness.

Social identity has been found to play a salient role in regulating teammate behavior among youth participating in a range of sports (Bruner, Boardley, & Côté, 2014). This study aimed to better understand social identity by examining how it may influence intrateam moral behavior specifically in competitive youth ice hockey. Thirty-six male and female competitive youth ice hockey players from nine teams participated in narrative interviews. Using a thematic narrative analysis, three distinct narratives were identified: (1) family-oriented team narrative, (2) performance-oriented team narrative, and (3) dominance-oriented team narrative. Within each of the narratives, a reciprocal relationship between social identity and intrateam moral behavior was reported such that young athletes’ social identities developed through team membership may influence and be influenced by their moral behavior toward teammates. Collectively, the results extend previous research by providing an in-depth qualitative understanding of social identity and intrateam moral behavior in youth sport.

This study used ecological sampling methods to examine associations between youth athletes’ experiences receiving and engaging in behaviors indicative of in-group ties, cognitive centrality, and in-group affect (i.e., social identity) during a 3-day competitive ice hockey tournament. Forty-five youth (M _age = 12.39 years; SD _age = 1.14 years; 94% male) from nine teams wore an electronically activated recorder that captured brief (50-s) audio observations throughout the tournament. Participants also completed daily diary questionnaires for each day of competition. Multilevel structural equation modeling demonstrated that athletes were more likely to engage in behaviors indicative of in-group affect and cognitive centrality on days when they received as higher-than-average frequency of behaviors indicative of cognitive centrality from teammates, coaches, and parents. The findings suggest that when team members interact in ways that demonstrate they are thinking about their team, they influence fellow members to behave in ways that promote a sense of “us.”