The sideline behaviour of coaches at children’s team sports games

Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Psychology of Sport and Exercise journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/psychsport

The sideline behaviour of coaches at children’s team sports games Simon R. Walters a, *, Philip J. Schluter b, c, f, Anthony R.H. Oldham a, Rex W. Thomson d, Deborah Payne e a

AUT University, School of Sport and Recreation, Auckland, New Zealand AUT University, School of Public Health & Psychosocial Studies, Auckland, New Zealand c The University of Queensland, School of Nursing and Midwifery, QLD 4072, Australia d Unitec, School of Sport, Auckland, New Zealand e AUT University, School of Heath Care Practices, Auckland, New Zealand f University of Otago, Department of Public Health and General Practice, Christchurch, New Zealand b

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 14 May 2010 Received in revised form 10 November 2011 Accepted 10 November 2011 Available online 20 November 2011

Objectives: This study aimed to establish the prevalence, pattern and nature of coaches’ verbal behaviour at children’s (ages 6e12 years) team sports events. The study draws upon the motivational model presented by Mageau and Vallerand (2003) to examine the influence of global (gender), contextual (sport related), and social (athlete gender) factors on coach comments. Design: A cross-sectional observational study of coaches stratified across four team sports: Rugby Union, Netball, Association Football and Touch Rugby. Method: The Observation Instrument at Sports Events was used to categorise covertly recorded verbal comments made by coaches at organised team sports games. Results: Overall, 10,697 comments were recorded at 72 games at a rate of 3.71 comments/minute; 35.4% were categorised as positive, 21.6% as negative, and 43.0% as neutral. Significant differences in negative comments were identified between sport (p < .001) with rugby coaches recording the highest percentage of negative comments and the lowest percentage of positive comments; by coach gender (p < .001), with male coaches recording higher rates of negative comments; and by athlete gender (p < .001), with coaches of male-only teams recording higher rates of negative comments. When simultaneously included in a Poisson regression model the difference in negative comments between sports remained statistically significant (p < .001) whereas coach gender was no longer significant. Conclusions: The ratio of negative coach comments for all sports gives cause for concern. These findings suggest that sports of national and cultural significance are a key driver of coaching behaviours in a competitive environment. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Children Sport Coach Motivational model

The role of sport in children’s lives is open to many conflicting interpretations, both positive and negative. The positive impact that sport can have on children’s psychological well-being has long been acknowledged (Allen & Howe, 1998; Woolger & Power, 1993). However, as Orlick and Botterill (1975) point out, sport involvement does not automatically lead to positive benefits for all. Positive outcomes are to some extent dependent on the sporting environment created (Rutten et al., 2011; Sanders, Field, Diego, & Kaplan, 2000). Correspondingly, significant attention has been paid to the role of coach behaviour and its contribution to the positive and

* Corresponding author. School of Sport and Recreation, AUT University, Private Bag 92006, Auckland 1020, New Zealand. Tel.: þ64 9 921 9999x7022; fax: þ64 9 921 9960. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S.R. Walters), philip.schluter@otago. ac.nz (P.J. Schluter), [email protected] (A.R.H. Oldham), rex_chch@hotmail. com (R.W. Thomson), [email protected] (D. Payne). 1469-0292/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.11.008

negative benefits of sport participation (Amorose & Horn, 2000; Gearity & Murray, 2011; Smith & Smoll, 1990). A number of studies have highlighted the positive benefits associated with coaches demonstrating autonomy supporting behaviours and creating appropriate achievement environments for athletes of all ages (Gillet, Vallerand, Amoura, & Baldes, 2010; Keegan, Harwood, Spray, & Lavallee, 2009; Mageau & Vallerand, 2003). The study by Keegan et al. (2009) in particular, confirms the considerable influence coaches have on the child athlete’s experience of, and benefits gained from, sport involvement. What needs to be better understood are the conditions that determine coach behaviour when supporting young athletes. The motivational model of the coach-athlete relationship proposed by Mageau and Vallerand (2003), which draws on the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Vallerand, 1997), is one theoretical view-point that facilitates an improved understanding of this behaviour. This model enables the exploration

S.R. Walters et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215

of influences on coaches’ behaviour in that it specifically deals with the impact of multiple, layered antecedents on autonomy support offered by coaches. Of specific interest is how these antecedents influence the verbal behaviour of coaches confronted by the pressures of competitive game-play. The model itself focuses on three key areas: the coach orientation (global influences), the coaching context, and the coaches’ perceptions of their athletes. The motivational model also describes how autonomy-supportive behaviours exhibited by coaches can benefit athletes’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness; and in turn how meeting these needs can influence athletes’ intrinsic motivation. In their model Mageau and Vallerand (2003) pay particular attention to coach orientation as the basis for motivational influences manifested at a global level. Amongst the other influences at this global, dispositional level is likely to be gender, which is supported in studies conducted by Dubois (1990), and Wandzilak, Ansorge, and Potter (1988). These studies found that the behaviours of male coaches differed from female coaches, in that male coaches offered significantly less encouragement. However, Millard (1996) noted that it is possible that the gender differences identified could be confounded by other factors. As a consequence, Millard’s study of gender differences in coaching behaviour also considered the effects of the age of the coach, number of years experience coaching, and coaches’ personal sporting participation history. Even after statistically controlling for these known confounding variables, Millard identified similar significant gender differences in coaching behaviours, with males offering greater levels of technical instruction and less general encouragement than their female counterparts. The contextual factors influencing coach behaviours will include sporting organisations, along with the values and expectations that they impress upon the coach. Thus a given sport and its associated incumbent culture may establish a particular context which strongly influences coach behaviour in training and competition. Mageau and Vallerand (2003) provide a rationale for how such a relationship might operate in sport; citing educational research by Deci, Spiegel, Ryan, Koestner, and Kauffman (1982), which showed that teachers under performance pressure demonstrated greater frequency of controlling behaviours. If pressures intrinsic to sport culture influence the controlling behaviours exhibited by coaches, then it is likely that sports of national significance that come with a high cultural expectation of competence might put coaches at all levels under increased pressures. Regardless of intentions, coaches are thus likely to demonstrate controlling behaviours in circumstances where there is pressure to demonstrate competence. If controlling behaviours are more likely to emerge from coaches under pressure then it might be also expected that winning, losing, and very close games would provoke different patterns of verbal behaviours. Mageau and Vallerand (2003) advocated that future research test similar hypotheses in the sport context. Further contextual factors which may impact upon coaching behaviour are the age and gender of the athlete. Weiss (2008) adopted an approach referred to as developmental sport psychology, to highlight the significance of taking into account developmental differences when examining children’s sporting experiences. Although much of the coaching literature has focused on the adolescent or teenage high-school athlete, the significance of coaching behaviours has been closely related to the sporting experiences of children of all ages, and would appear to be especially significant for younger children (Keegan et al., 2009). In relation to athlete gender, it has been suggested that many coaches may inaccurately stereotype girls as being not as naturally talented as boys in areas of physical activity (Horn, Lox, & Labrador, 2006). In spite of well documented research that indicates that there are extremely limited physiological differences between boys and girls

209

prior to puberty (Malina, 2002), these social perceptions have the potential to influence coaches’ expectations and their resultant behaviour towards their athletes based on the athletes’ gender. The need for this study arose from concerns about the behaviour of coaches at children’s team sports. Media reports in New Zealand, as elsewhere, have increasingly highlighted concerns over inappropriate coach behaviour at children’s sporting events; for example, see Robertson (2009). However, there is little if any scientific evidence to support these media assertions. It was therefore important to establish a more reliable description of the nature of coach behaviour using rigorous epidemiological methods. Objectives and hypotheses The objective of this study was to measure and compare the prevalence, pattern, and nature of coaches’ verbal behaviours at children’s events for four team sports, using a scientifically robust epidemiological design and instrument. Specifically, we were interested in determining the influence of potential predictive variables on the positive and negative comments made by coaches; particularly coach gender (global), sport (contextual), athlete age (contextual), game result (contextual), and athlete gender (social). Finally, we were interested in examining the differences in the frequency and distribution of the target of negative comments made by coaches across the four team sports. The four team sports selected for this study were rugby union, netball, association football, and touch rugby. Thompson (1988) has noted that rugby union has been commonly cited as not just being New Zealand’s national sport, but as the country’s major passion and religion. It has also been associated closely with New Zealand males’ sense of identity (Pringle, 2001). As such, we were interested in establishing if the high expectations of competence associated with a nationally significant sport influenced coaching behaviour. Netball was included due to its position as New Zealand’s most popular and internationally successful team sport for females. Football and touch rugby were selected for comparison due to their high participation rates for children (Sport and Recreation New Zealand, 2010). Football tends to viewed as an excellent first sport for young children to play; touch rugby is viewed traditionally as a less formal game, characterised by less organisation and bureaucracy, and as a consequence taken less seriously than the nationally significant sports (Thomson, 2000). Using the framework proposed by Mageau and Vallerand (2003), it is hypothesised that a sport of national significance (rugby union) will create a coaching context that elicits greater levels of negative and controlling coach behaviours, especially in tightly contested games, than other popular team sports. Second, based on the findings of previous studies (Millard, 1996; Wandzilak et al., 1988), we hypothesise at a global level of influence that male coaches will display higher levels of negative comments than female coaches. Third, we hypothesise that athlete age creates a context that will act as a mediating factor on coach behaviour. Finally, with reference to the work on gender stereotyping by Horn et al. (2006), we hypothesise that coaches’ preconceived notions of ability based on athlete gender would influence coach behaviour, with boys being subjected to higher expectations and therefore greater levels of negative criticism, than girls. Method Study design We adopted a cross-sectional observational study design of children’s team sport coaches stratified across four team sports: netball, rugby union, football, and touch rugby in the 2008e2009

210

S.R. Walters et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215

seasons. The study was originally designed to have equally sized strata with 20 games per sport, 80 in total. Participants In total, 72 matches and coaches were observed, randomly preselected from published fixture lists. These include 19 netball coaches (18 female, 1 male), 18 rugby coaches (all male), 17 football coaches (4 female, 13 male), and 18 touch rugby coaches (8 female, 10 male). The study design intention to observe a total of 80 matches was not ultimately possible within the time constraints of this study due to a range of factors including adverse weather conditions, researcher illness, and game cancellations. Observation instrument The systematic observation instrument employed in this study was an adaptation of the Parent Observation Instrument for Sports Events (POISE) (Kidman & McKenzie, 1996). This instrument was initially designed by Walley, Graham, and Forehand (1982) to record adult spectator behaviour at youth league T-ball games, and was subsequently adopted by Randall and McKenzie (1987) to record adult spectator behaviour at youth football games. Kidman and McKenzie (1996) further adapted this instrument and developed the POISE to record and analyse the nature of parents’ comments at children’s sport competitions. A number of previous studies have utilised the Coaching Behavior Assessment System (CBAS) developed by Smith, Smoll, and Hunt (1977) to observe coaching behaviours. However, the adapted POISE as developed by Kidman and McKenzie (1996) enabled the capture of other variables of interest including; the target of the comments, and the event that was occurring at the time of the comment. A further factor influencing the decision to use an adapted POISE, was a concern over the perceived levels of instruction and the impact this has on the development of decisionmaking opportunities for young athletes. Although skilled instruction has been identified as being beneficial and can have a positive impact on an athlete (Smoll & Smith, 2006), it has been argued that telling young children what to do effectively takes away from the athlete’s decision-making process (Kidman, McKenzie, & McKenzie, 1999; Martens, 2004). When a coach repeatedly tells an athlete what to do, particularly if the athlete knows they have made a poor decision, this can lead to athletes becoming irritated (Smoll & Smith, 2006) and can have a negative impact on athlete confidence and development (Kidman, 2005; Kidman et al., 1999). This concern led Kidman and McKenzie (1996) to classify instructional comments as negative. In acknowledging the ongoing debate over the perceived benefits and drawbacks of instruction, we have adapted the POISE instrument and classified instructional comments as neutral. Although not used to record coaching behaviours in previous studies, POISE is an instrument that is specifically designed to record game time sideline behaviour and met the specific aims of this study. As an adapted instrument which records sideline behaviour it is referred to as the Observation Instrument at Sporting Events. The adapted instrument is used to record the following information:  all comments made by the coaches under observation;  the target of the coach’s comment (e.g. player, referee, team etc.);  the event (e.g. ball in play, penalty, goal etc.) that is occurring as the comment is made;  the outcome of the game (win, loss or draw);  coach gender;

 team gender;  duration of game in minutes. The nature of the comments are categorised as Positive, Negative, or Neutral, broken down into sub-categories as follows: Positive  Reinforcing: A supportive comment such as “well done”.  Hustle: A motivating comment such as “go, go, go”. Negative  Correcting: A comment made which establishes that a specific action was not satisfactory and should be altered, such as “you need to shoot earlier”. The comment is made in an unsupportive manner with no supporting positive comment such as “bad luck” or “good effort” before providing the corrective feedback (as has been recommended by Smoll and Smith (2006)).  Scolding: Where a player is told off.  Witticism: A comment often involving sarcasm or ridicule, such as “Oh great shot” when the shot has been anything but.  Contradicting: A comment that may vary from positive to negative, and may be confusing for a player, e.g. “Tackle, that’s it, no you committed yourself too early”. Neutral  Instructional: telling the player what to do e.g. “Play it forward”.  Direct Question: e.g. “Do you want to come off?”  Indirect Question: A question aimed at a player but not relating to this event e.g. “Who will be at training next week?”  Rhetorical Question: A question requiring no answer e.g. “Where’s the passing today?”  Social: any comment not related to the event e.g. “Let’s get a coffee after”.  Other: any comment that does not fit into any other category. Procedure After gaining full permission from the sports bodies responsible for the administration of the sports involved, matches were randomly pre-selected for observation from their published fixture lists. The observer at the game then selected the primary coach for observation during the team talk stage. Every comment made by the coach under observation, the target of the comment, and the specific event was recorded by the observer into a voice recorder. The recordings were subsequently transcribed and coded into an Excel spreadsheet. The initial pre-testing of the instrument was conducted with the principal researcher and the assistant observing and recording the comments made by one coach at two separate football games. The results were compared to review inter-coder reliability. Points of discrepancy between coders’ results were discussed and reviewed before initiating the main study. The observers subsequently separately attended selected games. To ensure comments were being audio tape-recorded in a consistent manner and to establish inter-coder reliability, the observers recorded comments for the same coach at two different games. The recorded results were then compared and inter-observer reliability was established at 92%, which is an acceptably high level of agreement for an observation instrument (Herson & Barlow, 1984). The formula used to determine inter-observer reliability was as used by Kidman and McKenzie (1996) and as recommended by Siedentop (1991). Data analysis Comments were recorded and converted into codes and tabulated representing the nature of the comment, the target of the

S.R. Walters et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215

comment, and the event. Fisher’s exact and Pearson’s chi-square (c2) tests were used to compare distributions of categorical variables across the four sports. Poisson regression models were employed to estimate and compare rates of comments per minute between sports (using Wald’s c2 test) treating game length, which varied between sports, as an exposure variable. The effects of child’s age, gender of the coach, game result, athlete gender, and the team sport played on the rate of comments per minute were also investigated in these Poisson regression models and compared using Wald’s c2 test. All analyses were performed using Stata version 11.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) and a level of 5% was used to define statistical significance. Ethical Considerations As the primary aim of this study was to identify the nature and prevalence of coach behaviours at children’s sporting events, covert observation minimises the Hawthorne effect. This effect is well documented and relates to the phenomenon whereby a study subject’s behaviour alters as a direct consequence of the subject becoming aware they are being observed (Eckmanns, Bessert, Behnke, Gastmeier, & Rüden, 2006; Mangione-Smith, Elliot, McDonald, & McGlynn, 2002). In this study it was believed that awareness of observation would significantly influence a participant’s behaviour. Concerns have been expressed in relation to the erosion of community trust that can result from covert research (Riley & Manias, 2004). Therefore, considerable and careful thought was given to the ethical implications of using a covert observation instrument in this study. Full permission to conduct this study was sought and gained from each of the sporting organisations responsible for the organising and administration of the sporting events observed. Full ethical approval was gained from our institution’s ethics committee.

touch and football were similar, ranging from 3.29 (95% CI: 3.15, 3.43) in football to 3.49 (95% CI: 3.36, 3.63) for netball (Table 1). A breakdown of the nature of comments made by coaches revealed that the most common type of comment fell into the neutral category (43.0%). These predominantly comprised of instructional comments (n ¼ 4437). Positive comments accounted for 35.4% of total comments made and negative comments for 21.6% of the overall total (Table 2). A further breakdown of the comments by sport revealed significant differences in the pattern of comments between sports (Pearson’s c2(6, N ¼ 10,697) ¼ 294.62, p < .001, Cramér’s V ¼ 0.12). Rugby coaches recorded the lowest percentage of positive comments (26.5%) and the highest percentage of negative (23.0%) and neutral comments (50.5%), whereas football recorded the highest percentage of positive (46.8%) and the lowest percentage of negative comments (19.8%), (Table 3). Testing the effects of sport, athlete age, athlete gender, coach gender and game result on positive comments Poisson regression analysis (N ¼ 72) found no significant difference in positive comments by sports (Wald’s c2(3) ¼ 7.31, p ¼ .06), age of child athlete (Wald’s c2(1) ¼ 2.22, p ¼ .14), athlete gender (Wald’s c2(2) ¼ 0.63, p ¼ .73), or coach gender (Wald’s c2(1) ¼ 0.05, p ¼ .82). However, a significant difference in positive comments by game result (win, lose, or draw) was observed (Wald’s c2(2) ¼ 8.16, p ¼ .02). Using ‘winning’ as the reference category, incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of positive comments were 0.85 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.06) when the team lost and 1.30 (95% CI: 0.95, 1.79) when the team drew. This implies that when the team was losing, the rate of positive comments made by the coach on average dropped by 15% compared to a team that was winning. Testing the effects of sport, athlete age, athlete gender, coach gender and game result on negative comments

Results The gender of athletes in the teams observed were: 19 netball teams (girls-only); 18 rugby teams (3 mixed teams, 15 boys-only); 17 football teams (13 mixed, 4 boys-only); and 18 touch rugby teams (16 mixed, 2 boys-only). The prevalence of coaches’ comments Overall, 10,697 coach comments were recorded at a rate of 3.71 (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.64, 3.79) comments/minute. The number of comments recorded for rugby coaches (4033) is greater than for any of the other sports observed, although the length of game time observed is also greater for rugby (Table 1). However, even when accounting for game time, Poisson regression analysis revealed that, on average, 4.38 (95% CI: 4.25, 4.52) coach comments per minute were made in rugby; a rate significantly higher than the other three sports (Wald’s c2(3, N ¼ 72) ¼ 23.45, p < .001). In contrast, the average rate of comments per minute for netball,

Table 1 Number of games observed, total comments recorded, total number of minutes observed and rate of comments per minute. Sport

Games

Comments

Minutes

Rate (95% CI)a

Netball Rugby Soccer Touch Total

19 18 17 18 72

2656 4033 2169 1839 10,697

760 920 660 540 2880

3.49 4.38 3.29 3.41 3.71

a

211

Poisson regression analysis found a significant difference in the effects of the sport played on negative comments (Wald’s c2(3, N ¼ 72) ¼ 21.63, p < .001). Using ‘netball’ as the reference category, IRR of negative comments were 1.70 (95% CI: 1.20, 2.39) for rugby, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.35) for football, and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.25) for touch. The rate of negative comments made by rugby coaches were, on average, 70% higher than netball; whereas the rates of negative comments were not importantly different between the other sports.

Table 2 Number and percentage of nature of coaches’ comments. Nature

Number of comments

Reinforcing Hustle

1984 1801

Correcting Scolding Witticism Contradicting

744 1520 37 9

Instruction Direct question Indirect question Rhetorical question Social Other

4437 88 0 6 2 69

2310 (21.6%)

Neutral

(3.36e3.63) (4.25e4.52) (3.15e3.43) (3.25e3.56) (3.64e3.79)

Total comments 3785 (35.4%)

Negative

Total Rate is number of comments per minute.

Verbal behaviour

Positive

4602 (43%)

10,697

10,697

212

S.R. Walters et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215

Table 3 Number and percentage of coaches’ comments by sport. Sport

Positive comments Negative comments Neutral comments Total

Netball 1037 (39.0%) Rugby 1069 (26.5%) Soccer 1016 (46.8%) Touch 663 (36.1%) Total

Table 4 Target of coaches’ negative comments by sport.

3785 (35.4%)

540 926 429 415

(20.3%) (23.0%) (19.8%) (22.6%)

2310 (21.6%)

1079 2038 724 761

(40.6%) (50.5%) (33.4%) (41.4%)

4602 (43%)

2656 4033 2169 1839 10,697

A significant difference in negative comments by athlete gender (Wald’s c2(2, N ¼ 72) ¼ 16.31, p < .001) was also identified. Using ‘mixed gender teams’ as the reference category, coaches of female teams had a non-significantly higher IRR of negative comments, 1.13 (95% CI: 0.80, 1.57), but coaches of male teams had a significantly higher IRR of negative comments, 1.80 (95% CI: 1.34, 2.41). The incidence rate of negative comments made by coaches of male teams was thus 80% greater than coaches of mixed gender teams. No significant difference was found in negative comments by athlete age (Wald’s c2(1, N ¼ 72) ¼ 3.14, p ¼ .08) or game result (Wald’s c2(2, N ¼ 72) ¼ 1.91, p ¼ .39), although, a significant difference (Wald’s c2(1, N ¼ 72) ¼ 5.21, p ¼ .02) in negative comments by coach gender was identified. Females had an IRR of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.95) to that of males. This implies that the rate of negative comments made by male coaches was 29% higher than negative comments made by female coaches. Significant differences in negative comments were therefore identified between sport, between coach gender, and between athlete gender. It was not possible to examine the relationship between these three variables simultaneously in a single model, or between sport played and athlete gender. This was due to the heavily confounded relationship between sport played and athlete gender, as netball teams were made up of girls only and the three other sports had no girl-only teams. However, when both the sport and the coach gender were simultaneously included in a Poisson regression model the difference in negative comments between sports remained statistically significant (rugby union: IRR 1.15, standard error (SE) 0.44; football: IRR 0.79, SE 0.26; touch: IRR 0.81, SE 0.18; netball (reference); Wald’s c2(3, N ¼ 72) ¼ 17.00, p < .001) whereas the gender of coach was no longer significant (females: IRR 0.84, SE 0.21; males (reference); Wald’s c2(1, N ¼ 72) ¼ 0.45, p ¼ .50). While sport and coach gender are related, this finding suggests that the sport played is the key driver of the negative comments made, rather than the gender of the coach. Similarly, when coach gender and athlete gender were simultaneously considered, the difference in negative comments by athlete gender remained statistically significant (female teams: IRR 1.13, SE 0.33; male teams: IRR 1.69, SE 0.24; mixed teams (reference); Wald’s c2(2, N ¼ 72) ¼ 13.39, p ¼ .001), but again the gender of coach was found to be no longer significant (females: IRR 0.79, SE 0.18; males (references); Wald’s c2(1, N ¼ 72) ¼ 1.03, p ¼ .31). The target of coaches’ comments The frequency and distribution of the target of coaches’ negative comments for each of the four sports is presented in Table 4. While a statistically significant difference emerged in the patterns of targeted negative comments (Fisher’s exact test, p < .001), these comments are predominantly aimed at the team as opposed to individual players in all four sports. The percentage of negative comments aimed at umpires and officials, however, was visibly higher in touch (8.7%) and in rugby (7.3%) than in netball (1.3%) and football (2.1%).

Target

Netball

Rugby

Soccer

Touch

Totals

Team Player Umpire Official Opposition Other

312 (57.8%) 218 (40.4%) 7 (1.3%) 0 0 3 (0.5%)

482 (52.1%) 372 (40.2%) 51 (5.5%) 17 (1.8%) 4 (0.4%) 0

262 (61.1%) 158 (36.8%) 9 (2.1%) 0 0 0

307 (74.0%) 71 (17.1%) 36 (8.7%) 0 0 1 (0.2%)

1363 819 103 17 4 4

Total

540

926

429

415

2310

A further breakdown of the targets of negative comments also revealed variations across the four sports (Table 5). An analysis of the differences between sports in the rate of negative comments that targeted match officials revealed a significant difference (Fisher’s exact test, p ¼ .001). Officials’ decisions were challenged or criticised by coaches in 12 out of 18 of the games of rugby observed, and 11 out of 18 of the games observed in touch. Further analysis of negative and positive comments targeting individual players showed that in the majority of games observed (60%), at least one individual player was on the receiving end of only negative comments. However, there was no significant difference between sports in the targeting of individual players with negative comments (Fisher’s exact test, p ¼ .08). Discussion Coaches generally make many varied comments, with high prevalence, over the course of children’s team sport games. In support of our first hypothesis, the contextual influence of rugby union, as a sport of national significance, appeared to significantly influence the rates of negative comments directed at both athletes and referees. Rugby union is widely acknowledged as New Zealand’s national sport, has been related to New Zealand males’ sense of manliness, and dominates sports coverage in the media (Pringle, 2001; Pringle & Markula, 2005). The New Zealand Rugby Union has clear guidelines for junior coaches on their website (New Zealand Rugby Union, 2007), and is also one of the few sports in New Zealand that has compulsory coaching courses for their volunteers. The coaching materials for developing coaches emphasise the need for positive feedback and comments. In spite of this, rugby coaches recorded the lowest percentage of positive comments (26.5%) and the highest percentage of negative comments (23.0%). Our second hypothesis, that the global influence of coach gender would result in male coaches exhibiting less supportive behaviours than female coaches was also supported by the findings. A significant difference was identified in the rate of negative comments made by gender (male coaches made 29% more negative comments than female coaches), which is consistent with the findings of Table 5 Number of games in which umpires/officials or individual children were the target of negative comment. Sport

Games observed

Umpires/officialsa

95% CI

Individual playersb

95% CI

Netball Rugby Soccer Touch

19 18 17 18

4 12 2 11

(6%e46%) (4%e87%) (0.01%e36%) (36%e83%)

15 12 9 7

(79%) (67%) (53%) (39%)

(54%e94%) (41%e87%) (28%e77%) (17%e64%)

Total

72

29 (40%)

(29%e53%)

43 (60%)

(47%e71%)

a

(21%) (67%) (12%) (61%)

Number of games where officials were the target of negative comments. Number of games where at least one individual player received negative comments only. b

S.R. Walters et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215

Millard (1996), and Wandzilak et al. (1988). A significant difference was also identified in the rate of negative comments by sport (rugby coaches made 70% more negative comments than netball coaches, 80% more than football coaches, and 82% more than touch coaches). Coach gender and sport played is correlated, but when investigated together our analysis revealed that it was the sports played rather than the coach’s gender that explained the different rates of comments made. This analysis suggests that it is the contextual influence of the culture within the sport rather than the gender of the coach which drives the rates of coaches’ comments. Although the rates of negative comments were worst for rugby, over one in every five comments made by coaches in all sports were negative. This ratio of negative comments across the four sports is unlikely to be conducive to or promote a positive coaching environment. Indeed, punitive behaviours exhibited by coaches are more likely to induce feelings of resentment from athletes as opposed to improving performance, and have been identified as factors contributing to children withdrawing from sport (Smoll & Smith, 2006). The national and regional sporting organisations of the sports involved in this study highlight the need for coaches to focus on longer term skill development and less on the immediate game result, but this study revealed that coaches across all sports make significantly less positive comments if their team is losing. Studies of participation motivation for children playing sport have consistently highlighted that the most important reasons for children (up to the age of 14 years) to play sport are for fun/excitement, skill development, action and the challenge (Barber, Sukhi, & White, 1999). Winning has not been identified as being of over-riding importance to children, however there is evidence to suggest that children realise that winning is important to adults (Siegenthaler & Gonzalez, 1997; Smoll & Smith, 2006). Although our study does not examine the effect of coach behaviour on the child, the decrease in positive comments identified when a team is losing would support the findings of Smoll and Smith and would clearly indicate to the players that winning equals praise. At the level of social influence, our hypothesis that coaches would exhibit more critical behaviours towards male athletes than female athletes was also supported. Horn et al. (2006) have identified that coaches’ perceptions and preconceived notions of athlete ability can become self-fulfilling prophecies. It is possible that coaches’ expectations of athletes’ capabilities based on their gender would not only result in greater criticism of male athletes, but could also have the potential to undermine the motivation and selfconfidence of female athletes who perceive that coaches have lesser expectations of their abilities. The target of coaches’ comments also revealed interesting variations across the four sports. In the games observed, negative comments aimed at the referee/umpire more commonly occurred in rugby and in touch. Although this was unsurprising for rugby, these findings call into question the traditional positioning of touch as a game that is less serious and “characterised by less organisation and bureaucracy” (Thomson, 2000; p. 36). Some typical comments recorded in all sports were “Open your eyes ref” (rugby) and “Come on ref we’re not playing rugby here” (football). In three of the rugby games observed, the referee had to speak to the coach to ask them to curb their comments. In one of these games an argument ensued between the coach and the referee which resulted in the coach walking his team off the field before the end of the game (this was in a junior game of 7 years old children). These findings support concerns expressed in a study commissioned by the English Football Association (FA) where a survey of stakeholders involved in children’s sport found that 40% of respondents were concerned about swearing and abuse aimed at referees and coaches (Brackenridge et al., 2004). These findings also reinforce

213

broader concerns with respect to what young people learn from sport. The present data shows coaches using abusive comments as an instrumental strategy in pursuit of success. The analysis of negative comments targeting individual players was also illuminating. In all 72 games observed, at least one child was told off for not following instructions correctly or for making a mistake and in 43 (60%) games, at least one child only received negative comments. As a consequence, many children’s experience of their game was of simply being told off or scolded by their coach. Given that these are young children who are still developing skills and learning their games in what is supposedly a fun environment, these findings give cause for concern. The environment for children’s sport and overemphasis on competition and success by coaches has been linked to children’s feelings of low self-esteem, dropout and stress (Siegenthaler & Gonzalez, 1997). Finally, our hypothesis that athlete age would act as a mediating influence on coach behaviour was not supported, with no significant differences being identified between age groups (6e12 years). Considering the young age of the children playing these sports, this finding gives major cause for concern as coaches would not appear to be considering the developmental needs of athletes in their care, as has been advocated by Weiss (2008). Limitations The use of covert observation resulted in a number of limitations to this study. Variables such as number of years experience coaching, the previous sporting participation background of the coach, and the age of the coach, have been previously identified as factors that influence coaching behaviour (Millard, 1996). This study operated under strict ethical guidelines, and a key requirement was that the identity of individual coaches observed should not be known to researchers to preserve anonymity. However, the value of covert observation in this study, and the validity that this approach lends to capturing coach behaviour, outweighed the limitations of not capturing and examining the effects of certain variables. Although of interest, due to the relationship between sport played, coach gender, and team gender, it was not possible to examine these influences in a single model. Netball teams were female-only, and the other three sports had no female-only teams. To fully understand the interplay between these variables, future studies could focus on examining the differences between sports consisting of a mix of female-only, male-only, and mixed gender teams. However, it is important to note that in this study, gender of coach and athlete gender were no longer significant influences when separately compared to sport played. Future directions With 41.5% of all comments made being instructional in nature, the overall behaviour exhibited by coaches appears to represent a predominantly directional approach to coaching. The coaches observed did not adopt a coaching approach that encourages experiential learning and the development of decision-making ability. In addition, the rate of negative comments witnessed across all sports give cause for concern, especially when considering the young ages of the children involved. In drawing upon the motivational model developed by Mageau and Vallerand (2003), the most significant finding of this study related to the contextual influence of a nationally important sport on coach behaviour. Our findings also support findings of previous studies that have examined the influence of coach gender and athlete gender on coach behaviour.

214

S.R. Walters et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215

All the organising bodies of the sports studied here advocate positive coach behaviour of the type supported by theory and evidence. Indeed one of the sports (rugby), implements a wellfunded education programme that targets all coaches of children in the age group that was the focus of this study. Consequently it seems unlikely that rugby coaches in this study would be unaware of ‘expected’ behaviours. What is worrying then is that the coaches demonstrating the highest rates of negative comments and lowest rates of positive comments were the ones most likely to have been exposed to a coaching model advocating otherwise. This then draws attention toward models of coach behaviour and education. Smith and Smoll (1997) described coaches as “blissfully unaware of how they behaved” (p. 18) in response to evidence that showed coaches had difficulty in recalling their behaviours during training and that the athletes they coached were more accurate in their recall of the same session. More recent work by Millar, Oldham, and Donovan (2011) supported this in their own study of coach instructional behaviour during training. Discrepancies between actual and reported behaviour was as high as 40% despite the highly experienced coaches knowing what data was being collected and being asked to recall actions immediately following the session in question. Data in the study reflected a confirmatory bias whereby coaches appeared to report data in a manner consistent with expected behaviours. This would suggest that many coaches come away from sessions believing they have said the right thing even when they may not have. It is tempting to suggest that competitive contexts will increase this problem. Nevertheless the current data supports the call for coaches to be made more aware of their actions as part of their development. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Sport and Recreation New Zealand for their funding of this study. Sport and Recreation New Zealand had no academic or commercial control of the design and implementation of this study, or of the study’s findings. References Allen, J. B., & Howe, B. L. (1998). Player ability, coach feedback, and female adolescent athletes’ perceived competence and satisfaction. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20, 280e299, Retrieved from. http://hk.humankinetics.com/ jsep. Amorose, A. J., & Horn, T. S. (2000). Intrinsic motivation: relationships with collegiate athletes’ gender, scholarship status, and perceptions of their coaches’ behavior. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 22, 63e84, Retrieved from. http://journals.humankinetics.com/jsep. Barber, H., Sukhi, H., & White, S. A. (1999). The influence of parent-coaches on participant motivation and competitive anxiety in youth sport participants. Journal of Sport Behavior, 22, 162e180, Retrieved from. http://www. southalabama.edu/psychology/journal.html. Brackenridge, C., Bringer, J. D., Cockburn, C., Nutt, G., Pitchford, A., Russell, K., et al. (2004). The football association’s child protection in football research project 2002e2006: rationale, design and first year results. Managing Leisure, 9, 30e46. doi:10.1080/1360671042000182943. Deci, E. L., Spiegel, N. H., Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Kauffman, M. (1982). Effects of performance standards on teaching styles ebehavior of controlling teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 916e924. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.74.6.852. Dubois, P. (1990). The youth sport coach as an agent of socialization: an exploratory study. Journal of Sport Behavior, 4, 95e107, Retrieved from. http://www. southalabama.edu/psychology/journal.html. Eckmanns, T., Bessert, J., Behnke, M., Gastmeier, P., & Rüden, H. (2006). Compliance with antiseptic hand rub use in intensive care units: the Hawthorne effect. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, 27, 931e934, Retrieved from. http:// www.journals.uchicago.edu/ICHE/home.html. Gearity, B. T., & Murray, M. A. (2011). Athletes’ experiences of the psychological effects of poor coaching. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12, 213e221. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.11.004. Gillet, N., Vallerand, R. J., Amoura, S., & Baldes, B. (2010). Influence of coaches’ autonomy support on athletes’ motivation and sport performance: a test of the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11, 155e161. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.10.004.

Herson, M., & Barlow, D. H. (1984). Single case experimental designs. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon. Horn, T. S., Lox, C. L., & Labrador, F. (2006). The self-fulfilling prophecy theory: when coaches’ expectations become reality. In J. Williams (Ed.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (5th ed.). (pp. 82e108) Boston, MA: McGraw Hill. Keegan, R. J., Harwood, C. G., Spray, C. M., & Lavallee, D. E. (2009). A qualitative investigation exploring the motivational climate in early career sports participants: coach, parent and peer influences on sport motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 361e372. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2008.12.003. Kidman, L. (2005). Athlete-centered coaching: Developing inspired and inspiring people. Christchurch, New Zealand: Innovative. Kidman, L., & McKenzie, A. (1996). Parents’ verbal comments at sporting events. In First children’s issues centre conference on "Investing in children" (pp. 344e353), Dunedin, New Zealand. Kidman, L., McKenzie, A., & McKenzie, B. (1999). The nature and target of parents’ comments during youth sport competitions. Journal of Sport Behavior, 22, 54e68, Retrieved from. http://www.southalabama.edu/psychology/journal. html. Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coacheathlete relationship: a motivational model. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21, 883e904. doi:10.1080/ 0264041031000140374. Malina, R. M. (2002). The young athlete: biological growth and maturation in a biocultural context. In F. L. Smoll, & R. E. Smith (Eds.), Children and youth in sport: A biopsychosocial perspective (2nd ed.). (pp. 261e292) Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Mangione-Smith, R., Elliot, M. N., McDonald, L., & McGlynn, E. A. (2002). An observational study of antibiotic prescribing behavior and the Hawthorne effect. Health Services Research, 37, 1603e1623. doi:10.1111/14756773.10482. Martens, R. (2004). Successful coaching (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Millar, S.-K., Oldham, A. R. H., & Donovan, M. (2011). Coaches’ self-awareness of timing, nature and intent of verbal instructions to athletes. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 6, 503e513. doi:10.1260/1747-9541.6.4.503. Millard, L. (1996). Differences in coaching behaviors of male and female high school soccer coaches. Journal of Sport Behavior, 19, 19e31, Retrieved from. http://www. southalabama.edu/psychology/journal.html. New Zealand Rugby Union. (2007). Small Blacks. Retrieved 4th February, 2010, from. http://www.nzrugby.co.nz/SmallBlacks/tabid/933/Default.aspx. Orlick, T. D., & Botterill, C. (1975). Every kid can win. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall. Pringle, R. (2001). Competing discourses: narratives of a fragmented self, manliness and rugby union. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 36, 425e439. doi:10.1177/101269001036004004. Pringle, R., & Markula, P. (2005). No pain is sane after all: a Foucauldian analysis of masculinities and men’s experiences in rugby. Sociology of Sport Journal, 22(472), Retrieved from. http://journals.humankinetics.com/ssj. Randall, L., & McKenzie, T. L. (1987). Spectator verbal behavior in organized youth soccer: a descriptive analysis. Journal of Sport Behavior, 10, 200e211, Retrieved from. http://www.southalabama.edu/psychology/journal.html. Riley, R. G., & Manias, E. (2004). The uses of photography in clinical nursing practice and research: a literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48, 397e405. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03208.x. Robertson, G. (2009, August 10). Junior rugby child’s play no more. New Zealand: Herald. Retrieved from. http://www.nzherald.co.nz. Rutten, E. A., Schuengel, C., Dirks, E., Stams, G. J. J. M., Biesta, G. J. J., & Hoeksma, J. B. (2011). Predictors of antisocial and prosocial behavior in an adolescent sports context. Social Development, 20, 294e315. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2010.00598. Sanders, C. E., Field, T. M., Diego, M., & Kaplan, M. (2000). Moderate involvement in sports is related to lower depression levels among adolescents. Adolescence, 35, 793e797, Retrieved from Proquest central database. Siedentop, D. (1991). Developing teaching skills in physical education (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield. Siegenthaler, K. L., & Gonzalez, G. L. (1997). Youth sports as serious leisure: a critique. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 21, 298e314. doi:10.1177/ 019372397021003006. Smith, R. E., & Smoll, F. L. (1990). Self-esteem and children’s reactions to youth sport coaching behaviours: a field study of self enhancement processes. Developmental Psychology, 26, 987e993. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.26.6.987. Smith, R. E., & Smoll, F. L. (1997). Coaching the coaches: youth sports as a scientific and applied behavioral setting. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 16e21. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep11512606. Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., & Hunt, E. (1977). A system for the behavioral assessment of athletic coaches. Research Quarterly, 48, 401e407. Smoll, F. L., & Smith, R. E. (2006). Enhancing coach-athlete relationships: cognitivebehavioral principles and procedures. In J. Dosil (Ed.), The sport psychologist’s handbook: A guide for sport-specific performance enhancement (pp. 19e38). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Sport and Recreation New Zealand. (2010). SPARC facts 1997-2001. Retrieved from. http://www.activenzsurvey.org.nz/Documents/sparc-facts-1997-2001.pdf. Thompson, S. (1988). Challenging the hegemony: New Zealand women’s opposition to rugby and the reproduction of capitalist patriarchy. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 23, 205e223. doi:10.1177/101269028802300303. Thomson, R. W. (2000). Physical activity through sport and leisure: traditional versus non-competitive activities. Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 33(1), 34e39, Retrieved from Proquest Central Database.

S.R. Walters et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 13 (2012) 208e215 Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 271e360. doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60019-2. Walley, P. B., Graham, G. M., & Forehand, R. (1982). Assessment and treatment of adult observer verbalizations at youth league baseball games. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 254e266, Retrieved from. http://journals.humankinetics.com/jsep. Wandzilak, T., Ansorge, C. J., & Potter, G. (1988). Comparison between selected practice and game behaviors of youth sport soccer coaches. Journal of Sport

215

Behavior, 11, 78e88, Retrieved from. http://www.southalabama.edu/ psychology/journal.html. Weiss, M. R. (2008). C. H. McCloy lecture: "Field of dreams:" sport as a context for youth development. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79, 434e449, Retrieved from. http://www.aahperd.org/rc/publications/rqes/. Woolger, C., & Power, T. G. (1993). Parent and sport socialization: views from the achievement literature. Journal of Sport Behavior, 16, 171e190, Retrieved from. http://www.southalabama.edu/psychology/journal.html.