Volume 11 - Summer Supplementary                   Ann Appl Sport Sci 2023, 11 - Summer Supplementary: 0-0 | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Sut Txi M R, Mat Salleh F N, Azizuddin Khan T K. Athletes’ Relationship Toward Coaches in Malaysia. Ann Appl Sport Sci 2023; 11 (S1)
URL: http://aassjournal.com/article-1-1168-en.html
1- Faculty of Sport Science and Coaching, University Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Perak, Malaysia , mrdarchery@yahoo.com
2- Faculty of Sport Science and Coaching, University Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Perak, Malaysia
Abstract:   (988 Views)
Background. In order to be successful in sports, coaches, and athletes must work together. As a result, they play an important role in maintaining their relationship.
Objectives. This cross-sectional study determines the athletes’ relationship toward coaches in Malaysia.
Methods. This study included 168 male athletes and 195 female athletes. Archers made up the majority of the participants (12.4%), followed by athletes in athletics (8.8%), petanque (8.8%), and pencak silat (8.5%). An online survey was used, with two measures included: (a) demographics and (b) the Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q).
Results. According to the findings, the athletes have a stronger bond with their coaches. Furthermore, it revealed a significant difference in commitment between males and females and years of experience with a coach. Male athletes are more committed to their coaches than female athletes (t = 2.39, p = 0.02). Athletes who have trained with a coach for more than ten years are found to be more committed to their coach. (t = -2.52, p = 0.01). It reveals a significant difference in complementarity to training time per week (11-20 hours and 21-35 hours) between groups of athletes (F2, 360 = 3.03, p < 0.05).
Conclusion. Findings suggest that additional assessment, monitoring, and treatment plans be developed for athletes, particularly female athletes, and young athletes, to ensure that their psychosocial support is prioritized in the process of building a good social network in a relationship that involves processes to influence each other.
Full-Text [PDF 586 kb]   (493 Downloads)    
 
 
APPLICABLE REMARKS
• Continued monitoring and research into the relationship between athletes and coaches, particularly among groups such as female and male athletes, young athletes, and long and short-term relationships with coaches, as evidenced by data.
• Furthermore, the data obtained can ensure that psychosocial support in sports is disclosed and easily accessible to relevant parties.

Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Sport Psychology and its Related Branches
Received: 2022/10/8 | Accepted: 2022/12/27

References
1. Jean C, Wade G. An Integrative Definition of Coaching Effectiveness and Expertise. Int J Sport Sci Coach. 2009;4(3):307-323. [DOI:10.1260/174795409789623892]
2. Jowett S. Coaching effectiveness: the coach-athlete relationship at its heart. Curr Opin Psychol. 2017; 16:154-158. [DOI:10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.05.006] [PMID]
3. Jowett S, Cockerill IM. Olympic medallists' perspective of the athlete-coach relationship. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2003;4(4):313-331. [DOI:10.1016/S1469-0292(02)00011-0]
4. Farukuzzaman M, Rahman AHMM. Communication Pattern in Social Work Practice: A Conceptual Framework. Int J Res Sociol Anthropol. 2019;5(2):32-43.
5. Iso-Ahola SE. Intrapersonal and interpersonal factors in athletic performance. Scand J Med Sports 1995:5:191-199. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0838.1995.tb00035.x] [PMID]
6. Alavi K, Mahbob MH. Komunikasi berkesan dengan warga emas: Dari perspektif intervensi kerja sosial. J Komun Malaysian J Commun. 2017;33(4):21-37. [DOI:10.17576/JKMJC-2017-3304-02]
7. Hinde RA. Relationships: A Dialectical Perspective. London: Psychology Press, 1997.
8. Jowett S, Meek GA. The coach-athlete relationship in married couples: An exploratory content analysis. Sport Psychol. 2000;14, 157-175. [DOI:10.1123/tsp.14.2.157]
9. Vanden Auweele YV, Rzewnicki R. Putting relationship issues in sport in perspective. Int J Sports Psychol 2000: 31: 573-577.
10. Kelley HH, Berscheid E, Christensen A, Harvey JH, Huston TL, Levinger G, McClintock E, Peplau LA, Peterson DR, eds. Close Relationships. New York: Freeman, 1983.
11. Kiesler DJ. Contemporary Interpersonal Theory Research and Personality, Psychopathology, and Psychotherapy. New York: Wiley, 1997.
12. Berscheid E, Snyder M, Omoto AM. Issues in studying close relationships: conceptualising and measuring closeness. In: Hendric C, ed. Close Relationships. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989: 63-91.
13. Newcomb TM. An approach to the study of communicative acts. Psychol Rev 1953: 60: 393-404. [DOI:10.1037/h0063098] [PMID]
14. Wurther P. Success of coach athlete relationship (Canadian Olympic study): Canada, 2009.
15. Sut Txi MR. The level of relationship between athletes and coaches among sport school students in Malaysia. J Sains Sukan Pendidik Jasm. 2019;8(2):42-49. [DOI:10.37134/jsspj.vol8.2.5.2019]
16. Syed Muhammad SK. Methods of Data Collection. Basic Guidelines for Research: An Introductory Approach for All Disciplines Edition: First Chapter: 9Publisher: Book Zone Publication, Chittagong-4203, Bangladesh, 2016.
17. Jowett S, Ntoumanis N. The Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q): Development and initial validation. Scand J Med Sci Sport. 2004;14(4):245-257. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2003.00338.x] [PMID]
18. LaVoi NM. Expanding the Interpersonal Dimension: Closeness in the Coach-Athlete Relationship. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2007;2(4):497-512. https://doi.org/10.1260/174795407783359704 [DOI:10.1260/174795407783359696]
19. Wylleman P, Brussel VU. Interpersonal relationships in sport: Uncharted territory in sport psychology Running Head: Interpersonal Relationships In Sport Interpersonal Relationships in Sport: Uncharted Territory in Sport Psychology Research Paul Wylleman Faculty of Physical Ed. Int J Sport Psychol. 2000;31(August):1-18.
20. Hellstedt JC. The coach/parent/athlete relationship. Sport Psychol. 1987;1(2),151 - 160. [DOI:10.1123/tsp.1.2.151]
21. Holmes RM, Mcneil M, Adorna P, Procaccino JK. Collegiate student athletes' preferences and perceptions regarding peer relationships. J Sport Behav. 2008;31(4):338-352.
22. Smith RE, Smoll FL, Cumming SP. Motivational climate, and changes in young athletes' achievement goal orientations. Motiv Emot. 2009;33(2):173-183. [DOI:10.1007/s11031-009-9126-4]
23. Thomas G, Fletcher GJO. Mind-Reading Accuracy in Intimate Relationships: Assessing the Roles of the Relationship, the Target, and the Judge. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;85(6):1079-1094. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1079] [PMID]
24. Ericsson KA. Exceptional memorizers: Made, not born. Trends Cogn Sci. 2003;7(6):233-235. [DOI:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00103-7] [PMID]
25. Jowett S, Clark-Carter D. Perceptions of empathic accuracy and assumed similarity in the coach-athlete relationship. Br J Soc Psychol. 2006;45(3):617-637. [DOI:10.1348/014466605X58609] [PMID]

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Annals of Applied Sport Science

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb