درک ترک تحصیل و تعامل طولانی مدت در ورزش های رقابتی نوجوانان
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|36707||2008||18 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||9137 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Psychology of Sport and Exercise, Volume 9, Issue 5, September 2008, Pages 645–662
Objectives: The purpose of this study is to gain understanding of training patterns and roles of significant others (i.e. coaches, parents, peers, and siblings) in adolescent swimmers’ sport participation patterns. Design: The developmental model of sport participation [Côté, J., Baker, J., & Abernethy, B. (2003). From play to practice: A developmental framework for the acquisition of expertise in team sport. In J. Starkes, & K. A. Ericsson (Eds.), Recent advances in research on sport expertise (pp. 89–114). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; Côté, J., & Fraser-Thomas, J. (2007). Youth involvement in sport. In P. R. E. Crocker (Ed.), Introduction to sport psychology: A Canadian perspective (pp. 266–294). Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall] was used as a framework.
Organized sport plays an important role in the development of today's children and youth. With millions of children worldwide participating in community, school, and privately run sports programs (De Knop et al., 1996), the physical and psychosocial benefits of sport involvement are well recognized (see Fraser-Thomas et al., 2005, for a review). However, as many as two-thirds of participants aged 7–18 withdraw from sport each year, with attrition rates being particularly high during adolescence (Petlichkoff, 1996). Consequentially, sport psychology researchers have identified youth sport dropout as an area of concern (Gould et al., 1982). Much of the youth sport dropout research has been framed within motivation theories, with most commonly cited reasons for withdrawal including conflicts of interest, and negative experiences such as lack of fun, coach conflicts, and lack of playing time (see Weiss and Williams, 2004 for a review). However, it has been suggested (Lindner et al., 1991) that reasons such as these obtained through questionnaire data are intuitive, superficial, and subjective in nature, and that studies should focus instead on why youth have other interests, and why youth are no longer having fun. Côté and colleagues’ developmental model of sport participation (DMSP: Côté et al., 2003 and Côté and Fraser-Thomas, 2007) provides a framework to explore some of the physical (i.e. training patterns) and psychosocial (i.e. role of significant others) factors that may influence youths’ sport participation patterns. Developmental model of sport participation The DMSP (Côté et al., 2003 and Côté and Fraser-Thomas, 2007) emerged from extensive retrospective interviews with athletes in a variety of sports, and proposes that athletes pass through three stages of sport development: the sampling, specializing, and investment years. Athletes participate in a variety of sports during the sampling years (age 6–12), and a decreasing number of sports during the specializing (age 13–15) and investment years (age 16+). Further, athletes engage in large quantities of deliberate play activities during the sampling years (activities that are less structured, designed to maximize inherent enjoyment, and regulated by flexible age-adapted rules; Côté & Hay, 2002) and do not focus on deliberate practice activities until the specializing and investment years (activities that are highly structured, require effort, generate no immediate rewards, and are motivated by the goal of improving performance rather than inherent enjoyment; Ericsson et al., 1993). The DMSP (Côté et al., 2003 and Côté and Fraser-Thomas, 2007) also highlights the roles of significant others (i.e. coaches, parents, peers, and siblings) in assuring healthy and prolonged youth sport participation. Specifically, the model outlines how during the sampling years, coaches are primarily supportive and encouraging, while during the specializing and investment years, a more reciprocal coach–athlete respect develops, with coaches’ styles becoming more skill oriented and technical. Parents’ roles initially include introducing their children to sports, enrolling them in diverse activities, and providing them with necessary resources and equipment, but during adolescence, parents become less involved, while providing more financial and emotional support to help their children through challenges and obstacles. Parents generally progress from a leadership role during the sampling years, to a following and supporting role during the specializing and investment years. Peers are very influential during the sampling years, as they are one of the main reasons children participate in sports; however during the specializing and investment years, young athletes benefit from having peers both within and outside of their sport, serving as both role models and supporters. Finally, Côté (1999) suggests that siblings are influential in diversity of ways throughout young athletes’ development (i.e. acting as role models, fostering rivalries). Training patterns and significant other influences There is considerable support for the training patterns and roles of significant others outlined by the DMSP (Côté et al., 2003, Côté et al., 2007 and Côté and Fraser-Thomas, 2007). For example, studies of athletes in tennis, rowing, baseball, hockey, basketball, netball, and triathlon have all provided support for the sampling (i.e. early diversification) approach to expertise (see Côté et al., 2003 for a review). Further, sampling and early diversification have been suggested to foster fundamental skills for lifelong involvement in a diversity of sports, prolonged sport enjoyment, and mixed social opportunities (Côté & Hay, 2002; Kirk, 2005). In contrast, numerous negative outcomes have been associated with early specialization, including injuries, performance anxiety, parent and coach pressure, isolation, a restricted identity, and burnout (see Hecimovich, 2004 and Wiersma, 2000 for reviews). Most recently, Wall and Côté's (2007) study of high-level dropout and active (i.e. still involved in their sport) youth hockey players made associations between early specialization and dropout. They found that dropout players started specialized training (i.e. off-ice training) significantly earlier than active players (mean age of 11.75 years versus mean age of 13.8 years) and did significantly more specialized training than active players throughout development. The coach's role is one of the most explored areas of youth sport research, with numerous studies focusing on the relationship between coaches behaviors and athletes’ motivation and enjoyment (see Smoll and Smith, 2002 for a review). For example, Smoll, Smith, and colleagues (Barnett et al., 1992 and Smoll et al., 1993) found that coaches trained to increase technical instructional, reinforcement, and mistake contingent reinforcement behaviors were better liked, created a more enjoyable atmosphere, created more team unity and had lower dropout rates than untrained coaches. Similarly, Black and Weiss’ (1992) study of competitive swimming coaches found that those who provided information about performance, coupled with praise or encouragement depending on the outcome of the performance had athletes who experienced more enjoyment and had a greater preference for challenge. One more recent study of persistent and dropout adolescent swimmers (Pelletier et al., 2001) found that those who persisted in swimming perceived their coaches as more autonomy-supportive, while those who withdrew perceived their coaches as more controlling. Generally, high perceived amounts of parent support, encouragement, involvement, and satisfaction have been associated with more enjoyment, intrinsic motivation, and preference for challenge (e.g. Scanlan and Lewthwaite, 1986). Gould et al. (2006) recently examined the role of parents in American junior tennis players’ success. Coaches’ believed 59% of parents contributed to the success of their children, but 36% hurt the development of their children, primarily by overemphasizing winning, holding unrealistic expectations, criticizing their children, and pushing their children to play. Given the methodological challenges of assessing negative parent behaviors, no studies have examined relationships between such parent behaviors and athlete dropout; however, studies of junior tennis players highlight parent pressure in the form of criticism, high expectations, abusive actions from the sidelines, rewarding participation, and adopting coaching roles as influences in burnt out athletes (Gould et al., 1996 and Harlick and McKenzie, 2000). Finally, the DMSP highlights the role of peers and siblings in influencing youths’ sport participation patterns. Despite limited empirical research in the field, Smith (2003) suggests that peer relationships play an important role in physical activity contexts, as peers have been linked to youths’ sense of physical competence, their moral attitudes and behaviors, and their affective outcomes through sport. Weiss et al. (1996) explored the positive and negative dimensions of friendships in youth sport contexts. One could speculate that positive dimensions (e.g. companionship, self-esteem enhancement, help and guidance, prosocial behavior, intimacy, loyalty) could foster participation motivation, while negative dimensions (e.g. conflict, unattractive personal qualities, betrayal, inaccessibility) could contribute to youths’ reasons for withdrawal. Only a handful of studies have examined sibling influences in sport. Regression analyses to determine the influence of siblings in comparison to significant others (i.e. parents, peers, and coaches) resulted in mixed findings (e.g. Weiss and Knoppers, 1982). Purpose Given that past youth sport literature highlights primarily superficial reasons for dropout, many researchers (e.g. Lindner et al., 1991, Weiss and Petlichkoff, 1989 and Weiss and Williams, 2004) have emphasized the importance of conducting longitudinal and qualitative research to understand how physical and psychosocial factors interact to influence youths’ dropout decisions. Using the DMSP as a framework, the purpose of this study was to gain understanding of the training patterns and the roles of significant others’ (i.e. coaches, parents, peers, and siblings) in adolescent swimmers’ sport participation patterns. While past research has examined training and significant other influences in youth sport settings, little research has explored athletes’ perceptions of these patterns and influences, and the subsequent role they may play in adolescents’ sport participation patterns.