نقش انگیزشی عشق و شور ورزشکاران و مربیان در پیش بینی بازخورد تغییر محور کیفیت و کمیت

Abstract Objectives The provision of an autonomy-supportive change-oriented feedback has been identified as a crucial coaching behaviour that is beneficial for athletes' phenomenological experience and performance. Based on past research that focused on the determinants of other autonomy-supportive coaching behaviours, the present study investigates coaches' passion toward coaching and coaches' perceptions of their athletes' motivation as potential determinants of the quality (i.e., the extent to which it is autonomy-supportive) and quantity of the change-oriented feedback that coaches provide. Design Quantitative cross-sectional study using a dyadic approach.

.

Results Descriptive statistics All variables were normally distributed, as indicated by skewness and kurtosis scores ranging from −1.02 to .88. To obtain the descriptive statistics for athlete-level variables, we aggregated the data from the athletes who were trained by the same coach. The aggregated variables were also normally distributed, with skewness and kurtosis scores ranging from −.55 to 1.18. Descriptive statistics for coaches' measures and the aggregated coaches and athletes' measures are presented in Table 1 together with their correlations. Intraclass correlations revealed that most variability was found within coaches (i.e., 73.62% for perceived motivation) or across athletes (i.e., 56.21% for feedback quality, 82.25% for feedback quantity), which highlights the importance of adopting a multilevel analytical approach. Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations among level-2 and aggregated level-1 variables. Variables Correlations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Coaches' measures (Level-2) 1. Obsessive passion – .30* .50*** −.29* .09 −.19 .24 2. Harmonious passion – −.01 −.06 .24 .02 .08 Aggregated athletes' measures (Level-1) 3. Change-oriented feedback quantity – −.56*** .04 −.39** .39** 4. Change-oriented feedback quality – .35* .30* −.08 5. Perceived motivation – .26 −.03 6. Age – −.36* 7. Gender (0 = Male, 1 = Female) – N 47 47 47 47 46 47 47 Mean 3.22 5.83 4.66 5.46 5.45 15.87 .73 SD 1.03 0.78 0.88 0.75 0.93 5.39 0.39 Note. *p < .05, ***p < .001. Table options Passion and perceived motivation predicting change-oriented feedback quality HLM analyses were conducted to examine the relations amongst the two types of passion, perceived motivation, and the quality of change-oriented feedback received by athletes. We first specified an unconditional model, where the dependent variable, but no predictor, was modeled. The unconditional model provides the grand mean (γ00), which represents the mean of each coach's mean on the dependent variable (change-oriented feedback quality) across the level-1 units (i.e., coach's own athletes). As shown in Table 2, before the inclusion of any predictors, the grand mean of change-oriented feedback quality was 5.44 (γ00). Table 2. Fixed effects and variance components of the multilevel models predicting change-oriented feedback quality from coaches' passion and perceived motivation. Parameters Unconditional model Conditional model Fixed effects Grand mean Initial status γ00 (SE) 5.44*** (.10) 5.45*** (.10) Grand means Obsessive passion (Obs) γ01 (SE) – −.18* (.08) Harmonious passion (Harm) γ02 (SE) – −.04 (.12) Grand slope Perceived motivation (PerMot) γ10 (SE) .09 (.06) Variance components Level-1 Residual variability σ2 .48 .43 Level-2 Residual variability of means σ200 .38 .35 Level-2 Residual variability of slopes σ201 .03 Note. *p < .05, ***p < .001. Table options In order to test the impact of obsessive and harmonious passion on change-oriented feedback quality, the two types of passion (Obs and Harm) were entered as level-2 predictors of means. When adding level-2 predictors to an unconditional model to investigate variability of means, one predicts between-coaches differences on the dependent variable (i.e., change-oriented feedback quality) using level-2 variables (passion). Perceived motivation (PerMot) was entered as a level-1 predictor of change-oriented feedback quality to predict between-athletes differences. Table 2 presents the results from the unconditional and conditional models. Results showed that, as predicted, obsessive passion had a significant and negative association with change-oriented feedback quality. The more coaches had an obsessive passion toward coaching, the less they tended to give an autonomy-supportive change-oriented feedback (γ01 = −.18, p < .05). 4 However, surprisingly, harmonious passion (γ02 = −.04, p = .75) and perceived motivation (γ10 = .09, p = .11) did not have a significant impact on change-oriented feedback quality. Indeed, even though correlations indicated that perceived motivation was positively related to change-oriented feedback quality (r = .35, p < .05), this link disappeared when coaches' passion was taken into account. Adding coaches' passion to the unconditional model explained 12.4% of the between-coach variability of change-oriented feedback quality. Given that athletes included in the analyses differed from the excluded ones on their age and gender (see Footnote 2), we tested our model while adding age and gender as level-1 predictors to control for these potentially confounding variables.5 When controlling for age and gender, obsessive passion remained a significant predictor of change-oriented feedback quality (γ01 = −.17, p < .05), while results pertaining to harmonious passion (γ02 = −.08, p = .52) and perceived motivation (γ10 = .07, p = .19) remained non-significant. Results also showed that the older the athletes, the more they perceive their coach's change-oriented feedback as autonomy supportive (γ11 = .08, p < .001). Athletes' gender was not linked to perceptions of change-oriented feedback quality (γ12 = .10, p = .57). Adding level-1 predictors to the unconditional model explained 15.00% of the within-group variability of change-oriented feedback quality. Passion and perceived motivation predicting change-oriented feedback quantity The impact of coaches' passion toward coaching and their perception of their athletes' motivation on change-oriented feedback quantity was also investigated. The same model-building procedure was used, where an unconditional model was first specified, followed by a model that included the predictors. The grand mean of change-oriented feedback quantity was 4.64 (γ00). As presented in Table 3, results pertaining to the impact of coaches' passion showed that only obsessive passion significantly predicted mean levels of change-oriented feedback quantity. The more coaches had an obsessive passion toward coaching, the more they tended to give change-oriented feedback often (γ01 = .36, p < .001). Results pertaining to harmonious passion suggested an opposite relation with harmonious passion, where the more coaches had a harmonious passion the less they tended to give change-oriented feedback. However, this finding was only marginally significant (γ02 = −.19, p = .07). Results also showed that coaches' perception of their athletes' motivation had an impact on the quantity of change-oriented feedback that is provided. Indeed, the more coaches perceived athletes as being highly motivated, the more they tended to give change-oriented feedback often (γ10 = .17, p < .05). Adding coaches' passion to the unconditional model explained 45.18% of the between-coach variability of means of change-oriented feedback quantity, while adding perceived motivation to the unconditional model explained 7.04% of the within-group variability. Table 3. Fixed effects and variance components of the multilevel models predicting change-oriented feedback quantity from coaches' passion and perceived motivation. Parameters Unconditional model Conditional model Fixed effects Grand mean Initial status γ00 (SE) 4.64*** (.11) 4.66*** (.09) Grand means Obsessive passion (Obs) γ01 (SE) – 36*** (.10) Harmonious passion (Harm) γ02 (SE) – −.19† (.10) Grand slope Perceived motivation (PerMot) γ10 (SE) .17* (.07) Variance components Level-1 Residual variability σ2 1.38 1.26 Level-2 Residual variability of means σ200 .30 .16 Level-2 Residual variability of slopes σ201 .04 Note. †p < .07, *p < .05, ***p < .001. Table options Age and gender were once again entered as control variables in the model. When controlling for the impact of these variables, results pertaining to obsessive passion (γ01 = .36, p < .001) and perceived motivation (γ10 = .15, p < .05) remained the same. However, the link between harmonious passion and perceived change-oriented feedback quantity became significant (γ02 = −.26, p < .05).