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.