Comparing the strategies used to maintain the coach-athlete relationship in Japan and the United Kingdom

Daniel Rhind,Daichi Ando,Frank Owusu-Sekyere Frank Owusu-Sekyere

doi:10.34256/ijpefs2142

Abstract

The present study explored the strategies used to maintain the quality of the coach-athlete relationship amongst rowers in Japan and the United Kingdom. A total of 93 athletes from Japan (N = 49) and UK (N = 44) completed the Coach Athlete Relationship Maintenance Questionnaire (CARM-Q) and the Athlete Satisfaction Questionnaire (ASQ). The results of T-tests showed that (a) university rowers in the UK were significantly more satisfied with the coach-athlete relationship than those in Japan; (b) the athletes in Japan expressed higher scores on Preventative strategies than the ones in the UK; (c) the athletes in the UK expressed higher scores on all other CARM-Q subscales with the exception of Social Networks. The results of correlation analyses revealed positive associations between the use of maintenance strategies and athlete satisfaction. These findings evidence the importance of coaches using strategies to maintain the effectiveness of their relationship with athletes as well as the importance of researchers taking cultural factors into account.

Highlights

Coaching plays a critical role in sport through facilitating the development, performance and wellbeing of athletes [1, 2]
The present study will address this need by exploring relationship maintenance and athlete satisfaction amongst university rowers in the United Kingdom (UK) and Japan
The present study addresses this gap in the literature through comparing perceptions of athletes in Japan and the UK

Summary

Introduction

Coaching plays a critical role in sport through facilitating the development, performance and wellbeing of athletes [1, 2]. A significant body of literature provides empirical evidence of how the quality of the coach-athlete relationship is associated with a range of intrapersonal [5, 6], interpersonal [7,8,9] and group-related [10, 11]. The effectiveness of this relationship is shaped by a range of intrapersonal, interpersonal and contextual factors [12].

Methods

Results

Conclusion