Perceived Coaching Behaviors and College Athletes' Intrinsic Motivation: A Test of Self-Determination Theory

By Jill Hollembeak, A. Amorose. 2005

398 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/11e99958096787f31321cc39f7528f54918d4677

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

A model of knowledge‐sharing motivation (2009, neutral): “This is a well-known fact in sport psychology in which many studies have shown that supportive coaching styles influence athletes’ motivation (Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005; Mageau & Vallerand, 2003).”
Can self-determination theory explain what underlies the productive, satisfying learning experiences of collectivistically oriented Korean students? (2009, background): “Each of the three needs has repeatedly been shown to predict intrinsic motivation (e.g., Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005) and (low) proneness to negative affect (i.e., anxiety; Deci et al., 2001).”
Understanding Sports Coaching: The Social, Cultural and Pedagogical Foundations of Coaching Practice (2004, background): “commitment from them because they are investing a greater amount of their selves in their sporting endeavours (Gagne et al. 2003; Hollembeak and Amorose 2005; Kidman 2001).”
Women coaches' perceptions of their sport organizations' social environment: Supporting coaches' psychological needs? (2009, methodology): “…athletes has demonstrated support for the tenets of SDT. Specifically, that athletes’ perceptions of autonomy, competence and relatedness have been associated with positive sporting outcomes and are influenced by the actions of coaches (Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005; Reinboth, Duda & Ntoumanis, 2004).”
A motivational model of performance in the sport domain (2009, result): “However, results from past studies in sport were also inconsistent regarding the relative influence of the three basic needs on self-determined motivation (Amorose & Anderson-Butcher, 2007; Gillet, Rosnet, & Vallerand, in press; Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005; Sarrazin et al., 2002).”
Reciprocal relationships between contextual and situational motivation in a sport setting (2007, background): “…thought to support athletes’ basic needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness foster more internalized and self-determined forms of motivation which lead to more positive consequences (i.e., Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005; Ntoumanis, 2001; Sarrazin, Vallerand, Guillet, Pelletier, & Curry, 2002).”
The Basic Needs Satisfaction in Sport Scale (BNSSS) : instrument development and initial validity evidence (2011, background): “…been conducted to investigate the links between basic needs satisfaction and indicators of adaptive functioning, including intrinsic motivation (Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005), well-being (Gagné, Ryan, & Bargmann, 2003; Reinboth & Duda, 2006), persistence (Sarrazin et al., 2002) and flow…”
A review of competitive sport motivation research (2016, neutral): “Certain coaching actions (e.g., providing clear instruction and being supportive of decisions) is related to athletes’ self-determined motivation by satisfying their basic needs, which reinforces adaptive behaviours (Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005; Pope & Wilson, 2012).”
Burnout and Its Relations with Basic Psychological Needs and Motivation among Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta#Analysis (2013, neutral): “8 years old (SD = 1.3), volleyball players, USA (a) Purpose: BPN → burnout (b) Design: longitudinal (a) BPN - Autonomy: adapted items (Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005); Competence: adapted from the IMI (McAuley et al., 1989); Relatedness: a five-item subscale (Richer & Vallerand, 1998) (b) Burnout - ABQ…”