A review of controlling motivational strategies from a self-determination theory perspective: implications for sports coaches

By Kimberley J. Bartholomew, Nikos Ntoumanis, C. Thøgersen‐Ntoumani. 2009

326 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Safety Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/997e7458daa6bceed79c01239308035042c0b906

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Safety Research

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Giving and receiving autonomy support in a high-stakes sport context: A field-based experiment during the 2012 London Paralympic Games☆ (2015, background): “…belittle and counter-argue against any athlete resistance to the coach's procedures, impose coach-prescribed values while simultaneously invalidating the athlete's feelings and opinions, display power-assertive intimidation tactics, and show impatience (Bartholomew et al., 2009, 2010; Reeve, 2009).”
Need satisfaction and need frustration as distinct and potentially co-occurring constructs: Need profiles examined in physical education and sport (2019, background): “Although many teacher/coach behaviors have positive effects on students and athletes, maladaptive teaching and coaching strategies are not altogether uncommon (Bartholomew et al. 2009; Soenens et al. 2012).”
Perceived teachers’ behavior and students’ engagement in physical education: the mediating role of basic psychological needs and self-determined motivation (2020, background): “These teachers are said to adopt an autonomy-thwarting style through contingent rewards and a demanding communication style, through which they request students’ compliance to their pre-determined rules (Bartholomew, Ntoumanis, and Thøgersen-Ntoumani 2009).”
The Validity of the Interpersonal Behaviors Questionnaire (IBQ) in Sport (2017, background): “…interpersonal behaviors reported increased need satisfaction and autonomous motivation in sport (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003); while athletes who reported their coaches use need-thwarting interpersonal behaviors reported need frustration and controlled motivation in sport (Bartholomew et al., 2009).”
Beware of your teaching style: A school-year long investigation of controlling teaching and student motivational experiences (2018, background): “1 Controlling Teaching Behaviors 9 Teachers are controlling when they ignore students’ perspectives and behave in authoritarian and 10 pressuring ways in order to impose a specific and preconceived way of thinking, feeling, and 11 behaving (Bartholomew et al., 2009; Grolnick, 2003; Reeve, 2009).”
Autonomy-Supportive Pedagogical Approach to Sports Coaching: Research, Challenges and Opportunities (2014, background): “In contrast to autonomy-supportive behaviours, a coach that acts with the use of pressure, coercive demands, and offers rewards to direct a person’s behaviour is said to be controlling [13].”