Coach Feedback on Collegiate Athletes’ Self-Efficacy among Team Sports and Individual Sports Athletes

Ho, Gina Jones (2023) Coach Feedback on Collegiate Athletes’ Self-Efficacy among Team Sports and Individual Sports Athletes. Final Year Project (Bachelor), Tunku Abdul Rahman University of Management and Technology.

Text Gina Jones Ho _Full Text.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (827kB)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyse the self-efficacy of athletes in team sport and individual sport, as well as looking into their relationship with the coaches’ feedback on performance. The sample of the study consisted of 206 student-athletes in TAR UMT who is the representatives of sports team in the University and who are continuing their active sports life in various sport types categorized in team sport (basketball, volleyball, netball, water polo, and cheerleading) and individual sport (squash, taekwondo, badminton, swimming, and tennis). The data was analysed and interpreted with SPSS version 27. There was a significant difference between team sport and individual sport in coaching feedback, p = <.001. Next, there was no significant difference between team sport and individual sport in athlete self-efficacy, p = .353. Besides, it has revealed that there is no significant correlation between coaching feedback and athlete self-efficacy in team sport, (r = .130). Among the 3 components of coaching feedback, the positive coaching feedback revealed the strongest correlation with psychological thinking (r = .408), followed by sport discipline efficacy (r = .400), professional thought efficacy (r = .341), and it was weakly related to personality efficacy (r = .328). Finally, it has revealed that there is no significant correlation between coaching feedback and athlete self-efficacy in individual sport, (r = .190). Among the 3 components of coaching feedback, the positive coaching feedback revealed the strongest correlation with personality efficacy (r = .422), followed by professional thought efficacy (r = .401), psychological thinking (r = .371), and it was weakly related to sport discipline efficacy (r = .258). In conclusion, coaches’ responses to players’ performance errors will affect both team sport and individual sport athletes. This is because team and individual sport athletes have different sets of targets and accomplishments to pursue. They trained under different types of sports environments and settings. Therefore, coaching feedback is different in different types of sports. On the other hand, it was observed that self-efficacy belief did not contribute to predicting the perceptions of athletes both in team and individual sports about the current success of their teams. For further understanding of the relationship among the variables, the questionnaires need to be assessed and respond under the same training and exercise condition to avoid inaccuracy in responses.