Psychometric properties of the Malay version of the coach-athlete relationship questionnaire for coaches and athletes

Sut Txi, Mon Redee

Psychometric properties of the Malay version of the coach-athlete relationship questionnaire for coaches and athletes

AVAILABLE Article 611 Views

Back to search

Scan QR Code to share or view item link:

Digital Assets & Download Files

General Information Cached

Title

Psychometric properties of the Malay version of the coach-athlete relationship questionnaire for coaches and athletes

Type

Article

Main Author

Sut Txi, Mon Redee

Subject

G Geography (General)

ISBN

1394-195X

Language Code

eng

Bibliographic Details

Place of Production

Tanjung Malim

Publisher

Fakulti Sains Sukan & Kejurulatihan

Year of publication

2024

Notes

Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences

Dissertation Note

Other

Degree Type

Others

Corporate Name

Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

HTTP Link

Access Web Resource

Abstract

Background: In the world of sports, motivation is an essential concept that can affect the sporting performance of athletes and help them accomplish their goals. The coach is regarded as an important individual with the ability to significantly influence the athlete_s motivation. To assess the impact of the coach-athlete relationship on motivation, the objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Malay version of the Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q) for coaches and athletes. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among the coaches and athletes in Malaysia. Data were collected using a convenience sampling approach over a 6-month period. The study was carried out in two phases using two independent samples of coaches and athletes to assess the construct validity and internal consistency of the Malay version of the CART-Q. The CART-Q consisted of 11 items measuring three constructs: i) closeness (four items), ii) commitment (three items) and iii) complementarity (four items). In phase 1, the subjects consisted of 211 coaches (21 years old_65 years old) from both sexes and from individual and team sports, ranging from levels 1 to 5. In phase 2, the subjects consisted of 362 athletes (12 years old_39 years old), also from both sexes and from individual and team sports. The statistical analyses performed included confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to validate the translated version scale, composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE) and internal consistency (Cronbach_s alpha). Results: In phase 1, the sample of coaches, with 190 males (90.0%) and 21 females (10.0%), had a mean age of 38.6 (SD = 8.74) years old. The major sport type was archery (19.0%). The CFA revealed adequate fit indices with all 11 items retained (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.059, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.964, Tucker and Lewis Index [TLI] = 0.950, standardised root mean square residual [SRMR] = 0.037). The CR values were closeness = 0.874, commitment = 0.566 and complementarity = 0.757. The AVE values were closeness = 0.357, commitment = 0.194 and complementarity = 0.275. The Cronbach_s alpha values were closeness = 0.867, commitment = 0.553 and complementarity = 0.794. In phase 2, the sample of athletes, with 175 males (48.1%) and 189 females (51.9%), had a mean age of 20.2 (SD = 3.35) years old. The major sport type was archery (11.5%). The CFA revealed satisfactory fit indices with all 11 items retained (RMSEA = 0.092, CFI = 0.948, TLI = 0.924, SRMR =.038). The CR values were closeness = 0.893, commitment = 0.786 and complementarity = 0.949. The AVE values were closeness = 0.401, commitment = 0.253 and complementarity = 0.418. The Cronbach_s alpha values were closeness = 0.900, commitment = 0.772 and complementarity = 0.900. Conclusion: Overall, the study findings supported the conclusion that the Malay version of the CART-Q has adequate psychometric properties to assess the perceptions of coaches and athletes regarding their relationship. _ 2024, Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia. All rights reserved.

References

Jowett S, Shanmugam V. Relational coaching in sport: its psychological underpinnings and practical effectiveness. In: Schinke R, McGannon KR, Smith B, editors. International handbook of Sport Psychology. Routledge; 2016.

Kuan G, Roy J. Goal profiles, mental toughness and its influence on performance outcomes among wushu athletes. J Sports Sci Med. 2007;6:28-33.

Adie JW, Jowett S. Meta-perceptions of the coach-athlete relationship, achievement goals, and intrinsic motivation among sport participants. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2010;40(11):2750-2773. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00679.x.

Jowett S, Poczwardowski A. Understanding the coach-athlete relationship. In: Jowett S, Lavallee D, editors. Social psychology in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2007. pp. 3-14. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781492595878.ch-001.

Jones RL, Turner P. Teaching coaches to coach holistically: can problem-based learning (PBL) help? Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2006;11(2):181-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408980600708429.

Chelladurai P, Saleh SD. Preferred leadership in sports. Can J Appl. Sport Sci. 1978;3:85-92. 7.

Jowett S, Cramer D. The prediction of young athletes' physical self from perceptions of relationships with parents and coaches. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2010;11(2):140-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.10.001.

Chin NS, Teo EW, Kuan G, Ting PY. Adolescent athletes'expectancy beliefs, task values and types of motivation in sports. Pertanika J Soc Sci Hum. 2019;27(Suppl 3):193-206.

Hsieh Y-C, Lu FJH, Gill DL, Hsu Y-W, Wong T-L, Kuan G. Effects of mental toughness on athletic performance: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2023;1-2. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2023.2204312.

Zaker NA, Parnabas VA. The correlation between coach-athlete relationship and motivation among Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Shah Alam athhletes. Malays J Mov Health Exer. 2018;7(1):153. https://doi.org/10.4103/2600-9404.323047.

Buning MM, Thompson MA. Coaching behaviors and athlete motivation: female softball athletes' perspectives. Sport Sci Rev. 2015;24(5-6):345. https://doi.org/10.1515/ssr-2015-0023.

McLean KN, Mallett CJ. What motivates the motivators? An examination of sports coaches. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2023;17(1):21-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2010.535201.

Poczwardowski A, Barott JE, Henschen KP. The athlete and coach: their relationship and its meaning. Results of an interpretive study. Int J Sport Psychol. 2002;33(1):116-140.

Murugeesan Y, Hasan NAM. Review of factors influencing the coach-athlete relationship in Malaysian team sport. Malays J Soc Sci Humanit. 2016;1(3):83-98.

Aznan EAM, Baseri MF, Ali MNS. The relationships between communication management and coach-athlete relationship among sport team athletes in Perlis. e-BANGI. 2018;13(1):1-9.

Savci DU, Abakay U. Examination of trainer communication skills perceived by athletes according to sport fields. Eur J Educ Stud. 2017;3(11):581-591.

Balduck A-L, Jowett S, Buelens M. Factorial and predictive validity of the Belgian (Dutch) athlete version of the Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q). Int J Sport Psychol. 2011;42(2):204-226. https://doi.org/10.1037/t44018-000.