+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

Description

NOTE: BE SURE that the article that you abstract is a RESEARCH sport psychology article on youth sport.  The research conducted will either be quantitative (see objective analysis criteria above) or qualitative (data gathered on a smaller number of people over a longer period of time). In order to obtain credit for this assignment, the abstract must (1) contain each of the parts mentioned in the objective analysis above, and (2) be word-processed.

Ryan Brueggemann
April 11, 2021
Sport Psychology
SMGT 433
Barnett, N. P., Smoll, F. L., & Smith, R. E. (1992). Effects of Enhancing Coach-Athlete
Relationships on Youth Sport Attrition. Sport Psychologist, 6(2), 111–127.
1. The article that was chosen for this abstract is centered around enhancing coachathlete relationships in youth sports. More specifically they wanted to see what
the effects of Coach Effectiveness Training (CET), which a series of tests to help
coaches relate more to younger athletes and to connect with them, has on the
relationships of the coaches and athletes and see if putting the coaches through
this training would be a benefit for this. In the experiment conducted they used 18 male
coaches along with 202 male little league baseball players. 8 teams in one league were
the experimental ground, whereas 10 teams in two leagues were the unconditioned
groups. They were split into these experimental and controlled groups in order to try to
get the best and most accurate results from the experiment that was being
conducted. In terms of the procedure performed to accomplish the
experiment, they separated the experiments into two phases. Phase one was called a
coach training intervention. They started this phase by having the coaches attend a
CET workshop prior to the upcoming baseball season. During this they explained to the
coaches both desirable and undesirable coaching behaviors. Those coaches were also
instructed to decrease four undesirable behaviors: nonreinforcement, punishment,
punitive instruction, and regimenting behaviors aimed at keeping control in order to get
the best results. In addition to the workshop these coaches also had to fill out
a brief self-monitoring form. As a part of phase 1 there were preseason and
postseason assessments. In order to examine the effectiveness of the CET training,
assistants that had gone through two weeks of training handed out questionnaires for
the athletes to fill out 10 weeks before the start of the season. They also had to do
interviews and all of the people conducting the interviews were unaware of the
experiment. The athletes were encouraged to be honest in the interviews. During the
player interviews, a set of questionnaires was administered that assessed the children’s
postseason perceptions of their coach’s behaviors, postseason evaluation of their sport
experience, and preseason and postseason levels of self-esteem. During
postseason evaluation the goal was to figure out the athlete’s perception of the coaches
by asking about behaviors learned in the CET workshop. The last part of
the procedure was phase 2 assessment of attrition which was to see if the athletes were
going to play baseball again based on their experience with the coach and this was
done by questionnaires and interviews as well. The results of this experiment were also
separated into two parts. The first is the manipulation check which deals with phase
one. It was found that after assessment of preseason-to-postseason changes revealed
a significant increase in scores for low-self-esteem children in the experimental group
whereas their counterparts in the control group exhibited no significant change in
scores. The second part of results, effects of attrition, deal with phase 2 which
discussed whether kids would play again or not. The results stated that for most of the
children who decided to not play again, complete postseason data were available
from phase 1. However, the small number of dropouts who played for both groups
of coaches precluded the application of statistical tests to between-group
comparisons, so no meaningful interpretations were derived from these data. Basically
phase 2 was not able to give any meaningful results, whereas phase 1 did. The author
felt that from the results the CET coaches got the best results from their athletes and
gave them the best experience. The author felt this should be present in youth sports in
order to continue this trend.
2. I chose this article because in youth sports I feel like behavior training should be
important so that coaches give the athletes and enjoyable experience. I had some
sports that were terrible for me because of bad coaching so this article intrigued me to
see how CET training possibly helped. I think the findings of this research is valid
because of the data that was shown at the end and what the author found, the only
reason it could be looked at as possible invalid in some way is because of the age of
the article. The author used empirical verification to come to the conclusion because he
got statistical evidence and performed experiments to get the answer and
results. Overall, the conclusions were based on facts derived from the research.
3. I feel like this article was a great read full of great information. I liked reading about
how a positive impact from coaches can help the experience of the young athletes that
are participating in the sport. I would suggest this as a good read for anyone who is
interested in the topic as well. I would not suggest any changes to the article either.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

  
error: Content is protected !!