Basic psychological need satisfaction, behavioral regulations in performance and administrative tasks in coaching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coaches are required to undertake a variety of tasks related to their teams and athletes. These include performance tasks (e.g., conducting practice, practice planning), and administrative tasks (e.g., booking the bus and training facilities). The impact of different task requirements on coaches’ motivation has not been examined. From a foundation of self-determination theory, we hypothesized that performance tasks would associate with more self-determined forms of behavioural regulation, which would, in turn, associate with greater job satisfaction, over and above psychological needs satisfaction. A sample of 272 club volleyball coaches (71% male) completed measures of psychological needs satisfaction, general behavioural regulation, and behavioural regulation specific to administrative and performance tasks, and job satisfaction. A series of hierarchical regression analyses were conducted according to the tenets of self-determination theory such that psychological needs satisfaction was entered in the first block, followed by behavioural regulations for each of administrative and performance tasks, with the latter two blocks also modelled in reverse order. An overall significant model resulted explaining 24% of the variance in job satisfaction. Results showed positive associations of psychological needs satisfaction to job satisfaction that were not attenuated by behavioural regulations or task specific regulations. In addition to needs satisfaction, job satisfaction was significantly predicted positively by identified regulation for performance tasks, and negatively by extrinsic regulation for performance tasks and identified regulation for administrative tasks. There was a notable positive correlation between extrinsic regulation for administrative tasks and intrinsic regulation for performance tasks. These results suggest that engaging in administrative tasks might negatively effect coaches’ job satisfaction; to the extent they are externally regulated. Category: Sport and Exercise Psychology Key words: coaching, psychological need satisfaction, behavioral regulation, performance tasks, and administrative tasks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".