A systematic review of intrapersonal coach development programs: Examining the development and evaluation of programs to elicit coach reflection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The current approaches used to develop coaches within many sport organisations extend beyond merely the professional knowledge related to sport-specific aspects. Effective coaching notably entails intrapersonal skills related to learning through experience and developing one’s own approach, and these skills are often targeted in coach development. Recognising that researchers have delivered Coach Development Programs (CDPs) that use strategies like reflective practice to foster coaches’ strategies and attitudes toward reflection, reviewing research in this domain could inform the development of our field. We conducted the current review to examine nonformal intrapersonal CDPs within the academic literature with goals of summarising existing CDPs, while also identifying factors related to their implementation. Method: The PRISMA guidelines informed our search strategy, including a database search along with supplemental strategies to identify studies. In addition to describing the CDPs generally, each study was also coded for: (a) potential to be implemented and maintained in sport contexts, (b) behaviour change techniques (BCTs), and (c) risk of bias. Results: After screening the full-texts of studies, we identified 10 unique intrapersonal CDPs. Most CDPs entailed pilot investigations of small samples, involving both qualitative and quantitative methods focused on coaches’ experiences when using reflective strategies. The majority of CDPs were conducted in-person and in one-on-one contexts. The most frequently used BCT was self-monitoring of behaviour, and low-to-moderate information was reported regarding internal and external validity. Conclusions: Whereas reflective practice may enable coach development, researchers must seek opportunities to design higher-quality intervention studies that are designed to enhance both internal and external validity.
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 | 0.040 | 0.155 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".