HHS Public Access

Author manuscript
Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.
Author Manuscript

Published in final edited form as:

Dev Psychol. 2009 March ; 45(2): 320–328. doi:10.1037/a0014027.

The Effects of Autonomy-supportive Coaching, Need

Satisfaction and Self-Perceptions on Initiative and Identity in
Youth Swimmers
J. Douglas Coatsworth and David E. Conroy
The Pennsylvania State University
Author Manuscript

Abstract
This study tested a sequential process model linking youth sport coaching climates (perceived
coach behaviors and perceived need satisfaction) to youth self-perceptions (perceived competence
and global self-esteem) and youth development outcomes (initiative, identity reflection, identity
exploration). A sample of 119 youth between the ages 10–18 who participated in a community-
directed summer swim league completed questionnaires over the course of the seven-week season.
Results indicated that coaches’ autonomy support, particularly via process-focused praise,
predicted youth competence and relatedness need satisfaction in the coaching relationship. Youth
competence need satisfaction predicted self-esteem indirectly via perceived competence. Finally,
self-esteem predicted identity reflection and perceived competence predicted both identity
reflection and initiative. Effects of age, sex, and perceptions of direct contact with the coach were
not significant. Findings suggest that the quality of the coaching climate is an important predictor
Author Manuscript

of the developmental benefits of sport participation and that one pathway by which the coaching
climate has its effect on initiative and identity reflection is through developing youth self-
perceptions.

Keywords
youth sport; youth development; coaching climate; self-perceptions; self-determination theory

Participation in sports has been linked empirically to a number of positive developmental

outcomes for children and adolescents including heightened academic achievement (Eccles
& Barber, 1999), greater school retention (Mahoney & Cairns, 1997), better future
occupational outcomes (Barber, Eccles, & Stone, 2001), superior social skills and
Author Manuscript

confidence in peer relationships (Weiss & Ferrer Caja, 2002), better developed emotional
awareness and regulation skills (Scanlan, Babkes, & Scanlan, 2005), higher levels of self-
esteem (Bowker, 2006), and more initiative (Larson, Hansen, & Moneta, 2006). Yet, it is
also important to recognize that these effects reflect a general, or average, effect for a group
of youth who participate in organized sports compared to youth who do not.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to J. Douglas Coatsworth, Department of Human Development and
Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, 211 South Henderson, University Park, PA, 16802. [email protected].
J. Douglas Coatsworth, Department of Human Development and Family Studies; David E. Conroy, Department of Kinesiology, The
Pennsylvania State University.
 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 2

Youth sport participation is unlikely to influence all individuals in the same way. Indeed, it
Author Manuscript

is unclear why playing a sport or being a member of a sport team alone should have an
overall direct effect on positive youth development (Danish, Taylor, & Fazio, 2003). Effects
of youth sport participation are likely to be indirect and dependent on interpersonal and
intrapersonal processes that operate within the sport context (Larson et al., 2006). Moreover,
distinguishing the quality of youth experience from the quantity may be central to
understanding socialization and developmental processes in sport (e.g., Danish & Gullotta,
2000).

In this short-term longitudinal study of young athletes’ experiences over the course of a
seven-week summer swim season, we tested a model in which the relations between youth
sport participation and developmental outcomes were a function of the coaching climate and
youth self-perceptions (Conroy & Coatsworth, 2006). The conceptual model guiding this
research is shown in Figure 1, and draws primarily from self-determination theory (SDT;
Author Manuscript

Ryan & Deci, 2000) and developmental theories of self-perception (Harter, 1999). The
model specifies a series of indirect links such that the perceived coaching climate (i.e.,
perceived coaching behavior and need satisfaction with coaches) influences youth self-
perceptions (i.e., perceived competence and global self-esteem) which in turn influence
youth outcomes.

In this study we focused on the positive youth outcomes of initiative and identity (Larson et
al., 2006). Sport appears to be a prime context for developing initiative, but the processes by
which initiative develops in youth sport are not clear (Larson et al., 2006). We included the
outcome of identity because sports have been conceptually identified as an important
context for identity exploration and formation (Barber et al., 2001; Kleiber & Kirshnit,
1991), although evidence indicates that sport may have a weaker relationship than other
Author Manuscript

organized activities with identity work (Larson et al., 2006). We emphasized both self-
esteem and perceived competence because of strong evidence linking sport participation and
self-esteem (Fredricks & Eccles, 2006; Marsh & Kleitman, 2003) and because of their
relationship in hierarchical, multidimensional models of the self. Such models propose that
participation-based effects on global self-esteem should emerge from changes in domain-
specific self-perceptions (Fox & Corbin, 1989; Harter, 1998; Marsh, 1993). This evidence
linking sport participation to emerging self-perceptions also suggests that identity may be a
salient developmental consequence of sport participation.

Sport Participation and Self-Evaluations

Researchers in sport science have focused on the relation of sport and youth self-perceptions
(Horn & Harris, 2002) in part because of the inherent evaluative nature of both the sport
Author Manuscript

context and the self-system. Sport participation has been linked to higher self-esteem
concurrently (Fredricks & Eccles, 2006) and prospectively (Marsh & Kleitman, 2003; Tracy
& Erkut, 2002). Findings from these and other studies also indicate that the relations are
likely to be indirect and may be moderated by important personal and contextual factors.
Links between sport participation and global self-esteem are at least partially mediated by
physical or athletic self-image, perceived athletic competence, and body image (Bowker,
Gadbois, & Cornock, 2003; Richman & Schaeffer, 2000). Some results indicate a complex

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 3

relationship between sports participation and self-esteem that is partially mediated by

Author Manuscript

perceived competence within a team sport, but not by perceived athletic competence
generally (Pederson & Seidman, 2004). These studies suggest that sport participation is
related to concurrent global self-esteem, future global self-esteem, and changes in global
self-esteem, and that these relationships are a function not only of one’s perceived physical
competence, but also of aspects of the team or sport environment. The evidence across
studies does not indicate whether this is equally true for both boys and girls across ages.

Coaching Climate and Athletes’ Self Perceptions

Coaches can influence athletes’ experiences and self-perceptions through their direct
interactions with their athletes, as well as through the broader motivational climate they
create in the sport context. Within our theoretical model (see Figure 1) we conceptualized
the coaching climate as encompassing both the quality of specific coach behaviors and how
Author Manuscript

youth perceive coaches’ behaviors. Evidence indicates that these aspects of the coaching
climate may influence youth’s level of enjoyment and satisfaction (Baker, Yardley, & Côté,
2003), goal involvement (Treasure & Roberts, 2001), achievement motivation (Conroy,
Kaye, & Coatsworth, 2006), and self-perceptions (Allen & Howe, 1998). Experimental
manipulations of the coaching climate through coach training programs have demonstrated
that youth who play for coaches trained to alter the quality of their interactions by behaving
in more supportive, nurturing, encouraging, structuring, and non-hostile ways show greater
changes in self-esteem (Coatsworth & Conroy, 2006; Smoll, Smith, Barnett, & Everett,
1993). Untested in these coach-training studies were theoretically-based models specifying
which kinds of coach behavior influenced youth levels of self-esteem and the intrapsychic
mechanism(s) leading to such change. In this study, we draw from SDT (Ryan & Deci,
2000) to investigate whether changes in young athletes’ self-perceptions are a function of
Author Manuscript

autonomy-supportive coach behavior, and youths’ felt need satisfaction.

SDT suggests that autonomy-supportive interpersonal and social contexts will promote more
self-determined motivation, well-being, and healthy development by satisfying three
fundamental human needs: competence, autonomy and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
SDT has become a popular motivational framework for studying sport-related phenomena
(cf. Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2007), and as a consequence, greater attention has been
focused on autonomy-supportive coach behaviors and the satisfaction of athletes’ basic
psychological needs. Autonomy-supportive coaching includes such practices as (a)
providing choice for athletes, (b) providing a rationale for tasks and limits, (c) providing
non-controlling competence feedback, (d) avoiding controlling behaviors such as criticisms,
controlling statements and tangible rewards for interesting tasks, (e) acknowledging the
Author Manuscript

athlete’s feelings and perspectives, (f) providing opportunity for athletes to show initiative
and act independently, (g) providing non-controlling feedback, and (h) avoiding behaviors
that promote athlete’s ego-involvement (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003). These coaching
behaviors have been shown to influence athletes’ motivation (Amorose & Anderson-
Butcher, 2007, Gagné, Ryan, & Bargmann, 2003), physical activity (Hagger, Chatzisarantis,
Culverhouse, & Biddle, 2003), and psychological well-being (Reinboth, Duda, Ntoumanis,
2004). Some evidence also demonstrates that coach behaviors influence athlete outcomes
via basic psychological need satisfaction (Amorose & Anderson-Butcher, 2007; Reinboth, et

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 4

al., 2004). Gagné and colleagues (2003) tested longitudinal, sequential relations between
Author Manuscript

coach autonomy support and need satisfaction and between need satisfaction and self-
esteem; however, they did not specifically examine whether coach autonomy behavior
influenced self-esteem indirectly via need satisfaction. The current study adds to the
literature by testing this indirect pathway.

Self-Determination Theory and Self-Perceptions

Psychological need satisfaction was expected to be an important antecedent of perceived
competence and self-esteem in this study. According to self-determination theory, a secure
self-esteem is an element of well-being that derives from satisfaction of the basic needs for
competence, relatedness and autonomy, and may result from the internalization of
autonomy-supportive environments and relationships (Deci & Ryan, 1995, 2000).
Satisfaction of these basic needs allows one to behave autonomously and agentically,
Author Manuscript

providing for the development of true self-esteem (Ryan, 1993). This proposition is
consistent with the view of self-esteem as a developmental outcome derived in part as a
function of internalization of the affects and beliefs expressed in the quality of interpersonal
interactions (e.g., supportive and accepting vs. demeaning and rejecting) with significant
others (Cooley, 1902; Harter, 1999; Mead, 1934; Rosenberg, 1965). In light of the extensive
literature demonstrating that self-esteem is grounded in domain-specific perceptions of
competence (Harter, 1999), we expected competence need satisfaction and perceptions of
swimming competence to be the strongest intervening factors between autonomy-supportive
coaching and changes in self-esteem

The Current Study

The current study was guided by two aims that we tested in a single integrated model. The
Author Manuscript

first aim was to test a process model relating the coaching climate to self-perceptions. We
hypothesized that youth perceptions of their coaches’ autonomy supportive behaviors would
predict satisfaction of autonomy, relatedness, and competence needs in the coaching
relationship. Second, we hypothesized that autonomy-supportive coaching behaviors would
predict self-perceptions, and that this relationship would operate indirectly through need
satisfaction. We also hypothesized that competence need satisfaction would show the
strongest relationship with self-perceptions because, from a developmental perspective,
competence is a primary basis for self-perceptions and self-evaluations (Harter, 1999).
Third, we hypothesized that autonomy-supportive coaching behavior would indirectly
predict youth self-esteem at the end of the season, operating in a bottom-up fashion through
perceived competence in the sport (Fox & Corbin, 1989; Harter, 1998; Marsh, 1993).
Author Manuscript

Our second aim was to test a within-sport process model linking self-perceptions derived
from the coaching climate to the positive youth outcomes of initiative (goal setting), identity
exploration, and identity reflection (Larson et al., 2006). We expected a particularly strong
relationship between perceived competence and initiative because of their common
grounding in achievement motivation. We also expected that perceived-competence and
self-esteem would predict identity reflection and exploration, although we expected that
intrapersonal processes involved in perceiving and evaluating oneself (i.e., perceived

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 5

competence and self-esteem) would predict the cognitive dimension of identity reflection
Author Manuscript

more strongly than it would predict the behavioral dimension of identity exploration.

Method
Participants
Participants were recruited from a community recreational swim league (77 girls, 40 boys, 2
did not report sex; N = 119). Participants ranged in age from 10–17 years (M = 12.07, SD =
1.79). This study’s sample was predominantly Caucasian (88% of those reporting race/
ethnicity) with smaller proportions reporting Asian-American (2.8%), Hispanic (1%),
African-American (1%) and Other (7%). The season for this league lasted six weeks with
practices held five days/week and meets held twice weekly. Participants learned to swim an
average of 7.1 years previously (SD = 2.7) and had been swimming in this league for an
average of 3.3 years (SD = 2.4).
Author Manuscript

Procedures
During the first practice of the season, research assistants described the study to prospective
participants and a letter with a consent form was sent home to parents. The original study
recruited all 8–18 year old swimmers and obtained a 54% participation rate (see Conroy et
al., 2006). Because of the outcomes selected for the current study, we included only 119
youth between 10 and 18 years old (75% of original sample). Youth who provided informed
consent to participate in the study completed a baseline assessment during the first week of
the season. All measures used in this study, except the measures of positive youth
developmental outcomes, were included in the baseline assessment. Throughout the season,
youth completed questionnaire packets at the end of one practice session each week. One
question from these packets assessed perceived coach involvement and was used in the
Author Manuscript

present study. An end-of-season assessment was administered during the sixth and final
week of swim practices. This assessment included all of the baseline measures and the
measure of positive youth developmental outcomes. Measures were selected or constructed
for the median age of this sample. Flesch-Kincaid grade level reading scores ranged from
grade 2.8 to grade 6.6. Trained research assistants were available during all assessments to
help participants who needed assistance.

Measures
Perceptions of coaches’ autonomy support—Youth completed the 9-item Coaches’
Autonomy Support Questionnaire (CASQ; Conroy & Coatsworth, 2007a) which assessed
two forms of autonomy support: Sincere Interest in Athlete’s Input (5 items; “My coaches
Author Manuscript

ask for the team’s opinion about what we should do in practice”) and Praising Autonomous
Behavior (4 items; “My coaches praise me for the decisions that I make in practice”). The
two dimensions were derived through confirmatory factor analysis and were strongly
correlated (r = .62; p < .01) (Conroy & Coatsworth, 2007a). Both demonstrated strong
relations with youth-reported coach behaviors derived from a set of single items
representing dimensions of the Coaching Behavior Assessment System (CBAS; Smith,
Smoll, & Hunt, 1977), a common system for coding coach behavior, and the 12-item
Perceptions of Coaches’ Interpersonal Behavior Questionnaire (PCIBQ; Conroy &

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 6

Coatsworth, 2007b), which assesses youth perceptions of coach affiliation, control, and
Author Manuscript

blame.

Need satisfaction in relationship with coaches—We adapted the 9-item Basic Need
Satisfaction in Relationships Scale (LaGuardia, Ryan, Couchman, & Deci, 2000) to assess
need satisfaction in participants’ relationship with their coaches. Participants rated each item
on a scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true). Scores represented the degree to
which participants’ basic needs for autonomy (3 items; e.g., “When I am with the coaches, I
feel free to be who I am”), competence (3 items; e.g., “When I am with the coaches I feel
very capable and effective), and relatedness (3 items; e.g., “When I am with the coaches, I
feel loved and cared about”) were satisfied when they were with their swim coaches.

Perceived competence in swimming—Perceived competence in swimming was

assessed using a three-item scale reported by Conroy, Coatsworth, and Fifer (2005) that was
Author Manuscript

adapted from existing perceived competence measures (Fredricks & Eccles, 2002; Williams
& Deci, 1996). Participants rated their perceived competence in swimming (e.g., “How good
at swimming are you”) on a scale ranging from 1 (not at all good) to 7 (very good). In
previous research, scores from this scale have demonstrated evidence of factorial validity,
acceptable internal consistency, and a pattern of theoretically-expected relations with
constructs such as fear of failure, achievement goal adoption, situational motivation, basic
psychological need satisfaction, and self-esteem (Conroy et al., 2005).

Self-esteem—We measured self-esteem using items from the self-report Washington Self-
Description Questionnaire (WSDQ; Smoll, Smith, Barnett, & Everett, 1993). WSDQ scores
have been used to measure global self-esteem in previous youth sport research, and
exhibited strong positive correlations with scores from other self-esteem measures (e.g.,
Author Manuscript

General Self-Esteem subscale of the Piers-Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale [Piers,

1969]; Coopersmith Self-Esteem Scale [Coopersmith, 1967]) (Smoll et al., 1993). Previous
work indicated that only the six forward-keyed items representing positive self-esteem
comprised a scale with acceptable psychometric properties for longitudinal analyses
(Coatsworth & Conroy, 2006). Therefore, only the positive self-esteem dimension (e.g., “I
like being the way I am”) was used in this study. Participants rated how well each statement
characterized them on a four-point scale ranging from not at all like me (1) to very much like
me (4).

Positive youth development outcomes—Three scales from the YES 2.0 (Hansen &
Larson, 2005), initiative (goal setting), identity reflection and identity exploration, were used
to index youth development outcomes in this study. These three scales were selected
Author Manuscript

because of their conceptual proximity to self-perceptions in our sequential theoretical model.

The goal-setting subscale of the initiative scale comprised 3 items reflecting the extent to
which the athlete set and achieved goals for him or herself (e.g., “I set goals for myself in
this activity”). Identity reflection consisted of 3 items (e.g., “This activity got me thinking
about who I am”). The identity exploration scale also consisted of 3 items (e.g., “I tried
doing new things”). Participants were asked to rate the extent to which they had each of the
experiences listed on a scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 4 (yes, definitely). Although

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 7

identity reflection and identity exploration are often combined into a single higher order
Author Manuscript

scale of “identity work” (Larson et al., 2006), we elected to use these subscales separately
for two reasons. First, these scales were only modestly correlated (r = .23; p < .05). Second,
we anticipated distinct relations between the two identity dimensions and our two indicators
of self-perceptions. For example, we hypothesized that perceived competence would predict
the reflective element of identity (i.e., thinking about who I am) more strongly than it would
predict the behavioral component (i.e., trying out new things).

Perceived coach involvement—At the beginning of every weekly questionnaire packet,

participants were asked, “How many times did the coaches say something directly to you in
today’s practice?” An exploratory factor analysis (prior communality estimation with a
maximum likelihood algorithm) indicated that responses to this item over six weeks had a
unidimensional structure that accounted for 63% of the variance in responses. Based on
these results, responses were aggregated into a single score representing youth perceptions
Author Manuscript

of their coaches’ involvement with them.

Data Analysis
The proposed model of relations between coaching behaviors, need satisfaction in
relationships with coaches, perceived competence, self-esteem, and youth developmental
experiences was tested in a single structural equation model. This model used scale scores as
input variables and full information maximum likelihood estimation. Before interpreting
individual paths, we evaluated model fit using both absolute and relative fit indices. We
used the chi-square statistic as an absolute index of fit, and the Normed Fit Index (NFI:
Bentler & Bonnet, 1980), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI: Bentler & Bonnet, 1980), and the
root mean square approximation (Browne & Cudeck, 1993) as relative indexes of fit. For the
NFI and CFI, we used the standard of .90 and .95 as indicating acceptable and good fit,
Author Manuscript

respectively.

Results
Descriptive statistics and internal consistency estimates for the scale scores used in this
study are presented in the bottom three rows of Table 1. Responses to each scale spanned the
full range of each scale and, with the exception of identity exploration, all scales exhibited a
high level of internal consistency. None of the items from the identity exploration scale
appeared to be singularly responsible for the low internal consistency, so the scale was
retained and results were interpreted cautiously. Table 1 also presents a complete correlation
matrix for all study variables.
Author Manuscript

A structural equation model was estimated to test the sequence of relations proposed
between coaching behaviors, need satisfaction in relationships with coaches, perceived
competence, self-esteem, and youth developmental experiences. Preliminary analyses
included three variables that could confound our interpretation of relationships between the
key constructs in the model we proposed: age, sex, and perceived coach involvement (a
latent variable indicated by participants’ weekly estimates of their number of comments
their coaches made directly to them in that day’s practice). Age and sex were important to
examine because of expected developmental and sex differences in self-perceptions and

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 8

achievement motivation during adolescence. Perceived coach involvement was important to

Author Manuscript

examine because it was possible that program effects could be due to youth feeling that their
coaches were more or less engaged with them during the season. None of these variables
accounted for significant variability in model variables so we ruled them out as potential
confounds. For the sake of simplicity, the basic model of coaching behaviors, need
satisfaction, perceived competence, self-esteem, and youth developmental experiences was
estimated without the three potential confounds included and those results are presented
below. Conclusions did not change from the model including the three potential confounds.
Some paths that we expected to be null were also included in the model to ensure that we
were not overlooking important, but unanticipated, relations.

The two forms of autonomy-supportive coaching behaviors were permitted to covary, and
freed to predict scores for need satisfaction in relationships with coaches, end-of-season
perceptions of competence, and end-of-season self-esteem. The three need satisfaction
Author Manuscript

scores were permitted to covary, and freed to predict end-of-season perceptions of

competence and end-of-season self-esteem. Perceived competence and self-esteem at the
beginning of the season were permitted to covary, and freed to predict their corresponding
end-of-season score. End-of-season perceived competence also predicted end-of-season self-
esteem and the three youth development outcomes. End-of-season self-esteem predicted the
three youth development outcomes (whose uniquenesses also were permitted to covary).
This model exhibited an acceptable fit to the data: χ2 (33) = 79.45, NFI = .92, CFI = .91,
RMSEA = .11 (90% confidence interval = .08 – .14).

Figure 2 presents a path model displaying significant standardized coefficients of the model
with non-significant paths omitted for clarity. The text that follows reports unstandardized
coefficients, their standard errors, the corresponding standardized coefficients, and squared
Author Manuscript

multiple correlations for endogenous variables (where appropriate). Coaches’ praise for
autonomous behavior positively predicted satisfaction of competence needs (b = 0.34, SE =
0.10, β = .36, p < .01; R2 = .16) and relatedness needs (b = 0.46, SE = 0.10, β = .45, p < .01;
R2 = .24). Coaches’ interest in athletes’ input was unrelated to need satisfaction. These three
needs were significantly correlated with each other (covautonomy-competence = 1.44, SE = 0.24,
r = .77; covautonomy-relatedness = 1.35, SE = 0.24, r = .70; covcompetence-relatedness = 1.42, SE =
0.24, r = .76; p < .01). End-of-season perceived competence was significantly predicted by
beginning-of-season perceived competence (b = 0.50, SE = 0.07, β = .54, p < .01) and
competence need satisfaction (b = 0.36, SE = 0.09, β = .59, p < .01), but not by autonomy or
relatedness need satisfaction (R2 = .48). Perceived competence and self-esteem at the
beginning of the season were positively associated (cov = 0.30, SE = 0.06, r = .53, p < .01).
End-of-season self-esteem was predicted by beginning-of-season self-esteem (b = 0.52, SE =
Author Manuscript

0.07, β = .56, p < .01) and end-of-season perceived competence (b = 0.15, SE = 0.05, β = .
24, p < .01; R2 = .46). Youth identity reflection was associated with initiative (cov = 0.26,
SE = 0.06, r = .49, p < .01) and identity exploration (cov = 0.12, SE = 0.06, r = .23, p < .05),
but initiative and identity exploration were not significantly associated. Initiative was
predicted by end-of-season perceived competence (b = −0.23, SE = 0.09, β = −.28, p < .01),
but not end-of-season self-esteem (R2 = .12). Identity reflection was predicted by both end-
of-season perceived competence (b = −0.30, SE = 0.10, β = −.31, p < .01) and self-esteem (b

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 9

= −0.41, SE = 0.16, β = −.26, p < .01; R2 = .23). Identity exploration was not associated with
Author Manuscript

either end-of season perceived competence or end-of-season self-esteem.

Discussion
This study tested a theoretically derived process model for understanding how one element
of the youth sport context, the coaching climate, influences youth developmental outcomes.
The model hypothesized a pattern of direct and indirect effects of coach behaviors that
would lead to youth development outcomes. The proposed sequential model fit the data for
this sample of youth swimmers. As hypothesized, coaches’ autonomy-supportive behavior
during the season predicted satisfaction of athletes’ basic psychological needs. Need
satisfaction in turn predicted youth self-perceptions, and youth self-perceptions ultimately
predicted positive youth developmental outcomes.
Author Manuscript

Several important findings emerged from this study. First, it was the praising autonomous
behavior dimension of autonomy-supportive coaching behavior and not the sincere interest
dimension that predicted youth need satisfaction. In addition, contrary to expectations, this
form of coach behavior predicted competence and relatedness need satisfaction, but not
autonomy need satisfaction. Second, the bridge between youth need satisfaction in the
coaching relationship and self-perceptions appeared to be through competence needs.
Moreover, the relationship between coach climate and global self-esteem operated indirectly
in a bottom-up fashion through youth domain-specific (i.e. swimming) perceptions of
competence. Third, aspects of initiative and identity development associated with end-of-
season self-perceptions, controlling for beginning-of-season self-perceptions.

It should be noted that our study was designed to focus on the sport context and address
questions of within-sport variability in experiences and outcomes among currently
Author Manuscript

participating youth. The within-sport design is a unique feature of the study that can be
considered an asset or a liability. Studies using this kind of design are valuable because, in
contrast to comparative designs which tend to address questions of whether sport
participants differ from non-participants on specified developmental outcomes, they allow
us to examine within-sport processes (Larson et al, 2006) and address questions about how
the quality of youth sport experience matters for developmental outcome (Danish &
Gullotta, 2000). Using a single sport may also be considered a liability because it is not
certain that these findings will generalize to other sport contexts. The theoretical model
tested was not developed specifically for the swimming context, however, in this study we
cannot rule out the possibility there is something unique about being part of a summer swim
team that would be different from developmental experience in other sport contexts.
Additionally, although variability within the sample due to selection bias (e.g., youth who
Author Manuscript

select into sports are different from youth who select into other activities) is somewhat
controlled because all youth selected into this context, we cannot address whether youth
who select into the swim context are different from youth who select into other sports.

Our finding that autonomy-supportive coach behaviors were important for youth need
satisfaction adds to a growing literature documenting that when individuals in positions of
authority provide autonomy support, the individuals with whom they are working show

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 10

higher levels of need satisfaction which leads to feelings of well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Author Manuscript

This conclusion has been made previously in the literature on sport coaching (Amorose &
Anderson-Butcher, 2007; Gagné et al., 2003), but our findings extend this work in several
important ways. Past studies have examined these linkages in a piecewise manner (Gagné et
al., 2003), or using cross-sectional data (Amorose & Anderson-Butcher, 2007). We tested a
process model with indirect pathways using longitudinal data. Therefore, we tested for the
significance of specific paths after controlling for prior levels of variables of interest and
controlling for alternate paths. These controls increase confidence in the results and help to
isolate the temporal sequencing of the process.

Our finding that the coach strategy of praising youth autonomous behavior was related to
competence and relatedness need satisfaction was consistent with prior work (Amorose &
Anderson-Butcher, 2007), but our finding that neither autonomy-supportive coaching
behavior predicted autonomy need satisfaction was unexpected. Praise may be a particularly
Author Manuscript

salient coach behavior in this setting as it indicates a very clear and direct communication
between coach and youth that may signal the closeness of the relationship (relatedness) and
the coaches’ acceptance of an athlete’s performance or ability (competence). In contrast,
sincere interest (reflected in coaches’ seeking youth opinions, offering choices, and listening
to youths’ ideas about what they should do in practice) may be less salient for youth in part
because it is likely to occur less frequently. Youth in this study did report slightly lower
levels of sincere interest than praise. Youth may simply be less sensitive to passive
autonomy-support strategies (e.g., coaches expressing interest in them) than to active
autonomy-support strategies (e.g., coaches praising autonomous behavior).

It should be noted that praise can be used in different ways by coaches, and different forms
of praise can have distinct relations with youth outcomes. Sincere praise that focuses on
Author Manuscript

promoting autonomy, as was the case in this study, is expected to promote motivation, sense
of self and well-being (Henderlong & Lepper, 2002). Process-focused praise that highlights
behaviors (e.g., “great job kicking all the way to the end”) instead of the person as a whole
(e.g., “you’re a great swimmer”) is known to engender mastery as opposed to helpless
motivational responses and contingent self-worth in children (Cimpian, Arce, Markman, &
Dweck, 2007; Kamins & Dweck, 1999). In contrast, praise that is contingent or too heavily
reliant on social comparison can increase the salience of social evaluation, undermine
intrinsic motivation, and produce more self-consciousness and contingent self-worth
(Henderlong & Lepper, 2002). Nevertheless, praising youth autonomous behavior appears to
be a coaching strategy that effectively contributes to youths’ feelings that their basic human
needs of competence and relatedness are being met in that context.
Author Manuscript

Our findings are also consistent with the literature indicating an effect of sport participation
on youth global self-esteem (Marsh & Kleitman, 2003; Tracy & Erkut, 2002), that operates
indirectly via perceived competence (Bowker, 2006). In this study we also tested relations
between need satisfaction and global positive self-esteem but those relations were not
statistically significant. Thus, we concluded that variability in coaching influenced changes
in self-esteem indirectly through perceived competence. A particularly unique finding from
this study involved the suggestion that this effect originated from coach behaviors that
supported individual autonomy. Specifically, coaches who were perceived as giving praise

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 11

for effort, attitude, and behavior rather than solely performance outcome fulfilled youths’
Author Manuscript

basic psychological need to feel competent. The evaluative nature of the sport environment
means that it is a prime context for satisfaction or inhibition of the need for competence.
When coaches are able to foster youths’ sense that this need has been met, it contributes to
their own perception that they are successful and competent in swimming. In turn, the
perception of competence in the swim domain contributes to ones’ global sense of self-
esteem.

Two outcomes for which this model appears to be applicable are initiative and identity
reflection. We predicted these would be related in part because of the conceptual proximity
of competence related self-perceptions and competence related youth outcomes. The concept
of initiative has strong motivational and achievement components related to goal setting and
effort, which are also related to perceived competence (Conroy et al., 2005). The
intrapersonal processes of private self-evaluations of one’s competence and abilities that is
Author Manuscript

reflected in levels of perceived competence and self-esteem (Harter, 1999) would naturally
correspond to elements of identity reflection (i.e., “thinking about who I am”). The linkages
may signal processes within a broader self-system in which context-specific evaluations lead
to new ways of perceiving the self outside of that context. These self-related intrapersonal
processes may also help explain cross-domain findings that youth sport participation is
related to non-sport performance (Marsh & Kleitman, 2003).

Larson, Hanson and Walker (2005) have demonstrated that youth programming can enhance
the development of initiative, and our results indicate that effective youth sport coaching can
do the same. Initiative may be a particularly important set of skills to promote in youth,
because this capacity for planful action appears to be increasingly important in a rapidly
changing world (Larson 2000). Because initiative comprises a set of cognitive and
Author Manuscript

behavioral skills, youth may be able to carry that capacity into the future and other settings.
For example, it may be the development of initiative that helps explain why participation in
youth sports is linked to performance in schools or other developmental settings (Eccles &
Barber, 1999).

Likewise, promoting identify reflection within activities may have broader developmental
effects. Youth who report greater levels of identity related processes within activities also
report higher levels of general wellbeing (Coatsworth, Palen, Sharp, & Ferrer-Wreder, 2006)
and lower levels of delinquency (Palen & Coatsworth, 2007). Although age is an important
factor in identity processes (Erikson, 1968), we did not find age effects in our study. It is
possible that this is due to our restricted sample, low level of internal consistency with our
identity reflection variable, or the way we operationalized these constructs (for alternate
Author Manuscript

ways of conceiving identity exploration and goals, see Luyckx, Goosens, Soenens, & Beyers
[2006] and Elliot & Conroy [2005], respectively). Future research involving larger cohorts
and longer longitudinal studies on the development of identity reflection and youth initiative
in youth sports may help address age-related changes and may also be enriched by
incorporating a broader achievement motivation framework that extends beyond the narrow
self-regulatory strategy assessed in the present study.

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 12

These results also have implications for coach training programs. Our study indicates that
Author Manuscript

teaching coaches to effectively use praise to support autonomy in their interactions with
young athletes can have promotive effects. Other aspects of autonomy supportive coach
behaviors have been proposed (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003), and as further studies
empirically support their effects, they can be integrated into existing coach training
curricula, or new programs can be designed specifically to emphasize these coach behaviors.

Several limitations of our study should be noted. First the sample was relatively small and,
although it was representative of the community population from which it was drawn, it was
also homogeneous with regard to ethnicity and socioeconomic status. The single-sport
design, while providing some advantages, also created a more homogeneous group. These
study design issues limit our ability to generalize our findings to other communities and
sport contexts. The relatively small sample size also limited our power to detect small
effects, leaving us vulnerable to omitting important relations among these variables.
Author Manuscript

Extending this work to include a larger and more diverse sample would be useful. The study
also relied on youth self-report as a measurement strategy. Although direct observation is
one technique that has been used to study coach behavior (Smith, Smoll, & Hunt, 1977), our
focus in the present study was youth perceptions of autonomy support, rather than actual
coach behaviors, because our theoretical model of youth sport development emphasizes how
youth perceive their coaches’ behavior. Also, this study was not able to account for
alternative contexts that might contribute to these developmental processes. Family factors,
specifically parent’s autonomy supportive behaviors around the context of swimming could
also influence youth outcomes. Finally, we focused on one process in the youth sport
environment. Other coach-related, peer-related, or intrapersonal processes could also be
implicated in positive youth development through sport. Future studies designed to test
alternative models against each other would provide a valuable service to the field.
Author Manuscript

In conclusion, findings from this study contribute to a growing literature on the effects of
sport on youth outcomes (Brunelle, Danish, & Forneris, 2007; Larson et al., 2006). More
specifically, it adds to accumulating evidence that coach behaviors establish an important
context for youth experiences within sport that can have significant developmental effects
(Smoll & Smith, 2002). Our findings indicate that autonomy-supportive behaviors may be
an important aspect of coaching because of their potential to start important processes into
motion that culminate in distal positive youth outcomes. They also suggest that coach
training programs that are intended to promote positive youth outcomes might benefit from
focusing on these kinds of coach behaviors. Changing athletes self-perceptions appears to be
one important mechanism by which the coaching climate may have a distal effect on youth
development. This finding may be particularly meaningful, because changes to the self
Author Manuscript

system, in comparison to more context-specific skills or motivation, are likely to be

enduring and have a broader effect across developmental domains.

Acknowledgments
Funding for this research was provided by a grant from the National Institute for Child Health and Human
Development (HD42535). Thanks to Todd Roth, Ronald Woodhead, and the Centre Region Parks and Recreation
Department for their collaboration in this project.

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 13

Thanks also to all of the research assistants who were instrumental to the success of this project.
Author Manuscript

References
Amorose AJ, Anderson-Butcher D. Autonomy-supportive coaching and self-determined motivation in
high school and college athletes: A test of self-determination theory. Psychology of Sport and
Exercise. 2007; 8:654–670.
Allen JB, Howe BL. Player ability, coach feedback, and female adolescent athletes’ perceived
competence and satisfaction. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 1998; 20:280–299.
Baker J, Yardley J, Côté J. Coach behaviors and athlete satisfaction in team and individual sports.
International Journal of Sport Psychology. 2003; 34:226–239.
Barber BL, Eccles JS, Stone MR. Whatever happened to the Jock, the Brain, and the Princes? Young
adult pathways linked to adolescent activity involvement and social identity. Journal of Adolescent
Research. 2001; 16:429–455.
Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Psychological Bulletin. 1980; 88:588–606.
Author Manuscript

Bowker A. The relationship between sports participation and self-esteem during early adolescence.
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science. 2006; 38:214–229.
Bowker A, Gadbois S, Cornock B. Sports participation and self-esteem: Variations as a function of
gender and gender orientation. Sex Roles. 2003; 49:47–58.
Browne, MW.; Cudeck, R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen, KA.; Long, JS., editors.
Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park: Sage; 1993. p. 136-162.
Brunelle J, Danish SJ, Forneris T. The impact of a sport-based life skill program on adolescent
prosocial values. Applied Developmental Science. 2007; 11:43–55.
Cimpian A, Arce HMC, Markman EM, Dweck CS. Subtle linguistic cues affect children’s motivation.
Psychological Science. 2007; 18:314–316. [PubMed: 17470255]
Coatsworth JD, Conroy DE. Enhancing the self-esteem of youth swimmers through coach training:
Gender and age effects. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2006; 7:173–192.
Coatsworth JD, Palen LA, Sharp EH, Ferrer-Wreder L. Self-defining activities, expressive identity,
and adolescent wellness. Applied Developmental Science. 2006; 10:157–170.
Author Manuscript

Conroy DE, Coatsworth JD. Coach training as a strategy for promoting youth social development. The
Sport Psychologist. 2006; 20:128–144.
Conroy DE, Coatsworth JD. Assessing autonomy-supportive coaching strategies in youth sport.
Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2007a; 8:671–684. [PubMed: 18769531]
Conroy DE, Coatsworth JD. Coaching behaviors associated with changes in fear of failure: Changes in
self-talk and need satisfaction as potential mechanisms. Journal of Personality. 2007b; 75:383–
419. [PubMed: 17359243]
Conroy DE, Coatsworth JD, Fifer AM. Testing dynamic relations between perceived competence and
fear of failure in young athletes. European Review of Applied Psychology. 2005; 26:99–110.
Conroy DE, Kaye MP, Coatsworth JD. Coaching climates and the destructive effects of mastery-
avoidance achievement goals on situational motivation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology.
2006; 28:69–92.
Cooley, CH. Human nature and social order. New York: Charles Scribner & Sons; 1902.
Coopersmith, S. The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: Freeman; 1967.
Author Manuscript

Danish, SJ.; Gullotta, TP. Developing competent youth and strong communities through after-school
programming. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America Press; 2000.
Danish, SJ.; Taylor, T.; Fazio, R. Enhancing adolescent development through sport and leisure. In:
Adams, GR.; Berzonsky, M., editors. Blackwell handbook on adolescence. Malden, MA:
Blackwell; 2003. p. 92-108.
Deci, EL.; Ryan, RM. Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In: Kernis, M., editor.
Efficacy, agency and self-esteem. New York: Plenum; 1995. p. 1-49.
Deci EL, Ryan RM. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination
of behavior. Psychological Inquiry. 2000; 11:227–268.

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 14

Eccles JS, Barber BL. Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band: What kind of
extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research. 1999; 14:10–43.
Author Manuscript

Erikson, EH. Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton; 1968.
Fox KR, Corbin CB. The Physical Self-Perception Profile: Development and preliminary validation.
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 1989; 11:408–430.
Fredricks JA, Eccles JS. Children’s competence and value beliefs from childhood through
adolescence: Growth trajectories in two male-sex-typed domains. Developmental Psychology.
2002; 38:519–533. [PubMed: 12090482]
Fredricks JA, Eccles JS. Is extracurricular participation associated with beneficial outcomes?
Concurrent and longitudinal relations. Developmental Psychology. 2006; 42:698–713. [PubMed:
16802902]
Gagné M, Ryan RM, Bargmann K. Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and
well-being of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 2003; 15:372–390.
Haggar, MS.; Chatzisarantis, NLD., editors. Intrinsic motivation and self determination in exercise and
sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2007.
Hagger MS, Chatzisarantis NLD, Culverhouse T, Biddle SJH. The processes by which perceived
Author Manuscript

autonomy support in physical education promotes leisure-time physical activity intentions and
behavior: A transcontextual model. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2003; 95:784–795.
Hansen, DM.; Larson, R. The Youth Experience Survey. University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign;
2005. Unpublished manuscriptRetrieved March 28, 2007, from http://web.aces.uiuc.edu/youthdev/
yesinstrument.htm
Harter, S. The development of self-representations. In: Damon, W.; Eisenberg, N., editors. Handbook
of child psychology. 5. Vol. 3. New York: Wiley; 1998. p. 553-617.Social, emotional, and
personality development
Harter, S. The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York: Guilford; 1999.
Henderlong J, Lepper MR. The effects of praise on children’s intrinsic motivation: A review and
synthesis. Psychological Bulletin. 2002; 128:774–795. [PubMed: 12206194]
Horn, TS.; Harris, A. Perceived competence in young athletes: Research findings and
recommendations for coaches and parents. In: Smoll, FL.; Smith, RE., editors. Children and youth
in sport: A biopsychosocial perspective. 2. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt; 2002. p. 435-464.
Author Manuscript

Kamins ML, Dweck CS. Person versus process praise and criticism: Implications for contingent self-
worth and coping. Developmental Psychology. 1999; 35:835–847. [PubMed: 10380873]
Kleiber, DA.; Kirshnit, CE. Sport involvement and identity formation. In: Diamant, L., editor. Mind-
body maturity: Psychological approaches to sports, exercise, and fitness. Washington, DC:
Hemisphere Publishing Corp; 1991. p. 193-211.
La Guardia JG, Ryan RM, Couchman CE, Deci EL. Within-person variation in security of attachment:
A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000; 79:367–384. [PubMed: 10981840]
Larson R. Toward a psychology of positive youth development. American Psychologist. 2000;
55:170–183. [PubMed: 11392861]
Larson RW, Hansen DM, Moneta G. Differing profiles of developmental experience across types of
organized youth activities. Developmental Psychology. 2006; 42:849–863. [PubMed: 16953691]
Larson, R.; Hansen, D.; Walker, K. Everybody’s gotta give: Development of initiative and teamwork
within a youth program. In: Mahoney, JL.; Larson, RW.; Eccles, JS., editors. Organized activities
as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after-school and community programs.
Author Manuscript

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2005. p. 159-183.

Luyckx K, Goossens L, Soenens B, Beyers W. Unpacking commitment and exploration: Preliminary
validation of an integrative model of late adolescent identity formation. Journal of Adolescence.
2006; 29:361–378. [PubMed: 15878619]
Mageau GA, Vallerand RJ. The coach-athlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of Sport
Sciences. 2003; 21:883–904.
Mahoney JL, Cairns RB. Do extracurricular activities protect against early school dropout?
Developmental Psychology. 1997; 33:241–253. [PubMed: 9147833]

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 15

Marsh, HW. Academic self-concept: Theory, measurement, and research. In: Suls, J., editor.
Psychological perspectives on the self. Vol. 4. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1993. p. 59-98.
Author Manuscript

Marsh HW, Kleitman S. School athletic participation: Mostly gain with little pain. Journal of Sport and
Exercise Psychology. 2003; 25:205–228.
Mead, GH. Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1934.
Palen LA, Coatsworth JD. Activity-based identity experiences and their relations to problem behavior
and psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence. 2007; 30:721–737.
[PubMed: 17222899]
Pederson, s; Seidman, E. Team sport achievement and self-esteem development among urban
adolescent girls. Psychology of Women’s Quarterly. 2004; 28:412–422.
Piers, E. Manual for the Piers-Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale. Nashville, TN: Counselor
Recordings and Tests; 1969.
Reinboth M, Duda JL, Ntoumanis N. Dimensions of coaching behavior, need satisfaction, and the
psychological and physical welfare of young athletes. Motivation and Emotion. 2004; 28:297–313.
Richman EL, Shaffer DR. If you let me play sports: How might sport participation influence the self-
esteem of adolescent females? Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2000; 24:189–199.
Author Manuscript

Rosenberg, M. Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton NJ: Princeton University press; 1965.
Ryan, RM. Agency and organization: Intrinsic motivation, autonomy and the self in psychological
development. In: Jacobs, J., editor. Nebraska symposium on motivation: Developmental
perspectives on motivation. Vol. 40. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press; 1993. p. 1-56.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social
development, and well-being. American Psychologist. 2000; 55:68–78. [PubMed: 11392867]
Scanlan, TK.; Babkes, ML.; Scanlan, LA. Participation in sport: A developmental glimpse at emotion.
In: Mahoney, J.; Larson, R.; Eccles, J., editors. Organized activities as contexts of development:
Extracurricular activities, after-school and community programs. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates; 2005. p. 437-456.
Smith RE, Smoll FL, Hunt E. A system for the behavioral assessment of athletic coaches. Research
Quarterly. 1977; 48:401–407. [PubMed: 267981]
Smoll, FL.; Smith, RE. Coaching behavior research and intervention in youth sports. In: Smoll, FL.;
Smith, RE., editors. Children and youth in sport: A biopsychosocial perspective. Dubuque, IA:
Author Manuscript

Kendall-Hunt; 2002. p. 211-233.

Smoll FL, Smith RE, Barnett NP, Everett JJ. Enhancement of children’s self-esteem through social
support training for youth sport coaches. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1993; 78:602–610.
[PubMed: 8407704]
Tracy AJ, Erkut S. Gender and race patterns in the pathways from sports participation to self.
Sociological Perspectives. 2002; 45:445–466. [PubMed: 21399740]
Treasure DC, Roberts GC. Students’ perceptions of the motivational climate, achievement beliefs, and
satisfaction in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2001; 72:165–175.
[PubMed: 11393879]
Weiss, MR.; Ferrer Caja, E. Motivational orientations and sport behavior. In: Horn, TS., editor.
Advances in sport psychology. 2. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2002. p. 101-183.
Williams GC, Deci EL. Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: A test of self-
determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996; 70:767–779. [PubMed:
8636897]
Author Manuscript

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 16
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Figure 1.
Conceptual process model depicting the sequential effects of coaching on youth
development in organized sports.
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Coatsworth and Conroy Page 17
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Figure 2.
Structural model of relations between the coaching climate, self-perceptions, and youth
development. Paths that did not achieve statistical significance were omitted from the figure
for presentational clarity (see the Results section for details on these paths).
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

 Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript

Table 1

Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations Among Study Variables

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1. Sex 1.00
2. Age .03 1.00
3. Perceived Coach Involvement −.02 .29* 1.00
Coatsworth and Conroy

Coaches’ Autonomy-Supportive Behavior

4. Interest −.02 .11 .20 1.00
5. Praise −.02 −.01 .17 .43** 1.00

Need Satisfaction in Relationships with Coaches

6. Autonomy −.16 .03 −.12 .22* .20 1.00

7. Competence −.17 .05 .14 .24* .41** .78** 1.00

8. Relatedness −.12 −.02 −.01 .27** .48** .70** .80** 1.00

Perceived Competence
9. Week 1 .02 −.01 −.11 −.05 .15 .25* .30** .37** 1.00

10. Week 6 .00 −.03 −.03 .09 .22* .39** .57** .48** .62** 1.00

Self-Esteem
11. Week 1 .04 −.06 .17 .14 .12 .28** .42** .30** .53** .55** 1.00

12. Week 6 .03 −.15 .13 .14 .12 .24* .39** .32** .46** .54** .68** 1.00

Youth Development Outcomes

13. Initiative −.09 .09 .09 .20 .34** .42** .45** .40** .23* .37** .25* .28** 1.00

Dev Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 26.

14. Identity Reflection .00 .07 −.01 .21 .30** .23* .42** .40** .38** .47** .42** .43** .59** 1.00

15. Identity Exploration .16 −.01 .07 −.07 .14 .05 .11 .13 .01 .09 .07 .17 .13 .27** 1.00

M n/a 12.07 2.24 3.91 4.30 5.13 5.10 4.55 5.51 5.64 3.31 3.48 3.11 2.73 2.81
SD n/a 1.79 1.80 1.31 1.58 1.43 1.48 1.61 0.96 0.95 0.60 0.58 0.75 0.88 0.71
α n/a n/a .83 .90 .89 .83 .84 .83 .77 .71 .87 .90 .80 .84 .55

Note:
*
p <.05;
**
p <.01
Page 18