Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Gender of Athlete and Differences in the Preferences of Coll

No description

Mandana Sobhanzadeh

on 27 November 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Gender of Athlete and Differences in the Preferences of Coll

Gender of Athlete and Differences in the Preferences of Collegiate Basketball Coach’s Leadership Behaviours

Discussion & Conclousion
By: Bita Sobhanzadeh, Dr. Lim Boon Hooi

Leadership plays an important role in the success of a team. The effective coaching can lead to individual and team success (Jacob, 2006; McClain, 2006).

It will be important for coaches that be effective in their roles and understand player’s needs and help to improve athlete’s satisfaction (Sherman et al., 2000).

When the preferred leadership style is utilized by coach, players tend to respond more with higher levels of performance (Howard, 2005).

If male & female athletes motivate differently it should be necessary that they be coached in a different manner to drive them to maintain high performance level rely on different factors (Beam et al., 2004).
Problem Statement
Lack of compatible coaching style
(Wilson, 2007; McClain, 2006; Molinero et al., 2006)
Understanding the needs or desires of male & female athletes
(Beam et al., 2004; Holmes et al., 2008)
The most consistent findings in the literature have used Leadership Scale for Sport (LSS) on just five sub-scales of leadership behaviour while Few studies have examined comparing male & female athletes by using RLSS
(Beam et al., 2004; Lam et al., 2007; Holmes et al., 2008)
Most of previous studies on gender issues have concentrated on comparing the gender of coaches
(e.g., McGarity, 2009; Fasting & Pfister, 2000)
, while few studies have been focused on comparing gender of athletes
(Beam et al., (2000) and Holmes et al., (2008)
Purpose of Study
The main purpose of this quantitative study was to compare if there is a significant difference between athlete’s gender and preferred coach’s leadership behaviours.

Significance of Study
A coach plays a strong and positive role based on preferred leadership behaviour to the level of success and satisfaction. To improve athletic performance and satisfaction, it might be necessary for a coach to commit in leadership behaviours to which the athlete is interested
(Sherman et al., 2000).

Lack of compatible coaching style when the athletes wish another manner may make an unsatisfied athlete and athlete’s abandonment from the sport
(McClain, 2006; Molinero et al., 2006; Wilson, 2007).
Gender differences among athletes would be essential for Coaches’ knowledge; whether coach’s behaviour varies in male & female.
A Revised Leadership Scale for Sport (RLSS: Zhang et al., 1997) were employed in the current study. The estimated time for completion of the questionnaires were 10-15 minutes.
A total of 85 varsity male & female basketball student-athletes were recruited randomly during the basketball championship of Isfahan’s fourth region universities In season 2010-2011.
Given Permission granted by tournament administrator in Esfahan central city from eight universities in Iran.
This research will perform using quantitative methods with a Survey Design.
The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 16.0 used for analyses. The descriptive statistics for six leadership sub-scales was done to demonstrate Mean and Standard Deviation and also One-way ANOVA was implemented to indicate significant differences.Significant Level for this study was 0.05 (p< .05).
Autocratic Behaviour
(8 items)
Social Support
(8 items)

Situational Consideration
(10 items)
Training & Instruction
(10 items)

Positive Feedback
(12 items)

Democratic Behaviour
(12 items)
Six Dimension of RLSS
(60 items 5-Point Likert)

Validity & Reliability
Test-retest was done to check the content validity of the instrument, and also the reliability. The ranges of alpha coefficients for six sub-scales were found to be acceptable levels of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranged from 0.65 to 0.86).
Although, the results of One-way ANOVA (Table 2) was shown no significant differences [F (6, 78) = 1.93, P > 0.05; Wilks’ Lambda = 0.086] between two genders, but there was a similarity between male & female varsity basketball student-athletes’ preferences for six sub-scales of coach’s leadership behaviours as the male & female athletes rated in Positive Feedback Behaviour, Democratic Behaviour, Training & Instruction, Situational Consideration, Social Support, and Autocratic Behaviour respectively.

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for Six Dimensions of Leadership Behaviour based on athlete’s gender

The descriptive statistics for six leadership sub-scales in table 1 revealed that male & female varsity basketball student-athletes preferred Positive Feedback Behaviour (Male: M= 49.60; SD= 6.39; Female: M= 51.40; SD= 5.33) from their coaches as highest level if compared to other sub-scales. These research results displayed that Autocratic Behaviour was the least sub-scale (Male: M= 17.92; SD= 5.83; Female: M= 19.56; SD= 3.74). Mean scores of the five sub-scales in RLSS were higher for female athletes, except the Social Support Behaviour that showed lower scores (Male: M= 32.77; SD= 3.46; Female: M= 32.09; SD= 4.11).
 Table 2: Results of One-way ANOVA for Six Sub-Scales of Preferred Coach’s Leadership Behaviour based on athlete’s gender
[F (6, 78) = 1.93, P > 0.05; Wilks’ Lambda = 0.086]
The present results confirmed studies of Sherman et al., (2000) and Lam et al., (2007). According to Sherman et al. (2000) in dual gender sports, e.g. basketball, the type of coaching favoured is not affected by gender. Although male athletes preferred slightly higher AB compared to female athletes, the difference was not significant between both males and females ranked preferred coach’s behaviour in the same way (Sherman et al., 2000). Lam et al., (2007) also reported differences between male & female student-athletes with respect to their preferences for the types of coaching behaviours but the differences were not significant. Their findings suggested that male & female athletes need to be coached in a manner that is suitable for them.

The current findings implied that male & female athletes desire to have a greater feedback (e.g., compliment, appreciation, credit, and reward) from the coach in practice or competition and the coaches should struggle to compliment or encourage athletes for a good performance even if they performed by mistake.

In spite of all the previous researches that males preferred more Autocratic Behaviour, in the current study means scores of male varsity basketball student-athletes were lower. The present findings indicated that the dominant of coaches’ personal influence is not viewed as negative by female athletes as well. The female athletes preferred the coach displays total control though, for both gender Autocratic Behaviour was the least sub-scale.
Having the knowledge that males have a slightly higher preference for Social Support than females, suggested that coaches must involve themselves in satisfying more interpersonal needs of male varsity basketball student-athletes than female and provide a warm atmosphere that male athletes confide in coaches for solving their personal problems.

The current results concluded that gender differences among athletes may be less important in determining what coaching strategies are most likely to motivate and encourage optimal performance.
Beam, J. W., Serwatka, T. S., & Wilson, W. J. (2004). Preferred leadership of NCAA division I and II intercollegiate student-athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 27(1), 3-17.
Fasting, K., & Pfister, G. (2000). Female and male coaches in the eyes of female elite soccer players. European Physical Education Review, 6(1), 91-110.
Holmes, R. M., McNeil, M., Adorna, P., & Procaccino, J. K. (2008). Collegiate student athletes' preferences and perceptions regarding peer relationships.Journal of Sport Behavior, 31(4), 338-351.
Howard, W. C. (2005). Leadership: Four Styles. Education, 126(2), 384-391.
Jacob, R. L. (2006). The relationship between perceived coaching behaviours and win-loss success in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I men and women's basketball coaches. State University of New York at Buffalo.
Lam, E. T. C., Chen, L., Zhang, J. J., Robinson, D. A., & Ziegler, S. G. (2007). Preferred and perceived leadership styles by NCAA basketball players. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78.
McClain, N. M. (2006). Unique aspects of team cohesion with female athletes. Alliant international university, San Francisco Bay.
McGarity, S. (2009). Gender and Individual Differences that Affect Young Athletes' Preferences for Specific Coaching Behaviours (Doctoral dissertation, American University).
Molinero, O., Salguero, A., Tuero, C., Alvarez, E., & Marquez, S. (2006). Dropout reasons in young Spanish athletes: Relationship to gender, type of sport and level of competition. Journal of Sport Behavior, 29(1), 255-269.
Sherman, C., Fuller, R., & Speed, H. (2000). Gender comparisons of preferred coaching behaviours in Australian sports. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 23(4), 389-406.
Wilson, R. (2007). Where Have All the Women Gone? Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(35), 1.
Zhang, J., Jensen, B., & Mann, B. (1997). Modification and revision of the leadership scale for sport. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 20, 105-122.

Specially My Supervisor Dr. Lim Boon Hooi
Full transcript