The passion scale, based on the dualistic model of passion, measures 2 distinct types of passion: Harmonious and obsessive passions are predictive of adaptive and less adaptive outcomes, respectively. In a substantive-methodological synergy, we evaluate the construct validity (factor structure, reliability, convergent and discriminant validity) of Passion Scale responses (N = 3,571). The exploratory structural equation model fit to the data was substantially better than the confirmatory factor analysis solution, and resulted in better differentiated (less correlated) factors. Results from a 13-model taxonomy of measurement invariance supported complete invariance (factor loadings, factor correlations, item uniquenesses, item intercepts, and latent means) over language (French vs. English; the instrument was originally devised in French, then translated into English) and gender. Strong measurement partial invariance over 5 passion activity groups (leisure, sport, social, work, education) indicates that the same set of items is appropriate for assessing passion across a wide variety of activities--a previously untested, implicit assumption that greatly enhances practical utility. Support was found for the convergent and discriminant validity of the harmonious and obsessive passion scales, based on a set of validity correlates: life satisfaction, rumination, conflict, time investment, activity liking and valuation, and perceiving the activity as a passion.

The purpose of the present study was to develop and validate a self-report instrument that measures the nature of the coach -athlete relationship. Jowett and colleagues' (Jowett & Meek, 2000; Jowett, in press) qualitative case studies and relevant literature were used to generate items for an instrument that measures affective, cognitive and behavioral aspects of the coach -athlete relationship. Two studies were carried out in an attempt to assess content, predictive, and construct validity, as well as internal consistency, of the Coach -Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART -Q), using two independent British samples. Principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to reduce the number of items, identify principal components, and confirm the latent structure of the CART -Q.Results supported the multi-dimensional nature of the coach -athlete relationship. The latent structure of the CART -Q was underlined by the latent variables of coaches' and athletes' Closeness (emotions), Commitment (cognitions), and Complementarity (behaviors).Key words: coach-athlete relationship, scale development, validationThe Coach -Athlete Relationship Questionnaire 4 Sport and physical activity are carried out in the presence of others. Based on this premise, a conceptual framework was advanced by Iso-Ahola (1995) to show that athletic performance is a multiplicative function of intrapersonal (e.g., coping skills) and interpersonal (e.g., coach -athlete relationship) factors. Iso-Ahola's proposed framework emphasizes that for successful performance, athlete's intrapersonal and interpersonal psychosocial factors are required to be developed. Despite the apparent significance of both intrapersonal and interpersonal factors in athletic performance, the interest of sport psychology researchers has been predominantly concentrated on the intrapersonal factors such as motivation and anxiety (Biddle, 1997). Guisinger and Blatt (1994) stated that "western psychologies have traditionally given greater importance to self-development than to interpersonal relatedness, stressing the development of autonomy, independence, and identity as central factors in the mature personality" (p. 104). Guisinger and Blatt challenged theories that emphasize either dimension at the expense of the other because they restrict people's understanding of psychological development.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Coaching has been often viewed as a context within which coaches operate to largely bring about changes in athlete's performance and wellbeing. One key factor to successful outcomes in coaching is the quality of the relationship between coaches and athletes. In this article, I propose that the coach-athlete relationship is at the heart of coaching. Moreover, the aim is to describe and explain how the quality of the relationship coaches and athletes develop and maintain over the course of their sporting partnership alongside coaches and athletes' knowledge and outcomes, form a system that is capable of defining coaching effectiveness and success.

This study examined the extent to which athletes' perceptions of their relationship with their coach add to the prediction of team cohesion beyond what is predicted by perceptions of coach leadership. Four self-report instruments that measure perceptions of group cohesion, coach leadership, and the nature of coach-athlete relationships were completed by 111 university athletes. Multiple regression analyses revealed the variance accounted for by the hierarchically ordered sets of variables in task and social cohesion. Overall, the results revealed that leadership variables predicted more variance in task and social cohesion when relationship variables were included. Moreover, leadership and relationship variables were shown to be better and stronger predictors of task cohesion (R 2 ϭ .34) than social cohesion (R 2 ϭ .15). Limitations and future research directions are discussed.

This study examined the interpersonal athletic relationship of four married coach-athlete dyads. In order to facilitate the examination of this unique relationship, the interpersonal constructs of closeness, co-orientation, and complementarity were integrated into a conceptual-based model. The main purpose of this study was to establish the utility of the constructs in understanding the coach-athlete relationship in married couples. Following in-depth interviews, the responses of the participants were content analyzed. Analysis revealed that the coaches and athletes’ close relationship facilitated the formulation of a cooriented view of relevant and important issues which subsequently affected the way in which cooperative interactions were expressed in training. The relationship-oriented aspects of this unique dyad are discussed in relation to a proposed conceptualization of the coach-athlete relationship, and future directions are presented.