Effects of big‐five personality traits on the quality of relationship and satisfaction in Chinese coach–athlete dyads

Abstract

The present study examined the influence of personality traits on the quality of the Chinese coach-athlete relationship and satisfaction through a dyadic research design. A total of 350 coach-athlete dyads completed a self-report instrument that assessed personality traits, as well as perceptions of relationship quality and satisfaction with training. Results revealed that: (a) actor effects (i.e., actor's personality will predict his or her own perceptions of relationship quality) of personality traits, namely, conscientiousness, extroversion, and neuroticism, on both coaches' and athletes' perceptions of relationship quality and (b) partner effects (an actor's own personality will predict his or her partner's perceptions of relationship quality) of only athletes' personality, namely, conscientiousness, extroversion, and neuroticism, on their coaches' perceptions of relationship quality. The findings suggested that each relationship member's personality trait contributed independently to relationship quality, and both actor and partner effects of the relationship quality on satisfaction with training were found to be significant. In Chinese sports culture, there presents a unique dynamics of personality and relationship quality among coach-athlete dyad.

Toward a better assessment of perceived social influence: The relative role of significant others on young athletes

“…Figure provides a graphical representation of the 2 × 2 framework that informed item development. The conceptualization of these four dimensions aligns with the theoretical foundation of PSISS‐1, and also research and theories in sport psychology and social psychology about unconditional social influences. Under this hypothesized framework, we conducted a series of studies in the present investigation for the development and validation of PSISS‐2, which might contribute to a better understanding and assessment about the perception of social influence by significant others in youth sport: Study 1 developed the items of PSISS‐2 and provided evidence about their content validity. Study 2 examined the factorial validity, convergent validity, and criterion validity across the coach‐, father‐, mother‐, and teammates‐ versions of PSISS‐2. Study 3 examined the concurrent validity and discriminant validity of the various versions of PSISS‐2. …”

“…Third, the items of PSISS‐2 aim to capture the subjective perception of social influence from the direct perspective of athletes, yet future studies could adapt the items of PSISS‐2 to measure the perspective from significant others, including self‐rated or meta‐perception of social influence. This may enable dyadic research to examine how the social influence by significant others and young athletes could affect one another. Finally, following an emic approach in scale development, the current study only examined the Chinese version of PSISS‐2 in a Chinese sample, so we were unable to account for the effects of cultural differences in terms of language, literacy, interpretation, and response bias .…”

“…The second model (the constrained model) held threshold and factor loading equal across all groups. Coach, as being one of the most well‐researched social agents in sport,was selected to be the reference group . Scale factors were constrained at one in coach group and free in the others social agents; factor means were fixed at zero in coach group and free in others .…”

The Psychometric Properties of the Short and Long Versions of the Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire

“…Missing data were replaced using an expectation maximization algorithm. In keeping with the strategy from the previous validation studies (e.g., Jowett, 2009;Jowett & Ntoumanis, 2003, 2004Yang & Jowett, 2010b), CFA and structural equation modeling (SEM) were conducted by EQS6.1 (statistical package; Bentler, 2004) to explore the factorial and criterion validity of each of the three versions of the CART-Qs.…”

“…For example, there is an ever-increasing research body that has highlighted the associations of the quality of the coach-athlete relationship with coach-created motivational climates (Olympiou, Jowett, & Duda, 2008), multiple achievement goals (Adie & Jowett, 2010), passion for sport (Lafreniere, Jowett, Vallerand, & Carbonneau, 2011;Lafreniere, Jowett, Vallerand, Donahue, & Lorimer, 2008), physical self-concept (Jowett, 2008a), satisfaction with sport (Jowett & Nezlek, 2012;Lorimer & Jowett, 2009), attachment styles (Davis & Jowett, 2010), Big Five personality traits (Yang & Jowett, 2010b), interpersonal perceptions (Jowett, 2006), interpersonal conflict (Jowett, 2009), empathic accuracy (Lorimer & Jowett, 2009), collective efficacy (Jowett, Shanmugam, & Caccoulis, 2012), and team cohesions (Jowett & Chaundy, 2004). Collectively, the research findings highlight that the coach-athlete relationship is central to coaches' and athletes' performance-related aspects (e.g., passion for sport, satisfaction with sport, motivation) as well as psychological well-being (e.g., positive affect, relationship satisfaction, interpersonal conflict).…”