Exploring training adherence in elite school-age athletes

Abstract

This study extends athlete training adherence research by focusing on motivation and social support in athletes who successfully attend strength and conditioning sessions. Six male elite school-age athletes with high training attendance participated in semi-structured interviews to explore their experiences of strength and conditioning training. Their parents and two of their coaches also participated in interviews, and analysis was conducted using abbreviated grounded theory methodology. Facilitating factors relating to athletes themselves include motivation, enjoyment, a mastery-approach orientation, comprehension, thoughts and actions, determination and observable results. Support from parents, coaches and other athletes was also found to be important facilitators, along with routine. Athletes should be supported to move towards autonomous motivation to enhance their adherence to training. Additional recommendations for athletes, coaches and sporting organisations are given.

A Longitudinal Prospective Study: The Effect of Annual Seasonal Transition and Coaching Influence on Aerobic Capacity and Body Composition in Division I Female Soccer Players

“…During the spring season, our population had regular access to sport-specific coaches, strength and conditioning staff, and athletic trainers. The directed coaching strategies our population received across the spring season align with relevant literature, leading to greater training adherence [10,11] and therefore more consistent and positive training adaptations. This same direct coaching support was not present during the pre-season (B3-B4), which likely led to variations in training adherence [10,11] and therefore negatively impacted training volume and intensity.…”

“…The directed coaching strategies our population received across the spring season align with relevant literature, leading to greater training adherence [10,11] and therefore more consistent and positive training adaptations. This same direct coaching support was not present during the pre-season (B3-B4), which likely led to variations in training adherence [10,11] and therefore negatively impacted training volume and intensity. The lack of direct coaching support our population experienced across the pre-season (B3-B4) led to a −7.0% (p = 0.021) decrease in AC despite summer league competitions and self-directed training (Figure 1).…”

“…While the transition period typically includes reductions in cardiovascular performance [8,27], and therefore AC [27], our sample experienced a wide range of responses demonstrated by the large standard deviations in AC and FFM (43.34 ± 6.87 mL•kg −1 •min −1 ; 48.1 ± 4.09 kg), respectively. The limited coaching direction employed during the transition period is known as an indirect coaching method and can affect a wide variety of responses and adherence from athletes [6,8,10,11]. The differences observed within our population compared with elite athletes is something to note and can be due training prescription management throughout the competitive season.…”

“…The NCAA DI guidelines [29] limit player/coach communication throughout the summer or pre-season (B3-B4) for fall sports (Figure 1), which can create training programming and management barriers. The indirect coaching style and potential for a perceived lack of coaching support can result in poor training adherence [11].…”

“…The spring season (B2-B3) elicited the greatest positive physical adaptations and was likely due to direct coaching oversight [11] and CT paired with rest [14,21,23]. During the spring season, our population had regular access to sport-specific coaches, strength and conditioning staff, and athletic trainers.…”