Expression of Sport Experiences between Cadet and Junior Basketball Players

Abstract

Background. The hypothesis of this study is formulated as follows: the experience of junior basketball players in competitions will be more valuable than that of cadet basketball players. The aim of our study was to examine the peculiarities of youth and basketball players’ sport experiences.
 Methods. A total of 104 basketball players, 47 cadets and 57 juniors participated in the study. Survey questionnaire is used for the study. The following methodologies were used: Athlete’s Personal Experience Survey (Athletic Coping Skills Inventory, ACSI-28) and the Sport Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ).
 Results. The results of the study revealed statistically significant differences (p <.05) in personal sport experiences (athletic endurance skills) among basketball players of different age groups according to the following indicators: the coach’s influence on basketball players, concentration, athletes’ self-confidence and resilience. The results of the study of athletes’ competitive experiences revealed that there were statistically significant differences (p <.05) between cadet and junior basketball players in competition experience. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of risk and progress parameters.
 Conclusions. The coach’s influence was greater for the cadet basketball players. Concentration, self-confidence and resilience were better among junior basketball players. This shows that when competing, junior basketball players have higher levels of concentration compared to the cadet group, as they are more confident and can better cope with tension. In addition, it was found that the experience of junior basketball players in competitions is richer than that of cadet basketball players.
 Keywords: sport experience, junior, cadet, basketball players, basketball.

Correlations Between Coaching Behavior, Motivational Climate and Intrinsic Motivation in Cadet Basketball Players

“…Introducing that variable in the second group of regression model, the segment of the explained variability of intrinsic motivation increased to 30%. That shows that the findings obtained using our sample match with the results of other research (Romualdas et al, 2021). In the first group of the regression, both predictor variables have the statistically significant influence in predicting the variance criterion, with the close values of beta coefficient but with opposite directions.…”

“…Another study (Martín et al, 2018) has also shown positive interaction between the constructs democratic coaching and mastery-oriented motivational climate. In their study, the authors (Romualdas et al, 2021) have found negative correlation between the variables autocratic behavior and mastery-oriented motivational climate with young basketball players, as well as the positive correlation between specific coach's behavior and result orientation. The same authors have also reported that coaches whose leadership style that is characterized by the low level of autocratic actions, frequent positive reinforcement and informative positive feedback, with low frequency of disregarding success or failure of cadet basketball players, can generate the environment that will contribute to the development of athlete's intrinsic motivation.…”