Effects of goal orientation and perceived value of toughness on antisocial behavior in soccer: the mediating role of moral disengagement

In this study, we examined (a) the effects of goal orientations and perceived value of toughness on antisocial behavior toward opponents and teammates in soccer and (b) whether any effects were mediated by moral disengagement Male soccer players (N = 307) completed questionnaires assessing the aforementioned variables Structural equation modeling indicated that ego orientation had positive and task orientation had negative direct effects on antisocial behavior toward opponents Further, ego orientation and perceived value of toughness had indirect positive effects on antisocial behavior toward opponents and teammates which were mediated by moral disengagement Collectively, these findings aid our understanding of the effects of personal influences on antisocial behavior and of psychosocial mechanisms that could facilitate such antisocial conduct in male soccer player

The prosocial and antisocial behavior in sport scale

This research aimed to (a) develop a measure of prosocial and antisocial behavior in sport, (b) examine its invariance across sex and sport, and (c) provide evidence for its discriminant and concurrent validity. We conducted two studies. In study 1, team sport athletes (N = 1,213) recruited from 103 teams completed questionnaires assessing demographics and prosocial and antisocial behaviors in sport. Factor analyses revealed two factors representing prosocial behavior and two factors representing antisocial behavior. The model had a very good fit to the data and showed configural, metric, and scalar invariance across sex and sport. The final scale consisted of 20 items. In Study 2, team-sport athletes (N = 106) completed the scale and measures of empathy and goal orientation. Analyses provided Support for the discriminant and concurrent validity of the scale. In conclusion, the new scale can be used to measure prosocial and antisocial behaviors in team sport

Athletes' perceptions of coaching effectiveness and athlete-related outcomes in rugby union: An investigation based on the coaching efficacy model

This study examined the relationships between athletes' perceptions of coaching effectiveness, based on the coaching efficacy model, and their effort, commitment, enjoyment, self-efficacy, and prosocial and antisocial behavior in rugby union. Participants were 166 adult male rugby-union players (M age = 26.5, SD = 8.5 years), who completed questionnaires measuring their perceptions of four dimensions of coaching effectiveness as well as their effort, commitment, enjoyment, self-efficacy, and prosocial and antisocial behavior. Regression analyses, controlling for rugby experience, revealed that athletes' perceptions of motivation effectiveness predicted effort, commitment, and enjoyment. Further, perceptions of technique effectiveness predicted self-efficacy, while perceptions of character-building effectiveness predicted prosocial behavior. None of the perceived coaching effectiveness dimensions were related to antisocial behavior. In conclusion, athletes' evaluations of their coach's ability to motivate, provide instruction, and instill an attitude of fair play in his athletes have important implications for the variables measured in this study

Advancing leadership in sport: Time to 'actually' take the blinkers off?

In a recent article entitled Advancing Leadership in Sport: Time to Take off the Blinkers?’ Cruickshank and Collins presented what they deemed to be a critical analysis of extant leadership research in sport, attempting to establish a rationale for a greater emphasis on both the cognitive and ‘darker’ (i.e., socially undesirable) sides of leadership. The purpose of the present article is to challenge and clarify a number of misrepresentations in the arguments made in the foundation article, and to question some of the resultant recommendations made. Specifically, the present response will focus on Cruickshank and Collins’ (a) lack of specificity regarding the actual ‘dark’ traits they are apparently purporting to be effective leadership traits, (b) the dearth of theoretical and empirical support for their claims relating to the benefits of ‘dark’ leadership (c) misrepresentation of transformational leadership theory, (d) decision to ignore other relevant theoretical frameworks when presenting their arguments, and (e) apparent confirmation bias in the selective use of literature to support their arguments. Leadership research in sport may well benefit from new directions and methodological advancements and on this level we concur with the aims of Cruickshank and Collins’ article. However, we believe their misrepresentations and inappropriate recommendations do little to advance this area of research, and potentially serve to take it backwards not forwards

Development and initial validation of an indirect measure of transformational leadership integrity

An indirect measure of transformational leadership integrity was developed across three studies. In Study 1, the transformational leadership integrity implicit association test (TLI-IAT) was developed and tested with 65 leaders across heterogeneous organizational contexts. Study 2 involved 51 coaches from 18 sports. Results from Studies 1 and 2 supported the construct validity of the instrument, providing evidence of the instrument's convergent and discriminant validity. Study 3 involved 32 coaches and 133 players from six sports. Findings supported the criterion validity of the measure, providing evidence for the instrument's predictive validity. In sum, evidence is presented that supports the TLI-IATs construct and criterion validity. As such, the present research has made significant advancements to the transformational leadership integrity literature and provides researchers with an indirect measure of automatic transformational leadership integrity self-attitudes

Coaching efficacy and coaching effectiveness: examining their predictors and comparing coaches' and athletes' reports

Research on the conceptual model of coaching efficacy (Feltz, Chase, Moritz, & Sullivan, 1999) has increased dramatically over the past few years. Utilizing this model as the guiding framework, the current study examined: (a) coaching experience and sex as predictors of coaches' coaching efficacy; (b) sport experience, sex, and the match/mismatch in sex between coach and athlete as predictors of athletes' perceptions of their coach's effectiveness on the four coaching efficacy domains; and (c) whether coaches' reports of coaching efficacy and athletes' perceptions of coaching effectiveness differed. Coaches (N = 26) and their athletes (N = 291) from 8 individual and 7 team sports drawn from British university teams (N = 26) participated in the study. Coaches completed the Coaching Efficacy Scale (CES), while athletes evaluated their coach's effectiveness using an adapted version of the CES; coaches and athletes also responded to demographic questions. Results indicated that, in coaches, years of coaching experience positively predicted technique coaching efficacy, and males reported higher game strategy efficacy than females. In athletes, sport experience negatively predicted all perceived coaching effectiveness dimensions, and the mismatch in sex between athletes and their coach negatively predicted perceived motivation and character building coaching effectiveness. Finally, on average, coaches' ratings of coaching efficacy were significantly higher than their athletes' ratings of coaching effectiveness on A dimensions. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for coaching effectiveness