Organisational Stressors, Coping, and Coping Effectiveness: A Longitudinal Study with an Elite Coach
Levy, Andrew; Nicholls, Adam; Marchant, David; Polman, Remco
Professor Adam Nicholls A.Nicholls@hull.ac.uk
Professor of Psychology/ Leader of the Sport Psychology and Coaching Group
The purpose of this study was to examine organisational stressors, coping, and perceptions of coping effectiveness with an elite coach. The participant completed a daily diary over a 28-day period. Each diary entry consisted of an open-ended stressor, a coping response section, and a Likert-type scale measure of coping effectiveness. Inductive and deductive content analysis procedures were used to analyse the diaries, in addition to frequency data which were obtained for both stressors and coping strategies. Findings indicated administration, overload, competition environment, the athletes, and team atmosphere were the salient organisational stressors. Coping strategies used to alleviate such stressors were communication, preparation, planning, social support, and self-talk. These strategies were generally effective, but coping effectiveness declined over the 28-days.
|Journal Article Type||Article|
|Publication Date||Dec 31, 2009|
|Journal||INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCE & COACHING|
|Peer Reviewed||Peer Reviewed|
|APA6 Citation||Levy, A., Nicholls, A., Marchant, D., & Polman, R. (2009). Organisational Stressors, Coping, and Coping Effectiveness: A Longitudinal Study with an Elite Coach. International journal of sports science & coaching, 4(1), 31-45. https://doi.org/10.1260/1747-95126.96.36.199|
|Keywords||Social Sciences (miscellaneous)|
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (http://www.uk.sagepub.com/aboutus/openaccess.htm).
You might also like
The prevalence of pseudoscientific ideas and neuromyths among sports coaches