↓ Skip to main content

Perceptions of Coach–Athlete Relationship Are More Important to Coaches than Athletes in Predicting Dyadic Coping and Stress Appraisals: An Actor–Partner Independence Mediation Model

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perceptions of Coach–Athlete Relationship Are More Important to Coaches than Athletes in Predicting Dyadic Coping and Stress Appraisals: An Actor–Partner Independence Mediation Model
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00447
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam R Nicholls, John L Perry

Abstract

Most attempts to manage stress involve at least one other person, yet coping studies in sport tend to report an athlete's individual coping strategies. There is a limited understanding of coping involving other people, particularly within sport, despite athletes potentially spending a lot of time with other people, such as their coach. Guided by the systemic-transactional model of stress and coping among couples (Bodenmann, 1995), from relationship psychology, we assessed dyadic coping, perceptions of relationship quality, and primary stress appraisals of challenge and threat among 158 coach-athlete dyads (n = 277 participants). The athletes competed at amateur (n = 123), semi-professional (n = 31), or professional levels (n = 4). Coaches and athletes from the same dyad completed a measure of dyadic coping, coach-athlete relationship, and stress appraisals. We tested an Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Model to account for the non-independence of dyadic data. These actor-partner analyses revealed differences between athletes and coaches. Although the actor effects were relatively large compared to partner effects, perceptions of relationship quality demonstrated little impact on athletes. The mediating role of relationship quality was broadly as important as dyadic coping for coaches. These findings provide an insight in to how coach-athlete dyads interact to manage stress and indicate that relationship quality is of particular importance for coaches, but less important for athletes. In order to improve perceptions of relationship quality among coaches and athletes, interventions could be developed to foster positive dyadic coping among both coaches and athletes, which may also impact upon stress appraisals of challenge and threat.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 117 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 12%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Unspecified 8 7%
Other 6 5%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 39 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 30 25%
Psychology 25 21%
Unspecified 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 40 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2016.
All research outputs
#6,741,502
of 24,647,023 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,590
of 33,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,845
of 306,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#177
of 465 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,647,023 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 306,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 465 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.