Maarten De Backer

“Yes, we can!”: Perceptions of collective efficacy sources in volleyball

Abstract Collective efficacy can be defined as a groups shared confidence that they will successfully achieve their goal. We examined which behaviours and events are perceived as sources of collective efficacy beliefs in a volleyball context. In Study 1, volleyball coaches from the highest volleyball leagues (n = 33) in Belgium indicated the most important sources of collective efficacy. This list was then adapted based on the literature and on feedback given by an expert focus group, resulting in a 40-item questionnaire. In Study 2, coaches and players from all levels of volleyball in Belgium (n = 2365) rated each of these sources on their predictive value for collective efficacy. A principal component analysis revealed that the 40 sources could be divided into eight internally consistent factors. Positive supportive communication (e.g. enthusiasm after making a point) was identified as the factor most predictive for positive collective efficacy beliefs. The factor referring to the negative emotional reactions of players (e.g. discouraging body language) was the most predictive for negative collective efficacy beliefs. These findings offer a starting point for the design of continuous measurements of collective efficacy through observation.

Do coaching style and game circumstances predict athletes' perceived justice of their coach? A longitudinal study in elite handball and volleyball teams

Objective The present longitudinal study is the first to examine game to game fluctuations of perceived justice of elite volleyball and handball coaches. More specifically, we studied whether coaching style (i.e., need support versus control), coach behaviors (decision justifications), player’s status (i.e., starter or substitute), and game result (win/loss) predicted athletes’ perceived justice and its fluctuations. Methods A longitudinal questionnaire study was performed during 6 consecutive weeks among Belgian female volleyball (N = 57) and male handball players (N = 39). We administered a general questionnaire (i.e., need support/control) the first week, and game-specific questionnaires (i.e., justice, decision justifications, game circumstances) after six consecutive games. Because game-to-game measures (i.e., within-athlete) were nested into individuals (between-athletes) we conducted Hierarchical Linear Modeling to examine the hypotheses. Results Multilevel analyses showed that 49% of the variance of perceived justice was situated at the within-athlete level. Furthermore, coaches’ need support and the provision of decision justifications were positive predictors of athletes’ perceived justice of the coach. More specific, the impact of justifications was less strong in a high need supportive environment and stronger in a high controlling environment. Finally, both the status of the player and the game result were negative predictors of athletes’ perceived justice. Conclusions We can conclude that athletes’ perceived justice of their coach shifts considerably from game-to-game. Furthermore, the coaching style and coaching behaviors can help to overcome the negative effects of specific game circumstances such as being a substitute or losing a game on athletes’ perceived justice of the coach.