{"id":249,"date":"2006-09-03T10:24:23","date_gmt":"2006-09-03T15:24:23","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2015-03-27T13:38:02","modified_gmt":"2015-03-27T18:38:02","slug":"an-exploration-of-female-athletes-experiences-and-perceptions-of-male-and-female-coaches","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/an-exploration-of-female-athletes-experiences-and-perceptions-of-male-and-female-coaches\/","title":{"rendered":"An Exploration of Female Athletes\u2019 Experiences and Perceptions of Male and Female Coaches"},"content":{"rendered":"
Submitted by: Melinda Frey, Daniel R. Czech, Rebecca G. Kent & Matthew Johnson<\/div>\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n

Gender may be a mediating factor for relationship effectiveness between
\nathletes and coaches (Lirgg, Dibrezzo, & Smith, 1994; Medwechuk &
\nCrossman, 1994). Ironically, with the increase in participation of female
\nathletes and sports that has occurred since Title IX, there has been a
\ndecrease in the number of female coaches over the past 30 years (Felder
\n& Wishnietsky, 1990; Freeman, 2001; Pastore, 1992). The purpose of
\nthis study was to explore twelve female athletes\u2019 perceptions and
\nexperiences of being coached by women and men. Semi-structured interviews
\nrevealed four major themes: discipline and structure, personal relationships,
\npassivity and aggressiveness, and coach preference. Specifically, eight
\nof the participants stated a preference for male coaches, yet differences
\nwere found when comparing various coaching qualities. Results are discussed
\nin regards to overall sport experiences.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

The coach-athlete relationship has been shown to have a profound effect
\non an athlete’s satisfaction, performance, and quality of life (Greenleaf,
\nGould, & Dieffenbach, 2001; Kenow & Williams, 1999; Vernacchia,
\nMcGuire, Reardon, & Templin, 2000; Wrisberg, 1996) and several factors
\nmay influence this relationship (Burke, Peterson, & Nix, 1995; Grisaffe,
\nBlom, & Burke, in press). Olympic athletes from the 1996 Summer Games
\nwho did not perform as well as expected felt that conflict with the coach,
\nreceiving inaccurate technical information, the coach’s inability to handle
\nselection controversy, and lack of focus on team climate played significant
\nroles in lower-level performances (Greenleaf, Gould, & Dieffenbach,
\n2001). Trust, friendship, and feedback from the coach had a positive impact
\non the performances of athletes who met or exceeded expectations. Athletes
\nexperiencing burnout have cited the coach as a negative influence due
\nto the coaches\u2019 lack of belief in the athlete, extreme pressure,
\nand\/or unrealistic expectations (Udry, Gould, Bridges, & Tuffey, 1997).
\nStewart and Taylor (2000) found that athletes\u2019 perceptions of coaching
\ncompetence and coaching behaviors were contributing factors to performance.<\/p>\n

Numerous studies have examined the impact of gender on the coach-athlete
\nrelationship. Athlete preferences for same-sex or opposite-sex coaches
\nhave been examined, and factors taken into consideration have included
\nlevel of knowledge and ability to motivate, (Medwechuk & Crossman,
\n1994; Parkhouse & Williams, 1986), level of athlete’s comfort in disclosure
\n(Molstad & Whitaker, 1987; Sabock & Kleinfelter, 1987; Simmons,
\n1997), and capability of being a role model (Lirgg, Dibrezzo, & Smith,
\n1994). Molstad and Whitaker (1987) found that female basketball players
\nranked female coaches as superior in the coaching qualities of relating
\nwell to others and understanding athletes’ feelings (two of the three
\nmost important rated qualities), while no difference was found among other
\ncharacteristics. Conversely, a strong sex bias favoring male coaches was
\nfound in male and female high school basketball athletes who rated males
\nas more knowledgeable, more likely to achieve future success, more desirable
\nto play for, and having a greater ability to motivate (Parkhouse &
\nWilliams, 1986). Overall, 89% of male athletes and 71% of female athletes
\npreferred a male coach. Previous research investigations have not shown
\na clear consensus for coach gender for female athletes (Lirgg, Dibrezzo,
\n& Smith, 1994).<\/p>\n

Although female athletic participation has increased since the passage
\nof Title IX, there has been a decrease in the number of female coaches
\nover the past thirty years (Carpenter & Acosta, 1991; Freeman, 2001;
\nPastore, 1992). According to Felder and Wishnietsky (1990), the percentage
\nof females coaching high school teams has dropped as much as 50% between
\nthe mid-1970\u2019s and early 1980\u2019s. Similarly, females coached
\n90% of collegiate teams in 1972 while only 47.3% of teams were coached
\nby women in 1990 (Carpenter & Acosta, 1991).<\/p>\n

Osborne (2002) suggested that although male and female athletes share
\nmany attributes such as the desire to win, willingness to sacrifice time
\nand energy, and enjoyment of competition, athletes need to be coached
\ndifferently. Factors to consider include training methods, coaching philosophy,
\nmotivation tactics, communication style, and ability to relate on a personal
\nlevel. The majority of research that has examined the impact of coach
\ngender on the female athlete has been conducted quantitatively and has
\nused hypothetical coaches (Frankl & Babbitt, 1998; Medwechuk &
\nCrossman, 1994; Molstad & Whitaker, 1987; Williams & Parkhouse,
\n1988). The present study utilized a qualitative approach to explore female
\nathletes\u2019 experiences with actual male and female coaches. Further,
\nCarron and Bennett (1977) noted the importance of gaining the athlete\u2019s
\nperspective of coach-athlete compatibility, while Osborne (2002) pointed
\nout that very little is known about the extent to which female athletes
\nprefer a same-sex or opposite-sex coach. Thus, the purpose of this study
\nwas to obtain a first-person perspective of the female athlete\u2019s
\nexperiences of playing for a male and female coach.<\/p>\n

Method<\/strong><\/p>\n

Participants<\/em><\/p>\n

The participants in this investigation were twelve NCAA Division I female
\nathletes. All athletes were Caucasian and had participated in basketball,
\ngolf, cross country, track and field softball, or soccer. The sample was
\nderived from two different southeastern NCAA Division I universities.
\nFour athletes had junior academic classification, four athletes had senior
\nacademic classification, and four athletes had graduate academic classification.
\nThese athletes were chosen for this study as a purposeful sample (Glesne,
\n1999) because they had the potential to provide a rich description of
\nthe experience of being coached by both a male and female and had a recent
\nmemory of this experience.<\/p>\n

Procedure<\/em><\/p>\n

The process of bracketing one\u2019s own presuppositions was developed
\nfrom Husserl\u2019s concept of reduction in the method of phenomenology
\n(Glesne, 1999). Before initiating the present study, a bracketing interview
\nwas conducted to clarify the interviewer\u2019s personal experiences
\nof having a male coach and to explore potential biases. Themes from this
\ninterview included preference for organization, winning attitude, and
\nenjoyment of the game.<\/p>\n

Semi-structured interviews were then employed to collect information
\nabout the athletes\u2019 experiences and perceptions of having both male
\nand female coaches. All participants were invited to participate in the
\nstudy by personal or telephone contact, and those expressing interest
\nwere interviewed. Participants were informed that involvement was voluntary,
\nand were advised of the ability to terminate participation at any time.
\nTo ensure confidentiality, the participants were informed that pseudonyms
\nwould be used for actual names and any team affiliations. The interviews
\nwere conducted in person and lasted approximately forty minutes in length.
\nAfter the interview, participants were given an opportunity to review
\nthe transcript and suggest changes. No changes were suggested by the participants.<\/p>\n

Interview Protocol<\/em><\/p>\n

Questions posed to the participants were designed to achieve a comprehensive
\nunderstanding of the experiences of being coached by men and women. The
\ninterviewer initially gathered information about coach history, as well
\nas the sport and level of competition. Participants were then asked questions
\nrelated to differences or similarities experienced with each coach in
\ntraining methods, encouragement and motivation, personal relationships,
\nlevel of sport knowledge, and the coach preferred. The interview guide
\nis provided in the Appendix.<\/p>\n

Analysis<\/em><\/p>\n

Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a research team of five individuals
\nderived themes using a combination of phenomenological approaches. The
\nprocedures for analyzing were adapted more directly from those developed
\nby Barrell (1988), Goodrich (1988), Hawthorne (1989), Ross (1987), and
\nHenderson (1992). More specifically, the following steps of: Approaching
\nthe interview (Transcribing the interview, Obtaining a grasp of the interview
\nthrough an interpretive group), Focusing the data (Clearing the text,
\nGrouping the text), Summarizing the interviews (Preparing a summary, Verifying
\nthe summary), and Releasing meanings (Forming categories, Determining
\nthemes, and Describing themes) were utilized to analyze the information.<\/p>\n

Results<\/strong><\/p>\n

Table 1 gives a description of each participant and her history of having
\nboth male and female coaches. All participants played at the college level
\nfor at least two years and have played competitively for at least four
\nyears. It is important to note that three of the participants\u2019 experiences
\nof the female coach were from high school experiences. Four major themes
\nemerged from the interviews.<\/p>\n

Discipline and Structure<\/em><\/p>\n

The participants indicated that male coaches were more structured and
\norganized. Carmen stated, \u201c[the male coach] was much more together,
\nhe knew structure. He knew exactly where we needed to be, what time and
\nwhat time we needed to start.\u201d Differences were notably significant
\nin the practice setting. The male coaches would develop practice plans
\nand execute every detail needed to make them work. Kelli M. confirmed
\nthis by stating, \u201cI know [the male coach] would sit down before
\na game and write down every possible thing the other team could do to
\nbeat us; and then write down next to it exactly what we could do to defend
\nthem.\u201d Drills that were done at practice had a purpose, whether
\nit was fundamentals, offense, defense, or conditioning. The male coaches
\nwere seen as being harder on the athletes and \u201cexpected more\u201d
\nfrom the players than the female coaches. The males tended to coach from
\nan authoritarian perspective and enforced the concept of \u201cno excuses,
\nthis is the rule and we\u2019re going to stick with this rule,\u201d
\naccording to Kelli M. Many of the athletes felt there would be more consequences
\nto face in practices under the male coach if they did not pay attention
\nor were not serious. Some of the athletes in this study responded favorably
\nto the male coaches\u2019 disciplinary tactics, as it aided in keeping
\nthem focused; however the male coach was also considered to be \u201ctoo
\nstrict\u201d by others in the study.<\/p>\n

Four of the participants felt that the female coaches were unorganized\u00a0and
\nnon-authoritative. The female coaches tended to run late at times and
\nwould not get the players prepared for the game. Practices were not structured,
\nnor on a time schedule. These athletes perceived that the female coaches
\nhad a harder time trying to accomplish tasks in practice, and did not
\nhave similar discipline compared to experiences with the male coaches.<\/p>\n

With the female coach, she had different stuff everyday. It would take
\nher five minutes to explain what we\u2019re supposed to do and then it
\nwouldn\u2019t really work very well. So, we would just look at each other.
\nWhen we did the drill, we didn\u2019t do it full out because we knew
\nshe wasn\u2019t keeping score or we weren\u2019t on a time limit. We
\nknew we weren\u2019t going to really be disciplined. (Kelli M.)<\/p>\n

Female coaches were more likely to forget details in practice, such as
\nnot keeping score of games, which led to lack of motivation during practice.
\nParticipants indicated that female coaches would consider individual situations
\ninstead of sticking to certain rules and consequences. For example, if
\nan athlete was late to practice, a male coach would have a set rule regarding
\nthis behavior and if any player broke the rule, regardless of the reason,
\nshe would have to face the consequences. However, a female coach would
\nlisten to the athlete\u2019s reason and then decide what type of consequence
\nthe player should face.<\/p>\n

Personal Relationships<\/em><\/p>\n

All of the participants felt that female coaches had a greater ability
\nto relate to them. Jennifer C. stated, \u201c[the female coaches] know
\nsometimes what [female athletes] going through, different life cycles
\nand stages of their life. They can relate to how girls change differently
\nthan boys.\u201d The participants indicated that the female coach understood
\nhow to \u201cdeal with\u201d the athletes and could sympathize with
\nthem when it came to \u201cgirl stuff.\u201d The female coaches had
\na greater tendency toward being friends with the players and getting to
\nknow them more than the male coaches did. Kelli C. stated, \u201c[the
\nfemale coach] was more on our level. She wanted to \u201cchit-chat\u201d
\nwith us. Like get to know us rather than having to be stern.\u201d This
\nsometimes caused problems though, because the female coach would develop
\nemotional ties with the players and would construct feelings of whom she
\nliked and did not like. This made a difference in some of the participants’
\nexperiences because the coach would \u201ccharacterize a couple of players
\nas being similar to the way [the female coach] played and\/or worked in
\nhigh school or college. So people with different work ethics were considered
\ndifferent\u201d (Sam). The players began to see differences in coaching
\nas favoritism. Mistakes made by some players would be overlooked, but
\nsimilar mistakes would be made into \u2018an issue\u2019 with other
\nplayers.<\/p>\n

So, in practice a lot of the people knew that if they made a mistake
\nthen the female coach tended to focus on that one mistake. But if another
\nperson made a mistake, she would focus on something else, like just ignore
\nit. Like if somebody in a game continuously threw the ball out of bounds
\nor in the bleachers she wouldn\u2019t really look at that. She would
\nlook at it as a negative that somebody else who\u2019s not getting the
\nrebounds or not playing good defense or something like that. She would
\npick and choose which mistakes mattered and which ones didn\u2019t, with
\na lot of different kinds of players, depending on what she thought of
\nyou already. (Kelli M.)<\/p>\n

The athletes did experience a lot of positive feedback and encouragement
\nfrom the female coaches. Many of the participants believed this came naturally
\nfrom the female coaches. Emily stated, \u201cin general, you are going
\nto have a female that\u2019s better at [encouraging and motivating] just
\nbecause females are more encouraging in general.\u201d Others, such as
\nCarmen, felt the bond shared with the female coach is what helped motivate
\nand encourage performance. \u201cShe was a girl and girls can relate
\nto girls. And when they encourage you and you\u2019re friends with them
\nyou feel better.” The female coaches were more inclined than the
\nmale coaches to say positive statements to encourage players. Female coaches
\ntended to first point out the positive tasks the athletes did before saying
\nwhat could be improved.<\/p>\n

The personal relationships between the female athletes and male coaches
\nwere very different from the relationships with female coaches. Many of
\nthe female athletes were intimidated by the male coaches. The female players
\nknew that they could discuss \u2018most anything\u2019 about the sport,
\ncertain plays or tactics with the male coaches, but nothing outside of
\npractice or the game was \u201callowed to be discussed.\u201d Whereas
\nthe athletes felt a variety of issues could be discussed with the female
\ncoaches. Carmen stated, \u201cIf I had a [personal] problem with my male
\ncoach, I wouldn\u2019t say anything about it.\u201d There was no bond,
\nper se, like the one she had with the female coach. If something was bothering
\na player, the male coach would simply punish the player for not paying
\nattention. In similar situations with a female coach, Carmen thought that,
\n\u201cshe would have asked \u2018hey are you okay.\u2019 She would
\nhave known something was bothering me and said \u201chey let\u2019s
\nplay or practice.\u201d<\/p>\n

Four of the athletes indicated the biggest difference between the relationships
\nwith the male and female coaches came from a lack of encouragement and
\npositive reinforcement. The males tended to correct and point out the
\nmistakes more often and hesitated to use compliments as motivation. Sam
\nstated, \u201cMy male coach always told us what we were doing wrong.
\nAfter a while in practice, he could tell it was getting to us so he would
\nthrow in a compliment. But, everyone knew he had to think about it before
\nhe said it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Passivity and Aggressiveness<\/em><\/p>\n

The mentality of the male coach compared to the female coach was a major
\ntheme throughout the interviews. The males seemed to be more aggressive
\nand demanding. The males\u2019 mentality was \u201cyou gotta go out
\nand get it\u201d and they wanted to \u201cwin, win, win,\u201d which
\nmade practices hard and strict. A typical mindset was that if the female
\nathletes would make a mistake or, as Kelli M. stated, \u201cIf we took
\ntoo long, or if we were loafing around and it took us more than ten to
\nfifteen seconds to get in a drill, we had to get on the line and run.
\nIt was like clockwork. It made us a better team and I am thankful for
\nthat.\u201d<\/p>\n

With female coaches, a more laid back approach was utilized. The tone
\nwas much lighter and practice proceeded in a more calm and non-aggressive
\nfashion. Carmen stated, \u201cThe female coach I had, we always got things
\ndone but it was in a lighter tone. Like we\u2019d do what she said and
\nwe\u2019d follow what she wanted us to do but we could be playful at
\nthe same time.\u201d The pressure of doing something wrong or making
\na mistake and having to face consequences was not as prevalent with a
\nfemale coach. Only one of the participants had a positive outlook towards
\nthis mentality, as Emily explained, \u201cwe may not had to have done
\n[a drill] four hundred times like we did with the males, but the end result
\nwas the same.\u201d<\/p>\n

Coach Preference<\/em><\/p>\n

When asked which coach they preferred the most, eight participants responded
\nfavorably toward the male coach for various reasons. The athletes believed
\nthat to be a good coach, the coach must have respect from the players.
\nAccording to Kelli C., \u201cdemonstrating their (coaches) soccer knowledge,
\nability to control the team, and to enforce discipline,\u201d were all
\nkey elements in gaining the respect of players. Jennifer C. thought, \u201csome
\ncoaches you just respect because they know how to make you respect them.”
\nAlong with respect, the female athletes viewed a good coach as one who
\nwas able to perform the skill and have more than adequate knowledge about
\nthe sport. Carmen stated that \u201c[the male coach] was the one that
\nknew the most about soccer. He knew the most and challenged me the most.
\nI grew as a player when I was with him.\u201d Further, Kelli M. stated,
\n\u201cthe males assumed to know more about the basics and the fundamentals.
\nEverything that\u2019s required for a successful team.\u201d The female
\nathletes considered an ideal coach to be a good leader, teacher, friend,
\nand motivator. Specifically, Sam thought a coach should \u201cchallenge
\nplayers to become better physically, mentally, tactically, and technically,\u201d
\nwhile Emily felt that coaches should \u201cteach [athletes], prepare
\nthem for any kind of obstacles that they\u2019re going to have to come
\ninto contact with. Teaching them basics like discipline, punctuality,
\ngetting to practice on time, dealing with other people, teamwork, and
\ngood sportsmanship.\u201d Four of the female participants believed that
\na coach should be a good example and help in the teaching of life lessons.
\nSam felt that a coach should be \u201ca little bit of everything.\u201d<\/p>\n

Discussion<\/strong><\/p>\n

The purpose of the present investigation was to explore a group of female
\nathletes\u2019 experiences of having female and male coaches. This comparison
\ndemonstrated that four of the six female athletes preferred a male coach,
\nincluding various differences of opinions of each coach.<\/p>\n

Discipline and Structure<\/em><\/p>\n

While men were reported to be more detailed in instruction and structured,
\nthe women were more lenient disciplinarians. This finding coincides with
\nMasin\u2019s (1998) results, which found that 75% of female athletes
\npreferred male coaches because of more perceived organization. The desire
\nfor this quality might exist because many female athletes want to be pushed
\nphysically, challenged in skill development, and feel the need for competition,
\nand they believe this can be achieved through a structured environment
\n(Osborne, 2002). Five of the female athletes in this study expressed a
\npositive perception of the discipline enforced by the male coaches.<\/p>\n

Personal Relationships<\/em><\/p>\n

A female athlete may benefit from a personal connection with the coach.
\nWhen coaching females, there is the need for warmth, empathy, and a sense
\nof humor (Burke, Peterson, & Nix, 1995; Grisaffe, Blom, & Burke,
\nin press) with the players (Osborne, 2002). Female high school and college
\nbasketball players ranked the coaching qualities of \u201crelating well
\nto athletes\u201d and understanding athletes\u2019 feelings\u201d as
\ntwo of the top three desirable characteristics, and female coaches rated
\nsignificantly higher than male coaches in demonstrating these qualities
\n(Molstad & Whitaker, 1987). Sabock and Kleinfelter (1987) and Simmons
\n(1997) found that female athletes were more inclined to disclose personal
\ninformation to a female coach. Many of the athletes in the present study
\nexperienced these traits from female coaches. Female coaches in this study
\nwere better at relating and more likely to establish a friendship. Although
\nthe athletes expressed a desire to bond with the coach, they indicated
\ndid not want favoritism to be shown toward any players. Further, many
\nfemale athletes thrive on self-satisfaction and the belief they are capable
\nof doing a certain task or drill, and can best achieve this through encouragement
\nfrom the coach (Osborne, 2002). The present findings indicated that female
\ncoaches were viewed as more encouraging and motivating through a greater
\nuse of positive feedback.<\/p>\n

Passivity and Aggressiveness<\/em><\/p>\n

Female athletes tended to be more acceptable of the male coaches\u2019
\nmentality than that of the female coaches’ mentality. Nine participants
\nin this study approved the authoritarian style of coaching utilized by
\nthe male coaches. Women may prefer this style of coaching due to cultural
\nexpectations of men in authority positions, male dominance in women\u2019s
\nsports, or the lack of female coaches as role models (Osborne, 2002).
\nAs with male athletes, female athletes want to be trained hard and challenged.
\nHowever, if coaches use an extreme \u201cin your face\u201d mentality,
\nsuch as constant yelling, the female athlete may be less receptive to
\nthis style (Osborne, 2002).<\/p>\n

Coach Preference<\/em><\/p>\n

Nine of the female athletes in the present study expressed a preference
\nfor male coaches, citing factors such as a greater level of knowledge,
\nknowing what it takes to be successful, and having more respect for him.
\nPrevious research (Parkhouse & Williams, 1986) has not shown a clear
\nconsensus as to whether female athletes prefer a male or a female coach
\n(Lirgg, Dibrezzo, & Smith, 1994; Osborne, 2002). Some of the literature
\nhas claimed that athletes may be more comfortable with male authority
\nfigures who could explain their perceptions (Frankl & Babbitt, 1998;
\nOsbourne, 2002; Whitaker & Molstad, 1985). Similarly, since men have
\nheld coaching positions for a longer period of time, athletes may have
\nmore confidence in their knowledge levels and coaching abilities (Sabock
\n& Kleinfelter, 1987). In the late 1980\u2019s and early 1990\u2019s,
\nmuch of the literature stated that female athletes preferred a male coach
\nbecause there was simply a lack of women in the profession (Osborne, 2002).
\nFurther, coach preference may depend on the gender of the athletes\u2019
\npresent coaches (Medwechuk & Crossman, 1994; Sabock & Kleinfelter,
\n1987). Since the majority of coaches have been male, this could help to
\nexplain the female athletes\u2019 preference toward male coaches.<\/p>\n

Caution must be taken in assuming that coach preference is due only
\nto gender.
\nAdditional factors exist that may influence athletes\u2019 perceptions
\nof coaches such as the success of the team (Williams & Parkhouse,
\n1988) or influence of current coach (Parkhouse & Williams, 1986).
\nFemale athletes who exhibited higher trait anxiety, higher state cognitive
\nand somatic anxiety, and lower state self-confidence have been shown to
\nhave more negative perceptions of coaches (Kenow & Williams, 1992;
\n1999). Lirgg, Dibrezzo, & Smith (1994) found that female athletes
\ncoached by females reported a greater desire to become head coaches than
\nthose coached by male coaches. Other personal attributes such as athlete
\nage (Burke, Peterson, & Nix, 1995; Whitaker & Molstad, 1988),
\nsocioeconomic status, ethnicity, and the athletes\u2019 level of skills
\nand abilities (Williams & Parkhouse,1988) may also impact athletes\u2019
\nexperiences with coaches. Longitudinal studies should be employed to more
\nthoroughly examine the influences that male and female coaches have on
\nathletes.<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Burke, K. L., Peterson, D., & Nix, C. L. (1995). The effects of the\u00a0coaches\u2019 use of humor on female volleyball players\u2019 evaluation\u00a0of their coaches. Journal of Sport Behavior, 18, 83-90.<\/li>\n
  2. Carpenter, L. J. & Acosta, V. (1991). Back to the future: Reform\u00a0with a woman\u2019s voice. Academe, 23-27.<\/li>\n
  3. Carron, A. V. & Bennett, B. B. (1977). Compatibility in the coach-athlete\u00a0dyad. Research Quarterly, 48, 671-679.<\/li>\n
  4. Felder, D. & Wishnietsky, D. (1990). Role conflict, coaching burnout,\u00a0and the reduction in the number of female interscholastic coaches. The\u00a0Physical Educator, 47, 7-13.<\/li>\n
  5. Frankl, D. & Babbitt, D. G. (1998). Gender bias: A study of high\u00a0school track & field athletes\u2019 perceptions of hypothetical male\u00a0and female head coaches. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21, 396-407.<\/li>\n
  6. Freeman, W. H. (2001). Physical Education and Sport. Boston: Allyn and\u00a0Bacon.<\/li>\n
  7. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming Qualitative Researchers. New York: Addison\u00a0Wesley Longman.<\/li>\n
  8. Greenleaf, C., Gould, D., & Dieffenbach, K. (2001). Factors influencing\u00a0Olympic performance: Interviews with Atlanta and Nagano U.S. Olympians.\u00a0Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 154-184.<\/li>\n
  9. Grisaffee, C., Blom, L. C., & Burke, K. L. (in press). The Effects\u00a0of Head and Assistant Coaches\u2019 Uses of Humor on Collegiate Soccer\u00a0Players\u2019 Evaluation of Their Coaches. Journal of Sport Behavior.<\/li>\n
  10. Kenow, L. J. & Williams, J. M. (1992). Relationship between anxiety,\u00a0self-confidence, and evaluation of coaching behaviors. The Sport Psychologist, 6, 344-357.<\/li>\n
  11. Kenow, L. & Williams, J. M. (1999). Coach-athlete compatibility and\u00a0athlete’s perception of coaching behaviors. Journal of Sport Behavior,\u00a022, 251 – 259.<\/li>\n
  12. Lirgg, C. D., Dibrezzo, R., & Smith, A. N. (1994). Influence of gender\u00a0of coach on perceptions of basketball and coaching self-efficacy and aspirations\u00a0of high school female basketball players. Women, Sport, and Physical Activity\u00a0Journal, 3, 1-14.<\/li>\n
  13. Masin, H. L. (1998). Men coaching women\u2026..Coach and Athletic Director,\u00a068, 16.<\/li>\n
  14. Medwechuk, N. & Crossman, J. (1994). Effects of gender bias on the\u00a0evaluation of male and female swim coaches\u2019. Perceptual and Motor\u00a0Skills, 78, 163-169.<\/li>\n
  15. Molstad, S. & Whitaker, G. (1987). Perceptions of female basketball\u00a0players regarding coaching qualities of males and females. Journal of\u00a0Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics, 2, 57-71.<\/li>\n
  16. Osborne, B. (2002). Coaching the female athlete. In John M. Silva III\u00a0& Diane E. Stevens (Eds)., Psychological foundations of sport (pp.\u00a0428 – 437). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.<\/li>\n
  17. Parkhouse, B. L. & Williams, J. M. (1986). Differential effects of\u00a0sex and status on evaluation of coaching ability. Research Quarterly for\u00a0Exercise and Sport, 57, 53-59.<\/li>\n
  18. Pastore, D. L. (1992). Two-year college coaches of women\u2019s teams:\u00a0Gender differences in coaching career selections. Journal of Sport Management,\u00a06, 179-190.<\/li>\n
  19. Sabock, R. J. & Kleinfelter, E. R. (1987). Should coaches be gendered?\u00a0Coaching Review, 10, 28-29.<\/li>\n
  20. Simmons, C. D. (1997). The effects of gender of coach on the psychosocial\u00a0development of college female student-athletes. Unpublished master\u2019s\u00a0thesis, University of Louisville.<\/li>\n
  21. Stewart, C. & Taylor, J. (2000). Why female athletes quit: Implications\u00a0for coach education. Physical Educator, 57, 170.<\/li>\n
  22. Udry, E., Gould, D., Bridges, D., & Tuffey, S. (1997). People helping\u00a0people? Examining the social ties of athletes coping with burnout and\u00a0injury stress. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19, 368-395.<\/li>\n
  23. Vernacchia, R. A., McGuire, R. T., Reardon, J. P., & Templin, D.\u00a0P. (2000). Psychosocial characteristics of Olympic track and field athletes.\u00a0International Journal of Sport Psychology, 31, 5-23.<\/li>\n
  24. Whitaker, G. & Molstad, S. (1985). Male coach\/female coach: A theoretical\u00a0analysis of the female sport experience. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 9, 14-25.<\/li>\n
  25. Whitaker, G. & Molstad, S. (1988). Role modeling and female athletes.\u00a0Sex Roles, 18, 555-566.<\/li>\n
  26. Williams, J. M. & Parkhouse, B. L. (1988). Social learning theory\u00a0as a foundation for examining sex bias in evaluation of coaches. Journal\u00a0of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10, 322-333.<\/li>\n
  27. Wrisberg, C. A. (1996). Quality of life for male and female athletes.\u00a0Quest, 48, 392-408.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Table 1
    \nMean Demographic Data of Female Athletes<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Participant
    \n(Pseudonym)<\/td>\n    		Sport(s)<\/td>\nYears of Experience<\/td>\nYears coached by a male<\/td>\nYears coached by a female<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Kelli C.<\/td>\nBasketball Soccer and
    \nSoftball<\/td>\n    		10<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Kelli M.<\/td>\nBasketball<\/td>\n11<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Carmen<\/td>\nSoccer<\/td>\n13<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Emily<\/td>\nSoccer<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Jennifer C.<\/td>\nGolf and Basketball<\/td>\n13<\/td>\n6 \u00bd<\/td>\n6 \u00bd<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Sam<\/td>\nSoccer and Basketball<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Lekeisha<\/td>\nBasketball<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Tyler<\/td>\nCross Country<\/td>\n11<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Misha<\/td>\nSoccer<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Kylie<\/td>\nSoftball<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Alexis<\/td>\nBasketball<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Natalie<\/td>\nTrack and Field<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Carmen<\/td>\nSoccer<\/td>\n13<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    Appendix<\/p>\n

    Interview Guide<\/em>
    \nThe initial question posed to participants: \u201cWhat do you think the\u00a0role of a coach should be?”<\/p>\n

    Following questions:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. What sport do you play?<\/li>\n
    2. When were you coached by a male and a female?<\/li>\n
    3. How many years were you coached by a male and a female?<\/li>\n
    4. In what setting did you have the male and female coach?<\/li>\n
    5. Which coach did you prefer the most?<\/li>\n
    6. Who do you think knew more about the sport? Why?<\/li>\n
    7. If you had daughters, whom would you want them to be coached by?
      \nWhy? Were there any differences\/ similarities between the male and female
      \ncoaches in regards to:<\/li>\n
    8. Training practices and evaluation performance?<\/li>\n
    9. Encouragement and motivation?<\/li>\n
    10. Punishments and commands?<\/li>\n
    11. Helping with personal problems and enjoyment?<\/li>\n
    12. Encouraging after mistakes and correcting behavior?<\/li>\n
    13. Coaching methods?<\/li>\n
    14. In an ideal world, what would you like to see in the world of female
      \nsports in regards to coaching?<\/li>\n
    15. In general, what are your thoughts about males and females coaching
      \nfemale athletes?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
      Submitted by: Melinda Frey, Daniel R. Czech, Rebecca G. Kent & Matthew Johnson<\/div>\n

      Abstract<\/p>\n

      Gender may be a mediating factor for relationship effectiveness between
      \n athletes and coaches (Lirgg, Dibrezzo, & Smith, 1994; Medwechuk &
      \n Crossman, 1994). Ironically, with the increase in participation of female
      \n athletes and sports that has occurred since Title IX, there has been a
      \n decrease in the number of female coaches over the past 30 years (Felder
      \n & Wishnietsky, 1990; Freeman, 2001; Pastore, 1992). The purpose of
      \n this study was to explore twelve female athletes’ perceptions and
      \n experiences of being coached by women and men. Semi-structured interviews
      \n revealed four major themes: discipline and structure, personal relationships,
      \n passivity and aggressiveness, and coach preference. Specifically, eight
      \n of the participants stated a preference for male coaches, yet differences
      \n were found when comparing various coaching qualities. Results are discussed
      \n in regards to overall sport experiences. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_options":[]},"categories":[290,295,291,296,294],"tags":[25,8,70,75],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4btio-41","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":148,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/student-athletes-perceptions-about-abuse-by-ncaa-division-ii-tennis-coaches\/","url_meta":{"origin":249,"position":0},"title":"Student-Athletes’ Perceptions About Abuse by NCAA Division II Tennis Coaches","date":"February 21, 2008","format":false,"excerpt":"Submitted by: Vicky-Lynn Martin, D.S.M. Abstract The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant difference existed between the perception of the National Collegiate Athletic Association male and female athletes regarding various types of abusive behaviors by their coaches. This research examined whether or not athletic departments in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6426,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/an-exploration-of-female-athletes-experiences-and-perceptions-of-male-and-female-coaches-ten-years-later\/","url_meta":{"origin":249,"position":1},"title":"An Exploration of Female Athletes\u2019 Experiences and Perceptions of Male and Female Coaches: Ten Years Later","date":"May 9, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors:Melissa Rima, Rory Weishaar, Brian McGladrey, Erica Pratt Corresponding Author:Brian McGladrey, Ph.D.400 E University WayEllensburg, WA 98926brian.mcgladrey@cwu.edu509-963-1972 Dr. Brian McGladrey is an assistant professor in the Department of Physical Education, School Health, and Movement Studies at Central Washington University in Ellensburg, Washington. An Exploration of Female Athletes\u2019 Experiences and Perceptions\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Research"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":3834,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/leadership-athletes-and-coaches-in-sport\/","url_meta":{"origin":249,"position":2},"title":"Leadership: Athletes and Coaches in Sport","date":"July 1, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Dr. Sharon P. Misasi*, Dr. Gary Morin and Lauren Kwasnowski Dr. Sharon P. Misasi is a Professor of Exercise Science at Southern Connecticut State University. Dr. Gary Morin is a Professor of Exercise Science, Assistant Athletic Trainer and Program Director of the Athletic Training Education Program. Lauren Kwasnowski is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"Univariate comparison of training questions by coaches for gender","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/Table-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":6002,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/influence-of-gender-on-perceptions-of-coaches-relationships-with-their-athletes\/","url_meta":{"origin":249,"position":3},"title":"The influence of gender on perceptions of coaches’ relationships with their athletes: A novel video-based methodology","date":"August 30, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Paula Murray(a), Rhiannon Lord(b), & Ross Lorimer(b) (a) Loughborough College, UK (b) Abertay University, UK Corresponding Author: Dr. Ross Lorimer Abertay University Dundee, UK, DD1 1RG Ross.Lorimer@Abertay.ac.uk +44 (0)1382 308426 The influence of gender on perceptions of coaches\u2019 relationships with their athletes: A novel video-based methodology ABSTRACT The aim\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Research"","img":{"alt_text":"Figure 1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Figure-1-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":234,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/the-effect-of-gender-opportunity-in-sports-on-the-priorities-and-aspirations-of-young-athletes\/","url_meta":{"origin":249,"position":4},"title":"The Effect of Gender Opportunity in Sports on the Priorities and Aspirations of Young Athletes","date":"March 2, 2006","format":false,"excerpt":"Submitted by: Dr. Kelly E. Flanagan & The United States Sports Academy Undergraduate Research Team: Claudette I. Baker, Melissa Fortin & Derrick V. Tinsley Abstract The role and importance of athletics in the lives of today’s male and female youth is analyzed in responses to a survey co-authored by a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Sports Management"","img":{"alt_text":"Figure 1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2006\/03\/Survey-Figure1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":5079,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/perceptions-of-ncaa-division-i-athletes-on-strength-training\/","url_meta":{"origin":249,"position":5},"title":"Perceptions of NCAA Division I Athletes on Strength Training","date":"May 25, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Joni M. Boyd, Ashley M. Andrews, Janet R. Wojcik, & Charles J. Bowers Corresponding Author: Joni M. Boyd, PhD Winthrop University 216L West Center Rock Hill, SC 29733 boydj@winthrop.edu 803-323-4936 Joni Boyd is an Assistant Professor of Exercise Science in the Department of Physical Education, Sport, and Human Performance\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Sport Training"","img":{"alt_text":"Table 1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/Table1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=249"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2666,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249\/revisions\/2666"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}