Passion in Sport Coach Athlete Relationship

8/6/2019 Passion in Sport Coach Athlete Relationship

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/passion-in-sport-coach-athlete-relationship 1/20

541

Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,2008, 30, 541-560

© 2008 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Passion in Sport: On the Qualityof the Coach–Athlete Relationship

Marc-André K. Lafrenière,1 Sophia Jowett,2 Robert J. Vallerand,1 Eric G. Donahue,1 and Ross Lorimer2

1Université du Québec à Montréal and 2Loughborough University

Vallerand et al. (2003) developed a dualistic model o passion, wherein two types o passion are proposed: harmonious (HP) and obsessive (OP) passion that predict adap-tive and less adaptive interpersonal outcomes, respectively. In the present research,we were interested in understanding the role o passion in the quality o coach–athleterelationships. Results o Study 1, conducted with athletes ( N = 157), revealed that HPpositively predicts a high-quality coach–athlete relationship, whereas OP was largelyunrelated to such relationships. Study 2 was conducted with coaches ( N = 106) andshowed that only HP positively predicted the quality o the coach–athlete relation-ship. Furthermore, these eects were ully mediated by positive emotions. Finally, the

quality o the coach–athlete relationship positively predicted coaches’ subjectivewell-being. Future research directions are discussed in light o the dualistic model o passion.

Keywords: passion, coach–athlete relationship, positive emotions

Lately, sport psychologists have expressed a growing interest in the coach–athlete dyad (Jowett & Poczwardowski, 2007; Mageau & Vallerand, 2003). Mutualtrust, respect, and support are deemed among the main aspects that contribute to

satisying and successul coach–athlete relationships (Jowett, 2007; Jowett &Cockerill, 2003; Poczwardowski, Barott, & Peregoy, 2002). Still, one is let won-dering about the psychological actors that allow both athletes and coaches toexperience high-quality coach–athlete relationships. We posit that passion (Vall-erand et al., 2003) corresponds to such a psychological actor. Indeed, i both thecoach and the athlete are passionate toward their sport, this could lead them todevelop a positive coach–athlete relationship at the very least because they sharea love or their activity and may both ully devote themselves to reach high levelso perormance. Thus, the purpose o this article was to investigate the role o pas-sion in the quality o coach–athlete relationships.

Larenière, Vallerand, and Donahue are with the Département de Psychologie, Laboratoire deRecherche sur le Comportement Social, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada;Jowett and Lorimer are with the School o Sport & Exercise Sciences, Loughborough University,Loughborough, U.K.



542 Lafrenière et al.

The Dualistic Model of Passion

The Concept of Passion

In line with sel-determination theory (Deci, & Ryan, 2000), the dualistic modelo passion (Vallerand et al., 2003; Vallerand & Houlort, 2003; Vallerand &Miquelon, 2007) proposes that people engage in activities to ulll their basicpsychological needs o autonomy (a sense o personal volition), competence(interacting eectively with the environment), and relatedness (a positive recipro-cal connection with others). However, not all activities are evenly successul insatisying these basic psychological needs and thereore individuals are inclinedto develop a preerence or certain activities. O these activities, only a handulwill be perceived as particularly important and enjoyable, and will develop into a

sel-dening activity; these activities become passionate activities.In line with the above, Vallerand et al. (2003) conceptualize passion as astrong inclination toward a sel-dening activity that one likes and nds impor-tant, and in which one invests a signicant amount o time and energy. Moreover,the dualistic model o passion (Vallerand et al., 2003) posits two distinct types o passion, harmonious and obsessive passion, which can be dierentiated in termso how the passionate activity has been internalized into one’s identity. Identityreers to an individual’s relevant characteristics and experiences, as well as thesocial and sel-regulation unctions that such eatures serve (see Schlenker, 1985).Harmonious passion reers to a strong desire to engage in the activity reely and

results rom an autonomous internalization o the activity into the person’s iden-tity. This process occurs when individuals have willingly accepted the activity asimportant. With harmonious passion, the activity occupies an important but notoverwhelming space in one’s identity. Consequently, harmonious passion or anactivity should not instigate confict with one’s other lie domains and shouldallow the person to engage in the passionate activity with an openness that isavorable to positive experiences (Hodgins & Knee, 2002).

Conversely, obsessive passion results rom a controlled internalization o theactivity into one’s identity. This process originates rom intrapersonal and/orinterpersonal pressure either because particular contingencies are attached to theactivity, such as sel-esteem, or because the excitement derived rom activityengagement becomes uncontrollable. While the controlled internalization leadsthe activity to be part o the person’s identity, the values and regulations related tothe activity are then only partially internalized in identity (see Vallerand, 2008). Inother words, obsessive passion does represent an important part o one’s identity;however individuals with obsessive passion are not completely in control o theactivity since it is not properly integrated. Thereore, individuals with an obses-sive passion experience an uncontrollable urge to engage in their activity. As aresult, they run the risk o experiencing confict with other lie domains and nega-

tive consequences during and ater engagement in the passionate activity.Research has provided empirical support or the passion conceptualization.Results rom exploratory and conrmatory actor analyses supported the two-actor structure o the Passion Scale (Rousseau, Vallerand, Ratelle, Mageau, &Provencher, 2002; Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1; Vallerand et al., 2006, Study 1).



The Coach–Athlete Relationship 543

Moreover, results using the Passion Scale demonstrated that both types o passionwere positively correlated with the activity being perceived as part o their identityas measured by the Inclusion in the Other Sel Scale (Aron et al., 1992). Further-

more, harmonious passion and obsessive passion have been ound to be positivelycorrelated with measures o activity valuation and measures o the activity beingperceived as a passion. However, the two types o passion have been ound to leadto dierent predictions with respect to various outcomes (Vallerand et al., 2003,Study 1). Thus, harmonious passion was positively correlated with general posi-tive aect and psychological adjustment indices (Rousseau & Vallerand, 2003,2008; Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 2; Vallerand et al., 2006, Study 3; Vallerand etal., 2007, 2008a). Moreover, harmonious passion has been ound to be positivelyassociated with positive experiences during activity engagement such as positiveemotions and fow (Mageau & Vallerand, 2007; Mageau, Vallerand, Rousseau,Ratelle, & Provencher, 2005; Rousseau & Vallerand, 2003, 2008; Vallerand et al.,2003, Study 1; Vallerand et al., 2006, Study 2). On the other hand, obsessive pas-sion was positively correlated with negative emotions during activity engagement(Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1; Vallerand et al., 2006, Study 2), rumination whenprevented rom engaging in the passionate activity (Ratelle et al., 2004; Vallerandet al., 2003, Study 1), and rigid persistence (Rip, Fortin, & Vallerand, 2006; Vall-erand et al., 2003, Studies 3, 4).

Passion and Related Constructs

The concept o passion has some resemblance with other concepts such as thoseo intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and fow (Csikszentmi-halyi, 1990).

Passion shares some similarity with intrinsic motivation, as both involveinterest and liking toward the activity. However, intrinsically motivated activitiesare typically not seen as being internalized in the person’s identity (Deci & Ryan,2000). Thus, passion and intrinsic motivation represent dierent constructs. Fur-thermore, extrinsic motivation does not entail perorming the activity out o enjoy-ment, but to obtain something outside the activity. Thereore, the undamentaldierence between extrinsic motivation and passion is the lack o liking or theactivity. Vallerand et al. (2003, Study 2) empirically demonstrated the indepen-dence o passion, intrinsic motivation, and extrinsic motivation by showing thatharmonious and obsessive passion predicted changes in general positive and nega-tive aect, respectively, over and beyond intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Over-all, it seems that although passion and motivation are both motivational concepts,they represent distinct constructs.

The concept o fow represents a state o intense immersion in an activity(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). In line with sel-determination theory, it is posited thatemotions are a consequence o passion. It would be expected that harmonious

passion should lead to higher levels o fow because the autonomous internalizationo the activity leads the person to engage in the task in a more fexible manner andthus to experience task engagement more ully. Thus, fow is conceptualized as aconsequence o passion, and past research (Vallerand et al., 2003; Study 1) hasshown that it results mainly rom harmonious passion. In sum, while the concept




o passion does share some conceptual similarities with other constructs, it alsodiers rom them in signicant ways both theoretically and empirically.

Passion and Interpersonal Relationships

The dualistic model o passion (Vallerand et al., 2003) suggests that having anobsessive passion toward an activity should lead to confict in other lie domains,whereas this should not be the case or harmonious passion. Several studies haveprovided support or this hypothesis. For instance, Vallerand et al. (2003, Study 1)showed that only obsessive passion was positively associated with confict betweenthe passionate activity and other activities. A subsequent study (Séguin-Lévesque,Laliberté, Pelletier, Vallerand, & Blanchard, 2003) ound that controlling or theamount o time that individuals engaged in the Internet, obsessive passion or the

Internet positively predicted confict with one’s romantic partner, whereas harmo-nious passion was negatively related to confict. Similarly, a study conducted withEnglish soccer ans (Vallerand et al., 2008b, Study 3) showed that obsessive pas-sion or being a soccer an predicted confict between one’s passion or soccer andone’s romantic relationship that, in turn, predicted lower quality o couple rela-tionships. Conversely, harmonious passion was unrelated to confict with one’sspouse.

The above ndings provide support or the dualistic model o passion regard-ing the role o passion in interpersonal outcomes experienced outside the passion-ate activity. However, past studies have not addressed whether one’s passion can

infuence relationships in the purview o the passionate activity. It is believed thatthe two types o passion should infuence dierently the quality o the relationshipin the activity. Specically, harmonious passion is expected to positively infuencethe coach–athlete relationship, whereas obsessive passion is hypothesized to beeither unrelated or negatively related to the relationship. Further, it is posited thatthis eect is in large part mediated by positive emotions. Fredrickson (2001;Waugh & Fredrickson, 2006) demonstrated that the experience o positive emo-tions in a given context is conducive to high-quality relationships. Presumablybecause they lead people to open up to others and to engage in positive interper-sonal behaviors, such as smiling and connecting with others (Aron, Norman,Aron, McKenna, & Heyman, 2000), positive emotions should indirectly contrib-ute to the development o high-quality relationships. Given that harmonious pas-sion positively predicts the experience o positive emotions during engagement inthe passionate activity (Mageau et al., 2005; Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1; Vall-erand et al., 2006, Studies 2, 3), it can be hypothesized that harmonious passionshould indirectly lead to high-quality relationships within the passionate activitythrough the experience o situational positive emotions. Conversely, because itleads to the experience o ewer positive emotions (Mageau et al., 2005; Vallerandet al., 2003, Study 1; Vallerand et al., 2006) and even at times to negative emotions(Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1), obsessive passion is expected to be either unre-lated or even negatively related to the quality o interpersonal behaviors. Finally,




it was hypothesized that harmonious passion and obsessive passion would bepositively correlated because both entail a love or the activity and a strong iden-tication to it.

The Present Research

The purpose o the present research was to explore the role o harmonious andobsessive passion in the quality o coach–athlete relationships within two cultures(British and French Canadian). Study 1 ocused on the relationship between pas-sion and the quality o the coach–athlete relationship rom the athletes’ perspec-tive. It was posited that harmonious passion would acilitate the quality o thecoach–athlete relationship and that obsessive passion would be either unrelated or

negatively related to the quality o relationships. Study 2 sought to replicate Study1’s ndings rom the coaches’ perspective. Furthermore, Study 2 tested the medi-ating role o positive emotions in the relation between passion and the quality o coach–athlete relationships. In line with past research (Mageau et al., 2005; Rous-seau & Vallerand, 2003, 2008; Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1; Vallerand et al.,2006, Studies 2 and 3), it was hypothesized that harmonious passion or coachingshould lead to the experience o situational positive emotions, which were expectedto be conducive to high-quality coach–athlete relationships. On the other hand,obsessive passion was expected to be either unrelated or even negatively related tosituational positive emotions and thereore to be either unrelated or negativelyrelated to high-quality coach–athlete relationships. Finally, the role o qualitycoach–athlete relationships in coaches’ subjective well-being was also assessed.In line with theory and research on the need or relatedness and relationships(Baumeister & Leary, 1995; McClelland, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2007), it washypothesized that experiencing positive coach–athlete relationships would posi-tively predict subjective well-being in coaches.

Study 1

Study 1 ocused on the role o passion in the coach–athlete relationship rom theathletes’ perspective. It was hypothesized that harmonious passion would posi-tively predict high-quality relationships with coaches, while obsessive passionwould be less predictive o the quality o relationships. More specically, it wasposited that both types o passion would be positively related to commitment tothe relationship, since the passionate activity is very important and central to one’sidentity. However, because harmonious passion is generally associated with theexperience o positive emotions, it was posited that harmonious passion wouldacilitate the coach–athlete relationship the most. Conversely, obsessive passionwas expected to be either unrelated or even negatively related to the other dimen-sions o the coach–athlete relationship.




Method

Participants

The participants were 157 British college athletes (81 males and 76 emales)engaged in popular team sports (e.g., hockey, rugby, netball). The average age o the participants was 20.23 years (SD = 1.74 years). The participants classiedtheir perormance level as ollows: club level ( N = 10; 6%), county level ( N = 8;5%), university level ( N = 106; 68%), national level ( N = 13; 8%), and interna-tional level ( N = 20; 13%).

Measures

Passion Toward Sport. Athletes’ passion toward sport was assessed using thePassion Scale (Vallerand et al., 2003), an instrument composed o two six-itemsubscales assessing harmonious and obsessive passion (sample item or harmoni-ous passion: “My sport [e.g., rugby] is in harmony with other activities in mylie”; sample item or obsessive passion: “I have diculties controlling my urgeto do my sport [e.g., rugby]”). This scale was completed on a 7-point Likert scaleranging rom 1 (not agree at all) to 7 (very strongly agree). The Passion Scale hasbeen used in several studies and has shown high levels o validity and reliability(see Ratelle et al., 2004; Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1), including with athletes(Vallerand et al., 2003, Studies 2 and 3; Vallerand et al., 2006). In the current

study, the subscales were ound to have satisactory internal consistency withCronbach alphas o .80 and .83 or the harmonious and obsessive passion sub-scales, respectively.

The Coach–Athlete Relationship. The Coach-Athlete Relationship Question-naire (CART-Q; Jowett & Ntoumanis, 2004) was used to assess the athletes’ directperspective and the meta-perspective (Jowett & Clark-Carter, 2006) o the qualityo the relationship with their coach. The direct perspective reers to how athletesperceive the relationship with their coach (e.g., “I like my coach”), whereas themeta-perspective reers to how athletes believe their coach perceives their rela-

tionship (e.g., “My coach likes me”). Each perspective is composed o three sub-scales. Commitment is a our-item subscale that assesses members’ intentions tomaintain the athletic partnership over time (sample item or the direct perspective:“I am committed to my coach”; sample item or the meta-perspective: “My coachis committed to me”). Closeness is a three-item subscale that assesses the aec-tive tone o the relationship (sample item or the direct perspective: “I respect mycoach”; sample item or the meta-perspective: “My coach respects me”). Comple-mentarity is a our-item subscale that assesses cooperative actions (sample itemor the direct perspective: “When I am coached by my coach, I am ready to do mybest”; sample item or the meta-perspective: “My coach is ready to do his/her best

when he/she coaches me”). The Coach-Athlete Questionnaire was completed ona 7-point Likert scale ranging rom 1 (not agree at all) to 7 (very strongly agree).In the current study, all subscales demonstrated an acceptable internal consistencyranging rom .70 to .82 (see Table 2).




Procedure

Athletes were contacted either directly or indirectly via their coaches, through a

variety o means (e.g., e-mail, letter) and invited to participate in the study. Pro-spective participants were inormed about the overall aims o the study and therequirements or participation. Participants who consented to participate weresupplied with a questionnaire at the beginning o a training session; the question-naire was then completed and collected immediately.

Results and Discussion

There was no missing data in the current study. Inspection o the skewness and

kurtosis indices or all variables proved normal (values ranged rom −.448 to .423or skewness and rom −.619 to .698 or kurtosis). Pearson correlations are pre-sented in Table 1 and means, standard deviations, and reliability coecients arepresented in Table 2. In light o the signicant correlation between the two typeso passion (r = .41, p < .05) and past research on passion (Vallerand et al., 2003;Vallerand et al., 2006), partial correlations1 were conducted (see Table 2). Whencontrolling or obsessive passion, harmonious passion was signicantly and posi-tively correlated with all dimensions o the CART-Q. On the other hand, whencontrolling or harmonious passion, obsessive passion was signicantly and posi-tively correlated with only direct commitment and negatively correlated with

meta-complementarity.The present ndings provided support or the initial hypotheses. As expected,harmonious passion positively predicted all dimensions o a quality relationshipwith one’s coach. Moreover, obsessive passion was only positively related todirect commitment and negatively related to meta-complementarity. It would thusappear that harmonious passion is associated with higher quality coach–athleterelationships than is obsessive passion.

Study 2

The purpose o Study 2 was to pursue the investigation o the role o passion inthe coach–athlete relationship while making several modications. First, whereasStudy 1 looked at the athlete’s perspective, Study 2 explored the coach’s percep-tion o the coach–athlete relationship. Second, we sought to uncover the mediat-ing process involved in the relation between passion and the quality o the coach–athlete relationship. It was posited that harmonious passion or coaching shouldlead to the experience o situational positive emotions, which should be conduciveto high-quality coach–athlete relationships. Fredrickson (2001) demonstrated thatthe experience o situational positive aect is conducive to high quality o rela-

tionships because it acilitates interpersonal behaviors (e.g., smiling) that are con-tributing to the development o positive relationships. It was thus posited thatpositive emotions should mediate the relationship between harmonious passionand the quality o coach–athlete relationships. On the contrary, obsessive passion



548

T a b l e 1

C o r r

e l a t i o n M a t r i x I n v o l v i n g

A l l V a r i a b l e s F r o m S

t u

d y 1 ( N = 1 5 7 )

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1 . H a r m o n i o u s P a s s i o n

0 . 4 1 * *

0 . 2 8 * *

0 . 3 5 * *

0 . 3 8 * *

0 . 2 0 * *

0 . 2 5 *

0

. 3 2 * *

2 . O b s e s s i v e P a s s i o n

0 . 3 3 * *

0 . 2 2 * *

0 . 1 3

0 . 1 3

0 . 0 7

− 0

. 0 7

3 . D i r e c t C o m m

i t m e n t

0 . 6 6 * *

0 . 6 1 * *

0 . 7 2 * *

0 . 5 4 * *

0

. 4 6 * *

4 . D i r e c t C l o s e n

e s s

0 . 7 6 * *

0 . 5 2 * *

0 . 5 6 * *

0

. 6 2 * *

5 . D i r e c t C o m p l e m e n t a r i t y

0 . 4 7 * *

0 . 5 8 * *

0

. 6 5 * *

6 . M e t a - C o m m i t m e n t

0 . 7 2 * *

0

. 5 9 * *

7 . M e t a - C l o s e n e s s

0

. 7 6 * *

8 . M e t a - C o m p l e

m e n t a r i t y

* p < . 0 5 , * * p < . 0 1 .



549

T a b l e 2

M e a

n s , S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s , R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n

t s , a n d P a r t i a l C o r r e l a t i o n s B e t w e e n t h e S u b s c a l e s

o f t h e C A R T - Q

a n d H a r m o n i o u s a n d

O b s e s s i v e P a s s i o n F r o

m S

t u d y 1 ( N = 1 5 7 )

M

S D

H P

O

P

H a r m o n i o u s p a s

s i o n ( H P )

5 . 0 1

0 . 8 9

0 . 8 0

—

—

O b s e s s i v e p a s s i o n ( O P )

3 . 6 8

1 . 3 0

0 . 8 3

—

—

D i r e c t c o m m i t m

e n t

4 . 9 4

0 . 9 3

0 . 7 0

0 . 1 7 *

0 . 2 4 *

D i r e c t c l o s e n e s s

5 . 9 1

0 . 7 5

0 . 8 2

0 . 3 0 *

− 0 . 0 9

D i r e c t c o m p l e m

e n t a r i t y

5 . 6 9

0 . 7 3

0 . 7 3

0 . 3 6 *

− 0 . 0 3

M e t a - c o m m i t m e n t

4 . 5 2

1 . 0 1

0 . 8 0

0 . 1 6 *

0 . 0 5

M e t a - c l o s e n e s s

5 . 1 4

0 . 8 4

0 . 7 7

0 . 2 5 *

− 0 . 0 4

M e t a - c o m p l e m e

n t a r i t y

5 . 3 8

0 . 7 7

0 . 7 8

0 . 3 6 *

− 0 . 1 7 *

N o t e . P a r t i a l c o r r e l a

t i o n s i n v o l v i n g H P a n d r e l a t i o n s h i p d i m e n s i o n s c o n t r o l o r O P , w h i l e c o r r e l a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g O P a n d r

e l a t i o n s h i p d i m e n s i o n s c o n t r o l o r H P .

* p < . 0 5 .




should be either unrelated or negatively related to the quality o coach–athleterelationships, because it is usually unrelated to positive emotions (Mageau et al.,2005; Ratelle et al., 2004; Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1). Finally, we believed

that a successul and ullling coach–athlete relationship should have positiveoutcomes or the coach’s subjective well-being. In line with sel-determinationtheory (Ryan & Deci, 2007), and other need theories (see Baumeister & Leary,1995; McClelland, 1985), it was expected that a gratiying coach–athlete relation-ship should satisy the need or relatedness (Ryan, 1995), which is expected to beconducive to higher subjective well-being. Consequently, a model was proposedin which harmonious passion should positively predict positive emotions, whichin turn should be conducive to high-quality coach–athlete relationships. Subse-quently, satisying coach–athlete relationships should be contributing to highersubjective well-being. On the other hand, obsessive passion should be unrelated topositive emotions and to the quality o coach–athlete relationships.

Method

Participants

The participants were 106 French-Canadian coaches (95 males, 9 emales, and 2unspecied) engaged in one o several sports (e.g., gymnastics, basketball, oot-

ball). The mean age o the participants was 35.48 years (SD = 10.83 years). Onaverage, coaches engaged in coaching or 14.04 hr per week (SD = 7.96 hr) andhad been coaching or 5.77 years (SD = 6.15 years). The coaches were certiedby the National Coaching Certication Program o Canada (NCCP) as ollows:not certied ( N = 2; 1.9%), level 1 ( N = 12; 11.3%), level 2 ( N = 55; 51.9%), level3 (recommended or national competition; N = 30; 28.3%), and level 4 ( N = 2;1.9%).

Measures

Passion for Coaching. Coaches’ passion was measured using the Passion Scale(Vallerand et al., 2003). Given that the Passion Scale was used or the rst timewith coaches, a conrmatory actor analysis (CFA) was conducted in the currentstudy with LISREL 8.8 (Jöreskog, & Sörbom, 1996). In light o the relatively lownumber o participants, parcels were used to create six indicators by combining 2items rom the same subscale (see Kline, 2005). Results conrmed the two-actorstructure o the Passion Scale, 2(d = 8, N = 106) = 14.04, p > .05; CFI = .97,RMSEA = .09, SRMR = .06, GFI = .96, NFI = .94. Internal reliability coecientswere .83 and .85 or the harmonious and obsessive passion subscales,respectively.

Situational Positive Emotions. Coaches’ situational positive emotions wereassessed using three items assessing positive emotions (e.g., “In general during agame, I am happy”) taken rom Barrett and Russell (1998). The scale was com-pleted on a 7-point Likert scale ranging rom 1 (not agree at all) to 7 (very stronglyagree). The internal reliability coecient was 87.




The Coach–Athlete Relationship. The Interpersonal Relationship Quality Scale(Senécal, Vallerand, & Vallières, 1992) was employed to assess the quality o thecoach–athlete relationship. The instrument consists o our items (e.g., “In gen-

eral, your relationships with your players are satisying”) and was assessed on a5-point Likert scale ranging rom 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). The internal reli-ability coecient was .85.

Satisfaction With Life. This variable was measured using our items (e.g., “Ingeneral, my lie is close to my ideal.”) rom the Satisaction with Lie Scale (Blais,Vallerand, Pelletier, & Brière, 1989). The scale was completed on a 7-point Likertscale ranging rom 1 (not agree at all) to 7 (very strongly agree). The internal reli-ability coecient was .89.

General Positive and Negative Affect. Coaches’ aect generally experienced inlie was assessed using the short PANAS scales (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen,1988), an instrument composed o two subscales consisted o ve adjectivesassessing positive aect (e.g., proud) and ve adjectives assessing negative aect(e.g., nervous). There was no redundant aect between the present scale and themeasure o situational positive emotions. This scale was completed on a 7-pointLikert scale ranging rom 1 (not agree at all) to 7 (very strongly agree). The inter-nal reliability coecients were .85 and .83 or positive and negative aect,respectively.

ProcedureParticipation was voluntary. Participants completed the questionnaire through avariety o means. Coaches were met beore a competition or a coach clinic. Eachquestionnaire contained a consent orm and all participants were explained thegeneral purpose o the study directly by the test administrator. Some o the ques-tionnaires were completed in the presence o the test administrator, and otherswere completed at home in the absence o the test administrator and then sent bymail in a prestamped envelope.

Results and Discussion

Missing values were replaced with the mean o the valid answers to other scaleitems or the same individual. Inspection o the skewness and kurtosis indices orall variables in the model proved to be normal (values ranged rom −.326 to .423or skewness and rom −1.062 to −.166 or kurtosis). Means, standard deviations,and Pearson correlations are presented in Table 3. The hypothesized model wastested using path analysis (i.e., a structural model with observed variables) withLISREL 8.8 (Jöreskog, & Sörbom, 1996). They were no univariate or multivariateoutliers in the current study. All bivariate scatter plots were linear and homosce-dastic. Thereore, the assumption o multivariate normality was met (see Kline,2005). The covariance matrix served as database or the path analysis and themethod o estimation was maximum likelihood. The model was composed o twoexogenous variables (i.e., harmonious and obsessive passion toward coaching)and three endogenous variables (i.e., situational positive emotions, interpersonal



552

T a

b l e 3

M e a n s , S t a n d a r

d D e v i a t i o n s , a n d C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x I n v o l v i n g

A l l V a r i a b l e s

F r

o m S

t u d y 2 ( N = 1 0 6 )

M

S D

2

3

4

5

H

a r m o n i o u s p a s s i o n ( 1 )

5 . 4 5

0 . 8 8

. 2 5 *

. 5 8 *

*

. 3 2 * *

. 3 1 * *

O

b s e s s i v e p a s s i o n ( 2 )

2 . 9 4

1 . 4 0

. 1 3

. 1 2

. 1 5

S

i t u a t i o n a l p o s i t i v e e m o t i o n s ( 3 )

2 . 4 7

0 . 6 3

. 4 4 * *

. 3 1 * *

I n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p q u a l i t y ( 4 )

3 . 3 3

0 . 4 4

. 5 0 * *

S

u b j e c t i v e w e l l - b e i n g ( 5 ) a

0 . 0 0

0 . 6 3

a T h e m e a n r e f e c t s a s t a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e .

* p < . 0 5 , * * p < . 0 1 .



553

F i g u r e 1 — R e s u l t s o t h e p a t h a n a l y s i s o t h e

p r o p o s e d m o d e l . A l l p a r a m e t e

r s a r e s i g n i c a n t a t p < . 0 1 .




relationship quality, and subjective well-being). Moreover, in line with Diener’s(2000) denition o subjective well-being, an index was created by combiningcoaches’ lie satisaction with their general aect rom the PANAS scales (e.g.,

see Vallerand et al., 2006). Consequently, scores or negative aect were reversed,and then all three variables were standardized and added together. This index(alpha = .75) was used in the proposed model. Paths were specied according tothe hypotheses o the theoretical model.2 Results o the path analysis revealed asatisactory t o the model to the data. The chi-square was not signicant, 2(d = 6, N = 106) = 4.82, p > .05, and the other t indices were acceptable, CFI = 1.00,RMSEA = .00, SRMR = .07, GFI = .98, NFI = .96, thereore indicating goodmodel t.

As shown in Figure 1, the estimated path between harmonious passion andsituational positive emotions ( = .58) was signicant. Moreover, the estimatedpath between situational positive emotions and interpersonal relationship qualitywas signicant ( = .44). Finally, the estimated path between the quality o coach–athlete relationships and subjective well-being was also signicant ( = .50). ASobel test was conducted to conrm the signicance o the mediation o positiveemotions between harmonious passion and quality o coach–athlete relationships.Results revealed a signicant Sobel test (z = 4.10, p < .01), thus conrming thatthe mediation eect o positive emotions was signicant. Moreover, a regressionanalysis with standardized harmonious passion ( = .082, p > .05) and positiveemotions ( = .399, p < .05) variables and their interaction term ( = .080, p > .05)as predictors o the quality o the coach–athlete relationship was conducted. Therelationship between harmonious passion and the quality o coach–athlete rela-tionships was no longer signicant. Thereore, the mediation was ull. Then, asecond Sobel test was conducted to conrm the signicance o the mediation o quality o coach–athlete relationships between positive emotions and subjectivewell-being. Results revealed a signicant Sobel test (z = 3.78, p < .01). Thus, themediation eect o quality o coach–athlete relationships was signicant. Further-more, a regression analysis with standardized positive emotions ( = .195, p <.05) and quality o coach–athlete relationships ( = .356, p < .05) variables andtheir interaction term ( = −.076, p > .05) as predictors o subjective well-being

was conducted. However, the relationship between positive emotions and subjec-tive well-being was still signicant. Thereore, the mediation was partial.To ensure that the hypothesized model provided the best t indices, seven

meaningul alternative models were tested. These models were chosen becausethey were theoretically or statistically more plausible than other possible models.Results showed that most o these models had unacceptable ts and none hadbetter t indices than the proposed model.3 Thus, overall, the present ndingsprovided support or our hypothesized model.

General DiscussionThe purpose o the present research was to investigate the role o passion in thecoach–athlete relationship in two studies. It was hypothesized that harmoniouspassion would be positively associated to the quality o the coach–athlete relation-ship and that obsessive passion would be either unrelated or negatively related to




the quality o relationships. It was also posited that this eect would be mediatedby the experience o situational positive emotions. These hypotheses were sup-ported. First, results rom Study 1, conducted with athletes, revealed that harmo-

nious passion was associated with high-quality coach–athlete relationships. Con-versely, obsessive passion was generally unrelated to the quality o thecoach–athlete relationship, although it was positively related to commitment andnegatively related to meta-complementarity. Secondly, results o Study 2, con-ducted with coaches, replicated Study 1’s ndings. In addition, results rom thepath analysis conrmed the mediating role o positive emotions between harmo-nious passion and the quality o coach–athlete relationships as well as that o thequality o coach–athlete relationships between positive emotions and coaches’subjective well-being. These ndings lead to a number o implications.

Passion and Interpersonal Relationships

A rst implication is that passion matters with respect to the coach–athlete rela-tionship. Results o two studies showed that harmonious passion was positivelyassociated with high-quality coach–athlete relationships, whereas obsessive pas-sion was largely unrelated to such relationships. In addition, this conclusion wassupported rom both the coaches’ and athletes’ perspectives within two cultures(British and French Canadian). O major interest are the results o Study 1 thatshowed that although obsessively passionate athletes are committed to the rela-tionship with their coach, at the same time they view their coach as being uncoop-erative. It seems paradoxical that these athletes would be committed to a nonopti-mal relationship with their coach. However, these ndings are in line with thedualistic model o passion, which posits that obsessive passion leads to rigid per-sistence to situations (and in this case to relationships) that may be less than adap-tive (see Vallerand et al., 2003, Studies 3 and 4). Specically, rigid commitmentresulting rom obsessive passion can lead to persistence in a relationship eventhough some important negative consequences can be derived rom such a rela-tionship (e.g., rustration or even low levels o subjective well-being as shown inStudy 2). Thereore, the results rom Study 1 demonstrated that harmonious pas-sion positively predicts high-quality coach–athlete relationship, whereas obses-sive passion was predictive o a less-than-optimal coach–athlete relationship.Results rom Study 2 also supported this conclusion rom the coach’s perspective,as harmonious passion was positively related to the quality o the coach–athleterelationship, whereas obsessive passion was unrelated to it. These conclusions arethus in line with those o previous research (Séguin-Lévesque et al., 2003; Valler-and et al., 2008b, Study 3) that ound that having a harmonious passion is avor-able, whereas obsessive passion was unbenecial to relationships outside the pas-sionate activity. However, the present ndings extend these by showing that sucheects generalize to relationships within the purview o the passionate activity.

Positive Emotions as a Mediating Process

Results o Study 2 revealed that harmonious passion indirectly predicts high-qual-ity relationships within the passionate activity through the experience o situa-tional positive emotions as posited by Fredrickson (2001; Waugh & Fredrickson,




2006). It would appear that harmonious passion leads individuals to engage intheir passionate activity in a fexible manner because it is well integrated in theidentity. Such a orm o activity engagement leads to a greater openness to one’s

immediate environment and acilitates the experience o positive emotions duringactivity engagement (Mageau et al., 2005; Vallerand et al., 2003; Vallerand et al.,2006). These emotions then instigate interpersonal behaviors such as smiling,positive sharing o the activity, connection, and openness to others (Aron et al.,2000). Finally, such behaviors should create conditions that are conducive to posi-tive interpersonal relationships. The present ndings thus support the broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 2001) by demonstrating that the experience o positive aect is conducive to high-quality relationships. The results o Study 2also showed that obsessive passion was associated neither with positive emotionsnor to the quality o the coach–athlete relationships. Future research is needed todetermine whether situational negative emotions engendered by obsessive passion(Vallerand et al., 2003, Study 1; Vallerand et al., 2006, Study 2) would underminethe coach–athlete relationship. In addition, since the model tested in Study 2 wasobtained with only coaches, it should be replicated with athletes to determine i italso generalizes to this population.

It should also be noted that the present results revealed that high-qualitycoach–athlete relationships lead to higher subjective well-being. Moreover, onlyharmonious passion was conducive to optimal relationships which benet coachesin terms o subjective well-being. Accordingly, the present ndings are in linewith sel-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2007) and Baumeister and Leary’sneed to belong (1995), which postulate that ullling relationships are contribut-ing to higher subjective well-being. These ndings are in line with past researchon the role o passion in subjective well-being (Rousseau & Vallerand, 2003, inpress; Vallerand et al., 2007). However, they underscore the benecial role thatpositive emotions and quality o meaningul relationships, such as those withone’s athletes, play in the process.

Limitations

Some limitations o the present research need to be underscored. First, the corre-lational design used in both studies does not allow us to iner causal inerences.Study 2 proposed a model in which all variables were concurrently measured.Thereore, it is impossible to determine the directionality o causality with respectto the proposed model. Consequently, researchers should try to replicate the pres-ent ndings using experimental designs to clearly establish the directionality o the eect. Second, both studies took place only at one point in time. It would beimportant to conduct longitudinal or prospective research to determine the role o passion in predicting the development o the coach–athlete relationship. Third, the

sample o Study 2 contained a large disproportion o men ( N = 95) and women ( N = 9). This drawback did not permit us to investigate the issue o gender dier-ences. Future research should look into this issue. Fourth, in Study 2, we onlyassessed one type o emotions. Future research should evaluate a broader range o emotions (see Yik, Russel, & Feldman Barrett, 1999) to expand our understanding




o the role o dierent emotions in mediating the relation between passion and thequality o relationships. Finally, in the present research, all variables were reportedby the participants. Future research should replicate the present ndings while

using objective measures o the quality o relationships (e.g., the Coaching Behav-ior Assessment System; Smith, Smoll, & Curtis, 1979) rom both the coaches’ andthe athletes’ perspectives.

In sum, the ndings rom the present research suggest that passion matterswith respect to the coach–athlete relationship. It appears that harmonious passionpredicts better coach–athlete relationships than obsessive passion. Moreover, thisprocess is mediated by the experience o positive emotions and seems to contrib-ute to coaches’ higher levels o subjective well-being. To return to the introduc-tory paragraphs, it would then appear that passion does indeed represent a crucialactor to consider when trying to predict the quality o coach–athlete relation-ships. Future research is needed to more rmly establish when each type o pas-sion may aect the coach–athlete relationship, and identiy the nature o the psy-chological processes mediating such eects.

Notes

1. We conducted regression analyses with standardized harmonious and obsessive passion

variables and their interaction term as predictors o all subscales o the CART-Q (Jowett &

Ntoumanis, 2004). Results were identical to the partial correlations and no interaction terms

were signifcant.

2. The model was initially tested with all possible paths between the model’s variables. Therewere no signicant direct paths between harmonious passion and the quality o coach–athleterelationships as well as between harmonious passion and subjective well-being. In addition,there were no signicant paths between obsessive passion and all other endogenous variableso the model. We then retested the model without these nonsignicant paths. Consequently, thenal model includes all signicant paths existing between the variables o the structural model.

Alternative Model 1: C-A relationships → Passion → Positive emotions → SWB, 2(d = 7, N = 106) = 35.83, p < .05; CFI = .84, RMSEA = 0.19, SRMR =0.16, GFI = .88, NFI = .66.

Alternative Model 2: Positive emotions → Passion → C-A relationships → SWB, 2(d = 7, N = 106) = 22.46, p < .05; CFI = .86, RMSEA = 0.15, SRMR =0.13, GFI = .92, NFI = .82.

Alternative Model 3: Passion → C-A relationships → Positive emotions → SWB, 2(d = 6, N = 106) = 49.53, p < .05; CFI = .84, RMSEA = 0.27, SRMR =0.17, GFI = .84, NFI = .54.

Alternative Model 4: Passion→ Positive emotions→ SWB→ C-A relation-ships, 2(d = 6, N = 106) = 16.33, p < .05; CFI = .90, RMSEA = 0.13, SRMR =0.11, GFI = .94, NFI = .86.

Alternative Model 5: SWB→ C-A relationships→ Positive emotions→ Pas-

sion, 2(d = 7, N = 106) = 12.27, p > .05; CFI = .96, RMSEA = 0.09, SRMR =0.11, GFI = .96, NFI = .91. Alternative Model 6: Passion → SWB→ Positive emotions → C-A relation-

ships, 2(d = 6, N = 106) = 51.97, p > .05; CFI = .71, RMSEA = 0.27, SRMR =0.18, GFI = .83, NFI = .53.




Alternative Model 7: C-A relationships → Positive emotions → Passion → SWB, 2(d = 6, N = 106) = 51.97, p < .05; CFI = .79, RMSEA = 0.17, SRMR =0.13, GFI = .92, NFI = .76.

References

Aron, A., Aron, E.N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion o the other in the sel scale and thestructure o interpersonal closeness. Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596–612.

Aron, A., Norman, C.C., Aron, E.N., McKenna, C., & Heyman, R.E. (2000). Couple’sshared participation in novel and arousing activities and experienced relationshipquality. Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 273–284.

Barrett, L.F., & Russell, J.A. (1998). Independence and bipolarity in the structure o cur-

rent aect. Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 967–984.Baumeister, R., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire or interpersonal attach-ments as a undamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.

Blais, M.R., Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G., & Brière, N.M. (1989). L’Échelle de satisac-tion de vie: Validation canadienne-rançaise du “Satisaction with Lie Scale”. Revuecanadienne des sciences du comportement, 21, 210–223.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology o optimal experience. New York:Harpen Collins.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The “what” and “why” o goal pursuit: Human needs andthe sel-determination o behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.

Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science o happiness and a proposal or a

national index. The American Psychologist, 55, 34–43.Fredrickson, B.L. (2001). The role o positive emotions in positive psychology: the Broaden-

and Build theory o positive emotions. The American Psychologist, 56, 218–226.Hodgins, H.S., & Knee, R. (2002). The integrating sel and conscious experience. In E.L.

Deci & R.M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook on sel-determination research (pp. 87–100).Rochester, NY: University o Rochester Press.

Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reerence guide (2nd ed.). Chi-cago: Scientic Sotware International.

Jowett, S. (2007). Interdependence analysis and the 3 + 1Cs in the coach-athlete relation-ship. In S. Jowett and D. Lavallee (Eds.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 15–27).Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Jowett, S., & Clark-Carter, D. (2006). Perceptions o empathic accuracy and assumed simi-larity in the coach-athlete relationship. The British Journal o Social Psychology, 45, 617–637.

Jowett, S., & Cockerill, I.M. (2003). Olympic medalists’ perspective o the athlete-coachrelationship. Psychology o Sport and Exercise, 4, 313–331.

Jowett, S., & Ntoumanis, N. (2004). The coach-athlete relationship questionnaire(CART-Q): Development and initial validation. Scandinavian Journal o Medicine &Science in Sports, 14, 245–257.

Jowett, S., & Poczwardowski, A. (2007). Understanding the coach-athlete relationship. InS. Jowett and D. Lavallee (Eds.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 3–14). Champaign,

IL: Human Kinetics.Kline, R.B. (2005). Principles and practice o structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). NewYork: Guilord.

Mageau, G.A., & Vallerand, R.J. (2003). The coach-athlete relationship: A motivationalmodel. Journal o Sports Sciences, 21, 883–904.

Mageau, G.A., & Vallerand, R.J. (2007). The moderating eect o passion on the rela-tion between activity engagement and positive aect. Motivation and Emotion, 31, 312–321.




Mageau, G. A., Vallerand, R. J., Charest, J., Salvy, S,-J., Lacaille, N., Bouard, T., &Koestner, R. (2007). On the development o harmonious and obsessive passion: Therole o autonomy support, activity valuation, and identity processes. Paper submitted

or publication.Mageau, G.A., Vallerand, R.J., Rousseau, F.L., Ratelle, C.F., & Provencher, P.J. (2005).Passion and Gambling: Investigating the Divergent Aective and Cognitive Conse-quences o Gambling. Journal o Applied Social Psychology, 35, 100–118.

McClelland, D.C. (1985). Human motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Poczwardowski, A., Barott, J.R., & Peregoy, J.J. (2002). The athlete and coach: Their rela-

tionships and its meaning – Methodological concerns and research process. Interna-

tional Journal o Sport Psychology, 33, 98–115.Ratelle, C.F., Vallerand, R.J., Mageau, G.A., Rousseau, F.L., & Provencher, P. (2004).

When passion leads to problematic outcomes: A look at gambling. Journal o Gam-bling Studies, 20, 105–119.

Rip, B., Fortin, S., & Vallerand, R.J. (2006). The relationship between passion and injury indance students. Journal o Dance Medicine & Science, 10, 14–20.Rousseau, F.L., & Vallerand, R.J. (2003). Le rôle de la passion dans le bien-être subjecti

des aînés [The role o passion in the subjective well-being o the elderly]. Revue Qué-

bécoise de Psychologie, 24, 197–211.Rousseau, F.L., & Vallerand, R.J. (in press). An examination o the relationship between

passion and subjective well-being in older adults. International Journal o Aging & Human Development .

Rousseau, F.L., Vallerand, R.J., Ratelle, C.F., Mageau, G.A., & Provencher, P.J. (2002).Passion and gambling: Validation o the Gambling Passion Scale (GPS). Journal o Gambling Studies, 18, 45–66.

Ryan, R.M. (1995). Psychological needs and the acilitation o integrative processes. Jour-nal o Personality, 63, 397–427.

Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2007). Active human nature: Sel-Determination Theory and thepromotion and maintenance o sport, exercise, and health. In M.S. Hagger & N.L.D.Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and sel-determination in exercise and

sport (pp. 1–19). Human Kinetics Europe Ltd.Schlenker, B.R. (1985). In B.R. Schlenker (Ed.), Identity and sel-identifcation. The sel

and social lie (pp. 65–99). New York: McGraw-Hill.Séguin-Lévesque, C., Laliberté, M.L., Pelletier, L.G., Vallerand, R.J., & Blanchard, C.

(2003). Harmonious and obsessive passions or the Internet: Their associations withcouples’ relationships. Journal o Applied Social Psychology, 33, 197–221.

Senécal, C.B., Vallerand, R.J., & Vallières, E.F. (1992). Construction et validation del’Échelle de la Qualité des Relations Interpersonnelles (EQRI). Revue européenne de

psychologie appliquée, 42, 315–322.Smith, R.E., Smoll, F.L., & Curtis, B. (1979). Coach eectiveness training: A cognitive

behavioral approach to enhancing relationship skills in youth sport coaches. Journal

o Sport Psychology, 1, 59–75.Vallerand, R.J. (2008). On the psychology o passion: In search o what makes people’s

lives most worth living. Canadian Psychology, 49, 1–13.Vallerand, R.J., Blanchard, C.M., Mageau, G.A., Koestner, R., Ratelle, C., Léonard, M., et

al. (2003). Les passions de l’âme: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal o

Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 756–767.Vallerand, R.J., & Houlort, N. (2003). Passion at work: Toward a new conceptualiza-tion. In S.W. Gilliland, D.D. Steiner, & D.P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Emerging perspectiveson values in organisations (Vol. 3, pp. 175–204). Greenwich, CT: Inormation AgePublishing.

Vallerand, R.J., Mageau, G.A., Elliot, A., Dumais, A., Demers, M-A., & Rousseau, F.L.(2008a). Passion and perormance attainment in sport. Psychology o Sport and Exer-cise, 9, 373–392.




Vallerand, R.J., & Miquelon, P. (2007). Passion or sport in athletes. In D. Lavallée &S. Jowett (Eds.), Social Psychology in Sport (pp. 249–263). Champaign, IL: HumanKinetics.

Vallerand, R. J., Ntoumanis, N., Philippe, F., Lavigne, G., Carbonneau., N., Bonneville, A.,Lagacé-Labonté, C., & Maliha, G. (2008b). On being a sport an: The role o passionand a look at the 2006 World Soccer Cup. Paper submitted or publication.

Vallerand, R.J., Rousseau, F.L., Grouzet, F.M.E., Dumais, A., & Grenier, S. (2006). Passionin sport: A look at determinants and outcomes. Journal o Sport & Exercise Psychol-ogy, 28, 454–478.

Vallerand, R.J., Salvy, S.J., Mageau, G.A., Elliot, A.J., Denis, P., Grouzet, F.M.E., et al.(2007). On the role o passion in perormance. Journal o Personality, 75, 505–534.

Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation o brie mea-sures o positive and negative aect: The PANAS scales. Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.

Waugh, C.E., & Fredrickson, B.L. (2006). Nice to know you: Positive emotions, sel-otheroverlap, and complex understanding in the ormation o new relationships. Journal o Positive Psychology, 1, 93–106.

Yik, M.S., Russel, J.A., & Feldman Barrett, L. (1999). Structure o sel-reported currentaect: Integration and beyond. Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 600–619.

Manuscript submitted: November 28, 2007 Revision accepted: May 6, 2008

Documents

Passion in Sport Coach Athlete Relationship