Leseprobe
Content
Introduction Part A
Vallerand & Losier’s integrated theory of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport (Cox, 2007)
Social Factors
Psychological Mediators
Self-determination Continuum
Consequences
Literature Review on Motivation related to the case study of Janet
Introduction Part B
Conclusion
References
Introduction Part A
According to Cox “[h]igh levels of intrinsic motivation […] should lead to positive affect, positive behavioral outcomes, and improved cognition.” (2007, p. 123). Therefore it can be assumed that a form of intrinsic motivation is good for any person involved in sports, but especially important and desirable for youth sports participants. In the first part of this work Janet’s motivation and the problems referring to it being stated in her case study will be discussed.
Intrinsic motivation is described as motivation that comes from the inside of an individual without any external influences (Cox, 2007). At the beginning of her golfing career Janet’s motivation is highly intrinsic as stated in the case study in lines 7 and 8. This changes due to different factors during her growing up process in life and her game to a form of extrinsic motivation as referred to later on in this paper. This is the main performance issue she has to deal with and the reasons for her motivational shift are going to be pointed out with help of Vallerand & Losier’s integrated theory of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport (Cox, 2007).
Vallerand & Losier’s integrated theory of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport (Cox, 2007)
Social Factors
Vallerand & Losier included three different social factors in their model (Cox,2007). The first one is success or failure in sport (Cox, 2007). In Janet’s case success can clearly be seen, as she has been state open champion over the last three years and already won over $40,000 in her golfing career (l. 4-5).
Secondly in terms of competition and cooperation Janet seems to especially enjoy the cooperational part of her sport (Cox, 2007). In lines 12 to 15 of the case study is mentioned, that Janet and her friends she was playing golf with “considered themselves as a team” (l. 14-15) and spent most of their weekends together playing tournaments and having a good time. Unfortunately this reverses as her friends drop out of the sport after finishing high school (l. 23-24).
The third part of Vallerand & Losier’s model is the behavior of the coach (Cox, 2007). Janet’s first coach John always offered technique related advice and also gave tips for mental toughness. His coaching style was democratic, as the girls he used to coach, picked their own tournaments to participate in. He helped them to set goals and improve their overall skills in golfing (l. 17-21). This created a mastery climate which changed to a competitive climate when Janet’s mother Sue took over her daughters coaching. Sue’s focus for Janet is much more on competing with other players than on improving her overall skills (l. 39-41).
Psychological Mediators
In Vallerand & Losier’s model (Cox, 2007) this leads to three psychological mediators named competence, autonomy and relatedness. Janet’s competence is very high over the time she is coached by John, what can be seen in lines 1 and 4 to 5. However, her competence level seems to change drastically over time as she is unsure, if “her short game is actually good enough” (l. 52) to compete in a professional circuit. In terms of autonomy another shift is clearly pointed out in the case study. When being coached by John, the girls pick tournaments they want to compete in and their goals by themselves, compared to Sue, who points out tournaments Janet has to participate in and also the results she has to achieve, so as to being able to rival in the professional circuit (l. 19-21, 39-41).
Relatedness and the problems occurring for Janet can be clearly seen in the section of the social factor cooperation above.
Self-determination Continuum
According to Vallerand and Losier’s model all the above factors influence motivation of an individual (Cox, 2007). Janet’s shift of an intrinsically motivated sports participant to an introjected motivation is therefore clearly stated, when Janet only goes to practice “to please her mum” (l. 62).
Consequences
Vallerand and Losier (Cox, 2007) provide a section of consequences at last part of their model. The mentioned consequences Janet’s change in motivation are less commitment to golfing and practice (l. 54-55) mostly by avoidance (l. 61) and isolation (l. 63).
Literature Review on Motivation related to the case study of Janet
Introduction Part B
The second part of this paper provides with a short overview of recent literature addressing motivational changes and providing possible interventions. They deal with different strategies and interventions to address the problems appearing in the case study and conclude that intrinsic motivation should be withheld for athletes if possible.
The first study reviewed, conducted by Jõesaar, Hein, and Hagger (2011) about peer influence on intrinsic motivation found out, that motivational climate created by a peer-group and a coach can be either highly supporting or disturbing for young athletes in terms of their intrinsic motivation. For the purpose of the study 424 Estonian team-sport athletes aged 11-16 were asked to answer several different questionnaires measuring motivational climate, basic psychological needs, and general sports motivation repeatedly over one year during practice. As results the study presents a significant connection between peer-group created motivational climate and intrinsic motivation of the athletes participating. Furthermore research in the study also states that basic psychological needs like autonomy, competence, and relatedness can be positively influenced by a distinct motivational climate which is created through coaches and peer-groups in sport.
[...]