Influence of perceived and preferred coach feedback on youth athletes' perceptions of team motivational climate

ObjectivesThis study examined youth ice hockey players' perceptions of individual feedback received from their coach, and the agreement and discrepancies between preferred and perceived coach feedback patterns, on athletes' perceptions of team motivational climate. The following research questions were answered: How does agreement in perceived and preferred coach feedback relate to task- and ego-involving motivational climate? How does the degree of discrepancy between perceived and preferred coach feedback relate to motivational climate? How does the direction of the discrepancy between perceived and preferred coach feedback relate to motivational climate?DesignThis study used non-probability based sampling within a cross-sectional (survey) design.MethodAthletes (n = 70) completed a self-report survey comprised of measures of coaching feedback and motivational climate. The data were examined using polynomial regression and response surface analysis.ResultsLinear associations were observed between coaching feedback and motivational climate, and unique associations between the perceived and preferred coach feedback discrepancies were distinctly related to increased perceptions of both task- and ego-involved motivational climates.ConclusionsThe type of feedback, purpose of the feedback, and agreement or discrepancy in perceptions and preferences for different feedback styles are important to understanding task- and ego-involved motivational climate in youth sport. Coaching programs should assist coaches in learning their athletes' preferences for positive and negative feedback in sport and matching these preferences with their individual feedback styles.     

To have and to hold: gratitude promotes relationship maintenance in intimate bonds

This multimethod series of studies merges the literatures on gratitude and risk regulation to test a new process model of gratitude and relationship maintenance. We develop a measure of appreciation in relationships and use cross-sectional, daily experience, observational, and longitudinal methods to test our model. Across studies, we show that people who feel more appreciated by their romantic partners report being more appreciative of their partners. In turn, people who are more appreciative of their partners report being more responsive to their partners' needs (Study 1), and are more committed and more likely to remain in their relationships over time (Study 2). Appreciative partners are also rated by outside observers as relatively more responsive and committed during dyadic interactions in the laboratory, and these behavioral displays are one way in which appreciation is transmitted from one partner to the other (Study 3). These findings provide evidence that gratitude is important for the successful maintenance of intimate bonds.     

Priming correct information reduces the misinformation effect

The misinformation effect is a well-established phenomenon in the false memory literature, although the mechanisms that underlie it are debated. In the present study, we explored one aspect of the controversy, the fate of the original memory. We began from an activation-based view of memory, capitalizing on the well-understood processes of associative priming and spreading activation, to test the hypothesis that true and suggested information can coexist in memory. After exposure to misinformation, participants were unknowingly primed with associates of either the true or a suggested item. Misled participants who were primed for the true item performed better on a final memory test than did misled participants primed for neutral information. The results indicated that true and suggested information coexist and that retrieval is influenced by each concept's activation level at test. Implications for theories of the misinformation effect were discussed.     

Reconsidering reconsent: Threats to internal and external validity when participants reconsent after debriefing

We overwhelmingly utilize (partially) informed consent for, and debriefing of, human research participants. Also common is the practice of reconsent, particularly where changes in study protocols (or in participants themselves) occur midstream – participants consent again to remaining in the project or to having their data included. Worryingly under-discussed is post-debriefing reconsent, wherein participants can withdraw their data after learning more fully of the study's goals and methods. Yet, major ethics bodies in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom promote such practice, with vague and potentially problematic guidelines. Here, the author provides examples involving such reconsent practice, highlighting potentially serious problems that are scientific (e.g. threats to internal and external validity) and ethical (i.e. to the participant, their peers, the researcher and society) in nature. Particularly, problematic is the introduction, by design, of unknowable bias in our research findings. For example, highly prejudiced participants could withdraw data from a discrimination study after learning of the study's hypotheses and goals. The practice may arguably contradict an Open Science goal of increasing research transparency. This call for discussion about the direction of psychological science methods aims to engage a broader discussion in the research community.     

Measuring rationality independent of social desirability

The development of a test to measure Elli's concept of rationality is described. In the first study discussed, a 58-item test is developed to measure rationality, and the reliability and convergent validity of the test is described. In a second study, the discriminant validity of the test is examined. An attempt is also made to reduce social-desirability content in the test by eliminating items most highly correlated with a Social Desirability Scale. The final 44-item test is found to be high in both reliability and validity. The factor structure of the test is also examined.