Journal of Physical Education and Sport ® (JPES), Vol. 23 (issue 5), Art 163, pp.

1332 - 1339, May 2023

online ISSN: 2247 - 806X; p-ISSN: 2247 – 8051; ISSN - L = 2247 - 8051 © JPES
Original Article

The impact of basketball coach’s leadership style on perfectionism of basketball

players
ILMA ČAPRIĆ1, MIMA STANKOVIĆ2, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ3, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ4, ADEM MAVRIĆ5,
ARMIN ZEĆIROVIĆ6, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ7, DRAŽEN ČULAR8, IGOR JELASKA9, MARIO
TOMLJANOVIĆ10, GORAN SPORIŠ11
1,4,7
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Pazar, 36300 Novi Pazar, SERBIA
2,3,5
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Niš, 18000 Niš, SERBIA
6
Faculty of Sports and Physical Education, University of East Sarajevo, 71000 Sarajevo, BOSNIA AND
HERZEGOVINA
8,9,10
Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Split, 21000 Split, CROATIA
11
Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, 10110 Zagreb, CROATIA

Published online: May 31, 2023

(Accepted for publication May 15, 2023)
DOI:10.7752/jpes.2023.05163

Abstract:
Leadership in sports is a collaborative, cooperative, and interactive process between coaches and athletes. A
coach’s most important abilities include athlete motivation, creating a productive environment in the group, and
pursuing success. The aim of this research was to determine the influence of the coach's leadership style on
basketball players' perfectionism. The sample of participants for the purposes of this research consisted of 104
respondents (51 male, 53 female), who play the second rank of the national competition. In order to examine the
coach's behavior, the online questionnaire Leadership Scale for Sport and Competitive perfectionism Scale was
used to determine the positive and negative dimensions of competitive perfectionism. The influence of
leadership style on the pursuit of perfectionism and changes in the values of the pursuit of perfectionism is
determined by changes in instructiveness 7.1%, democratic behavior 16.9%, autocratic behavior 26.3%, social
support 16.5% and positive feedback 33.6 %. The obtained results indicate the influence of leadership style on
the perfectionism of the basketball players and statistical significance, and that each coach type tends towards
per-fectionism and it is not possible to generalize which style is more appropriate in which situation. The impact
on the scale of competitive perfectionism and changes in the values of striving for perfectionism was determined
by changes in instructiveness 3.1%, democratic behavior 5.6%, autocratic behavior 8.3%, social support 1.9%
and positive feedback 10.3%. Based on the obtained results, we conclude that autocratic behavior (8.3%) and
positive feedback (10.3%) showed statistically significant values in relation to other values of the coach's
behavior style on competitive perfectionism.
Key Words: sport performance, team sport, behavior, perception.

Introduction
Leadership in sports is a collaborative, cooperative and interactive process between coaches and
athletes. The learning process, success, motivation and achievements in sports influences leadership style,
because a positive relationship with the coach provides motivation and desire for success (Barić, 2007). A
coach’s most important abilities include athlete motivation, creating a productive environment in the group and
pursuing success (Bajraktarević, 2004). Among the development of human psychological resources that enable
athletes to use their cognitive, emotional and behavioral mechanisms to prevent psychological problems, aiming
to maintain or improve their performance is mental toughness (Beattie et al., 2019; Jones & Parker, 2019).
Athletes spend a significant amount of time with their coaches and peers in sports, which has an impact on their
development, both inside and outside of sports (Froyen & Pensgaard, 2014). The ‘coach-athlete’ relationship is
critical in defining an athlete’s experience and performance because coaches supervise, organize, educate and
advise players about the teams they work with (Keegan et al., 2010). As a result of a coach’s experience,
approach, and knowledge, the coach influences psychosocial development (Barić, 2004). Similarly, a coach’s
work is reflected, not only in technical and tactical success, but also in acceptance of another coach or athlete,
honesty, support, giving, friendship, respect, encouragement, help in difficulties and decision-making (Jowett,
2005).
A substantial amount of research examines the extent to which leaders' personal behavior qualities
influence their conduct, as well as the reasons that explain these links. According to various research, leadership
influences the approach to consideration and focal leadership structures (Črešnar & Nedelko, 2020). This
framework was used to propose common patterns of leaders offering guidance, implementing goals, and

1332----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corresponding Author: DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, E-mail: ddemirovic@np.ac.rs
 ILMA ČAPRIĆ, MIMA STANKOVIĆ, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ, ADEM MAVRIĆ, ARMIN
ZEĆIROVIĆ, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ, DRAŽEN ČULAR, IGOR JELASKA, MARIO TOMLJANOVIĆ, GORAN SPORIŠ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
inspiring individuals (Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1996; Yammarino et al., 2005), resulting in the formation of
various leadership styles (Martindale, 2011).
Although models of coach effectiveness differ in terms of behavior, effectiveness, motivation of a team
and an individual athlete performance (Feltz et al., 2008), the mul-tidimensional model of leadership in sports is
the most commonly used theoretical framework for researching and explaining coach’s leadership styles
(Chelladurai, 1990). Chelladurai & Saleh (1980) have created a sports leadership scale (LSS) with five sub-
scales (instructive style, democratic behavior, autocratic behavior, social support and positive feedback). The
coach’s psychological characteristics, knowledge and experience have a positive effect on team success
(Tenenbaum et al., 2012), while the coach’s lead-ership style has a relatively strong relationship with athlete
motivation (Duda, 2001), as well as their psychological health (Reinboth & Duda, 2006). Situational
characteristics (contextual factors such as the nature of the sport and associated social norms), leader
characteristics (aspects that can influence behavior), and member characteristics (ability, intelligence, motivation
etc.), are thought to influence leadership behaviors (Høigaard et al., 2015; Moen, 2014). Furthermore, the
coach’s de-sire to achieve results and positive behavior play an important role in shaping the ath-lete’s
motivation and creating democratic behavior, both of which contribute to the de-velopment of adaptive
perfectionism (Aleksic-Veljkovic et al., 2019).
On the other hand, perfectionism is a personality trait characterized by high stand-ards; in the broadest
sense, it means striving for perfection (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Athletes who strive for perfection have higher
personal standards and are more organized (Hogg, 1997), and only their participation in additional training
results in improved competitive performance, reducing the harmful impact of psychological stress on
performance itself (Kim et al., 2019). External expectations, on the other hand, can cause psychological stress,
which has a negative impact on athletes' performance (Stoeber & Otto, 2006).
There have been studies that examined perfectionism in sports as well as the influ-ence of leadership
style (Anshel & Mansouri, 2005; Hill et al., 2014; Madigan et al., 2018; Stoeber et al., 2009). Stoll et al. (2008)
discovered that perfectionistic as-pirations predict better overall training task performance in sports students,
whereas (Madigan et al., 2018) discovered that perfectionistic aspirations predict better performance results in
basketball players. A bad relationship with the coach, characterized by an increased number of conflicts and
reduced support, an autocratic leadership style, and weight criticism, is associated with the development of
eating disorders (Shanmugam et al., 2013). Setting high standards is an essential aspect of top sports, and it is
frequently advantageous to the athlete's performance. Those, on the other hand, who are characterized by
frequent thoughts about achieving the ideal and by perfectionistic ideals have been demonstrated to be more
prone to suffer heightened levels of anxiety owing to inconsistencies between the ideal and the existing
self/situation. Of course, this might have a negative impact on their athletic performance (Koivula et al., 2002).
Sports collaboration is now described as the pursuit of individual and group goals, as well as their combination
to generate a certain athletic behavior (Garcia-Mas et al., 2009). It may also be defined as dynamic decision
making based on recurrent interaction between individuals aiming to attain certain goals and their integration
into a sport team (Olmedilla et al., 2011). According to Dosil (2008), the autocratic leadership style is defined by
coaches who believe that athletes should not "talk" about their recommendations, which means that athletes have
no one to turn to for advice, which is why eating disorders are so common. Some authors (Bajraktarević, 2004;
Stephens & Waters, 2016) show that athletes value the coach's instructive and democratic behavior more than
the coach's autocratic behavior. That is, a coach who provides social support and provides more positive in-
formation can expect better results. However, personality is one of the most important predictors of success in
any sport, and diagnosing the athlete's conative traits is frequently critical, both for the selection process and for
the focused training of top athletes (Cox & Cox, 2002). Previous research has found that leadership styles
centered on training and instruction, positive feedback, social support, and democratic behavior are all positively
associated with collective high confidence in individuals/teams and increase beliefs of high efficacy (Soyer et al.,
2014; Vieira et al., 2015). A democratic coaching style, in particular, has been shown to increase athletes' sense
of competence, independence, satisfaction, and self-esteem, as well as to result in more adaptive behaviors,
stronger commitment, a higher level of sportspersonship, and a focus on task and achievement (Moen, 2014;
Park et al., 2016). There have been studies that observed, not only the behavior of coaches, but also the positive
and negative aspects of competitive perfectionism. Given that, to the best of the author's knowledge, no research
has included the previously mentioned in one study and that on the population of basketball players, the goal of
this study is to determine the influence of the coach's leadership style on basketball players' perfectionism.

Material & methods

Participants Sample
For the purposes of this study, a sample of 104 participants (51 male, 53 female) who compete in the
second rank of the national competition was used. Participants were chosen based on their status as active
basketball players over the age of 17. All participants were healthy individuals with no noticeable abnormalities
concerning physical characteristics and abilites (Table 1). The study's participation was entirely voluntary.
Written informed consent was obtained from the minor players and their parents. Moreover, the ethics board of

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1333
JPES ® www.efsupit.ro
 ILMA ČAPRIĆ, MIMA STANKOVIĆ, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ, ADEM MAVRIĆ, ARMIN
ZEĆIROVIĆ, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ, DRAŽEN ČULAR, IGOR JELASKA, MARIO TOMLJANOVIĆ, GORAN SPORIŠ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the State University of Novi Pazar provided the approval of the research experiment (Ethical Board Approval
No: 399/22).

Table 1. Participants and group in-close characteristics

Body Mass Training experience
Age (years) Height (cm) Weight (kg)
Index (years)
Male 23.49±6.71 189.51±11.99 74.18±7.20 19.18±2.89 5.86±3.68
Female 22.25±5.60 182.41±5.89 70.49±6.92 20.94±2.36 4.88±2.21

Procedures
Each participant provided basic anthropometric characteristics such as body height, body mass, number
of years, how long they had been playing basketball for, and whether or not they are currently active players.
Based on the inclusion criteria in the study, a sample of 104 participants was drawn and asked to complete the
LSS (Leadership Scale for Sport - LSS) online questionnaire.

LSS
The Leadership Scale for Sport - LSS is the most commonly used questionnaire to assess coaches’
behavior (Chelladurai & Saleh, 1980; Cruz & Kim, 2017; Loughead & Hardy, 2005) It has five subscales that
correspond to the dimensions of coaching behavior: (1) instructiveness, which refers to coaches' sports skills and
tactical instructions aimed at improving athletes' performance; (2) democratic behavior; (3) autocratic behavior,
which refers to making a coach's decision without the possibility of involving the athlete in making the same; (4)
social support, and (5) positive feedback, which characterize the athlete's motivational style (Cruz & Kim, 2017).

CPS
To determine the positive and negative dimensions of competitive perfectionism, the Competitive
Perfectionism Scale (CPS) was used elsewhere (Hamidi & Besharat, 2010). Striving for perfectionism (adaptive
perfectionism) and negative reaction to imperfection (nonadaptive perfectionism) were rated on a Likert scale
from 1 (very little) to 5 (extremely much) (completely).

Statystical Data Processing

All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS v. 20 (IBM Corporation; Armonk, NY, USA).
Descriptive statistics was calculated for all the previously mentioned data. Pearson's correlation coefficient was
used to determine the correlation between all the tests. The magnitude of the correlations was interpreted using
the following criteria: <; 0.1, trivial; 0.1–0.3, small; 0.3–0.5, moderate; 0.5–0.7, large; 0.7–0.9, very large; and >
0.9 almost perfect. The level of significance for the correlation analysis was set at p≤ 0.05 (Hopkins et al., 2009).
For determining the significance of the linear connection, i.e., the impact of each coaching style on perfectionism
variables, we have applied the univariate linear regression analysis.

Results
Average values of representation scores for style of the interviewees’ coaches and competetive
perfectionism dimensions, for the entire data, are shown in Tables 2 and 3. The normality of ditribution analysis
for all the representation scores varibles are shown in Table 4. The correlation analysis results are shown in
Table 5, whereas the impact of the leadership style on the striving for perfectionism and perfectionist
perfectionism are shown in Tables 6 and 7.

Table 2. Representation of the participant’s coaching style for the entire data
Coach type Mean±SD
Instructiveness 4.04±.61
Democratic behavior 3.67±.79
Autocratic behavior 3.42±.73
Social support 3.61±.64
Positive feedback 3.21±.70

Among the coaches who took part in this research, the characteristics of an instructional coach were represented
the most (4.04±0.61) and the characteristics of a coach with positive feedback were represented the least
(3.21±0.70). Therefore, these characteristics are represented in the coach sample of our participants.

Table 3. Representation of the competitive perfectionism dimensions for the entire data
Competitive perfectionism dimensions Mean±SD
Striving for perfectionism 2.9530±.67845
Competitive Perfectionism Scale 3.6578±.85501

1334----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JPES ® www.efsupit.ro
 ILMA ČAPRIĆ, MIMA STANKOVIĆ, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ, ADEM MAVRIĆ, ARMIN
ZEĆIROVIĆ, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ, DRAŽEN ČULAR, IGOR JELASKA, MARIO TOMLJANOVIĆ, GORAN SPORIŠ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4. Coaching style and competitive perfectionism dimensions distribution normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Shapiro-Wilk
Variables
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Instructiveness .118 104 .027 .931 104 .001
Democratic behavior .088 104 <.200* .969 104 .103
Autocratic behavior .121 104 .021 .976 104 .234
Social support .135 104 .006 .970 104 .123
Positive feedback .131 104 .008 .963 104 .054
Striving for perfectionism .110 104 .052 .875 104 .000
Competitive Perfectionism Scale .112 104 .047 .962 104 .045

Tests of normality have shown that our variables can all be considered normally distributed with the
level of significance of 1%, and for most of them even for the level of significance of 5%. Some issues
concerning the contradiction of conclusions for different normality tests, here Kolmogorov-Smirnov and
Shapiro-Wilk test, can be seen. These issues can be neglected due to the confirmed normal distribution in most
cases and large sample size (Barić, 2007). Also, further parametric analysis results can be considered
discriminant and reliable.
The values of Spearman's correlation coefficient and its significance for the correlation between coaching styles
and the tendency towards perfectionism, i.e. leadership styles and the scale of competitive perfectionism are
given in Table 5.

Table 5. Leadership styles and scales of competitive perfectionism – Correlation analysis

Striving for Competitive
Coach type
perfectionism Perfectionism Scale
r .241 .242
Instructiveness
p .055 .054
r .363 .309
Democratic behavior
p .003 .013
r .343 .269
Autocratic behavior
p .006 .032
r .286 .223
Social support
p .022 .077
r .438 .284
Positive feedback
p .000 .023

Based on the data shown in Table 5, we see that a significant positive correlation (increasing the
independent variable - the left margin - also increases the dependent variable - the upper margin) is present in the
impact:
1. Democratic behavior, autocratic behavior and positive feedback both on the striving for perfectionism
and on the scale of competitive perfectionism;
2. Social support for the pursuit of perfectionism (the impact on the scale of competitive perfectionism is
not significant at the significance level of 5%, while it is at the 1% level);
3. Coach's instructiveness has no significant impact - for a significance level of 5% - neither on the
striving towards perfectionism nor on the scale of competitive perfectionism.
Pearson correlation has confirmed these results.

Table 6. The impact of coaching style on the pursuit of perfectionism

Model Beta t p R R2
(Constant) 1.76 3.15 .003
.27 .07
Instructiveness .29 2.17 .034
(Constant) 1.66 4.47 .000
.411 .17
Democratic behavior .35 3.55 .001
(Constant) 1.33 3.78 .000
.51 .26
Autocratic behavior .47 4.70 .000
(Constant) 1.40 3.12 .003
.41 .17
Social support .43 3.50 .001
(Constant) 1.16 3.52 .001
.58 .34
Positive feedback .56 5.60 .000

The univariate linear regression analysis for the impact of coaching style on pursuit for perfectionism (Table 6)
has yielded the following results:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1335
JPES ® www.efsupit.ro
 ILMA ČAPRIĆ, MIMA STANKOVIĆ, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ, ADEM MAVRIĆ, ARMIN
ZEĆIROVIĆ, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ, DRAŽEN ČULAR, IGOR JELASKA, MARIO TOMLJANOVIĆ, GORAN SPORIŠ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7.1% of the changes in the values of perfectionism were determined by the changes in instructiveness. If the
value of instructiveness scale is increased by 1, the value of striving towards perfectionism scale increases
by 0.29. The increase is statistically significant (t=2.17; p=0.034<0.05).
 16.9% of the changes in the values of perfectionism are determined by changes in democratic behavior. If
the value of democratic behavior scale is increased by 1, the value of striving for perfectionism scale
increases by 0.35. The increase is statistically significant (t=3.55; p=0.001<0.05).
 26.3% of the changes in the values of striving for perfectionism were determined by changes in autocratic
behavior. If the value of autocratic behavior is increased by 1, the value of striving for perfectionism scale
increases by 0.47. The increase is statistically significant (t=4.70; p=0.000<0.05).
 16.5% of the changes in the values of striving for perfectionism were determined by changes in social
support. If the value of social support is increased by 1, the value of striving for perfectionism increases
scale by 0.43. The increase is statistically significant (t=3.50; p=0.001<0.05).
 33.6% of the changes in the values of striving for perfectionism were determined by changes in positive
feedback. If the value of positive feedback scale is increased by 1, the value of striving for perfectionism
increases by 0.56. The increase is statistically significant (t=5.60; p=0.000<0.05).

Table 7. The impact of coaching style on the competitive perfectionism scale

Model Beta t p R R2
(Constant) 2.67 3.71 .000
.18 .03
Instructiveness .25 1.40 .167
(Constant) 2.72 5.45 .000
.24 .06
Democratic behavior .26 1.92 .059
(Constant) 2.51 5.07 .000
.29 .08
Autocratic behavior .34 2.37 .021
(Constant) 2.99 4.88 .000
.13 .02
Social support .18 1.10 .275
(Constant) 2.40 5.00 .000
.32 .10
Positive feedback .39 2.66 .010

The univariate linear regression analysis results for the impact of coaching style on the competetive
perfectionism scale (Table 7) has yielded the following results:
 3.1% of the changes in the values of perfectionism were determined by the changes in instructiveness. If the
value of instructiveness scale is increased by 1, the value of the competitive perfectionism scale increases by
0.25, but this rise is insignificant (t=1.40, p=0.167>0.05).
 5.6% of the changes in the values of competetive perfectionism were determined by the changes in
democratic behavior. If the value of democratic behavior scale is increased by 1, the value of the
competitive perfectionism scale increases by 0.26, but this increase is insignificant (t=1.92; p=0.059>0.05).
 8.3% of the changes in the values of competetive perfectionism were determined by the changes in
autocratic behavior. If the value of the autocratic behavior is increased by 1, the value of the scale of
competitive perfectionism increases by 0.34. The increase is statistically significant (t=2.37, p=0.021<0.05).
 1.9% of the changes in the values of competetive perfectionism were determined by the changes in social
support. If the value of the social support scale is increased by 1, the competetive perfectionism scale value
increases by 0.18, but this increase is insignificant (t=1.10, p=0.275>0.05).
 10.3% of the changes in the values of competetive perfectionism were determined by the changes in positive
feedback. If the value of positive feedback scale is increased by 1, the value of the competitive
perfectionism scale increases by 0.39. The increase is statistically significant (t=2.66, p=0.010<0.05).

The multivariate linear regression approach would yield inconclusive results due to the significant
correlation among the coaching style variables. Namely, using the multivariate regression analysis, one of the
variables could be used as a mediator and its impact would be shown as significant, but for other variables the
conclusion would have shown the opposite. However, it would be incorrect, because that way the combination of
all styles would be considered, which is not the aim of the research. One example of such approach can be found
in study elsewhere (Bajraktarević, 2004). That way, we could neglect the real significant impact. Here, we aim to
contribute via results that might indicate comparison of competitiveness of various coaching styles when it
comes to impact on perfectionism variables.

Dicussion
The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the coach's leadership style on the
perfectionism of basketball players. Striving for perfectionism and competitive perfectionism obtained
significant correlations between democratic behavior, autocratic behavior, and positive feedback, whereas social
support on striving for perfectionism has no significant influence, and coach’s instructiveness has no significant
influence. Changes in instructiveness (7.1%), democratic behavior (16.9%), autocratic behavior (26.3%), social
1336----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JPES ® www.efsupit.ro
 ILMA ČAPRIĆ, MIMA STANKOVIĆ, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ, ADEM MAVRIĆ, ARMIN
ZEĆIROVIĆ, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ, DRAŽEN ČULAR, IGOR JELASKA, MARIO TOMLJANOVIĆ, GORAN SPORIŠ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
support (16.5%), and positive feedback (33.6%) determine the influence of leadership style on the pursuit of
perfection and changes in the values of the pursuit of perfection.
The obtained results indicate the influence of leadership style on basketball players’ perfectionism, and
that each coach type tends towards perfectionism. Hence, it is impossible to generalize which style is more
appropriate in which situation. Changes in instructiveness (3.1%), democratic behavior (5.6%), autocratic
behavior (8.3%), social support (1.9%), and positive feedback (10.3%) had an impact on the scale of competitive
perfectionism and changes in the values of striving for perfection. Based on the findings, we can conclude that
autocratic behavior (8.3%) and positive feedback (10.3%) had statistically significant values in comparison to
the other values of the coach’s behavior style on competitive perfectionism.
The characteristics of an instructional coach who provides them with more positive feedback and social
support are the most prevalent among the interviewees’ coaches, while the characteristics of a coach who
provides them with positive feedback are the least prevalent. A coach’s responsibilities include both technical
and interpersonal aspects aimed at improving player performance.
Training athletes and developing game strategies are technical aspects of sport, but a coach’s
interpersonal role includes encouraging and inspiring players, as well as being aware of their specific strengths
and limitations in order for them to perform to their full potential (Fletcher & Roberts, 2013). Sport
psychologists are responsible for developing psychological abilities to deal with the demands of the sporting
environment. However, it has been noticed that sports coaches, via their everyday contacts in the training
environment and contests, play an essential role in the psychological and emotional growth of athletes
(Kegelaers & Wylleman, 2019; Nicholls et al., 2016; Wylleman et al., 2016). Attachment Theory, which
provides a psychological framework that adds considerably to the understanding of emotional attachments
developed in personal relationships, as well as those that pervade the sport setting, supports it’s function in the
socio-emotional construction of the athlete (Davis & Jowett, 2010).
Coaching leadership behavior is one of the factors that can influence players' motivation and some
studies (Moen et al., 2014; Soyer et al., 2014) have attempted to investigate the most important factors
influencing coaching leadership behavior. This relationship has an impact on the development of athletes and
their sporting careers. The way players perceive their coaches’ actions affects everyone involved, as well as
sports achievements, and is influenced by a variety of psychological factors (attitudes, emotions, and goals)
(Aleksić-Veljković et al., 2017).
The impact of coaching leadership behavior on athlete performance, team cohesion, satisfaction,
intrinsic motivation, and team success is significant (Abedini et al., 2014; Karimi et al., 2012). Based on this
fact, it has been established that coaches of elite athletes frequently see them solely as competitors, rather than as
individuals with unique needs and desires (Balague, 1999). Athletes who experienced verbal and physical
aggression from coaches during their athletic careers reported feeling stupid, worthless, upset, angry, depressed,
humiliated, and hurt (Gervis & Dunn, 2004; Stirling & Kerr, 2008, 2013), and they felt the negative
consequences of the coach's behavior long after their sports careers had ended (Gervis & Dunn, 2004).
Finally, the perception of high expectations stemming from the coach’s attitude that winning is the only
measure of sports success is linked to anxiety (Vazou et al., 2006) and the development of maladaptive
perfectionism (Dunn et al., 2006) which underpins a variety of psychological difficulties as well as more serious
psychopathological deviations. In the future, more research into their relationship is required.

Conclusions
The findings indicate the importance of training coaches on the characteristics and consequences of a
specific leadership style, with team sports coaches receiving special attention. The results show that each type of
trainer has a tendency toward perfectionism, and it is impossible to generalize which style is more appropriate in
which situation. In team sports, there was a higher prevalence of negative and a lower prevalence of positive
coach behavior. Hence, it is critical to include coaches in training programs that address behavior, nutrition, and
the influence and roles of coaches in the lives of athletes. It is necessary to work on strengthening the coach’s
positive influence on the group and on the individual in terms of social support and positive feedback.
Striving for perfectionism and competitive perfectionism has a substantial relationship with democratic
conduct, autocratic behavior, and positive feedback. It is important to notify that the positive feedback has
yielded the best impact on both pursuite for perfectionism and competetive perfectionism. In that regard, future
research can apply the obtained results via large scale experimental models, including one coaching style at a
time, several or all of them combined.
The quatitative application plan of styles in cases of combining them can be directly drawn from this
paper results. From a practical standpoint, the findings of this study emphasize the importance of adopting
specific coaching behaviors that are congruent with the idiosyncratic charac-teristics of the various team
members, as well as the importance of implementing lead-ership concepts that are adapted to the situational
demands, primarily oriented to train-ing and instruction using positive feedback, in order to promote
cooperation, in either situation.

Conflicts of interest - The authors declare no conflict of interest.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1337
JPES ® www.efsupit.ro
 ILMA ČAPRIĆ, MIMA STANKOVIĆ, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ, ADEM MAVRIĆ, ARMIN
ZEĆIROVIĆ, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ, DRAŽEN ČULAR, IGOR JELASKA, MARIO TOMLJANOVIĆ, GORAN SPORIŠ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Abedini, M., Esmaili, M., & Tojari, F. (2014). The relationship between coaching leadership styles and
achievement motivation of Iran’s professional and amateurish fencers. International Journal of Sport
Studies, 4(7), 744–750.
Aleksic-Veljkovic, A., Herodek, K., Djurovic, D., Zivkovic, M., & Arsic, N. (2019). The impact of the coaches’
behavior on the perfection of athletes. In T. Iancheva (Ed.), Book of Proceedings of the International
Scientific Congress of Applied Sport Sciences, Balkan Scientific Congress „Physical Education, Sports,
Health" (pp. 106–118). National Sports Academy „Vasil Levski“.
Aleksić-Veljković, A., Živčić-Marković, K., Milčić, L., Herodek, K., & Veljković, M. (2017). The relationship
between perfectionism and perception of coaches’ behavior in male athletes. In S. Pantelić (Ed.), FIS
COMMUNICATIONS in physical education, sport and recreation (pp. 98–101). Faculty of Sport and
Physical Education, University of Niš.
Anshel, M. H., & Mansouri, H. (2005). Influences of perfectionism on motor performance, affect, and causal
attributions in response to critical information feedback. Journal of Sport Behavior, 28(2).
Bajraktarević, J. (2004). Psihologija sporta-teorija i empirija. Univerzitet u Sarajevu.
Balague, G. (1999). Understanding identity, value, and meaning when working with elite athletes. The Sport
Psychologist, 13(1), 89–98.
Barić, R. (2004). Klima v športu.[Motivational climate in sport.]. Unpublished Master Thesis, University of
Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Barić, R. (2007). Povezanost trenerjevega vedenja in njegove motivacijske strukture z motivacijskim tendencami
športnikov. Doktorska disertacija). Ljubljana: Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska ….
Beattie, S., Alqallaf, A., Hardy, L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2019). The mediating role of training behaviors on self-
reported mental toughness and mentally tough behavior in swimming. Sport, Exercise, and Performance
Psychology, 8(2), 179.
Chelladurai, P. (1990). Leadership in sports: A review. International Journal of Sport Psychology.
Chelladurai, P., & Saleh, S. D. (1980). Dimensions of leader behavior in sports: Development of a leadership
scale. Journal of Sport Psychology, 2(1).
Cox, R. H., & Cox, R. H. (2002). Sport psychology: Concepts and applications.
Črešnar, R., & Nedelko, Z. (2020). Understanding future leaders: How are personal values of generations Y and
Z tailored to leadership in industry 4.0? Sustainability, 12(11), 4417.
Cruz, A. B., & Kim, H.-D. (2017). Leadership preferences of adolescent players in sport: influence of coach
gender. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 16(2), 172–179.
Davis, L., & Jowett, S. (2010). Investigating the interpersonal dynamics between coaches and athletes based on
fundamental principles of attachment. Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 4(2), 112–132.
Dosil, J. (2008). Eating disorders in athletes. John Wiley & Sons.
Duda, J. (2001). Goal perspectives research in sport: Pushing the boundaries and clarifying some
misunderstandings. In Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 129–182). Human Kinetics.
Dunn, J. G. H., Dunn, J. C., Gotwals, J. K., Vallance, J. K. H., Craft, J. M., & Syrotuik, D. G. (2006).
Establishing construct validity evidence for the Sport Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale. Psychology
of Sport and Exercise, 7(1), 57–79.
Feltz, D. L., Short, S. E., & Sullivan, P. J. (2008). Self-efficacy in sport. Human Kinetics.
Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on
organizations. Citeseer.
Fletcher, R. B., & Roberts, M. H. (2013). Longitudinal stability of the leadership scale for sports. Measurement
in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 17(2), 89–104.
Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2002). Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment. American Psychological
Association.
Froyen, A. F., & Pensgaard, A. M. (2014). Antecedents of need fulfillment among elite athletes and coaches: A
qualitative approach. International Journal of Applied Sports Sciences, 26(1), 26–41.
Gervis, M., & Dunn, N. (2004). The emotional abuse of elite child athletes by their coaches. Child Abuse
Review: Journal of the British Association for the Study and Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect,
13(3), 215–223.
Hamidi, S., & Besharat, M. A. (2010). Perfectionism and competitive anxiety in athletes. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 5, 813–817.
Hill, A. P., Stoeber, J., Brown, A., & Appleton, P. R. (2014). Team perfectionism and team performance: A
prospective study. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 36(3), 303–315.
Hogg, J. (1997). Understanding psychological preparation for sport: Theory and practice of elite performers. The
Sport Psychologist, 11(3), 355–356.
Høigaard, H., De Cuyper, B., Fransen, K., Boen, F., & Peters, D. M. (2015). Perceived coach behavior in
training and competition predicts collective efficacy in female elite handball players. International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 46(6), 321–336.
Jones, M. I., & Parker, J. K. (2019). An analysis of the size and direction of the association between mental
1338----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JPES ® www.efsupit.ro
 ILMA ČAPRIĆ, MIMA STANKOVIĆ, DUŠAN ĐORĐEVIĆ, OMER ŠPIRTOVIĆ, ADEM MAVRIĆ, ARMIN
ZEĆIROVIĆ, DENIS DEMIROVIĆ, DRAŽEN ČULAR, IGOR JELASKA, MARIO TOMLJANOVIĆ, GORAN SPORIŠ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
toughness and Olympic distance personal best triathlon times. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 8(1),
Jowett, S. (2005). The coach-athlete partnership. The Psychologist, 18(7), 412–415.
Karimi, M., Heydarinejad, S., & Shafynia, P. (2012). The relationship between coaches’ leadership behaviors
and success motivation in women players of volleyball teams in Khuzestan Province. International
Journal of Sport Studies, 2(3), 168–172.
Keegan, R., Spray, C., Harwood, C., & Lavallee, D. (2010). The motivational atmosphere in youth sport: Coach,
parent, and peer influences on motivation in specializing sport participants. Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology, 22(1), 87–105.
Kegelaers, J., & Wylleman, P. (2019). Exploring the coach’s role in fostering resilience in elite athletes. Sport,
Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 8(3), 239.
Kim, E.-J., Park, S., & Kang, H.-S. T. (2019). Support, training readiness and learning motivation in determining
intention to transfer. European Journal of Training and Development, 43(3/4), 306–321.
Koivula, N., Hassmén, P., & Fallby, J. (2002). Self-esteem and perfectionism in elite athletes: Effects on
competitive anxiety and self-confidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(5), 865–875.
Loughead, T. M., & Hardy, J. (2005). An examination of coach and peer leader behaviors in sport. Psychology of
Sport and Exercise, 6(3), 303–312.
Madigan, D. J., Stoeber, J., Culley, T., Passfield, L., & Hill, A. P. (2018). Perfectionism and training
performance: The mediating role of other-approach goals. European Journal of Sport Science, 18(9),
1271–1279.
Moen, F. (2014). The coach-athlete relationship and expectations. International Journal of Humanities and
Social Science, 4(11), 29–40.
Moen, F., Høigaard, R., & Peters, D. M. (2014). Performance progress and leadership behavior. International
Journal of Coaching Science, 8(1), 69–81.
Nicholls, A. R., Morley, D., & Perry, J. L. (2016). Mentally tough athletes are more aware of unsupportive
coaching behaviours: Perceptions of coach behaviour, motivational climate, and mental toughness in
sport. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 11(2), 172–181.
Park, E.-M., Seo, J.-H., & Ko, M.-H. (2016). The effects of leadership by types of soccer instruction on big data
analysis. Cluster Computing, 19, 1647–1658.
Reinboth, M., & Duda, J. L. (2006). Perceived motivational climate, need satisfaction and indices of well-being
in team sports: A longitudinal perspective. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7(3), 269–286.
Shanmugam, V., Jowett, S., & Meyer, C. (2013). Eating psychopathology amongst athletes: The importance of
relationships with parents, coaches and teammates. International Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 11(1), 24–38.
Soyer, F., Sarı, İ., & Talaghir, L.-G. (2014). The relationship between perceived coaching behaviour and
achievement motivation: a research in football players. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152,
421–425.
Stephens, K., & Waters, E. D. (2016). How & Why Technology Matters in Consulting & Coaching
Interventions. Consulting That Matters, 508.
Stirling, A. E., & Kerr, G. A. (2008). Elite female swimmers’ experiences of emotional abuse across time.
Journal of Emotional Abuse, 7(4), 89–113.
Stirling, A. E., & Kerr, G. A. (2013). The perceived effects of elite athletes’ experiences of emotional abuse in
the coach–athlete relationship. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 87–100.
Stoeber, J., & Otto, K. (2006). Positive conceptions of perfectionism: Approaches, evidence, challenges.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(4), 295–319.
Stoeber, J., Uphill, M. A., & Hotham, S. (2009). Predicting race performance in triathlon: The role of
perfectionism, achievement goals, and personal goal setting. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,
31(2), 211–245.
Stoll, O., Lau, A., & Stoeber, J. (2008). Perfectionism and performance in a new basketball training task: Does
striving for perfection enhance or undermine performance? Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9(5), 620.
Tenenbaum, G. E., Eklund, R. C., & Kamata, A. E. (2012). Measurement in sport and exercise psychology.
Human Kinetics.
Vazou, S., Ntoumanis, N., & Duda, J. L. (2006). Predicting young athletes’ motivational indices as a function of
their perceptions of the coach-and peer-created climate. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7(2), 215–233.
Vieira, E. de P. L., Gurgel, J. L., Maia, T. N., Porto, F., Louro, J. Q., Silva, E. F., & Alves Junior, E. de D.
(2015). Reach capacity in older women submitted to flexibility training. Revista Brasileira de
Cineantropometria & Desempenho Humano, 17, 722–732.
Wylleman, P., Rosier, N., De Brandt, K., & De Knop, P. (2016). Coaching athletes through career transitions. In
The psychology of sports coaching (pp. 7–20). Routledge.
Yammarino, F. J., Dionne, S. D., Chun, J. U., & Dansereau, F. (2005). Leadership and levels of analysis: A
state-of-the-science review. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(6), 879–919.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1339
JPES ® www.efsupit.ro