An under-representation of head female coaches have been prominent throughout the sports industry and have served as an area of concern for researchers. Cunningham, Doherty, and Gregg, (2007) suggests that this occurrence maintains the stereotype of male domination within sport organizations and neglects the visibility of role models to young female athletes. Recent literature has used the Social Cognitive Career Theory (Cunningham et al., 2007) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (Sagas, Cunningham, & Pastore, 2006) to investigate decreasing numbers of females in head coaching positions. Various approaches have been researched including: perceived barriers of career development in college students (Albert & Luzzo, 1999), gender roles and ethnic differences (Gainor & Lent, 1998), and future intentions of assistant coaches. Gender has continued to be a factor in career development with women producing lower results in self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to further investigate the occurrence of the gender gap through female collegiate athletes.
Method
To examine the cognitive-person variables in line with previous coaching and SCCT research (Cunningham, Doherty, & Gregg, 2007), scales were derived for perceived social supports and barriers for the coaching profession (Lent et al., 2001), outcome expectations of pursuing a coaching career (Lent et al.), and perceived self-efficacy in coaching (Doherty & Johnson, 2001). For this study, five items were adapted for the social supports measure, six items for the social barriers measure. Five items were used to evaluate the athletes' expectations of positive outcomes with six items for the negative outcomes. Finally, six items were used to explore self-efficacy in coaching. Student-athletes (N=1600) were randomly selected from 23 institutions across three BCS conference and responded with a rate of 34.3%. Of these, 163 female student athletes were used for the current analysis. Further, to assess for gender differences in the coach-athlete dyad, respondents were divided into opposite gender dyads (n=80) and same gender dyad (n=83). A MANCOVA was constructed, with the team's success and athlete race as covariates, to examine any differences between female athletes and their coach's gender.
Analysis/Results
Interestingly, no significant differences occurred in the analyses. That is, no differences in perceived outcomes, supports, barriers, or coaching efficacy occurred between female athletes coached by males than those coached by females.
Conclusions
While no differences occurred here, a significant plight of the female coach exists today. Results here seem to merit further research into numerous antecedents contributing to today's female coach.