Background/Purpose
Much research has been done on social cohesion in athletics but significantly less has been completed on the coach-athlete relationship. While the coach-athlete relationship and social cohesion studies have answered many questions few have taken team demographics into account. Therefore, this study considers the impacts of socioeconomic status on the coach-athlete relationship and social cohesion
The first hypothesis predicted a negative correlation between socioeconomic status and coach-athlete relationship. The second hypothesis was that there would be no relationship between social cohesion and socioeconomic status and the third hypothesis was that socioeconomic status would have an impact on the relationship between social cohesion and the coach-athlete relationship.
Method
One hundred forty-one baseball and softball players from nine high schools in central and south Mississippi participated in this study. Participants were surveyed at the end of the regular season but prior to the post season. They responded to questions regarding their socioeconomic status, team social cohesion (GEQ; Carron, Brawley & Widmeyer, 2002), and their perception of their coach-athlete relationship (CART-Q; Jowett & Cockerill, 2002).
Analysis/Results
Pearson's correlations were used to analyze the first two hypotheses. There was a non-significant correlation between socioeconomic status and the averaged total score of the CART-Q, r (136) = -.031, p > .05. A positive correlation was found for socioeconomic status and the total mean scores of the GEQ social subscales, r (136) = .231, p < .05.
The third hypothesis was tested first by performing a correlation between coach-athlete relationship and social cohesion, r (136) = .319, p < .05. Next a partial correlation was conducted with the aforementioned variables controlling for socioeconomic status, r (136) = .336, p < .05. A positive relationship was evident, meaning that socioeconomic status was shown to affect the relationship between social cohesion and the coach-athlete relationship.
Ancillary results showed that playing status and familial status did not impact the coach-athlete relationship.
Conclusions
Previous research has shown that there are differences in the experiences of those from various socioeconomic levels. It would be naive to assume these different perspectives and experiences would not manifest once an individual enters an athletic environment. This would suggest that coaches who have members of their teams from lower socioeconomic statuses will need to invest more effort in developing social cohesion but should not have great concerns with respect to the coach-athlete relationships. This study should be conducted again, perhaps in more urban environments and with other sports.