SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences / 2026 / Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Adaptation of the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches (Sport Climate Questionnaire) Into Turkish

Gülselin Küçükçakir0009-0009-6305-6806
Sinan Yıldırım(PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-0307-7922
Pages
—
Publication Date
2025-08-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, the long and short forms of the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches are valid and reliable tools for assessing coaches’ autonomy-supportive behaviors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study seeks to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish adaptation of the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches (Sport Climate Questionnaire).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research group consisted of 353 active athletes aged between 12 and 18 years (199 females and 154 males; mean age = 13.95 ± 2.08 years).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, the long and short forms of the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches are valid and reliable tools for assessing coaches’ autonomy-supportive behaviors.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Autonomy support · Autonomy-supportive behaviors · Coach

Abstract

This study seeks to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish adaptation of the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches (Sport Climate Questionnaire). The research group consisted of 353 active athletes aged between 12 and 18 years (199 females and 154 males; mean age = 13.95 ± 2.08 years). Data were collected using the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches and the Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used for data analysis. The CFA results confirmed the single-factor structure of both the long and short forms of the scale. Criterion-related validity analysis revealed a positive correlation between the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches and the empowering climate dimension, while a negative correlation was found with the disempowering climate dimension. Both forms of the scale demonstrated adequate reliability coefficients, with satisfactory Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability values. Similarly, test-retest correlations were found to be sufficient. In conclusion, the long and short forms of the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches are valid and reliable tools for assessing coaches’ autonomy-supportive behaviors.

🔖

Cite This Article

Küçükçakir, G., Yıldırım, S. (2025). Adaptation of the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coaches (Sport Climate Questionnaire) Into Turkish. Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences, Volume: 16 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.54141/psbd.1634761

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (47)

  1. Adie, J. W., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2012). Perceived coach-autonomy support, basic need satisfaction and the well-and ill-being of elite youth soccer players: A longitudinal investigation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(1), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.07.008
  2. Alpar, R. (2006). Spor bilimlerinde uygulamalı istatistik [Applied statistics in sport sciences] (3. Baskı [3rd ed]). Nobel Yayın Da˘gıtım [Nobel Publication Distribution].
  3. Amorose, A. J. (2007). Coaching effectiveness: Exploring the relationship between coaching behavior and self-determined motivation. In M. S. Hagger & N. L. D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Self- determination theory in exercise and sport (pp. 209-227). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  4. Appleton, P. R., Ntoumanis, N., Quested, E., Viladrich, C., & Duda, J. L. (2016). Initial validation of the coach-created Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ-C). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 53-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.05.008
  5. Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction: a motivational basis of performance and weil‐being in two work settings 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 34(10), 2045-2068. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02690.x
  6. Balaguer, I., Castillo, I. y Duda, J. L. (2009). Apoyo a la autonomía, satisfacción de las necesidades, motivación y bienestar en deportistas de competición: Un análisis de la teoría de la autodeterminación. Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 17, 123-139.
  7. Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self‐determination theory perspective. Science Education, 84(6), 740-756. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6 3.0.CO;2-3
  8. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS, EQS, and LISREL: Comparative approaches to testing for the factorial validity of a measuring instrument. International Journal of Testing, 1(1), 55-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327574IJT0101_4
  9. Byrne, B. M. (2016). Adaptation of assessment scales in cross-national research: Issues, guidelines, and caveats. International Perspectives in Psychology, 5(1), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/ipp0000042
  10. Carpentier, J., & Mageau, G. A. (2013). When change-oriented feedback enhances motivation, well-being and performance: A look at autonomy-supportive feedback in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14(3), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.01.003
  11. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
  12. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
  13. Cronin, L., Arthur, C. A., Hardy, J., & Callow, N. (2015). Transformational leadership and task cohesion in sport: The mediating role of inside sacrifice. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 37(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2014-0116
  14. Côté, J. (2002). Coach and peer influence on children’s development through sport. In J. M. Silva & D. Stevens (Eds.), Psychological foundations of sport (pp. 520-540). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  15. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985b). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
  16. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024
  17. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
  18. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49(3), 182. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801
  19. Deci, E. L., La Guardia, J. G., Moller, A. C., Scheiner, M. J., & Ryan, R. M. (2006). On the benefits of giving as well as receiving autonomy support: Mutuality in close friendships. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 32(3), 313-327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205282148
  20. Felton L, Jowett S. (2013). “What do coaches do” and “how do they relate”: Their effects on athletes' psychological needs and functioning. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 23(2), e130-e139. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12029
  21. George, D., Mallery, P. (2012). IBM SPSS Statistics 23 step by step: A simple guide and reference. Boston, Pearson.
  22. Gözmen Elmas, A., Keskin Akın, N., & Aşçı, F. H. (2018). The Validity and reliability of empowering and disempowering motivational climate questionnaire (EDMCQ-C) for Turkish adolescents athletes. Spormetre: The Journal of Physical Education & Sport Sciences, 16(3), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1501/Sporm_0000000376
  23. Isoard-Gautheur, S., Guillet-Descas, E., & Lemyre, P.-N. (2012). A prospective study of the influence of perceived coaching style on burnout propensity in high level young athletes: Using a self-determination theory perspective. The Sport Psychologist, 26(2), 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.26.2.282
  24. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson. R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  25. Hagger, M.S., Chatzisarantis, N.L.D., Hein, V., Pihu, M., Soos, I. & Karsai, I. (2007). The perceived autonomy support scale for exercise settings (PASSES): Development, validity, and crosscultural invariance in young people. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8(5), 632-653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.09.001
  26. Hodge, K., & Lonsdale, C. (2011). Prosocial and antisocial behavior in sport: The role of coaching style, autonomous vs. controlled motivation, and moral disengagement. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 33(4), 527-547. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.33.4.527 https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/sport-climate-questionnaire/ Karadağ, D., Gözmen, A, Keskin, N., Aşçı, F. H. (2025). Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of the Scales of Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Coach and Parent in Young Athletes: Methodological Study. Türkiye Klinikleri Journal of Sports Sciences, 17(1), 52-60. https://doi.org/10.5336/sportsci.2024-105741
  27. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
  28. Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coach-athlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21, 883-904. https://doi.org/10.1080/0264041031000140374
  29. Mageau, G. A., Ranger, F., Joussemet, M., Koestner, R., Moreau, E., & Forest, J. (2015). Validation of the perceived parental autonomy support scale (P-PASS). Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 47(3), 251–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039325
  30. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64-82. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64
  31. Müftüler, M. (2016). Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Exercise Settings: Validity and reliability study for Turkish. Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1), 2158-2169. https://doi.org/10.14687/ijhs.v13i1.3653
  32. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1978). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
  33. Özdemir, A. (2008). Yönetim Biliminde İleri Araştırma Yöntemleri ve Uygulamalar (Advanced Research Methods and Applications in Management Science). Beta Yayınları (Beta Publications), İstanbul.
  34. Quested E. & Duda JL. (2011). Perceived autonomy support, motivation regulations and the self-evaluative tendencies of student dancers. Journal of Dance Medicine & Science, 15(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089313X1101500101
  35. Reinboth, M., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2004). Dimensions of coaching behavior, need satisfaction, and the psychological and physical welfare of young athletes. Motivation and Emotion, 28(3), 297-313. https://doi.org/0146-7239/04/0900-0297/0
  36. Reynolds, A. J., & McDonough, M. H. (2015). Moderated and mediated effects of coach autonomy support, coach involvement, and psychological need satisfaction on motivation in youth soccer. The Sport Psychologist, 29(1), 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.2014-0023
  37. Ryan, R. M. (2009). Self determination theory and well being. Social Psychology, 84(822), 848–849.
  38. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., ve Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395793
  39. Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323-338. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338
  40. Smoll, F. L., & Smith, R. E. (2002). Coaching behavior research and intervention in youth sports. In F. L. Smoll, & R. E. Smith (Eds.), Children and youth in sport: A biopsychosocial perspective (pp. 211–233). Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.
  41. Smith, A., Ntoumanis, N., & Duda, J. (2010). An investigation of coach behaviors, goal motives, and implementation intentions as predictors of well-being in sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 22(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200903403190
  42. Smit, E. S., Dima, A. L., Immerzeel, S. A. M., van den Putte, B., & Williams, G. C. (2017). The virtual care climate questionnaire: development and validation of a questionnaire measuring perceived support for autonomy in a virtual care setting. Journal of medical internet research, 19(5), e155. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6714
  43. Stenling, A., & Tafvelin, S. (2014). Transformational leadership and well-being in sports: The mediating role of need satisfaction. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 26(2), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2013.819392
  44. Vallerand, R. J., & Losier, G. F. (1999). An integrative analysis of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 142-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413209908402956
  45. Van Widenfelt, B. M., Treffers, P. D., De Beurs, E., Siebelink, B. M., & Koudijs, E. (2005). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of assessment instruments used in psychological research with children and families. Clinical child and family psychology review, 8, 135-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-005-4752-1
  46. Williams, G. C., Grow, V. M., Freedman, Z. R., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Motivational predictors of weight loss and weight-loss maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.115
  47. Yıldırım, S., & Koruç, Z. (2021). The Effect of Transformational Leadership and Well-Being on Performance of Soccer Players: An Inclusive Model. The Sport Psychologist, 1(4), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.2020-0064