Scand J Med Sci Sports 2008: 18: 664–673
Printed in Singapore . All rights reserved
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x
What makes coaches tick? The impact of coaches’ intrinsic and
extrinsic motives on their own satisfaction and that of their athletes
S. Jowett
School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
Corresponding author: Sophia Jowett, PhD, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough
LE11 3TU, UK. Tel: 144 1509 226331, Fax: 144 1509 226301, Email: S.Jowett@lboro.ac.uk
Accepted for publication 12 April 2007
This study aims to investigate the influence of two types of
motivational forces on coach and athlete satisfaction. The
focus is on intrinsic and extrinsic motives that initiate coach-
related behavior. A questionnaire that measures both types
of motivation and three facets of satisfaction (i.e., satisfac-
tion with performance, with instruction, and with the coach–
athlete relationship) was completed by 138 coaches. One
athlete from each of the coaches who participated in the
study was also asked to complete a questionnaire that
measures their satisfaction with performance, instruction,
and the coach–athlete relationship. Results from a series of
In the context of sport and exercise, motivation as a
general psychological concept has been researched
extensively and systematically for over two decades.
Most of this research has applied theoretical frame-
works such as achievement goal theory (e.g., Duda,
2001), self-determination theory (e.g., Frederick &
Ryan, 1995), and the hierarchical model of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation (e.g., Vallerand, 1997)
to investigate motivational issues concerning
mainly young sport participants. Research that
involves motivational issues concerning adult and/
or professional coaches is limited. Nonetheless,
coach motivation is an important psychological
characteristic because it can determine the form,
direction, intensity, and duration of coach behavior.
It has been suggested that enthusiastic and satisfied
coaches are these coaches who are highly motivated
(e.g., Martens, 1997). Thus, the study of coach
motivation is important because the generated
knowledge could provide valuable information
about what factors stimulate, maintain, and channel
coach behavior toward certain goals (e.g., desire to
impart information and achieve excellence). It could
also supply practical information in terms of recruit-
ing, educating, and retaining coaches. This study
aims to investigate the influence of intrinsic
motives (personal needs) and extrinsic motives (en-
664
Copyright & 2007 The Author
Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Munksgaard
regression analyses indicated that while intrinsic motivation
was moderately and positively related to all facets of coach
satisfaction, extrinsic motivation was only related to coach
satisfaction with the coach–athlete relationship. Athletes’
satisfaction with the coach–athlete relationship was only
associated with the coach’s intrinsic motivation. Interaction
effects among the two types of motivation were significant
suggesting that extrinsic motivation can potentially under-
mine intrinsic motivation when intrinsic motivation is low.
The findings are discussed based on assumptions put for-
ward by self-determination theory.
vironmental forces) on both coaches’ and athletes’
satisfaction.
Sports coaching is slowly but steadily becoming a
profession in many parts of the world. In the United
Kingdom, the profession, professionalism, and pro-
fessionalization of coaching have been widely dis-
cussed in various policy documents (see, e.g.,
Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2002).
In such documents, it is envisaged that coaching will
be elevated to a profession by 2012 and that it will
gain a professional structure and career pathway. In
the United States of America, coaching is already
viewed as a profession in which employment is
expected to increase faster than the average of all
professions through the year 2014 (see Occupational
Outlook Handbook, 2006–2007). Coaching is a pro-
fession in Australia, Canada, and Greece requiring
formal training, exams, certificates, and licensing.
Within a professionalized coaching context, intrinsic
motives (e.g., personal enjoyment and achievement,
interest in the job, and feelings of challenge) and
extrinsic motives (e.g., pay, promotions, benefits, job
security, work conditions, policies, and supervision)
will often be available and form part of the opera-
tional coaching structure. Consequently, profes-
sional coaches may be involved in coaching for its
intrinsic and extrinsic rewards to support and protect

the work they do. The discussion that follows pre-
sents research studies that have been conducted to
investigate specific motives that coaches hold for
coaching.
An international study in which coaching motives
across four countries (Australia, Canada, United
Kingdom, and Japan) were explored, revealed that
the main motives of coaches practising in the United
Kingdom included, fun and enjoyment, a means to
continue sport involvement, a sense of pride, achieve-
ment and success, as well as fitness and health
(Tamura et al., 1993). Moreover, a national study
conducted for the English Sports Council (1997)
reported that the most popular reasons for getting
involved in coaching included natural progression
from competitive sport and general interest in sport;
whereas the most popular reasons for maintaining
involvement in coaching included helping others to
improve, enjoyment from teaching, and making a
contribution to sport.
Within sport and exercise psychology, a handful of
empirical studies have investigated what drives coa-
ches into coaching. For example, Stevens and Weiss
(1991) examined female coaching motivation and
found that the major factors were the enjoyment
associated with working with athletes as well as the
pleasure gained from coaching and teaching. In
another study, Weiss et al. (1991) interviewed 28
female coaches following a coaching internship.
Major themes emerged following an inductive con-
tent analysis and revealed that female coaches ex-
pressed both positive motives and negative coaching
motives (i.e., disincentives). Positive themes included
the satisfaction of working with young sport perfor-
mers, the development of coaching skills and asso-
ciated fun, whereas negative themes included
negative interactions with mentor coach, low percep-
tions of competence, negative relationships with
athletes, and a lack of administrative support.
In a more recent study, Frederick and Morrison
(1999) found that collegiate coaches had five broad
coaching motives: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic
motivation, social motivation, educational growth
motivation, and professional relations motivation.
They found that coaches who endorsed a high
extrinsic-low intrinsic motivational attitude were
distant, tense, and private in their approach with
their athletes, while coaches who endorsed a low
extrinsic–high intrinsic motivational attitude were
more autonomous, yet more closely connected with
their athletes. It was suggested that coaches’ intrinsic
motivation contained affiliation and that coaches’
extrinsic motivation contained domination. It was
finally concluded that coaches’ motives impact on
athletes’ satisfaction and performance.
Overall, these studies suggest that there are a range
of coach-related motivating factors and that these
16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Coaching motives
factors are largely intrinsic in nature. Within Self-
Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985),
intrinsic motivation, defined as being motivated into
doing something that one finds innately interesting,
has been viewed as important because it can posi-
tively affect behavior, performance, and well-being.
According to the theory, a coach who is intrinsically
motivated will experience satisfaction, happiness,
and a sense of achievement. On the other hand,
extrinsic motivation, defined as being motivated
into doing something because it leads to a specific
goal, has been characterized as damaging because it
can control people’s behavior. Accordingly, a coach
who is extrinsically motivated to coach will approach
various coaching tasks with despise and resistance in
order to gain status, promotion, or positive evalua-
tions from others.
Deci’s (1980) Cognitive Evaluation Theory (a sub-
theory contained within SDT) claims that perceptions
that underline an individual’s internal control repre-
sent the basic feature that distinguishes intrinsically
motivated behavior from extrinsically motivated be-
havior (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000a, b;
Gagnè & Deci, 2005). For example, coaches who are
intrinsically motivated perceive themselves to be
more in control of their actions relative to coaches
who are extrinsically motivated. Early experimental
work has supported that extrinsic motivation, in the
form of extrinsic reinforcement or rewards, is not
necessarily a motivating factor, and it has been
argued that tangible rewards in fact undermine
intrinsic motivation (Deci, 1971). A meta-analytic
review of experimental research has supported that
‘‘tangible rewards tend to have a substantially nega-
tive effect on intrinsic motivation’’ (Deci et al., 1999,
pp. 658–659). Overall, theoretical assumptions and
empirical findings, generated from empirical studies
in coach motivation (e.g., Stevens & Weiss, 1991;
Frederick & Morrison, 1999) as well as athlete
motivation (e.g., Whitehead & Corbin, 1991; Man-
digo & Holt, 2000), highlight the importance of
intrinsic sources of motivation.
Although intrinsic motives are seemingly impor-
tant, extrinsic motives may not necessarily under-
mine coach motivation but may have an important
role to play particularly as the nature of sport
coaching gains professional status. A study by Potrac
et al. (2002) investigated the coaching behaviors of a
professional English soccer coach. Inductive analysis
of the interview data revealed that the coach’s
primary motivation was to develop a winning team
(an external source of motivation) while improve-
ment of individual players’ technique and decision-
making (internal sources of motivation) were sec-
ondary concerns. Moreover, Cushion and Jones
(2006) showed that in the context of professional
youth soccer, players who accepted their coaches’
665

Jowett
values and beliefs perceived to feel a step closer to
achieving performance success (e.g., professional
status as a soccer player). It is possible that the
evolving nature of professionalized sports coaching
requires that both intrinsic motives (e.g., personal
pleasure and enjoyment) and extrinsic motives (e.g.,
success and pay) work in synergy to meet not only
coaches but also their athletes’ needs for satisfaction
and performance accomplishments.
Cameron et al. (2001) recently conducted a meta-
analysis involving empirical research carried out
within the psychology of extrinsic and intrinsic
motivation. The study aimed to clarify whether
extrinsic rewards have negative effects on such out-
comes as enjoyment and performance. The findings
from their analysis indicated that extrinsic rewards
do not have pervasive negative effects on intrinsic
motivation. They further argued that rewards can be
helpful to shape performance, to establish interest,
and to maintain or enhance effort and persistence at
a task. Researchers in organizational psychology
have supported the claim that extrinsic motivation
does not have negative effects on working adults
(e.g., Bateman & Grant, 2006). Thus, research that
examines the relative effectiveness of intrinsic moti-
vation and extrinsic motivation of professional, adult
coaches on their own feelings of satisfaction and that
of their athletes is warranted.
The present study
This study aims to explore two sets of coach motives,
namely intrinsic and extrinsic motives, and their
impact on both coaches’ and athletes’ satisfaction.
Satisfaction has been viewed as an important correlate
of motivation (see e.g., Herzberg, 1959; Hackman &
Oldham, 1980; Baron, 1991; Gagnè & Deci, 2005).
Within organizational psychology, one of the most
influential and enduring theoretical frameworks
to link motivation and satisfaction is Frederick
Herzberg’s (1959) two-factor theory of motivation
and hygiene. Herzberg’s theory explains what job
factors motivate employees. He proposed that such
factors as company policy, supervision, interpersonal
relations, working conditions, and salary are hygiene
factors rather than motivators. According to the
theory, the absence of hygiene factors can create job
dissatisfaction, but their presence does not necessarily
lead to satisfaction. Herzberg further proposed that
five factors are strong determinants of job satisfaction:
achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibil-
ity, and advancement. These motivators (satisfiers)
were associated with long-term positive effects in job
performance while the hygiene factors (dissatisfiers)
consistently produced only short-term changes in job
performance.
666
16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Thus, this study examined three variables of satis-
faction in order to ascertain the degree to which
coaches’ and their athletes’ satisfaction is affected by
coaches’ intrinsic and/or extrinsic motives for coach-
ing. In addition, athletes’ satisfaction is studied in an
effort to explore the notion that coaches’ motivation
promotes satisfying sport participation in athletes
(e.g., Frederick & Morrison, 1999; Janssen & Dale,
2002). Finally, this dyadic approach to the study
highlights the interdependence that exists between a
coach and his/her athlete (Jowett, 2007). Thus, the
expectation is that the coach-athlete interdependence
would transpire in the links between coaches’ moti-
vation and athletes’ feelings of satisfaction. Based on
the above discussion, the following hypotheses are
formulated:
1. Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation
will be positively related to coach and athlete
satisfaction-related variables.
2. An interaction of intrinsic motivation and ex-
trinsic motivation will produce an effect on
satisfaction-related variables.
Hypothesis 1 is consistent with prevailing assump-
tions about the direct and positive association of
intrinsic motives on positive outcomes such as satis-
faction. This hypothesis further tests whether extrin-
sic rewards predict satisfaction that is similar to the
operation of intrinsic motivation. Hypothesis 2 is
based on whether intrinsic and extrinsic types of
motivation interact in producing positive or negative
effects on satisfaction-related variables. Testing this
hypothesis would provide evidence of potential un-
dermining effects of extrinsic motivation.
Method
Participants
Participants represented a cross-section of 138 male (n 5 114)
and female (n 5 24) coaches who practiced coaching in sports
like athletics (n 5 16), badminton (n 5 15), cycling (n 5 17),
equestrian (n 5 2), golf (n 5 19), gymnastics (n 5 4), rowing
(n 5 10), sailing (n 5 1), squash (n 5 10), swimming (n 5 23),
tennis (n 5 4), trampoline (n 5 2), and triathlon (n 5 15). The
level to which coaching was delivered varied from university
(n 5 18), regional (n 5 19), club (n 5 56), national (n 5 28), and
international level (n 5 16). Coaches were asked to categorize
their age in one of four groups: five coaches belonged to the
18- to 25-year-old group, 77 coaches belonged to the 26- to 39-
year-old group, 41 coaches belonged in the 40- to 55-year-old
group, and 15 coaches in the 561-year-old group. Coaches’
experience in coaching varied across five categories: 19 coa-
ches were relatively new to the profession (1–3 years), 18
coaches were coaching for a longer period (4–7 years), 56
coaches recorded coaching experience that spanned from 8 to
15 years, 28 coaches were coaching for much longer (15–30
years), while 17 coaches had at least 31 years coaching
experience. The participants reported their status as either
full-time coaches (39% salaried coaches), part-time coaches
(45% coached for a fee), or volunteer coaches (16% coached

without payment). The majority (n 5 134) of the coaches were
British nationals and coached in England with the exception
of eight coaches who coached in Scotland.
Moreover, data were collected from 138 male (n 5 72) and
female (n 5 66) athletes, each one was coached by the coaches
recruited to participate in the study. The age of the athletes
was categorized in four categories: 26 athletes were categor-
ized in the o18-year-old group, 59 athletes were categorized in
the 19- to 23-year-old group, 26 athletes were categorized in
the 24- to 30-year-old group, and 27 athletes were categorized
in the 431-year-old group. For both the athlete and the coach
samples, the gender distribution was as follows: female coa-
ches coached eight male athletes and 16 female athletes, while
male coaches coached 50 female athletes and 64 male athletes.
(This study is part of a larger research project.)
Instruments
Two subscales from the Coach Motivation Scale (CMS;
Frederick & Morrison, 1999) were utilized to examine coa-
ches’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The CMS was devel-
oped based on the principles of Self-Determination Theory
(Deci & Ryan, 1985) and thus its emphasis on differentiating
intrinsic and extrinsic coaching motives. The intrinsic motiva-
tion subscale includes six items and indicates to what extent
the sources of engagement are intrinsic such as fun and
enjoyment (e.g., ‘‘I coach because it’s fun’’; and ‘‘I coach
because the work is interesting’’). The extrinsic motivation
subscale includes five items and reflects motivational sources
that are external such as high salary or good benefits (e.g., ‘‘I
coach because the pay is good’’; and ‘‘I coach because the
‘‘perks’’ of the job are good’’). (The coach motivation items
are presented in Appendix A.) A 7-point response scale was
used, where 1 5 ‘‘strongly disagree,’’ 4 5 ‘‘half-way,’’ and
7 5 ‘‘strongly agree,’’ The internal consistency with the sample
of this study was acceptable with 0.85 for intrinsic motivation
and 0.83 for extrinsic motivation.
The scale was subjected to confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) because evidence of its validity has not been extensive
(see Frederick & Morrison, 1999). CFA was performed to
assess the two-dimensional factorial structure of intrinsic and
extrinsic motives with this sample. Hu and Bentler (1998)
recommended the usefulness of standardized root mean
square residual (SRMR) and the comparative fit index (CFI)
in model assessment. It has also been suggested that any model
reporting values above 0.90 for CFI (Bentler & Bonett, 1980)
and below 0.08 for SRMR (Hu & Bentler, 1998) should be
viewed as acceptable. The fit indexes for the two-dimensional
structure of intrinsic and extrinsic motives were 0.93 for CFI
and 0.07 for SRMR. These indexes suggest a good model fit
with the data. Notwithstanding these results, two items (‘‘I
coach because I enjoy the thrill of the competitive situation’’
and ‘‘I coach because I like being in charge of others’’)
recorded high measurement error, low standardized coeffi-
cients, and low standardized r-squared indicating that these
items may be less effective. Therefore, future research should
pay attention to how these items perform.
The Athlete Satisfaction Questionnaire (Riemer & Chella-
durai, 1998) was employed to measure both athlete and coach
satisfaction-related variables. For the purpose of this study
two satisfaction subscales were utilized to assess both athletes’
and coaches’ perceptions of satisfaction: (a) satisfaction with
performance, and (b) satisfaction with instruction. Satisfac-
tion with performance included three items (e.g., ‘‘I am
satisfied with my athlete’s skill improvement thus far’’). The
subscales’ internal consistency with this sample was 0.80 for
athletes and 0.75 for coaches. Satisfaction with instruction
16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Coaching motives
also included three items (e.g., ‘‘I am satisfied with the training
programme this season’’) and the internal consistency was 0.83
for athletes and 0.73 for coaches. Two further items were also
developed to measure coaches’ and athletes’ perceptions of
their overall satisfaction with the coach–athlete relationship
(i.e., ‘‘I am satisfied with the overall coach–athlete relation-
ship’’ and ‘‘My athlete/coach is satisfied with our overall
coach–athlete relationship’’). The internal consistency of these
items was 0.79 for athletes and 0.73 for coaches. A 7-point
response scale was used, where 1 5 ‘‘strongly disagree,’’
4 5 ‘‘half-way,’’ and 7 5 ‘‘strongly agree,’’ (The satisfaction
items are presented in Appendix A.)
Procedures
Two research assistants administered the questionnaires em-
ploying a variety of methods (telephone, email, and paper-
and-pencil). The participants’ informed consent was sought
once the objectives of the study were explained, ethical issues
of confidentiality were ensured, and the criteria for participa-
tion were listed (e.g., coaches’ and athletes’ age had to be at
least 18 and they had to be involved in the sport on a regular
basis). The study received full ethical approval from the
University Ethical Advisory Committee before data collection.
Data analysis
Means, Standard Deviations (SDs), response range, and
correlations of all study variables were calculated. A series
of regression analyses were then employed to investigate the
relationships between the dependent variables of coach and
athlete satisfaction with the independent variables of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation. Tests of Hypothesis 1 involved
computing six separate multiple regression correlations. The
goal was to determine the direction and strength of the
relationships between the independent (motivation types)
and dependent variables (satisfaction-related). Tests of Hy-
pothesis 2 involved computing moderated hierarchical regres-
sion analyses in which the independent variables were centered
(i.e., they were put in deviation score form so that their means
are zero). These analyses aimed to determine whether intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation could predict interactively each one
of the six satisfaction-related variables. The procedures fol-
lowed are in accordance with recommendations put forward
by Aiken and West (1991), Cohen et al. (2003), and Biddle et al.
(2001).
Results
Table 1 displays descriptive statistics, response range,
reliability scores, and bivariate correlations among
all variables. The results of the regression analyses
are displayed in Table 2 and include information
about the standardized and unstandardized regres-
sion coefficients for the independent variables con-
tained in Hypothesis 1. Table 3 includes information
related to Hypothesis 2 and presents the moderated
regressions concentrating on the interaction effects
between the independent variables.
Hypothesis 1 concerned the nature of the relation-
ship between the six dependent variables of coach
and athlete satisfaction (i.e., satisfaction with instruc-
tion, with performance, and with relationship) and
667
 16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Jowett
Table 1. Means, SD, range of responses, reliabilities (in brackets), and correlations for all variables

Mean SD Range 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Intrinsic motivation 6.10 0.81 2.33–7.00 (0.85)

Extrinsic motivation 3.44 1.50 1.00–6.60 0.26** (0.83)
Coach performance satisfaction 5.84 0.83 3.00–7.00 0.21* 0.05 (0.75)
Coach instruction satisfaction 3.87 1.35 2.67–7.00 0.23** 0.09 0.62** (0.73)
Coach relationship satisfaction 5.94 0.86 3.00–7.00 0.43** 0.25** 0.47** 0.36** (0.73)
Athlete performance satisfaction 5.82 0.93 2.33–7.00 0.02 0.04 0.31** 0.06 0.31** (0.80)
Athlete instruction satisfaction 3.62 1.26 1.00–7.00 0.17 0.02 0.11 0.07 0.25 0.36** (0.83)
Athlete relationship satisfaction 5.83 0.90 1.50–7.00 0.27** 0.15 0.17* 0.05 0.35** 0.31** 0.67** (0.79)

N 5 134 (listwise deletion of missing data).

*Po0.05; **Po0.01.

Table 2. Satisfaction-related variables regressed on intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation separately

Intrinsic motivation Extrinsic motivation

b (unstandardised coefficients) P b (unstandardised coefficients) P

Coach performance satisfaction 0.21 (0.25) 0.01 0.003 (0.002) 0.97

Coach instruction satisfaction 0.22 (0.22) 0.01 0.03 (0.02) 0.69
Coach relationship satisfaction 0.39 (0.41) 0.01 0.15 (0.09) 0.05
Athlete performance satisfaction 0.03 (0.04) 0.69 0.05 ( 0.03) 0.58
Athlete instruction satisfaction 0.12 (0.13) 0.18 0.008 ( 0.005) 0.93
Athlete relationship satisfaction 0.24 (0.27) 0.01 0.09 (0.05) 0.28

N 5 134 (listwise deletion of missing data).

Table 3. Satisfaction-related variables regressed on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

Variables R2 change F change b t

Coach performance satisfaction

Intrinsic 0.04 6.30* 0.21 2.41**
Extrinsic 0.05 3.13* 0.003 0.03
Intrinsic 0.06 2.91* 0.31 2.82**
Extrinsic 0.004 0.07
Intrinsic  extrinsic 0.10 1.55
Coach instruction satisfaction
Intrinsic 0.05 7.34** 0.22 2.51**
Extrinsic 0.02 3.73** 0.40 0.69
Intrinsic 0.07 3.53** 0.28 2.99**
Extrinsic 0.02 0.45
Intrinsic  extrinsic 0.10 1.74*
Coach relationship satisfaction
Intrinsic 0.19 31.0** 0.41 4.93**
Extrinsic 0.21 17.6** 0.09 1.91*
Intrinsic 0.23 13.0** 0.36 3.98**
Extrinsic 0.08 1.88*
Intrinsic  extrinsic 0.09 1.78*

N 5 136.
*Po.10; **Po.05 (two tailed).

the two motivation types of extrinsic and intrinsic
motivation. The independent or predictor variables
of coach intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motiva-
tion explained moderate amounts of variance in
coaches’ satisfaction with the coach–athlete relation-
ship (R2 5 0.19 and 0.21, Po0.01). Coach intrinsic
motivation and extrinsic motivation explained
small amounts of variance in coach satisfaction
with instruction (R2 5 0.05 and 0.05, Po0.05), and
with performance (R2 5 0.04 and 0.04, Po0.05).
Similarly, the independent variable of coach intrinsic
motivation and extrinsic motivation explained
small amounts of variance in athlete satisfaction
with the coach–athlete relationship (R2 5 0.07 and
0.08, Po0.01). The nature of the relationship be-
tween the independent variables of coach intrinsic

668

motivation and extrinsic motivation and the depen-
dent variables of athlete satisfaction with instruction
(R2 5 0.01 and 0.01, P40.01), and with performance
(R2 5 0.001 and 0.003, P40.01) was trivial and not
significant.
Hypothesis 2 essentially tested the potential under-
mining (negative) effect of extrinsic motivation on
the six dependent variables of satisfaction. An under-
mining effect would occur if a significant interaction
were noted. A significant interaction effect was noted
because there was a significant increment in R2 when
the interaction term (intrinsic  extrinsic motivation)
was entered into the equation. Table 3 includes
satisfaction-related variables regressed on the inde-
pendent variables of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic
motivation, and their interaction. Specifically, two
interactions effects were significant using a two-tailed
test and a significance level of 0.10. (These effects
would have been significant at 0.05 in a one-tailed
test.) The findings suggest that coach satisfaction-
related variables (satisfaction with instruction and
satisfaction with relationship) were predicted by the
interaction between the two types of motivation.
It has been explained that by plotting the regres-
sion of the dependent variable (satisfaction-related)
on one of the independent variables (extrinsic moti-
vation) the form of the interaction is determined (see
Aiken & West, 1991; Biddle et al., 2001). Corre-
spondingly, high (1 SD above the mean) and low
(1 SD below the mean) values were substituted for
the independent variables into the final regression
equation and plotted the slopes against the depen-
dent variable. Figure 1 shows when intrinsic motiva-
tion is low, extrinsic motivation has a negative effect
on coaches’ satisfaction with instruction and when
intrinsic motivation is high, extrinsic motivation has
a positive effect on coaches satisfaction with instruc-
tion. Correspondingly, Fig. 2 shows that when in-
trinsic motivation is low, extrinsic motivation has a
positive effect on coaches’ satisfaction with the re-
lationship with their athlete, and when intrinsic
0.5
Coach instruction Satisfaction
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
−0.1
−0.2
−0.3
−0.4
−0.5
Extrinsic Motivation
Fig. 1. Regression slopes for coach instruction satisfaction
on extrinsic motivation under high ( & ) and low () condi-
tions for intrinsic motivation.
16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Coaching motives
0.5
Coach Relationship Satisfaction
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
− 0.1
− 0.2
− 0.3
− 0.4
− 0.5
− 0.6
Extrinsic Motivation
Fig. 2. Regression slopes for coach relationship satisfaction
on extrinsic motivation under high ( & ) and low () condi-
tions for intrinsic motivation.
motivation is high, extrinsic motivation has no effect
on coaches’ satisfaction with the relationship.
Discussion
This study sampled a cross-section of adult and/or
professional coaches exposed to ongoing intrinsic
(coaching is fun, interesting, challenging) and/or
extrinsic (coaching pay, benefits, prestige) rewards
and investigated the relationships between intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation with coach and athlete
satisfaction. Two specific hypotheses were tested.
The first hypothesis aimed to test whether intrinsic
motivation and extrinsic motivation operate in simi-
lar ways. The findings from multiple regression
analyses indicated that coaches’ both intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation positively affected coaches’ sa-
tisfaction with the coach–athlete relationship (i.e.,
the degree to which the coach was satisfied with the
relationship developed with his/her athlete). Coa-
ches’ intrinsic motivation, but not extrinsic motiva-
tion, affected coaches’ satisfaction with performance
and instruction. Athletes’ satisfaction with perfor-
mance and instruction appeared to be unaffected by
the type of coach motivation, with the exclusion of
satisfaction with the coach–athlete relationship.
While acknowledging that the variances explained
in these regressions were small, the findings partially
support Hypothesis 1 and indicate that extrinsic
sources of motivation did not lead to neither coach
nor athlete satisfaction with performance and in-
struction. This finding is in line with Herzberg’s
(1959) contention that the presence of some factors
(essentially extrinsic sources of motivation) do not
necessarily lead to satisfaction, yet their absence
could lead to dissatisfaction. Future research inves-
tigating the specific effects of the absence of extrinsic
sources of coach motivation on satisfaction is war-
ranted.
The finding that the extrinsic type of motivation
does not seem to have negative effects on coaches’
669

Jowett
experiences of satisfaction may be explained using
the concept of internalization. Gagnè and Deci
(2005; see also Ryan & Deci, 2000a) have explained
that extrinsically motivated behavior can vary in the
degree to which it is autonomous vs controlled.
Coaches’ autonomous extrinsic motivation refers to
experiencing activities as interesting and sponta-
neously satisfying. In contrast, coaches’ controlled
extrinsic motivation is located at the other end of the
spectrum and so it reflects feelings of external control
and pressure in behaving in certain ways. It is
suspected that coaches in this study had internalized
(‘‘took in’’) extrinsic rewards as autonomous yet not
as fully internalized to positively and strongly relate
to satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2 aimed to address the possible inter-
play among intrinsic motivation and extrinsic moti-
vation on producing an effect on satisfaction-related
variables. This hypothesis is important to test from a
theoretical and practical perspective because it can
inform us of the potential undermining (or not)
effects of extrinsic motivation. The findings indicated
that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations interact and
when intrinsic motivation was low, extrinsic motiva-
tion negatively affected coaches’ satisfaction with
instruction. Moreover, under conditions of high
intrinsic motivation, more extrinsically motivated
coaches experienced greater satisfaction with instruc-
tion. This finding suggests a synergistic effect of
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on coaches’ satis-
faction and supports Cameron et al.’s (2001) meta-
analytic findings that there is no statistical evidence
for detrimental effects of extrinsic rewards on mea-
sures of intrinsic motivation.
Moreover, the findings suggest an antagonistic
interaction pattern between intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation on coaches’ satisfaction with the coach–
athlete relationship (see Table 3, the opposite sign of
the interaction). Such a negative interaction (see
Cohen et al., 2003) signifies that the importance of
coaches’ high intrinsic motivation was lessened by
high extrinsic motivation, and vice versa; a partial
pattern of influence of the independent variable of
motivation on coaches’ satisfaction with the coach–
athlete relationship. Figure 2 further illustrates that
when intrinsic motivation was high, extrinsic motiva-
tion had no effect, while when intrinsic motivation
was low, extrinsic motivation positively influenced
coaches’ satisfaction with the relationship they had
established with the athlete.
Overall, these findings highlight the importance of
intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation and
also points to the potential undermining effect of
extrinsic motivation for coaches who are less intrin-
sically motivated. Organizational psychology has
long recognized the importance of intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation in work (e.g., Herzberg, 1959;
670
16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Porter & Lawler, 1968; Gagnè & Deci, 2005; Latham
& Pinder, 2005). Within the coaching context, coa-
ches are likely to receive both intrinsic rewards such
as personal enjoyment, a sense of achievement, and
feelings of challenge, and extrinsic rewards such
as pay, benefits, recognition, work conditions and
policies. Consequently, monetary rewards as a moti-
vating factor in sports coaching, like in any other
work setting, should be considered as practically
important.
From an applied perspective, the findings suggest
that coaches’ enjoyment, happiness and satisfaction
with their coaching involvement is largely dependent
on experiencing high levels of intrinsic motivation.
Thus, by putting in place strategies that increase
coaches’ interest in coaching (e.g., time and freedom
to make choices about when and where the training
will take place, what competitions to attend, how
many athletes they manage, help coaches to develop
effective relationships with athletes), coaching activ-
ities can be made more intrinsically rewarding. It is
also recommended that the coaching environment is
structured in such a way so that it offers both
intrinsic and extrinsic sources of motivation – parti-
cularly because extrinsic rewards appear to enhance
further intrinsic motivation.
The study has a number of theoretical and meth-
odological strengths. First, despite the empirical
evidence that intrinsic motivation is important in
both athletes and coaches, this is the first study to test
that coach intrinsic and extrinsic motivation have
additive and interactive effects on coach satisfaction.
This study is the first to have tested widely claimed
assumptions about the role of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation on behavior in the sport coaching setting.
Second, this study was a field study in which col-
lected data came from coaches who coached on a
regular basis, at a good performance level, and
received intrinsic and/or extrinsic rewards. Third,
the study utilized a dyadic approach to investigate
the impact of coaches’ motivation on their athletes’
feelings of satisfaction. Finally, a number of direc-
tions for future research and practical implications
emerge from the findings of the study.
The present study was focused on a single outcome
variable (i.e., satisfaction); thus additional outcome
variables such as performance, psychological well-
being, organizational trust, and commitment could
be examined to provide a better picture of the work
outcomes associated with coaches’ intrinsic and ex-
trinsic motivation. Moreover, future research should
also examine individual differences (e.g., personal
orientations, gender, coaching experience and quali-
fications), and environmental factors associated with
sports coaching and/or factors that define the specific
context in which the coach operates (e.g., challenge,
choice, feedback, performance level, sport type), as

well as the interpersonal climate (e.g., coaching
mentor/manager, coach–athlete–parent network).
Longitudinal and qualitative research co-examine
how, why, and when the promotion of intrinsic
and/or extrinsic motivation leads to the most effec-
tive performance and satisfaction. Such research
would generate knowledge of change and stability
of motivational factors. Moreover, the opportunity
to incorporate the measure of the three basic psy-
chological needs of autonomy, competence and re-
latedness (see Ryan & Deci, 2000a, b; Gagnè & Deci,
2005), would help understand the manner to which
extrinsic rewards become internalized and hence
promote autonomous (extrinsic) motivation. Finally,
the development of an instrument that assesses coach
intrinsic motivation and the types of autonomous
and controlled extrinsic motivation would help the
generation of knowledge pertaining to the motiva-
tional bases for effective coaching behavior.
Research within the field of coach motivation is
significant because it would help provide knowledge
relative to what work environments promote intrin-
sic motivation, satisfaction, and full internalization
of extrinsic motivation. In the context of sports
coaching (be it professional or not), coaches need
to operate in an environment that maximizes persis-
tence, effective performance, job satisfaction, positive
work attitudes, and psychological commitment. Un-
16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Coaching motives
der such environmental conditions coaches would be
fully equipped to experience feelings of fulfilment
while they strive to actualize their athletes’ talents.
Perspectives
In sport and exercise settings, motivation as a psy-
chological concept has been researched extensively
and systematically; however, most of this research
involves motivational issues concerning young sport
participants. From a psychological perspective, the
coach’s motivation is as important as the athlete’s
motivation, because it offers valuable information
about what factors stimulate, maintain, and channel
the behaviors of two distinct yet interrelated indivi-
duals toward certain goals. The findings of this study
reveal the role of coach motivation in their own
experience of satisfaction, as well as the satisfaction
experienced by their athletes. This study makes an
important contribution to the literature by highlight-
ing important aspects of coach motivation that have
both conceptual and practical value. Finally, this
study paves the way for more research in the under-
studied area of coach motivation.
Key words: coach motivation, intrinsic motivation,
extrinsic motivation.

References
Aiken LS, West SG. Multiple regression:
testing and interpreting interactions.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.
Baron RA. Motivation in work settings:
reflections on the core of
organizational research. Motivat Emot
1991: 15: 1–8.
Bateman TS, Grant JM. 2006 Revisiting
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Unpublished manuscript.
Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests
and goodness of fit in the analysis of
covariance structures. Psychol Bull
1980: 88: 588–606.
Biddle SJH, Markland D, Gilbourne D,
Chatzisarantis NLD, Sparkes AC.
Research methods in sport and exercise
psychology: quantitative and
qualitative issues. J Sports Sci 2001: 19:
777–809.
Cameron J, Banko KM, Pierce WD.
Pervasive negative effects of rewards on
intrinsic motivation: the myth
continues. The Behav Anal 2001: 24: 1–
44.
Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS.
Applied multiple regression/correlation
analysis for the behavioural sciences,
3rd ed. London: Lawrence Elbaum,
2003.
Cushion C, Jones RL. Power, discourse,
and symbolic violence in professional
youth soccer: the case of Albion
football club. Sociol Sport J 2006: 23:
142–161.
Deci EL. Effects of externally mediated
rewards on intrinsic motivation. J
Personal Soc Psychol 1971: 18: 105–
115.
Deci EL. The psychology of self-
determination. Lexington, MA: D.C.
Health and Company, 1980.
Deci EL, Koestner R, Ryan RM. The
undermining effect is reality after all:
extrinsic rewards, task interest, and
self-determination: Reply to
Eisenberger, Pierve, and Cameron
(1999) and Lepper, Henderlong, and
Gingras (1999). Psychol Bull 1999: 125:
627–668.
Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic motivation
and self-determination in human
behaviour. New York: Plenum Press,
1985.
Department for Culture, Media and
Sport 2002. The coaching task force:
Final report. (Sport and Recreation
Division).
Duda JL. Achievement goal research in
sport: pushing the boundaries and
clarifying some misunderstandings. In:
Roberts GC, ed. Advances in
motivation in sport and exercise.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics,
2001: 129–182.
English Sports Council 1997. Survey of
English Coaches 1993.
Frederick CM, Morrison CS. Collegiate
coaches: an examination of motivation
style and its relationship to decision
making and personality. J Sport Behav
1999: 22: 221–233.
Frederick CM, Ryan RM. Self-
determination in sport: a review using
cognitive evaluation theory. Int J Sport
Psychol 1995: 26: 5–23.
Gagnè M, Deci EL. Self-determination
theory and work motivation. J Org
Behav 2005: 26: 331–362.
Hackman JR, Oldham GR. Work
redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley, 1980.
Herzberg F. The motivation to work.
New York: Wiley, 1959.

671

Jowett
Hu L, Bentler PM. Fit indices in
covariance structure modeling:
sensitivity to underparameterized
model misspecification. Psychol
Methods 1998: 3: 424–453.
Janssen J, Dale G. The seven secrets of
successful coaches: how to unlock and
unleash your team’s full potential.
Tuscon, AZ: Winning The Mental
Game, 2002.
Jowett S. Interdependence analysis and
the 311 Cs in the coach–athlete
relationship. In: Jowett S, Lavallee D,
eds. Social psychology in sport.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics,
2007: 15–27.
Latham GP, Pinder CC. Work
motivation theory and research at
the dawn of the twenty-first
century. Ann Rev Psychol 2005: 56:
485–516.
Mandigo JL, Holt NL. Putting theory
into practice: how cognitive
evaluation theory can help us motivate
children in physical activity
environments. J Phys Educ Recreat
Dance 2000: 71: 44–49.
672
Martens R. Successful coaching, 2nd edn.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics,
1997.
Occupational outlook handbook (2006–
07). U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau
of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2600.
Porter LW, Lawler EE. III. Managerial
attitudes and performance.
Homewood, IL: Irwin-Dorsey, 1968.
Potrac P, Jones R, Armour K. It’s all
about getting respect: the coaching
behaviours of an expert English soccer
coach. Sport Educ Soc 2002: 7: 183–
202.
Riemer HA, Chelladurai P. Development
of the athlete satisfaction questionnaire
(ASQ). J Sport Exerc Psychol 1998: 20:
127–156.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation: classic definitions
and new directions. Contemp Educ
Psychol 2000a: 25: 54–67.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. The ‘‘what’’ and
‘‘why’’ of goal pursuits: human needs
and the self-determination of
behaviour. Psychol Inquiry 2000b: 11:
227–268.
16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Stevens C, Weiss MR. Motivation and
attrition of female coaches. Sport
Psychologist 1991: 7: 244–261.
Tamura K, Davey C, Haslam L. A four
country study of the training for sports
coaching in Australia, Canada, the
United Kingdom and Japan. Osaka
University of Health and Sports
Science, 1993.
Vallerand RJ. Toward a hierarchical
model of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. In: Zanna MP, ed.
Advances in experimental social
psychology. New York: Academic
Press, 1997: 29, 271–360.
Weiss MR., Barber H, Sisley BL, Ebbeck V.
Developing competence and confidence
in novice female coaches: perceptions of
ability and affective experiences
following a season-long coaching
internship. J Sport Exerc Psychol 1991:
13: 336–363.
Whitehead JR, Corbin CB. Youth fitness
testing: the effective of percentile-based
evaluative feedback on intrinsic
motivation. Res Quart Exerc Sport
1991: 62: 225–231.
 Appendix A

Table A1Questionnaire items used to assess coaching motivation and coaches’ and athletes’ satisfaction with performance, instruction and relationship

Coach items Athlete items

Coaching motivation items

Intrinsic motives
I like to coach sports
Because it is fun
Because the work is interesting
Because I find coaching to be exciting
Because I like the challenge of coaching
Because I enjoy the thrill of the competitive situation
Because it makes me happy
Extrinsic motives
Because the pay is good
Because the benefits associated with my coaching job are good
Because I like the prestige associated with coaching
Because I like being in charge of others
Because the ‘‘perks’’ of the job are good
Satisfaction items
Satisfaction with instruction
I am satisfied with the training program this season I am satisfied with the training program this season
I am satisfied with the instruction I have provided my athlete I am satisfied with the instruction I have received from my coach
I am satisfied with the way I have instructed the various tactics I am satisfied with the way my coach has instructed me in
and techniques relevant tactics and techniques
Satisfaction with performance
I am satisfied with the degree to which my athlete has reached his/her I am satisfied with the degree to which I have reached my
performance goals during the season performance goals during this season
I am satisfied with my athlete’s improvement over the previous season I am satisfied with the improvement in my performance over the
previous season
I am satisfied with my athlete’s skill improvement thus far I am satisfied with my skill improvement thus far
Satisfaction with media
I am satisfied with the media’s support of our sport I am satisfied with the media’s support of our sport
I am satisfied with the support from the club/sport association. I am satisfied with the support from the club/sport association.
I am satisfied with the supportiveness of the fans I am satisfied with the supportiveness of the fans
Relation satisfaction
I am satisfied with my overall coach-athlete relationship I am satisfied with my overall coach-athlete relationship
My athlete is satisfied with our overall coach-athlete relationship My coach is satisfied with our overall coach-athlete relationship

673
Coaching motives

16000838, 2008, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00705.x by Cochrane Croatia, Wiley Online Library on [12/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License