Background The current approaches used to develop coaches within many sport organisations extend beyond merely the professional knowledge related to sport-specific aspects. Effective coaching notably entails intrapersonal skills related to learning through experience and developing one’s own approach, and these skills are often targeted in coach development. Recognising that researchers have delivered Coach Development Programs (CDPs) that use strategies like reflective practice to foster coaches’ strategies and attitudes toward reflection, reviewing research in this domain could inform the development of our field. We conducted the current review to examine nonformal intrapersonal CDPs within the academic literature with goals of summarising existing CDPs, while also identifying factors related to their implementation. Method: The PRISMA guidelines informed our search strategy, including a database search along with supplemental strategies to identify studies. In addition to describing the CDPs generally, each study was also coded for: (a) potential to be implemented and maintained in sport contexts, (b) behaviour change techniques (BCTs), and (c) risk of bias. Results: After screening the full-texts of studies, we identified 10 unique intrapersonal CDPs. Most CDPs entailed pilot investigations of small samples, involving both qualitative and quantitative methods focused on coaches’ experiences when using reflective strategies. The majority of CDPs were conducted in-person and in one-on-one contexts. The most frequently used BCT was self-monitoring of behaviour, and low-to-moderate information was reported regarding internal and external validity. Conclusions: Whereas reflective practice may enable coach development, researchers must seek opportunities to design higher-quality intervention studies that are designed to enhance both internal and external validity.

Purpose: Coaches' motivation is central to their coaching, however, few studies have examined coaches' motivation in different cultures. The aim of this study was to provide initial validation of the Portuguese version of the Coach Motivation Questionnaire. Method: The participants were 369 coaches from various sports (males ¼ 288) aged between 18 and 67 years old (M ¼ 32.4, SD ¼ 11.04). Confirmatory factor analysis, discriminant and nomological validity, and invariance across gender, team/individual sports and coaching experience were analysed. Results: The hypothesised six-factor structure obtained acceptable values with the following robust adjustment indices: RTLI ¼ .902; RCFI ¼ .921; RGFI ¼ .904 and RRMSEA (90% CI) ¼ .066 (.058-.074). The amended model also showed high factor weights (k ! .500) and appropriate individual reliabilities (k 2 ! .25). The instrument's internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha (.646-.898) and composite reliability (.662-.900). Regarding discriminant validity, correlations among the factors were in general according to the hypothesised patterns, where closer factors were positively related and not close factors were less strongly related. Regarding nomological validity, results supported for the hypothesised relationships through the associations with measures of motivation at work, need satisfaction and need frustration. Lastly, the measurement model met configural and metric invariance across gender and coaching experience and also met configural invariance across team/individual sports. Conclusions: The evidence from this study suggests that the Portuguese Coach Motivation Questionnaire is a promising and parsimonious questionnaire to assess coaches' motivation, albeit its development remains a work in progress.

No abstract

No abstract