Levels of Social Complexity and Dimensions of Peer Experiences in Youth Sport

Abstract

We assessed young adolescent female soccer players' perceptions of their peer group experiences. Data were collected via interviews with 34 girls from two youth soccer teams (M age = 13.0 years). Following inductive discovery analysis, data were subjected to an interpretive theoretical analysis guided by a model of peer experiences (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 2006). Five categories of peer experiences were identified across three levels of social complexity. At the interaction level players integrated new members into the team and learned to interact with different types of people. At the relationship level players learned about managing peer conflict. At the group level a structure of leadership emerged and players learned to work together. Findings demonstrated interfaces between peer interactions, relationships, and group processes while also simplifying some apparently complex systems that characterized peer experiences on the teams studied.

The Motivational Atmosphere in Youth Sport: Coach, Parent, and Peer Influences on Motivation in Specializing Sport Participants

“…Elements of these findings replicate those of Conroy and Coatsworth (2007 -regarding coaches) and Holt et al (2008;2009 -regarding parents), whilst other findings offer new possible themes.…”

“…When considered alongside other studies (e.g., Beltman & Volet, 2007;Garcia-Bengoechea & Strean, 2007;Weiss, et al, 1996), one can construct an initial overview of ways that peers reportedly influence each other's motivation, including: emphasizing effort, emphasizing competition, collaboration, evaluative comments, conflict (and its resolution/absence), emotional/moral support, and friendships/group-membership. Likewise, recent studies have examined the roles of parents in more detail, identifying such behaviors as additional coaching/instruction, feedback, emotional responses, autonomy support, controlling behaviors, maintaining focus, and social support (Gould, Lauer, Rolo, Jannes & Pennisi, 2008;Holt, Black, Tamminen, Mandigo & Fox, 2008;Holt, Tamminen, Black, Mandigo & Fox, 2009) as well as the 'conditionality' of support ( i.e., whether parents emphasize a return for their 'investment' or assure the athlete that their support is unconditional - Assor, Roth & Deci, 2004;Gould et al, 2008). These exploratory studies would appear to facilitate the dismantling of the socio-environmental influences on motivation, which was called for by Amorose (2007) and Smith et al (2007), but what is missing from this research is a comprehensive and integrated description of the behaviors/interactions that athletes perceive to influence their motivation.…”

The Role of Enjoyment and Motivational Climate in Relation to the Personal Development of Team Sport Athletes

“…This finding differs from previous work Duda & Balaguer 2007) that links task climates with positive emotional and cognitive development in athletes and ego climates with negative development (for a review, see Duda & Balaguer, 2007). Results also suggest that peer relationships within the sport setting play a larger role (Holt, Black, Tamminen, Fox, & Mandigo, 2008) than the perceived climate, which would explain why personal and social skills developed across both task and ego climates. However, further investigations of the relationship between affiliation with peers and motivational climates are necessary to substantiate this claim.…”

Perceptions of Cohesion by Youth Sport Participants

“…Smith (2007) also pointed out that the majority of research concerning peer relationships (e.g., Holt, Black, Tamminen, Fox, & Mandigo, 2007;Smith, 2007;Wisdom & Smith, 2007) has focused on individual perceptions (e.g., friendships, peer acceptance) in sport despite the presence of multiple levels of affiliation. Smith's observation has been echoed by Rubin, Bukowski, and Parker (2006); they noted that multiple levels of affiliation are present in the social environment of children and adolescents.…”