Everhart and Chelladurai (1998) Gender differences in preferences for coaching as an occupation: the role of self-efficacy, valence, and perceived barriers

getCITED

Home Search Add Content Reports Help

Edit Publication | Edit Contributors | Delete Publication | Edit References | Edit Citations

Add to Bookstack | Show Bookstack | Change Bookstack

Gender differences in preferences for coaching as an occupation: the role of self-efficacy, valence, and perceived barriers

Post a Comment

CONTRIBUTORS:

	Author:	Everhart, C. B.
	Author:	Chelladurai, P. (The Ohio State University Columbus)

JOURNAL:

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport (RQES), 69(2), 188 - 200.

YEAR:

1998

PUB TYPE:

Journal Article

SUBJECT(S):

coaching; career; sex-factor; perception; self-efficacy; constraint; comparative-study

DISCIPLINE:

No discipline assigned

HTTP:

https://secure.sportquest.com/su.cfm?articleno=S-270448&title=S-270448

LANGUAGE:

English

PUB ID:

103-341-990 (Last edited on 2002/02/27 18:44:07 US/Mountain)

SPONSOR(S):

ABSTRACT:
This study investigated gender differences in the role of self-efficacy, occupational valence, valence of coaching, and perceived barriers in preference to coach at the high school, 2-year college, Division III, Division II, and Division I levels. The participants, 191 Big Ten university basketball players (94 men, 97 women), responded to a specially constructed instrument. The genders did not differ in their coaching self-efficacy, preferred occupational valence, and perceived barriers. Relative to men, women perceived greater valence in coaching (p < .001). Women with a female coach perceived greater valence in coaching (p < .05) and expressed less concern with perceived discrimination (p < .05) than those with a male coach. Perceived self-efficacy and preferred occupational valence were differentially related to the desire to coach at various levels. Working hours most negatively affected the desire to coach at every level (R > .20).

STATISTICS

Click on # to view
Citations		1
References		0
Comments		0
Quality		0/0.00
Interest		0/0.00
View(er)s		8/520

Quality
	N/A
High
	7
	6
	5
	4
	3
	2
	1
Low

Interest
	N/A
High
	7
	6
	5
	4
	3
	2
	1
Low

Prev | Next