Which Assessment of Coach-Created Motivational Climate Better Predicts Young Athletes’ Engagement over a Season? Athletes’ Perceptions and Match Observations Do
, Mauro Pérez-Gaido 1,5, Octavio Alvarez 6 and Isabel Castillo 6
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Congratulations to the authors for their work.
The title of the paper should be rephrased, it should not be a question. The research question as such should be stated in the introduction before the objectives.
The objective of the paper is to analyse the motivation of athletes and coaches over the course of a basketball and volleyball season. The perception of each other is studied and motivational behaviour in training and matches is observed.
The manuscript may fit in the journal only because of the specific theme of the special issue. In this sense, the special issue of the journal is on "Using the Sustainable Development Goals for Citizenship Education: Challenges and Opportunities" and yet, although the subject matter is specific, it is curious that no reference is made to the sustainable development goals or the social aspect of the goals.
It would be interesting to make some allusion to "perception" in the key words, although this is not strictly necessary.
The method used for this mixed analysis is adequate, both the questionnaire and the observation system are already validated, as well as the data analysis models used, which are also referenced.
The results and their discussion are well presented, responding to the hypotheses put forward and the conclusion is supported by other similar research.
Author Response
Reviewer 1
Congratulations to the authors for their work.
Response: We would like to thank Reviewer 1 for the positive comments on our manuscript. Below we show how we addressed each suggestion/comment made by the Reviewer.
The title of the paper should be rephrased, it should not be a question. The research question as such should be stated in the introduction before the objectives.
Response: Following the reviewer's comments we have chosen instead of rephrasing the question, to answer it, adding after the question.... “Athletes’ perceptions and match observations do”.
The objective of the paper is to analyse the motivation of athletes and coaches over the course of a basketball and volleyball season. The perception of each other is studied and motivational behaviour in training and matches is observed.
The manuscript may fit in the journal only because of the specific theme of the special issue. In this sense, the special issue of the journal is on "Using the Sustainable Development Goals for Citizenship Education: Challenges and Opportunities" and yet, although the subject matter is specific, it is curious that no reference is made to the sustainable development goals or the social aspect of the goals.
Response: In response to this important suggestion, we have added a paragraph in the introduction (see page 1, lines 36-42) and another one in the conclusions (see page 15, lines 561-564), highlighting the importance of sport as a context for the achievement of the sustainable development goals.
It would be interesting to make some allusion to "perception" in the key words, although this is not strictly necessary.
Response: Since athletes' perceptions have been introduced in the title, we do not consider it necessary to introduce perception as a key word.
The method used for this mixed analysis is adequate, both the questionnaire and the observation system are already validated, as well as the data analysis models used, which are also referenced.
The results and their discussion are well presented, responding to the hypotheses put forward and the conclusion is supported by other similar research.
Response: Thank you again for your positive comments on our manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
The idea of the study is relevant and important to analyze, the content of the manuscript is actual both for scientists and practitioners. The quality of the manuscript is high.
I have just one suggestion: your study will be more valuable if you will discuss theoretical and practical implementations more in details.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
The idea of the study is relevant and important to analyze, the content of the manuscript is actual both for scientists and practitioners. The quality of the manuscript is high.
Response: We would like to thank Reviewer 2 for the positive comments on our manuscript. Below we show how we addressed each suggestion/comment made by the Reviewer.
I have just one suggestion: your study will be more valuable if you will discuss theoretical and practical implementations more in details.
Response: In the section “5. Conclusions and practical implications” (see page 15) we highlighted several practical implementations of the study.
Reviewer 3 Report
The article discusses coach-created motivations predicting young athletes’ engagement over a season. The article can be published after addressing these comments:
- What is the relevance of the work with sustainability?
- Why gender equality has not considered?
- English needs to be checked. Some sentences need to be converted into passive mode.
- Why you do not check your file before submission (with comments included)?
Author Response
Reviewer 3
The article discusses coach-created motivations predicting young athletes’ engagement over a season. The article can be published after addressing these comments:
Response: We would like to thank Reviewer 3 for the positive comments on our manuscript. Below we show how we addressed each suggestion/comment made by the Reviewer.
- What is the relevance of the work with sustainability?
Response: In response to this important point, we have added a paragraph in the introduction (see page 1, lines 36-42) and another one in the conclusions (see page 15, lines 561-564), highlighting the importance of sport as a context for the achievement of the sustainable development goals.
- Why gender equality has not considered?
Response: We appreciate the reviewer's question. We did not consider gender differences given the large number of analyses already performed to answer the general research question. Hence, we have considered this deficiency as a limitation in our work (see page 15, lines 546-548) and we look forward to addressing this topic in future studies.
- English needs to be checked. Some sentences need to be converted into passive mode.
Response: We have carefully revised our manuscript, including an in-depth review of the English language.
- Why you do not check your file before submission (with comments included)?
Response: We are very sorry for the mistake of having left some comments regarding bibliographic references without deleting them. Thank you for your advice.
Reviewer 4 Report
Is a well-written manuscript, I enjoyed reading it. It was well organized and has a fluent expression. I only have one suggestion:
Table 4: (Model1, Athlete)- remove the sign (-) from the coefficient of the controlling variable
The authors have a good work. So, in my opinion this paper can be accepted for publication.
Author Response
Reviewer 4
It is a well-written manuscript, I enjoyed reading it. It was well organized and has a fluent expression. I only have one suggestion:
Response: We would like to thank Reviewer 4 for the positive comments on our manuscript. Below we show how we addressed each suggestion/comment made by the Reviewer.
Table 4: (Model1, Athlete)- remove the sign (-) from the coefficient of the controlling variable
Response: The analyses were reviewed, and the coefficient obtained was rounded off. Thus, the sign was left unchanged, but the coefficient was modified from 0.00 to 0.01.
The authors have a good work. So, in my opinion this paper can be accepted for publication.
Response: Thank you again for your positive comments on our manuscript.
Reviewer 5 Report
The manuscript entitled “Which assessment of coach-created motivational climate better predicts young athletes’ engagement over a season?” describes an interesting and valuable contribution to the applied research field of coaching. In my modest opinion, the manuscript deserves publication after a few issues are addressed.
In the abstract, the findings of the study need to be clarified so that readers understand whether the main research question is answered. Namely, are there coach-created motivational climate variables that adequately predict young athletes' engagement? Most importantly, how do the study and its findings fit into the field of sustainable development?
Similarly, in the introductory paragraph, the authors do not address how their study fits into sustainable development. If the study is to be published in Sustainability, should a link be made?
In the section labeled “[t]he present study”, the authors are encouraged to state clearly not only each of the hypotheses that stem from their main research question but also the rationale of each hypothesis. In this way, the authors’ selection of particular predictors becomes self-evident (i.e., it is justified).
In the sub-section devoted to participants, what were the participation rates for athletes and coaches? What are the characteristics of the populations targeted for this study? Since the authors relied on convenience samples, information about the populations from which the samples were drawn (e.g., size and overall composition) gives readers an idea (albeit imperfect) about whether each of the samples can be said to adequately represent its respective population.
In either the discussion section or the conclusion section, the authors may consider broader coverage of the extent to which the findings of the study may apply to other athlete populations. Furthermore, it may be of interest to readers to understand at a deeper level the varied implications and applications of its findings. Most importantly, how do the findings of the present study address issues of sustainable development? If the paper is to be published in Sustainability what is the relation between the findings of the authors’ study and sustainable development goals?
Author Response
Reviewer 5
The manuscript entitled “Which assessment of coach-created motivational climate better predicts young athletes’ engagement over a season?” describes an interesting and valuable contribution to the applied research field of coaching. In my modest opinion, the manuscript deserves publication after a few issues are addressed.
Response: We would like to thank Reviewer 5 for the positive comments on our manuscript. Below we show how we addressed each suggestion/comment made by the Reviewer.
In the abstract, the findings of the study need to be clarified so that readers understand whether the main research question is answered. Namely, are there coach-created motivational climate variables that adequately predict young athletes' engagement? Most importantly, how do the study and its findings fit into the field of sustainable development?
Response: At the end of the abstract, it is noted that the variables that best predict engagement are athlete perceptions and match observations. Regarding the study importance in sustainable development, we have added a paragraph in the introduction (see page 1, lines 36-42) and another one in the conclusions (see page 15, lines 561-564), highlighting the importance of sport as a context for the achievement of the sustainable development goals.
Similarly, in the introductory paragraph, the authors do not address how their study fits into sustainable development. If the study is to be published in Sustainability, should a link be made?
Response: As stated in the response above, we have added a paragraph in the beginning of the introduction (see page 1, lines 36-42), highlighting the importance of sport as a context for the achievement of the sustainable development goals.
In the section labeled “[t]he present study”, the authors are encouraged to state clearly not only each of the hypotheses that stem from their main research question but also the rationale of each hypothesis. In this way, the authors’ selection of particular predictors becomes self-evident (i.e., it is justified).
Response: Since the rationale of each of the hypotheses has been developed throughout the introduction, we have considered that to give a rationale again in the "present study" section would be repetitive. Nevertheless, we have added after each of the hypotheses the bibliographic citations on which we support each of them. In the discussion and conclusions section we return to these citations to confirm or refute the hypotheses (see page 4, lines 153-172).
In the sub-section devoted to participants, what were the participation rates for athletes and coaches? What are the characteristics of the populations targeted for this study? Since the authors relied on convenience samples, information about the populations from which the samples were drawn (e.g., size and overall composition) gives readers an idea (albeit imperfect) about whether each of the samples can be said to adequately represent its respective population.
Response: As suggested, information was added about the sports practiced by the participants in the present study (see page 4, lines 192-198).
In either the discussion section or the conclusion section, the authors may consider broader coverage of the extent to which the findings of the study may apply to other athlete populations. Furthermore, it may be of interest to readers to understand at a deeper level the varied implications and applications of its findings. Most importantly, how do the findings of the present study address issues of sustainable development? If the paper is to be published in Sustainability what is the relation between the findings of the authors’ study and sustainable development goals?
Response: A paragraph was added referring to the possibility of transferring this knowledge to athletes of other sports, specifically team sports, and to other educational contexts. As stated in one response above, we have added a paragraph in the conclusions and practical implication section (see page 15, lines 561-564), highlighting the importance of sport as a context for the achievement of the sustainable development goals.
