Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan 1985) asserts that humans have a basic psychological need for competence, which can be defined as individuals’ perceptions of their abilities in specific domains (e.g. academic, athletic, physical, social) (Weiss & Ebbeck 1996). Social contexts that support the satisfaction of competence are proposed to facilitate growth and intrinsically motivated behaviour, while those that hinder competence are associated with poorer motivation, performance, and well-being (Deci & Ryan 2000). Within the youth sport and developmental psychology literature, higher perceptions of competence are associated with a number of salient outcomes including: (a) greater intrinsic motivation, (b) higher levels of achievement, (c) more positive achievement-related cognitions (e.g. self-esteem) and behaviours (e.g., effort, persistence), (d) higher levels of positive affect (e.g. happiness), and (e) lower levels of negative affect (e.g. anxiety) (see Weiss and Ebbeck, 1996 and Weiss and Ferrer-Caja, 2002 for reviews).

Confidence can be defined as the degree of certainty individuals possess about their ability to be successful (Feltz & Chase 1998). This construct can be viewed in relation to a particular context (i.e. task self-efficacy) (Maddux 1995) or it can be viewed more generally to encompass a number of domains (Horn 2004). According to Jelici et al’s (2007) broader conceptualisation, confidence represents an individual’s global self-worth. In the developmental psychology literature, low levels of self-worth among children and adolescents have been associated with depression, suicide ideations, eating disorders, antisocial behaviours, delinquency, and teen pregnancy (see reviews by Mecca et al., 1989 and Harter, 1999). Within the sport domain, confidence has been identified as being fragile and critical to the cognitions, affect, and behaviours of athletes (see Vealey & Chase 2008 for a review).

Humans hold a ‘pervasive drive’ to form and maintain lasting, positive interpersonal relationships which originates from an innate, fundamental need for belonging (Baumeister & Leary 1995). Self-determination theory identifies this psychological need as relatedness, the need to feel connected and cared for, and the need to be close to others and one’s community (Deci & Ryan 1985). Within the sport psychology literature, there is a growing body of research that supports the importance of connections that young people have with significant others (e.g. peers, coaches) in contributing to well-being (see Jowett and Poczwardowski, 2007 and Smith, 2007 for reviews).

Sport has long been celebrated as an activity that builds character. However, sport has also been the subject of much criticism, often being viewed as a pursuit that undermines character (Weiss & Smith 2002b). The distinct, opposing views of character development in sport have led to a considerable amount of research (see Weiss et al 2007 for a review). In the sport literature, character development is often discussed in terms of moral development and sportspersonship. The final C of caring/compassion is commonly viewed as a goal of moral development. Past work highlighting the potential impact of sport in fostering moral development, has led to the implementation of a number of initiatives and interventions such as Personal-Social Responsibility (Hellison 1995).

By integrating the 4Cs into the CM, the model is strengthened by providing concrete outcomes that coaches should aim to develop in their athletes. This integration re-affirms the three key variables that must be considered in any kind of coaching environment: the coach’s personal characteristics, the athletes’ personal characteristics, and other contextual factors. In particular, individuals who are initiated into coaching come from different backgrounds, experiences, and knowledge (i.e. the coach’s personal characteristics). Second, coaches work with athletes who vary in terms of age, developmental level, and goals (i.e. the athletes’ personal characteristics). Finally, coaches work in various types of contexts with varying resources, equipment, and facilities (i.e. contextual factors). As in the original model, one can see that any changes in one of these three key variables may affect the learning environment and the interactions that a particular coach may have with his or her athletes, thus affecting athletes’ development in training, competition, and organisation settings. Although the coach’s personal characteristics and the contextual factors are important in affecting coaching, any coaching system should start by examining the varying developmental needs of athletes of different ages and competitive levels. Figure 5.1 is an adaptation of the original CM emphasising the athletes’ personal characteristics as the foundation of coaching effectiveness and highlighting the specific developmental outcomes (i.e. the 4Cs) that should be facilitated through an athlete’s sport involvement. In the section that follows, a typology of coaches, which is built on athletes’ developmental needs at various ages and competitive levels, is proposed.

The sampling years of the DMSP (ages 6–12), encompassing middle to late childhood, provide the foundation for both the recreational participation and elite performance through sampling trajectories. Characterised by participation in or ‘sampling’ of a number of different sports as opposed to specialising in one sport year-round, the sampling years usually involve high amounts of deliberate play and lower amounts of deliberate practice.

For children to develop physical competence during the sampling years, it is important that they engage in a variety of fundamental physical and cognitive skills associated with later sporting ability (Martindale et al 2005). These fundamental skills are not sport-specific and are not usually developed through deliberate practice in any single sport, as deliberate practice is typically characterised by a relatively limited range of required movements and decisions (Côté 2007). In judging their own physical competence, Harter (1999) noted that children tend to start with an overall sense of physical competence based on concrete and observable skills and abilities, generally taking an all-or-none evaluative approach (i.e. either ‘good’ or ‘bad’). In later childhood, young athletes progress to a more differentiated perception of competence.

Thus, in order to develop feelings of physical competence, children in the sampling years need to be developing fundamental skills, and having concrete mastery experiences with tangible outcomes (Chase 1998). The direct promotion of deliberate play may be an effective way for coaches to address these developmental needs in sport. High amounts of deliberate play can provide children with the diversity and freedom to try new and alternative approaches necessary for fundamental skill development (Wiersma, 2000 and Côté, 2007), while the child-centred nature of deliberate play (i.e., modified rules, focus on enjoyment) allows children many opportunities to experience success.

Recent work in the field of talent development has suggested that competence at very young ages is most often not predictive of future ability (Martindale et al 2005). In Bloom’s (1985) landmark study of talent development, very few elite-level performers reported a similar elite level of performance in relation to their peers at age 11 or 12. Kaplan (1996) echoed this sentiment, noting that performance in childhood is an unreliable predictor of future performance. As such, an inclusive focus as opposed to a focus on selection of only the most physically competent top performers appears the most appropriate developmental approach during the sampling years (Martindale et al 2007).

It is important to note that substantial changes in children’s sources of information used to judge physical or athletic competence occur during the sampling years (Horn and Weiss, 1991 and Weiss et al., 1997). In particular, children first become capable of peer comparison during this stage. Further, while children initially take adult feedback as in independent source of information, adult feedback is gradually integrated with feedback from other sources during this time (i.e. peer comparison), such that it is no longer automatically taken at face value (Horn 2004). Use of performance outcomes as a source of competence information also develops from middle to late childhood. It is only in later childhood when young people develop the ability to integrate a number of different sources of personal competence information that they are able to separate their own competence from team performance (Horn 2004). Therefore, as children develop, they need individualised competence information from adults that is positive, but that is also realistic in relation to what they can observe through peer comparison.

Past research by Smith, Smoll and colleagues (see Smith & Smoll 2007 for a review) has examined coaches for their provision of individualised competence information. Their work found strong support for the positive influence of coach supportiveness and instructiveness and for the negative effects of punitive coach behaviour. These findings were further validated through intervention studies implementing a coach training program (Coach Effectiveness Training: CET) (Smith et al., 1979 and Smith and Smoll, 2002). Coaches trained to be more supportive and to provide more technical instruction with limited use of punishment were consistently found to produce more positive outcomes related to perceived competence and confidence in their athletes (i.e. lower competitive anxiety, higher self-esteem) than untrained coaches (Smith & Smoll 2007).

Children’s confidence, equated with a global sense of self-esteem or self-worth, and associated with feelings of competence, begins as a behavioural pattern during the sampling years (Harter 1990). Specifically, children thought to exhibit high self-confidence express a behaviour pattern characterised by curiosity, initiative, and independence, as well as a capacity for flexibility in response to environmental change. Thus, children in the sampling years need to be encouraged to demonstrate curiosity, initiative, and independence. The intrinsic motivation associated with deliberate play is characterised by and encourages this behavioural pattern (Ryan & Deci 2000). As such, deliberate play is a potentially fruitful means by which to develop children’s confidence.

Judgements of self-worth may also be significantly influenced by goal orientations in sport (Duda 1993), given the increasing awareness of peer comparison that children develop during the sampling years. Children employing an ego-orientation, with a focus on evaluating competence in relation to the performance of others, may be at an increased risk for damage to self-confidence, especially in the presence of more skilled peers. In contrast, the confidence of children with a task-orientation, whereby competence is evaluated according to self-referenced improvement and effort, may be more resilient to fluctuations in relative performance. This resilient confidence may, in turn, encourage persistence in skill learning efforts and increased perceptions of competence (Harwood et al 2008).

Given the positive influence of a task goal-orientation on confidence and competence in childhood, the promotion of such an orientation in children’s sport contexts is of utmost importance. In particular, the development of a task orientation in individuals has been linked to a perceived mastery motivational climate as created by the coach (Harwood et al 2008). A mastery climate is one in which improvement, effort, and learning are valued and rewarded (Ames 1992). A performance climate, on the other hand, is one in which evaluation is relative to others and defeating others is of primary importance. Treasure (2001) suggests that a mastery-oriented motivational climate can be created in children’s sport, in accordance with Epstein’s (1989) TARGET model: Tasks that are diverse and appropriately challenging, Authority that is flexible and allows for children’s input, Recognition that is private and personal, Groupings that are varied and heterogeneous in ability, Evaluation that is self-referenced and considers fun, effort, and participation, and Timing that provides an appropriate pace of instruction and adequate time for tasks.

Positive peer relationships and friendships have been identified as a key reason why many children participate in sport (Scanlan et al., 1993 and Weiss, 1993). These early peer relationships and friendships also play a critical role in the development of vital social skills, such as intersubjectivity or shared understanding (Goncu 1993). During the sampling years, children tend to define friendship quality according to characteristics related to loyalty, mutual liking, and helping or taking care of each other (Newcomb & Bagwell 1995). However, Zarbatany and colleagues (1992) noted that children’s friendship expectations differ by context. Within the sport context, Weiss, Smith, and Theeboom (1996) found that loyalty and prosocial behaviour were rated as most important by children under 12.

Thus, to promote the development of positive peer connections, children in the sampling years need the time and opportunity to develop friendships. In developing these friendships, children need encouragement to demonstrate loyalty and prosocial helping behaviours. The child-driven nature of deliberate play (Côté 1999) can provide opportunities for both positive peer interaction and the demonstration of prosocial behaviours by encouraging cooperation and recognition of the needs and abilities of others.

In addition to connections with peers, connections with adults are also important during the sampling years. Parents are typically the individuals of most influence in children’s lives (Siegler et al 2003). With regard to sport participation, parents in the sampling years ‘…have a greater and more lasting effect on children’s sport involvement than in other periods of development’ (Wylleman et al 2007 p 239). As such, the positive participation and supportive involvement of parents in their children’ sport experiences should be encouraged. Further, this may help to ensure consistency of developmental messages across contexts, what Benson and colleagues (2006) refer to as developmental redundancy.

Finally, while parents tend to be most influential in children’s lives overall, coaches are the primary adults in the sport setting and their connections with young athletes should not be overlooked. Positive relationships with coaches are predictive of children’s enjoyment of their sport participation (Scanlan et al 1993), while negative feedback and lack of interaction have been linked to non-enjoyment (McCarthy & Jones 2007). As such, active coaches who promote positive relationships with their young athletes are essential to developing healthy coach connections (Smith & Smoll 2007).

It has been argued that sport participation can lead to both positive and negative character development (Shields & Bredemeier 1995), a consideration of utmost importance for children in the sampling years who are still developing their moral reasoning skills and abilities. Siegler and colleagues (2003) suggest that the primary environmental influence on the development of prosocial behaviour in children is socialisation through interactions with significant adults. This socialization takes three general forms: (a) modelling and communication of values; (b) opportunities for prosocial activities; and (c) discipline style (i.e. reasoning and drawing attention to consequences of behaviour for others). In the sport context, Shields and Bredemeier (1995) posit that compassion, a key component of moral character, is manifested through the psychological competencies of role taking, perspective taking, and empathy. Similar to the socialisation of prosocial behaviour, Shields and Bredemeier argue that leaders in sport settings (i.e. coaches) can promote the development of these competencies through their interaction style and the appropriate structuring of activities. Thus, in order to develop character and caring, children in the sampling years need positive role models, interactions with adults that promote moral reasoning, and opportunities to demonstrate character and caring.

Deliberate play may again provide a fertile context to demonstrate character and caring. The intrinsically motivating structure and emphasis on fun typical of deliberate play (Côté 1999) may promote a more adaptive and ethical view of competition, whereby focus is placed on the process of competing to the best of one’s abilities rather than on the outcome of competition (Hochstetler 2003). Sport is inherently competitive; however, competition during childhood should not lead to negative character development (e.g. Eccles & Barber 1999) unless the outcome is over-emphasized and instrumental antisocial behaviours are subsequently more likely to be justified.

The development of character and caring in children may also be facilitated by goal orientation and climate. By defining success as competing to the best of one’s own abilities, opponents may be more likely to be seen as fellow competitors, necessary for the game or competition to occur (Harwood et al 2008). In contrast, an increase in ego-orientation may promote the view of opposition as enemy, standing in the way of the desired outcome. With this ego-oriented perspective, one may therefore feel more justified in demonstrating unsportspersonship-like behaviour, or injurious acts towards the opposition in order to win (Harwood et al 2008).

Below are five strategies emerging from the literature that highlight how coaches can facilitate the 4Cs in athletes during the sampling years, through appropriate competition, training, and organisational strategies. First, coaches can best encourage children’s development by structuring competition and training to include high amounts of deliberate play. Second, coaches should promote a mastery-oriented motivational climate through the use of Epstein’s (1989) TARGET activity guidelines (discussed earlier). Third, in implementing these strategies, coaches should seek to interact with their athletes in a supportive and instructive manner, while limiting punitive interactions. Fourth, with regard to organisation, coaches should include parents in positive and supportive roles. Finally, coaches should adopt an inclusive developmental focus, as opposed to an exclusive team selection policy based on current performances, to provide all children with opportunities to develop the 4Cs.

Adolescent participants electing not to pursue an elite developmental trajectory but remaining involved in sport seek a context that promotes fun, challenge and enjoyment (Côté et al 2007a). To this end, participation coaches for adolescents must be cognisant of the specific developmental and contextual needs of their athletes. This may be particularly relevant for participation coaches, as their young athletes are in a critical period of growth and development, and engaging in a number of activities to build their personal identity (Wagner 1996). As such, the 4Cs framework (Jelicic et al 2007) can once again serve to help coaches identify adolescent’s developmental needs.

An adolescent’s perceived abilities or competence have been found to be associated with a number of positive outcomes in several domains including sport (see Weiss and Ebbeck, 1996 and Weiss and Ferrer-Caja, 2002 for reviews). As a child moves into adolescence, he or she begins to integrate competence information from various sources, with a greater emphasis on information from peers and coaches (Horn and Weiss, 1991 and Weiss et al., 1997). Young adolescents’ perceptions of competence develop as a function of two separate but interrelated factors: cognitive maturation and social-cultural environment. The contextual setting of sport can be critical to an adolescent’s cognitive maturation. This is exemplified particularly by adolescents’ differentiation of self-competence into several sub-domains. Specifically, teenagers begin to compartmentalise themselves as being ‘different’ people in the different domains. This ability to develop higher-order abstractions about self permits adolescents to evaluate themselves as having differing levels of ability in different contexts. For example, athletes may feel competent in one sport (e.g. basketball) yet not in another (e.g. soccer) or view themselves as being competent in one skill (e.g. jump shot) but not in another (e.g. lay-up). However, this developmental process is not seamless, and frequently involves adolescents reconciling ‘cognitive confusion’ of one self (Harter 1999). It is during these trying times that young athletes look to their social-cultural environment, specifically the feedback of significant others such as coaches and peers, to resolve conflicting information about the self.

Another related developmental construct of self is confidence. Jelicic and colleagues (2007) operationalise confidence as a global construct such as self-worth. As previously outlined, low levels of self-worth among adolescents have been linked to a number of negative outcomes such as depression, delinquency, and antisocial behaviours (see reviews by Mecca et al., 1989 and Harter, 1999). Based upon studies in school settings, physical appearance and social acceptance are primary personal antecedents of global self-confidence at this age (Harter 1999). As such, it is critically important that adolescents’ sport environments foster a culture of social acceptance of all teammates, and intolerance of negative comments directed toward a young athlete’s physical appearance.

During adolescence, positive ties with peers become increasingly important as young people develop personal identity and a sense of self (Harter, 1999 and McLellan and Pugh, 1999). In a sport setting, peers are particularly important given their direct involvement in most young athlete’s day-to-day experiences. Quite surprisingly, research investigating the developmental significance of peer connections and relationships in sport is relatively underdeveloped (Weiss and Stuntz, 2006 and Smith, 2007). As such, considerable theoretically driven research is needed to understand the role of peer relationships (i.e. peer acceptance, friendship) on a young athlete’s development (Weiss & Stuntz 2006).

Alongside the salient role of peers, adolescents’ connections with their families and schools are important. Adolescents’ perceptions of family closeness or cohesion have been found to be positively associated with a number of health-promoting behaviours (e.g. decreased alcohol usage) (Bray et al 2001), and negatively associated with adolescent problem behaviours (e.g. delinquency, aggression) (Barber & Buehler 1996). Further adolescents’ school cohesion, operationalised as the level of mutual support, belonging, and connectedness of the school, has been found to offer a protective, moderating effect for adolescents experiencing low family and peer support (Botcheva et al 2002). However, similar to the lack of research on peers in sports, additional research is necessary to further explore the role of family and school connections on the development of the young athlete.

Over the last decade, the athlete–coach relationship has received a considerable amount of attention in the literature. Several conceptual models have been proposed (e.g., LaVoi, 2004 and Jowett, 2005) highlighting the importance of the connections between the coach and athlete (see Jowett & Poczwardowski 2007 for a review). LaVoi’s (2004) conceptual framework of coach–athlete relationships proposes how feelings of belonging and close, inter-dependent relationships with coaches and teammates lead to athletes’ healthy psychological development. Jowett’s (2005) integrated model of coach–athlete relations also includes the psychological construct of closeness. Jowett (2007) describes closeness as the affective component of the coach–athlete relationship that is reflected in mutual feelings of trust and respect. While there is a need for significantly more research on connections in adolescent sport context, it is clear that the supportive, dynamic, and diverse connections of athletes with their peers, coaches, families, and wider communities are an essential component of adolescents’ healthy development in their sport environment.

Research on adolescents has shown that experiences in sport can promote prosocial behaviour and reduce antisocial behaviours (e.g. aggression, lack of responsibility) (Weiss et al 2007). Two primary theoretical perspectives dominate the field: (a) social learning theory (Bandura 1986) and (b) structural development approaches (Weiss et al 2007). In brief, social learning theory suggests that moral development is learned through individuals’ interactions with socialising agents such as adults and peers. Specifically, appropriate behaviours that conform to societal norms and regulations occur as a result of modelling and reinforcement from significant others (e.g. adults, peers). Social learning theory identifies self-regulation skills as being critical in displaying moral behaviour. These self-regulating skills include monitoring, judgement, evaluation, strong beliefs in one’s capabilities to achieve personal control, and self-regulatory efficacy to adhere to moral standards (Weiss et al 2007).

Structural developmental theories focus on how individuals reason or judge values and behaviour (Weiss et al 2007). Shields and Bredemeier (1995) proposed a conceptual model that outlines factors that may explain variations in moral thoughts and behaviours in physical activity and sport settings. Within the model, Shields and Bredemeier identify several important contextual factors that coaches can modify to play a vital role in shaping young athletes’ moral thoughts and behaviours. Two salient contextual factors include moral atmosphere and motivational climate. A considerable amount of research has investigated the influence that moral atmosphere, conceptualised as team norms, can have on adolescent athletes’ beliefs about appropriate and inappropriate behaviour (e.g., Smith, 1974, Stephens et al., 1997 and Stephens, 2000). As previously discussed, motivational climate typically identifies what is recognised, rewarded and emphasised within the context of the team environment (Ames 1992). A mastery-oriented climate generally emphasises effort, improvement, and personal mastery, while a performance-oriented climate focuses more on peer comparison and final outcome. Several studies with youth soccer teams (e.g. Ommundsen et al., 2003 and Miller et al., 2005) have found support for participants’ perceptions of a more mastery-oriented motivational climate being associated with higher levels of moral-reasoning and a more performance-oriented climate being associated with lower level of moral reasoning (e.g. greater perceived legitimacy of aggression and injurious acts).

Along with the identified contextual factors, Shields and Bredemeier’s (1995) model suggests a number of individual factors such as moral reasoning, achievement goal-orientation, moral identity, and self-regulation skills as essential for understanding moral development in sport. The early work of Bredemeier and Shields, 1984 and Bredemeier and Shields, 1986 on moral reasoning in sport led to the introduction of several key concepts such as game reasoning or bracketing one’s morals in a sport setting (e.g. legitimising aggression in pursuit of winning). Individuals’ achievement goal orientations (i.e. task versus ego) (Duda 1993) have also been linked to moral attitudes, intentions, and behaviours. Research examining the linkages between goal orientations and sportsperson-like attitudes have consistently found that young athletes (high school, college), who are higher on task-orientation report higher sportsperson-like attitudes. In contrast, athletes higher on ego-orientation report greater approval of unsportsperson-like play (e.g. Lemyre et al., 2001 and Kavussanu and Ntousmanis, 2003). A promising implication for coaches from this area of research has been the recommendation to implement social goals (e.g. bring honour to the group, be a productive member of society, be a good person) along with task and ego goals (e.g. Urdan and Maehr, 1995, Jarvien and Nicholls, 1996 and Wentzel, 1998). It has been suggested that this integrated goal perspective may be particularly important for recreational adolescent athletes, and an area in need of further research (Weiss et al 2007). Furthermore, empirical evidence has begun to demonstrate how an adolescent’s moral identity (i.e. a person’s use of moral beliefs to define the self) (Damon, 1984 and Damon, 2004) and self-regulatory skills may influence a young athlete’s moral thoughts and actions (e.g. Aquino & Reed 2003, Bandura et al 2003).