FACULTY OF SPORTS SCIENCE AND RECREATION
UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY MARA, PERLIS BRANCH
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY IN SPORT
AND BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES (SRT603)
TOPIC:
THE PREFERRED BETWEEN AUTOCRATIC AND
DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE AMONG
ATHLETES AT UiTM PERLIS
PREPARED BY
SITI NUR MADIHAH HANIM BINTI BAHARI
(2019252008)
PREPARED FOR:
DR. KHOR POY HUA
DUEDATE:
14/2/2022
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1
Introduction
1-2
1.2
Background of the Study
2-4
1.3
Problem Statement
4
1.4
Research Objectives
5
1.5
Research Questions
5
1.6
Research Hypotheses
5
1.7
Significance of Study
6
1.8
Definition of Terms
7
1.8.1
Leadership
1.8.2
Leadership Style
1.8.3
Democratic Leadership Style
1.8.4
Autocratic Leadership Style
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Introduction
2.2
The Factors Conjugated Multidimensional Leadership Style
8
8-10
of Coach Perspective
2.3
The Factors of Effectiveness on Shared Leadership Style
2.4
The Factors of Psychological Perception on Coach
11
12-13
Leadership Style
2.5
Research Conceptual Framework
13
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
14
3.2
Research Design
14
3.3
Population and Sampling
14
3.4
Research Instrument
3.4.1
Pilot Study
3.4.2
Data Analysis of Pilot Study
3.5
Research Procedure
3.6
Data Analysis
15-17
17
18-20
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Leadership is commonly characterized as the behavioral process of
manipulating organized individuals and groups' actions towards specific
objectives and achieving them. Trainers who can adapt their leadership qualities
to the preferences of athletes can promote an attractive and optimizing learning
environment. Most coaches could not take their players' needs into account.
There is widely recognized a positive relationship between coaches and athletes
as an intermediary in the field of success and satisfaction in sports. In most
environments coaches have to complete different activities such as preparation
and game policies, organizational tasks and athletes mentoring that actually
require more than just basic skills and tactics (Challadurai et al., 1984). The
success of a team depends on being able to lead athletes and using the right
leadership style. The effect of a coach on their team is important to understand.
(Kim & Cruz, 2016). That is why coach's guidance and treatment are one of the
important roles to be played in an athlete's training environment.
The autocratic coach or intense style is introduced when the coach
assumes authority and the decisions are centralized. This coaching style is
beneficial to a directive and dominating coach who prepares the team or
individual for any kind of competition. The downside of this style of coaching,
however, is its one-way learning process. The coach seems to be without
empathy and the only one who determines the rules, rewards and skills (Lyle,
2006). The second form of leadership conduct is Democratic
Action.
Democratic conduct is the degree to which the coach encourages athletes to
make decisions (Chelladurai & Saleh, 1980). These decisions will include
community priorities and how they can accomplish those objectives.
Basically, the more democratic conduct a coach performs the more influence his
players have on certain choices that are going to be made during a season or
service.
1
The standard of the sports coach is critical for the development of athletes
and overall sports performance. (Prophet et al., 2017). More precisely, how a
coach chooses to lead his athletes will impact many areas that decide the
performance of an athlete. The success of sports depends on several factors: one
is the style of coach leadership (Aruda & Marquez, 2007). In addition, coaches
have a great impact on their team and the leadership styles and conduct of the
coach significantly influence their athletes' success (Nezhad & Keshtan, 2010).
Overall, coaches need to under the leadership style they use in order to complete
the task and put athletes to their finest performance and simultaneously
acknowledge the preferences that athletes are more comfortable to work with to
ensure a balanced and positive relationship.
1.2
BACKGROUND OF STUDY
Leadership could be defined as „a process whereby an individual influence
a group of individuals to achieve a common goal‟ (Northouse, 2001). There are
four components identified in central leadership, which is the first component of
a process. This component indicates that it is not a trait or characteristic, but an
interactive occurrence between leader and followers. The leader affects and/or is
affected by followers making leadership not a unidirectional linear event but an
interactive process. The second component is influences. It deals with how the
leader affects the followers. This is a very important component of leadership,
since if there is no influence, and then leadership could be failure. The third
component is that leadership occurs in a group, which means provides the
context for leadership to occur. The last component of leadership is goals. The
leadership is concerned with guiding a group of individuals towards a goal
achieved (Chelladurai & Saleh, 1978).
The relationship between coaches and players depends on whether the
team is professional or amateur and depends on the skill level. An amateur team
that may include students or young people and the coach spends a large amount
of time with skill instruction (Cushion & Jones, 2001). This is because the
coaches in an inexperienced or early stage athlete team expend more time on
training than the coaches of a specialized team in which the players are
2
already highly trained. The success of the coach as a leader is measured by the
performance of both the amateur and the professional team.
In the sport domain it is important to satisfy the autonomy, skill, and
relationship needs of athletes via their sporting environment. The degree to
which the criteria of sports are suppressed hypothesizes inverse relations. The
definition of need satisfaction is especially appealing in enabling researchers to
define the framework under which the needs of three could be met and, in turn,
to promote well-being (Reinboth & Duda, 2006).
Coaches may encourage autonomy in the options and possibilities of
athletes, with the assistance of offering reasonable support for behavior
demands and by promoting self-regulation (Dwan Anderson-Butsher, 2007).
For example, provide athletes with the knowledge they need to solve a problem
or learn new skills or strategies, enabling them to solve this problem or to
improve their skills and strategy with a view to fostering a sense of competence
for athletes, coaches could establish standards for assessment based on selfreference and effort in training and competition. They may also enable athletes
to establish internal expectations of success and help them learn how to track
themselves. Lastly, coaches will do well to embrace, take care of and fulfill the
need for connectivity.
However, the coachs predetermination of its leadership styles does not
always land on par. This is because athletes are not always on their best social
and interpersonal behavior. Some of these factors may be seen to the coaches as
a lack of discipline. Thus, coaches tend to break athletes character to make them
fall into their respective preference by forcing an autocratic style of leadership,
but the result may differ from certain projection of bad performance and even
rebellious attitude from the athletes reaction. In conjunction, leadership style of
conveying democratic support makes a good written promise on paper but
sometimes it can be directly unworkable when the athlete has been handed too
much power over decision. This will automatically put the athlete on the same
level of authority to coach. Resulting from this, the athlete will not have any
decencies or compromises. To summarize, coach leadership style is
3
important when it comes to assessing athlete deliverance but more too that is
both agreements are on the same page in order to improve their performance on
both sides. This means that coaches must compel to a certain degree of
leadership style to satisfy athletes needs and supposedly level up their
performances.
1.3
PROBLEMS STATEMENT
In circumstances where their coaches employed reward and expert powers,
they tended to be more satisfied and eventually offset the effect of anti-social
power discern which would contribute to lower levels of athlete satisfaction.
Empirical research mainly addressed leadership relationships and the happiness
of athletes. Athletes appear pleased with preparation and education as well as
constructive reviews when coaches emphasize (Turnman, 2006). This means
that athletes are perform better when coaches reveal accomplishment reward
system in accordance to its leadership style which a democratic style.
The concept of leadership is the most discussed and observed, but
there is lack of mutual understanding on what leadership approach or style
deems to fit in a particular context or culture (Goethals et al., 2004). Many
coaches have a way of leading their teams. However, coaches need to know
what types of leadership their athletes choose because of the positive effects
they may have. It is crucial to define which management styles are the preferred
ones so that coaches can change their leadership skills. If coaches can adjust to
what their athletes wantproperly, they can contribute to a stronger relationship
and an improvement in overall success for their athletes. This synthesis is
intended to decide how athletes favor leadership styles and how coaches should
incorporate these styles in their day- to-day practices. This can be either their
factors of personal mental health, age, past injury or and most important of all
their perceptions towards their training regimen which is conducted under the
regulations of the coach's leadership style. Thus, this study aims to compare
between major leadership style (autocratic and democratic) among athletes in
UiTM Perlis.
4
1.4
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
To compare leadership styles (autocratic and democratic) for coach to
build a successful team at UiTM Perlis.
1) To investigate preference of athlete's perceptions on leadership style
(autocratic and democratic) among athletes at UiTM Perlis.
2) To compare athletes perceive autocratic leadership between male and
female athletes at UiTM Perlis.
3) To compare athletes perceive democratic leadership between male and
female athletes at UiTM Perlis.
1.5
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1) What is the preference of athlete's perceptions on leadership style
(autocratic and democratic) among athletes at UiTM Perlis?
2) Is there any difference on athletes perceive democratic leadership between
male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis?
3) Is there any difference on athletes perceive autocratic leadership between
male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis?
1.6
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
HA1: There is a significant difference on athletes perceive autocratic leadership
between male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis.
HO1: There is no significant difference on athletes perceive autocratic
leadership between male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis.
HA2: There is a significant difference on athletes perceive democratic
leadership between male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis.
HO2: There is no significant difference on athletes perceive democraticleadership
between male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis.
5
1.7
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
This research definitely would offer several advantages to quality
coaches. This is because it will provide a fresh understanding of the value of
leadership. The biggest challenge is how best to enhance the productivity of
coaches at the highest level. What other kind of leadership is best suited to
improving an athlete's success. This is important as the coaching skills can be
developed to become a major benefit for the coaches.
Technically, it would help to think that coach, team leaders and one self
have an acceptable leadership style to improve success in the sport they are
playing. If done right, this can be good for the entire team. In addition, it can
enhance coaching success over the long term, enhance social connections
between coaches and athletes, and help strengthen relations with close teams,
such as family members.
6
1.8
DEFINITION OF TERMS
1.8.1 Leadership
Leadership is the action of leading a group of team for an
organization. Leadership is a most important thing that use in each team.
The leader must be an effective which is must create an inspiring vision
of the future. To be a leader they must always motivate and inspire their
team to engage their vision and leader should manage delivery of vision.
1.8.2
Leadership Style
The leadership styles are the course of action which a leader
takes to control his followers' behavior, such as the manner in which
he gives orders to his subordinates and leads them to achieve the given
aims.
1.8.3
Democratic Leadership Style
Democratic leadership is a type of leader in which group
members are more involved in decision-making. This style of learning is
generally one of the most effective and productive leaders to improve
productivity improve group leadership contributions and improve group
morality. Employees meet to discuss and fix problems by giving us a
chance to take decisions.
1.8.4
Autocratic Leadership Style
Autocratic leadership is a management style in which one
person dominates all the decisions and makes no contribution from other
members of the group. Autocratic leaders decide on the basis of their
own faith and don't include others in their suggestion or opinion.
7
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
INTRODUCTION
The primary objective of this study is to investigate and examine the
factorsof traits to preferred coach leadership style affecting their performances
managing teams and athletes. The details for the study were elaborated in
discussion on the following sections.
a) The factors of conjugated multidimensional leadership style of coach
perspective
b) The factors of effectiveness on shared leadership style
c) The factors of psychological perception on coach leadership style
d) The factor of autocratic on coach leadership style
e) The factor of democratic on coach leadership style
2.2
THE
FACTORS
CONJUGATED MULTIDIMENSIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE OF COACH PERSPECTIVE
An important framework to understand leadership in sports is the
Multidimensional Model of Leadership. The Multidimensional Model of Leadership
says that three aspects of leader behavior need to be aligned to see an increase in group
performance and member satisfaction (Andrew 2009). These three types of leadership
are characterized by a behavior that includes situational characteristics or behaviors,
which are prescribed for a specific circumstance, the leader's actual conduct and,
finally, the members' preferred conduct, the conduct that athletes prefer. The author
summarized the model to the effect that a leader will achieve successful participants'
performance and satisfaction when these three aspects are similar. Thus, a leadership's
desired activity has the satisfaction and success of members. The author noted that this
model was ultimately designed to concentrate on the leadership analysis in a particular
sport (Andrew, 2009).
8
To supplement the Multidimensional Model of Leadership, the
Leadership Scale for Sport was developed to better understand this model and
help understand preferred behavior in sport specific situations (Cruz & Duck
Kim, 2017). The Scale breaks down leadership into five styles or behaviors that
coaches can use and that athletes can prefer. These categories are Positive
Feedback, Democratic Behavior, Autocratic Behavior, Social Support and
Training and Instruction (Chelladurai & Saleh 1980). The Five categories are
five of the most common and are frequently used to assess various types of
leadership in various coaches. Positive feedback is an idea which is important to
the coach to appreciate the athletes for their success and their contribution to the
team (Chelladurai & Saleh 1980). It is crucial, in theory, to make sure that a
coach recognizes any effort made by his/her sport athletes tosupport the team.
Some details can go unnoticed in competition, so it's important in some
circumstances to express positive feedback to any coach.
Democratic Behavior is the second style of leadership behavior.
(Chelladurai & Saleh 1980) said the democratic conduct is defined as allowing
the coach to engage in decision-making by athletes. These decisions will include
group objectives and the manner in which these objectives are accomplished.
The more democratic conduct a coach demonstrates, the more his athletes are
interested in such decisions taken over a season or term.
The third form of leadership is autocratic behavior. Autocratic conduct is
defined as how much a coach separates himself from sportsmen and emphasizes
his or her authority (Chelladurai & Saleh 1980). This can also be known to be
the opposite of a democracy and is about a coach who keeps things near the
vest and does things by his own choices.
The fifth and final leadership style is Training and Instruction. Training
and Instruction is explained as the ability of a coach to improve the performance
level of an athlete. Also, it is the ability to instruct an athlete in how to acquire
the necessary skill and teaching the techniques and the tactics of the sport he or
she is coaching (Chelladurai & Saleh 1980). This is one of a coach's most
important roles and can be seen as how long and how quickly a coach can
9
prepare and train an athlete to be the best possible player. In terms of how a
coach should conduct his team it is necessary to consider those five types of
leadership. They should also look at how these factors affect the satisfaction
and success of an athlete. If preferred behavior helps to enhance member
performance and the coach needs to consider which types are preferred. If
coaches understand how to efficiently use these variables and understand which
athletes choose to use them, coaches may improve. If there is a better
understanding of how these factors effect athletes on a daily basis and a better
understanding of what athletes prefer, coaches‟ jobs across the world can
become much easier. The credibility of a coach‟s success rate is never enough to
be measure by only limiting to one traits of leadership style. So that is
why the gap wereproduced on the previous study that indicates the functional
process of taking responsibility as a coach and managing personal traits of style
between athletes and teams. The manipulative content of external distractions is
considered to be crucial evidence as for the performance is affected in many
different forms of distractions that may leads to a certain leadership style.
The continuation of research of (Loughead & Hardy, 2005) investigated
Athletes' views of coaches and peer leaders, though coaches displayed greater
levels of autocratic conduct compared with peer leaders, demonstrated higher
levels of democratic conduct than coaches. Regarding insight into the leadership
styles of coaches, male athletes reported greater levels of autocratic conduct
(Beam et al., 1978) in comparison with female athletes. In contrast, female
athletes preferred more democratic leadership behavior (Chelladurai & Saleh,
1978) from their coaches (Amorose & Horn, 2000) found that For women's
intrinsic motivation, democratic style is more critical than males. Another
research line found that independence-focused coaches can increase the
motivation and satisfaction of their students from the course and ultimately their
intention to engage during leisure time in physical work (Chatzi-saranti s & H
agger, 2009). In addition, the results of a qualitative study found that the
positive leadership style of activity instructors improved the self-efficacy,
happiness andintrinsic motivation of women as participants in similar physical
activities and more willing participants (Lloyd & Little, 2010).
10
2.3
THE FACTORS OF EFFECTIVENESS ON SHARED LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Based on the research evidence just outlined, shared leadership may
have many benefits, ranging from team functioning to well-being and
performance (Cotterill & Fransen, 2016). The next step will be to identify the
most productive strategy for creating an impactful shared leadership framework
where coaches could be persuaded to take a collective management approach.
The coach should be able to recognize the best leaders in activities,
motivational, social and external leaders, as a basic necessity to incorporate this
framework in sport teams. Coaches remain the key decision makers in today's
sport culture when it comes to appointing leaders of their teams (Gould et al.,
2013). While coaches frequently claim to have the greatest insight into the
management structure of their team, this may not be true. For example,
criticized the strategy of allowing coaches to nominate leading athletes, since
the team may not embrace this option entirely if the appointed person is not
regarded as leader (Gulak Lipka, 2017). If the designated leader has no team
support, his influence would be minimal and successful joint leadership is far
from achieving. In the same row, the main position of the followers'
expectations to assess leadership effectiveness was emphasized (Fletcher &
Arnold, 2015). Therefore made it clear that players in the leading selection
process should be given the voice (Gulak Lipka, 2017). This is substantiated by
the work as the results showed that almost half of the team captains normally
chosen by the coach were not considered by the players as best leaders in any of
the four leadership positions not in the field of mission or motivating leadership,
nor as social or external leaders (Fransen et al., 2014). Other team members
were instead regarded by their teammates as the best informal leaders. These
results indicate that the existing management selection processes in sports teams
are not as successful as possible. This may be troubling, because research shows
that if coaches' and team management perceptions do not overlap, and coaches
appoint leaders who are not permeated by players as good leaders, cohesion is
undermined team functioning (Gulak Lipka, 2017). Therefore, the second
important issue in this article is about the overlap in the team leadership
between coaches' expectations and players.
11
2.4
THE FACTORS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL PERCEPTION ON
COACH LEADERSHIP STYLE
Due to its relationship to success, including happiness and cohesion,
many psychological variables are thought to be beneficial in sport. Satisfaction
is characterized as a positive affective state resulting from evaluating sporting
experiences' mechanisms, processes and performance. Cohesion is described as
a process which makes it possible for team members to remain together to
achieve their goals or objectives and to fulfill each other's affective needs.
Cohesion is divided into roles and societal factors related to teamwork and
interpersonal appeal. These systems were analyzed in terms of leadership and
were found to be influenced by the leadership style of the coach. Coaches that
use higher levels of social support, preparation and training, constructive
reinforcement and democratic style such as positive for athletes to be happy and
cohesive with their teams. However, who are considered to be an autocratic
coaching style, affect the negative feelings of players in terms of team unity
and personal interaction. In addition, many variables including gender are
influenced in the relationship between coaching behavior, player motivation and
team cohesion.
Previous studies have shown that sport leadership has several different
facets and different backgrounds can affect their performance, in particular the
effect of leadership on the well-being of players. Therefore, it is critical when
predicting the efficacy of coach leadership skills to assess the leadership
features that a coach exhibits to his/her athletes and how such conduct affects
the behavioral status of athletes. Moreover, because the perceived satisfaction
and cohesion of athletes can be influenced by leadership behavior, it is
necessary to understand the degree of satisfaction for athletes and the cohesion
of each leadership dimension to predict and improve effective training measures
and strategies to support the well-being of sportsmen. In the past, the relation
between coaching behavior and psychosocial variables of athletes often is
highlighted, particularly within the context of multidimensional leading, using
the LSS as a test tool. Nevertheless, it is assumed that the approach of critically
examining the connection strengths of the relevant studies by incorporating
12
comparable results in a more rigorous and systematic way and then analyzing
relevant quantitative data through higher statistical evaluation is important.
2.5
RESEARCH CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
This study will identify the coaching leadership style and athletes‟
satisfaction as perceived by team sports athletes of UiTM Perlis from the aspect
of democratic style (Research Question 1), autocratic style (Research Question
2), training and instruction style (Research Question 3), social support style
(Research Question 4), and positive feedback style (Research Question 5).
Studies will also identify athletes‟ satisfaction from the aspect of individual
performance (Research Question 6), team performance (Research Question 7),
ability utilization (Research Question 8), and training and instruction (Research
Question 9).s
Coaches
Performances
UiTM Perlis Athletes
Leadership Style
(autocratic and
democratic)
Dependent Variables
Independent
Variables
Figure 2.5 Conceptual Frameworks on the Preferred Between Autocratic and
Democratic Leadership Style among Athletes at UiTM Perlis
13
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study shown that have adopted a descriptive method
through surveying methodology. It shown by getting a data using a sampling
design, questionnaire and making a data analysis.
3.2
RESEARCH DESIGN
The design of the study shows the data collection source. Questionnaires
and sampling techniques are also discussed in this section. This research has
utilized quantitative design. The relationship between a dependent variable and
its predictor has been used long ago as a quantitative design. The design to be
utilized in research. Based on researches, quantitative designs show that
researchers need to use democratic leading style information and autocratic
leadership information to get good coaches in sport. It also helps researchers
to know which methods to get the best coaches are successful.
3.3
POPULATION AND SAMPLING
The respondents for this study will be students of UiTM Perlis. Samples
will be selected using purposive sampling. Samples will be selected using
simple random sampling. The cluster sampling is when the researchers classify
multiple clusters of people from a population to extract, observe and evaluate
their homogeneous characteristics of the population and successfully
become the subjected clusters. Thus, this type research is very viable for this
cluster sampling method because it involves individual and simultaneous
groups' opinion and perception towards experiencing situations. The targeted
audience is athletes‟ students of UiTM who are experienced in sports and also
interact with coaches. The population of athletes at UiTM is 309.
14
3.4
RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
Items in this questionnaire are divided into 3 sections. Section A is
related to the data on personal data. Section B consists of 11 questions that
evaluate democratic leadership is the type of leader in which group members are
more involved in decision making while Autocratic leadership is a management
style in which one person dominates all decisions and does not make
contributions from other group members. Which way do you like to choose the
best coach. Section c consists of 5 questions that evaluate to identify which
leadership styles are suitable for coach to build a successful team. The
questionnaire used a Likert scale question and the scale ranged from 1 to 4 (1strongly disagree, 2- disagree, 3- agree, and 4- strongly agree). The reliability
value for Section B was 0.84 and for Section C was 0.7.
3.4.1
Pilot Study
The study was piloted to guarantee that the items in the
questionnaire are valid and reliable before the intended study. A total of
60 respondents participated in this pilot study. The respondents were
participants of athletes UiTM Perlis.
The validity and overall reliability value are acceptable when
the value is more than 0.4 and 0.6 respectively for social studies
(Ramzaninezhad et al., 2009). In this study, the retain items with value
of overall reliability more than 0.7 and the inter item value more than
0.45 was keep as items for questionnaire for the actual study,
3.4.2
Data Analysis of Pilot Study
For reliability analysis, the result of Cronbach‟s Alpha
presented that the overall reliability value for the quality factor is 0.84.
Table 3.1 presented the result for 7 items retains as the inter-item
reliability values was more the 0.45.
15
Table 3.1 Item-Total Statistics on Democratic Leadership Style
(N=60)
Corrected
Item- Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alphaif
Item
Deleted
0.81
I always retain the final
decision-making
authority within my
department or team.
0.71
I always try to include
one or more employees
in determining what to
do and how to do it.
However, I maintain the
final decision making
authority.
Tell my employees what
has to be done and how
to do it
When someone makes a
mistake, I tell them not
to ever do that again and
make a note of it.
0.69
0.81
0.65
0.82
0.74
0.81
New employees are
not allowed to make
any decisions unless
it is approved by me
first.
0.75
0.81
Not explain his
action.
Refuse to compromise
a point.
0.51
0.83
0.71
0.81
For reliability analysis, the result of Cronbach‟s Alpha presented that the
overall reliability value for the autocratic leadership style is 0.7. Table 3.2
presented the result for 5 items retains as the inter-item reliability value was
more than 0.45.
16
Table 3.2 Item-Total Statistics on Autocratic Leadership Style
(N=60)
Corrected
Cronbach’s Alpha
Item-Total
if Item Deleted
Correlation
I believe that it is
0.64
0.52
0.62
0.53
0.49
0.61
imperative to
utilize well-tested
method sin a
work
environment
I believe that
exemplary
punishment
disciplines staff
I provide
followers with
“step by step”
instructions
on how to
accomplish tasks
3.5
RESEARCH PROCEDURE
Permission will be granted from Timbalan Rektor (Students Affairs
Department), UiTM Perlis Branch to conduct the survey. Once permission is
granted appointment will be arranged with the sport officer at Unit Sukan UiTM
Perlis to collect the list of 2019 team athletes (samples). The link to access
Google Form (Research Questionnaire) will be provided to the sample through
Whats App group. During the appointment session, questionnaires will be
distributed to the samples. Instruction will be explained to the samples before
they complete the questionnaire. Respondents will not be required to write their
names on the questionnaire for confidentially purpose. Questionnaires will be
collected instantly upon completion.
17
3.6
Data Analysis
Data collected will be analysed using the Statistical Package of Social
Science (SPSS) Version 25 for windows. The relationship between preferred
leadership styles on the performance coaches in UiTM Perlis will be
evaluated by applying a set of descriptive statistic, reliability analysis, and
independent sample t-test, MANOVA, linear regression.
18
Table 3.6: Specification of Measurement Scale and Data Analysis
Procedures
Section
Number
of
Detail of Measurement
A
Personal
Data
B
Democratic
Statistic
Procedures
Items
3
Descriptive
11
Descriptive
Statistic
leadership is the
Statistic
type of leader in
Reliability
which group
Analysis
members are
Independent
more involved in
Sample t- Test
decision making
while Autocratic
leadership is a
management
style in which
one person
dominates all
decisions and
does not make
contributions
from other group
members. Which
Way Do You
Like to
Choose the Best
Coach?
C
To Identify
5
Descriptive
Which
Statistic
Leadership Style
Reliability
Are Suitable For
Analysis
Coach ToBuild
Independent
A Successful
Sample tTest
19
Demographic analysis of gender group and type of sport (Section A) will be
analyzed using descriptive statistics. The preference of athlete's perceptions on
leadership style (autocratic and democratic) among athletes at UiTM Perlis will be
analyzed using descriptive statistic (Research question 1). The difference on athletes
perceives democratic leadership between male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis
(Research question 2) and the difference on athletes perceive autocratic leadership
between male and female athletes at UiTM Perlis (Research question 3) will be
analyzed using descriptive statistic, reliability analysis and Independent Sample tTest.
20
REFERENCES
Arkin, H., & Colton, P. R. (1970). Statistical methods. New York: Barnes & Noble
Books.
Bridges, F.J. and Roquemore, L.L.,(1996). Management for Athletic and Sport
Administration: Theory and Practice, Second Edition, Decatur, GA: ESM
Books, pp. 85-132.
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1982). Reliability and validity assessment.
Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Carey, L. M. (1988). Measuring and evaluating sports school learning.
London: Allyn and Bacon.
Chelladurai. P. (1984). Discrepancy Between Preferences and Perceptions of
Leadership Behavior and Satisfaction of Athletes in Varying Sports. Journal of
Sport Psychology, 1984, Volume 6, 27-41.
Dawn Anderson-Butcher. (2007). Autonomy-supportive coaching and selfdetermined motivation in high school and college athletes: A test of selfdetermination theory.
El-Saleh M.S. & Althawabeyeh M.M. (2020). Distinguished leadershipbehaviors and
styles of basketball coaches in UAE universities. Journal of Human Sport and
Exercise,
15(2proc),
S393-S407.
https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2020.15.Proc2.30.
Ekstrand J., Lundqvist D., Lagerbäck L., Vouillamoz M., Papadimitiou N. &
Karlsson J. (2017). Is there a correlation between coaches‟ leadership styles
and injuries in elite football teams? A study of 36 elite teams in 17 countries.
Sports Med Published. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2017- 098001.
Gay, L. R. (1985). Educational evaluation and measurement. London: A Bell &
Howell
Gilda K. Mohamad K. & Nasrollah S. (2011). The relationship between coach‟s
leadership styles & player satisfaction in women skate championship. Procedia
Social
and
Behavioral
Sciences
10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.34.
21
15,
3596–
3601.
DOI:
Hyun-Duck K. & Angelita B. C. (2016). The influence of coaches‟ leadership
styles on athletes‟ satisfaction and team cohesion: A meta- analytic
approach. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 0(0) 1–10.
DOI: 10.1177/1747954116676117.
Joseph B. Alla & Idisape Inengite. (2016). Leadership Styles and Staff Performance
in Sports Organizations. European Journal of Physical Education and Sport
Science ISSN: 2501 – 1235 ISSN-L: 2501 –1235.
Lawal Y.I. (2016). Effective Managerial Leadership and Challenges in Sport
Organization. Journal of Sports and Physical Education. e-ISSN: 23476737, p-ISSN: 2347-6745, Volume 3, Issue 4 (Jul. – Aug. 2016). DOI:
10.9790/6737-0304XXXX.
Lesika K. & Leapetswe M. (2019): Coaching Efficacy, Player Perceptions of
Coaches‟ Leadership Styles, and Team Performance in Premier League
Soccer.
Research
Quarterly
for
Exercise
and
Sport.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2018.1563277.
Lyle, S. (2008). Sports development, sports coaching, and domain specificity, 22,
222-240.
Melissa S. Price & Maureen R. Weiss. (2013). Relationships among Coach
Leadership, Peer Leadership, and Adolescent Athletes‟ Psychosocial and
Team Outcomes: A Test of Transformational Leadership Theory. Journal of
Applied
Sport
Psychology,
25:2,
265-279.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2012.725703.
Mohd Solleh Fathi B Muhammad Sabri, Mustafa Yen & Tan Chee Hian. (2012).
Athletes‟ Satisfaction with The Coaches Leadership Styles in Schools‟
High-Performance Sports Programme. Paper Code. No. I2442.
O‟Connor, R. (1993). Issues in the measurement of health-related quality of life,
working paper 30. Melbourne: NHMRC National Centre for Health
Program Evaluation ISBN: 1-875677-26-7.
22
Perera,. H. P.N. & Pushpakumari. M. D. (2015). The Perception of Athletes on the
Factors Affecting to Coach Leadership Behavior Styles: An Empirical Study
on Leadership Styles Exhibited by the Coaches of State Universities in
Western Province - Sri Lanka. International Journal of Multidisciplinary
Studies, Vol. 2(2): 8 3 -9 1.
Rune Høigaard, Gareth W. Jones & Derek M. Peters. (2008). Preferred Coach
Leadership Behaviour in Elite Soccer in Relation to Success and Failure.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 3.
Sedighe, H., & Omid, A. (2010). Relationship Between Coaching Leadership Styles
and Team Cohesion in Football Teams of The Iranian University
League. Studies in Physical Culture and Tourism Vol. 17, No. 4.
S, Engeser,. & F, Rheinberg. (2004). Flow, performance and moderators of
challenge-skill balance. DOI 10.1007/s11031-008-9102-4.
Vincer, D,. & Loughead, T. (2010). The Relationship among Athlete Leadership
Behaviors and Cohesion in Team Sports. The Sport Psychologist, 24(4),
448- 467.
23