Motivational profiles and their relation to wellbeing, burnout, and drop-out intentions in university football players in the UK: A mixed methods approach.
Chris Saward,David Harrison,Laura Healy,Mustafa Sarkar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2023.102585
IF: 5.118
2023-12-15
Psychology of Sport and Exercise
Abstract:In this multi-study paper, we adopted a mixed methods approach to examine the motivational profiles of sub-elite student footballers participating in UK university sport, in relation to their wellbeing, burnout, and drop-out intentions. In Study 1 we used a cross-sectional survey design to collect quantitative measures of motivational regulations, wellbeing, burnout, and drop-out intentions in 260 (n = 129 female) and (n = 131 male) sub-elite university footballers from UK universities ( M age = 20.7 y, SD = 1.5 y). Latent profile analysis revealed five distinct motivational regulation profiles that we deemed ranged from less to more motivationally adaptive in the following order: High-controlled, Amotivated (n = 27), Very-low Motivation (n = 32), Average Motivation (n = 104), High-autonomous, High-controlled (n = 38), and High-autonomous, Low-controlled (n = 59). Wald chi-square tests revealed between-profile differences in wellbeing (χ 2 = 115, p < .001), burnout (reduced accomplishment: χ 2 = 74, p < .001, exhaustion: χ 2 = 34, p < .001, devaluation: χ 2 = 121, p < .001), and drop-out intentions (university football: χ2 = 40, p < .001, football in general: χ 2 = 91, p < .001). Pairwise comparisons suggested more adaptive motivational profiles had higher wellbeing, and lower burnout and drop-out intentions, than less adaptive profiles. Subsequently, in Study 2 we qualitatively explored the experiences of footballers from the different motivational profiles. We purposefully sampled 2–4 participants from each of the five motivational profiles to take part in focus groups, resulting in a total of 15 participants ( M age = 21.6 y, SD = 1.41 y; n = 8 female, n = 7 male). Results revealed commonalities across the motivational profiles, including that while motivation was complex, individualized, dynamic and interactive in nature; a central, underlying motivator for all players was their passion for football. However, results also suggested that compared to those from less motivationally adaptive profiles, those from more adaptive profiles tended to perceive the environment more positively and tended to feel more valued by those around them. Thus, protecting players' passion for football and helping them feel more valued within their university-sport environment may support players in remaining in, or moving towards, more adaptive motivational regulation profiles and associated positive outcomes.
sport sciences,psychology, applied,hospitality, leisure, sport & tourism