| Literature DB >> 35010719 |
Victor Hugo Duque1, Pedro Saenz-López2, Miguel Ángel Gómez-Ruano3, Sergio J Ibáñez-Godoy4, Cristina Conde2, Bartolomé J Almagro2, José Antonio Rebollo2.
Abstract
In spite of the negative effects of anger, coaches are often seen becoming angry during games. This is especially worrying in U18 categories. Thus, the objective of this study was to identify the influence that the coach's anger has on the performance of a basketball team in competition. For this, an ad hoc observation tool was designed, in which 587 moments of anger from the coaching staff (64 coaches) were recorded in the 24 semi-final and final matches of the Spanish Autonomous Region Team Championships in 2019 and 2020 in the infantil (M = 14 years old) and cadete (M = 16 years old) categories. The results show that, in response to most incidents of coach anger, the performance of the team did not change. Significant differences were identified in some scenarios, with low- or medium-intensity anger targeted at the defence, where the team performance improved. However, anger towards the referee in the last quarter with scores level had a negative influence on the team's performance.Entities:
Keywords: anger; basketball; competition; negative emotions; youth
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35010719 PMCID: PMC8744875 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19010459
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Cluster obtained via the two-stage method for the contextual variables related to the episode of anger (values in % frequency).
| C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 120 (22.1%) | N = 80 (14.7%) | N = 77 (14.2%) | N = 85 (15.6%) | N = 82 (15.1%) | N = 100 (18.4%) | ||
| Variables | BIC | 6233.2 | 5967.9 | 5708.4 | 5479.4 | 5305.3 | 5146.9 |
| Period (I = 1.0) | 1° | 15.0 | 0 | 0 | 35.3 | 31.7 | 51.0 |
| 2° | 45.8 | 100 | 3.9 | 12.9 | 0 | 15.0 | |
| 3° | 31.7 | 0 | 64.9 | 7.1 | 39.0 | 22.0 | |
| 4° | 7.5 | 0 | 31.2 | 44.7 | 29.3 | 12.0 | |
| Intensity (I = 0.54) | Low | 55.8 | 65.0 | 46.8 | 0 | 73.2 | 100 |
| Medium | 41.7 | 22.5 | 53.2 | 92.9 | 20.7 | 0 | |
| High | 2.5 | 12.5 | 0 | 7.1 | 6.1 | 0 | |
| Cause (I = 0.35) | Attack | 18.3 | 18.8 | 14.3 | 28.2 | 12.2 | 24.0 |
| Defence | 44.2 | 20.0 | 58.4 | 43.5 | 17.1 | 36.0 | |
| Referee | 32.5 | 56.3 | 22.1 | 22.4 | 64.6 | 37.0 | |
| Others | 3.3 | 5.0 | 3.9 | 3.5 | 6.1 | 2.0 | |
| Two episodes | 1.7 | 0 | 1.3 | 2.4 | 0 | 1.0 | |
| Episodes of anger (I = 0.94) | Single | 0 | 96.3 | 100 | 69.4 | 61.0 | 100 |
| Acumulated | 100 | 3.7 | 0 | 30.6 | 39.0 | 0 | |
| Score difference (I = 0.811) | Losing > 21 | 2.5 | 1.3 | 26.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Losing 7–20 | 19.2 | 13.8 | 11.7 | 0 | 53.7 | 18.0 | |
| Winning 5–19 | 10.8 | 26.3 | 10.4 | 16.5 | 46.3 | 3.0 | |
| Winning > 20 | 15.0 | 8.8 | 26.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Level −6 to 4 | 52.5 | 50.0 | 26.0 | 83.5 | 0 | 79.0 |
Descriptive results of points scored and conceded for each cluster, and mean differences between performance before and after the episode of anger (Wilcoxon repeated-measures test).
| Before | After | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | M | DT | M | DT | Z |
| |
| Cluster 1 | |||||||
| Scoredpoints1PB | 120 | 0.52 | 0.91 | 0.66 | 0.97 | −1.19 | 0.23 |
| Scoredpoints2PB | 120 | 0.97 | 1.17 | 1.37 | 1.44 | −2.25 | 0.02 * |
| Scoredpoints3PB | 120 | 1.44 | 1.67 | 1.95 | 1.74 | −2.39 | 0.02 * |
| Concededpoints1PB | 120 | 0.98 | 1.08 | 0.95 | 1.08 | −0.29 | 0.77 |
| Concededpoints2PB | 120 | 1.77 | 1.62 | 1.58 | 1.31 | −0.94 | 0.35 |
| Concededpoints3PB | 120 | 2.50 | 2.00 | 2.38 | 1.74 | −0.39 | 0.69 |
| Cluster 2 | |||||||
| Scoredpoints1PB | 80 | 0.64 | 1.12 | 0.79 | 1.10 | −0.80 | 0.42 |
| Scoredpoints2PB | 80 | 1.40 | 1.72 | 1.60 | 1.51 | −0.67 | 0.50 |
| Scoredpoints3PB | 80 | 2.13 | 2.10 | 2.45 | 1.97 | −0.88 | 0.38 |
| Concededpoints1PB | 80 | 0.84 | 1.19 | 0.81 | 1.08 | −0.25 | 0.80 |
| Concededpoints2PB | 80 | 1.56 | 1.45 | 1.55 | 1.62 | −0.01 | 0.99 |
| Concededpoints3PB | 80 | 2.14 | 1.77 | 2.21 | 1.90 | −0.37 | 0.71 |
| Cluster 3 | |||||||
| Scoredpoints1PB | 77 | 0.51 | 0.95 | 0.44 | 0.82 | −0.52 | 0.60 |
| Scoredpoints2PB | 77 | 1.09 | 1.33 | 0.94 | 1.24 | −0.88 | 0.38 |
| Scoredpoints3PB | 77 | 2.03 | 1.78 | 1.68 | 1.63 | −1.28 | 0.20 |
| Concededpoints1PB | 77 | 1.01 | 1.13 | 0.64 | 0.87 | −2.48 | 0.01* |
| Concededpoints2PB | 77 | 1.52 | 1.40 | 1.40 | 1.31 | −0.80 | 0.62 |
| Concededpoints3PB | 77 | 2.14 | 1.79 | 2.08 | 1.64 | −0.40 | 0.93 |
| Cluster 4 | |||||||
| Scoredpoints1PB | 85 | 0.61 | 1.05 | 0.71 | 1.11 | −0.50 | 0.62 |
| Scoredpoints2PB | 85 | 1.19 | 1.43 | 1.42 | 1.51 | −0.95 | 0.34 |
| Scoredpoints3PB | 85 | 1.93 | 1.86 | 1.94 | 1.76 | −0.04 | 0.97 |
| Concededpoints1PB | 85 | 1.13 | 1.17 | 0.76 | 1.02 | −0.34 | 0.02 * |
| Concededpoints2PB | 85 | 1.73 | 1.52 | 1.56 | 1.46 | −0.73 | 0.43 |
| Concededpoints3PB | 85 | 2.35 | 1.85 | 2.44 | 1.64 | −1.93 | 0.69 |
| Cluster 5 | |||||||
| Scoredpoints1PB | 82 | 0.72 | 1.07 | 0.63 | 1.02 | −0.43 | 0.67 |
| Scoredpoints2PB | 82 | 1.27 | 1.45 | 1.26 | 1.41 | −0.07 | 0.95 |
| Scoredpoints3PB | 82 | 1.99 | 1.82 | 1.90 | 1.68 | −0.49 | 0.62 |
| Concededpoints1PB | 82 | 0.99 | 1.27 | 1.11 | 1.22 | −0.34 | 0.74 |
| Concededpoints2PB | 82 | 1.79 | 1.84 | 1.98 | 1.74 | −0.73 | 0.46 |
| Concededpoints3PB | 82 | 2.30 | 2.09 | 2.73 | 2.18 | −1.27 | 0.20 |
| Cluster 6 | |||||||
| Scoredpoints1PB | 100 | 0.49 | 0.95 | 0.87 | 1.17 | −2.31 | 0.02 * |
| Scoredpoints2PB | 100 | 1.15 | 1.37 | 1.53 | 1.55 | −1.82 | 0.07 |
| Scoredpoints3PB | 100 | 1.76 | 1.56 | 2.14 | 1.81 | −1.51 | 0.13 |
| Concededpoints1PB | 100 | 0.78 | 1.03 | 1.01 | 1.14 | −1.47 | 0.14 |
| Concededpoints2PB | 100 | 1.40 | 1.41 | 1.66 | 1.63 | −0.96 | 0.34 |
| Concededpoints3PB | 100 | 2.07 | 1.76 | 2.50 | 1.68 | −1.93 | 0.05 * |
Note: Concededpoints#PB and Scoredpoints#PB represent the points in the first, second, and third ball possessions. * p < 0.