Health Psychology Research / HPR / Volume 14 / Issue 1 / DOI: 10.14440/hpr.0349
Submit to HPR
Cite this article
17
Download
65
Citations
229
Views
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
Forthcoming Issue
Current Issue
View All
News and Announcements
View All
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Coach–Athlete Relationship in Greek Basketball Community: Associations between Relationship Quality, Maintenance Strategies, and Demographic Factors

Nikolaos Kostopoulos1 ,  Theodoros Rachiotis1* ,  Christos Marmarinos1 ,  Panagiotis Kostopoulos2 ,  Elias Armenis1
Show Less
1 Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, School of Physical Education and Sport Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Dafni, Athens 17237, Greece
2 Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, School of Physical Education and Sport Science, Democritus University of Thrace, Komotini, Thrace 69100, Greece
HPR 2026 , 14(1), e81240045; https://doi.org/10.14440/hpr.0349
Submitted: 28 October 2025 | Revised: 11 November 2025 | Accepted: 17 November 2025 | Published: 18 March 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). Licensee Health Psychology Research, USA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Download PDF
Cite
XML
Abstract

Background

High quality coach–athlete relationships strongly influence athlete performance and wellbeing, yet limited evidence exists on how relational quality and maintenance strategies interact within Greek basketball.

Objective

This study investigated the coach–athlete relationship within the Greek basketball community, examining the associations between relationship quality (closeness, commitment, complementarity; measured by the Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire) and relationship maintenance strategies (COMPASS model; measured by Coach–Athlete Relationship Maintenance Questionnaire), and how these dynamics are moderated by athletes’ demographic characteristics.

Methods

Greek basketball players (male/female, n = 595) across various age groups, competitive levels (A1 League to Amateur), and years of experience participated in the online questionnaires. Non-parametric analyses revealed significant positive correlations between all dimensions of relationship quality and maintenance strategies, with conflict management and openness showing particularly strong associations with closeness, commitment, and complementarity.

Results

Motivation emerged as the most highly rated maintenance strategy, while social networks and preventative strategies were the least frequently reported. Significant demographic differences were found: female athletes reported higher commitment; younger athletes (≤22 years) reported lower closeness and complementarity; A1 League athletes reported lower complementarity; athletes with more experience reported higher overall relationship quality and greater use of conflict management, assurance, and motivation strategies. Age and competitive level also significantly influenced the use of specific maintenance strategies.

Conclusion

The findings underscore the interdependence of relationship quality and maintenance strategies, highlighting the importance for coaches to consider athlete demographics, particularly age, experience, and competitive level, when fostering effective coach–athlete dyads in the Greek basketball context.

Keywords
Coach–athlete relationship
Relationship maintenance
Basketball
Greece
Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire
Coach–Athlete Relationship Maintenance Questionnaire
Funding
This study is supported by the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens under the Special Research Funds Account.
References
  1. Jowett S. Coaching effectiveness: The coach– athlete relationship at its heart. Curr Opin Psychol. 2017;16(1):154-158.  doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.05.006

 

  1. Jowett S, Poczwardowski A. Understanding the coach–athlete relationship. In: Jowett S, Lavallee D, editors. Social Psychology in Sport. Champaign, IL, USA: Human Kinetics; 2007. pp. 3-14.

 

  1. Jowett S. On the nature and importance of the coach–athlete relationship. In: Jowett S, Lavallee D, editors. Social Psychology in Sport. Champaign, IL, USA: Human Kinetics; 2005. pp. 13-28.

 

  1. Rhind DJ, Jowett S. Development of the Coach– Athlete Relationship Maintenance Questionnaire (CARM-Q). Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2010;7(1):121- 137. doi: 10.1260/1747-9541.7.1.121

 

  1. Jowett S, Shanmugam V. The 3+1Cs model of the coach–athlete relationship. In: Routledge International Handbook of Sports Psychology. New York, NY, USA: Routledge; 2016. pp. 336-349.

 

  1. Sánchez Galán J, Lorenzo Calvo A, Battaglia O, Leite N, Borrás P. The coach–athlete relation- ship in basketball: Analysis of the antecedents, components, and outcomes. Rev Psicol Deporte. 2009;18(2):349-352.

 

  1. Wang Y, Li C, Jowett S. Cross-cultural validation of the Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q) in Chinese and Spanish basketball play- ers. Front Psychol. 2023;14:1273606. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1273606

 

  1. Jowett S, Cockerill IM. Olympic medalists’ per- spective of the athlete–coach relationship. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2003;4(4):313-331. doi: 10.1016/S1469-0292(02)00011-0

 

  1. Pan F, Sui W. Research on coach–athlete rela- tionship and team performance based on 3Cs theory: The chain mediating role of emotional intelligence and athletic engagement. Front Psychol. 2025;16:1587900. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1587900

 

  1. Hampson R, Jowett S. Effects of coach leader- ship and coach–athlete relationship on collective efficacy. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2012;24(2):454-460. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01527.x

 

  1. Mageau GA, Vallerand RJ. The coach–ath- lete relationship:  A  motivational model. J  Sports    2003;21(11):883-904. doi: 10.1080/0264041031000140374

 

  1. Jowett S. 25 years of relationship research in sport: The quality of the coach–athlete relation- ship. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2025;72:102004. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2025.102004

 

 

  1. Davis L, Jowett S. Coach-athlete attach- ment and  the  quality  of  the coach-athlete relationship: Implications for athlete well-be- ing. J Sports Sci. 2014;32(15):1454-1464. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2014.898183

 

  1. McGee V, DeFreese JD. The coach–athlete rela- tionship and athlete psychological outcomes. J Clin Sport Psychol. 2018;13(1):1-29. doi: 10.1123/jcsp.2018-0010

 

  1. Rachiotis T,  Stavrou  N,  Adamakis M, Karteroliotis K. Basketball referee burnout: A systematic scoping review. Health Psychol Res. 2024;12(1):e81240033. doi: 10.14440/hpr.0176

 

  1. Davis L, Appleby R, Davis P, Wetherell M, Gustafsson H. The role of coach-athlete relation- ship quality in team sport athletes’ psychophysio- logical exhaustion: The mediating role of perceived stress. J Sports Sci. 2018;36(17):1985-1992. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1429176

 

  1. Gerber M, Gygax B, Cody R. Coach-athlete relationship and burnout symptoms among young elite athletes and the role of mental toughness as a moderator. Sports Psychiatry. 2024;3(1):5-14. doi: 10.1024/2674-0052/a000071

 

  1. Zhao C, Jowett S. Before supporting athletes, evaluate your coach–athlete relationship: Exploring the link between coach leadership and coach–athlete relationship. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2023;18(4):633- 641. doi: 10.1177/17479541221148113

 

  1. Freire GLM, Cronin L, Jowett S, et al. Coach– athlete relationships and life skills development. Quaderns Psicol. 2024;26(1):e2051.

 

  1. Davis, L, Jowett, S, Sörman, D, Ekelund, R. Quality relationships, communication strategies, and basic psychological needs. J Sports Sci. 2022;40(21), 2424–2436. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2022.2162240

 

  1. Yang SX, Jowett S, Chan DK. Effects of big-five personality traits on the quality of relationship and satisfaction in Chinese coach-athlete dyads. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2015;25(4):568-580. doi: 10.1111/sms.12329

 

  1. Jowett S,  Ntoumanis    The  Coach– Athlete  Relationship  Questionnaire (CART-Q): Development  and  initial  validation. Scand J  Med  Sci  Sports.  2004;14(4 :245-257.  doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2003.00338.x

 

 

  1. Jiahao L, Jing L. Coach–athlete relation- ship, training satisfaction and athlete burnout: A mediation analysis. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2024;17:1-10.

 

  1. Kostopoulos N, Rachiotis T, Agrotou S, Kostopoulos P, Armenis E. Psychological fac- tors and performance in basketball: The cor- relation between motivation, basic needs, and commitment. Sports Injr Med. 2024;8(4):204. doi: 10.29011/2576-9596.100204

 

  1. McShan K, Moore EWG. Systematic review of the coach–athlete relationship from the coaches’ perspective. Kinesiol Rev. 2023;12(2):158-173. doi: 10.1123/kr.2022-0006

 

  1. Gomes AR, Faria S, Gonçalves B, Jowett S. Psychometric properties of the Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q) in a sample of Portugueseathletes.2024;19(5):e0302928. doi: 10.1177/17479541231194758

 

  1. Cook JR, O’Neil BJ, Kelling M. Athletes’ percep- tions of effective S&C coach behaviours within the 3+1 C’s model. 2019;7(12):244. doi: 10.3390/sports7120244

 

  1. Mellano KT, Smith AL, Gustafsson H, et al. Coaching behaviours and within-season changes in athlete burnout.Psychol Sport Exerc. 2022;60:102164. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102164

 

  1. Jowett   The  coach–athlete  relation- ship within a cross-boundary talent system. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2024;22(3):1-14. doi: 10.1080/1750984X.2024.2416968

 

  1. Luo Y, Li S, Cao Y, Luo Z. The predictive role of coach–athlete relationship quality in train- ing engagement and skill development among adolescent basketball    Front Psychol. 2025;16:1648082. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1648082

 

  1. Philippe RA, Seiler R. Closeness, co-orientation and complementarity in coach–athlete relation- ships: What male swimmers say about their male coaches. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2006;7(2):159-171. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2005.08.004

 

  1. Fan F, Zhang Y, Chen L. How relationship-main- tenance strategies influence athlete satisfaction and commitment. Front Psychol. 2023;14:1104143. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1104143

 

  1. Griffiths B. Stronger Together: Coach & Athlete Partnership Guide. Kempele, Finland: Polar; 2024.
  2. Kostopoulos N, Rachiotis T, Mitsopoulos N, Armenis E. Burnout, resilience and needs satis- faction: Exploring the associations in basketball athletes. Chron Pain Manag. 2024;8(1):166. doi: 10.29011/2576-957X.100066

 

  1. Canary DJ, Stafford L. Maintaining relation- ships through strategic and routine interaction. In: Canary DJ, Stafford L, eds. Communication and Relational Maintenance. Cambridge, MA, USA: Academic Press; 1994. pp. 3-22.

 

  1. Rhind DJ, Jowett S. Development of the Coach– Athlete Relationship Maintenance Questionnaire (CARM-Q). Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2010;5(1):121-137.

 

  1. Coussens AH, Jowett S, Freire GLM, et al. Coach support, coach–athlete relationship, self-confi- dence and psychological well-being. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2024;34(3):e11680554. doi: 10.1002/ ejsc.12226

 

  1. Rhind DJ,  Jowett    The  Coach–Athlete Relationship    Maintenance Questionnaire (CARM-Q):  A  confirmatory  factor analysis. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2012;7(1):121-137. doi: 10.1260/1747-9541.7.1.121

 

  1. Davis L, Jowett S, Lafrenière MAK. An attach- ment theory perspective in the study of the coach-athlete relationship. Int J Sport Psychol. 2013;44(4):365-385. doi: 10.1123/jsep.35.2.156

 

  1. Jowett S, Meek GA. The coach–athlete relation- ship in married couples: An exploratory content analysis. Sport Psychol. 2000;14(2):157-175. doi: 10.1123/tsp.14.2.157

 

  1. Jowett   The  coach–athlete  relation- ship within a cross-boundary talent system. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2024;22(3):1-14. doi: 10.1080/1750984X.2024.2416968

 

  1. Fasting K,  Pfister    Female  and male coaches in the eyes of female elite soccer play- ers. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2000;6(1):91-110. doi: 10.1177/1356336X000061001

 

  1. Murray P, Lord R, Lorimer R. How the per- ceived effectiveness of a female coach is influenced by their apparent masculinity/femininity. Sport J. 2020;24(2):1-10. ISSN:1543-9518.

 

  1. Norman L. Is there a need for coaches to be more gender responsive? A review of the evidence. Int Sport Coach J. 2016;3(2):192-196. doi: 10.1123/iscj.2016-0032

 

  1. Partington M, Cushion C, Harvey S. An inves- tigation of the effect of athletes’ age on the coach- ing behaviours of professional top-level youth soccer coaches. J Sports Sci. 2014;32(5):403-414. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2013.835063

 

  1. Smith RE, Smoll FL. Social-cognitive approach to coaching. In: Jowett S, Lavallee D, editors. Social Psychology in Sport. Champaign, IL, USA: Human Kinetics; 2007:75-90. doi: 10.5040/9781492595878.ch-006

 

  1. Pido GB, Dizer JV, Dapanas A. The coaching preferences and differences of athletes’ satisfaction among the different demographic factors. Int J Phys Educ Sports Health. 2018;5(6):18-23.

 

  1. Rachiotis T,  Adamakis  M,  Stavrou N, Karteroliotis K. Causes and consequences of burn- out among basketball referees. Kinesiol Humanit Dir. 2023;10(1):77-98.

 

  1. Kim SK, Park H, Lee D, et al. Effects of coaches’ autonomy support,  coach–athlete relationship, team efficacy, and athlete burnout. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1388185. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1388185

 

  1. Jowett S, Lavallee D, editors. Social Psychology in Sport. Champaign, IL, USA: Human Kinetics; 2007. doi: 10.5040/9781492595878

 

  1. Côté J, Gilbert W. An integrative defini- tion of coaching effectiveness and expertise. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2009;4(3):307-323. doi: 10.1260/174795409789623892

 

  1. Simons EE, Bird MD. Coach–athlete relation- ship, social support, and sport well-being/burnout. Sport Exerc Perform Psychol. 2023;12(2):103-115. doi: 10.1080/19357397.2022.2060703

 

  1. Jowett S,Clark-Carter D.Perceptions of empathic accuracy and assumed similarity in the coach–ath- lete relationship. Br J Soc Psychol. 2006;45(3):617- 637. doi: 10.1348/014466605X58609

 

  1. Şenel E, Uçar A, Kara S, et al. Coach behaviours, team performance and the coach–athlete rela- tionship. Eur J Sport Sci. 2024;24(5):733-745. doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2024.2369717

 

  1. Longakit J, Toring-Aque L, Aque F Jr, Sayson M, Lobo J. The role of coach–athlete rela- tionship on motivation and sports engage- ment. Phys Educ Stud. 2024;28(4):268-278. doi: 10.15561/20755279.2024.0403

 

  1. Pinho A, Monteiro D, Jacinto M, Matos R, Rodrigues F, Amaro N, et al. Initial valida- tion of the coach–athlete relationship ques- tionnaire in a sample of Portuguese athletes. Percept Mot Skills. 2024;131(4):1360-1377. doi: 10.1177/00315125241254437

 

  1. Luo Y, Li S, Cao Y, Luo Z. Coach–athlete rela- tionship quality predicting training engagement and skill in adolescent basketball. Front Psychol. 2025;16:1648082. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1648082

 

  1. Bryman A. Social Research Methods, 5th ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2016.

 

  1. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 5th ed. Oaks, CA, USA: Sage; 2018.

 

  1. Etikan I, Musa SA, Alkassim RS. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Am J Theor Appl Stat. 2016;5(1):1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

 

  1. Punch KF. Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches, 3rd ed. Oaks, CA, USA: Sage; 2014.

 

  1. Rhind DJ, Jowett S. Linking maintenance strat- egies to the quality of the coach–athlete relation- ship. Int J Sport Psychol. 2011;42(1):55-68.

 

  1. The British  Psychological    Code  of Human Research Ethics. 2nd ed. Leicester, UK: The British Psychological Society; 2014. Available from: https://www.bps.org.uk/news-and-policy/bps-code-human-research-ethics-2nd-edition-2014 [Last accessed on May 2025].
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Share
Back to top
Health Psychology Research, Electronic ISSN: 2420-8124 Published by Health Psychology Research
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept