An Exploration of Sociometric Status and Peer Relations in Youth Sport

More than 10 years ago, it was suggested that sociometry and systematic observation were two potentially useful but under-utilized methods for the study of peers in youth sport (Smith, 2003). Despite this call, the methods used to study peers in sport remain largely focused on athletes' perceptions through questionnaires and interviews. Thus, the purpose of this descriptive study was to investigate the utility of sociometry in relation to sport competence and observed athlete behavior in youth sport. Three adolescent female volleyball teams were videotaped during three practice sessions, and sport competence and sociometric status were assessed using questionnaires. An observational coding system was developed and used to code athlete behaviors and data were compared across sociometric status groups. Results revealed significant differences between sociometric status groups on peer ratings of sport competence, but not on athlete behavior. However, interesting findings emerged with respect to how status groups interacted with teammates and coaches. Thus, sport competence seems to be an important factor in gaining acceptance among youth peer groups. Further, sociometry and behavioral observation appear to be useful techniques that should continue to be employed in the study of peer relations in youth sport.

Applied Research “Specializers”Versus “Samplers” in Youth Sport: Comparing Experiences and Outcomes

The purpose of the current study was to examine two different trajectories of sport participation and explore any similarities or differences that may result regarding per­sonal development and sport outcomes. Seventy-four youth athletes (40 “specializ­ers” and 34 “samplers”) were recruited for the current study and four measures were employed to assess sport experiences and outcomes. Discriminant function analyses revealed no differences between groups in asset possession or sources of enjoyment however, differences were reported in sport experiences and burnout. The “samplers” reported more experiences regarding the integration of sport and family as well as linkages to the community. Although the “specializers” reported higher levels of physical/emotional exhaustion than did the “samplers,” they also reported more expe­riences related to diverse peer groups. The differences highlight the importance of examining specific pathways of development in sport to gain a deeper understanding of youths’ experiences in sport.

ISSP Position Stand: To Sample or to Specialize? Seven Postulates About Youth Sport Activities that Lead to Continued Participation and Elite Performance

A comprehensive approach to sport expertise should consider the entire situation that is comprised of the person, the task, the environment, and the complex interplay of these components (Hackfort, 1986). Accordingly, the Developmental Model of Sport Participation (Côté, Baker, & Abernethy, 2007; Côté & Fraser-Thomas, 2007) provides a comprehensive framework for sport expertise that outlines different pathways of involvement in sport. In pathways one and two, early sampling serves as the foundation for both elite and recreational sport participation. Early sampling is based on two main elements of childhood sport participation: 1) involvement in various sports and 2) participation in deliberate play. In contrast, pathway three shows the course to elite performance through early specialization in one sport. Early specialization implies a focused involvement on one sport and a large number of deliberate practice activities with the goal of improving sport skills and performance during childhood. This paper proposes seven postulates regarding the role that sampling and deliberate play, as opposed to specialization and deliberate practice, can have during childhood in promoting continued participation and elite performance in sport.

Systematic Observation of Youth Ice Hockey Coaches During Games

The behaviors of youth ice hockey coaches during games are examined using the Coaches Observation System for Games. This tool identifies 16 types of coach behaviors and eight targets of such behaviors. Findings reveal that coaches spend 51.2% of their time simply observing the game. Other common coach behaviors are organizing (15%), directing the game (8.1%) and giving information (6.1%). Targets of these behaviors include players in action (40.9%), on the bench (30.4%) and in transition (22.3%).