Sport dropout during adolescence is a common phenomenon which is connected to motivation. Therefore this thesis investigated the relationship between coaches’ (N = 61, Mage = 40.39) transformational leadership and athletes’ (N = 132, Mage = 20.61) type of motivation in Swedish sport clubs. In addition, the moderating role of personality and self-other agreement ratings were examined. A cross sectional research design was used and data was collected through self-ratings and other ratings. Data was analysed using SPSS and the add-on program Process macro. To investigate the moderating role of personality and level of agreement, coach-athletes dyads were created (N = 38). The result showed that transformational leadership is positively associated with more self-determined types of motivation. Four of the coach’s personality traits (i.e., honesty-humility, emotionality, extraversion and conscientiousness) moderated the relationship between transformational leadership and motivation. For the athletes agreeableness moderated this relationship. A majority of the coaches and athletes disagreed in rating the coaches’ transformational behaviours; however the result only showed significant correlation between coaches who underestimated and athletes’ lack of motivation. In conclusion, transformational leadership is suitable in a sport context. Future research could use a longitudinal design to further explore personality’s role in leadership. Practical implications of transformational leadership in connection to education are discussed.

This thesis investigates the effect that non-anonymity has upon student team-member evaluations; more specifically, it looked at how to create conditions of openness and honesty in which students will readily give and receive constructive criticism. The central hypothesis of this research is that if students are taught and prepared to properly give and receive constructive criticism, and have multiple opportunities to do so, non-anonymous feedback is the most effective and desirable. In order to gauge the effects of non-anonymity, eight specific hypotheses relating to different aspects of the feedback process were tested. Predictions were made as to the effects upon the self-awareness and defensiveness of those who received feedback, the honesty and candor of those who provided it, as well as the effect upon teams' levels of trust and unity, and levels of performance. The statistical analysis showed that non-anonymity had no significant effect upon self-awareness, trust and unity, and performance. Significant differences were observed for honesty and candor, as well as defensiveness. Although some of these differences were in favor, others were contrary to the assumptions that were made. One of the results showed that at the beginning of the procedure, non-anonymous ratings were more lenient, but at the end of the process there was no difference. This was as expected. In regards to the overall process, non-anonymous students perceived ratings to be less honest and candid. A second conclusion was that non-anonymous students were actually more defensive towards negative feedback. In the end, there was no strong evidence for or against non-anonymity, and thus it appears that there was no major treatment effect. There are two justifications as to why this may be the case. These are based upon insights gained from the free-response section of a follow-up survey which the participants took. First, if non-anonymous feedback does indeed produce positive outcomes it may take a longer period of time for these differences to be noticed. This process took place over only about a three-month period, and feedback was received only 3-4 weeks apart. Secondly, when teams are small (i.e., only 3-5 members), it is difficult to maintain anonymity, which essentially removes the treatment. From these observations, the final recommendation of this report is that for students working in small teams, non-anonymous feedback is preferable. This is because, as just noted, anonymity is difficult to maintain even if it is a required condition. It seems that pretending that anonymity exists, when in fact it does not, actually hinders transparency and trust. Also, it seems that giving feedback non-anonymously will more effectively prepare students for working on teams in their careers, as this is more reflective of the way that feedback will be provided in the workforce.

No description available.

No description available.

Application of multisource feedback (MSF) increased dramatically and became widespread globally in the past two decades, but there was little conceptual work regarding self-other agreement and few empirical studies investigated self-other agreement in other cultural settings. This study developed a new conceptual framework of self-other agreement and used three samples to illustrate how national culture affected self-other agreement. These three samples included 428 participants from China, 818 participants from the US, and 871 participants from globally dispersed teams (GDTs). An EQS procedure and a polynomial regression procedure were used to examine whether the covariance matrices were equal across samples and whether the relationships between self-other agreement and performance would be different across cultures, respectively. The results indicated MSF could be applied to China and GDTs, but the pattern of relationships between self-other agreement and performance was different across samples, suggesting that the results found in the U.S. sample were the exception rather than rule. Demographics also affected self-other agreement disparately across perspectives and cultures, indicating self-concept was susceptible to cultural influences. The proposed framework only received partial support but showed great promise to guide future studies. This study contributed to the literature by: (a) developing a new framework of self-other agreement that could be used to study various contextual factors; (b) examining the relationship between self-other agreement and performance in three vastly different samples; (c) providing some important insights about consensus between raters and self-other agreement; (d) offering some practical guidelines regarding how to apply MSF to other cultures more effectively.