The motivational relevance of peer and teacher relationship profiles in physical education

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify combinations or profiles of peer (i.e., friendship quality, peer acceptance) and teacher (i.e., perceived support) relationship variables in physical education and then test for motivation-related differences among the emergent profiles. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Method: An online survey assessing study variables was completed by 7th and 8th grade physical education students (n1⁄4 244). Results: Three meaningful profiles emerged: aMixed profile (n1⁄4 67) with relatively high peer acceptance, a trend toward relatively high friendship quality and relatively low teacher support, aWeak profile (n1⁄4 74) with relatively low peer relationships and teacher support, and a Positive profile (n1⁄4 103) with relatively high teacher support and a trend toward high peer relationships. TwoMANOVAs showed significant main effects (p< .01, hp1⁄4 .30 and .17) with follow-ups specifying that the Positive profile had higher (p< .01) perceived autonomy, relatedness, self-determined motivation, enjoyment, effort and value compared to the others, both the Positive and Mixed profiles experienced less (p< .05) worry, higher perceptions of competence and physical activity than the Weak profile, and the Mixed and Weak profiles experienced similar perceptions of autonomy, self-determined motivation, effort, and value. Conclusions: Profile differences suggest that positive relationships with both teachers and peers are associated with optimal physical education experiences. Positive peer relationships, even when teacher support is relatively low may afford some advantages within this setting. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Physical education has been identified as a critical avenue for promoting a physically active lifestyle (Ward, Saunders, & Pate, 2007) and research has supported the link between more positive physical education experiences and higher levels of leisure-time physical activity in young adolescents (Cox, Smith, & Williams, 2008; Hagger et al., 2009). However, when students reach early adolescence and many make the transition into a secondary school setting, their cognitive, emotional and behavioral experiences in physical education are quite diverse. These students exhibit a wide range of: positive (e.g., enjoyment) and negative (e.g., anxiety) affect, values they place on physical education, concentration levels, effort and preferences for challenge during class (e.g., Cox, Duncheon, & McDavid, 2009; Ntoumanis, 2001; Standage, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2005, 2006). A substantial body of research grounded in self-determination theory has supported the roles that selfdetermined motivation and satisfaction of the needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness (see Deci & Ryan, 1985; R.M. Ryan & Deci, 2007) play in explaining these individual differences in the physical education setting (Cox & Williams, 2008; Ntoumanis, 2005; Standage, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2003; Standage et al., 2006). Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; R.M. Ryan & Deci, 2007) suggests that individuals have innate psychological needs to interact effectively in their environment (i.e., feel competent), exercise free will (i.e., feel autonomous), and have meaningful social connections with others (i.e., feel related). Further, the extent to which these three needs are fulfilled is theorized to relate positively to the degree of self-determination characterizing individuals’ motivation. Motivation that is self-determined emanates from sources within the self (e.g., experiencing enjoyment and satisfaction from the activity) rather than sources outside of the self (e.g., pressure fromothers, avoiding punishment) and is purported to lead to more positive cognitive, affective and behavioral consequences. The positive association between need satisfaction and self-determined motivation has been well-supported in physical education research (e.g., Cox & Williams, 2008; Standage et al., 2006). * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 309 438 2655; fax: þ1 309 438 5559. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.E. Cox), [email protected] (S. UllrichFrench).