The effects of the coaches' use of humor on female volleyball players' evaluation of their coaches.

Burke, Kevin L. ; Peterson, Debbie ; Nix, Charles L. 等

Humor has fascinated people since recorded history. Humor has been studied by scholars in a variety of fields such as psychology, biology, anthropology, and sociology (Vinton, 1989). Humorous effects have been studied in the workplace (Duncan, 1982; Malone, 1980; Vinton, 1989), on consumers (Scott, Klein & Bryant, 1990), and in clinical settings (Marcus, 1990; Rosenheim & Golan, 1986; Saper, 1987). This investigation examined the relationship between humor and coaching.

There have been a great number of studies performed on the effects of teachers' use of humor in the classroom. Research has focused primarily upon teacher effectiveness (Gruner, 1966, 1967), teacher evaluations (Bryant, Crane, Comisky, & Zillmann, 1980; Tamborini & Zillmann, 1981), perceived teacher competency (Zillmann & Bryant, 1983), student learning outcomes (Davies & Apter, 1980; Gorham & Christophel, 1990; Hauck & Thomas, 1972; Kaplan & Pascoe, 1977; Terry & Woods, 1975; Zillmann & Bryant, 1983), and type and frequency of teacher humor (Downs, Javidi, & Nessbaum, 1988: Gorham & Christophel 1990; Javidi & Long, 1989; Mussbaum, Comadena, & Holladay, 1985). In general, the use of humor by instructors in the classroom results in a positive outcome for the teacher and student. These studies have shown that teachers employing humor in the classroom receive higher teacher evaluations, are seen as more approachable by students, and develop a positive rapport with students (Neuliep, 1991).

Educators may need to become aware that humor in their classroom may be beneficial to the students learning and understanding of materials. In recent research, not only do teachers receive better marks when humor is used but, humor has been seen to enhance the learning atmosphere, student receptivity (Hunsaker, 1988), student participation (Welker, 1977), interest in the topic (Hunsaker, 1988), and create a more open and relaxed atmosphere (Gilliland & Mauritsen, 1971).

Cornett (1986) listed several reasons as to why the use of humor in education is important. Schwartz (1989) proposes that humor still remains as one of the most powerful tools an instructor has for teaching and learning. However, no studies were found on coaching and humor.

Coaching is a form of teaching. Coaches need to instruct athletes on the correct method of movement. Coaches need to be patient. Athletes need to be receptive. If humor helps with increased athlete interest and receptivity, and, the coach is viewed as being more approachable, it would seem that humor may play an important role in coaching.

[TABULAR DATA FOR TABLE 1 OMITTED]

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of coaches' humor on female volleyball players. Specifically, this study examined the relationship between the volleyball players' perceptions of their coaches' humor and their perceptions of their coaches' abilities. Additionally, the relationship between the coaches' humor and how the players liked their coach was examined.

Method

Subjects. The participants of this study were all female high school volleyball players (N=51) with ages ranging from 14 to 17 ([mean]= 15.6). A coaching evaluation questionnaire was administered during a weekly summer high school volleyball league. The coaches being evaluated were two males and six females. The players were from surrounding area high schools. Their coaches were not present during the testing.

Questionnaire Format. A cover letter was provided explaining the nature of the study and that participation was voluntary. Each participant completed a modified version of The Coach Evaluation Questionnaire (CEQ) (Rushall & Wiznak, 1985). Out of the 36 CEQ questions, three were used as primary indicators of the players' perception of their coach's sense of humor, coaching abilities, and how much they liked their coach. These items were measured by using a Likert scale of 1-5 (1=strongly agree, 5=strongly disagree).

Procedure. A high school summer volleyball league was offered to the surrounding area high school volleyball teams. The league was attended by female athletes every Monday night. All players attending the third week of competition were asked to participate in this study.

During a break in competition, the players were asked to complete the questionnaire and return it to the administrator.

Results

Table 1 shows the mean and standard deviations for (Item 12) "I feel my coach has a sense of humor," (Item 14) "I like my coach," and (Item 33) "Overall, I feel my coach is a good volleyball coach," for all participants, by age groups and by seasons of experience.

There was a low to moderate relationship (r=.379) between the coach's sense of humor and perceived coaching ability. A moderate relationship (r=.567) existed between the coach's sense of humor and the liking of the coach by the players. A strong relationship (r=.782) existed between liking the coach and the players perceived ability of the coach. Each of these correlations was found to be statistically significant (p [less than] .01).

The group was then divided into age categories (14-15, N=24; 16-17, N=27) and the Pearson product-movement analysis was again computed. It was found that both groups showed a moderate relationship (r=.5598, r=.5849 respectively) between the coach's sense of humor and liking the coach.

Additionally, both groups demonstrated a strong significant (p [less than] .01) relationship between liking the coach and the perceived coaching ability. However, the older group had a higher correlation (r=.8557) than the younger group (r=.7027).

When examining the correlations between the coach's sense of humor and the perceived coaching ability, there was a low to moderate relationship. The relationship in the younger group (r =.4111) was found to be statistically significant (p [less than] .05). The older group, however, demonstrated a weaker relationship (r =.3409), that was not statistically significant.

A Pearson product-movement correlation was performed on the players' experience level. To gauge the players' experience levels, the questionnaire inquired into the number of seasons each player competed. One season of play was counted for each year of high school competition. Another season of play was counted for each year the player competed in an established United Stated Volleyball Association Juniors program.

The number of seasons was broken down into two categories. These groups were separated into (0-2) 2 seasons (N =29) and (3-4) [greater than or equal to]3 seasons (N =22). No participant competed in more than four seasons. One participant had not yet played in a high school season.

The results based on the number of seasons played, mirrored those found earlier when the age categories were studied. There was a moderate relationship (r=-.5536, r=.6178 respectively) in both groups between the coach's sense of humor and liking the coach. These relationships were found to be statistically significant (p[less than or equal to].01).

There was a moderate to high correlation (r =.6812, r =.8772 respectively) between liking the coach and the perceived coaching ability. Once again, the more experienced players demonstrated a higher correlation in liking the coach to perceived coaching ability. Both groups had relationships that were statistically significant (p [less than or equal to] .01).

The relationship between the coach's sense of humor and the perceived coaching ability was found to have a low to moderate significant correlation (p [less than or equal to] .05) for the less experienced players (r=.3826). Unlike the less experienced players, the more experienced players did not show a statistically significant correlation (r=.3939).

Discussion

This study demonstrated a high relationship between liking the coach and the players' perceived ability of the coach. In the older, more experienced players, a high evaluation of their perceived coaches performance was directly linked to liking their coach. The correlation for this was very strong.

The younger, more inexperienced players also showed a strong relationship between the two, although the relationship was not quite as strong as the older group. This weaker relationship may be a result of the younger players not being as familiar with the coach.

This study also demonstrated that humor was a variable in coaching. The volleyball players that felt their coaches had a sense of humor, also seemed to indicate that they liked them. However, it was shown that for older, more experienced players, a sense of humor was not a major factor when perceiving the coach's ability. The younger, more inexperienced group did show a higher relationship between the two.

Humor may not play a large part in a players perceived ability of the coach. However, it should not be discarded all together. To the younger group it was significant. This may show that younger players want more "light hearted" competition than older players do. Also, the younger players may be more anxious and insecure than their older teammates, therefore, their coaches' humor may help alleviate some pressure they may feel.

The older players do not seem as concerned with the coach's ability to make them laugh. This seems to mirror the study done by Neuliep (1991) where he found that high school teachers use humor less often because humor seems to reduce credibility and rapport with the student. This study concluded that the age and maturity level of the high school adolescent may cause humor to be mis-perceived, and not an effective teaching tool.

This study showed that some high school participants may not want or need humor. However, with younger athletes, it may be important to use humor as a means of coaching effectively. The younger players may need the lighter atmosphere to perform and respond more appropriately.

Future studies need to be performed in this area of humor and coaching. Not only do both younger and older athletes need to be studied, but male athletes need to be considered. Also, there may be a need to compare team and individual athletic competitions.

Some humor may be needed in athletics to help offset the stresses that sometimes come with practice and competition. Maybe with more investigation into this area, humor may be found to play an important role in this and other sport and exercise related variables.

References

Bryant, J., Comisky, P.W., Crane, J.S., & Zillmann, D. (1980). Relationship between college teachers' use of humor in the classroom and student's evaluations of their teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 511-519.

Cornett, C.E. (1986). Learning through laughter: Humor in the classroom. Bloomington: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.

Davies, A.P., & Apter, M.J. (1980). Humor and its effect on learning in children. In P.E. McGhee & A.J. Chapman (Eds.), Children's humor(pp. 237-254). New York: Wiley.

Downs, V.C., Javidi, M., & Nessbaum, J.F. (1988). An analysis of teachers' verbal communication within the college classroom: Use of humor, self-disclosure, and narratives. Communication Education, 37, 127-141.

Duncan, W.J. (1982). Humor in management: Prospects for administrative practice and research. Academy of Management Review, 7, 136-142.

Gilliland, H., & Mauritsen, H. (1971, May). Humor in the classroom. The Reading Journal, 753-765.

Gorham, J., & Christophel, D.M. (1990). The relationship of teachers' use of humor in the classroom to immediacy and student learning. Communication Education, 39, 46-62.

Gruner, C.R. (1966). A further experimental study of satire as persuasion. Speech Monographs, 33, 184-185.

Gruner, C.R. (1967). Effects of humor on speaker ethos and audience information gain. Journal of Communication, 17, 228-233.

Hauck, W.E., & Thomas, J.W. (1972). The relationship of humor to intelligence, credibility, and intentional and incidental learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 40, 52-55.

Hunsaker, J.S. (1988). It's no joke: Using humor in the classroom. The Clearing House, 285-286.

Javidi, M.N., & Long, L.W. (1989). Teachers' use of humor, self-disclosure, and narrative activity as a function of experience. Communication Research Reports, 6, 47-52.

Kaplan, R.M., & Pascoe, G.C. (1977). Humorous lectures and humorous examples: Some effects upon comprehension and retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 61-65.

Malone, P.B. (1980). Humor: A double-edged tool for today's managers? Academy of Management Review, 5, 357-360.

Marcus, N.N. (1990). Treating those who fail to take themselves seriously: Pathological aspects of humor. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 44, 423-432.

Neuliep, J.W. (1991). An examination of the content of high school teachers' humor in the classroom and the development of an inductively derived taxonomy of classroom humor. Communication Education, 40, 344-355.

Nussbaum, J.F., Comadena, M.E., & Holladay, S.J. (1985, May). Verbal communication within the college classroom. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago, IL.

Rosenheim, E., & Golan, G. (1986). Patients reactions to humorous interventions in psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 40, 110-124.

Rushall, B.S., & Wiznak, K. (1985). Athletes' assessment of the coach: The coach evaluation questionnaire. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 10, 157-161.

Saper, R. (1987). Humor in psychotherapy: Is it good or bad for the client. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 18, 360-367.

Schwartz, G. (1989). The importance of being silly. Educational Leadership, 46, 82-83.

Scott, C., Klein, D.M., & Bryant, J. (1990). Consumer responses to humor in advertising: A series of field studies using behavioral observations. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 498-501.

Tamborini, R., & Zillmann, D. (1981). College students' perception of lecturers using humor. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 52, 427-432.

Terry, R.L., & Woods, M.E. (1975). Effects of humor on the test performance of elementary school children. Psychology in the Schools, 12, 182-185.

Vinton, K.D. (1989). Humor in the workplace: It is more than telling jokes. Small Group Behavior, 20, 151-166.

Welker, W.A. (1977). Humor in education: A foundation for wholesome living. College Student Journal, 11, 252-254.

Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1983). Uses and effects of humor in education ventures. In P.E. McGhee & J.H. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of humor research. Volume II: Applied studies (pp. 173-194). New York: Springer-Verlag.