1. The Effect of Athlete’s Perceptions of Coaching Behavior and Coaches’ Perceived Behavior on Burnout in NCAA Division III Collegiate Athletes: A Proposal of Research Tianna Homad and Rebecca Y. Concepcion, Ph.D. Department of Exercise Science | Pacific University | 2043 College Way | Forest Grove, OR 97116 Background Burnout is a term that is thrown around by coaches and athletes all the time in the athletic world. It is defined as a multidimensional response to the ongoing stresses of competitive sport involvement that is characterized by feelings of physical/emotional exhaustion, a lack of perceived accomplishment, and a depersonalized attitude in relation to others (Vealey et al, 1998). Due to the pressures placed on student-athletes at the Division III level, these athletes will most likely experience burnout at some point during their collegiate careers. The coach-athlete relationship is an integral part of athletics and influences the satisfaction of athletes in their competitive sports careers. In the collegiate athletic world, the coach-athlete relationship is dynamic which can cause many frequent and intense interactions. The behaviors of coaches has the obvious potential to influence the development of burnout in athletes by affecting their psychological well-being such as their self-confidence, motivation, enjoyment, and anxiety. Coaching behaviors are described in terms of training and instruction, decision making style (democratic or autocratic), social support, and feedback (Price & Weiss, 2000). There has been little previous research examining burnout in athletes as compared to burnout in coaches or athletic trainers. However, research has shown that positive influence from coaches was related to lower levels of burnout while negative coach influences was related to higher levels of burnout. Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between an athlete’s perception of their coach’s behavior and their level of burnout while also investigating the coach’s own perception of their coaching behavior. Hypotheses 1.Athletes who perceive their coaches as demonstrating positive coaching behaviors (high levels of training/instruction, positive feedback, social support, and democratic coaching style) will have lower levels of burn out than the athletes who perceive their coaches as demonstrating negative coaching behaviors (high levels of autocratic coaching style). Methods Subjects o Participants will be NCAA Division III college athletes and head coaches who are at least 18 years of age Instruments o Athlete Demographic Information o Coach Demographic Information o Athlete Burnout Questionnaire (ABQ; Raedeke & Smith, 2001) Reduced Sense of Accomplishment (  =.86) Emotional and Physical Exhaustion (  =.92) Sport Devaluation (  =.92) o Leadership Scale for Sports – Athlete’s Perspective (LSS; Chelladurai & Saleh, 1980) Training and Instruction (α=.93) Democratic Behavior (  =.87) Autocratic Behavior (α=.79) Social Support (α=.86) Positive Feedback (α=.92) o Leadership Scale for Sports – Coach’s Version (LSS; Dwyer, J.M. & Fischer, D.G, 1988) Training and Instruction (  =.86) Democratic Behavior (  =.77) Autocratic Behavior (  =.36) Social Support (  =.61) Positive Feedback (  =.75) Procedures o Institutional Review Board Approval will be obtained o Participants will be contacted through email to complete an online survey via SurveyMonkey.com. They will be able to complete the survey on their own time and in the location of their choosing o Participants will complete the informed consent before participating o They will then complete the demographic information, ABQ, LSS-Athlete perspective, and lastly the LSS-Coach’s version questionnaires o Participants who fully complete the survey will be eligible to win one of four $20 gift certificates o Data will be obtained and analyzed References Chelladurai, P. & Saleh, S.D. (1980). Dimensions of leader behavior in sports: Development of a leadership scale. Journal of Sport Psychology, 2, 34-45. Dwyer, J.M. & Fischer, D.G. (1988). Psychometric properties of the coach’s version of the leadership scale for sports. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67, 795-798. Price, M.S. & Weiss, M.R. (2000). Relationship among coach burnout, coach behaviors, and athlete psychological responses. The Sport Psychologist, 14, 391-400. Raedeke, T. D., & Smith, A. L. (2001). Development and preliminary validation of an athlete burnout measure. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 23, 281-306. Vealey, R.S., Armstrong, L., & Comar, W. (1998). Influence of perceived coaching behaviors on burnout and competitive anxiety in female college athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 10, 297-318. Acknowledgment This project is funded by Pacific University’s Arts and Sciences Undergraduate Research Grant.