Coaches, parents, peers, and media all play a key role in sport motivation by contributing to influence young or adult athlete performance. Studies in educational psychology have demonstrated how the achievement in social competitive contexts, such as school or sport domains, depends on the reciprocal enhancement of abilities and emotional–motivational attributes (Pepi et al., 2006; Alesi et al., 2015).

A current line of research examines the important role played by the coach and its impact on the motivational climate in the team following the framework of achievement goal theory (Duda, 2001; Duda and Balaguer, 2007; Torregrosa et al., 2008; Granero-Gallegos et al., 2012; Gómez-López et al., 2013, 2014; Nicholls et al., 2016). In particular, coaches interact for many hours with their players both in training sessions and competition periods (Ruiz Sánchez et al., 2017). This determines the coach is an essential educational figure for player quality during a sport’s career (Gagné et al., 2003). The Social Cognitive Theory of achievement goal perspectives proposed that athletes are motivated by the need to show their competence and avoid displaying their incompetence (Cervelló and Santos-Rosa, 2001; Cecchini et al., 2004). The use of these criteria to define success or failure depends as much on athletes’ personal characteristics (dispositional orientation) as on their social environment (motivational climate). Specifically, the achievement goal theory (Nicholls, 1989; Ames, 1992) underlies the individuals’ disposition to demonstrate the own ability and competence when participating in the achievement context. Two different achievement goals, namely task and ego involvement (Nicholls, 1989) drive their ability perception. As a consequence, two goal orientations known as ego- or performance-orientated and as task- or mastery-orientated can be differentiated. A task goal orientation determines adaptive motivational, affective, and behavioral patterns that are more positive than an ego goal orientation (Duda, 2001). Thus, task-oriented athletes judge their competence level by self-comparison and view sport as reinforcing their cooperation capacity and interest in learning. In contrast, ego-oriented athletes judge their competence by comparing themselves with others and consider sports’ practice as a way to gain recognition and social status (Nicholls, 1989; Cervelló et al., 1999; Duda, 2001; Ferreira et al., 2016). These athletes attribute failure to a lack of ability, skill, and effort (Treasure and Roberts, 2001).

Studies have also shown that goal orientations are good predictors of beliefs about the reasons for success in sport (Treasure and Roberts, 1994; Cervelló et al., 1999) and of enjoyment or self-satisfaction with sports’ practice (Duda et al., 1995; Cervelló et al., 1999; Cecchini et al., 2004; Granero-Gallegos et al., 2014). This means that task-orientated athletes are more likely to attribute their success to their efforts. Moreover, they tend to consider failure as a learning experience to improve their skills and performances, rather than a negative or frustrating experience. This perception will have the consequence of enjoyment and satisfaction along with a greater commitment to the given sport. On the other hand, athletes with an ego-orientated represent the success as achievable through ability and deception. They see the failure as an indicator of limited abilities. In this condition, they will quickly become bored or disillusioned with the given sport’s activity and show a lower level of personal satisfaction. In consequence, ego-orientated athletes will be more likely to drop-out the sport, especially if sport challenges and results are perceived as an indicator of their limited abilities (Duda et al., 1995; Cervelló and Santos-Rosa, 2001; Castillo et al., 2002; Walling et al., 2002; Cecchini et al., 2004). Moreover, the nature of the sport is hypothesized to influence the adoption of goal orientations. Individual sports are more informative about personal performance; this lead athletes to adopt ego-oriented goals aimed at ensuring positive judgments of their skills, with comparative and normative evaluations of personal performance, as well as to have the need to show themselves and others their personal success as an indicator of personal high ability. Furthermore, this level of ego-orientation was found to be higher in the competition context than in the training one because of the psychological pressure (Van de Pol and Kavussanu, 2012).

Individual goal orientations may be influenced or modulated by the motivational climate perceived by the subject (Nicholls, 1989; Ames, 1992; Jaakkola et al., 2016). Schneider and Reichers (1983) carry out a review of studies concerning the climate etiology. The authors focus on conceptual and methodological progress in this research topic and argue that individuals attribute meanings to events through interactionism processes with the context over the time. According to Ames (1992), the motivational climate can be described as a set of implicit and/or explicit environmental signals through which the keys to success or failure are defined. So, in the field of sports the individual-level climate perceptions are strongly influenced by the individual goal orientations as well as the educational figure of the coach (Nicholls, 1989; Ames, 1992; Seifriz et al., 1992; Escartí et al., 1999; Newton et al., 2000; Cervelló and Santos-Rosa, 2001; Curran et al., 2015). A performance climate will be created when the most important coach’s goals are that the team wins, the demonstration of skills and effort, the punishment of errors promoting inter-individual competition, and rivalry between team members. This climate induces anxiety regarding performance and reduced satisfaction with the sport’s environment. In contrast, when the coach promotes learning through errors, personal progress, skill development, and cooperation between team members, the climate will be one of mastery, inducing the psychological well-being of the athlete (Balaguer et al., 1999, 2002; Newton et al., 2000; Pensgaard and Roberts, 2000; Duda, 2001; Atkins et al., 2015). A mastery-oriented motivational climate is positively related to task-orientated goals, enjoyment, satisfaction, interest, self-motivation, and commitment rather than the negative affective behavior and feeling of pressure associated with a performance-orientated motivational climate. Accordingly, the ego or mastery perspective of an athlete at a given time will be determined by the perceived motivational climate, goal orientations, and the environment characteristics (Nicholls, 1989).

The present study examines the effects of the motivational climate created by the coach and perceived by a group of young handball players on their goal orientations, their beliefs regarding reasons for success, and their self-satisfaction. It was hypothesized that a perceived mastery-oriented climate was positively related to a task-centered goal orientation, personal enjoyment, and the belief that success is achieved through effort while a perceived performance-orientated climate was related to an ego-based orientation, boredom, and the belief that ability and deception are means to success.

According to our descriptive analysis, the handball players examined here perceived their training climate as more orientated toward mastery than toward performance. This finding is consistent with reports by other authors (Moreno et al., 2007; Torregrosa et al., 2008).

The present canonical correlation analysis positively related a perception of a mastery-orientated training climate with a task-centered goal orientation, enjoyment, and effort, and related a perceived performance-orientated training climate with an ego-centered goal orientation, boredom, and the use of deception techniques. Accordingly, our results suggest that although the population examined featured both goal orientation perspectives, most of the handball players perceived a mastery-orientated motivational climate and a task goal orientation, reported they enjoyed their sport and felt that effort was the means to success. These results are similar to those detected by Holgado et al. (2010) for professional athletes, who described that participants developing a task-centered goal orientation found satisfaction in their sport and perceived a motivational climate that rewarded hard work while believing that success came with effort.

In our study the handball players who perceived a high-mastery motivational climate had more task-centered goal orientations, enjoyed practicing their sport more, and put more effort into training than handball players who perceived a high-performance motivational climate. These handball players obtained high scores in items suggesting an ego-centered goal orientation and a more apathetic approach to their sport including a willingness to use deception techniques.

With regard to the objective of our study, it seems that there is a relationship between the motivational climate created by the coach in the training sessions and the goal orientation, intrinsic satisfaction, and beliefs about the causes of success on handball players. This means that those players who perceived a mastery-orientated motivational climate showed a more positive goal achievement pattern than those who perceived a performance-orientated motivational climate. In the latter type of situation, players are punished for, rather than learning from, their errors and feel that for their coach the main thing to strive for is victory through improved performance and demonstrating their abilities.

Studies have shown the improved psychological well-being of players subjected to a mastery-oriented motivational climate compared to a more competitive training climate, which has been related to anxiety and reduced satisfaction with their sport (Balaguer et al., 1999, 2002; Pensgaard and Roberts, 2000; Duda, 2001; Vazou et al., 2006). In the study by Balaguer et al. (2002), it was observed that when handball players perceived an intensely task-oriented motivational climate, their performance and self-satisfaction with this performance improved, and their image of the coach was even better. In contrast, the perception of an ego-oriented motivational climate was negatively associated with ratings of their coach, yet in general, positively associated with satisfaction with their team’s results.

As in earlier studies (Seifriz et al., 1992; Walling et al., 1993; Escartí et al., 1999; Cervelló and Santos-Rosa, 2001; Vazou et al., 2005), our results reveal associated constructs of similar goal perspective.

In general, handball players who were self-satisfied with their sport were those subjected to the more mastery-orientated tasks while those whose training climate was more performance-orientated expressed their dissatisfaction and lack of enthusiasm or boredom. Other authors have also reported that the satisfaction of players with their sport’s progress and competition results is positively linked to a task-orientated motivational climate created by the coach (Treasure and Roberts, 1998; Balaguer et al., 1999, 2002; Ruiz-Juan et al., 2010; Gómez-López et al., 2014). In contrast, the negative feelings of players can lead to sport dropout, especially if there is a sense that small hurdles cannot be overcome and players question their own ability (Duda et al., 1995; Cervelló and Santos-Rosa, 2001; Castillo et al., 2002; Walling et al., 2002; Cecchini et al., 2004).

Lastly, for handball players who perceived a mastery-orientated training climate, defeat was viewed as part of the learning process and success, both in training and competition, was attributed to effort, while according to those perceiving a performance motivational climate, ability and deception techniques were the means to success. These findings are in agreement with those described by Seifriz et al. (1992) and Escartí et al. (1999).

Specifically, the results of this study indicate that the coach’s socializing role determines a handball player’s behavior, sport commitment, and enjoyment. Although players show a personal predisposition for adopting a given goal orientation and behavior pattern (Cecchini et al., 2004). Our data confirm the relationship, both positive and negative, that coaches may have on their players. However, taking into account that they are young handball players, it is necessary to clarify that the training history (clubs, etc.) of these young players should be studied to better understand the variables evaluated in this work. Thus, the coach should create a task-orientated motivational climate (Gano-Overway et al., 2005), emphasizing self-reported achievements related to mastering skills, effort, and interest in the activity itself (Cecchini et al., 2004), while giving priority to displays of effort besides outcomes (Moreno et al., 2007). The coach should also encourage players to analyze their failures and successes as a way of self-satisfaction (Cervelló et al., 1999) and enhancing commitment rather than only of improving results.

As limitations to our study, we should mention that although our data extend the information provided in similar studies, the small sample size examined limits their generalization. These data require confirmation in future work. Further topics that could be addressed in the future are the influence on players of parents and peers, and the difference between an athlete’s and coach’s own perception of the coach-created motivational climate.

AG-G elaboration of method and results. MG-L elaboration of the introduction, discussion, and conclusions. NR-S reviewed the results. JA reviewed the introduction. MA reviewed the discussion and conclusions. AB studied design and reviewed the methods.

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.