Abstract

Psychological Skills Training (PST) is widely recognized as part of athlete
preparation and performance development, but less is known about how PST is learned, supported, delivered, and experienced in applied sport settings. This study compared coach and athlete perspectives on PST, with particular attention to familiarity, learning pathways, support structures, delivery, perceived effectiveness, and motivation for further development. A cross-sectional online survey was completed by 49 coaches and 94 athletes from a range of sports, with experience from two years or fewer to over ten years and from regional to international or elite level.
Comparative analyses were restricted to conceptually similar items across the two surveys and were interpreted descriptively rather than causally. Coaches reported significantly greater familiarity with PST, higher levels of self-directed learning, stronger motivation to continue developing PST-related knowledge, and greater perceived importance of hands-on practice. Athletes reported significantly greater satisfaction with perceived current PST delivery, while no significant group difference emerged in perceived effectiveness of current methods. Exploratory subgroup analyses indicated that motivation to continue developing PST knowledge differed across competitive levels and was highest at international level. Among coaches, perceived effectiveness also differed by the performance level of the athletes they coached. These findings suggest that demand for further development may be particularly evident in higher-performance contexts.
The clearest descriptive contrast concerned learning pathways. Athletes most commonly reported first learning about PST through their coach, whereas coaches most commonly reported fi rst learning through online resources, workshops, and books or articles. Both groups also reported limited input from sport psychologists.
These findings suggest that PST knowledge in applied sport may move through an uneven chain of transmission, with coaches acting as the principal route through which athletes encounter PST, while coaches themselves often learn through informal and weakly supported routes. All findings reflect coach and athlete reported perceptions rather than objectively assessed performance outcomes and should be interpreted with reference to the study’s descriptive design, non-validated survey
instruments, and modest, unevenly distributed subgroup sizes. The study highlights the need to examine not only whether PST is valued, but how it is learned, supported, and translated into practice across the sporting system.