A semi-structured interview guide was developed for the participant coaches 5
and players separately to ensure that the same questions were asked of all 6
participants, while still allowing the interviewer to use probes as necessary (Patton, 7
2008). At the time of data collection there was no theoretical framework on which to 8
base video feedback research in sport. Thus, the questions contained within each 9
guide were developed with reference to: (i) a review of relevant video literature in 10
sport, (ii) the primary researcher’s own practical experience working within youth 11
football, delivering video feedback (iii) recommendations from qualitative research, 12
and (iv) advice from an experienced Academic and Sport Psychologist currently 13
practicing within professional football. Within the introduction of the interview 14
guide, the principal researcher explained the purpose of the interview, the interview 15
format and how the results might be used. An introductory statement was developed 16
to explain the purpose of the interview, which was read to all the participants at the 17
beginning of the interview. Following this, reassurances regarding confidentiality 18
and the participants’ right to withdraw at any time were explained. The coaches and 19
players were then asked to respond to a series of questions related to three areas of 20
video feedback delivery:
21
(i) Current experience – exploring the participants’ experiences of VFB 22
within youth football, e.g., first experiences of VFB, exposure to different 23
formats of delivery as individual or within a group, best and worst 24
experiences;
25
38
(ii) Impact – exploring participants’ perceptions of the effectiveness of 1
different video interventions, the psychological responses of themselves 2
and others to VFB and the impact on their performance; perceptions of 3
the role/impact of delivery support staff (coach, sport scientist, 4
psychologist) and other factors.
5
(iii) Optimizing VFB delivery – Exploring participants’ perceptions of how 6
VFB delivery be improved for them as player or coach, barriers to 7
learning, role for the video practitioner.
8
Questions were included in order to encourage responses and build rapport 9
(e.g., ‘How is your season going so far?’). Open questions such as ‘Can you tell me 10
about a typical post-match evaluation session using the video’, were followed by 11
more specific questions such as ‘How does it feel if a mistake you made on the pitch 12
is replayed in front of the group on the video?’ until the participant felt that they had 13
no more to add on a particular issue. In line with research on the value of self-14
observation techniques, opportunity was also provided for the players to discuss 15
situations where they used video away from the coaches. Although the structure was 16
the same, there were small differences in the focus and wording of the interview 17
guide for study 1a and 1b. In the coaches’ interview guide, questions were more 18
focused on their role as the facilitator of the video-based practice. For example, open 19
questions such as ‘Can you tell me what influences how you deliver video feedback 20
from a recent game’, were followed by more specific questions such as ‘How much 21
interaction do you like to see between players during video feedback group 22
sessions?’, again until the participant had no more to add in this area. In the players’
23
interview guide, questions were designed to explore their role as the receiver in the 24
delivery sessions. Clarification and elaboration probes were also used to encourage 25
39
the participants to expand on their responses, to ensure an accurate, in-depth 1
understanding of what the participants were describing. Before proceeding to the 2
next section, all the participants were asked whether there was anything else they 3
could tell the interviewer concerning what had just been discussed.
4 5
3.24 Procedure 6
Institutional ethics approval was sought from the University to conduct the 7
research. Following the successful completion of this process, all participants were 8
asked to sign an informal consent form, and were informed of their right to withdraw 9
from the study at any time. As the players were under 18 years of age at the time of 10
study, written permission was also obtained from their parents / guardian. Following 11
this, the participants were invited to interview at their convenience. Interviews were 12
conducted by the principal researcher who had received training in qualitative 13
research methods and who at the time of the study was working as a Sport 14
Psychologist within an English youth football club. Pilot interviews were conducted 15
with a sample of two players (one youth international level player, and one youth 16
academy level player), and three coaches (one coach / academy director, and two 17
academy level coaches). These pilot interviews were conducted in order to develop a 18
suitable interview schedule, and to inform the primary researcher’s interviewing style 19
for the main study. The results of the pilot study showed that the interview guides 20
were appropriate for the participants in the study. In both the coach and player 21
interview guides prompts were added to the questions in order to probe the 22
participant’s answers more thoroughly. A copy of both interview guides is provided 23
in full for Study 1a in Appendix B (elite youth football coaches) and Study 1b in 24
Appendix C (elite youth football players). Within the data collection phase in study 25
40
1a /1b interviews were conducted at the convenience of the participant. In the 1
majority of cases, these were face-to-face (ten coaches / eleven players) interviews, 2
with telephone interviews conducted for two participants’ (one coach / one player).
3
All interviews were conducted within a five-week period, several months into the 4
competitive season. Participant coach interviews lasted between 63 and 107 min 5
(time, M = 83.3 min, SD = 25 min), while participant player interviews lasted 6
between 54 and 97 min (time, M = 74.1 min, SD = 21.8 min).
7 8
3.25 Data Analysis