Once again, a better analysis method could have been chosen based on the nature of the data collected. The ecological generaliziability for the study is fairly high.The surveys were mailed out, and returned on a volunteer basis.
That way, after reading the first paragraph, the reader would know the purpose, hypotheses, and findings.However, due to the nonrandom nature of the sample, the results would not generalizable beyond the 162 participants in the study. In order to reduce threats to internal validity, the participants were asked to respond honestly and confidentiality was stressed so that the coaches might feel more at ease in responding. The researchers mention that the scales were given in a variety of settings.This could present a threat to the internal validity in that participants might not have been entirely focused on completing the scale, but instead on coordinating practice, completing paperwork, etc.The instrument utilized was the Revised Leadership for Sport Scale (RLSS) developed by Zhang, Jensen, and Mann in 1996.This scale is used to measure six leadership behaviors: training and instruction, democratic, autocratic, social support, positive feedback, and situational consideration.Junior high coaches also demonstrated a lesser degree of social support than either the high school or college coaches.A MANOVA was again used to analyze the data for any interaction between gender and coaching level with regard to overall leadership behavior.Next, the student described specifics about the research design, including the sample, instrumentation, and data analysis.Ecological and population generalizability were discussed. The student spoke at length on threats to internal validity.The scale uses 60 statements, which were preceded by In coaching, I: A Likert scale was then given for each statement: 1 = never; 2 = seldom; 3 = occasionally; 4 = often; and 5 = always. Scales were administered in a number of environmental settings: classrooms, gymnasiums, practice fields, and offices.The internal consistency for each section was calculated: 0.84 for training and instruction; 0.66 for democratic; 0.70 for autocratic; 0.52 for social support; 0.78 for positive feedback; and 0.69 for situational consideration.