{"title":"Chinese coaches' perceptions of non-physical factors in training adaptation: A multicausal, cross-cultural perspective","authors":"Kechi Anyadike-Danes, Meijun Qu, Lars Donath","doi":"10.1016/j.jsams.2026.03.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Chinese coaches were surveyed to examine their opinion on non-physical factors role in training adaptation and performance, results were compared with prior Western data and the influence of cultural reasoning styles on causal prioritisation considered.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Cross-sectional survey.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A survey was administered to Chinese coaches (n = 106) across a range of sports (e.g. Olympic Weightlifting and racket sports) and competitive levels (club to international). Included were items rating the importance of various non-physical factors alongside physical training components and open-ended questions probing perceived mechanisms.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Most coaches (e.g., ≥<!--> <!-->80%) rated non-physical factors as essential modifiers of training adaptation and performance across all timescales. Quantitative ratings showed a broad range of factors were considered important, with less clustering than observed in a prior Western sample. Qualitative themes indicated that coaches view non-physical factors as modulators that act to amplify or dampen the effects of training, thus shaping ‘how much’ an athlete improves. These findings align with a multicausal perspective and suggest a holistic orientation in causal reasoning.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These coaches perceived training adaptation as inherently multifactorial, with non-physical factors functioning as critical modifiers rather than peripheral influences. The broad range of importance ratings suggests cultural context may shape causal prioritisation. Sport science should move beyond linear, physical-centric models and incorporate culturally informed, configurational frameworks that account for the diverse conditions underpinning adaptation. Future cross-cultural and mixed-methods research is needed to test whether cognitive style differences underlie variation in coaching beliefs and to refine training models.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16992,"journal":{"name":"Journal of science and medicine in sport","volume":"29 11","pages":"Pages 1277-1285"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of science and medicine in sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1440244026001076","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
Chinese coaches were surveyed to examine their opinion on non-physical factors role in training adaptation and performance, results were compared with prior Western data and the influence of cultural reasoning styles on causal prioritisation considered.
Design
Cross-sectional survey.
Methods
A survey was administered to Chinese coaches (n = 106) across a range of sports (e.g. Olympic Weightlifting and racket sports) and competitive levels (club to international). Included were items rating the importance of various non-physical factors alongside physical training components and open-ended questions probing perceived mechanisms.
Results
Most coaches (e.g., ≥ 80%) rated non-physical factors as essential modifiers of training adaptation and performance across all timescales. Quantitative ratings showed a broad range of factors were considered important, with less clustering than observed in a prior Western sample. Qualitative themes indicated that coaches view non-physical factors as modulators that act to amplify or dampen the effects of training, thus shaping ‘how much’ an athlete improves. These findings align with a multicausal perspective and suggest a holistic orientation in causal reasoning.
Conclusions
These coaches perceived training adaptation as inherently multifactorial, with non-physical factors functioning as critical modifiers rather than peripheral influences. The broad range of importance ratings suggests cultural context may shape causal prioritisation. Sport science should move beyond linear, physical-centric models and incorporate culturally informed, configurational frameworks that account for the diverse conditions underpinning adaptation. Future cross-cultural and mixed-methods research is needed to test whether cognitive style differences underlie variation in coaching beliefs and to refine training models.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport is the official journal of Sports Medicine Australia (SMA) and is an an international refereed research publication covering all aspects of sport science and medicine.
The Journal considers for publication Original research and Review papers in the sub-disciplines relating generally to the broad sports medicine and sports science fields: sports medicine, sports injury (including injury epidemiology and injury prevention), physiotherapy, podiatry, physical activity and health, sports science, biomechanics, exercise physiology, motor control and learning, sport and exercise psychology, sports nutrition, public health (as relevant to sport and exercise), and rehabilitation and injury management. Manuscripts with an interdisciplinary perspective with specific applications to sport and exercise and its interaction with health will also be considered.