Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40650865›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2025

Why do Some Respond and Develop more from Coaching than Others? A Systematic Review of Coachability and Its Constituent Components.

Stephen MacGabhann, Phillip Newman, Jeremy Witchalls, Rebecca Dowse, Gordon Waddington, Stephen Cobley

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Stephen MacGabhannFaculty of Health, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Phillip NewmanFaculty of Health, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Jeremy WitchallsFaculty of Health, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Rebecca DowseNew South Wales Institute of Sport (NSWIS), Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Gordon WaddingtonFaculty of Health, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Stephen CobleyDiscipline of Exercise and Sport Science, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Susan Wakil Health Building, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. stephen.cobley@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-6099-392X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs an inter-individual psychological and behavioural construct, coachability is hypothesised to be a fundamental determinant of learning and performance enhancement within sport, business and education domains. Despite its perceived importance, consensus on a precise definition and its exact dimensional components has yet to be established.

objectivesThis systematic review aimed to: (1) establish consensus on a common definition and (2) identify consistent constituent component constructs of coachability evident in the literature.

methodsUsing systematic search and screening methods, 53 articles (41 studies; 12 grey literature) from sources spanning 5 decades were identified.

resultsFindings revealed variable definitions of coachability that evolved with respective theoretical and investigatory paradigm shifts. Nonetheless, throughout, coachability was consistently considered a multi-component construct. Literature supported the existence of potentially six inter-connected component dimensions: Attentiveness to information; Willingness to learn; Persistence in overcoming setbacks; Feedback seeking; Feedback receptivity; and Feedback implementation. For each component, evidence illustrating psychological and behavioural features resonating with higher and lower component presence was identified. Identified components were also validated through independent interviews with sport coaches. Collectively, findings established a synthesised consensus definition aligned with identified component dimensions, reflecting: an individual's willingness and ability to seek, receive and act upon constructive feedback to persistently foster self-development and enhance performance in a given domain.

conclusionsGiven the limited assessments, methodologies and instruments available, research is recommended to refine and validate assessment instruments, verify constituent components identified, confirm relationships between coachability and developmental outcomes, and identify coachability optimisation strategies to benefit personal development within domain contexts.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceLearningMentoringSportsFeedbackHumans

Identifiers

PMID40650865
PMCPMC12476389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.