ArticleScientific reports2026
AI-based performance feedback and coaching effectiveness: a moderated mediation model in football.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative tool in professional sports coaching, yet its impact on psychological and strategic coaching outcomes remains insufficiently understood. This study investigates the influence of AI-Based Performance Feedback (AIPF) on Coaching Effectiveness (CE), incorporating Tactical Awareness (TA) and Coaching Self-Efficacy (CSE) as mediators and Coaching Tenure Perception (CTP) as a moderator. Using data from 512 professional football coaches in Henan, China, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling was employed to test a moderated mediation model. The results reveal that AIPF significantly predicts CE both directly (β = 0.74, p < .001) and indirectly through TA (β = 0.61, p < .001) and CSE (β = 0.55, p < .001), indicating partial mediation. Technology Acceptance and Coach Digital Literacy were identified as significant antecedents of AIPF, indicating that coaches' acceptance of AI tools and digital competence support engagement with AI-based feedback rather than directly predicting CE. Additionally, CTP significantly moderated the AIPF-TA relationship (β = 0.11, p = .018), suggesting that coaches with higher perceived tenure derive greater tactical insights from AI feedback. These findings provide theoretical contributions to the fields of educational technology and coaching psychology and offer practical implications for designing AI-driven coaching interventions that are both personalized and psychologically grounded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.