Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov 29;13:21010. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-48239-6

Table 2.

Estimated coefficients examining the relationship between coach narcissism and athlete performance and perceived self-enhancement opportunity.

Fixed effects Athlete performance (end time) Athlete perceived self-enhancement opportunity
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
B SE R2 B SE R2 B SE R2 B SE R2
Constant 455.38 2.03 454.95 1.99 4.64 0.11 4.66 0.11
Controls
 Athlete gender a 57.48*** 2.75 56.48*** 2.72  − 0.63*** 0.15  − 0.58*** 0.15
 Distance  − 4.49*** 1.11  − 3.98*** 1.11 0.17* 0.08 0.15 0.08
 Tenure with coach  − 3.75** 1.28 .680  − 3.74** 1.25  − 0.11 0.07 .102  − 0.11 0.07
Predictor
 Coach narcissism  − 3.52** 1.20 .695 0.16* 0.07 .118
 Random intercept (τ00) 224.93 203.23 0.09 0.09
Model fit
 AIC 2245.00 2238.46 809.31 806.83
 BIC 2266.29 2263.31 830.60 831.67
  − 2LL 2233.00 2224.46 797.31 792.83
 χ2(1) 8.54** 4.48*

N = 257.

a1 = man, 2 = woman; Distance in meters; Tenure in years; R2 = Marginal R2; Fit indices presented are based on ML estimation; χ2(1) is the difference between the − 2 log likelihoods of Model 1 vs. Model 2 and Model 3 vs. Model 4, respectively.

p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.