The Relationship between Self Efficacy and Coping Styles to Stress and Burnout in Selected Sports Coaches in Tehran City

This study investigated the relationship of self-efficacy and coping styles to stress and burnout in selected coaches sports in Tehran. Accordingly, 450 coaches were randomly selected on the base of Morgan table. Data gathered from the questionnaires as follows; a) coping style of stress (Dadsetan et al., 2009, α=0/74), b) self efficacy (Schwartz et al., 1995, α=0/82) and, c) Burnout Inventory (Maslash and Jackson, α=0/80). The Results showed positive significant correlations between job burnout and coping styles of problem orientation (0/217), Coping styles of exciting orientations(0/373), avoidant coping style (0/454) in total coaches(individual and team field sports coaches). In addition, the correlations between burnout and coping styles of stress in individual field sports coaches were positive significant as follows; coping styles of problem orientation(0/436), coping styles of exciting orientations (0/489), avoidant coping style (0/468) and also the correlations between burnout and coping styles of stress in team field sports coaches were positive significant as follows; coping styles of problem orientation(0/123), coping styles of exciting orientations(0/321), avoidant coping style (0/429). About correlating between occupational burnout and self efficacy in total coaches (individual and team field sports coaches), it was negative significant (-0/332), but separately, in individual field sport coaches wasn’t significant (-0/011), meanwhile in team field sports coaches was significant(-0/418). There was negative significant between self efficacy and subtitles of coping styles of stress in total coaches( individual and team field sports coaches), as follows; coping styles of problem orientation (-0/261), coping styles of exciting orientations(-0/229) , avoidant coping style( -0/35) and also in individual field sports was the same; coping styles of problem orientation(-0/352), Coping styles of exciting orientations(-0/334), avoidant coping style( -0/429), but in team field sports coaches there was no significant correlation; coping styles of problem orientation(-0/036), Coping styles of exciting orientations(-0/03), avoidant coping style(0/04). There was also negative significant correlation between self efficacy and emotional exustion (0/211), reduction of productivity performance (-0/138) and depleted personality characteristics (-0/ 331) in total selected sports coaches. There were significant differences between self efficacy of individual and team field sport coaches, and it was more in individual sports field coaches than team sport field coaches. Also there were significant differences between occupational burnout of individual and team field sport coaches. And finally, there was significant differences between component of reduction of productivity performance and depleted personality characteristics and no significant differences between two groups in emotional exustion. Accordingly, the efficacy of coaches could be predicted by occupational burnout and subtitles of coping styles of stress.