Articles
Influence
of the family environment on the development of athletic
talent
in youth tennis: a documentary review
Influencia
del entorno familiar en el desarrollo del talento deportivo
en
el tenis juvenil: una revisión documental
Richar Jacobo Posso-Pacheco 1
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-9852
Pablo Ricardo Olvera Sánchez 2
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7163-9565
Director of MENTOR Revista de
Investigación, Educativa y deportiva. Quito-Ecuador 1
Centro Nacional de Tenis. Guayaquil,
Ecuador 2
Autor de
correspondencia
rjposso@revistamentor.ec
prostennis1971@gmail.com
Available online: 15-07-2026
Abstract
The family environment constitutes a decisive component in the
development of athletic talent among youth tennis players. The objective of
this study was to analyze the scientific evidence on the influence of the
family environment on the development of athletic talent among youth tennis
players. A documentary review with a systematized search and thematic synthesis
was conducted in the Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases, considering
publications available up to January 2026. Of the 312 records identified, 198
were removed as duplicates and 103 were excluded for not meeting the thematic
relevance criteria; finally, 11 documents were incorporated into the main
corpus of analysis. The results were organized into three axes: functions of
parental support, effects of parental pressure, and moderating variables of
family involvement. The evidence showed that parental support favors talent
development when it promotes autonomy, emotional stability, motivation, and
coordination with the coach. In contrast, result-centered pressure, criticism,
excessive control, and unrealistic expectations may affect psychological
well-being and weaken continued sport participation. It is concluded that the
most appropriate parental support is not the most intense, but the one most
closely adjusted to the developmental stage, competitive level, and
psychological needs of the young tennis player.
Keywords: athletic
talent; youth tennis; family environment; sport motivation; parental pressure;
sport dropout.
Resumen
El entorno familiar constituye un componente decisivo en el
desarrollo del talento deportivo de tenistas juveniles. El objetivo de esta investigación
fue analizar la evidencia científica sobre la influencia del entorno familiar
en el desarrollo del talento deportivo de tenistas juveniles. Se desarrolló una
revisión documental con búsqueda sistematizada y síntesis temática en las bases
de datos Scopus, Web of Science y PubMed, considerando publicaciones
disponibles hasta enero de 2026. De 312 registros identificados, se eliminaron
198 por duplicación y 103 por no cumplir los criterios de pertinencia temática;
finalmente, 11 documentos fueron incorporados al corpus principal de análisis.
Los resultados se organizaron en tres ejes: funciones del apoyo parental,
efectos de la presión parental y variables moderadoras de la implicación
familiar. El apoyo parental favorece el desarrollo del talento cuando promueve
autonomía, estabilidad afectiva, motivación y coordinación con el entrenador.
En cambio, la presión centrada en resultados, la crítica, el control excesivo y
las expectativas irreales pueden afectar el bienestar psicológico y debilitar
la continuidad deportiva. Se concluye que el apoyo parental más adecuado no es
el más intenso, sino el más ajustado a la etapa de desarrollo, al nivel
competitivo y a las necesidades psicológicas del joven tenista.
Palabras clave: talento deportivo; tenis
juvenil; entorno familiar; motivación deportiva; presión parental; abandono
deportivo.
Introduction
Sporting talent does not emerge from purely
individual conditions (Alarfaj et al., 2024). The trajectories of elite
athletes consistently show the early and sustained involvement of family
environments as agents of sport socialization, funding, transportation, and
emotional regulation (Côté, 1999; Henriksen et al., 2010). In tennis, a sport
that requires high economic investment, early technical specialization, and
intensive logistical availability, the family assumes a role that goes beyond
emotional support and becomes part of the system through which the athlete is
developed (Novak et al., 2025; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005).
Talent development distinguishes between
functional parental involvement, which promotes autonomy, intrinsic motivation,
and the young athlete’s sport identity, and dysfunctional involvement,
characterized by normative pressure, excessive expectations, and excessive
behavioral control (Gao et al., 2024; Ntalachani et al., 2025). These two forms
of involvement often coexist within the same family unit, and their balance may
change according to the stage of sport development and the age of the tennis
player (Stambulova et al., 2009).
The available evidence on the specific effects
of these dynamics in youth tennis remains dispersed across qualitative case
studies, cross-sectional surveys, and longitudinal trajectory analyses (Cahill
& MacNamara, 2025; Gould et al., 2006; Harwood & Porter, 2026; Novak et
al., 2020; Pill et al., 2024). A systematic integration of this evidence is
necessary to identify the differentiated mechanisms that operate in each
direction and to support interventions aimed at parents, coaches, and managers
of training programs.
The objective of this review was to analyze the
scientific evidence on the influence of the family environment on the
development of sport talent among junior tennis players, identifying the
factors of parental support and pressure that affect performance, motivation,
and continued participation in the sport.
To this end, a documentary review was conducted
through a systematized search and thematic synthesis of the scientific
literature. The search was carried out in the Scopus, Web of Science, and
PubMed databases, considering publications available up to January 2026. The
descriptors used were: (family environment OR parental involvement OR parental
support OR parental pressure) AND (junior tennis OR youth tennis OR tennis
talent) AND (motivation OR performance OR dropout OR burnout). In addition,
studies published before 2015 were included when they provided relevant
theoretical models or evidence.
The document screening process began with 312
records identified in the main search. A total of 198 records were removed due
to duplication, and 103 were excluded because they did not specifically address
the relationship between family and athlete in developmental sport contexts, or
because they did not focus on variables related to parental support, pressure,
motivation, performance, dropout, or talent development in youth tennis.
Finally, 11 documents were included in the main body of analysis.
The analysis was conducted through inductive
thematic categorization of the units of meaning extracted from the selected
documents. Based on this procedure, three axes of analysis were organized: the
functions of parental support in talent development; the effects of parental
pressure on psychological well-being and performance; and the moderating
variables that determine the differential impact of family involvement.
Development
Functions of Parental Support in Sport Talent
Development in Youth Tennis
The family environment constitutes a structural
condition in the development of sport talent in youth tennis, although its
influence should not be understood as an automatic relationship between family
support and competitive success. In this sport, the family becomes involved
from the earliest stages of participation through emotional support, financial
resources, logistical accompaniment, regulation of daily life, and the
progressive construction of a sport identity. This understanding is related to
Côté’s (1999) developmental model of sport participation, which distinguishes
between the sampling years, specialization years, and investment years, stages
in which the role of the family changes according to the athlete’s age, sport
commitment, and competitive demands.
In the initial phases, family support is mainly
oriented toward facilitating access to the sport, sustaining attendance at
training sessions, and promoting a positive experience of participation. During
the specialization and investment phases, the family role becomes more complex,
because it must accompany the increase in technical, competitive, and emotional
demands without replacing the young athlete’s progressive autonomy. From this
perspective, talent development does not depend solely on the individual
qualities of the tennis player, but on the interaction between personal
abilities, training opportunities, available resources, and the quality of
family accompaniment (Côté, 1999; Henriksen et al., 2010).
Family accompaniment also fulfills an
educational function in the development of the junior tennis player. This
function is not limited to providing resources or ensuring attendance at
training sessions; rather, it involves promoting values associated with sport
practice, such as discipline, order, respect, perseverance, autonomy, and
responsibility. These values allow the player to face the demands of training
and competition as part of a progressive formative process, in which sport
development must be articulated with personal and academic maturation.
In the specific context of tennis, Wolfenden and
Holt (2005) identified six categories associated with adult influence on the
talent development of elite junior tennis players: emotional support, tangible
support, informational support, sacrifices, pressure, and relationships with
coaches. Their findings show that parents play a particularly relevant role in
providing emotional and tangible support, while the coach is mainly positioned
in the domain of technical advice. This differentiation of functions is
important because it makes it possible to understand that the family should not
assume the technical role of the coach, but rather create conditions of
stability, trust, and continuity so that the sport development process can be
sustained.
The family role requires a permanent willingness
to engage in dialogue with the coach or technical team that supports the
player. The family can provide emotional stability, daily organization, and
motivational support, but it should avoid replacing the coach’s technical
decisions. Therefore, selecting coaches with experience in formative processes
is important, as is subsequently trusting their pedagogical and sport-related
work, while avoiding interference that limits the player’s autonomy during
training.
The family also appears as a central source of
social capital in the sport trajectory of junior tennis players. Novak et al.
(2020), in a study with 75 players participating in an ITF junior tournament,
found that social capital indicators explained 13.1% of the variance in sport
success. In addition, 97.33% of the players stated that their family supported
and paid attention to their tennis career. These data show that family support
is a highly present dimension in competitive youth tennis, although its effect
is mediated by other components of the environment, such as school, the sport
team, the coach, and institutional conditions.
Family social capital should not be reduced to
economic availability. Although tennis requires resources for training,
tournaments, travel, and equipment, the evidence shows that family support also
includes trust, guidance, emotional validation, a sense of belonging, and the
ability to sustain the athlete during periods of competitive uncertainty. Novak
et al. (2024), in studying family ties and social capital among tennis players
of different levels, including Grand Slam champions, concluded that the family
plays a key role in upbringing, accompaniment, and the accumulation of social
capital throughout the sport career. However, these authors caution that the
family is a relevant but not sufficient condition for achieving maximum
performance, since sport success also depends on technical, psychological,
institutional, and contextual factors.
Family support must sustain an integral vision
of the development of the junior tennis player. Academic training and sport
training should not be understood as opposing dimensions, but as complementary
components of the same formative trajectory. The family plays a relevant role
when it helps balance training sessions, competitions, studies, rest, and
personal life, preventing sport performance from completely absorbing the young
athlete’s identity.
Positive parental involvement is therefore
characterized by a balance between presence and autonomy. Gao et al. (2024), in
a systematic review on the role of parents in the motivation of young athletes,
identified favorable parental strategies such as positive goals and values,
autonomy support, moderate involvement, positive parent-child relationships,
and a task-oriented motivational climate. Although this review is not limited
to tennis, its findings are relevant because they allow family involvement to
be interpreted through well-established motivational theories. In this sense,
parental support favors talent development when it promotes autonomy,
competence, and affective bonds, rather than when it turns performance into a
condition for family recognition.
Functional parental involvement is also
expressed in parents’ ability to accompany the competitive experience without
invading it. Gould et al. (2006), in a national survey administered to youth
tennis coaches in the United States, found that coaches perceived parents as
very important actors in the success of young tennis players. However, the same
coaches distinguished between positive and negative influence: 59% of parents
were perceived as a positive influence and 36% as a negative influence.
Positive behaviors included logistical, financial, and socioemotional support,
opportunities for practice, and unconditional love; negative behaviors were
related to an excessive emphasis on winning, unrealistic expectations, and
criticism of the athlete.
These findings make it possible to affirm that
the family fulfills a formative function when it sustains the sport process
without conditioning the affective bond on the result. The evidence does not question
parental participation in youth tennis; rather, it problematizes the form that
such participation takes. The family can become a decisive support network when
it accompanies, organizes, contains, and validates the young tennis player’s
effort. Conversely, it can become a risk factor when it interprets the sport
career as an investment that must produce immediate results.
Effects of Parental Pressure on Psychological
Well-Being, Motivation, and Performance
Parental pressure constitutes one of the most
consistent findings in the reviewed literature. This pressure is not limited to
demanding victories; it may also manifest as criticism after matches,
unsolicited technical instructions, comparison with other players,
disproportionate expectations, constant monitoring of performance, or affection
conditioned by results. In youth tennis, these forms of pressure acquire
particular intensity because the athlete competes individually, is directly
exposed to error, and must manage frustration without constant support during
play.
Wolfenden and Holt (2005) showed that parents
were perceived as a source of pressure when they became excessively involved in
competitive settings. This pressure appeared especially when adults exceeded
their support role and began to interfere in technical or evaluative decisions
that corresponded to the coach or the athlete. Consequently, parental overinvolvement
can weaken the tennis player’s autonomy and turn competition into a permanent
space of family evaluation.
The evidence from Gould et al. (2006) reinforces
this interpretation. The coaches surveyed identified excessive emphasis on
winning, unrealistic expectations, and criticism of the child as negative
parental behaviors. These behaviors are particularly problematic because they
shift the formative meaning of sport toward a result-centered logic. When the
value of effort becomes subordinated to the score, the young tennis player may
develop controlled motivation, oriented more toward avoiding disapproval than
toward sustaining enjoyment, technical improvement, and continued participation
in the sport.
From the perspective of self-determination theory,
this difference between support and control helps explain the opposing effects
of the family on motivation. Gao et al. (2024) found that autonomy-supportive
parenting is associated with favorable motivational outcomes, whereas pressure,
psychological control, and performance-centered expectations are related to
amotivation, controlled motivation, and frustration of basic psychological
needs. In other words, the problem is not that parents are present, but that
their presence becomes surveillance, criticism, or control.
Parental pressure can also affect the athlete’s
psychological well-being. In youth tennis, competitive anxiety does not arise
only from the difficulty of the match or the opponent’s level, but also from
anticipating the family’s reaction to defeat. When the athlete perceives that
the result modifies the treatment, recognition, or emotional climate at home,
competition ceases to be a learning experience and becomes a threat to personal
worth. This dynamic may reduce sport enjoyment and increase the probability of
exhaustion, rejection of training, or progressive dropout.
The literature on sport transitions helps
explain this relationship with continued participation. Stambulova et al.
(2009) argue that transitions within a sport career are critical moments that
require contextual support. When athletes are unable to cope adequately with
these transitions, negative consequences may emerge, including premature
dropout. In youth tennis, transitions between training, specialization, and
high-performance stages usually coincide with higher costs, greater competitive
demands, ranking pressure, and tensions among school, family, and sport. If the
family responds to these demands with excessive control, the transition may
become more vulnerable.
However, the relationship between pressure and
performance should not be interpreted simplistically. Certain degrees of demand
may be perceived as structure, discipline, or commitment, especially when
accompanied by emotional support and realistic expectations. The problem arises
when demand becomes control, affective conditionality, or constant criticism.
Therefore, the review makes it possible to distinguish between formative demand
and dysfunctional pressure. The former guides, organizes, and accompanies; the
latter invades, conditions, and deteriorates the sport experience.
In this regard, optimal parental involvement
does not mean the absence of participation. An indifferent or distant family
does not favor talent development either. The critical point lies in the
quality of involvement. Moderate, autonomy-supportive, and emotionally stable
involvement helps sustain intrinsic motivation and sport continuity. In
contrast, excessive, controlling, or result-centered involvement may affect
psychological well-being and weaken continued participation in tennis (Gao et
al., 2024; Gould et al., 2006; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005).
Moderating Variables of Family Impact
The influence of the family on sport talent does
not operate uniformly across all junior tennis players. The evidence allows
several moderating variables to be identified: developmental stage, competitive
level, gender, the type of relationship among parents, coach, and athlete, and
the institutional structure of the sport environment. These variables explain
why the same parental behavior may be interpreted as support by one athlete and
as pressure by another.
Developmental stage is one of the most relevant
variables. Côté (1999) showed that the family modifies its role throughout the
sport career, from initial accompaniment during the sampling years to emotional
and organizational support during the investment phase. This implies that
parental behavior that is appropriate at early ages may become intrusive if it
is maintained without adjustment during later adolescence. For example,
organizing training sessions and accompanying the athlete to tournaments may be
necessary in childhood, but constantly deciding for the athlete during the
specialization stages may interfere with autonomy.
Cahill and MacNamara (2025) provide recent
evidence by showing that the parental role among high-potential tennis players
evolves over time. In their longitudinal qualitative study, parents were
identified as providers, interpreters, and role models. These functions varied according
to the developmental stage, competitive demands, challenges of the season, and
family dynamics. This finding is important because it shows that the family
does not fulfill a fixed role, but rather an adaptive one. The quality of its
support depends on the ability to read the athlete’s changing needs and adjust
the forms of accompaniment.
Competitive level also moderates family
influence. In players who progress toward national or international circuits,
family support tends to acquire greater logistical and emotional complexity.
Novak et al. (2020) showed that family and sport-team social capital were
related to performance, although differently according to gender. Among female
players, family and sport social capital showed a more favorable association
with competitive success. This result indicates that the family may be
especially relevant for certain athlete profiles, but also that its influence
depends on interaction with other domains, such as the team, school, and
support networks.
Gender introduces another dimension that must be
considered with caution. The available evidence does not allow universal
conclusions to be established, but it does suggest that male and female players
may experience support, pressure, and family expectations differently. Novak et
al. (2020) found differences in the relationship between social capital and
performance according to the players’ sex. This evidence invites researchers
and practitioners to avoid generalizations and to recognize that the family experience
of tennis may be shaped by differentiated expectations, distinct forms of
accompaniment, and specific sociocultural conditions.
The relationship among parents, coaches, and
athletes constitutes another decisive variable. In youth tennis, talent development
does not depend solely on the family or the coach separately, but on the
quality of the interaction between both. Ntalachani et al. (2025), from a
phenomenological perspective of the coach-athlete-parent relationship, found
that parental involvement fluctuates between support and pressure, and that the
construction of trust between parents and coaches significantly influences
young athletes’ sport experience. Although this study was not conducted in
tennis, its findings are useful for understanding the triangular dynamic that
also characterizes developmental sport.
Communication constitutes the operational axis
of this triangular relationship. In youth tennis, communication must function
clearly between parents and players, parents and coaches, and coaches and
players. When these three communicative links remain coherent, the athlete
receives consistent guidance regarding goals, responsibilities, and areas for
improvement. Conversely, weak or contradictory communication can generate
confusion, additional pressure, and tensions among technical guidance, family
expectations, and the player’s subjective experience.
In tennis, this triangular relationship is
especially important because parents are often present at training sessions,
tournaments, travel, and planning decisions. If there is no clear communication
between coach and family, the messages received by the athlete may become
contradictory. Harwood and Porter (2026), in a 30-week intervention based on
the 5Cs framework within a British youth tennis talent development environment,
showed that psychosocial work was more effective when it was adapted to tennis,
to the individual needs of the player, and to collaboration among parents,
coaches, and athletes. This study demonstrates that the psychosocial
development of the tennis player improves when the actors within the
environment share language, criteria, and responsibilities.
Within this framework, the family should promote
spaces in which the player can train, decide, and progressively face sport
responsibilities. Parental presence should not translate into constant
surveillance or permanent intervention during training, but into accompaniment
that allows the athlete to build independence, confidence, and self-regulation
skills.
Henriksen et al.’s (2010) ecological approach
makes it possible to integrate these findings into a broader understanding.
According to this approach, talent development should not focus exclusively on
the individual athlete, but on the development environment that surrounds the
athlete. In the case of youth tennis, this environment includes family, coach,
peers, sport institution, school, competitive calendar, and available
resources. Therefore, the family environment is a fundamental dimension, but
its effect depends on how it is articulated with the other conditions of the
system.
The importance of the environment has also been
highlighted in general studies on sport talent development. Alarfaj et al.
(2024) show that talent development is not explained only by internal factors
of the athlete, but also by environmental conditions related to support,
opportunities, family context, resources, and educational trajectories.
Although their study does not focus on youth tennis, it is useful as contextual
support to reinforce the idea that sport talent is constructed in interaction
with external conditions and not as the exclusive result of personal
attributes.
The institutional structure of tennis also
influences the way families accompany the sport development process. Pill et
al. (2023), in analyzing barriers and supports for women tennis coaches in
Australia, show that the organizational context of tennis presents tensions
related to job stability, institutional support, professional development, and
work-family balance. Although this study does not directly examine the
family-junior tennis player relationship, it suggests that talent development
occurs within sport systems where the availability, quality, and stability of
coaching staff also shape the experience of players and families.
From this perspective, the family may either
amplify or reduce the tensions inherent to youth tennis. It may amplify them
when it increases pressure for results, invades the technical role of the
coach, or conditions affection on performance. It may reduce them when it
offers emotional security, helps organize daily demands, respects the athlete’s
progressive autonomy, and maintains constructive communication with the coach.
This difference makes it possible to understand why the same family presence
may operate either as a resource or as a risk.
Conclusion
The family environment influences the
development of sport talent among junior tennis players through the resources
it provides and through the way it regulates the emotional, motivational, and
competitive climate surrounding the athlete. The family can promote
performance, motivation, and continued participation when it accompanies the
process with appropriate support, affective stability, respect for autonomy,
and coordination with the coach. Conversely, it can weaken the sport trajectory
when its involvement is expressed through pressure for results, criticism,
excessive control, or expectations that the young tennis player perceives as
imposition.
Research makes it possible to understand that
the most appropriate parental support is not the most intense or the most
visible, but the support that adapts to the athlete’s developmental stage,
competitive level, and psychological needs. Family accompaniment should also be
understood as an educational and communicative task, aimed at articulating
personal values, academic development, sport development, and respectful
coordination with the coach. Therefore, talent development in youth tennis
requires a family capable of sustaining the process without taking ownership of
it, demanding effort without conditioning affection, and accompanying
competition without turning the result into a measure of the player’s personal
worth.
References
Alarfaj, A. A., Hassan, M. M., Aljohar, R. M., Almuaili, F. A.,
& Hassan, M. D. (2024). The internal and external factors influencing
talent development of athletic talent among Saudi Arabia’s twice exceptional
elite athletes: A comprehensive study. PLOS ONE, 19(12),
e0304049. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0304049
Cahill, G., & MacNamara, A. (2025). Beyond the Courts: A
Qualitative Exploration of the Evolving Role of Parents in Supporting
High-Potential Tennis Players. The Sport Psychologist, 39(3),
163–175. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.2024-0159
Côté, J. (1999). The Influence of the Family in the Development of
Talent in Sport. The Sport Psychologist, 13(4), 395–417.
https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.13.4.395
Gao, Z., Chee, C. S., Norjali Wazir, M. R. W., Wang, J., Zheng, X.,
& Wang, T. (2024). The role of parents in the motivation of young athletes:
A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1291711.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1291711
Gould, D., Lauer, L., Rolo, C., Jannes, C., & Pennisi, N.
(2006). Understanding the role parents play in tennis success: A national
survey of junior tennis coaches. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 40(7),
632–636. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2005.024927
Harwood, C., & Porter, K. (2026). Applying the 5Cs Framework to
Elite Youth Tennis: Impact Factors in a Talent Development Environment. Behavioral
Sciences, 16(2), 166. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs16020166
Henriksen, K., Stambulova, N., & Roessler, K. K. (2010).
Holistic approach to athletic talent development environments: A successful
sailing milieu. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(3), 212–222.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.10.005
Novak, D., Oršolić, M., Barbaros, P., Suzuki, E., & Subramanian,
S. V. (2025). Family ties and social capital among grand slam tennis champions.
International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 60(5), 900–920.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10126902241298498
Novak, D., Svalina, F., & Delale, E. A. (2020). Connection
between Social Capital and Sport Success of Young Tennis Players. Social
Sciences, 9(11), 206. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci9110206
Ntalachani, K., Dania, A., Karteroliotis, K., & Stavrou, N.
(2025). Parental Involvement in Youth Sports: A Phenomenological Analysis of
the Coach–Athlete–Parent Relationship. Youth, 5(3), 81.
https://doi.org/10.3390/youth5030081
Pill, S., Petersen, J., Agnew, D., Prichard, I., & Ridley, K.
(2024). Barriers, supports and constraints on women coaching in tennis. International
Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 19(1), 33–40.
https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541231191596
Stambulova, N., Alfermann, D., Statler, T., & Côté, J. (2009).
ISSP Position stand: Career development and transitions of athletes. International
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 7(4), 395–412.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2009.9671916
Wolfenden, L. E., & Holt, N. L. (2005). Talent Development in
Elite Junior Tennis: Perceptions of Players, Parents, and Coaches. Journal
of Applied Sport Psychology, 17(2), 108–126.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200590932416
