Adolescence represents a particularly important developmental stage for exploring career opportunities and establishing the foundations of an individual life trajectory. During this period, young people select activities and environments in which their future career aspirations appear attainable, based on their interests, perceived competencies, personal values, and developmental needs (Savickas, 2013). Consequently, the preparation for career-related decisions and the development of long-term commitment are considered central developmental tasks for adolescent athletes (Staff et al., 2009; Super et al., 1996).

Within this developmental context, many successful adolescent athletes aspire to pursue a career in elite sport. However, such a pathway requires substantial temporal, physical, and psychological investment from an early age. Accordingly, the secondary school years are often conceptualized as the investment stage of the athletic career (Stambulova et al., 2015), during which athletes increasingly dedicate themselves to high-level training and competition.

At the same time, this intensified commitment to sport carries potential risks. A lack of sustained commitment can also lead to the premature termination of athletic careers during adolescence. Research has consistently indicated that only a small proportion of youth athletes progress to elite-level adult sport (Gulbin et al., 2010). Nevertheless, many young athletes develop a strong athletic identity and may base their future expectations primarily on their sporting role. As a result, the unexpected or forced termination of a sport career may leave athletes insufficiently prepared for life beyond sport, potentially complicating their transition to alternative career pathways and their integration into the labor market (Ryba et al., 2016).

In Hungary, youth sport is typically organized within a well-structured, club or academy-based system that is closely linked to education. Although the concept of dual career has gained increasing attention in recent years, its practical implementation still varies across sports disciplines and sport organizations. As a result, student-athletes often face challenges when trying to balance training and competition with their academic responsibilities (Oláh et al., 2022), especially during secondary school.

Handball, as one of the most popular and successful team sports in the country, operates within a highly organized talent development framework. This makes it a particularly suitable context for examining how sport and education can be balanced during adolescence. The international success of Hungarian handball further highlights this relevance, as both the men's and women's national teams have qualified for the last Olympic Games in Beijing.

The present study employed a cross-sectional survey design to examine adolescent handball players' and coaches' perceptions of dual career development and the developmental role of sport organizations in Hungary. The research focused on identifying patterns related to athletes' personality characteristics, future orientation, perceived developmental practices within clubs, and the perceived responsibilities of sport organizations in supporting holistic athlete development. By comparing the perspectives of players and coaches, and also genders, the study aimed to provide a broader understanding of how developmental environments in youth sport contribute to dual career preparation.

The study included 507 secondary school-aged handball players (M = 16.36 ± 2.19 years; 42.8% male, 57.2% female) and 279 coaches (M = 44.60 ± 12.74 years; 57.35% male, 42.65% female). Participants were recruited from all first- and second-division male and female handball clubs in Hungary (N = 60), aiming to include the entire target population. All eligible players and their coaches holding a valid competition license were invited to take part. In total, 1,920 players and 480 coaches were contacted, of whom 507 athletes (26.4%) and 279 coaches (58.1%) completed the questionnaire.

The online questionnaire was distributed via official club contacts and coaching networks, ensuring broad national coverage. Data collection was based on the Erasmus+ DC4AC questionnaire, which included background variables and 23 items rated on a four-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree). The questionnaire assessed athletes' personality characteristics, perceptions of developmental practices within clubs and sport departments, and respondents' views regarding the responsibility of sport organizations for different areas of athlete development. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, which indicated good reliability for the overall sample (α = 0.85) as well as for both subgroups (players: α = 0.85; coaches: α = 0.86).

Although the Shapiro–Wilk test was significant (p < 0.05), this is likely due to the large sample size, which can make normality tests overly sensitive (Ghasemi and Zahediasl, 2012). Skewness and kurtosis values were within acceptable ranges, and Q–Q plots suggested approximate normality; therefore, parametric tests were applied.

Descriptive statistics were used to describe sample characteristics and response distributions. Differences between athletes and coaches were examined using independent samples t-tests. All analyses were conducted in SPSS 26.0, with the level of significance set at p < 0.05.

The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of World Medical Association (2003). Written informed consent was obtained from the parents or legal guardians of all participating minors prior to data collection. Ethical approval for the study was granted by the Institutional Review Board of Eszterházy Károly Catholic University (Approval ID: RK/1585/2025).

According to self-reports, 94.0% of the total sample indicated that they were familiar with the concept of dual career. In addition, 64.9% of the athletes reported that they had already encountered situations in which they had to choose between their athletic career and their studies.

Based on the responses of the total sample, both athletes and coaches generally perceived the athletes as curious (M = 3.070 ± 0.895). In contrast, the overall assessment suggests that athletes show lower levels of concern regarding their dual careers (M = 2.089 ± 0.896) and also their future (M = 1.888 ± 0.902) (Table 1).

Based on the overall responses, the existing developmental and support practices of sport organizations are primarily oriented toward physical development (M = 3.474 ± 0.682) and sport-specific development (M = 3.276 ± 0.773). In contrast, academic/intellectual development (M = 2.760 ± 0.872) and psychological/emotional development (M = 2.678 ± 0.948) receive the least emphasis (Table 2).

In relation to the perceived developmental responsibilities of sport clubs and departments, respondents attributed the greatest responsibility to these institutions for sport-specific development (M = 3.643 ± 0.577) and physical development (M = 3.431 ± 0.766). The lowest levels of perceived responsibility were reported for communication development (M = 2.998 ± 0.831) and academic/intellectual development (M = 2.720 ± 0.891) (Table 3).

The present study aimed to explore how adolescent handball players and their coaches perceive dual career preparation and the developmental role of sport organizations. Overall, the results suggest that although awareness of the dual career concept is relatively high, many athletes already experience conflicts between sport and education, while showing relatively low levels of concern about their future and dual career pathways. This may indicate that dual career is recognized at a general level but is not yet fully integrated into athletes' long-term thinking. From the perspective of career construction theory, this pattern may reflect a developmental stage in which future-oriented thinking and career adaptability are still evolving rather than fully established (Savickas, 2013; Super, 1990).

At the same time, the results point to a clear imbalance in the developmental orientation of sport organizations. Both athletes and coaches perceived that physical and sport-specific development dominate current practices, whereas psychological, academic, and communication-related domains receive less attention. This finding is consistent with previous research highlighting the gap between theoretical models of holistic athlete development and their practical implementation (Brown et al., 2018; Henriksen et al., 2020a). From the perspective of career adaptability, which includes dimensions such as concern, control, curiosity, and confidence (Savickas, 2013), this imbalance is particularly relevant. While the relatively higher levels of perceived curiosity and confidence may support adaptability, the low levels of future concern suggest that one of its key components remains underdeveloped.

A similar tension is reflected in the discrepancy between perceived practices and expectations. Although respondents attributed considerable responsibility to sport organizations for supporting broader developmental areas, these domains appear to be less systematically addressed in everyday practice. This may indicate that performance-oriented environments continue to prioritize short-term sporting success over long-term career construction processes. Such a tendency aligns with earlier findings emphasizing the dominance of athletic identity within talent development systems (Stambulova et al., 2009, 2024).

Differences between athletes' and coaches' perspectives provide further insight into this issue. Athletes tended to evaluate their own preparedness and developmental context more positively, whereas coaches emphasized the need for stronger support across multiple domains. This discrepancy may reflect differences in experience and role expectations. At the same time, it may also suggest that athletes' self-perceptions are shaped by a strong athletic identity, which can limit critical reflection on future career challenges beyond sport (Ryba et al., 2015a).

Gender differences also emerged as an important aspect of the findings. Female athletes and female coaches appeared to demonstrate greater sensitivity toward future planning and psychosocial aspects of development, whereas male athletes reported higher levels of self-confidence. These patterns may indicate differences in how career adaptability resources are activated across genders. In particular, greater concern and reflection among female participants may support more proactive career construction, which is consistent with previous findings on gender-related differences in developmental perspectives (Wylleman et al., 2004).

Taken together, the findings highlight a central dilemma in adolescent sport development, which is the strong emphasis on athletic identity within performance-oriented environments. While such environments may effectively support short-term sporting success, they may also limit the development of broader identity structures and future orientation. According to career construction theory, identity formation and adaptability are closely interconnected processes, and the dominance of a single role may constrain the development of alternative career pathways (Savickas, 2013). This may help explain why athletes report relatively low concern about their future despite being embedded in highly structured developmental systems (López-Flores et al., 2020).

The findings of the present study are also in line with international research suggesting that athletes often deprioritize career planning outside sport during their active careers (Hernando Domingo et al., 2025; Quinaud et al., 2022). This tendency is particularly pronounced when the athletic role constitutes a central component of self-concept (Ryba et al., 2015b).

From a practical perspective, the results suggest that the developmental approach in secondary school talent development sport may benefit from a more balanced and intentional focus. In addition to physical and sport-specific development, greater emphasis could be placed on psychological, academic, and life-management competencies. Strengthening these areas may support the development of career adaptability and encourage more conscious engagement with future career planning. In this process, coaches should be considered not only as technical instructors but also as facilitators of holistic development, which requires appropriate training and institutional support.

Future research could further explore these processes using longitudinal designs to better understand how career adaptability, identity development, and environmental factors interact over time. In addition, qualitative approaches may provide deeper insight into how athletes and coaches interpret dual career challenges in everyday practice. Finally, comparative studies across different education, sports and cultural contexts would help to clarify the generalizability of the present findings.

Although the study provides useful insights, some limitations should be considered. First, all data were self-reported, which may introduce common method bias, for example through subjective interpretations or social desirability. In addition, the cross-sectional design does not allow for causal conclusions about the relationships between athletes' perceptions, developmental environments, and dual career preparation. The study also focused specifically on adolescent handball players within a particular talent development context, so the findings may not be directly transferable to other sports, age groups, or settings. Moreover, as the research was conducted in Hungary, the characteristics of the national sport and education system may have influenced the results.

This study demonstrates that although young handball players are generally aware of the dual career concept, it is not yet a central part of how they think about their future and long-term planning. Sport environments in youth handball still focus mainly on performance, while areas like education and personal development receive less attention. This may make it harder for handball players to prepare for life beyond competitive sport. The results highlight the need for a more balanced approach, where coaches and sport organizations actively support not only athletic success but also athletes' long-term career planning.