Search Results

This article reports initial evidence of construct validity for a four-factor measure of attributions assessing the dimensions of controllability, stability, globality, and universality (the CSGU). In Study 1, using confirmatory factor analysis, factors were confirmed across least successful and most successful conditions. In Study 2, following less successful performances, correlations supported hypothesized relationships between subscales of the CSGU and subscales of the CDSII (McAuley, Duncan, & Russell, 1992). In Study 3, following less successful performances, moderated hierarchical regression analyses demonstrated that individuals have higher subsequent self-efficacy when they perceive causes of performance as controllable, and/or specific, and/or universal. An interaction for controllability and stability demonstrated that if causes are perceived as likely to recur, it is important to perceive that causes are controllable. Researchers are encouraged to use the CSGU to examine main and interactive effects of controllability and generalizability attributions upon outcomes such as self-efficacy, emotions, and performance.

This article provides initial evidence for the construct validity of the Perceived Available Support in Sport Questionnaire (PASS-Q), which assesses emotional, esteem, informational, and tangible support. In Study 1, confirmatory factor analyses provided evidence for a four-dimension factor structure. Correlations supported hypothesized relationships between the PASS-Q dimensions and the Social Support Survey questions (Richman, Rosenfeld, & Hardy, 1993). In Study 2, the four-dimension factor structure was supported in an independent sample. Further, higher levels of perceived available emotional, esteem, informational, and tangible support were associated with higher levels of self-confidence and lower levels of burnout. Researchers are encouraged to use the PASS-Q to examine the effects of perceived available support in sport contexts.

This study’s purpose was to evaluate the unique contributions of self-, other-, and collective constructs in the efficacy–performance reciprocal relationship for athlete dyads involving low- and high-dependence roles. Data were obtained from 74 intact cheerleading pairs on self-, other-, and collective efficacy and subjective performance evaluations for each of 5 successive trials. Objective assessments of dyad performances were obtained from digital recordings. Across path models involving a single efficacy construct, similar reciprocal relationships between objective dyad performance and self-, other-, or collective efficacy were observed. In path models composed of multiple efficacy or performance constructs, unique efficacy contributions were observed in the prediction of objective dyad performance, and unique subjective performance contributions were observed in the prediction of efficacy beliefs. Partner effects were observed more often for athletes in the high-dependence role than for those in the low-dependence role. Findings support how self-, other-, and collective beliefs are processed by team athletes.

This study explored person-related sources of variance in athletes’ efficacy beliefs and performances when performing in pairs with distinguishable roles differing in partner dependence. College cheerleaders (n = 102) performed their role in repeated performance trials of two low- and two high-difficulty paired-stunt tasks with three different partners. Data were obtained on self-, other-, and collective efficacy beliefs and subjective performances, and objective performance assessments were obtained from digital recordings. Using the social relations model framework, total variance in each belief/assessment was partitioned, for each role, into numerical components of person-related variance relative to the self, the other, and the collective. Variance component by performance role by task-difficulty repeated-measures analysis of variances revealed that the largest person-related variance component differed by athlete role and increased in size in high-difficulty tasks. Results suggest that the extent the athlete’s performance depends on a partner relates to the extent the partner is a source of self-, other-, and collective efficacy beliefs.

To address calls for context-specific measurement of social support, this article reports the development of the Athletes’ Received Support Questionnaire (ARSQ) and demonstrates initial evidence for its validity. Across four studies there was support for a four-dimensional structure reflecting emotional, esteem, informational, and tangible received support. There was also support for unidimensional and higher-order models. Further, Study 3 provided some support for convergent validity, with significant correlations between the corresponding dimensions of the ARSQ and the Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors. Study 4 provided evidence for the nomological validity of the ARSQ. Emotional and esteem support significantly predicted self-confidence and positive affect, and tangible support significantly moderated the relationship between stress and negative affect. Collectively, these results provide initial evidence for the validity of the ARSQ, and offer researchers flexibility to adopt either a multidimensional or aggregated approach to measuring received support.

In a one group pretest-posttest design, 15 elite academy cricketers were exposed to two personal-disclosure mutual-sharing (PDMS) sessions during a preseason tour. Within PDMS1, athletes disclosed (via prepared speeches) relationship-oriented information and within PDMS2, mastery oriented information. Social identity, social identity content, and collective efficacy were measured at baseline (1 week before the tour), post-PDMS1, midpoint, and post-PDMS2, while social validation was also obtained after each intervention session. Quantitative data revealed significant increases in social identity and friendships identity content at post-PDMS1, and results identity content and collective efficacy at post-PDMS2. Qualitative social validation data highlighted the thoughts and feelings of the athletes before their speeches and supported the effectiveness of the PDMS sessions. In sum, the data suggest practitioners can develop team outcomes (e.g., a focus on results) through developing specific aspects of teams’ identities. Study limitations, practitioner guidelines, and areas for future research are discussed.

Research on the effect of athlete leadership on precursors of team performance such as team confidence is sparse. To explore the underlying mechanisms of how athlete leaders impact their team’s confidence, an online survey was completed by 2,867 players and coaches from nine different team sports in Flanders (Belgium). We distinguished between two types of team confidence: collective efficacy, assessed by the CEQS subscales of effort, persistence, preparation, and unity; and team outcome confidence, measured by the ability subscale. The results demonstrated that the perceived quality of athlete leaders was positively related to participants’ team outcome confidence. The present findings are the first in sport settings to highlight the potential value of collective efficacy and team identification as underlying processes. Because high-quality leaders strengthen team members’ identification with the team, the current study also provides initial evidence for the applicability of the identity based leadership approach in sport settings.

Efficacy beliefs and communication are key constructs that have been targeted to develop task cohesion. This study’s purpose was to (a) examine whether collective efficacy, team-focused other-efficacy, and team-focused relation-inferred self-efficacy are predictive of task cohesion and (b) evaluate the possibility that communication mediates efficacy–task cohesion relationships. British university team-sport athletes (N = 250) completed questionnaires assessing efficacy beliefs, communication (i.e., positive conflict, negative conflict, and acceptance communication), and task cohesion (i.e., attractions to group, group integration). Data were subjected to a multigroup path analysis to test mediation hypotheses while also addressing potential differences across males and females. Across all athletes, collective efficacy and team-focused other-efficacy significantly predicted attractions to group and group integration directly. Positive conflict and acceptance communication significantly mediated relationships between efficacy (team-focused other-efficacy, collective efficacy) and cohesion (attractions to group, group integration). Findings suggest that enhancing athletes’ collective efficacy and team-focused efficacy beliefs will encourage communication factors affecting task cohesion.