Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Bryan Blissmer x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Alan G. Ingham, Bryan J. Blissmer and Kristen Wells Davidson

This article offers a proposal for combining the sport sociological and sport psychological imaginations. In order to effect this rapprochement, some serious adjustments to the ways in which many applied sport psychologists and sport sociologists think about and conduct research are required. Thus, the initial part of this article expresses some critiques, albeit brief, of current tendencies within both sport sociology and sport psychology. We deemed these critiques necessary to advance a neo-Millsian position on the articulation of social structure and personality. This neo-Millsian position draws on the ego-psychoanalytical tradition to offer suggestions for how we might reconceive the problems of indispensability/expendability in the Prolympic structures of sport and for how we might, using a life-histories (biographical) methodology, engage in useful or practical research, especially on the problematics of how individuals handle/mishandle early, pre-career, and mid-career failure, and, in the long-run, inevitable failure at the end of their careers. Where, then, is the common ground between sport sociology and sport psychology? We argue that it is the analysis of ego-practices and ego-defenses as learned, consciously or unconsciously, over our biographical lives as they intersect with, and are contoured by, social history and social structure.

Restricted access

Jessica M. Lipschitz, Miryam Yusufov, Andrea Paiva, Colleen A. Redding, Joseph S. Rossi, Sara Johnson, Bryan Blissmer, N. Simay Gokbayrak, Wayne F. Velicer and James O. Prochaska

This study examined longitudinal differences in use of transtheoretical model (TTM) behavior change constructs in maintainers (who reached and maintained exercise guidelines), relapsers (who reached guidelines, then regressed), and nonchangers (who did not reach guidelines). Data from two population-based TTM-tailored randomized trial intervention groups targeting exercise behavior (N = 1050) were pooled, and analyses assessed differences in TTM constructs between the three groups at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. Findings indicated that relapsers tended to use TTM variables similarly to maintainers with the exception of self-efficacy, consciousness raising, and most behavioral processes of change, at 24 months. Nonchangers, however, used all TTM variables less than maintainers at nearly every time point. Findings suggest that relapsers remain more active than nonchangers in terms of use of change processes. Poor response to interventions (nonchangers) may be predicted by low baseline engagement in change processes. Although relapsers reverted to physical inactivity, their overall greater use of TTM constructs suggests that their efforts to change remain better than those of the stable nonchanger group. Future research can focus on treatment engagement strategies to help the stable nonchangers initiate change and to help relapsers to maintain treatment gains.