Although considerable research exists on performers’ responses to sporting encounters, little is known about thriving in sport contexts. The current study examined if distinct response patterns existed between sport performers who thrived in competitive encounters compared with those who did not. Participants were 535 sport performers (134 women; M age = 23.60 years, SD age = 8.08; M competing = 11.84 years, SD competing = 7.11). Results of factor mixture analysis supported a four-profile solution comprising a thriving group (n = 146), a low-functioning group (n = 38), and two groups characterized by scores marginally above (n = 131) and below (n = 209) the sample mean. Profile membership was found to be predicted by personal enablers (viz., personal resilient qualities, psychological skills use) and process variables (viz., basic psychological need satisfaction and frustration, challenge appraisal). This examination of thriving in sport performers offers significant implications for research and practice.
Daniel J. Brown, Rachel Arnold, Martyn Standage and David Fletcher
Ana C. Holt, Daniel J. Plews, Katherine T. Oberlin-Brown, Fabrice Merien and Andrew E. Kilding
Purpose: To determine the effect of different high-intensity interval-training (IT) sessions on the postexercise recovery response and time course across varying recovery measures. Methods: A total of 13 highly trained rowers (10 male and 3 female, peak oxygen uptake during a 6-min maximal test 4.9 [0.7] L·min−1) completed 3 IT sessions on a rowing ergometer separated by 7 d. Sessions consisted of 5 × 3.5 min, 4-min rest periods (maximal oxygen uptake [VO2max]); 10 × 30 s, 5-min rest periods (glycolytic); and 5 × 10 min, 4-min rest periods (threshold). Participants were instructed to perform intervals at the highest maintainable pace. Blood lactate and salivary cortisol were measured preexercise and postexercise. Resting heart-rate (HR) variability, post-submaximal-exercise HR variability, submaximal-exercise HR, HR recovery, and modified Wingate peak and mean power were measured preexercise and 1, 10, 24, 34, 48, 58, and 72 h postexercise. Participants resumed training throughout the measurement period. Results: Between-groups short-term response differences (1 h post-IT) across IT sessions were trivial or unclear for all recovery variables. However, post-submaximal-exercise HR variability demonstrated the longest recovery time course (threshold = 37.8 [14.2], glycolytic = 20.2 [11.0], and VO2max = 20.6 [15.2]; mean [h] ± confidence limits). Conclusion: Short-term responses to threshold, glycolytic, and VO2max IT in highly trained male and female rowers were similar. Recovery time course was greatest following threshold compared with glycolytic and VO2max-focused training, suggesting a durational influence on recovery time course at HR intensities ≥80% HRmax. As such, this provides valuable information around the programming and sequencing of high-intensity IT for endurance athletes.