Search Results

In adopting attribution theory, researchers in the field of sport psychology have followed the cognitive perspectives characteristic of mainstream investigations in this area. Numerous investigations regarding the self-perception of achievement outcomes in sport reveal this trend. The present article discusses the sport psychological perspective of attribution theory in terms of present and future concerns. First, a critical evaluation of existing approaches to the study of sport attribution is presented. The discussion outlines the typical characteristics of such investigations and their problems, some inherited from psychology and others unique to sport. This critical analysis underscores the narrowness of previous interests. Second, the broad scope of attribution is presented to emphasize the wealth of research problems that could be studied, in addition to those concerning self-focus on achievement outcomes. Third, recent investigations of attribution in sport are briefly described to exemplify new research directions. These examples sketch the importance of subjects' phenomenology, the situational and internal variables affecting attributions, and a developmental comment. If future studies recognize the rich array of social inference problems within the sport context and confront previous investigative errors, the result should be a productive decade of attribution research in sport psychology.

A major research limitation in investigating the validity of the TAIS has been the failure to distinguish when attentional style has an effect on the information processing system, early as in encoding or late after processing. Few investigations have examined the TAIS predictive validity in a controlled setting wherein task attention demands can be systematically and accurately varied. Does the general trait of attentional style really have anything to do with how attention related information is processed? The present study examined this question using a valid attention theory (Treisman's feature integration theory) and a visual search paradigm. When the TAIS attentional-style scales were correlated with visual search rate for attention demanding targets, no significant relationships were observed. Specifically, TAIS scales did not relate to visual search rate for an attention demanding target, the performance of subjects extreme in search rate, or the central to peripheral slowing of search time in target detection. The factorial validity of the TAIS was also questioned. It was concluded that the attentional-style scales were not valid in predicting how attention related visual information is processed. The importance of distinguishing when attentional style might be operating in the information processing system was emphasized for future research.

Over the past three decades, an interface has developed between sport and social psychology, characterized primarily by commonly utilized concepts and theories. The list of social psychological benefits to sport psychology is lengthy and includes theory, hypotheses, research paradigms, general independent and dependent variables, methods, and measures. In this paper, the following areas of sport research are used to illustrate the interface between sport and social psychology: (a) social facilitation and cohesion as two social influence phenomena, (b) anxiety and goal orientations as personality moderators of social behavior, and (c) self-efficacy beliefs and attitudes as social cognitions relevant to motivated behavior. Each of these areas are discussed in terms of social psychology’s impact on its development as a line of research in sport and in terms of the recent contributions each has made in return to social psychology. The general nature of the interface of social and sport psychology is also discussed.

Sport psychology has experienced substantial growth in the past decade. Despite many positive developments, however, a nagging question remains. Specifically, what are the boundaries of sport psychology? In this paper, an organizational model is provided as one way of defining sport psychology and related domains of inquiry: exercise psychology, health psychology, and rehabilitation psychology. The process of defining boundaries for sport psychology goes far beyond simple semantics. Failure to reflect and work toward resolution of this issue will continue to restrict the direction and breadth of research, jeopardize appropriate training of graduate students, and maintain definitional ambiguity in the public sector.

There are multiple avenues to gain health promoting and disease preventing benefits of physical activity (PA) but nonadherence makes health benefits short-lived. Gains obtained through structured exercise training and therapy quickly decay once participants leave programs. Scientific position statements underscore cognitive-behavioral strategies (CBS) as an essential intervention component to increase and maintain PA and recommend transfer of CBS knowledge to practice. Our review of reviews indicates high quality PA interventions involving CBS consistently demonstrate medium effect sizes. Kinesiologists are the human resource capacity to translate this knowledge. Building capacity to implement CBS knowledge is potentially large given North American kinesiology programs and American College of Sports Medicine and Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology certification routes. Yet CBS training of kinesiologists by universities and organizations is minimal. Immediate change in CBS training and practice is needed. Professional organizations/institutions can either be leaders in developing human resources or part of the problem should they fail to address the challenge of CBS training.

The process of validating a recently developed instrument to assess perceived team cohesion is discussed. The Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ), an instrument designed to measure cohesion in sport teams, has good estimates for its internal consistency and for its content and factorial validity (Carron, Widmeyer, & Brawley, 1985; Widmeyer, Brawley, & Carron, 1985). However, other aspects of its validity required examination. The present article reports three studies concerning inspection of the GEQ's concurrent (Study 1), predictive (Study 2), and construct (Study 3) validities. In Study 1 the GEQ exhibited the predicted correspondence with similar measures of cohesion and was not significantly correlated with measures of other constructs. In Study 2 the GEQ successfully discriminated team and individual sport athletes by predicting their membership to these groups on the basis of their task cohesion scores. As well, classification of athletes as new and long-standing members of individual sport teams was predicted on the basis of their social cohesion scores. Finally, in Study 3 evidence was obtained for the predicted difference in self-responsibility attributions between high and low task-cohesive athletes of team sports. Considering the results of the three studies with previous evidence of content and factorial validity, the conclusion was that the GEQ is valid. In sum, demonstrations of the GEQ's content, factorial, concurrent, predictive, and construct validity reflect the ongoing process of its construct validation.

This article presents three studies representing the development stages of a theoretically driven measure employed to assess the frequency of use of the self-presentational strategy of self-handicapping in exercise contexts (Self-Handicapping Exercise Questionnaire: SHEQ). First a pilot study was conducted to examine the nature of the phenomenology of self-handicaps reported in exercise settings. Study 2 involved item creation, item trimming, and model confirmation. Study 3 concerned factorial validation, cross-validating the self-handicapping measure created in the second study. The outcome was a 20-item measure assessing self-handicapping claims in exercise. The results of both model-testing studies indicated three unique and stable factors addressing self-handicapping claims about making exercise a routine, training in an exercise facility, and healthy physical functioning. Self-handicapping responses were not moderated by gender, age, or exercise setting. Further use and development of the SHEQ is discussed.

Many researchers in psychology and physical activity have discussed the overlap among control constructs in various theories. Skinner (1996) proposed an integrative control framework based on an agent-means-ends distinction that offered comparisons among and more explicit measurement of 3 control constructs—control, capacity, and strategy beliefs. No study in the exercise domain has yet empirically examined these advantages. This study evaluated Skinner’s framework relative to their contribution to predicting exercise attendance. A prospective design was used to consider the potential change in the nature of the relationships. High correlations (range r = .52–.88) at 2 time points in the exercise program suggested overlap among control constructs when using Skinner’s measurement procedures. Only capacity beliefs and behavioral intention were significantly related to exercise attendance (model R ² _adjusted = .11 and .16, p = .03 and .01, respectively, at onset and midprogram).Adjusted The findings do not support Skinner’s contentions but are similar to previous findings in the exercise literature.

This investigation examined the influence of leadership behavior on exercise- induced feeling states and self-efficacy beliefs following an acute bout of physical activity. Forty-six college-aged women participated in a single session of physical activity that involved either socially enriched or bland social interactions by an activity leader. Participants completed the Exercise-Induced Feeling Inventory (EFI) and self-efficacy measures prior to and 10 min following the experimental treatments. The results revealed that those in the enriched condition reported greater increases in Revitalization. There was a similar trend for the Positive Engagement subscale, and those in the enriched condition reported much larger increases in self-efficacy. There was no evidence that self-efficacy was related to the change seen in EFI responses; however, enjoyment of the instructors’ approach to the class was related to residualized change scores for both Revitalization and Positive Engagement.