Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Robert J. Donovan x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Daniel F. Gucciardi, John Mahoney, Geoffrey Jalleh, Robert J. Donovan and Jarred Parkes

Although there is an emerging body of research that has examined perfectionistic clusters in the general population, few studies have explored such profiles in athlete samples. The purposes of this research were to explore perfectionistic profiles within a sample of elite athletes and the differences between them on key motivational variables. A sample of 423 elite athletes (179 males, 244 females) aged between 14 and 66 years (M = 25.64; SD = 8.57) from a variety of team (e.g., rowing, hockey, baseball, rugby) and individual sports (e.g., cycling, athletics, triathlon, gymnastics) completed a multisection questionnaire including measures of sport perfectionism, motivation regulation, achievement goals, and fear of failure. Cluster analyses revealed the existence of three perfectionism profiles, namely, nonperfectionists, maladaptive perfectionists, and adaptive perfectionists. Subsequent analyses generally supported the robustness of these perfectionism profiles in terms of differential motivational orientations (achievement goals, fear of failure, and motivation regulation) in hypothesized directions. Overall, the differences in motivational orientations between the three clusters supported a categorical conceptualization of perfectionism.

Restricted access

Derwin K. C. Chan, Vanessa Lentillon-Kaestner, James A. Dimmock, Robert J. Donovan, David A. Keatley, Sarah J. Hardcastle and Martin S. Hagger

We applied the strength-energy model of self-control to understand the relationship between self-control and young athletes’ behavioral responses to taking illegal performance-enhancing substances, or “doping.” Measures of trait self-control, attitude and intention toward doping, intention toward, and adherence to, doping-avoidant behaviors, and the prevention of unintended doping behaviors were administered to 410 young Australian athletes. Participants also completed a “lollipop” decision-making protocol that simulated avoidance of unintended doping. Hierarchical linear multiple regression analyses revealed that self-control was negatively associated with doping attitude and intention, and positively associated with the intention and adherence to doping-avoidant behaviors, and refusal to take or eat the unfamiliar candy offered in the “lollipop” protocol. Consistent with the strength-energy model, athletes with low self-control were more likely to have heightened attitude and intention toward doping, and reduced intention, behavioral adherence, and awareness of doping avoidance.