Psychological Resilience in Sport Performers - A Review of Stressors and Protective Factors - Fletcher-Sarkar

This article was downloaded by: [Memorial University of Newfoundland]
On: 04 June 2014, At: 16:43

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Sports Sciences

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjsp20
Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review

of stressors and protective factors
a a
Mustafa Sarkar & David Fletcher
a
School of Sport, Exercise, and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough,
UK
Published online: 09 Apr 2014.
To cite this article: Mustafa Sarkar & David Fletcher (2014): Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of
stressors and protective factors, Journal of Sports Sciences, DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2014.901551
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2014.901551
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Journal of Sports Sciences, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2014.901551
Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and

protective factors
MUSTAFA SARKAR & DAVID FLETCHER
School of Sport, Exercise, and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
(Accepted 17 December 2013)

Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 16:43 04 June 2014
Abstract
Psychological resilience is important in sport because athletes must utilise and optimise a range of mental qualities to
withstand the pressures that they experience. In this article, we discuss psychological resilience in sport performers via a
review of the stressors athletes encounter and the protective factors that help them withstand these demands. It is hoped that
synthesising what is known in these areas will help researchers gain a deeper profundity of resilience in sport, and also
provide a rigorous and robust foundation for the development of a sport-specific measure of resilience. With these points in
mind, we divided the narrative into two main sections. In the first section, we review the different types of stressors
encountered by sport performers under three main categories: competitive, organisational and personal. Based on our
recent research examining psychological resilience in Olympics champions, in the second section we discuss the five main
families of psychological factors (viz. positive personality, motivation, confidence, focus, perceived social support) that
protect the best athletes from the potential negative effect of stressors. It is anticipated that this review will help sport
psychology researchers examine the interplay between stressors and protective factors, which will, in turn, focus the
analytical lens on the processes underlying psychological resilience in athletes.
Keywords: athletes, demands, pressures, psychological characteristics, resilient qualities, sport performance
resilience as “the role of mental processes and beha-

The sporting arena represents a “natural laboratory”
vior in promoting personal assets and protecting an
to study how individuals operate and perform in
individual from the potential negative effect of stres-
highly demanding circumstances. Top-level sport is
sors” (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012, p. 675, 2013, p. 16).
characterised by the ability of athletes to utilise and
This definition extends previous conceptual work in
optimise a range of psychological qualities to with-
this area in a number of ways. First, the focus on
stand the pressures that they experience (Fletcher &
psychological resilience delimits the scope of the
Sarkar, 2012; Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett,
description, by definition, to “mental processes and
2002). Over the past few decades, researchers have
behavior” and excludes other types of resilience such
identified numerous stressors that sport performers
as physical, molecular and structural resilience.
encounter (see, e.g. McKay, Niven, Lavallee, &
Second, this definition encapsulates aspects of both
White, 2008; Scanlan, Stein, & Ravizza, 1991) and
trait and process conceptualisations of resilience (cf.
explored the role of psychological characteristics in
Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012, 2013). Regarding the trait
helping elite performers adapt to setbacks and tran-
conceptualisation, the “mental processes and beha-
sitions encountered along the pathway to excellence
vior” enable individuals to adapt to the circum-
(MacNamara, Button, & Collins, 2010a, 2010b).
stances they encounter (cf. Connor & Davidson,
The influence of psychological factors within the
2003). The process conceptualisation of resilience
context of the stress process is broadly conceptua-
recognises that it is a capacity that develops over
lised as psychological resilience (cf. Fletcher &
time in the context of person–environment interac-
Sarkar, 2013).
tions (Egeland, Carlson, & Sroufe, 1993). Central to
The study of psychological resilience seeks to
the definition is the focussing of the conceptual lens
understand why some individuals are able to with-
on the role that psychological-related phenomena
stand – or even thrive on – the pressure they experi-
play – rather than the mental processes and beha-
ence in their lives. We recently defined psychological
viour per se – in avoiding negative consequences.
Correspondence: Mustafa Sarkar, School of Sport and Exercise, University of Gloucestershire, Oxstalls Campus, Oxstalls Lane, Gloucester, GL2 9HW.
E-mail: [email protected]
© 2014 Taylor & Francis

2 M. Sarkar & D. Fletcher
Third, the emphasis is placed on the more neutral socio-cultural factors that influenced the athletes’
term “stressor” rather than the negative value-laden efforts to manage the unpleasant emotions and men-
term “adversity” (cf. Fletcher & Sarkar, 2013). tal struggles associated with the adversities. Resilient
Fourth, the focus is on “promoting personal assets qualities included positivity, determination, compe-
and protecting an individual from the potential nega- titiveness, commitment, maturity, persistence, pas-
tive effect of stressors” rather than positive adapta- sion for the sport and strong networks of social
tion per se, because resilience generally refers to the support. During the interviews, the “athletes were
ability of individuals to maintain normal levels of asked to describe the most difficult adversity that
functioning rather than the restoration or enhance- they ever had to overcome as an athlete … [and] …
ment of functioning (cf. Bonanno, 2004). Although all subsequent questions were in reference to the
not directly related to the presented definition, a adversity identified by the athlete” (p. 321). As
relevant conceptual debate in this area is the com- noted by Galli and Reel (2012), this was perhaps
parison between psychological resilience and other an oversimplification of the participants’ sport
potentially related constructs. The interested reader experiences given that athletes typically encounter
is directed to relevant papers that discuss the simila- multiple challenges simultaneously rather than in
rities and differences between resilience and other isolation. Another point worth highlighting is that
psychological phenomena such as mental toughness Galli and Vealey (2008) recognised that further
(see Gucciardi & Gordon, 2009; Gucciardi, Gordon, knowledge of the resilient qualities that enable
& Dimmock, 2008, 2009), hardiness (see Howe, sport performers to positively adapt to stressors is
Smajdor, & Stöckl, 2012; Windle, 2011), recovery necessary to enhance understanding of resilience in
(see Bonanno, 2004; deRoon-Cassini, Mancini, sport.
Rusch, & Bonanno, 2010; Deshields, Tibbs, Fan, In the most recent sport resilience study, we
& Taylor, 2006; Lam et al., 2010) and coping (see interviewed 12 Olympic champions to explore and
Campbell-Sills, Cohan, & Stein, 2006; Major, explain the relationship between psychological resi-
Richards, Cooper, Cozzarelli, & Zubek, 1998; Van lience and optimal sport performance (Fletcher &
Vliet, 2008). Sarkar, 2012). We found that Olympic gold medal-
In terms of the extant resilience research, studies lists encountered a wide variety of different stres-
have sampled children, adults and families who have sors, ranging from ongoing daily demands (e.g.
overcome significant adversities in their lives, includ- balancing work and training) to major life events
ing the death of a parent (Greeff & Human, 2004), (e.g. the death of a close family member). The
childhood sexual abuse (Bogar & Hulse-Killacky, emergent grounded theory (see Figure 1) indicated
2006) and terrorism (Bonanno, Galea, Bucciarelli, that the world’s best athletes protect themselves
& Vlahov, 2007). When considering the adversity from the potential negative effect of stressors by
experienced by study participants, resilience influencing their challenge appraisal and meta-cog-
researchers have tended to employ a threshold- nitions. These constructive cognitive reactions pro-
dependent conception by defining adversity in moted facilitative responses that appeared to be
terms of statistical probabilities; that is, the focus is firmly embedded in taking personal responsibility
on negative life events that are statistically associated for one’s thoughts, feelings, and actions. In turn,
with maladjustment, an approach that is closely positive responses led to the realisation of optimal
aligned to the notion of risk (Fletcher & Sarkar, sport performance. Importantly, Olympic cham-
2013). Due to the contextual specificity of resilience pions possess several psychological-related phe-
(cf. Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000), the findings nomena (relating to a positive personality,
of many studies in this area are not easily applicable motivation, confidence, focus and perceived social
to elite athletes who actively choose to participate in support) that underpin the resilience–stress–perfor-
competitive sport and engage with its inherent mance relationship.
demands largely of their own volition (cf. Fletcher In the majority of sport resilience studies, it is
& Sarkar, 2012). worth noting that the authors have identified a
Over the past few years, researchers have begun to need for a measure of psychological resilience in
specifically investigate psychological resilience in athletic performers to advance sport psychologists’
sport performers (e.g. Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012; understanding of this area. To further enhance
Galli & Vealey, 2008). In one of the initial sport researchers’ knowledge of measuring resilience in
resilience studies, Galli and Vealey (2008) inter- athletes, and in line with a recommendation by
viewed college and professional athletes about their Gucciardi, Jackson, Coulter, and Mallett (2011),
perceptions and experiences of resilience. Four dif- we recently reviewed psychometric issues in resili-
ferent adversities were identified: injury, perfor- ence research and considered the implications for
mance slump, illness and career transition. The sport psychology (Sarkar & Fletcher, 2013).
findings revealed various personal resources and Importantly in the context of the present discussion,
Psychological resilience in sport performers 3
Psychological Resilience
Psychological
Factors
Positive
Personality Motivation
Challenge Appraisal Facilitative Optimal Sport

Stressors
and Meta-Cognitions Responses Performance
Confidence Focus
Perceived
Social
Support
Figure 1. A grounded theory of psychological resilience and optimal sport performance (reproduced with permission from Fletcher &
Sarkar, 2012).
we contended that examining the interplay between resilience, but numerous narrative reviews (see, e.g.
stressors and protective factors is essential since it Davydov et al., 2010; Fletcher & Sarkar, 2013;
focusses the analytical lens on the processes under- Luthar & Zelazo, 2003; Windle, 2011).
lying adaptation or vulnerability (see also Luthar & Furthermore, in an editorial entitled “Balancing the
Zelazo, 2003; Naglieri & LeBuffe, 2005; Rutter, strengths of systematic and narrative reviews”,
2006; Windle, 2011). The importance of the context Collins and Fauser (2005) remarked:
was recently emphasised by Gucciardi et al., who
argued that “important protective (e.g., teammate The primary problem is that the narrow focus and
support) and vulnerability (e.g., rigorous training prescribed methods of the systematic review do
schedules) factors are likely not to be adequately not allow for comprehensive coverage. [Certain]
captured when using [current resilience] measures topics … require the wider scope of a traditional
… that were developed with other [than sport] popu- narrative review, in which less explicit methods are
lations in mind” (p. 431). Hence, before developing the trade-off for broader coverage (pp. 103–104).
a sport-specific measure of resilience, we recom-
mended that researchers utilise the empirical knowl-
edge base in the pivotal resilience-related areas of We have divided the narrative into two main sec-
stressors and protective factors (Sarkar & Fletcher, tions. In the first section we review the different
2013). types of stressors encountered by sport performers
In this article, we discuss psychological resilience under three main categories: competitive, organisa-
in sport performers via a review of the stressors tional and personal. Based on our grounded theory
athletes encounter and the protective factors that of psychological resilience in Olympics champions
help them withstand these demands. To the best of (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012), in the second section we
our knowledge, this is the first review of resilience in discuss the five main families of psychological factors
sport. It is hoped that synthesising what is known in (viz. positive personality, motivation, confidence,
these areas will help researchers gain a deeper pro- focus and perceived social support) that protect the
fundity of resilience in sport, and also provide a best athletes from the potential negative effect of
rigorous and robust foundation for the development stressors. The review is organised around our
of a sport-specific measure of resilience. Indeed, model because it is the only sport-specific theory of
Rutter (2006) observed that “resilience is an inter- resilience, grounded in original data, which is free
active concept that can only be studied if there is a from the constraints of a preconceived model. In line
thorough measurement of risk and protective fac- with the narrative review approach adopted in this
tors” (p. 3). We undertook a narrative review to article, studies were selected based on situational
allow for extensive coverage of psychological resili- choices about the inclusion of evidence (cf. Collins
ence in sport performers. A systematic review was & Fauser, 2005; Dijkers, 2009). In this review, we
not considered appropriate due to the broad nature selected studies that significantly advanced research-
of the research topic (cf. Davydov, Stewart, Ritchie, ers’ knowledge of the stressors encountered by com-
& Chaudieu, 2010). Indeed, this is reflected in the petitive athletes and enhanced researchers’
general psychology literature, which currently does understanding of withstanding stress and pressure
not have any published systematic reviews of in competitive sport.
Stressors Competitive stressors

We recently observed that when researchers inves- Competitive stressors are defined as “the environ-
tigate how individuals’ positively adapt to difficult mental demands associated primarily and directly
life events, adversities or risks are predominantly with competitive performance” (Mellalieu, Hanton,
considered (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2013); that is, resi- & Fletcher, 2006, p. 3). Sport psychology research-
lience researchers focus on negative life circum- ers identified performance-related stressors in a
stances that are known to be statistically associated number of early exploratory studies (e.g. Gould
with adjustment difficulties (cf. Luthar et al., 2000). et al., 1993; Holt & Hogg, 2002; James & Collins,
We went on to argue that this threshold-dependent 1997). More recently, scholars have investigated
approach is somewhat limited since it typically pre- competitive stressors in a more systematic fashion
cludes the inclusion of many highly taxing, yet still (see Hanton, Fletcher, & Coughlan, 2005;
common, events. This is pertinent for the sport Mellalieu et al., 2009; Neil, Hanton, Mellalieu, &
context since athletes often experience regular Fletcher, 2011). Based on the collective findings of
everyday hassles that are embedded in their sporting these studies, stressors experienced in relation to
lives, such as relationship problems, inadequate pre- competitive performance include preparation, inju-
paration, and logistical issues (see, e.g. Thelwell, ries, pressure, underperforming, expectations, self-
Weston, & Greenlees, 2007). Moreover, although presentation and rivalry.
the term “adversity” associates negative circum- Demands related to preparation for competition
stances with negative consequences, ostensibly posi- have been frequently cited by the majority of athletes
tive life experiences – that are not typically in studies exploring the different types of environ-
associated with a higher probability of undesirable mental demands (see, e.g. Weston et al., 2009).
outcomes – are also relevant in resilience research Specifically, sport performers have identified how
(Fletcher & Sarkar, 2013). To illustrate, in a sport various aspects of their preparation (physical, men-
context, winning an important competition is unli- tal, technical and tactical) were at times inadequate,
kely to be labelled as an adversity but will none- inappropriate or arduous prior to competition.
theless require individuals to positively adapt to the Another common stressor, experienced by a variety
inevitable heightened expectations related to suc- of athletic populations, has been sport-related inju-
cess (cf. Kreiner-Phillips & Orlick, 1993). On the ries (see, e.g. Gould, Udry, Bridges, & Beck, 1997).
basis of these arguments, we proposed that when Injury-related pressures include the risk of sustaining
assessing resilience in sport performers, “it is an injury, the risk of being deliberately injured due to
imperative that researchers consider the inclusion an opponent’s actions, the act of getting injured,
of both significant life events and ongoing daily determining the cause of injury, the inability to
challenges” (Sarkar & Fletcher, 2013, p. 266). train, missing important competitions, loss of fitness,
Thus, to allow different types of situations, circum- attaining pre-injury levels of performance and com-
stances and experiences to be included under the peting whilst injured (see Evans, Wadey, Hanton, &
rubric of resilience, the more neutral term “stres- Mitchell, 2012). In addition, athletes have reported
sor” is employed here and defined as “the environ- the pressure to perform well at competition (see, e.g.
mental demands (i.e., stimuli) encountered by an McKay et al., 2008). To illustrate, sport performers
individual” (Fletcher, Hanton, & Mellalieu, 2006, have identified the demands of international compe-
p. 359). tition, performing under pressure and the pressure to
Over the past couple of decades or so, sport beat others. Furthermore, underperforming in com-
psychology researchers have unearthed a wide petition has been a frequent demand encountered by
range of stressors encountered by sport performers a variety of sport performers (see, e.g. Dugdale,
(see, e.g. Gould, Jackson, & Finch, 1993; McKay Eklund, & Gordon, 2002). Specifically, athletes
et al., 2008; Mellalieu, Neil, Hanton, & Fletcher, have reported pressures related to making mistakes
2009; Noblet & Gifford, 2002; Scanlan et al., 1991; or errors during performance, periods of limited
Thelwell et al., 2007; Weston, Thelwell, Bond, & progress, not achieving performance goals, poor per-
Hutchings, 2009; Woodman & Hardy, 2001). sonal and team performances, not performing as
Collectively, the stressors identified in these studies expected, a loss of form and performance slumps.
have been associated with competitive performance, One of the most common stressors experienced by
the sport organisation within which athletes operate, athletes is performance expectations (see, e.g. Gould
and personal “nonsporting” life events (Fletcher et al., 1993). Internal expectations, that is, pressures
et al., 2006). Based on this classification, the fol- that a performer places on his or her self as a result of
lowing subsections will review and synthesise the external demands, include wanting to start well dur-
stressors experienced by athletes in each of these ing a competition, aspiring to perform to one’s abil-
respective categories. ity and staying at the top of the rankings. External
expectations, that is, pressures placed on a performer personality and attitudes, roles, cultural norms, and
by an external source, include being the favourite for goals. Logistical and environmental issues consisted
a competition, starting well for the benefit of the of facilities and equipment, selection, competition
team, other people expecting you to do well, com- format, structure of training, weather conditions,
peting for a better ranking place and competing on travel, accommodation, rules and regulations, dis-
live television. Self-presentation issues have been tractions, physical safety, and technology. Finally,
repeatedly identified by numerous athletes (see, e.g. performance and personal issues consisted of inju-
James & Collins, 1997). Frequently cited demands ries, finances, diet and hydration, and career
in this subcategory include the evaluation of perfor- transitions.
mance from coaches and teammates, not wanting to Beyond the identification of stressors encountered
let coaches and teammates down, wanting to look by athletes, researchers in this area have explored the
the part physically, the demonstration of ability and content and quantity of stressors in elite and non-
seeking recognition. The final type of competitive elite sport performers. For example, Hanton et al.
stressor encountered by sport performers relates to (2005) found that elite athletes experienced and
the rivalry experienced as part of competition (see, recalled more demands associated primarily and
e.g. Thelwell et al., 2007). Rivalry-related demands directly with the sport organisation than with com-
include competing against better athletes, opponents petitive performance. Furthermore, this population
behaving deviously and competing against up-and- appeared more likely to experience similar competi-
coming opponents. tive stressors but varied organisational stressors, per-
haps because the former are typically common to
most athletes’ experiences of performance, whereas
Organisational stressors
the latter are generally disparate and subject to
Organisational stressors are defined as “the environ- numerous sociocultural, political, economic, occu-
mental demands associated primarily and directly pational and technological influences. More
with the organization within which an individual is recently, Fletcher et al. (2012) compared the fre-
operating” (Fletcher et al., 2006, p. 359). In a num- quency and content of organisational stressors
ber of early studies that identified different types of between elite and non-elite sport performers. They
environmental demands, sport psychology research- found that the higher skilled participants encoun-
ers unearthed a variety of organisational-related tered more stressors than the lower skilled partici-
stressors (see, e.g. Gould et al., 1993; Scanlan pants. The findings also suggested that across skill
et al., 1991). Subsequently, scholars began to sys- levels certain types of organisational stressors are
tematically investigate the organisational stressors experienced and recalled more frequently than
encountered by athletic performers (see, e.g. others. More specifically, the elite performers men-
Fletcher & Hanton, 2003; Fletcher, Hanton, tioned travel and accommodation arrangements,
Mellalieu, & Neil, 2012; Hanton et al., 2005; income and funding, media attention, and a lack of
Kristiansen & Roberts, 2010; Woodman & Hardy, participation in the decision-making process more
2001). often than their non-elite counterparts. To examine
To advance the body of knowledge in this area, the potential negative effects of organisational stress
Arnold and Fletcher (2012) recently synthesised the on sport performers, Tabei, Fletcher, and Goodger
research that has identified the organisational stres- (2012) investigated the relationship between organi-
sors encountered by athletes and developed a taxo- sational stressors and burnout in collegiate soccer
nomic classification of these environmental players. Results revealed multiple organisational
demands. Using a meta-interpretation method, 34 stressors linked to athlete burnout comprising train-
studies (with a combined sample of 1809 partici- ing and competition load, training and competition
pants) were analysed and yielded 640 distinct orga- environment, travel arrangements, nutritional issues,
nisational stressors. The demands were abstracted risk of injury, leadership style, lack of social support,
into 31 subcategories, which formed four categories: career and performance development, inadequate
leadership and personal issues, cultural and team communication channels, and role overload.
issues, logistical and environmental issues, and per-
formance and personal issues. Leadership and per-
Personal stressors
sonal issues consisted of the coach’s behaviours and
interactions, the coach’s personality and attitudes, Personal stressors are defined as the environmental
external expectations, support staff, sports officials, demands associated primarily and directly with per-
spectators, media, performance feedback, and the sonal “nonsporting” life events. Within this category,
governing body. Cultural and team issues consisted stressors encountered by sport performers include
of teammates’ behaviours and interactions, commu- the work–life interface, family issues and the death
nication, team atmosphere and support, teammates’ of a significant other. First, the work–life interface
has been repeatedly identified as a stressor in the inoculation (Meichenbaum, 1985), it has been sug-
sport psychology literature (see, e.g. Gould et al., gested that exposure to stressors in moderation can
1993). Youth athletes at the initial stages of their mobilise previously untapped resources, help engage
career have identified difficulties associated with aca- social support networks and create a sense of mas-
demic commitments, and balancing educational tery for future stressors. Thus, where possible, aspir-
goals with personal relationships (see, e.g. McKay ing high performers should be encouraged to actively
et al., 2008). Older athletes in the latter stages of seek out challenging situations since this will make
their career have identified demands related to work subsequent demands seem more manageable (cf.
commitments, specifically the difficulties of balan- Sarkar & Fletcher, 2014), leading to improvements
cing personal relationships with a job (see, e.g. in performance (see, e.g. Arnetz, Nevedal, Lumley,
Noblet & Gifford, 2002). Within this subcategory, Backman, & Lublin, 2009).
relocation-related pressures have also been recog-
nised, including problems with finding suitable
Protective factors
accommodation, missing family and friends, and
adjusting to independent living (see, e.g. Giacobbi Within the field of psychology, early research exam-
et al., 2004). Second, family issues have been a ining resilience represented a “paradigm shift from
frequent demand encountered by a wide variety of looking at risk factors that led to psychosocial pro-
athletes. Specifically, sport performers have faced blems to the identification of strengths of an indivi-
financial pressures of having to provide for a family dual” (Richardson, 2002, p. 309). Increasingly,
(see, e.g. Thelwell et al., 2007), relationship pro- researchers focussed on identifying the characteris-
blems (see, e.g. Gould et al., 1993), family respon- tics of individuals, particularly young people, who
sibilities (see, e.g. Weston et al., 2009) and a volatile thrived whilst living in difficult circumstances, such
family life at home (see, e.g. Scanlan et al., 1991). as poverty and parental mental illness (Garmezy,
Third, a number of sport performers have identified 1991; Rutter, 1990; Werner & Smith, 1992).
the death of a significant other. Some athletes have Examples of such qualities were: an easy tempera-
experienced the death of a family member (see, e.g. ment, good self-esteem, planning skills and a sup-
McKay et al., 2008) whereas others have experi- portive environment inside and outside the family.
enced the loss of team members (see, e.g. Scanlan These qualities have been referred to as protective
et al., 1991). factors, which Rutter (1985) defined as “influences
In summary, this section has reviewed the stres- that modify, ameliorate, or alter a person’s response
sors encountered by sport performers under the fol- to some environmental hazard that predisposes to a
lowing categories and subcategories: competitive maladaptive outcome” (p. 600). Since the publica-
performance (preparation, injuries, pressure, under- tion of this work, numerous protective factors have
performing, expectations, self-presentation and riv- been identified in the resilience research literature,
alry); the sport organisation within which the athletes including hope (Horton & Wallander, 2001), extra-
operate (leadership and personal issues, cultural and version (Campbell-Sills et al., 2006), optimistic
team issues, logistical and environmental issues, and explanatory style (Kleiman, Liu, & Riskind, 2013),
performance and personal issues); and personal self-efficacy (Gu & Day, 2007), spirituality (Peres,
“nonsporting” life events (work–life interface, family Moreira-Almeida, Nasello, & Koenig, 2007) and
issues and the death of a significant other). By social support (Brown, 2008). In the context of the
synthesising the wealth of knowledge in this pivotal present discussion, it is worth noting that a constel-
resilience-related area, across a large number and lation of these factors, that protect individuals’ from
wide range of studies, it is anticipated that research- the stressors they encounter, are assessed in the
ers will gain a more complete understanding of the majority of resilience instruments to date (Windle,
stressors encountered in competitive sport. In the Bennett, & Noyes, 2011).
context of psychological resilience, and from an In our review of psychometric issues in resilience
applied perspective, it is crucial that individuals’ research, we explored and discussed various issues
immediate environment is carefully managed to opti- pertaining to the measurement of protective factors
mise the stressors they encounter in their lives. in sport performers (Sarkar & Fletcher, 2013).
Traditionally, there has been a tendency to assume Perhaps most importantly, we argued that the pro-
that negative situations and circumstances impede tective factors assessed in current measures of resi-
positive adaptation. However, Seery, Holman, and lience are specific to the context in which they arise
Silver (2010) recently found that people with a his- and cannot be easily generalised to other popula-
tory of some lifetime adversity reported better men- tions. Indeed, when considering the implications
tal health and well-being outcomes than people with for sport psychology, we observed that all of the
no history of adversity (see also Neff & Broady, resilience inventories to date have been developed
2011; Seery, 2011). Drawing from theories of stress for use in non-sport contexts, such as psychiatric
patients (see, e.g. Connor & Davidson, 2003; optimism has been linked with lower levels of pre-
Madsen & Abell, 2010; Osman et al., 2004). This competition anxiety (Wilson, Raglin, & Pritchard,
is particularly problematic for sport psychology 2002), better emotional adjustment during sport
researchers since qualities that are meaningful in competition (Gaudreau & Blondin, 2004), and
non-sport participants are unlikely to be entirely task-oriented coping following a performance
relevant to athletic performers (Gucciardi et al., slump (Grove & Heard, 1997). In line with the
2011). In light of these arguments, we proposed second conception, athletes with an optimistic expla-
that as a prerequisite to developing a sport-specific natory style (i.e. those who usually explain bad
measure of resilience, scholars need to comprehen- events with unstable, contextual and external causes)
sively review protective factors in the specific context have been found to bounce back after failure (Coffee
of athletic performance (Sarkar & Fletcher, 2013). & Rees, 2011; Coffee, Rees, & Haslam, 2009;
Based on our grounded theory of psychological resi- Martin-Krumm, Sarrazin, Peterson, & Famose,
lience in Olympics champions (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2003). To illustrate, using an experimental design,
2012), this section will review the five main families Martin-Krumm et al. (2003) examined the relation-
of psychological factors (viz. positive personality, ship between explanatory style and resilience in a
motivation, confidence, focus, perceived social sup- group of recreational basketball players. Following
port) that the best athletes utilise and optimise to failure feedback in a dribbling task, optimistic parti-
withstand the stressors they encounter. cipants were found to be more confident, less
anxious and perform better, than pessimistic
participants.
Positive personality
Competiveness has been described as the desire to
Personality traits have been defined as “the relatively win in interpersonal situations (Gill & Deeter,
enduring patterns of thoughts, feelings, and beha- 1988). Using the Sport Orientation Questionnaire
viors that reflect the tendency to respond in certain (Gill & Deeter, 1988), research has shown that a
ways under certain circumstances” (Roberts, 2009, competitive orientation is positively related to out-
p. 140). We found that Olympic gold medallists come self-efficacy (Martin & Gill, 1991) and facil-
possessed numerous positive personality characteris- itative interpretations of anxiety (Jones & Swain,
tics, which influenced the resilience-related mechan- 1992). With regard to this latter study, and particu-
isms of challenge appraisal and meta-cognition larly important in the context of psychological resi-
(Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). Indeed, certain disposi- lience, Jones and Swain (1992) found that
tional qualities have been frequently associated with competitive athletes reported their anxiety as more
sporting excellence by influencing athletes’ cognitive facilitative and less debilitative for performance than
processing in a positive fashion (Gould & Maynard, less competitive athletes. In addition, based on inter-
2009). The main personality traits that have been views with elite sport performers, competitiveness
found to have a desirable impact on athletes’ reac- has recently been found to play an important role
tions and responses are adaptive perfectionism, opti- in adapting to setbacks (e.g. injuries, performance
mism, competiveness, hope and proactivity. slumps) that are encountered along the pathway to
Adaptive perfectionism is a healthy type of perfec- sporting excellence (MacNamara et al., 2010a,
tionism that is characterised by having high personal 2010b).
standards and striving for excellence but, at the same Hope is defined as “a cognitive set that is based on
time, having little concern for mistakes and doubts a reciprocally derived sense of successful (a) agency
about actions (see, for a review, Stoeber & Otto, (goal-directed determination) and (b) pathways
2006). Studies have found that features of adaptive (planning of ways to meet goals)” (Snyder et al.,
perfectionism are associated with positive attitudes, 1991, pp. 570–571). High-hope individuals are able
processes and outcomes, such as mastery and per- to envision alternative routes in the face of goal
formance approach goals (see Stoeber, Stoll, blockage, develop multiple strategies for overcoming
Pescheck, & Otto, 2008), competitive self-confi- obstacles, and display high levels of dedication and
dence (see Stoeber, Otto, Pescheck, Becker, & energy in pursuing desirable goals (see Snyder,
Stoll, 2007), self-serving attributions of success and Lehman, Kluck, & Monsson, 2006). Surprisingly,
failure (see Stoeber & Becker, 2008), lower levels of empirical investigations of hope in the sport domain
anxiety (see Stoeber et al., 2007) and lower levels of are scarce. Using the Dispositional and State Hope
burnout (see Hill, Hall, Appleton, & Kozub, 2008). Scales (Snyder et al., 1991, 1996), Curry, Snyder,
Optimism has been defined in two main ways: as a Cook, Ruby, and Rehm (1997) found that sport
trait-like expectancy for successful outcomes performers with higher hope performed better aca-
(Scheier & Carver, 1985) and as an approach to demically and athletically after controlling for other
explaining positive and negative events (Peterson, possible influences such as self-esteem, mood and
2000). Based on the first conception, dispositional confidence. More recently, Gustafsson, Hassmén,
and Podlog (2010) found that feelings of high hope challenging sport environments. This process of
were associated with lower perceptions of burnout internalisation and integration of regulations and
among sport performers. By enabling athletes to values, whereby one’s goals are brought into line
develop their strengths, to mobilise effort and to with one’s self identity, is central to self-determina-
pursue goal-attainment in the face of adversity, tion theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000), and appears to be
hope appears to be associated with better ability to an important psychological asset that protects the
withstand stress in competitive sport. best athletes from the potential negative effect of
Proactivity has been defined as a “dispositional stressors.
construct that identities differences among people Previous research that has examined the motiva-
in the extent to which they take action to influence tion of elite athletes has suggested that their beha-
their environments” (Bateman & Crant, 1993, p. viour is not solely intrinsically motivated, that
103). People who are proactive identify opportu- multiple motives are likely to exist, and that the
nities and act on them, show initiative, and persevere social conditions defining one’s participation are
until they bring about meaningful change. likely to have a significant effect on motivational
Researchers have found a proactive personality to processes. Chantal, Guay, Dobreva-Martinova, and
be an important characteristic in predisposing one Vallerand (1996) examined the motivational profiles
to higher levels of achievement in various perfor- of 98 elite Bulgarian athletes from a variety of sports
mance domains, including politics (Deluga, 1998), using the Bulgarian version of the Sport Motivation
business (Seibert, Kraimer, & Crant, 2001) and Scale (Pelletier et al., 1995). They found that, in
sport (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). In one of the few comparison with less successful athletes, the best
sport studies in this area, Baker, Côté, and Deakin performing athletes exhibited higher levels of non-
(2005) recognised this personal disposition in ath- self-determined types of motivation. Specifically,
letes and found that expert triathletes were more title holders and medal winners more frequently
proactive in their preparation with a greater empha- reported external rewards, feelings of obligation
sis on thoughts related to their performance, whereas and pressure as their primary sources of motivation.
non-experts reported more passive thoughts unre- Interestingly, the authors suggested that the highly
lated to performance. In the context of psychological competitive sport structure that prevailed in Bulgaria
resilience, our research has found that a proactive at the time may have influenced the athletes’ motiva-
disposition is an important attribute for withstanding tion in that the sport structure strongly emphasised
the pressure associated with sport at the highest winning at all costs. To provide a greater insight into
levels (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). Collectively, the the motivation of elite sport performers in less con-
research in these five areas suggests that positive trolling social conditions, Mallett and Hanrahan
personality traits are relevant to sport performers’ (2004) explored the motivational processes of elite
resilience by influencing their reactions and track and field athletes in Australia using semi-struc-
responses in a positive fashion. tured interviews. They found that these individuals
were characterised by multiple motivations that were
both self-determining and non-self-determining in
Motivation
nature. Although the interview data revealed excite-
The topic of motivation addresses the “what” and ment, enjoyment and a sense of relatedness with
“why” of human behaviour (cf. Deci & Ryan, 2000), fellow athletes as important motives, less self-deter-
and concerns “energy, direction, persistence and mined reasons also emerged. Indeed, some of the
equifinality – all aspects of activation and intention” athletes identified beating opponents, money and
(Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 69). Optimal levels of moti- social recognition as motives for competing at the
vation are consistently reported as a required psy- highest level. The results of Mallett and Hanrahan’s
chological attribute for withstanding stress and study, however, suggest that elite sport performers
pressure in competitive sport (see, for a review, appear to be able to internalise and integrate more
Standage, 2012; Treasure, Lemyre, Kuczka, & self-determined forms of extrinsic motivation. That
Standage, 2007). We found that Olympic champions is, they are gradually able to transform external reg-
had multiple motives for competing at the highest ulations into self-regulation. More specifically, and
level including “being the best that you can be”, particularly important in the context of psychological
social recognition, passion for the sport, achieving resilience, they find ways to evaluate and bring into
incremental approach goals, demonstrating compe- congruence the environmental demands of the sport
tence and proving their worth to others (Fletcher & with their personally held values and beliefs.
Sarkar, 2012). Particularly important in the context A fundamental tenet of self-determination theory
of psychological resilience, Olympic gold medallists is that individuals engaged in an activity by choice
consciously valued and judged external demands as will experience better consequences than those
important and therefore actively chose to perform in whose participation is less autonomous (see Ryan &
Deci, 2000). Indeed, in sport settings, autonomous Championship and/or World Cup) using qualitative
motivation has been shown to predict adaptive out- methods. Nine sources of confidence were identi-
comes, such as better well-being and vitality (Gagne, fied: preparation, performance accomplishments,
Ryan, & Bargmann, 2003); higher levels of flow coaching, innate factors, social support, experience,
(Kowal & Fortier, 1999); greater reported effort, competitive advantage, self-awareness and trust.
interest, and persistence (Pelletier, Fortier, Analysis also revealed six types of sport confidence:
Vallerand, & Brière, 2001); and positive sportsman- skill execution, achievement, physical factors, psy-
ship orientations (Ntoumanis & Standage, 2009). In chological factors, superiority to opposition and tac-
the case of elite sport, however, a great deal of train- tical awareness. Following on from this investigation,
ing can be uninteresting and, although essential to Hays, Thomas, Maynard, and Bawden (2009) exam-
improving performance, extremely repetitive and ined the role of confidence in relation to the cogni-
monotonous. Nonetheless, research has demon- tive, affective and behavioural responses it elicits
strated that even the most tedious aspects of training within the organisational subculture of world-class
can be transcended through the use of interest- sport. Qualitative analysis indicated that high sport
enhancing strategies that assist an individual’s inter- confidence facilitated performance through its posi-
nalisation of self-determined motivation regulations tive effect on athletes’ thoughts, feelings and beha-
(Green-Demers, Pelletier, Stewart, & Gushue, viours. Specifically, high sport confidence was found
1998). The preceding research findings suggest that to be synonymous with effective cognitions (e.g.
optimal motivation is an important asset for psycho- focus on the task at hand), positive affect (e.g. enjoy-
logical resilience in sport performers. Specifically, ment), and effective behaviours (e.g. confident body
possessing autonomous values and beliefs appear to language).
have a positive influence on athletes’ thought In a review of this area, Vealey and Chase (2008)
processes. noted that solely possessing a general sport confi-
dence may not be enough to perform successfully;
rather, they argued that athletes need to possess
Confidence
robust confidence to overcome possible setbacks.
Confidence has been identified as a positive influ- Indeed, it has been suggested that the robust nature
ence for withstanding stress and pressure in compe- of confidence (i.e. the ability to maintain belief in the
titive sport (Galli & Vealey, 2008; Gucciardi et al., face of disconfirming experiences) may contribute to
2011). In an athletic context, it is described as the success over and above the contribution of the level
degree of certainty one possesses about his\her ability of general sport confidence (where high levels are
to be successful in sport (Vealey, 1986). Confidence perceived as sufficient) (cf. Bull, Shambrook,
was deemed to be a particularly important factor James, & Brooks, 2005). In the first study to specifi-
underpinning the resilience–stress–performance cally explore this area, Thomas, Lane, and Kingston
relationship in Olympic champions (Fletcher & (2011) defined and contextualised the characteristics
Sarkar, 2012). Various sources of confidence were of robust sport confidence based on semi-structured
salient to the world’s best athletes, including multi- interviews with elite sport performers. Robust sport
faceted preparation, experience, self-awareness, confidence was defined as “a set of enduring, yet
visualisation, coaching and teammates. malleable positive beliefs that protect against the
To explore this desirable construct in the specific ongoing psychological and environmental challenges
context of athletic performance, Vealey, Hayashi, associated with competitive sport” (p. 194).
Garner-Holman, and Giacobbi (1998) examined Qualitative data analysis procedures also resulted in
the sources of sport confidence in high school and the identification of six characteristics of robust sport
collegiate athletes. Using factor analysis techniques confidence: multidimensional, malleable, durable,
to develop a measure of sport confidence, they iden- strength of belief, developed and protective. This
tified nine separate sources of sport confidence that latter feature is particularly important in the context
grouped into three domains: achievement (mastery of psychological resilience since it indicates that
and demonstration of ability); self-regulation (physi- robust sport confidence has the potential to act as a
cal/mental preparation and physical self-presenta- buffer against stressors. Building on this construct
tion); and social climate (sources of social support, using quantitative methods, Beattie, Hardy, Savage,
coaches leadership, vicarious experience, environ- Woodman, and Callow (2011) developed and vali-
mental comfort and situational favourableness). dated a Trait Robustness of Self-Confidence
Building on this study in an elite sample of sport Inventory for use in competitive sport settings. The
performers, Hays, Maynard, Thomas, and Bawden single-factor eight-item inventory, including ques-
(2007) explored the sources and types of confidence tions such as “my self-confidence goes up and
salient to athletes who had medalled in at least one down a lot” and “if I perform poorly, my confidence
major championship (i.e. Olympic Games, World is not poorly affected”, was consistent across both
male and female athletes. Regarding the predictive The second source of evidence that demonstrates
validity of the inventory, high robust confidence the importance of focus and concentration has
scores were associated with more stable self-confi- emerged from experimental research. For example,
dence levels prior to competition, and athletes with using quantitative methods, Mallett and Hanrahan
high levels of robust confidence managed to main- (1997) found that sprinters who had been trained to
tain higher state self-confidence following discon- use race plans, that deliberately involved focussing
firming experiences than those with low robust on the task at hand, ran faster than those in baseline
confidence levels. In sum, both general and robust (control) conditions. Indeed, the authors contended
confidence are important psychological factors for that the improvements observed were due to the
withstanding stress and pressure in competitive employment of a specific cognitive strategy that
sport. More specifically in the context of psychologi- focussed attention on task-relevant information asso-
cal resilience, general sport confidence appears to ciated with sprint performance. Similarly, research
have a desirable impact on athletes’ reactions and has shown that the use of associative concentration
responses, and robust sport confidence seems to be techniques, in which athletes are trained to concen-
particularly influential in protecting athletes from the trate on bodily signals such as heart beat and kines-
potential negative effect of stressors. thetic sensations, are effective cognitive strategies
that enable faster performances in running (Masters
& Ogles, 1997; Morgan, 2000) and swimming
Focus
(Couture, Jerome, & Tihanyi, 1999). The preceding
Focus, or concentration, refers to a person’s ability lines of evidence, therefore, converge on the conclu-
to exert deliberate mental effort on what is most sion that the ability to focus and concentrate appro-
important in any given situation (Moran, 1996). priately is vital for psychological resilience in sport
We found that the ability to focus was an important performers since it has a positive influence on ath-
aspect of resilience for the world’s best athletes letes’ cognitive processing under pressure.
(Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). Specifically, Olympic
champions were able to focus on relevant cues in
Perceived social support
the environment, maintain focus over long time per-
iods, remain aware of the situation around them and In an athletic context, perceived social support refers
alter the scope of their attention as demanded by the to “one’s potential access to social support and is a
situation. support recipient’s subjective judgment that friends,
Two main lines of inquiry illustrate the impor- team-mates, and coaches would provide assistance if
tance of focus and concentration. The first source needed” (Freeman, Coffee, & Rees, 2011, p. 54).
of evidence comes from descriptive research explor- We found that Olympic champions were protected
ing the psychological characteristics associated with from the pressures of elite sport by perceiving that
athletes’ ability to withstand – and thrive on – pres- high-quality social support was available to them,
sure when preparing and performing at major sport- including support from family, coaches, team-mates
ing events (see, e.g. Gould & Maynard, 2009). and support staff (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). Results
Indeed, numerous aspects of focus and concentra- indicated that the perception of available support
tion appear to be important for dealing with pressure from a variety of social agents underpinned the resi-
and adversity in various competitive sport contexts lience–stress–performance relationship in the world’s
(see, e.g. Bull et al., 2005; Gucciardi et al., 2008; best athletes. This finding shows the stress-buffering
Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2002, 2007). effects of perceived social support and suggests that
Specifically, elite athletes are able to withstand the it is an important aspect of resilience in elite sport.
pressure associated with sport at the highest level by: In order to gain a better understanding of the
remaining fully focussed on the task at hand in the social support experiences of sport performers,
face of distractions, switching a sport focus on and Rees and Hardy (2000) conducted interviews with
off as required, refusing to be swayed by short-term high-level athletes regarding their experiences of
goals (e.g. finances) that will jeopardise the achieve- social support. The results highlighted the multi-
ment of long-term goals, and remaining focussed on dimensional nature of social support, revealing four
processes and not solely outcomes. More recently, primary dimensions: emotional, esteem, informa-
researchers have found that having an appropriate tional and tangible. Emotional support refers to
attentional focus, and focussing on task-relevant others being there for comfort and security, leading
cues are fundamental mental qualities that help to a person feeling loved and cared for. Esteem sup-
young elite athletes adapt to setbacks and effectively port refers to others bolstering a person’s sense of
negotiate key transitions encountered along the path- competence or self-esteem. Informational support
way to excellence (Holland, Woodcock, Cumming, refers to others providing advice or guidance, and
& Duda, 2010; MacNamara & Collins, 2010). tangible support refers to others providing concrete
instrumental assistance. In line with these defini- support) that protect athletes from the potential
tions, Freeman et al. (2011) recently developed and negative effect of stressors. By exploiting the empiri-
validated the Perceived Available Support in Sport cal knowledge base in these areas, it is anticipated
Questionnaire (PASS-Q) using confirmatory factor that researchers will gain a deeper profundity of the
analysis. Specifically, by deriving items from state- numerous protective factors that sport performers
ments made by the high-level athletes in Rees and utilise and optimise to withstand the stressors they
Hardy’s study, they found evidence for a four- encounter. From an applied perspective, individuals
dimension factor structure in two independent sam- operating in competitive sport should identify and
ples of athletes. Regarding the structural and predic- monitor the psychological characteristics outlined in
tive validity of the questionnaire, the findings this review that athletes need to develop to exhibit
demonstrated that higher levels of perceived emo- resilience. Practitioners, for example, should help
tional, esteem, informational and tangible support aspiring sport performers’ to be proactive in their
were associated with higher levels of self-confidence sporting development, be sensitive to different
and lower levels of burnout. types of motivation, build confidence from multiple
The four primary dimensions of support have sources rather than focussing on one particular
been used to frame research on the stress-buffering source, focus on what they can control and on pro-
effects of social support (see, e.g. Freeman & Rees, cesses, and take specific steps to obtain the support
2009, 2010). The stress-buffering hypothesis sug- that they need.
gests that high levels of perceived support protect
an individual from the potential negative effect of
Future research directions
stressors. Specifically, perceived support is hypothe-
sised to intervene when a stressor is encountered, There are a number of directions that future
leading it to be appraised as less stressful (Cohen & researchers can explore to advance knowledge of
Wills, 1985). In a sample of university athletes, psychological resilience in sport performers.
Freeman and Rees (2010) examined the stress-buf- Regarding the stressors that athletes encounter,
fering effects of social support on self-confidence although researchers have extensive information
using moderated hierarchical regression analyses. about the different types of environmental demands,
The findings showed that high perceived emotional, there is a limited understanding about the interface
esteem and informational support from team-mates between and interactive impact of stressors. It would
buffered the potential detrimental effect of perfor- be beneficial, for example, to investigate the relation-
mance-related stressors on self-confidence. ship between competitive, organisational and perso-
Specifically, at low and moderate levels of support, nal stressors and examine their combined effect on
stressors negatively affected self-confidence. athletes’ reactions and responses (cf. Brough &
However, at high levels of support, stressors did O’Driscoll, 2005). In the context of psychological
not significantly predict self-confidence. To better resilience, it is important to consider the suitability
understand the potential mechanisms through of appropriately exposing athletes to stressors and
which perceived support influences performance, encouraging them to actively engage with challen-
Freeman and Rees (2009) examined the relationship ging situations that present opportunities to raise
between perceptions of support availability and their performance level. Indeed, in our study of
objective performance in a competitive sport envir- Olympic champions, “most of the participants
onment using observed variable path analysis. argued that if they had not experienced certain
Findings revealed that the beneficial effects of per- types of stressors at specific times, including highly
ceived support were primarily attributable to esteem demanding adversities such as parental divorce, ser-
support. Perhaps more importantly, in the context of ious illness, and career-threatening injuries, they
psychological resilience, individuals with high levels would not have won their gold medals” (Fletcher &
of available esteem support appraised competitive Sarkar, 2012, p. 672). As suggested in this observa-
situations as more of a challenge and less of a threat. tion, it will also be interesting to explore the extent
In turn, challenge appraisals were associated with to which significant adversities are instrumental in
better performance. Collectively, the research in the resilience–high achievement relationship (cf.
this area suggests that different types of perceived Sarkar & Fletcher, 2014). However, before addres-
support are relevant to sport performers and that sing these questions, a more fundamental avenue for
the notion of stress buffering may help to better research is better understanding when a stressor (i.e.
elucidate the shielding effect of perceived available an environmental demand) becomes an adversity
support. (i.e. a typically negative event) for sport performers.
In summary, this section has reviewed the five In the extant sport psychology literature, stressors
main psychological factors (viz. positive personality, are often assumed to be adversities for athletes,
motivation, confidence, focus, perceived social including performance slumps, coach conflicts and
career transitions (see, e.g. Galli & Vealey, 2008; In terms of the design of the model, we acknowl-
Tamminen, Holt, & Neely, 2013). However, based edged that a potential limitation concerns the validity
on the definition of an adversity, a stressor only of the linear stage framework evident within its struc-
represents an adversity if the problems displayed by ture (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). Recent evidence
an individual are typical of those exhibited in nor- from cognitive neuroscience indicates that sequen-
mative populations (Luthar et al., 2000). Exposure tial, unitary approaches are rather simplistic and that
to parental divorce, for example, constitutes an parallel, multiple processes offer a more ecologically
adversity since children experiencing it are two or valid conceptualisation of psychological resilience
three times more likely to exhibit psychological and (see, e.g. Feder, Nestler, & Charney, 2009).
behavioural problems than those from non-divorced Another important consideration is the sociocultural
families (Hetherington & Elmore, 2003). This type context in which an individual operates. Our model
of epidemiological evidence is required in relation to was predominantly focussed on psychological pro-
the stressors encountered by sport performers to cesses underpinning the resilience–performance rela-
ascertain whether they do indeed represent actual tionship and future resilience researchers need to
adversities. explore the sociocultural context within which this
Turning to the protective factors that help athletes occurs (cf. Ungar, 2008).We acknowledge that our
withstand stressors, although there is a relatively model of sport resilience is relatively new and,
large knowledge base on the main protective factors hence, is currently untested. To determine the utility
(i.e. positive personality, motivation, confidence, of our model, future studies should use it to generate
focus, perceived social support), there is a dearth of research questions and hypotheses about resilience
information about whether a matching effect exists in sport. For example, what psychological factors
between protective factors and stressors; that is lead to positive outcomes either directly or indirectly
whether particular protective factors match best via their influence on challenge appraisal and meta-
with certain stressors. Furthermore, building on cognitions? Since our model was derived from data
our assertion that “individuals operating in elite collected from a specific group of participants, such
sport should … intervene to attain the optimum questions might be best answered through large-
levels of, and balance between, these factors” scale quantitative studies, using statistical techniques
(Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012, p. 676), research is needed such as structural equation modelling, to predict
to determine the best combination of protective fac- resilience across a wider range of athletes and sport
tors for different sport types and skill levels. This settings.
type of research, where the relative importance of This article has provided a platform for develop-
each factor is determined and compared, will be ing a sport-specific measure of psychological resili-
best realised once a sport-specific measure of resilience (cf. Sarkar & Fletcher, 2013). Due to the
ence is developed. In terms of better understanding conceptually distinct nature of stressors and protec-
this area, it is worth noting that researchers have tive factors, researchers will need to assess these
distinguished between protective and promotive fac- concepts and validate their associated scales sepa-
tors (see, e.g. Sameroff, Gutman, & Peck, 2003). rately from the outset. In terms of measuring the
Specifically, they have argued that, while the former stressors that athletes’ encounter, when generating a
implies shielding or insulation from the potential pool of questionnaire items, researchers need to
negative effects of an event, there are psychological- consider the variety of demands associated with
related phenomena that impute an independent salu- competitive performance, the sport organisation
tary value by yielding benefits such as frequent suc- within which the athletes operate, and personal
cess experiences. Sport psychology researchers need “nonsporting” life events. To gain a more compre-
to examine the aforementioned factors at a more hensive picture of stressors, sport psychology
fine-grained level to determine if they moderate researchers should consider the inclusion of both
associations between stressors and adaptive out- significant life events and ongoing daily pressures
comes (i.e. protective) or if they have a direct asso- in an initial pool of items. In terms of measuring
ciation with adaptive outcomes (i.e. promotive) (cf. the factors that protect athletes from negative con-
Laird, Marks, & Marrero, 2011). sequences, researchers will need to assess the pro-
Regarding our grounded theory of psychological tective factors relating to a positive personality,
resilience, it is open to extension and can be tested motivation, confidence, focus and perceived social
and modified to accommodate new insights support. More specifically, when generating a pool
(Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). For example, although of items, questions should focus on aspects of ath-
our theory focusses on the relationship between psy- letes’ desirable cognitive tendencies, autonomous
chological resilience and optimal sport performance, values and beliefs, general and robust sport confi-
future research needs to elucidate other important dence, ability to focus appropriately and perceptions
outcomes of the resilience process (e.g. well-being). of available social support.
Concluding remarks Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma and human resilience: Have
we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely
Psychological resilience is important in sport since aversive events? American Psychologist, 59, 20–28.
athletes must utilise and optimise a constellation of Bonanno, G. A., Galea, S., Bucciarelli, A., & Vlahov, D. (2007).
protective factors to withstand the distinct stressors What predicts psychological resilience after disaster? The role
of demographics, resources and life stress. Journal of Consulting
that they encounter (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012). To and Clinical Psychology, 75, 671–682.
help researchers gain a better appreciation of the Brough, P., & O’Driscoll, M. (2005). Work-family conflict and
existing knowledge base in key resilience-related stress. In A. Antoniou & C. Cooper (Eds.), Research companion
areas, in this article we reviewed stressors and pro- to organizational health psychology (pp. 346–365). Cheltenham:
tective factors in the specific context of athletic Edward Elgar.
Brown, D. L. (2008). African American resiliency: Examining
performance. The stressors encountered by sport racial socialization and social support as protective factors.
performers can be classified under the following Journal of Black Psychology, 34, 32–48.
three categories and 14 subcategories: competitive Bull, S. J., Shambrook, C. J., James, W., & Brooks, J. E. (2005).
performance (preparation, injuries, pressure, under- Towards an understanding of mental toughness in elite English
performing, expectations, self-presentation and riv- cricketers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 209–227.
Campbell-Sills, L., Cohan, S. L., & Stein, M. B. (2006).
alry); the sport organisation within which the Relationship of resilience to personality, coping, and psychiatric
athletes operate (leadership and personal issues, symptoms in young adults. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44,
cultural and team issues, logistical and environmen- 585–599.
tal issues, and performance and personal issues); Chantal, Y., Guay, F., Dobreva-Martinova, T., & Vallerand, R. J.
and personal “nonsporting” life events (work-life (1996). Motivation and elite performance: An exploratory
investigation with Bulgarian athletes. International Journal of
interface, family issues and the death of a significant Sport Psychology, 27, 173–182.
other). In this article we also synthesised the extant Coffee, P., & Rees, T. (2011). When the chips are down: Effects
literature pertaining to the five main psychological of attributional feedback on self-efficacy and task-performance
factors (viz. positive personality, motivation, confi- following initial and repeated failure. Journal of Sports Sciences,
dence, focus, perceived social support) that protect 29, 235–245.
Coffee, P., Rees, T., & Haslam, S. A. (2009). Bouncing back from
athletes from the potential negative effect of stres- failure: The interactive impact of perceived controllability and
sors. It is hoped that this review will provide a stability on self-efficacy beliefs and future task performance.
rigorous and robust foundation for the development Journal of Sports Sciences, 27, 1117–1124.
of a sport-specific measure of resilience, and subse- Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the
quently help researchers examine the interplay buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357.
Collins, J. A., & Fauser, B. C. J. M. (2005). Balancing the
between stressors and protective factors, which strengths of systematic and narrative reviews. Human
will, in turn, focus the analytical lens on the pro- Reproduction Update, 11, 103–104.
cesses underlying psychological resilience in Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. T. (2003). Development of a
athletes. new resilience scale: The Connor–Davidson resilience scale
(CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety, 18, 76–82.
Couture, R. T., Jerome, W., & Tihanyi, J. (1999). Can associative
and dissociative strategies affect the swimming performance of
recreational swimmers? The Sport Psychologist, 13, 334–343.
References
Curry, L. A., Snyder, C. R., Cook, D. L., Ruby, B. C., & Rehm,
Arnetz, B. B., Nevedal, D. C., Lumley, M. A., Backman, L., & M. (1997). Role of hope in academic and sport achievement.
Lublin, A. (2009). Trauma resilience training for police: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1257–1267.
Psychophysiological and performance effects. Journal of Police Davydov, D. M., Stewart, R., Ritchie, K., & Chaudieu, I. (2010).
and Criminal Psychology, 24, 1–9. Resilience and mental health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30,
Arnold, R. S., & Fletcher, D. (2012). A research synthesis and 479–495.
taxonomic classification of the organizational stressors encoun- Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal
tered by sport performers. Journal of Sport and Exercise pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior.
Psychology, 34, 397–429. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Baker, J., Côté, J., & Deakin, J. (2005). Cognitive characteristics Deluga, R. J. (1998). American presidential proactivity, charis-
of expert, middle of the pack, and back of the pack ultra- matic leadership, and rated performance. The Leadership
endurance triathletes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6, 551– Quarterly, 9, 265–291.
558. deRoon-Cassini, T. A., Mancini, A. D., Rusch, M. D., &
Bateman, T. S., & Crant, J. M. (1993). The proactive component Bonanno, G. A. (2010). Psychopathology and resilience follow-
of organizational behavior: A measure and correlates. Journal of ing traumatic injury: A latent growth mixture model analysis.
Organizational Behavior, 14, 103–118. Rehabilitation Psychology, 55, 1–11.
Beattie, S., Hardy, L., Savage, J., Woodman, T., & Callow, N. Deshields, T., Tibbs, T., Fan, M. Y., & Taylor, M. (2006).
(2011). Development and validation of a trait measure of Differences in patterns of depression after treatment for breast
robustness of self-confidence. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, cancer. Psycho-Oncology, 15, 398–406.
12, 184–191. Dijkers, M. P. J. M. (2009). The value of “traditional” reviews in
Bogar, C. B., & Hulse-Killacky, D. (2006). Resiliency determi- the era of systematic reviewing. American Journal of Physical
nants and resiliency processes among female adult survivors of Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88, 423–430.
childhood sexual abuse. Journal of Counseling and Development, Dugdale, J. R., Eklund, R. C., & Gordon, S. (2002). Expected
84, 318–327. and unexpected stressors in major international competition:
Appraisal, coping, and performance. The Sport Psychologist, 16, Gould, D., & Maynard, I. (2009). Psychological preparation for
20–33. the Olympic games. Journal of Sports Sciences, 27, 1393–1408.
Egeland, B., Carlson, E., & Sroufe, L. A. (1993). Resilience as Gould, D., Udry, E., Bridges, D., & Beck, L. (1997). Stress
process. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 517–528. sources encountered when rehabilitating from season-ending
Evans, L., Wadey, R., Hanton, S., & Mitchell, I. (2012). Stressors ski injuries. The Sport Psychologist, 11, 361–378.
experienced by injured athletes. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30, Greeff, A. P., & Human, B. (2004). Resilience in families in which
917–927. a parent has died. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 32,
Feder, A., Nestler, E. J., & Charney, D. J. (2009). Psychobiology 27–42.
and molecular genetics of resilience. Nature Reviews Green-Demers, I., Pelletier, L. G., Stewart, D. G., & Gushue, N. R.
Neuroscience, 10, 446–457. (1998). Coping with the less interesting aspects of training:
Fletcher, D., & Hanton, S. (2003). Sources of organizational Toward a model of interest and motivation enhancement in indi-
stress in elite sports performers. The Sport Psychologist, 17, vidual sports. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20, 251–261.
175–195. Grove, R. J., & Heard, P. N. (1997). Optimism and sport con-
Fletcher, D., Hanton, S., & Mellalieu, S. D. (2006). An organiza- fidence as correlates of slump-related coping among athletes.
tional stress review: Conceptual and theoretical issues in com- The Sport Psychologist, 11, 400–410.
petitive sport. In S. Hanton & S. D. Mellalieu (Eds.), Literature Gu, Q., & Day, C. (2007). Teachers resilience: A necessary con-
reviews in sport psychology (pp. 321–374). Hauppauge, NY: dition for effectiveness. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23,
Nova Science. 1302–1316.
Fletcher, D., Hanton, S., Mellalieu, S. D., & Neil, R. (2012). A Gucciardi, D. F., & Gordon, S. (2009). Development and pre-
conceptual framework of organizational stressors in sport per- liminary validation of the cricket mental toughness inventory
formers. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, (CMTI). Journal of Sports Sciences, 27, 1293–1310.
22, 545–557. Gucciardi, D. F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J. A. (2008). Towards
Fletcher, D., & Sarkar, M. (2012). A grounded theory of psycho- an understanding of mental toughness in Australian football.
logical resilience in Olympic champions. Psychology of Sport and Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 20, 261–281.
Exercise, 13, 669–678. Gucciardi, D. F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J. A. (2009).
Fletcher, D., & Sarkar, M. (2013). Psychological resilience: A Development and preliminary validation of a mental toughness
review and critique of definitions, concepts and theory. inventory for Australian football. Psychology of Sport and
European Psychologist, 18, 12–23. Exercise, 10, 201–209.
Freeman, P., Coffee, P., & Rees, T. (2011). The PASS-Q: The Gucciardi, D. F., Jackson, B., Coulter, T. J., & Mallett, C. J. (2011).
perceived available support in sport questionnaire. Journal of The Connor–Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC):
Sport and Exercise Psychology, 33, 54–74. Dimensionality and age-related measurement invariance with
Freeman, P., & Rees, T. (2009). How does perceived support lead Australian cricketers. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12, 423–433.
to better performance? An examination of potential mechan- Gustafsson, H., Hassmén, P., & Podlog, L. (2010). Exploring the
isms. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21, 429–441. relationship between hope and burnout in competitive sport.
Freeman, P., & Rees, T. (2010). Perceived social support from Journal of Sports Sciences, 28, 1495–1504.
team-mates: Direct and stress-buffering effects on self-confi- Hanton, S., Fletcher, D., & Coughlan, G. (2005). Stress in elite
dence. European Journal of Sport Science, 10, 59–67. sport performers: A comparative study of competitive and orga-
Gagne, M., Ryan, R. M., & Bargmann, K. (2003). Autonomy nizational stressors. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23, 1129–1141.
support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-being Hardy, L., Jones, G., & Gould, D. (1996). Understanding psycho-
of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 15, 372–390. logical preparation for sport: Theory and practice of elite performers.
Galli, N., & Reel, J. J. (2012). “It was hard, but it was good”: A Chichester: Wiley.
qualitative exploration of stress-related growth in division I Hays, K., Maynard, I., Thomas, O., & Bawden, M. (2007).
intercollegiate athletes. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise, Sources and types of confidence identified by world class
and Health, 4, 297–319. sport performers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 19, 434–
Galli, N., & Vealey, R. S. (2008). “Bouncing back” from adver- 456.
sity: Athletes’ experiences of resilience. The Sport Psychologist, Hays, K., Thomas, O., Maynard, I., & Bawden, M. (2009). The
22, 316–335. role of confidence in world-class sport performance. Journal of
Garmezy, N. (1991). Resiliency and vulnerability to adverse devel- Sports Sciences, 27, 1185–1199.
opmental outcomes associated with poverty. American Hetherington, E. M., & Elmore, A. M. (2003). Risk and resilience
Behavioral Scientist, 34, 416–430. in children coping with their parents’ divorce and remarriage.
Gaudreau, P., & Blondin, J.-P. (2004). Differential associa- In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in
tions of dispositional optimism and pessimism with coping, the context of childhood adversities (pp. 182–213). New York,
goal attainment, and emotional adjustment during sport NY: Cambridge University Press.
competition. International Journal of Stress Management, 11, Hill, A. P., Hall, H. K., Appleton, P. R., & Kozub, S. A. (2008).
245–269. Perfectionism and burnout in junior elite soccer players: The
Giacobbi Jr., P. R., Lynn, T. K., Wetherington, J. M., Jenkins, J., mediating influence of unconditional self-acceptance.
Bodendorf, M., & Langley, B. (2004). Stress and coping dur- Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9, 630–644.
ing the transition to university for first-year female athletes. The Holland, M. J. G., Woodcock, C., Cumming, J., & Duda, J. L.
Sport Psychologist, 18, 1–20. (2010). Mental qualities and employed mental techniques of
Gill, D. L., & Deeter, T. E. (1988). Development of the sport young elite team sport athletes. Journal of Clinical Sport
orientation questionnaire. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Psychology, 4, 19–38.
Sport, 59, 191–202. Holt, N. L., & Hogg, J. M. (2002). Perceptions of stress and
Gould, D., Dieffenbach, K., & Moffett, A. (2002). Psychological coping during preparations for the 1999 women’s soccer
characteristics and their development in Olympic champions. world cup finals. The Sport Psychologist, 16, 251–271.
Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 172–204. Horton, T. V., & Wallander, J. L. (2001). Hope and social sup-
Gould, D., Jackson, S. A., & Finch, L. M. (1993). Sources of port as resilience factors against psychological distress of
stress in national champion figure skaters. Journal of Sport and mothers who care for children with chronic physical conditions.
Exercise Psychology, 15, 134–159. Rehabilitation Psychology, 46, 382–399.
Howe, A., Smajdor, A., & Stöckl, A. (2012). Towards an under- Mallett, C. J., & Hanrahan, S. J. (2004). Elite athletes: Why does
standing of resilience and its relevance to medical training. the “fire” burn so brightly? Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5,
Medical Education, 46, 349–356. 183–200.
James, B., & Collins, D. (1997). Self-presentational sources of Martin, J. J., & Gill, D. L. (1991). The relationships among compe-
competitive stress during performance. Journal of Sport and titive orientation, sport-confidence, self-efficacy, anxiety, and per-
Exercise Psychology, 19, 17–35. formance. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 149–159.
Jones, G., Hanton, S., & Connaughton, D. (2002). What is this Martin-Krumm, C. P., Sarrazin, P. G., Peterson, C., & Famose,
thing called mental toughness? An investigation of elite sport J.-P. (2003). Explanatory style and resilience after sports fail-
performers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 205–218. ure. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1685–1695.
Jones, G., Hanton, S., & Connaughton, D. (2007). A framework Masters, K. S., & Ogles, B. M. (1997). Associative and dissocia-
of mental toughness in the world’s best performers. The Sport tive cognitive strategies in exercise and running: 20 years later,
Psychologist, 21, 243–264. what do we know? The Sport Psychologist, 12, 253–270.
Jones, G., & Swain, A. (1992). Intensity and direction as dimen- McKay, J., Niven, A. G., Lavallee, D., & White, A. (2008).
sions of competitive state anxiety and relationships with com- Sources of strain among UK elite athletes. The Sport
petitiveness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74, 467–472. Psychologist, 22, 143–163.
Kleiman, E. M., Liu, R. T., & Riskind, J. H. (2013). Enhancing Meichenbaum, D. (1985). Stress inoculation training. New York,
attributional style as a resiliency factor in depressogenic stress NY: Pergamon.
generation. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 26, 467–474. Mellalieu, S. D., Hanton, S., & Fletcher, D. (2006). A competi-
Kowal, J., & Fortier, M. S. (1999). Motivational determinants of tive anxiety review: Recent directions in sport psychology
flow: Contributions from self-determination theory. The research. In S. Hanton & S. D. Mellalieu (Eds.), Literature
Journal of Social Psychology, 139, 355–368. reviews in sport psychology (pp. 1–45). Hauppauge, NY: Nova
Krane, V., & Williams, J. M. (2006). Psychological characteristics Science.
of peak performance. In J. M. Williams (Ed.), Applied sport Mellalieu, S. D., Neil, R., Hanton, S., & Fletcher, D. (2009).
psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (pp. 207–227). Competition stress in sport performers: Stressors experienced
Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. in the competition environment. Journal of Sports Sciences, 27,
Kreiner-Phillips, K., & Orlick, T. (1993). Winning after winning: 729–744.
The psychology of ongoing excellence. The Sport Psychologist, 7, Moran, A. P. (1996). The psychology of concentration in sport perfor-
31–48. mers: A cognitive analysis. Hove: Psychology Press.
Kristiansen, E., & Roberts, G. C. (2010). Young elite athletes and Morgan, W. P. (2000). Psychological factors associated with dis-
social support: Coping with competitive and organizational tance running and the marathon. In D. T. Pedloe (Ed.),
stress in “Olympic” competition. Scandinavian Journal of Marathon medicine (pp. 293–310). London: Royal Society of
Medicine and Science in Sports, 20, 686–695. Medicine Press.
Laird, R. D., Marks, L. D., & Marrero, M. D. (2011). Religiosity, Naglieri, J. A., & LeBuffe, P. A. (2005). Measuring resilience in
self-control, and antisocial behavior: Religiosity as a promotive children: From theory to practice. In S. Goldstein & R. B.
and protective factor. Journal of Applied Developmental Brooks (Eds.), Handbook of resilience in children (pp. 107–121).
Psychology, 32, 78–85. New York, NY: Springer.
Lam, W. W., Bonanno, G. A., Mancini, A. D., Ho, S., Chan, M., Neff, L. A., & Broady, E. F. (2011). Stress resilience in early
Hung, W. K., … Fielding, R. (2010). Trajectories of psycho- marriage: Can practice make perfect? Journal of Personality and
logical distress among Chinese women diagnosed with breast Social Psychology, 101, 1050–1067.
cancer. Psycho-Oncology, 19, 1044–1051. Neil, R., Hanton, S., Mellalieu, S. D., & Fletcher, D. (2011).
Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of Competition stress and emotions in sport performers: The role
resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. of further appraisals. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12, 460–470.
Child Development, 71, 543–562. Noblet, A. J., & Gifford, S. M. (2002). The sources of stress
Luthar, S. S., & Zelazo, L. B. (2003). Research on resilience: An experienced by professional Australian footballers. Journal of
integrative review. In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulner- Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 1–13.
ability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities (pp. 510– Ntoumanis, N., & Standage, M. (2009). Morality in sport: A self-
549). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. determination theory perspective. Journal of Applied Sport
MacNamara, A., Button, A., & Collins, D. (2010a). The role of Psychology, 21, 365–380.
psychological characteristics in facilitating the pathway to elite Osman, A., Gutierrez, P. M., Muehlenkamp, J. J., Dix-
performance. Part 1: Identifying mental skills and behaviors. Richardson, F., Barrios, F. X., & Kopper, B. A. (2004).
The Sport Psychologist, 24, 52–73. Suicide resiliency inventory-25: Development and preliminary
MacNamara, A., Button, A., & Collins, D. (2010b). The role of psychometric properties. Psychological Reports, 94, 1349–1360.
psychological characteristics in facilitating the pathway to elite Pelletier, L., Fortier, M., Vallerand, R., Tuson, K., Brière, N., & Blais,
performance. Part 2: Examining environmental and stage-related M. (1995). Toward a new measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic
differences in skills and behaviors. The Sport Psychologist, 24, 74–76. motivation, and amotivation in sports: The sport motivation scale
MacNamara, Á., & Collins, D. (2010). The role of psychological (SMS). Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 35–54.
characteristics in managing the transition to university. Pelletier, L., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., & Brière, N. M.
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11, 353–362. (2001). Associations among perceived autonomy support,
Madsen, M. D., & Abell, N. (2010). Trauma resilience scale: forms of self-regulation, and persistence: A prospective study.
Validation of protective factors associated with adaptation fol- Motivation and Emotion, 25, 279–306.
lowing violence. Research on Social Work Practice, 20, 223–233. Peres, J. F. P., Moreira-Almeida, A., Nasello, A. G., & Koenig, H.
Major, B., Richards, C., Cooper, M. L., Cozzarelli, C., & Zubek, G. (2007). Spirituality and resilience in trauma victims. Journal
J. (1998). Personal resilience, cognitive appraisals and coping: of Religion and Health, 46, 343–350.
An integrative model of adjustment to abortion. Journal of Peterson, C. (2000). The future of optimism. American
Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 735–752. Psychologist, 55, 44–55.
Mallett, C. J., & Hanrahan, S. J. (1997). Race modeling: An Rees, T., & Hardy, L. (2000). An investigation of the social
effective cognitive strategy for the 100 m sprinter. The Sport support experiences of high-level sports performers. The Sport
Psychologist, 11, 72–85. Psychologist, 14, 327–347.
Richardson, G. E. (2002). The metatheory of resilience and resi- Stoeber, J., & Otto, K. (2006). Positive conceptions of perfection-
liency. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58, 307–321. ism: Approaches, evidence, challenges. Personality and Social
Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and assess- Psychology Review, 10, 295–319.
ment and personality development. Journal of Research in Stoeber, J., Otto, K., Pescheck, E., Becker, C., & Stoll, O. (2007).
Personality, 43, 137–145. Perfectionism and competitive anxiety in athletes:
Rutter, M. (1985). Resilience in the face of adversity: Protective Differentiating striving for perfection and negative reactions to
factors and resistance to psychiatric disorder. British Journal of imperfection. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 959–969.
Psychiatry, 147, 598–611. Stoeber, J., Stoll, O., Pescheck, E., & Otto, K. (2008).
Rutter, M. (1990). Competence under stress: Risk and protective Perfectionism and achievement goals in athletes: Relations
factors. In J. Rolf, A. S. Masten, D. Cicchetti, K. H. with approach and avoidance orientations in mastery and per-
Nuechterlin, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors formance goals. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9, 102–121.
in the development of psychopathology (pp. 181–214). New York, Tabei, Y., Fletcher, D., & Goodger, K. (2012). The relationship
NY: Cambridge University Press. between organizational stressors and athlete burnout in soccer
Rutter, M. (2006). Implications of resilience concepts for scien- players. Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 6, 146–165.
tific understanding. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Tamminen, K. A., Holt, N. H., & Neely, K. C. (2013). Exploring
1094, 1–12. adversity and the potential for growth among elite female ath-
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and letes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 28–36.
the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and Thelwell, R. C., Weston, N. J. V., & Greenlees, I. A. (2007).
well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. Batting on a sticky wicket: Identifying sources of stress and
Sameroff, A., Gutman, L. M., & Peck, S. C. (2003). Adaptation associated coping strategies for professional cricket batsmen.
among youth facing multiple risks: Prospective research find- Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 219–232.
ings. In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Thomas, O., Lane, A., & Kingston, K. (2011). Defining and
Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities (pp. 364–392). contextualizing robust sport-confidence. Journal of Applied
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Sport Psychology, 23, 189–208.
Sarkar, M., & Fletcher, D. (2013). How should we measure Treasure, D. C., Lemyre, P.-N., Kuczka, K. K., & Standage, M.
psychological resilience in sport performers? Measurement in (2007). Motivation in elite-level sport. In M. S. Hagger & N. L.
Physical Education and Exercise Science, 17, 264–280. D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determina-
Sarkar, M., & Fletcher, D. (2014). Ordinary magic, extraordinary tion in exercise and sport (pp. 153–165). Champaign, IL: Human
performance: Psychological resilience and thriving in high Kinetics.
achievers. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 3, 46–60. Ungar, M. (2008). Resilience across cultures. British Journal of
Scanlan, T. K., Stein, G. L., & Ravizza, K. (1991). An in-depth Social Work, 38, 218–235.
study of former elite figure skaters: III. Sources of stress. Van Vliet, K. J. (2008). Shame and resilience in adulthood: A
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1, 102–120. grounded theory study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55,
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and 233–245.
health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome Vealey, R. S. (1986). Conceptualization of sport-confidence and
expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219–247. competitive orientation: Preliminary investigation and instru-
Seery, M. D. (2011). Resilience: A silver lining to experiencing ment development. Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 221–246.
adverse life events. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, Vealey, R. S. (2001). Understanding and enhancing self-confi-
390–394. dence in athletes. In R. N. Singer, H. A. Hausenblas, & C.
Seery, M. D., Holman, E. A., & Silver, R. S. (2010). Whatever M. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (pp. 550–565).
does not kill us: Cumulative lifetime adversity, vulnerability New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
and resilience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, Vealey, R. S., & Chase, M. A. (2008). Self-confidence in sport:
1025–1041. Conceptual and research advances. In T. S. Horn (Ed.),
Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Crant, J. M. (2001). What do Advances in sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 65–97). Champaign,
proactive people do? A longitudinal model linking proactive per- IL: Human Kinetics.
sonality and career success. Personnel Psychology, 54, 845–874. Vealey, R. S., Hayashi, S. W., Garner-Holman, M., & Giacobbi,
Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Irving, L., Sigmon, S. P. (1998). Sources of sport-confidence: Conceptualization and
T., Yoshinobu, L., … Harney, P. (1991). The will and the instrument development. Journal of Sport and Exercise
ways: Development and validation of an individual-differences Psychology, 20, 54–80.
measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, Werner, E., & Smith, R. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk
570–585. children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Snyder, C. R., Lehman, K. A., Kluck, B., & Monsson, Y. (2006). Press.
Hope for rehabilitation and vice versa. Rehabilitation Psychology, Weston, N. J., Thelwell, R. C., Bond, S., & Hutchings, N. V.
51, 89–112. (2009). Stress and coping in single-handed round-the-world
Snyder, C. R., Sympson, S. C., Ybasco, F. C., Borders, T. F., ocean sailing. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21, 460–474.
Babyak, M. A., & Higgins, R. L. (1996). Development and Wilson, G. S., Raglin, J. S., & Pritchard, M. E. (2002). Optimism,
validation of the state hope scale. Journal of Personality and pessimism, and precompetition anxiety in college athletes.
Social Psychology, 70, 321–335. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 893–902.
Standage, M. (2012). Motivation: Self-determination theory and Windle, G. (2011). What is resilience? A review and concept
performance in sport. In S. M. Murphy (Ed.), The Oxford analysis. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology, 21, 152–169.
handbook of sport and performance psychology (pp. 233–249). Windle, G., Bennett, K. M., & Noyes, J. (2011). A methodologi-
New York, NY: Oxford University Press. cal review of resilience measurement scales. Health and Quality
Stoeber, J., & Becker, C. (2008). Perfectionism, achievement of Life Outcomes, 9, 8–18.
motives, and attribution of success and failure in female soccer Woodman, T., & Hardy, L. (2001). A case study of organizational
players. International Journal of Psychology, 43, 980–987. stress in elite sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 207–238.

Psychological Resilience in Sport Performers - A Review of Stressors and Protective Factors - Fletcher-Sarkar

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psychological Resilience in Sport Performers - A Review of Stressors and Protective Factors - Fletcher-Sarkar

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psychological Resilience in Sport Performers - A Review of Stressors and Protective Factors - Fletcher-Sarkar

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Memorial University of Newfoundland]

On: 04 June 2014, At: 16:43

Journal of Sports Sciences

Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2014.901551

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and

MUSTAFA SARKAR & DAVID FLETCHER

School of Sport, Exercise, and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK

(Accepted 17 December 2013)

resilience as “the role of mental processes and beha-

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

Challenge Appraisal Facilitative Optimal Sport

Stressors Competitive stressors

You might also like