Cropley Brendan, Baldock Lee, Hanton Sheldon, Gucciardi Daniel F, McKay Alan, Neil Rich, Williams Tom
School of Health, Sport and Professional Practice, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, United Kingdom.
School of Sport and Health Sciences, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Front Psychol. 2020 Aug 13;11:1823. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01823. eCollection 2020.
Hardiness has been identified as a key personal characteristic that may moderate the ill-effects of stress on health and performance. However, little is known about how hardiness might be developed, particularly in sport coaches. To systematically address this gap, we present two linked studies. First, interviews were conducted with pre-determined high-hardy, elite coaches ( = 13) to explore how they had developed their hardy dispositions through the associated attitudinal sub-components of control, commitment, and challenge. Utilizing thematic analysis, we identified that hardiness was developed through experiential learning, external support, and the use of specific coping mechanisms. Key to all of these themes was the concept of reflective practice, which was thought to facilitate more meaningful learning from the participants' experiences and, subsequently, enhance the self-awareness and insight required to augment hardiness and its sub-components. To investigate further the potential relationship between coaches' reflective practices and their level of hardiness, we conducted a follow-up study. Specifically, a sample of 402 sports coaches completed the Dispositional Resilience Scale-15, the Self-Reflection and Insight Scale, and the Questionnaire for Reflective Thinking. Using latent profile analysis (LPA), we clustered participants into groups based on their reflective profiles (e.g., type of engagement, level of reflective thinking). We then examined differences in hardiness between the five latent sub-groups using multinomial regression. Findings revealed that the sub-group of reported significantly higher levels of all three hardiness sub-components than all other sub-groups; these effect sizes were typically moderate-to-large in magnitude (standardized mean differences = -1.50 to -0.10). Conversely, the profile of reported the lowest level of all three dimensions. Collectively, our findings offer novel insights into the potential factors that may influence a coaches' level of hardiness. We provide particular support for the importance of reflective practice as a meta-cognitive strategy that helps coaches to develop hardy dispositions through augmenting its attitudinal sub-components. Consequently, our research makes a significant contribution by providing a comprehensive insight into how we might better train and support coaches to demonstrate the adaptive qualities required to thrive in demanding situations.
坚毅已被视为一种关键的个人特质，它或许能够减轻压力对健康和表现的不良影响。然而，对于如何培养坚毅，尤其是在体育教练群体中，我们却知之甚少。为了系统地填补这一空白，我们开展了两项相关研究。首先，我们对预先选定的13位高坚毅水平的精英教练进行了访谈，以探究他们是如何通过控制、投入和挑战这些相关的态度子成分来培养自己的坚毅性格的。通过主题分析，我们发现坚毅是通过体验式学习、外部支持以及使用特定的应对机制而得以培养的。所有这些主题的关键在于反思性实践的概念，我们认为反思性实践有助于从参与者的经历中进行更有意义的学习，并进而增强提升坚毅及其子成分所需的自我意识和洞察力。为了进一步探究教练的反思性实践与其坚毅水平之间的潜在关系，我们进行了一项后续研究。具体而言，402名体育教练参与了此次研究，他们完成了《特质复原力量表 - 15》《自我反思与洞察量表》以及《反思性思维问卷》。我们使用潜在剖面分析（LPA），根据他们的反思特征（例如参与类型、反思性思维水平）将参与者聚类分组。然后，我们使用多项回归分析检验了五个潜在子群体之间在坚毅方面的差异。研究结果显示，[具体子群体名称]子群体在所有三个坚毅子成分上的得分均显著高于所有其他子群体；这些效应大小通常为中等至较大（标准化平均差异 = -1.50至 -0.10）。相反，[具体子群体名称]的剖面图显示其在所有三个维度上的得分最低。总体而言，我们的研究结果为可能影响教练坚毅水平的潜在因素提供了新颖的见解。我们特别支持反思性实践作为一种元认知策略的重要性，它有助于教练通过增强其态度子成分来培养坚毅的性格。因此，我们的研究通过全面深入地探讨如何更好地培训和支持教练以展现出在苛刻环境中茁壮成长所需的适应能力，做出了重要贡献。
