Centre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, and Stockholm Health Care Services, Region Stockholm, Norra Stationsgatan 69, 113 64, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Psychology, Uppsala University, von Kramers allé 1A and 1C, Uppsala, Sweden.
Sports Med. 2024 Feb;54(2):347-373. doi: 10.1007/s40279-023-01931-z. Epub 2023 Oct 9.
Psychological interventions are commonly applied in sports to help athletes enhance their performance, but the effect psychological interventions have on actual performance is unclear despite decades of research.
We conducted a systematic review with meta-analyses to investigate the effects of a wide range of psychological interventions on performance in competitive athletes.
A study protocol was preregistered in PROSPERO, and a literary search was performed in the MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus databases. Psychological intervention studies were eligible by using a group design and a quantitative performance outcome with athletes competing at a regional or university level or higher. Included studies were assessed regarding intervention characteristics, research methodology, and risk of bias. A multi-level meta-analysis framework with cluster robust variance estimation was used to quantitatively synthesize the results.
A total of 111 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 25 of these studies (37 effects) could be synthesized into five meta-analyses in which there were similarities in the type of psychological intervention, comparator, and experimental design. Meta-analyses I (multimodal psychological skills training vs control), II (mindfulness- and acceptance-based approaches vs control), and III (imagery vs control) consisted of parallel-group studies, and random-effects models were used to calculate the standardized mean difference. Meta-analyses IV (attentional focus strategies, external vs internal) and V (regulatory focus performance instructions, prevention vs promotion) consisted of counterbalanced crossover design studies, and random-effects models were used to calculate the standardized mean change using change score standardization. Significant results were found in three of the meta-analyses (I, II, and III). Psychological skills training (g = 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.21-1.45), mindfulness- and acceptance-based approaches (g = 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.01-1.32), and imagery (g = 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.14-1.36) outperformed controls with moderate effects. However, when non-randomized trials and subjective performance outcomes were removed in sensitivity analyses, the overall estimates of the effect size were no longer significant in any of the syntheses.
The significant moderate effects for psychological skills training, mindfulness- and acceptance-based approaches, and imagery are not stable, and further trials with robust research methodology, such as randomized controlled trials, are requested for all types of psychological interventions aiming to enhance performance in athletes. Moreover, improved reporting standards and the provision of datasets in open science repositories are important to consider in future trials in sport psychology.
PROSPERO CRD42017056677.
心理干预常用于运动领域,帮助运动员提高表现,但经过几十年的研究,心理干预对实际表现的影响仍不清楚。
我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以调查广泛的心理干预对竞技运动员表现的影响。
研究方案在 PROSPERO 中预先注册,并在 MEDLINE、PsycINFO、Web of Science 和 SPORTDiscus 数据库中进行文献检索。使用群组设计和具有区域或大学及以上水平运动员的定量表现结果的心理干预研究符合纳入标准。纳入的研究评估了干预特征、研究方法和偏倚风险。使用多层次荟萃分析框架和聚类稳健方差估计来定量综合结果。
共有 111 项研究符合纳入标准,其中 25 项研究(37 个效应)可以综合为五项荟萃分析,这些分析在心理干预类型、对照和实验设计方面具有相似性。荟萃分析 I(多模式心理技能训练与对照)、II(正念和接纳为基础的方法与对照)和 III(意象与对照)包含平行组研究,使用随机效应模型计算标准化均数差。荟萃分析 IV(注意焦点策略,外部与内部)和 V(调节焦点表现指令,预防与促进)包含平衡交叉设计研究,使用随机效应模型计算变化分数标准化的标准化均数变化。其中三项荟萃分析发现了显著结果(I、II 和 III)。心理技能训练(g=0.83,95%置信区间 0.21-1.45)、正念和接纳为基础的方法(g=0.67,95%置信区间 0.01-1.32)和意象(g=0.75,95%置信区间 0.14-1.36)的效果优于对照组,效果中等。然而,在敏感性分析中去除非随机试验和主观表现结果后,任何综合分析的效应大小的总体估计都不再显著。
心理技能训练、正念和接纳为基础的方法以及意象的显著中等效果并不稳定,需要进一步进行研究,例如采用随机对照试验,以确定所有类型的心理干预对提高运动员表现的效果。此外,在未来的运动心理学试验中,应考虑改进报告标准和在开放科学存储库中提供数据集。
PROSPERO CRD42017056677。