Sports Coaching – Page 34 – The Sport Journal

Entering “The Zone” : A Guide for Coaches

Submitted by: Dr. Costas Karageorghis

Ask any champion athlete whether their state of mind is an important component of sporting performance and the answer will always be the same – a resounding “YES!”. At the highest level, mindset is the crucial factor that separates winners from losers. The ideal mindset enables the body to function automatically with little conscious effort. In this optimal state, complex tasks appear to be easily accomplished and time can either stand still or rush by as the performer is completely immersed in what he or she is doing.

Coaches and sport psychologists often refer to this optimal mindset as “The Zone”. For some athletes, performance in the zone is achieved only a few times in their careers; however, with systematic training using sport psychology techniques, the zone can be entered almost at will. The aim of this article is to outline the theory, which underlies optimal psychological state, and to provide 10 techniques that can safely be recommended to athletes.

Theories of optimal performance

There have been two pioneers in sport psychology research who have devoted their lives to the investigation of optimal psychological state. First, the Hungarian Prof. Mihalyi Czikszentmihalyi introduced the concept of flow state in 1975 while the Russian, Prof. Yuri Hanin, proposed the zone of optimal functioning theory in 1980.

The concept of flow entails a state in which there is a perfect match between the perceived demands of an activity and the abilities of the performer. During flow, a performer loses self-consciousness and becomes completely immersed in the task at hand. This engenders a state in which performance is very pleasurable and intrinsically gratifying. Hence, Czikszentmihalyi refers to flow as being an autotelic experience. The term autotelic is derived from the Greek word auto which means self and telos which means end. Hence, an autotelic experience is one which is an end in itself or intrinsically rewarding. The concept of autotelic experience serves to highlight the need for emphasis on the enjoyment one can derive from participation rather than extrinsic rewards such as medals, trophies and public recognition.

Hanin’s theory is slightly different as it states that each athlete has an optimal zone of anxiety at which he or she performs at her peak. If an athlete’s anxiety leaves this zone, performance levels will invariably decrease. Prof. Hanin, who leads the Finland Research Institute for Olympic Sports, has published a great deal of empirical evidence in support of his theory. My opinion is that Hanin’s theory is useful in terms of establishing the right level of mental and bodily anxiety for peak performance to occur, while Czikszentmihalyi’s theory is useful in identifying key psychological components of flow. Once a phenomenon can be identified, it is easier to manipulate. In psychology, we refer to such manipulations as interventions and here are ten examples of interventions that you should find useful.

10 Techniques to attain optimal psychological state

Centering

Centering is an attentional control technique, which helps to calm athletes and get them focused at critical moments during their sport. It is typically used in sports which involve continuous breaks such as volleyball (during side-outs), and tennis (in-between games and sets). Centering can also be useful at the start of a short duration event such as a 400m sprint or a downhill ski race.

Instruct the athlete to begin by standing with his or her feet at shoulder width with arms at the side. The athlete should breathe deeply using the diaphragm and exhale very slowly. On breathing in, the athlete must focus attention on the area behind the navel. He or she will notice that on each in-breath, the tension in the upper body increases slightly, while on each exhalation, there is a calming sinking feeling. Once mastered, centering is a quick and effective way to attain calmness and counter the destructive effects of over-arousal.

Mental Rehearsal

Creating a mental blueprint for success is one of the best ways in which to enter the zone. Athletes should be encouraged to practice key aspects of their sport in their mind’s eye both prior to competition and, given the opportunity, during breaks in competition. Britain’s top 400m runner, Iwan Thomas, sees himself performing the perfect race before getting into his blocks. This is one of the ways in which he manages to maintain consistently high level performances.

The secret of high quality mental rehearsal involves bringing all the senses into play and using them to create life-like images. The effective combination of senses is called synaesthesis. Encourage athletes to run through sequences from their sport as if looking out through their own eyes noticing all the shapes, colours and textures. They should immerse themselves in the smells, sounds and general feel of their competitive environment. These images should be in real time and it is a good idea to play through a series of “what if” scenarios; for example, when something does not go to plan. Visualise different situations involving poor conditions, tough opponents, late starts and minor mishaps. Preparing mentally for any adversity ensures that athletes will not be stifled in competition when such situations arise. Failing to prepare is preparing to fail. Mental rehearsal is a cornerstone of success in sport.

Error Parking

Sometimes making a silly mistake or getting frustrated in competition can lead to a complete loss of concentration and a departure from the zone. To regain a state of flow after an error, you should advise athletes to “park it” by wiping it away on their shorts or on their playing implement (e.g., racquet, bat, club, etc.). Some sports people like to spit the mistake away although this is clearly not the most hygienic option! Parking an error is a way by which the error can be forgotten to enable athletes to focus on the here and now.

There are many examples of sports stars getting caught up in their mistakes or frustrations and allowing a momentary lapse of concentration to bring about a collapse in their game. A fairly recent example involves the Manchester United and England soccer star, David Beckham. Beckham was representing his country at the 1998 World Cup Finals in France. England had made it through to the second round of the finals and faced formidable opposition in the form of their old adversary, Argentina. Having been brought down by the Argentinean striker Simione, rather than wipe his frustrations away into the turf, Beckham lashed out at Simione with his heel resulting in a red card and an early departure for England from the Championships. The control of anger and frustration is an important lesson, which Beckham needs to learn. Such psychological control would be a perfect compliment to his abundant technical skills.

Losing Self-consciousness

Many sports people report that they become very distracted by the presence of spectators, officials and other competitors. The anxiety provoked by onlookers at competitions is induced by a natural fear of evaluation. Some competitors are able to turn this to their advantage, while others are completely debilitated by it. If an athlete finds it difficult to distract his/her mind from the fact that people will judge them, suggest these three simple strategies:

First, consider that any attention given to onlookers is wasted mental energy, which can be channelled into sporting performance. Channelling attention into performance will ensure that physical capabilities are maximised. Second, just prior to the competition, withdrawal from the other competitors and avoidance of communication with them is a sound strategy. This will demonstrate appropriate focus and may even cause the other competitors to feel anxious. Finally, use of a self-affirmation statement, which reinforces the required positive mindset. For example, “Fear is negative. Desire is positive”, “When the going gets tough the tough get going” or “Be cool like the Fonz”. Remember, if you can talk the talk you can walk the walk!

Using Keywords

As well as using self-affirmation statements, the use of keywords to reinforce what it is that you are trying to achieve can be very useful as part of an armoury of sport psychology techniques. For example, the world champion canoeist, Britain’s Steve Harris uses the phrase “Keep it smooth” to emphasise the smooth entry of the paddle into the water. Many golfers report using a swing thought just prior to striking the ball such as “fluid”, “relaxed” or “loose”. You should advise athletes to find one word which encapsulates what they are trying to do and to use it at critical times just to get them completely focused on what they should be doing. Hence, sprinters may use “explode”, swimmers may use “glide” and cyclists may use “spin”.

Self-hypnosis

Self-hypnosis can be used as an effective way of calming pre-competition nerves. It promotes activation of the right hemisphere of the brain and limits the conscious mental activities of the left hemisphere. Thus, self-hypnosis has a prophylactic effect against the disruptive influences of cognitive anxiety and negative self-talk.

Once mastered, hypnosis can be implemented very quickly to bring a calm and relaxed state. It simply involves focusing attention on one thought at a time. For example, you could focus on the regularity of your breathing and concentrate on breathing slowly from the diaphragm. Alternatively, as in centering, you could focus on your mid-point — the area just behind your navel. Further ways of attaining a hypnotic state involve continuously repeating a mantra such as “relax” or “easy”. Some athletes enter a trance-like state by listening to music. This will be covered in detail later, however, it should be noted that Prof. Czikszentmihalyi contends that flow is a “semi-hypnotic state”. In a sporting context, self-hypnosis is about taking control of yourself so as not to be vexed by the demands of competition.

Simulated Practice

An easy way for athletes to learn about the rigorous demands of competition so that they are able to enter the zone at will is through the use of simulated practice. This involves contriving situations, which accurately reflect what goes on in competition. Simulated practice helps athletes by once again creating a mental blueprint for how to react in particular situations. One method which we have found to be effective with young tennis players is to have one member of the group serving while the remainder attempt to create as much noise and disruption as possible. This forces the server to focus intently on the task at hand, and, over time, greatly improves their powers of concentration. I like to call this drill Mr or Ms Concentration. Crowd noise can also be played through loud speakers to simulate a competitive environment. Similar practices are useful for sprint starts, football kicks and basketball free throws. In fact, in any situation where there is emphasis on an individual, distraction practices such as this can be helpful. Other types of simulated practice involve practicing with 10 vs. 11 in team sports to emulate situations in which a player is sent off. Also, rather than practicing indoors, having sessions in cold and wet conditions builds mental toughness. Being strong mentally increases the chances of successfully entering the zone. The opportunities for simulated practice are only as limited as your imagination.

Pre-event Routine

Having a routine that is standardised but also flexible enough to adjust to differing competitive conditions can put athletes in control and make them feel both psyched and confident. For some athletes, the pre-event routine will start from the evening before a competition; however, being in control of the three minutes just prior to the start of competition is absolutely essential. You could suggest that athletes write down their pre-event routine, indicating what they do, what they are thinking and how they should feel in the hours and minutes leading up to competition.
Such routines involve the following checkpoints:

What is eaten and how long before competition it is consumed
What is packed in the kit bag
What mode of transport is to be used
How long before competition to arrive
What are the reporting-in procedures
What exactly does the warm-up routine consist of
What will the psych-up consist of e.g., imagery, self-statements, music etc.
What actions will be taken in the minute prior to start of competition
What is the ideal mindset on commencement of competition

The Winning Feeling

Ask athletes to think about their most successful performance ever. Encourage them to see themselves performing ……..; what were they wearing?; who were they competing against?; what was distinct about their movements? It is important for them to recreate exactly how they felt inside during their best performance and to write down every detail so that this feeling can be recreated at will. For some athletes, time speeds up when they are performing at their best and the performance is over before they really have a chance to appreciate it. For others, time will slow down and they will feel as if they have all the time in the world to perform. Either way, the winning feeling will be a unique experience which, once identified, can be recreated at will.

The Power of Sound

Music has the ability to inspire, motivate and relax the competitive athlete. Choosing the “right” music is dependent upon what you wish to gain from the listening experience: if your goal is to psych-up, it is advisable to select upbeat music with a strong driving rhythm and lyrics that reinforce what it is that you are trying to achieve. For example, “Eye of the Tiger” (Survivor), “You’re Simply the Best” (Tina Turner) “A Kind of Magic” (Queen). Conversely, if you want music to control your pre-competition anxiety it can be both sedative and inspiring at the same time. For example, “One Moment in Time” (Whitney Houston), “My Heart Will Go On” (Celine Dion) or “Easy” (Lionel Richie). Either way, rather than have specific pieces of music imposed upon them, athletes should be encouraged to make choices which reflect their own musical preferences.

Author’s note

Dr. Costas Karageorghis is a BASES accredited scientific support and research sport psychologist. He is a member of the British Olympic Association Psychology Advisory Group and is head of sport psychology at Brunel University’s Department of Sport Sciences. Further, Dr. Karageorghis is an alumnus of the USSA MSS program and acts as the United Kingdom academic representative.
E-mail: costas.karageorghis@brunel.ac.uk.

U.S. Sports Academy2017-08-07T15:36:25-05:00February 12th, 2008|Sports Coaching, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

Athletics as a Predictor of Self-esteem and Approval Motivation

Submitted by: Keith Bailey, Patrice Moulton, Ph.D., and Michael Moulton, Ed.D.

Abstract

Past research has found a negative correlation between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation (Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson, 1976). This relationship has not been explored specifically for individuals who participate in athletics. The purpose of this study was to compare athletes and non-athletes on their levels of self-esteem and approval motivation, and to determine if a positive correlation exists for athletes in contrast to the negative correlation found in the general college population. A significant difference was found between athletes and non-athletes in their levels of self-esteem and approval motivation.

Previous research has been conducted in order to identify and explore personal attributes which are associated with participation in sports. There has been a significant relationship found between athletics and the attribute of self-esteem (Kumar, Pathak, & Thakur, 1985). Studies based on the general population suggest a significant negative relationship between self-esteem and an attribute known as approval motivation. Self-esteem is defined as, “an intrapsychic structure: an attitude about the self” (Baumeister, Tice, & Hutton, 1989, p. 547). Coopersmith (1967) defined self-esteem as “the evaluation which the individual makes and customarily maintains with regard to himself” (p. 4-5). Kawash and Scherf (1975) asserted that, “there is probably no personality trait more significant in the context of total psychological functioning than self-esteem” (p. 715). Approval motivation is defined as the desire to produce positive perceptions in others and the incentive to acquire the approval of others as well as the desire to avoid disapproval (Martin, 1984; Shulman & Silverman, 1974).

Geen (1991) listed three conditions that he felt must be met before he considered approval motivation to have occurred. First, an individual must be in direct contact with a person or a group of people, such as an audience or a partner or partners in interaction. Next, the social presence has a nondirective effect. This means that the social group does not provide direct cues on how the person should act in the situation. Finally, the socially generated effect on the individual is considered an intrapsychic state, and this state is capable of initiating and/or intensify behavior.

Research has shown that an individual’s level of approval motivation can be used to predict how he or she will react to expectations or influences of others. Smith and Flenning (1971) conducted a study that investigated the connection between subjects’ need for approval and their susceptibility to subtle unintended influence of biased experimenters. They found that individuals with a high need for approval altered their behavior in the direction of the experimenter’s expectancy, while those in the low approval motivation group did not. Past research has also found a negative correlation to exist between self-esteem and approval motivation (Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson, 1976). This indicates that as an individual’s level of self-esteem increases, their need for approval from others decreases. There is no research at this time that has examined the relationship of athletic participation on the negative correlation between self-esteem and approval motivation or on approval motivation alone. However, research has examined the affect of athletic participation and coaching style on self-esteem.

Taylor (1995) conducted a study where he compared athletic participants and nonparticipants in order to ascertain if participating in intercollegiate athletics had an effect on self-esteem. He reported that athletic participation did have a positive effect on self-esteem, but it was not strong enough to have a statistically significant effect on its own. Kumar, Pathak and Thakur (1985) compared individual athletes, team athletes, and non-athletes on their levels of self-esteem using the Self-esteem Inventory (Prasad & Thakur, 1977). The Self-esteem Inventory (Prasad & Thakur, 1977) had two subscales: the personally perceived self, and the socially perceived self. They found that individual athletes were significantly higher on personally perceived self and socially perceived self than team athletes and non-athletes.

Research examining coaching behaviors has found that a coach’s instructional style can have an impact on individual’s with low self-esteem. Smoll, Smith, Barnett, and Everett (1993) examined the effect of coach’s instructional style on self-esteem. Eighteen male head coaches and 152 male Little League Baseball players were studied with 8 of the head coaches participating in a workshop that was designed to increase their supportiveness and instructional effectiveness. A preseason measure of self-esteem of the 152 players who played under the 18 coaches was taken. Post-season measures of the players’ self-esteem were assessed and compared to their preseason score. It was found that players who scored low on self-esteem in the preseason assessment showed a significant increase in their general self-esteem scores in the postseason assessment.

There has been no research conducted at this time that has examined the variable of approval motivation among athletes. However, research investigating other aspects of athletic participation suggests a need for approval among athletes. For example, research in conformity has found that rookies and newcomers to teams quickly learn and adopt attitudes and behaviors of veteran players and team leaders. This influence can be found to affect the athletes’ beliefs and behaviors in both athletic and non-athletic situations (Carron, 1980). Also, Harris (1973) examined the motivational factors related to athletic participation and concluded that motivational forces such as love, social approval, status, security and achievement are basic components to the overall motivational structure which would encourage someone toward athletic participation. Finally, additional research conducted by Smith (1990) indicated that some athletes continue to participate in sports although they do not want to in order to avoid letting down coaches or family members (as cited in Thorton, 1990).

The purpose of this study was to compare athletes and non-athletes on levels of self-esteem and approval motivation. The researchers proposed the following hypothesis. First, there would be a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes in levels of self-esteem and approval motivation. Second, for non-athletes, as supported by past research, there would be a negative correlation between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. Finally, for athletes, the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation would be positively correlated.

Methods
Four hundred ninety-two undergraduate students over the age of 18 attending core courses at a small southern university volunteered to participate in this study. There were 94 athletes and 398 non-athletes with the participant’s ages ranging from 18 years to 49 years, with a mean age of 21.95 years. Participants were provided with a description of the project and inform consent forms prior to receiving the questionnaire.

After returning the signed informed consent forms, participants were given a questionnaire that contained a demographics sheet, Revised Martin-Larsen Approval Motivation Scale (MLAM) (Martin, 1984), and the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSS) (Rosenberg, 1989). The MLAM is a questionnaire consisting of 20 statements designed on a five point Likert-type scale. This instrument measures an individuals level of approval motivation “by assessing both the desire to receive positive evaluations and social reinforcements and avoid negative evaluations and social punishment” (Martin, 1984, p.509). The MLAM has a total range of summative scores from 20 to 100 and a total range of mean scores from one to five. Higher scores indicate a greater need for social approval while lower scores indicate a lower need for approval. This scale has stability coefficients ranging from .73 to .93, and a reliability coefficient of .79.

The RSS is a ten item Guttman scale designed to measure an individuals level of self-esteem. It is unidimensional, which means that individuals may be ranked along a single continuum from very low to very high. Scores range from 10 to 40 with higher scores indicating a higher level of self-esteem and lower scores indicating a lower level of self-esteem. This measure has been found to have a test-retest reliability of .85 (Rosenberg, 1989).

The survey required approximately 35 to 40 minutes to take and participants were allowed to withdraw at any time without penalty. Participants did not place their names on the answer sheet and their signed informed consents were kept separate from their answer sheets to insure anonymity. All participants were treated according to the ethical guidelines concerning research set forth by the American Psychological Association.

Results
The data was analyzed using a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to determine if there was a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. The MANOVA revealed that there was a significant main effect found between the two groups (see Table 1). The results of the MANOVA also revealed that there were no interaction effects between the two groups. This supported the first hypothesis that there was a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation.

Table 1 Degrees of Freedom, F Values, and Levels of Significance for Self-esteem and Approval Motivation
	df	F	Sig.
Self-esteem	1	21.8685	.0001
Approval motivation	1	4.2735	.0392

A Pearson r correlation was computed to examine the nature of the relationship between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation for both the athlete and non-athlete groups. For non-athletes, a negative correlation was found to exist between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation (r = -.4503, p< .001). This finding is consistent with the findings of past research that examined the relationship between self-esteem and approval motivation in the general population (Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson, 1976). The second hypothesis of this study was supported.

A negative correlation was found to exist between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation for the group consisting of college athletes (r = -.4534, p< .001). Resulting in the rejection of hypothesis three. This finding suggests that athletes, like non-athletes, exhibit a negative correlation between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation.

Discussion
The findings of this study suggest that there is a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. These findings mirror those of Kumar, Pathak, and Thakur (1985) who found that athletes have higher levels of self-esteem than non-athletes. In this study, a portion of the subjects were Division I college aged athletes. There are several factors that may have contributed to these athletes having higher self-esteem than non-athletes, such as receiving special treatment. For example, many of these athletes may have received scholarships to college for their athletic skills, been allowed to travel to other schools to compete, and had access to uniforms and other athletic wear that served to set them apart from their non-athletic peers. In addition, these athletes may have received special attention from the press and fans, and received certain rewards that non-athletes have not received. Further, athletes have the unique opportunity to develop close friendships with team members and identify with the team itself.

Results of the current study indicate that there is a statistically significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variable of approval motivation. However, despite being statistically significant there is some question as to whether these findings have everyday applicability (see Table 2). Further research is needed to determine if there is a true behavioral difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variable approval motivation, and if so what aspect of athletic participation is responsible for this difference.

Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations for Athletes and Non-Athletes on the Variables of Self-esteem and Approval Motivation
	Mean		Standard Deviation
	Self-esteem	Approval Motivation	Self-esteem	Approval Motivation
Athletes	34.1064	2.5840	4.6315	.4373
Non-athletes	31.3668	2.7045	5.2139	.5234

There are a number of possible reasons why the need for athletes to receive praise or to avoid the rejection of others, is met through sport participation. Athletes, especially at the collegiate level, receive many benefits from participating in sports. For example, athletes receive praise and support from their parents, peers, coaches, fans, and community. In addition, personal rewards are obtained through the athlete’s athletic prowess and identity with the team. Many of the athletes competing at the Division I collegiate level bring with them to college successful high school experiences in athletics. Therefore, athletes in this study may have received approval for a number of years through athletic participation. Due to the history of approval and reward associated with athletic participation, athletes may not need to engage in further approval seeking behaviors.

It should be noted that the athletes in this study are most likely the elite athletes from their high school programs. They are good at what they do and have excelled in athletics for many years. Therefore, the athletes in this study due to their history of athletic success, may be more likely to participate in Division I athletics. Athletes with low self-esteem and high needs for approval may not be as likely to reach Division I college athletics. Future research may wish to examine approval motivation and self-esteem in youth sports and high school athletics to determine if there is consistency of findings.

As predicted, there was a negative correlation found between self-esteem and approval motivation for non-athletes. This finding was consistent with those of Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson (1976) who also examined the relationship between approval motivation and self-esteem in the general population. However, what was not predicted was the negative correlation that was found between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation for the group of collegiate athletes. Although there was a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on their levels of approval motivation, these results imply that athletic participation does not alter the negative relationship between self-esteem and approval motivation. The results of this study suggest that athletes are more likely to view themselves positively and see themselves as worthy and are less likely to engage in approval seeking behavior than non-athletes.

The findings of this study lead to several additional questions concerning the difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. Future research may wish to explore factors that contribute to the differences found in self-esteem and approval motivation for athletes, such as the number of years experience, ethnicity, gender, and types of athletic experience.

References
Baumeister, R.F., Tice, D.M., & Hutton, D.G. (1989). Self-presentational motivations and personality differences in self-esteem. Journal of Personality, 57, 547-579.

Carron, A.V. (1980). Social psychology of sport. Ithaca: Mouvement Publications.

Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Geen, R.G. (1991). Social motivation. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 377-399.

Harris, D.V. (1973). Involvement in sport: A somatopsychic rationale for physical activity. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.

Kawash, G.F. & Scherf, G.W. (1975). Self-esteem, locus of control, and approval motivation in married couples. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31, 715-720.

Kumar, A., Pathak, N., & Thakur, G.P. (1985). Self-esteem in individual athletes, team members, and nonathletes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 178.

Larsen, K.S., Martin, H.J., Ettinger, R.H., & Nelson, J. (1976). Approval seeking, social cost, and aggression: A scale and some dynamics. The Journal of Psychology,94, 3-11.

Martin, H.J. (1984). A revised measure of approval motivation and its relationship to social desirability. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 508-519.

Prasad, M.S. & Thakur, G.P. (1977). Manual and directions for Self-esteem Inventory. Agra: Agra Psychological Research Cell.

Rosenberg, M. (1986). Conceiving the self. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company

Shulman, A.D. & Silverman, I. (1974). Social desirability and need approval: Some paradoxical data and a conceptual re-evaluation. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 27-32.

Smith, R.E. & Flenning, F. (1971). Need for approval and susceptibility to unintended social influence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36, 383-385.

Smoll, F.L., Smith, R.E., Barnett, N.P., & Everett, J.J. (1993). Enhancement of children’s self-esteem through social support training for youth sport coaches. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 602-610.

Thornton, J.S. (1990). Playing in pain: When should an athlete stop? The Physician and Sportsmedicine, 18, 139-142.

Taylor, D.L. (1995). A comparison of college athletic participants and nonparticipants on self-esteem. Journal of College Student Developement,36, 444-451.

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-27T17:35:44-06:00February 11th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Coaching, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

You Go Girl ! The Link Between Girls’ Positive Self-Esteem and Sports

Submitted by: Allison M. Schultz

Positive self-esteem is a favorable perception of one’s self, or, how happy you are with just being you. In general, feelings of self-esteem contribute to a person’s self-worth, confidence and competence. These feelings of worthiness, assurance and proficiency can influence a person’s life in regard to personal aspirations, motivation, achievement potential and relationships (Melpomene Institute, 1996). A person’s self-esteem is affected by and formed from a variety of circumstances in life, some of which are:

degree of parental expectations, encouragement and influence
degree of peer expectations, encouragement and influence
involvement in making of decisions
development of talents, hobbies or interests
influence and importance of role models
extent of emphasis on body image
experiences and interactions during education
participation in physical activity and/or sports (Kopecky, 1992)

Many studies have been done to investigate the self-esteem of young girls and have concluded that as girls move from grade school to high school, their self-esteem levels drop (Feldman & Elliott, 1990; Gilligan, Lyons & Hammer, 1990; How Schools Shortchange Girls, 1992). For example, one study found that 69% of grade school boys and 60% of grade school girls responded that they were “happy the way I am”. The same study found 46% of high school boys and only 29% of high schools girls reported being “happy the way I am”. Overall, girls self-esteem dropped at a rate three times that of boys. Feelings of low self-esteem in adolescence are one contributing factor that increases the likelihood of a young girl dropping out of school or becoming pregnant. The low self-esteem seen in girls does not disappear with maturity; girls with low self-esteem often grow to be women with low self-esteem. Low levels of self-esteem are linked to increased rates of depression, substance abuse, suicide and eating disorders in both adolescents and adults (How Schools Shortchange Girls, 1992; Melpomene Institute, 1996).

What can be done about the decrease in self-esteem? What can girls do to maintain their self-esteem as they mature? To answer these questions, it is important to look at what boys are doing differently from girls as both groups move from grade school to high school. One important difference to consider is the rate of sports participation among boys and girls. As girls move from grade school to high school, they drop-out of sports at a rate six times higher than boys (Women’s Sports Foundation, 1998). Could the lower rate of sports participation among girls be linked to a lower self-esteem? In order to answer the question, it is essential to consider two factors: what contributes to the development of self-esteem and the benefits of sport participation.

For girls living in the 1990s, self-esteem is linked to both physical attractiveness and physical competence. Prior to the 1990s, however, the main factor contributing to a girls’ self-esteem was physical attractiveness (Nelson, 1994). Coupling self-esteem to both competence and beauty is a step in the right direction, although it’s still unfortunate that girls place so much importance on physical attractiveness as it relates to their happiness. Recognizing that young girls often compare themselves to unrealistic standards of beauty can help parents better understand, guide and influence their children (Nelson, 1994; Women’s Sports Foundation, 1998). In attempting to de-emphasize the importance their daughters place on beauty and emphasize the importance of physical competence, parents may find it helpful to utilize the benefits of participation in sport.

Participating in sport is one way that girls can develop physical competence. Girls learn to appreciate their bodies for what they can do, instead of the perceived appearance by oneself or by others. In a sport environment girls learn to control their bodies and to rely on acquired physical skills. Partaking in sport also helps girls trust and rely on themselves and teammates while working toward common goals. In a sense, participation in sport allows each girl to become her own personal cheerleader – cheering on her physical self and what might be possible; not just standing on the sidelines, or in the bleachers, cheering others on (Nelson, 1994). Involvement in athletics provides lessons in teamwork and leadership, the development of citizenship, and community involvement. Membership in sport also offers girls a greater pool of adult role models from where they can draw guidance and support (Melpomene Institute, 1996; Murtaugh, 1988). Additionally, girls find new friends in the sport setting. For girls, this sense of friendship is essential, being liked by other girls is sometimes more important than having others see them as smart or independent (Feldman & Elliott, 1990).

A study published by the Women’s Sport Foundation on over 30,000 girls compared athletes to non-athletes.

The study stated that athletes were more likely than non-athletes to:

score well on achievement tests
feel “popular” among one’s peers
be involved in other extracurricular activities
graduate from high school (three times more likely)
attend college and obtain a bachelor’s degree
stay involved in sport as an adult
aspire to community involvement
not become involved with drugs (92% less likely)
not become pregnant (80% less likely)

(Women’s Sports Foundation, 1998).

It is important that parents realize the many contributions participation in sport can make to young girls’ development. The positive aspects of sport can help girls maintain their self-esteem as they make the difficult transition from grade school to high school.

References

Feldman, S. & Elliott, G. (Eds.). (1990). At the threshold: the developing adolescent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gilligan, C., Lyons, L., & Hammer, T. (Eds.). (1990). Making connections: The relational worlds of adolescent girls at Emma Willard School. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

How Schools Shortchange Girls – The AAUW Report. (1992). New York, NY: Marlowe & Company.

Kopecky, G. (1992). The age of self-doubt. Working Mother, July, 46-49.

Murtaugh, M. (1988). Achievement outside the classroom: The role of nonacademic activities in the lives of high school students. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 19, 383-395.

Melpomene Institute. (1996). Melpomene Institute packet -Girls, physical activity and self-esteem. St. Paul, MN.

Nelson, M.B. (1994). The stronger women get, the more men love football – sexism and the American culture of sports. New York, New York: Avon Books.

Women’s Sports Foundation. (1998). Eisenhower Park, East Meadow, New York.

U.S. Sports Academy2017-08-07T15:37:24-05:00February 11th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology, Women and Sports|Comments Off

Analysis of Selected Physical and Performance Attributes of the United States Olympic Team Handball Players: Preliminary Study

Submitted by: Brian Bergemann, Ph.D.

During the Spring of 1995, prior to the Olympic Games in Atlanta, the United States Team Handball team and coaches came to the United States Sports Academy in Daphne, AL for testing. Dr. Thomas P. Rosandich, president of the U.S. Team Handball Federation, and the president of the United States Sports Academy hosted the testing at the Alabama campus. Testing of the athletes consisted of laboratory tests of maximum oxygen uptake, computerized strength measures, blood tests, etc., and a battery of field tests that included assessments of physical characteristics, and physical performance components. This paper reports the results of the field test battery.
Skills test batteries have been used in physical education and in sport to assess various components of the skills of players. These assessments served the teacher and coach to determine a player’s level of ability, or their progress, weaknesses and strengths. These test batteries for sports performance usually dealt with the physical fitness components like strength and endurance, or the motor skills components, like speed, agility, power, or accuracy.

Batteries of tests for team handball have not been developed in the United States. The purpose of this investigation was to construct a team handball test battery that would be reflective of the skills, abilities, physical fitness components and anthropometric factors that contribute to high levels of performance, and to establish a database of performances by the National Team Handball players. Additional purposes for developing the test included using the test to screen potential players at the National level, to provide teachers in the schools and colleges with tests that are inexpensive and easy to administer, and to provide self-administered tests that would train the athletes to improve their performance in team handball.

Methods
Subjects
The United States National Handball team came to the United States Sports Academy in Daphne, Alabama for testing in June of 1995 prior to the Atlanta Olympic Games. There were 20 players in attendance. Their ages ranged from 22.01 to 31.73 years with an average age of 26.69 years (sd = 2.94).

Test Selection and Procedures
The coaches and this investigator discussed the test items and agreed that they were relevant to the sport. The test items included:

Anthropometric measurements: height, weight, hand breadth, arm length, and arm span
Hand grip strength
Running speed: 20 m dash
Vertical jump: take-off of dominant leg with one step, non-dominant leg with one step, and both legs
Accuracy throw: a 7 m throw at a automobile tire hanging vertically from the goal. 2 points for shots through the center, 1 point for hitting the tire but not passing through the center. The player had 10 throws.
50 m dribble test: Five cones are placed in a straight line with 5m between each cone. Player runs 25m, passing each cone alternately on the right and left sides, then goes completely around the last cone and returns to the start line alternating as before. The ball is dribbled once per cone.
Jump and throw test: A volleyball net 2.44 m high placed 7 m from the goal with a tire hanging vertically from the top of the goal. The bottom of the tire rested on the floor. The player had 10 throws. Two points were awarded for hitting the tire or passing through the center and 1 point for passing through the goal mouth.
Endurance test: Four tires are placed on the corners of a basketball court that has the dimensions of 15.24 m by 25.61 m. The player runs diagonally on the first leg, then along the short side, then diagonally again, and then returns to the start. This constitutes one lap. The runner runs 10 laps for a total of 900m; 90 m per lap.

Results
The results of the anthropometric testing are shown in table 1. The data for the skills tests are shown in tables 2 and 3. The mean vertical jump for the dominant leg was 54.03 cm (21.27 in), the non-dominant leg was 46.72 cm (18.39 in), and for both legs was 62.15 cm (24.47 in). This is higher than vertical jumps of 52.8 cm (20.8 in) for professional soccer players (Raven, Gettman, Pollock, & Cooper, 1976), 53.3 cm (21 in) for college basketball players (Noble & Maresh, 1979), but less than 67.0 cm (26.4) for elite men volleyball players (Gladden & Colaccino, 1978). Olympic men’s volleyball players were tested doing the vertical jump with a 4-step approach, as in a spike approach and averaged 94.2 cm (37.1 in). This approach run was estimated to add 10.2 to 15.4 cm (4 to 6 in) higher than the standing position vertical jump off of both legs (McGown et al., 1990). The maximum height reached when the player took off from the dominant leg was 3 m (9 feet, 10.1 in), the non-dominant leg was 2.92 m (9 feet, 7 in), and both legs was 3.08 m (10 feet, 1.26 in).

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-27T17:48:39-06:00February 11th, 2008|Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

International Physical Fitness Test

Submitted by: Dr. Thomas P. Rosandich, President, USSA

FOREWARD

The United States Sports Academy, in cooperation with the Supreme Council for Youth and Sport, presents the Arab world with its own International Physical Fitness Test Manual based on norms collected and processed on Arab youth, ages 9 to 19. This fitness test is one of the few developed outside the Western world and is believed to be the only such test battery that measures the basic components of all physical activity, i.e. speed, strength, suppleness, and stamina.

This test was introduced to 199 physical education teachers by Dr. Thomas P. Rosandich on 15 January 1977 in Manama. This test was initially developed by the International Committee for Physical Fitness Testing in Tokyo in 1964 at which time Dr. Rosandich served that committee as its first Secretary.

On 16 January, this two-day test battery, made up of the 50-meter sprint, standing long jump, grip strength, 1000-meter run, 30-second sit-up, pull-up, 10-meter shuttle run, and trunk flexion, was administered to 500 boys of the Manama Secondary School. The test was coordinated by Dr. Bob Grueninger, Director of Fitness and Research and administered by him and Dr. Bob Ford, Dr. Lawrence Bestmann, Vic Godfrey, James Kampen, Bruce Mitchell, and Larry Nosse, along with their counterparts, the inspectors and teachers of the Ministry of Education.

The Academy faculty and their counterparts eventually tested over 20,000 boys and girls, but not before the components of the test were re-evaluated and modified to better reflect the environment in which it was delivered. The initial test information was presented by Dr. Rosandich and Dr. Grueninger at the First Middle East Sports Science Symposium (MESS I) in April of 1977. The physical performance tables were developed in coordination with the Academy team in Bahrain and the Chairman of Fitness and Research at the Academy’s home office in Mobile, Alabama, then located on the campus of the University of South Alabama. Instrumental in developing these tables were two computer experts, Dr. George Uhlig and Dr. Bill Gilley, both members of the Academy’s National Faculty.

During MESS II, in April of 1978, the Academy did a special study to evaluate the I.C.P.F.T. battery for possible revision. In addition to the Academy coaching team in Bahrain, we brought aboard Dr. Richard Berger, Temple University, and Dr. Bob Stauffer, West Point, both members of the Academy’s National Faculty. This combined team tested the Bahrain Defense Force Personnel and reached the following conclusions, which in essence are reflected in this test manual.

1. The test battery was changed from a two-day test battery to a one-day battery for purposes of efficiency and because the test administered over two days in the heat of the Middle East impacted severely upon the individual students and their second-day performances.

2. The test battery was reduced from eight components to five components that reflected effectively those components needed in sport and eliminated costly equipment such as the hand dynamometer, that often malfunctioned in field testing.

The test battery is as follows:

1. 50-meter test, relative power, speed
2. Pull-up, relative strength, strengt
3. 10-meter shuttle run, relative power, speed and suppleness
4. Back throw, absolute power, speed and suppleness
5. 1,000-meter run, aerobic/anaerobic capacity, stamina

The above test was coordinated by Dr. Grueninger and Dr. Gary Hunter with over 20,000 Bahraini children tested. The results of this test are found in this manual and wer presented for the first time internationally by Dr. Rosandich during the Asian Games in Bangkok, Thailand, in December of 1978. Subsequently, the test battery was adopted in more than 21 nations. Since the initial presentation, the test has been modified by replacing the pull-up with the flexed-arm hang based on data collected in neighboring Saudi Arabia.

During MESS III, in April of 1979, the leadership of the International Committee for Physical Fitness Research, including the organization’s president, Dr. Ladislav Novak, and members, Dr. Leonard Larson (USA), Dr. Roy Shepherd (Canada), and Dr. Ishiko (Japan), attended the symposium, as observers of Bahrain’s leadership role in physical fitness, research and sport medicine. Bahrain, under the leadership of the Supreme Council for Youth and Sport, developed not only the finest sport medicine and research centers found in the Middle East but also programs reflecting research, such as this Physical Fitness Test Manual. Thus, the I.C.P.F.T. named Bahrain its research center for the Middle East. Subsequently, the Arab Sport Medicine Council moved its headquarters from Tunisia to Bahrain, which is yet another indication of Bahrain’s leadership in fitness and research.

The Academy has been privileged to work with the Supreme Council for Youth and Sport — now known as the General Organization of Youth and Sport — and its many constituencies, e.g. the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Interior, and the Ministry of Defense, in the development of this International Physical Fitness Test, which in fact is a major contribution to the world of sport education.

U.S. Sports Academy2016-10-14T14:39:42-05:00February 11th, 2008|Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off