Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Australian football.
A thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Western
Australia.
2008
I declare that this thesis is my own work and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, it
contains no material to a substantial extent that has been accepted or submitted to this or
any other institution for an academic award or previously published or written by another
i
Acknowledgements
There are many people that I would like to thank for their assistance along what has
Sandy Gordon and Dr. James Dimmock – deserve the greatest acknowledgment here. Both
have provided professional and personal guidance during the course of my candidature that
has undoubtedly contributed to growth in all areas of my life. For example, Sandy made it
his personal objective to ensure that all of his PhD students developed as both researchers
and practitioners, going beyond the call of duty many times. James, on the other hand,
and perhaps most importantly time on the golf course. Having the opportunity to work with
you both has been an honour and privilege, and your enthusiasm and passion for all things
I would like to thank Steve Hargrave and Luke Rayner from the Western Australian
Football Commission for their assistance during the first two years of my candidature.
Steve initially endorsed and offered unswerving assistance for my research, and when Luke
took over his position he had no hesitation in continuing this support. Both saw great
potential in this topic and went out of their way to ensure that things were made easier for
me. Football development in Western Australia has profited immensely from the efforts of
both individuals.
This project would not have been possible if it were not for those individuals who
participated in this research. I am extremely grateful for the considerable time and effort the
players, coaches, and parents volunteered to this research and the interest they
demonstrated in an area that is lacking in Australian football. What I have learnt from these
ii
individuals, in particular, the coaches, players, and parents of the Navy Blue’s 15s, is
unmeasurable.
Special thanks also to the Personal Construct Psychology (PCP) community whose
openness and willingness to share their experiences and thoughts in helping me evolve my
understanding of PCP are greatly appreciated. I would like to thank David Savage, in
particular, for his correspondences during the early stages of my candidature and the
following individuals for their constructive comments on written work that contributed to
PCP aspects of this thesis: Beverly Walker, Chris Laming, Fay Fransella, Robin Hill, Brian
To everyone I have shared office space with during my candidature thank you for
putting up with my so called “Tourette syndrome” and other annoying habits including the
establishment on an indoor putting green in our office. Thanks also to the postgraduate
contingent, in particular members of the infamous “boys’ night” crew (Pete, Jon, Nat,
Shioto), for all the coffee and lunch runs as well as the late nights in the department spent
Last, but certainly not least, to my family for everything they have and have not
done!
iii
Abstract
At the commencement of this research project in February 2005, there was a paucity
mental toughness in sport (Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005; Fourie & Potgieter,
2001; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2002). Although impressive, the available literature
did little in offering consensus in terms of a definition and operationalising the construct in
and development. The absence of theoretically guided research, in particular, was noted as
a major limitation of this research. The potential significance of mental toughness for
performance excellence combined with the conceptual confusion and lack of rigorous
empirical research highlighted the need for further research on mental toughness in sport.
Accordingly, the purpose of this thesis was to examine issues pertaining to the
football coaches’ perspectives on mental toughness and those factors contributing to its
development are reported. Three central themes for understanding mental toughness in
intelligence, sport intelligence, and physical toughness); situations (e.g., injuries, success);
however, the findings indicated that parents and coaches play the most important role in
iv
acquiring and developing mental toughness. A number of strategies and processes in which
In the second empirical chapter, the data generated from these qualitative
measure of mental toughness for Australian football. Confirmatory and exploratory factor
analyses were employed to explore the factor structure of a pool of items designed to
capture the 11 keys to mental toughness reported by the coaches. The analyses produced a
24-item scale that measures four components of mental toughness in Australian football –
thrive through challenge, sport awareness, tough attitude, and desire success. It was shown
to have adequate internal reliaibilty estimates across different raters (α = .70 to .81)
including footballers, parents, and coaches. Moderate correlations with flow and resilience
were evidenced, while minimal correlations existed with social desirability. Multisource
In the final empirical chapter, two manuscripts in which the effectiveness of two
youth-aged (15’s) Australian footballers are reported. The first presents a quantitative
analysis while the second presents a qualitative analysis. Multisource ratings (self, parent,
and coach) of the AfMTI and self-reported resilience and flow indicated more positive
changes in mental toughness, resilience, and flow than the control group. Similar patterns in
the findings were evident across rating sources. Interviews with several players and one of
their parents as well as the coaches generated their perceptions on the benefits of
v
participating in the program (e.g., increased work ethic, tougher attitudes) and the processes
In summary, the results of the five studies presented in this thesis provide a
several aspects of previous research but also extend this line of inquiry in a number of
ways. It is my hope that other researchers will be stimulated to engage in further research
extending what is presented here and that practitioners will use this information to inform
vi
Manuscripts and Publications Generated from this Thesis
In addition to a general introduction and summary and conclusion chapter, the six
chapters within this thesis are made up of individual manuscripts which have been
published/accepted or submitted for peer-review. In all cases the papers are presented as
typewritten manuscripts suitable for publication. Those co-authors listed below contributed
with the correction and proof reading of the manuscripts once a complete draft had been
prepared. In consultation with his supervisors, the candidate was responsible for designing
the experiments, data collection and analysis, interpretation of the data, and preparation of
the manuscripts.
Chapter II
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (2008). Mental toughness in sport: Current
Gucciardi, D.F., & Gordon, S. (in press). Construing the athlete and exerciser: Research
Sport Psychology.
Gucciardi, D.F., & Gordon, S. (in press). Personal construct psychology and the research
interview: The example of mental toughness in sport. Personal Construct Theory &
Practice.
Gordon, S., Gucciardi, D., & Chambers, T. (2007)1. A personal construct psychology
toughness. In T. Morris, P. Terry & S. Gordon (Eds.), Sport and exercise psychology:
Technology.
1
This book chapter is a compilation of the three manuscripts presented in Chapter II.
vii
Chapter III
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (2008). Towards an understanding of mental
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (2008). Australian football coaches’
publication.
Chapter IV
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (in press). Development and preliminary
Chapter V
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (2008). Evaluation of a mental toughness
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (2008). Evaluation of a mental toughness
Miscellaneous
Gucciardi, D.F., & Gordon, S. (in press)2. Revisiting the performance profile technique:
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (2008)3. Advancing mental toughness
2
Although not a direct contribution to this thesis, this manuscript extends the discussion of PCP presented in
Chapter II by revisiting the performance profile technique. A case example of the revised methodology in
generating an Australian footballer’s perception of mental toughness is also presented.
viii
Professional Presentations Generated from this Thesis
Oral Presentations
Gordon, S., & Gucciardi, D. (2006). Mental toughness in Australian football. Invited
Gordon, S., & Gucciardi, D. (2006). Developing mental toughness among Australian
Gordon, S., & Gucciardi, D. (2006). Being tough in a mental world. Invited presentation
and workshop conducted at the 2nd Annual Clubs United Clubs’ Conference, Perth,
Gordon, S., & Gucciardi, D. (2006). Mental toughness. Invited presentation at the Western
Gucciardi, D., Chambers, T., & Gordon, S. (2007). Construing the personal constructs of
athletes and exercisers: Research and applied perspectives. Paper presented at the
July 16-20.
3
This manuscript integrates aspects of the mental toughness review manuscript presented in Chapter II with
information detailed in the Summary and Conclusion Chapter.
ix
Gucciardi, D., & Gordon, S. (2007). Mental toughness in sport: Current perspectives and
future directions. Paper presented at the Annual Association for Applied Sport
Ryba, T.V., Stambulova, N., Gucciardi, D., Gordon, S., & Wrisberg, C. (2007). Will we
know mental toughness when we see it? Symposium presented at the Annual
October 24-27.
Poster Presentations
Gucciardi, D., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J. (2007). Mental toughness in Australian football:
Ranking the key characteristics. Poster presented at the Annual Association for
Gucciardi, D., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J. (2007). Multisource ratings of mental toughness
Gucciardi, D., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J. (2008). Evaluation of a mental toughness
Gucciardi, D., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J. (2008). Evaluation of a mental toughness
x
Table of Contents
Contents Page
Declaration ……………………………………………………………………… i
Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………... ii
Abstract ……………………………………………………………………….... iv
directions …………………………………………………………..... 11
football ……………………………………………………………... 84
xi
i. Method ……………………………………………………… 90
xii
i. Method ……………………………………………………… 181
Development………………………………………………………… 233
football ………………………………………………………
analysis..................................................................................... 239
analysis………………………………………………………. 231
xiii
d. Personal Construct Psychology ……………………………………... 242
xiv
List of Tables
Page
Chapter II
Chapter IIb
11 corollaries ………………………………………………. 38
poles ………………………………………………………... 49
coping” ……………………………………………………... 54
Chapter IIc
Chapter III
Chapter IIIa
xv
Table 3. Descriptions of the general and competition-specific
Chapter IIIb
Chapter IV
Chapter IV
xvi
Chapter V
Chapter Va
xvii
List of Figures
Page
Chapter I
Chapter II
Chapter IIb
Chapter IIc
toughness …………………………………………………… 76
Chapter III
Chapter IIIa
xviii
Chapter IIIb
Chapter VI
xix
CHAPTER I – Introduction
1
The pursuit for performance excellence in sport encompasses the continual development of
four key facets of performance, namely physical, technical, tactical, and mental skills.
However, when physical, technical and tactical skills are evenly matched, which commonly
occurs at the elite level, the performer with greater levels of what is commonly referred to
as mental toughness seems to prevail more often than those with less developed forms.
Athletes, coaches, sport administrators, and their media widely acknowledge the
Unfortunately, however, there has been a lack of rigorous scientific research designed to
clarify anecdotal reports and develop theoretical conceptions owing important implications
for measuring as well as developing and enhancing this desirable psychological construct.
At the commencement of this research project in February 2005, there was a paucity
Pioneering research in this area (Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton,
2002) focused on understanding mental toughness and the key characteristics encompassing
this construct from the perspective of athletes and coaches from various team and
specific examinations of mental toughness among cricketers (Bull, Shambrook, James, &
Brooks, 2005) and soccer players (Thelwell, Weston, & Greenlees, 2005). Although
mental toughness remained and the area required considerably more research attention in
terms of being able to better understand, measure, and develop or enhance mental
toughness among athletic cohorts (Gordon, Gucciardi, & Chambers, 2007). Even with the
publication of several studies during the course of this research project (e.g., Connaughton,
2
Wadey, Hanton, & Jones, 2008; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2007; see also Crust,
combined with the conceptual confusion and lack of rigorous empirical research
highlighted the need for further research on mental toughness in sport. In order to advance
scientific knowledge in the area of mental toughness several key issues relating to
development of this construct. The information obtained from this conceptual research on
the nature of mental toughness then provides a solid foundation upon which a reliable and
valid measure designed to assess and monitor mental toughness can be developed and
useful for designing and evaluating programs designed to develop and/or enhance mental
toughness. Each of these key issues was examined within the context of Australian football.
Australian Football
Australians, was chosen as the context in which to conduct the series of investigations
presented in this thesis. Since its beginnings in the 1850’s (Blainey, 2003), Australian
football has developed into a multi-million dollar business with a large majority of its
players at the highest level (Australian Football League) being household names in
3
Sport science research on player demands in Australian football have been
(e.g., Cochrane, Lloyd, Buttfield, Seward, & McGivern, 2007) systems as well as analyses
of player movement patterns (e.g., Veale, Pearce, & Carlson, 2007); psychological factors
have received far less attention and represent one area of sport science where Australian
Woodman, AFL Coaching Manager, April, 2007). Notable exceptions do exist, however,
including examinations of perceived stress (Noblet & Gifford, 2002) and predictors of
strain (Noblet, Rodwell, & McWilliams, 2003) as well as retirement from the elite level
(Fortunato & Marchant, 1999). The lack of research on the psychological aspects of
performance in Australian football combined with an increase in player demands both from
within and outside the sport stimulated my interest in exploring the concept of mental
Australian football has one of the highest participation rates (14% or 188,500) for
Australian youth aged 5 to 14 (ABS, 2006). Indeed, it is perhaps the nation’s great
indigenous game and Australia’s most popular and most passionately supported pastime.
From a conceptual standpoint, Australian football provided a medium through which I was
extended to a sport that had not previously been (and is rarely) studied.
Figure 1. The dimensions of the oval are usually between 135-185m long and 110-155m
wide and comprise a centre square which is 40 x 40m as well as a curved “fifty metre” line
4
which is 50m away from the goal line. It is played between two teams made up of 22
players, the objective of which is to score more points than your opponent over four
quarters each of about 30 min. Points are scored by kicking a prolate spheroid ball through
four posts, approximately 6.4m apart, erected at each end of the field. When kicked through
the inner two posts, known as the goal posts, six points are scored; only one point is scored
when the ball passes through a goal post and the outer post, which is referred to as a behind
post.
The ball is moved in all directions either by kicking or hand passing the ball (using
one hand to hold the ball and the other to fist it) to a teammate. When a ball is caught on the
full from a kick the player receiving the ball is awarded a “mark” and can stop and take
approximately 10 sec to size up his or her options. On the other hand, receiving a hand pass
5
requires the player to continue moving the ball and the player must bounce the ball on the
ground every 15m when running with the ball in his or her possession. Opposition players
aim to stop an opponent carrying the ball by tackling or bumping the player below the
shoulders. Only when the ball is kicked on the full out of play does the opposition side
receive a free-kick, otherwise the ball is thrown back in by an umpire monitoring the
boundaries. Field and goal umpires officiate over general play and allocate a free-kick to
players for a number of reasons (e.g., throwing the ball, incorrect tackle).
Multimethod research involves two or more unique ways of collecting and analysing data
program and which integrates or relates the data of each technique at some stage of the
research process (Creswell, Plano Clark, Guttman, & Hanson, 2003). Importantly,
multimethod research designs have been acknowledged by several scholars as one of the
most viable ways of examining complex social and psychological phenomena (Brannen,
1992; Creswell, 2003). Several rationales for combining qualitative and quantitative data
collection and analysis methods have been described in the literature (Brewer & Hunter,
1989; Greene, Caracelli, & Graham, 1989; Newman, Ridenour, Newman, & DeMarco,
2003; Punch, 2005). Those relevant to the present research include being able to
compliment and elaborate the results from one method with the other by combining the
subsequently measured through the development of a new instrument; and examine the
6
Consequently, the general purposes of this thesis were threefold. First, I aimed to
elicit participants’ perspectives about mental toughness and those factors contributing to its
development in Australian football. A second endeavour was to use this information in the
toughness among youth-aged (15’s) footballers. A corollary of this was to determine the
Kelly, 1995/1991) was adopted as the theoretical framework guiding this thesis. Unlike
other theoretical frameworks which tackle only single and isolated functions and
unifies all of these components into one psychology (Gucciardi & Gordon, in press-a).
Thesis Organisation
Following this introductory chapter, I present an empirical and theoretical overview chapter
toughness literature (Chapter IIa), I introduce PCP (Kelly, 1995/1991) and its usefulness
for sport and exercise psychology research and practice (Chapter IIb). Due to space
IIc) dedicated to a detailed discussion of the PCP interview employed in the first empirical
examination of this thesis. Thereafter follows a presentation of the five studies central to
The two qualitative studies presented in Chapter III explore definitional and
conceptual issues pertaining to the understanding of mental toughness and its development
in Australian football. Within Chapter IV, the development and validation of a sport-
7
specific measure of mental toughness is discussed within a construct validity framework
(Marsh, 1997, 2002). Two manuscripts detailing a quantitative and qualitative analysis of
collection of papers in a format suitable for publication, Chapter VI draws together the
main findings in the context of previous research and establishes the significance of the
this thesis, reflect on the usefulness of PCP for informing the methodologies within this
thesis and as a theoretical base in which to interpret the data, and discuss the implications
8
CHAPTER II – Empirical and
Theoretical Overview
9
Overview of Chapter II
general layout of this thesis, this review of the literature is organised according to
personal construct psychology (PCP; Kelly, 1955/1991) – driving this thesis. Its usefulness
for sport and exercise psychology research and practice is also highlighted. I conclude the
chapter with an overview of the PCP interview employed to elicit coaches’ perceptions of
10
CHAPTER IIa
11
The term “mental toughness” is commonly used throughout the world by sporting
communities and their media to describe the superior mental qualities of a performer.
Whether it is the 10 foot “final putt” to win a golf tournament or the ability to come from
two sets down in tennis to win the match in five it is a quality that is highly valued by sport
participants. Most elite athletes contend that at least 50% of superior athletic performance is
the result of mental or psychological factors that reflect the phenomenon of mental
toughness (Loehr, 1982, 1986), whereas 83% of wrestling coaches rated it as the most
Hodge, Peterson, & Petlichkoff, 1987). Despite the widely acknowledged importance of
mental toughness for achieving performance excellence within coaching and scientific
communities (e.g., Gibson, 1998; Goldberg, 1998; Gould, 2002), only recently have
The objective of this manuscript is to outline the empirical literature that has
research that has addressed conceptual, measurement, and development issues to highlight
current knowledge and future avenues of research in the area of mental toughness in sport.
Qualitative research that has sought to gain an understanding of mental toughness and the
key characteristics encompassing it as well as attempts to define this elusive construct are
12
Understanding Mental Toughness
in sport is limited. This is surprising given the widespread and numerous anecdotal reports
from coaches and athletes emphasising its importance. Earlier investigations sampled
participants from a variety of sports (Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones, Hanton, &
Connaughton 2002; see also Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2007), whereas more recent
attempts to examine this construct have been conducted within individual sports (Bull,
Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005; Thelwell, Weston, & Greenlees, 2005)4. Prior to these
peer-reviewed publications, Loehr (1982; see also 1986, 1995) provided one of the earliest
discussions of mental toughness and its training in sport in which he claimed that mental
control; negative energy; motivation level; attitude control; positive energy; and visual and
which was based on his extensive consulting work but not grounded in sound theoretical
and empirical knowledge, provided what seems to be the catalyst for empirical interest in
Sport-General Research
Fourie and Potgieter (2001) were the first to identify psychological attributes that
study, written responses from 131 expert coaches and 160 elite athletes from 31 team and
4
It should be noted that a number of qualitative investigations do exist (e.g., Fawcett, 2006; Gordon &
Sridhar, 2005; Middleton, Marsh, Martin, Richards, & Perry, 2004c). Given that these studies are from
conference proceedings and do not report the research rigour attached to those studies which have been
through the peer-review process, I have chosen not to include these within the empirical review.
13
individual sports were content analysed and 12 key components of mental toughness were
convictions; and ethics. Concentration was regarded by the coaches as the most important
characteristic, whereas perseverance was the most important characteristic according to the
athletes. However, the use of open-ended written responses did not afford a methodology
by which these researchers could probe participants’ responses thereby limiting the quality
of data because specific comments could not be expanded and developed further.
Ten international performers (seven males and three females) from a variety of individual
and team sports participated in either a focus-group or 1-1 interview. An inductive thematic
content analysis of the transcribed verbatim data revealed 12 attributes as keys to mental
toughness in sport. Having established these key characteristics, procedures in which the
key characteristics were ranked by their importance to a mentally tough athlete assembled
these key characteristics in the following manner: unshakeable self-belief in your ability to
achieve competition goals; ability to bounce back from performance set-backs as a result of
qualities and abilities that make you better than your opponents; insatiable desire and
internalised motives to succeed; remaining fully focused on the task at hand in the face of
emotional pain, while still maintaining technique and effort under distress (in training and
14
competition); accepting that competition anxiety is inevitable and knowing that you can
cope with it; not adversely affected by other’s good and bad performances; thriving on the
pressure of competition; remaining fully focused in the face of personal life distractions;
and switching sport focus on and off as required. However, a number of methodological
(e.g., small sample size and limited variety of sports sampled) as well as conceptual
limitations (e.g., presentation of the results was largely descriptive and failed to draw on
established theory) associated with this research limited its theoretical impact and scientific
rigour.
Olympic or world champions as well as three coaches and four sport psychologists who
have worked with these athletes. This data triangulation methodology represents one of the
most rigorous investigations to date. Their primary objective was to explore the concept of
mental toughness with the aim to “develop a framework of mental toughness by identifying
the key underpinning attributes in a broad range of sports” (p. 244). An inductive thematic
analysis of the transcribed verbatim data revealed 30 key attributes central to a framework
of mental toughness, which concurred with but also differed considerably from the 12
attributes were subsequently clustered into subcategories (belief; focus; using long-term
goals as motivation; controlling the environment; pushing yourself to the limit; regulating
performance; handling pressure; awareness and control of thoughts and feelings; and
handling failure and success) within four central dimensions. The first dimension was
which are relevant for the three major contexts of athletic performance (training,
15
competition, and post-competition). Overall, this framework provides a description of what
foundation upon which to better understand the processes by which the key mental
toughness characteristics enable one to be mentally tough. As this was not a key focus of
their study, future research is required to identify and understand these processes.
Sport-Specific Research
Two recent investigations focusing specifically on cricketers (Bull et al., 2005) and
soccer players’ (Thelwell et al., 2005) perceptions of mental toughness represent significant
al. (2005) interviewed 12 male English cricketers identified by 101 English cricket coaches
as being high in mental toughness during the previous 20 years. An inductive thematic
analysis of their interview transcripts identified four global themes, which were composed
into a hierarchical structure (pyramid) and subsequently used to disseminate the findings to
England’s cricket coaching and playing population. The first theme, environmental
influence, incorporated parental influences and childhood background and was viewed as
the foundation for the development of mental toughness and its primary antecedent during
the formative years (cf. Bloom, 1985; Côté, 1999). Other secondary factors, such as the
need to “earn” success, have opportunities to survive early setbacks, and exposure to
The other three themes focused on the players themselves. Common personality
competitiveness with self as well as others, were categorised under the theme tough
character. Several major attitudes were also identified and categorised under the theme
tough attitudes, which were considered an important component for the successful
16
exploitation of a tough character. These included having a never-say-die mindset, go-the-
opportunities, willing to take risks, belief in quality preparation, determination to make the
most of ability, and self-set challenging targets. The most desirable cognitions in and
around competitive events were categorised under the final theme of tough thinking, and
included an ability to think clearly (e.g., good decision-making, keeping perspective, honest
off physical conditioning, maintain self-focus). Importantly, Bull et al.’s data merged
providing an intuitively appealing conceptualisation, which itself was not grounded in the
empirical data but rather for its use in disseminating the findings, Bull et al.’s interpretation
of the data was largely descriptive and lacked any detailed analysis. Established theory, for
example, was not discussed as a means of facilitating a deeper understanding of the key
and Greenlees (2005) interviewed six male professional soccer players, all with
understanding of mental toughness with that forwarded by Jones et al. Each interviewee
was given the opportunity to amend their definition of mental toughness after being
presented with the Jones et al. definition and there was considerable overlap between the
two cohorts. The major difference being, however, that the soccer sample viewed mental
toughness as enabling players to always cope better than their opponents rather than
generally coping better. In addition, Thelwell et al. identified 10 key mental toughness
17
attributes for mental toughness in soccer, which closely resembled those provided by Jones
et al. (2002).
In a second study, 43 male, professional players with first team playing experience
having total self-belief at all times that you will achieve success; wanting the ball at all
times (when playing well and not so well); having the ability to react to situations
positively; having the ability to hang on and be calm under pressure; knowing what it takes
to grind yourself out of trouble; having the ability to ignore distractions and remain
opponents; having everything outside of the game in control; and enjoying the pressure
associated with performance. Aside from self-belief, which was ranked as the most
important attribute for the mentally tough performer by both the Jones et al. (2002) and
Thelwell et al. samples, there was a considerable difference among the importance ascribed
to key characteristics across these cohorts. However, the scientific rigour of these findings
are confounded by the very small sample size in the first study (n = 6) as well as the limited
theoretical impact of these findings as a result of the descriptive presentation of the results.
perspectives of mental toughness through exploratory research but has failed to draw on
these research endeavours, Clough, Earle, and Sewell (2002) sought to combine the
ecologically valid views of athletes, coaches and practitioners with already established
18
1979; Kobasa, Maddi, & Kahn, 1982) with applied sport psychology knowledge to develop
challenge that provide an individual with resistance to negative life experiences such as
stress and anxiety (Maddi, 2006). Clough et al. conceptualised hardiness and mental
challenge, but they added confidence into their model of mental toughness to differentiate it
from hardiness. Indeed, the addition of confidence into such a conceptualisation of mental
toughness is consistent with the scant literature (e.g., Bull et al., 2002: Fourie & Potgieter,
According to the 4C’s model, mentally tough individuals: (a) view negative
experiences (e.g., anxiety and stress) as a challenge that they can overcome but also a
natural and essential catalyst for growth and development; (b) believe that they are
influential in dealing with and controlling negative life experiences; (c) are deeply involved
in what they are doing and committed to achieving their goals; and (d) are confident in their
ability to deal with and overcome negative life experiences (Clough et al., 2002). Despite
was not developed on the basis of exploratory empirical work but on existing theoretical
The fact that their conceptualisation of mental toughness is not grounded in the social and
cultural conditions of sport presents some questions as to the applicability of their model in
scientific rigour in that no information was presented as to data collection and analysis of
the views of practitioners, players, and coaches. However, their research does highlight the
19
importance of drawing on established psychological theory to enhance our understanding of
literature (e.g., Gibson, 1998; Goldberg, 1998), the only formal definition of mental
toughness which has emerged from empirical research is that forwarded by Jones and
Support for this definition was recently obtained with male soccer players (Thelwell et al.,
2005) and Olympic and world champions as well as coaches and sport psychologists who
have worked with these athletes (Jones et al., 2007). Minor differences were observed
between the soccer-specific definition and the definition forwarded by Jones and
colleagues, however. Specifically, the soccer sample viewed mental toughness as enabling
players to always cope better than their opponents rather than generally coping better.
Despite representing an excellent starting point, this definition is lacking for two
reasons. First, because of its focus on the outcomes of mental toughness this definition does
little to suggest what this “natural or developed psychological edge” is. Unfortunately,
adversity, pressure, and challenge provides little information about the processes of mental
toughness that moderate and mediate one’s ability to thrive through such circumstances.
Second, the outcomes of mental toughness are focused heavily on success being defined in
20
regards to beating an opponent, which implies that those athletes who do not beat their
opponent or achieve success cannot be mentally tough. Defined in this way, it may be
argued that mental toughness simply reflects superior athleticism rather than a superior
ability to deal with, overcome, and thrive through the many challenges and pressures
has meant that there have been few attempts to develop inventories that profile and assess
mental toughness in sport. Loehr’s (1986) Psychological Performance Inventory (PPI) has
been the most influential and widely employed inventory for measuring mental toughness
in both applied and research settings (e.g., Golby & Sheard, 2004, 2006; Golby, Sheard, &
Lavallee, 2003; Sheard & Golby, 2006). The PPI measures what Loehr claims as being the
negative energy; motivation; attitude control; positive energy; and visual and imagery
control. However, Loehr offered no psychometric support for its use and, until recently,
little rigorous research has been conducted on the psychometric properties of the PPI.
results. Middleton et al. (2004d) evaluated the construct validity of the PPI with a sample of
263 (163 males; 101 females) student-athletes (aged 12 to 17) from an elite sports high
school in Sydney, Australia. Initially, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was not
supportive of the a priori model and was of poor fit. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
was then performed and an alternative five-factor model was found to be most supportive
of the data. Although the alternative structure provided a sounder model fit, it showed
21
weaker correlations with some of the hypothesised key correlates of mental toughness (e.g.,
when compared with the original structure. Middleton et al. concluded that neither the
original nor the alternative five-factor structure were psychometrically sound measures of
mental toughness and suggested that further conceptual/theoretical work was needed to
methodological limitations inherent within this design such as the small sample size (cf.
Meyers, 2006) and external validity (e.g., mean age of participants being 13.8 years)
As a replication and extension of Middleton et al. (2004d), Golby, Sheard, and Van
Wersch (2007) utilised a larger and more representative sample. Participants in this study
included 303 males aged 14 to 63 (M = 25.68, SD = 6.28) and 105 females aged 12 to 44
(M = 19.78, SD = 5.95) from a variety of team (e.g., rugby union, basketball, soccer) and
individual sports (e.g., swimming, slalom canoeing). Unlike Middleton et al., who initially
conducted a CFA to examine the PPI’s factor structure, Golby et al. embarked by
analysis yielded minimal support for the a priori factor structure (e.g., items on each factor
were inconsistent with original structure). Prior to running a subsequent EFA, 13 items
from the principal components analysis with factor loadings <.40 or those with cross-
loadings >.30 were deleted. The analysis yielded an alternative four-factor, 14-item
structure with significant correlations among the four factors. Accordingly, a higher-order
factor analysis was performed on the four-factor solution, with the general mental
toughness (GMT) factor accounting for 14% to 58% of item variance. A CFA on the GMT
22
yielded was not supportive, whereas the incremental and fit indices for the four-factor
Based on their 4C’s model of mental toughness, Clough et al. (2002) subsequently
developed the Mental Toughness-48 (MT-48). It has 48 statements with responses made on
a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The MT-48
was completed by more than 600 athletes from various sports and was shown to have good
test-retest reliability (r = .90) and sufficient internal consistency of the subscales (α = .71 to
.80). Construct validity was offered in the form of moderate correlations with other
.42), life satisfaction (r = .56), and self-efficacy (r = .68). Using the MT-48, Clough and
colleagues have revealed moderate correlations between the MT-48 and isometric
process was overly brief and did not provide enough detail regarding the methodologies
employed to develop their model and associated inventory. Such brevity fails to convey the
extent to which the methodologies employed demonstrate rigor, reliability and validity.
For example, there was no indication whether the instrument went through (the required)
rigorous statistical procedures (e.g., exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses) in the
development and validation stages. Such information is important for two reasons. First,
this information is required to demonstrate that the inventory has adequate psychometric
properties and, therefore, is actually measuring what the inventory is asserting to measure
(i.e., the proposed model). Second, supportive information concerning the factor structure
of the inventory will provide further evidence in favour of the associated model of mental
23
toughness, whereas unsupportive evidence will place some doubt on the proposed model. In
addition, Clough et al. have failed to demonstrate that their measure of mental toughness,
and therefore their 4C’s model, can be differentiated from psychometrically sound
hardiness measures (e.g., Personal Views Survey III; Maddi & Khoshaba, 2001).
Another gap in the mental toughness literature is that there is little research
examining how the key characteristics revealed in the handful of peer-reviewed studies are
toughness per se, Bull et al. (2005) highlighted the interaction of a performer’s
toughness. Four global themes, which were hierarchically organised in the form of a mental
toughness pyramid, highlighted the important role that an athlete’s environment plays in
competitiveness with self as well as others), tough attitude (e.g., having a never-say-die
determination to make the most of ability, and self-set challenging targets), and tough
thinking (e.g., being able to think clearly and having a robust self-confidence). Primary
environmental influences identified by Bull et al. (2005) included parental influences and
childhood background. Other secondary influences (e.g., need to earn success, have
opportunities to survive early setbacks, and exposure to foreign cricket) were also
highlighted as being an important foundation upon which the key characteristics of mental
toughness are developed. However, while revealing that these influences were integral to
the development of mental toughness, little information was provided as to how (i.e.,
24
processes, strategies, mechanisms) these factors exerted their influence in the development
process.
from a previous study (Jones et al., 2002) about their perception of how mental toughness is
developed and maintained. Several contributing factors were said to interact throughout a
long-process discussed within each of Bloom’s (1985) developmental stages (early, middle,
and late years). Key individuals within the athlete’s socialisation network (coaches, peers,
considered integral to this process. Participants were also in agreement that exposure to a
variety of experiences, both within and outside of sport, were crucial for its development.
Similarly, intrapersonal influences resulting from the motivational climate (e.g., enjoyment,
mastery) as well as an insatiable desire and internalised motives to succeed were commonly
discussed by participants. Finally, psychological skills and strategies such as imagery, pre-
performance routines, and goal-setting, which are taught by sport psychologists, were
considered highly influential in the later years. Participants also believed that maintenance
through three sources was required once mental toughness had been developed: intrinsic
motivation to succeed; social support; and the implementation of basic and advanced
of gifted and talented school children (Gagné, 2004) and athletes (Bloom, 1985; Côté,
1999; Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002) as well as talent development research in sport
(e.g., Fraser-Thomas, Côté & Deakin, 2005; Martindale, Collins, & Daubney, 2005;
Tranckle & Cushion, 2006; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005) offers a useful backdrop for
understanding how the psychological characteristics associated with mental toughness may
25
be developed. This research consistently shows that people within an individual’s
socialisation network (e.g., coaches, parents, and teachers) play an important role in the
development of those psychological skills enabling gifts to develop into talent. The ways in
include both direct (e.g., teaching or emphasising certain psychological lessons) and
with this line of inquiry. However, talent development research has further highlighted that
the key individuals in an athlete’s socialisation network, including parents and coaches, can
have both positive and negative effects on the psychological development of individuals
(e.g., Gould, Lauer, Rolo, Jannes, & Pennisi, 2006; Scanlan, Stein, & Ravizza, 1991;
Wolfenden & Holt, 2005; see also Gagné, 2004). As such, future research should examine
the ways in which important sources of influence both facilitate and hinder the
known about and understood as mental toughness in sport. Perhaps the most common
finding from these studies is that mental toughness is consistently considered multifaceted
and made up of multiple key components. These key components can be broadly classified
characteristics that are common across all the sports sampled thus far (e.g., self-
and handle pressure, resilience, and quality preparation) suggesting that this constellation of
26
core psychological characteristics would not vary significantly by sport. It should be noted,
however, that the cohorts involved in these investigations are certainly not representative of
all sport participants. Indeed, there are other notable variances in key characteristics which
seem to provide sport-specific information (e.g., team unity, ethics, religious convictions,
ability to react quickly), suggesting that mental toughness may be contextually driven.
manifesting itself only in negative life experiences (e.g., Clough et al., 2002), recent
research suggests that these key characteristics are important for dealing with both positive
(e.g., winning streak) and negative situations (e.g., injury) in which an individual perceives
some kind of challenge, pressure or adversity (Jones et al., 2007). The fact that mental
toughness seems to be relevant for dealing with both positively and negatively construed
situations provides an important conceptual distinction from other related constructs such
as resilience and hardiness, which are conceptualised only in relation to negative life
experiences such as adversity, stress, and anxiety (Maddi, 2006; Rutter, 2006). For
2006). Mental toughness, on the other hand, is much more than being resilient. Although
the number of characteristics or skills that have been associated with mental toughness are
far-ranging and include a resilience component, each characteristic seems to refer more
pressure, and adversity (cf. Bull et al., 2005; Jones et al., 2002, 2007; Thelwell et al., 2005).
some components may be more important and contributing more to mental toughness than
others (Jones et al., 2002, 2007; Thelwell et al., 2005). However, the hierarchical structure
27
of this organisation cannot be determined from these investigations as the key
characteristics identified, although comparable, were not exactly the same across studies.
The rather simplistic nature of the rankings methodologies also lacks scientific rigour.
important component of mental toughness in sport. This trend is not surprising given that
high self-confidence and belief in one’s ability to achieve success is commonly associated
with many other positive psychological states and optimal experiences such as flow
(Jackson & Csikszentmihalyi, 1999) and peak performance (Krane & Williams, 2006).
Unlike these previous investigations, Bull et al. (2005) employed a pyramid to disseminate
their findings and convey the conceptual relationship between environmental influences,
tough character, tough attitudes, and tough thinking as well as its development in cricket.
conceptual representation was not grounded in any empirical data and, therefore, requires
further examination.
Finally, there is also preliminary evidence to suggest that mental toughness derives
from some innate disposition as well as through the internal and external experiences one
has throughout his or her life and the interpretations that develop from such experiences
(Jones et al., 2002; Connaughton et al., 2008). Key individuals in the athlete’s socialisation
network and intrapersonal factors (e.g., motives to succeed), in particular, seem to play a
Unfortunately, however, these conclusions are based on limited empirical evidence and
28
Where to Next?
which is predominantly outcome focused and descriptive in nature, seems weak at offering
insights into the processes by which mental toughness operates. As a result, the literature
on this apparently desirable attribute still fails in both offering consensus in terms of a
reported in the literature that a number of conceptual ambiguities exist regarding mental
toughness (e.g., Gordon, Gucciardi, & Chambers, 2007) but no specific detail is provided
by authors to alert the reader as to what these are or how they can be addressed. In this final
section I address this issue by highlighting both conceptual and methodological limitations
associated with previous research and by identifying potential avenues for alleviating such
concerns.
Generally speaking, the research to date has been inadequate as it has focused only
on describing the key characteristics and the outcomes of mental toughness. Previous
research has also failed to ground key stakeholders’ perceptions of mental toughness in the
context of what mental toughness contrasts with. The danger in conceptualising mental
that it opens the possibility for this construct to be misconstrued. A discussion in which
mental toughness is likened to the resilience construct is one example how it can be
understand perceptions of mental toughness and its conceptual opposite, the processes
involved, the constructs driving these processes, and what eventuates as a result of these
29
both the outcomes and processes of the way mental toughness functions and, in particular,
Associated with the descriptive nature of the scant literature is that there has been
little in the way of using established psychological theory to clarify as well as enhance our
research that has identified key stakeholders’ perceptions of mental toughness has failed to
draw on psychological theory such as self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; see
also Ryan & Deci, 2000), stress and coping theory (e.g., Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), and
self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1997; see also Feltz, Short, & Sullivan, 2008) to theoretically
ground idiosyncratic meanings of motivation, coping, and self-efficacy which are prevalent
in the empirical literature on mental toughness. In contrast, Clough et al. (2002) integrated
psychological theory examining hardiness within health psychology with their personal
knowledge stemming from consultations with elite athletes and coaches to elucidate a
lack of scientific rigour in their work does little to support the applicability of their model
in sport.
and retrieval of themes to understand the meaning of each participant’s discourse has been
emotions, intentions, and attitudes (Krippendorf, 2003), the data interpretation that
30
coincides with content analyses is largely descriptive in nature and fails to encourage the
collection and analysis methodologies have largely been ignored by researchers in the area.
Grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), for example, seeks to develop theory which is
grounded in the data by reading (and re-reading) a textual database and “discovering” or
labelling variables (called categories, concepts and codes) and their interrelationships as
the study of a range of human phenomena across various settings (Kuhn, 1962). Although
Jones et al. (2002) indicated that personal construct psychology (PCP; Kelly, 1955/1991)
was the general framework driving their research, they did not detail exactly how PCP
informed the design of their research or provided a platform in which to interpret the
resultant data. Theory-based research, rather than purely descriptive studies, is required to
facilitate future research in its attempt at working towards conceptual clarity and consensus
Conclusion
excellence in sport settings, relatively few researchers have explored the area. In this first
section of the empirical and theoretical review chapter I have reviewed the extant literature
understanding, measuring and developing mental toughness in sport and to identify avenues
for future research. Although important contributions have been made to current
31
conceptualisations of mental toughness in sport over the last decade, there are a number of
knowledge on mental toughness, none more so than the atheoretical nature of this research.
Consequently, this dissertation employs PCP (Kelly, 1955/1991) as its guiding theoretical
Accordingly, the next section of this chapter reviews PCP and its potential usefulness for
32
CHAPTER IIb
Construing the athlete and exerciser: Research and applied perspectives from personal
construct psychology.
33
Theoretical frameworks provide researchers and practitioners with specific methodologies,
applications, and theoretical interpretations for the study of a range of human phenomena
across various settings. Over the years, several sport and exercise psychology theorists have
and exercise (e.g., Brustad, 2002; Martens, 1987). In support of these suggestions, several
authors have proposed and demonstrated the usefulness of a number of frameworks for
research and practice in sport and exercise settings. Recent examples include hermeneutic
discursive psychology (Faulkner & Finlay, 2002), and personal construct psychology (PCP;
Gordon, Gucciardi, & Chambers, 2007). However, despite having been employed
(Costigan, Ellis, & Watkinson, 2003), education (Pope & Denicolo, 2001), and
psychotherapy (Winter & Viney, 2005) PCP (Kelly, 1955/1991) has yet to feature strongly
Studies using traditional PCP construct elicitation techniques such as the repertory
grid and laddering techniques as well as elaborations of this theory using the performance
profile in sport and exercise settings do exist (see Gordon et al., 2007, for an overview). A
more recent extension has seen the use of PCP in the derivation of an interview protocol to
(Gucciardi & Gordon, in press; Gucciardi, Gordon, & Dimmock, in press). Despite such
examples in the literature, PCP has yet to make a significant impact in sport and exercise
settings. One explanation for this is the absence of a detailed overview of PCP, its key
34
methodologies, and its potential usefulness for sport and exercise psychology researchers
and practitioners. For this theoretical framework to be fully appreciated and recognised as a
participation in sport and physical activity we require an overview of PCP that grounds it
The purposes of this paper, therefore, are to review key tenets of PCP and provide a
foundation upon which others may seek to explore its usefulness for an array of research
and professional endeavours in sport and exercise settings. To achieve these goals I first
provide an overview of the philosophical roots and the key components of PCP. This is
personal construct enquiry and two elaborations of PCP in sport and exercise settings. I
then describe two case examples illustrating how I have employed PCP in my professional
practice. I conclude with a discussion of the implications for research and professional
practice.
Central to PCP is the notion that we actively and continuously attempt to make
sense of the world around us (Kelly, 1955/1991). Kelly was clear in noting, however, that
while perhaps there is ultimate truth in the world no one has direct access to such truth. He
argued that “since an absolute construction of the universe is not feasible, we shall have to
predictive efficiency” (p. 150)5. Rather than conforming to the concept of one unalterable
reality, Kelly contended that there is always more than one way to interpret and give
5
Direct quotations of Kelly (1955/1991) throughout this paper were taken from the 1955 publication which is
currently no longer in print, whereas the 1991 publication is still in print. However, we have included the page
numbers of the fundamental postulate and the 11 corollaries for both publications in Table 1.
35
Constructive alternativism emphasises that there will always be other ways of
viewing the world, some of which will undoubtedly be better than other constructions (e.g.,
self-belief vs. self-doubt). Constructions that are more useful permit clearer avenues for
anticipating a wider range of events, whereas less useful constructions provide fragmented
avenues of anticipation and fewer predictions of one’s behaviour (Kelly, 1955/1991). Thus,
no one should feel trapped by one interpretation of an event as we all have the ability to
the adoption of new perspectives and frameworks for our understanding of the world.
Consistent with his theoretical formulation (i.e., contrasting poles of distinction), Kelly
advanced through the accumulation of facts and truths, which he termed accumulative
fragmentalism.
all behaviour is an experiment in which we test our anticipations of the world. It follows
that the events of our lives do not determine our behaviour; rather, we experience an event
and place our anticipations and predictions on it and this, not the event itself, is what
determines our behaviour (Kelly, 1955/1991). It is through these (internal and external)
experiences that we develop and modify constructions of the world. Personal constructs are
not evaluated in terms of their truth or correctness but rather for the usefulness and validity
of each construct for that individual’s behaviour; how well that construction of events
allows an individual to best anticipate what will happen in the immediate and long-term
36
Personal Construct Psychology: The Key Components
The fundamental postulate presented in Table 1 describes the central thesis of PCP
useful model than the more dominant theories at the time (e.g., behaviourism and
people seem to act as personal scientists engaged in making meaning of the world around
them by anticipating and making predictions about their personal experiences much like a
research scientist. Construing is the term Kelly coined to represent the interpretive process
whereby individuals seek to reveal meaning from the succession of events (i.e., elements)
they experience by identifying recurring themes and their contrasts (i.e., constructs). Kelly
further specified 11 corollaries of the fundamental postulate that stipulate and describe the
nature of construing but also the development and modification of personal constructs and
the organisation of our construct systems (see Table 1). Taken together, the fundamental
postulate and its 11 corollaries propose that we actively seek to make sense of our world
through our experiences (both internal and external) by developing, maintaining, and
of discrimination taking place at all levels of awareness, from verbal to intuitive thought,
which supports our anticipation of events. Kelly (1955/1991) viewed humans as holistic
emphasised that because these features stem from one underlying process of anticipation
and construction we cannot reduce human psychology into parts and study each
individually without any consideration of the other features (e.g., cognitive psychology vs.
37
Table 1. An overview of PCP: The fundamental postulate and the 11 corollaries.
Construction A person anticipates events by construing their replications (p. We identify recurring or consistent themes, which enable us to anticipate their replications and recognise them when they
Corollary 50/35). do occur, by distinguishing between those things that are similar and those that are not.
Individuality Persons differ from each other in their construction of events (p. Each person is different not because they experience different events but because of the idiosyncratic and unique manner
Corollary 55/38). in which they make sense of their experiences.
Organisation Each person characteristically evolves, for his [sic] convenience People develop a hierarchical system of interrelated constructs where some constructs are more important (superordinate)
Corollary in anticipating events, a construction system embracing ordinal than others (subordinate) in an attempt to make their world manageable.
relationships between constructs (p. 56/39).
Dichotomy A person’s construct system is composed of a finite number of People store their meaning-making experiences in the form of bipolar constructs, which guide how an individual thinks,
Corollary dichotomous constructs (p. 59/41). feels, and behaves.
Choice A person chooses for himself [sic] that alternative in a Rather than being passive or reactive, at some level of awareness people choose a preferred pole of a construct that seems
Corollary dichotomised construct through which he [sic] anticipates the most useful for predicting future events.
greatest possibility for elaboration of his [sic] system (p. 64/45).
Range A construct is convenient for the anticipation of a finite range of Each personal construct has both a focus and range of convenience (i.e., area of maximum usefulness) in which it can be
Corollary events only (p. 68/48). most applicable and others where it will not; that is, no construct is useful for everything.
Experience A person’s construction system varies as he [sic[ successively Personal construct systems undergo a progressive evolution as people continually attempt to make sense of their world in
Corollary construes the replication of events (p. 72/50). which some personal constructs are validated and retained while those that are not validated are revised.
Modulation The variation in a person’s construction system is limited by the Permeable constructs are more useful in making sense of novel occurrences or events, while those that are impermeable
Corollary permeability of the constructs within whose ranges of are impenetrable and not open to change.
convenience the variants lie (p. 77/54).
Fragmentation A person may successively employ a variety of constructions People’s construct systems do not always have to be logically related because constructs within an individuals system
Corollary subsystems which are inferentially incompatible with each other may appear incompatible or inconsistent with each other, as far as their superordinate constructs are permeable enough to
(p. 83/58). tolerate these inconsistencies.
Commonality The extent that one person employs a construction of experience Despite personal construct systems being idiosyncratic and unique, individuals may share similarities in the ways in
Corollary which is similar to that employed by another, his [sic] processes which they make sense of events.
are psychologically similar to those of the other person (p.
90/63).
Sociality To the extent that one person construes the construction process This corollary is concerned with interpersonal understanding and interaction by which people go beyond simple
Corollary of another he [sic] may play a role in a social process involving observation of another’s behaviour and interpret what that behaviour means to them; that is, construing another person’s
the other person (p. 95/66). construction of events.
38
behavioural psychology). PCP avoids this schism and attempts to unify all of our senses
into one psychology recommending that they be construed together so that we may develop
Ultimately, we are trying to understand what a person’s construing leads him or her to
anticipate from his or her world of people and events, and how these meanings dictate his
or her behaviour. This “anticipatory” focus is what distinguishes PCP from every other
techniques are not viewed as standardised, objective tests (Walker & Winter, 2007) but
rather methods for structuring conversations and interventions (Fransella, Bell, &
Bannister, 2004). Despite my focus on two of the more popular traditional methods, namely
the repertory grid and laddering techniques, there are a range of elicitation methods to fit
grids; see Denicolo, 2003; Fransella, 2003; Walker & Winter, 2007, for an overview). I also
The repertory grid technique (RGT) is a method (not a test) for exploring the
relations between elements and constructs. Specifically, it enables one to understand those
constructs that an individual considers personally meaningful for some particular event
(e.g., the Olympics), context (e.g., competition or training), or set of objects (e.g., people;
Fransella et al., 2004). Although the RGT was originally developed by Kelly to assist in
39
counselling his clients, the technique has subsequently been applied in many different
contexts (see Fransella et al., 2004). Gordon et al. (2007) have provided an overview of
research that has employed the RGT in sport and exercise settings.
framework and then try to fit everyone into a limited set of “boxes.” It can be carried out in
a timely and efficient manner with the development of computerised versions of the
technique placing less emphasis on conducting face-to-face interviews. Perhaps the most
attractive feature of the RGT is that the data generated can be subjected to a variety of
grids is required by the analyst to make the most appropriate decision. As individuals’ grids
can be substantially different from one another, this becomes even more important when
analysing several grids. Researchers and practitioners implementing the technique for the
first time may benefit greatly from any one of the software packages designed specifically
adaptations of the RGT, as the nature of the constructs elicited can be substantially affected
by even subtle changes (see Neimeyer, Neimeyer, Hagans, & Van Brunt, 2002, for an
help establish the positioning of that construct within the individual’s overall system. As a
result, little information is obtained about the importance individuals place on certain
constructs within their construct system. Another traditional method for a personal
construct enquiry, referred to as the laddering interview, can provide us with such
information.
40
Laddering
levels of constructs within an individual’s personal construct system thereby enabling one
Anderson, & Stockton, 2001). One can move up the personal construct system using “why”
questions and down the system using “how” questions. Typically, laddering is employed as
core constructs of his or her individual system. It is also employed as a method for drawing
up alternative plans (or a repertoire of plans and policies) of how to act to achieve more
superordinate goals, objectives, and ideals in a manner that remains compatible with one’s
core constructs or values (R. Hill, personal communication, March 21, 2007).
Unfortunately, however, examples of the laddering technique in sport and exercise settings
construct enquiry. It is immediately useful to the practitioner and, therefore, can be adopted
during a session at anytime deemed necessary by the practitioner. Despite these clear
attractions, the laddering interview has been described as a “complex skill and not just an
interviewing technique” (Fransella, 2003, p. 113) and being deceptively simple to conduct
(Neimeyer et al., 2001). Having enough variation in how one asks the “why” question
(Fransella et al., 2004) and preventing the production of “snakes as well as ladders” (i.e.,
moving up and down the system; Butt, 1995) are two major challenges in conducting a
laddering interview. Therefore, the interviewer requires certain skills (e.g., ability to
subsume another’s construing, suspending one’s personal values, and listening credulously)
41
to carry out the laddering interview as well as other methodologies of a personal construct
understanding of how the constructs within a system relate to elements within their range of
convenience. Researchers and practitioners can alleviate such concerns by combining the
laddering and repertory grid techniques. It should be noted, however, that both techniques,
(1955/1991) fixed-role therapy, which is described through a case example later in this
paper, is a useful technique for exploring the evolution of an individual’s personal construct
system.
Performance Profiling
PCP is perhaps best known in sport settings as the basis upon which the
performance profile (Butler, 1991) was conceived. The performance profile is essentially
an adaptation of the RGT in which the coach or consultant seeks to gain an understanding
of the meaning an athlete maintains about his or her performance by bringing him or her
more into focus and more involved in the decision-making process (Butler & Hardy, 1992;
Jones, 1993). This meaning is most commonly centred on the (physical, mental, tactical, or
technical) constructs that the athlete believes are essential for performance excellence at the
elite level. Research indicates that the performance profile is effective in raising an
individual’s self-awareness about his or her current state and enhancing adherence to
intervention programs (Butler, Smith, & Irwin, 1993; Jones, 1993). Qualitative and
quantitative research has also shown that group profiling is useful for increasing athlete
6
Neimeyer et al. (2001) have described 10 heuristics to help guide researchers and practitioners in the
administration and interpretation of a laddered interview.
42
self-awareness and performance evaluation, goal setting, enhancing communication and
interaction within teams and between athlete and coach, and increasing intrinsic motivation
(Weston, 2005). However, although there is moderate support for the predictive and
construct validity of the performance profile, it may not be sensitive enough to detect small
changes in performance that occur across the competitive season and when small changes
managers (Hedge, Borman, & Birkeland, 2001). The method highlights the richness of data
that can be obtained by rating systems covering a wide range of performance dimensions
and sources of information. People chosen as raters (e.g., self, peer, coach, parent)
generally interact routinely with the person receiving the feedback because each person is
exposed to the individual in different ways. While two or more raters, one of which is
usually the self, are required for multi-source feedback, a full circle of feedback made up of
superiors, subordinates and peers are required for 360-degree feedback (Foster & Law,
2006).
A lack of agreement between rating sources does not necessarily reflect poor quality
ratings; rather, it reflects the unique sources of performance information observed from
each rater. This idea is consistent with Kelly’s (1955/1991) descriptions of the sociality
other people can hold different points of view, feelings, and experiences. It follows that if
one is able to distinguish another person’s construction of events from his or her own
43
idiosyncratic construction it is through this interpersonal understanding one will be better
equipped for change and development. As such, it is surprising that this methodological
described previously and elsewhere (see Denicolo, 2003; Fransella, 2003; Fransella et al.,
2004; Neimeyer et al., 2001; Neimeyer et al., 2005; Walker & Winter, 2007) represent an
exciting array of options for sport and exercise psychology researchers and practitioners.
Unfortunately, use of these methods has diminished in recent years despite their diverse
potential in our field. Accordingly, in this section I aim to stimulate ideas concerning
potential applications of these methods by providing two case examples of how I have
incorporated PCP into the services I have offered athletes and sport teams.
It should be noted that my training in using the PCP techniques described in this
paper has been limited to reading key texts and gaining practical experiences in
implementing the techniques with students and clients. Specifically, I have obtained an
have combined my academic training with professional training over the past three years
registered sport psychologist who holds diplomas in education and physical education,
masters’ degrees in education and arts, and a PhD in physical education and sport studies.
His professional training has occurred simultaneously with other qualifications over the
past 30 years.
regarding a performance anxiety issue that he was experiencing. At the time of initial
44
contact, Peter (pseudonym) had been involved in competitive swimming for 14 years, seven
of which had been at the state-level (i.e., level below the national team). In the previous 6
months, he was regularly failing to make the final race for his three main disciplines (50m,
100m, and 200m freestyle). Prior to this performance slump, Peter was consistently placing
in the top three swimmers for all three disciplines and was on target to reach his long-term
goal of making the national squad. However, both Peter and his coach were aware that his
current performance slump was hindering his chances of attaining that goal.
In the first couple of sessions with Peter, my main objective was to assist him in
recognising and understanding his current view of the world in relation to his performance
anxiety beliefs, attitudes, thoughts, and behaviours using a combination of the tools and
techniques mentioned previously (e.g., performance profile, repertory grid). I began with
the performance profile technique as a method to enquire about the mental qualities Peter
believed are required to perform at his best in competition. Specifically, I asked Peter to
consider the following: “What in your opinion are the qualities or characteristics you
handled the competitive pressure and performed to his potential (i.e., situation as an
element) in an attempt to facilitate the process of bringing his personal constructs into
consciousness. For each of the qualities Peter listed (self-belief, handle pressure, emotional
control, attentional control, positivity, and perseverance) I had him write a short description
of what that characteristic meant to him. This served as a reminder of what Peter was
referring to for each of the characteristics over the course of my time with Peter as well as
45
I was next interested in obtaining the contrast pole for each of the qualities Peter
listed previously. Unlike the traditional version of the performance profile technique (cf.
Butler, 1991; Butler & Hardy, 1992), which only generates an emergent pole, obtaining
bipolar personal constructs is more consistent with a PCP approach to the exploration of
individual’s meaning making. To achieve this, I asked Peter the following: “Someone who
is not [emergent pole] would be…?” Other variations include asking, “How does someone
differ from someone who is [emergent pole]?” or “[emergent pole] would contrast with
someone who is?” Similar to the emergent pole, I also had Peter write a short description of
what each of the contrast poles meant to him. Peter then completed a performance profile
and provided a rating for his current level on each bipolar construct. The bipolar personal
constructs were placed on the perimeter of the profile chart illustrated in Figure 1 and the
important not only for enabling me to gain an initial insight into Peter’s construction of
events but it also provided me with a simple tool for monitoring his progress throughout
our sessions. However, the profile only provided me with one vantage point of Peter’s view
of the topic. Having established what these key constructs were I was next interested in
in constant and continual engagement with the external world, we are encouraged to
actively seek out, describe, and evaluate the elements we experience in an attempt to
anticipate and predict what will occur in the future (Kelly, 1955/1991). Particular contexts
and people are the most frequently employed elements in PCP research that utilises the
46
Emergent Pole Contrast Pole
Self-belief Self-doubt
“Belief in my physical ability” “Doubting my ability to perform
well”
Positivity Negativity
“Remaining positive no matter the “Allowing negative thoughts to
circumstance” dictate my thinking”
Perseverance Lazy
“Never giving up and pushing myself “Taking the easy option of giving
to my limits” up”
Pre-Assessment
Post-Assessment
Figure 1. Peter’s performance profile including a pre- and post-assessment and descriptions of the emergent and contrast poles.
47
The bipolar constructs Peter generated through the performance profile technique
formed the basis for the RGT that followed. Specifically, I was interested in having Peter
consider these constructs in relation to other swimmers whom he believed thrived on the
pressure of competition and in the context of training and critical incidents during
competition. He completed a ratings grid with minimum and maximum Likert scores
anchored on each construct pole. The “critical incidents as elements” grid displayed in
those incidents listed as elements. These ratings provided me with an insight into Peter’s
perception of that pole of the construct he currently positioned himself for those incidents.
assessment of other swimmers whom he believed handled the pressures and challenges of
The RGT was an important process because it provided a platform from which I
could begin my discussions that sought to assist Peter in reinterpreting competition to help
endeavoured to help Peter realise that his construction of events may not be the most useful
one and that there are other constructions available to him. I found through the RGT that
Peter consistently rated himself towards the contrast pole of each construct for critical
incidents occurring during competition but not during training. He also construed other
swimmers – who dealt effectively with performance pressure and anxiety – towards the
emergent pole of each construct. It was my opinion that the constructs themselves were not
the problem and in that terms of constructive revision total “construct innovation” (i.e., the
development of new constructs to make sense of these events) was perhaps not required.
48
Table 2. (a) Peter’s completed ratings grid of critical incidents during competition as
elements with minimum and maximum Likert scores anchored on construct poles.
Elements
Clean Turns
Race Finish
False Start
Execution
Training
Strategy
Emergent Pole Contrast Pole
Self-belief (1) 2 4 2 2 5 (7) Self-doubt
(b) Peter’s completed ratings grid of people as elements with minimum and maximum
Likert scores anchored on construct poles.
Elements
James
Adam
Bruce
John
Self
49
Rather, I focused my efforts on “slot change” in which I helped Peter move from one pole
which the practitioner drafts a hypothetical role description of someone who confronts
similar experiences to those being discussed but approaches them in different ways. The
information obtained through the RGT performed previously becomes a useful reference
for the practitioner. Using this approach, the client is invited to assume this fictional
identity and experiment with events that s/he would normally experience from the
perspective of this identity for a short period. This allows the client to gain experience in
In this instance, the hypothetical role I sketched for Peter was made up of those
characteristics described by the emergent poles that were elicited using the performance
profile. Alternatively, practitioners may consider asking their client to complete ratings on
the performance profile for themselves and two or three fellow athletes with whom they are
familiar. I combined this experiential exercise with psychological skills training aimed at
developing Peter’s ability to: control his emotions (e.g., individual zone of optimal
functioning; see Hanin, 2004) and attention (e.g., pre-event and pre-performance routines,
goal setting); and maintain self-belief and positivity at critical incidents during competition
(e.g., self-talk). Over the course of my time with Peter, I noticed considerable
profile ratings (see Figure 1) provided evidence for the validity and usefulness of the
7
From this example, it may be assumed that the emergent pole of a construct is always the preferred pole. It
should be noted that this is not always the case.
50
Case example 2. A coach of a men’s Australian football team from a state-level
league asked me to assist in identifying a core leadership group within his team. Being new
to the club and the players, the coach was eager to understand the players’ thoughts on what
they considered as leadership qualities and to use this information to identify a leadership
group for the seasons ahead. He believed that obtaining the players’ perceptions should be
an essential component of any endeavour designed to assign a leadership group that was
respected by the playing group, as he believed that a lack of respect from the playing group
was one of the major weaknesses of the leadership group of this team prior to his
I started out by conducting a series of repertory grid interviews in which each player
(n = 28) was required to compile a list of elements including six “ideal leaders” (both
within and outside of sport) to be used only for his repertory grid. A seventh element “the
ideal leader” was also used in eliciting personal constructs. Overall then, there were 35
possible triads of the seven elements listed. Consistent with the triadic construct elicitation
technique, the player was presented with a triad of three randomly chosen elements and
asked to state the most important attribute that distinguishes two of the elements from a
third in the triad. This word or phrase represented the emergent pole of that construct. The
contrast method, which involves asking the interviewee the following question, was
employed to elicit the contrast pole for the emergent pole: “Someone who is not [emergent
pole] would be…?” Rather than using all possible triad groupings, the triadic construct
elicitation process was repeated until each player could not elicit new constructs (i.e.,
constructs are being repeated). Overall, there were 156 bipolar constructs elicited by the
playing group, with the number of constructs generated by each player ranging from
51
I was primarily interested in eliciting a pool of bipolar constructs (i.e., criteria) for
selecting players to be included in the leadership group; obtaining ratings for the constructs
in relation to the elements was not a priority at this stage in the process. Assumptions about
phenomenon of interest here (leadership qualities) involved more than one individual. An
inductive content analysis of the grids and discourse about the constructs revealed the
following 11 bipolar constructs: team focused vs. individual focused; inspirational vs.
arrogant; hard worker vs. lazy; supportive vs. unsupportive; foster competitiveness vs.
success-oriented; positive role model vs. negative role model; clear communicator vs.
mixed messages; professionalism vs. carefree attitude; vision of success vs. short-term
The next step in the process involved revealing the players’ perceptions of those
individual team members who were more like the emergent and preferred pole of each
construct. After drawing up a grid with the 11 bipolar leadership constructs listed vertically
and the 17 players (i.e., elements) listed horizontally, each player in the team then provided
minimum and maximum Likert scores anchored on the construct poles for each player in
the team (including himself) on the 11 constructs. Coaches who had been with the playing
group for two or more years also completed the group repertory grid. Scores from each of
the ratings grid were averaged to provide a final output similar to that presented in Table
2b. This process enabled me to determine those players who were considered by the group
as being higher in the “leadership constructs” than those who were not.
I was next interested in determining the extent to which the 11 leadership qualities
were or were not congruent with a player’s core constructs. This was an important step in
the process because two players may construe an ideal leader in light of being a positive
52
role model, for example, but they may differ in the significance and meaning they attach to
being a positive role model. The laddering technique, which can help clarify such
differences, was then conducted with the top 10 ranked players. To begin the laddering
process, the interviewee either generates a bipolar personal construct through triadic or
dyadic construct elicitation or is supplied one by the interviewer. This initial construct
effectively becomes the bottom “rung” of the ladder. Although the idiosyncratic generation
For the purposes of the present consultation, I supplied each player with the first
bipolar construct to maximise the degree of standardisation between the 10 players with the
following three constructs each involved in a separate laddering interview: team focused vs.
individual focused; positive role model vs. negative role model; and solution-focused vs.
problem-focused. The laddering interview was initiated by asking the player “which pole of
the construct do you prefer and why?” The player’s response to this question generated the
emergent pole of the second construct. Drawing on the methodological procedures outlined
in the RGT, I used the contrast method outlined previously to elicit the contrast pole of the
emergent pole. The “why” question and contrasts method is then posed of this second
bipolar construct to generate a third bipolar construct. This process was repeated until the
interviewee was unable to explain why he prefers one pole of a construct or his response
presented in Table 3.
The constructs elicited and the verbal discourse about each were content analysed
and compared with the 11 key leadership qualities obtained via the RGT. Those players
with greater congruence between the team elicited leadership constructs and their
53
Table 3. An extract of a laddering interview beginning with the construct “solution-focused
coping vs. problem-focused coping.”
Achieve goals Vs. Goals not achieved Being able to deal with any situation effectively and achieve
Persistence Vs. Give up Persisting through tough situations allows me to achieve the
Intrinsically Vs. Carefree attitude Being intrinsically motivated helps me persist but a carefree
Remain positive Vs. Self-doubt Positivity helps me keep intrinsically motivated through most
Confidence in Vs. Forced decisions When I feel confident I’m better able to remain positive
More options Vs. Fewer options I can be more confident in identifying a beneficial decision,
Solution-focused Vs. Problem-focused Offers me more options whereas by focusing on the problem
54
individual core constructs were deemed most suitable for the leadership group. Taken
recommendation of three to five players for the leadership group. All five players
recommended were subsequently included in the leadership group assigned by the coach.
Perhaps the major attraction of PCP is that it has the ability to direct researchers and
practitioners in their efforts to appreciate and understand how another person constructs his
or her reality of the world. Its fundamental premise involves the recognition of the
idiosyncratic and unique manner in which people make sense of their experiences but also
the interpersonal and intrapersonal contexts in which these meanings are formed.
“psychological movement” afford a primary focus for the practitioner and his or her client
When a client presents with a specific problem or issue (e.g., performance anxiety)
the exploration would centre largely on those constructs for which the problem or issue is
within their range of convenience. However, through such discussions with his or her
client, the practitioner may generate evidence to suggest that the issue the client has
presented is not the “real” issue. Such evidence may stem from, for example, repertory grid
data suggesting that the client is confident in his or her ability to handle performance
pressure arising during a competitive performance but that s/he has doubts in some of his or
her teammate’s ability to handle such pressures. In either circumstance, the goal for the
practitioner is to help the client see the problem/issue as chronological and that it is
55
temporary rather than permanent. As demonstrated in case example 1, the PCP practitioner
can encourage the client to experiment with different constructions of events and the
implications of these for his or her behaviour to change his or her anticipations and
interpretations (Fransella & Dalton, 2000). Consistent with the experience corollary, the
practitioner may choose to encourage the client to explore different ways in which s/he
views an event and how s/he approaches it. Exploring a client’s predictions about changes
that may result from such reconstructions and what these changes might mean for him or
A range of tools and techniques described previously and elsewhere (see Denicolo,
2003; Fransella, 2003; Fransella et al., 2004; Neimeyer et al., 2001; Neimeyer et al., 2005;
Walker & Winter, 2007) are useful for structuring the conversations between a practitioner
and his or her client when exploring such viewpoints. Although the case examples
structured manner, each technique comes with enormous flexibility and adaptability during
any discourse between a practitioner and his or her client. For example, the laddering
technique, which does not rely heavily on office software and hardware, is immediately
useful to the practitioner and can be adopted during a session at anytime deemed necessary
by the practitioner. However, practitioners need to be aware of each method’s range and
focus of convenience. Laddering is more concerned with how constructs within a system
interrelate; it is about organisation rather than content (see case example 2). On the other
hand, the RGT concentrates more on the way constructs apply to elements within their
range and focus of convenience (see case example 1). In the applied setting, it is advisable
that practitioners, when time and resources permit, employ a combination of the
56
methodologies for a personal construct enquiry to gain a deeper understanding of both the
assisting an individual to understand his or her strengths and weaknesses, and those aspects
360-degree feedback can be likened to the more traditional methods of a personal construct
enquiry in that they can help structure and guide the conversations that practitioners have
with their clients. Both are particularly useful methods for helping an individual realise that
his or her own perception of events is not the only one available to them. I employed
the Australian football team as being higher in the “leadership constructs” than those who
were not. The data can also be a very powerful form of construct validation when ratings
are similar across sources because the person receiving the feedback can be surer of the
accuracy of the reports than if the feedback comes from one person (Smither, London, &
Reilly, 2005). However, even when there is disagreement between self and other ratings,
self-ratings, when coupled with information from others’ ratings, provide an insight into
compared with evaluations that rely solely on the self-reports of participants, for example,
programs when several rating sources (e.g., self, parent, coach, teammate) observe similar
methodologies triangulating different perspectives not only provide researchers with a more
57
thorough account of the phenomenon being examined but also add considerable
trustworthiness to the data when information can be verified across sources. Importantly, it
seems the aforementioned methods that obtain more than one perspective may help
alleviate some of the concerns associated with self-reporting such as social desirability (cf.
Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) and retrospective recall (cf. Nisbett & Wilson, 1977), which are
The performance profile technique can facilitate the process of revealing gaps or
areas for improvement and maintenance to both the athlete and coach as well as provide a
simple tool for monitoring progress throughout a program. Variations that enable the coach
and athlete to gain a deeper understanding of how the athlete views him or herself and how
others within his or her social network view the athlete include: (a) current level vs. best
ever performance, (b) actual self vs. ideal self, and (c) self vs. other (coach, parent,
teammate). However, the performance profile in its current form does not fully appreciate
key aspects of PCP and those with a deeper understanding of PCP will be better equipped
to use this technique. For example, a performance profile more in line with PCP would also
include a contrasting pole for each of the characteristics (see case example 1). Moreover, an
via the relative importance of the key characteristics and range of situations to which each
is found useful should also be sought. Variations such as these represent exciting avenues
Summary
The central theme of this paper is that PCP has much to offer when working with
endeavoured to present PCP as one potentially useful framework for studying and accessing
58
psychological phenomena associated with participation in sport and physical activity. My
overview of this framework’s philosophical position, its key components, and the key
methodologies provide a foundation upon which others may seek to explore its usefulness
for an array of research and professional purposes. In the final section of this paper, I
brought the PCP concepts alive by demonstrating the theory in action with two case
individual athlete and a sport team. Although these represent examples of how I have
employed PCP there does not seem to be a single best way of applying it, since PCP has a
range of construct elicitation methods for different purposes that can be readily adapted to
suit particular circumstances (Denicolo, 2003; Fransella, 2003; Walker & Winter, 2007).
However, I believe that PCP represents a viable alternative to existing models and it is my
hope that the information presented in this paper will encourage other researchers and
59
CHAPTER IIc
Personal construct psychology and the research interview: The example of mental
toughness in sport.
60
In its 50 year history, personal construct psychology (PCP; Kelly, 1955/1991) has
nursing (Costigan, Ellis, & Watkinson, 2003), education (Pope & Denicolo, 2001),
forensics (Horley, 2003), politics (Stojnov, 2003), and psychotherapy (Winter & Viney,
2005). The repertory grid is the key tool of PCP and the technique most frequently
fact, over the last 50 years it has flourished to an extent where it has become synonymous
with PCP. There are other, less prominent techniques (e.g., laddering, pyramiding, self-
characterisation sketches) that are used by personal construct practitioners and researchers
to explore personal construing (Denicolo, 2003; Fransella, 2003). Little attention has been
devoted in the PCP literature, however, to examining the effectiveness of a PCP interview
how I have used PCP to design a retrospective interview protocol containing several open-
ended questions for examining mental toughness in Australian football. As I was unable to
provide a detailed overview of how I designed the PCP interview protocol previously
(Gucciardi, Gordon, & Dimmock, 2008), the primary objective here is to describe the
process involved in generating the open-ended questions. A brief discussion of the findings
interested reader should consult our previous manuscript for a detailed discussion of the
findings (Gucciardi et al., 2008). In so doing, I hope to stimulate ideas about how PCP can
be employed to develop an interview protocol for any line of psychological inquiry. After
providing a brief discussion of the background to the present study, I next detail my
thinking behind the development of the interview questions. Following this, I discuss some
61
of the findings from our own and others (Chambers, 2008; Savage, 2006) research using the
interview protocol described here. I conclude by offering some suggestions for future
research.
Mental toughness in sport is a relatively new and growing area of sport psychology
research, having caught the imagination of both the general sporting public and the
academic community. In fact, there are currently only a handful of peer-reviewed studies
which have examined this psychological construct (Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks,
2005; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2002, 2007; Thelwell,
Weston, & Greenlees, 2005). Although impressive and providing some insight into the
complexity of this phenomenon, research on this apparently desirable construct has been
inadequate as it has focused only on describing the key characteristics and outcomes of
mental toughness (Gordon, Gucciardi, & Chambers, 2007). To enable both conceptual and
applied advancements, more research was needed to better understand both mental
toughness outcomes and processes. For example, research has failed to understand when
these characteristics are required, what they enable a mentally tough athlete to do, and what
overt behaviours mentally tough athletes characteristically exhibit (Gucciardi & Gordon,
2007).
Given the atheoretical nature of previous research in the area (Gordon et al., 2007),
experiences, meanings, and perceptions can be articulated and understood to allow for a
was interested in adopting a theoretical framework that could facilitate my attempt to gain a
62
theoretical lens with which to interpret to the data. The primary objective of my research,
therefore, was to explore the content as well as the structure and organisation of mental
toughness within an Australian football context. The interview protocol illustrated in Table
Q1. Please describe for me what you consider “mental toughness” to be in football. Can
you offer a definition, phrase or quote to describe it?
Q2. What do you think are the contexts which require a footballer to be mentally tough
and those contexts which do not? (situations)
Q3. What do you believe distinguishes mentally tough footballers from those footballers
who are not mentally tough? (people)
Q4. What do you consider to be the contrast of each of these characteristics? (dichotomy
corollary)
Q5. In your opinion, what do you consider to be the role(s) or purpose(s) of each of these
characteristics? (behaviours)
Q6. Please rank these characteristics, according to what you believe, in order of
importance for mental toughness in football. (organisation corollary)
Q7. Please list and describe those contexts to which you believe each of these
characteristics are useful and those contexts in which they are not useful. (range
corollary)
Q8. I want you to put yourself in your [other person] shoes and describe for me what you
believe s/he would consider mental toughness in football to be? (sociality corollary)
In designing the interview protocol I was concerned with how I could use several of
the 11 corollaries, other established methodologies of a personal construct enquiry (e.g., the
repertory grid), and information regarding Kelly’s (1955/1991) clinical work to design
open-ended questions for construct elicitation. Perhaps the most salient feature that I drew
from Kelly’s clinical work was his emphasis on adopting a credulous approach toward
everything the interviewee mentions (Fransella, 2003; Kelly, 1955/1991). Specifically, the
63
interviewer must not disregard any of the interviewee’s discourse because it does not
conform to his or her own or others thinking, or is even inconsistent with what previous
research has revealed. The endeavour, rather, is to see the interviewee’s world through his
or her eyes. Kelly highlighted that whilst the credulous approach should encourage the
interviewer to respect what the interviewee is saying they must not be misled by that
throughout an interview to ensure that they do not disregard anything that is mentioned by
the individual because of any preconceptions they may have, whilst at the same time
maintaining some level of objectivity about the interviewee’s discourse. In other words, the
(Fransella, 2003).
The credulous approach is evident in the interview schedule from the outset (i.e.,
asking the interviewee about his or her perception of mental toughness) and is maintained
throughout by directly asking each interviewee for his or her opinions and thoughts in each
question. By directly asking the interviewee for his or her opinions and thoughts in each
question of the interview (e.g., what do you believe…, how do you…, etc) the interviewer
is also encouraged to maintain some level of objectivity, as they are constantly reminded of
the idiosyncratic nature of those comments whilst recognising it as one valid formulation of
events. Put simply, although those statements are useful for that individual they may not
necessarily be useful for another individual, as they only represent that individual’s
construing.
Particular contexts and people are the most frequently employed elements in PCP
research that utilises the repertory grid technique (Fransella, Bell, & Bannister, 2004;
Jankowicz, 2004). This is not surprising given that Kelly (1955/1991, 2003) highlighted in
64
the experience cycle, which is based on the experience corollary, the central role that the
contexts or events of our lives play in the development and modification of personal
constructs. This is due to our drive to make sense of human behaviour by interpreting it
within the context in which it occurs. Because we are in constant and continual engagement
with the external world we are encouraged to actively seek out, describe and evaluate the
phenomena we experience in an attempt to anticipate and predict what will occur in the
future (Kelly, 1955/1991). Indeed, certain people and contexts are prominent events that we
consistently encounter on a daily basis throughout our lives. In using this tenet, I asked
interviewees to identify those contexts which do and do not require mental toughness. An
based on one’s personal experiences to identify the salient features of those experiences.
Importantly, this also ensures that the information explicated by the interviewee is more
specific and relates to the particular behaviours associated with mental toughness.
People are also another important element in the repertory grid technique. As with
most things in life, there will always be individuals who are perceived as being high in a
construct and those who are not, and individuals will import characteristics of these
mental toughness by asking individuals about the characteristics (and their contrasts) that
distinguish mentally tough individuals with individuals who are not. As explicated by the
contexts and people) that represent characteristics that encourage the development of
65
the interviewer is to gain access to these constructions. The dichotomy corollary extends
this notion by asserting that these similarities and inconsistencies form references axes or
constructs (Kelly, 1955/1991) where there is a personally relevant (emergent) pole and a
contrasting pole that implies some distinction (contrast pole). Thus, there was the need to
context of the opposite pole that we can begin to understand the true meaning of that
coping, for example, can represent a completely different set of characteristics and
behaviours when compared with the construct solution-focused coping vs. emotion-focused
coping.
Kelly (1955/1991) originally introduced two methods for eliciting bipolar, personal
constructs. The difference method, which requires that the interviewee express how the
third element in a triad differs from two others, is the most commonly employed technique
in repertory grid research (Neimeyer, Bowman, & Saferstein, 2005). In contrast, the
opposite method requires that the interviewee express the opposite for the similarity pole of
the construct. Repertory grid research shows that the difference method is effective in
method involves an instructional set that is less complex and enhances bipolarity, but
extreme, negative contrast poles (Hagans, Neimeyer, & Goodholm, 2000; Neimeyer,
Neimeyer, Hagans, & Van Brunt, 2002). Noting these advantages and disadvantages,
Neimeyer et al. (2005) recently developed and tested a new method of personal construct
elicitation, called the contrast method, which was shown to avoid construct negativity and
66
the generation of bent constructs, whilst generating higher levels of personal construct
instructs individuals as follows: “To you, being [emergent pole] would contrast with
Although these methods have been developed and evaluated for repertory grid usage
I considered each as possible techniques for eliciting bipolar, personal constructs in a PCP
guided interview. My preference here was the contrast method (see Table 1, Q4).
Obviously, I cannot make any judgments as to which of these three or any other methods
for that matter may be more effective than any other method for eliciting bipolar constructs
attempt to identify both the emergent and contrast poles of a construct, as PCP emphasises
that we cannot fully understand what the emergent pole of a construct is without gaining a
sense of the contrast pole of that construct. It is in this context that we can gain a more
accurate understanding of what these characteristics mean for that individual’s own
construct and any subsequent behaviour. From a conceptual standpoint, identifying the
toughness by conceptualising mental toughness in the context of what it is not. This was a
Now that I had gauged each interviewees personal constructs regarding mental
toughness in the contexts that require mental toughness, my focus turned to the
understanding these constructs in more detail. First, it is simply not enough to only identify
what constructs an individual holds about mental toughness; we need to identify what
behaviours the individual infers from these constructs. There are many ways in which
questions can be posed to identify pertinent behaviours, but I chose to ask the interviewee
67
what they believe is the purpose or role of the construct. One alternative that I considered
was simply asking the interviewee what it is that individuals do in those contexts that
require the phenomenon of interest (e.g., “what do you believe are the behaviours those
constructs are organised into a hierarchical system with some constructs being more
purpose of this hierarchical organisation is to reduce the chaos of the external world and
provide the individual with clear avenues of inference and movement. Accordingly, people
do not only differ in their interpretations of events but also in the importance they place on
certain constructs within their system. Essentially then, I aimed to understand the
relationships between the constructs identified as keys to mental toughness. By asking the
information about the organisation of their superordinate and subordinate constructs. I also
constructs by asking the interviewee to list all the situations for which each construct is
useful and not useful for, as guided by the range corollary. A construct will only account
for the anticipations known to that individual and when a construct has a higher range of
applied to a greater variety of events (Kelly, 1955/1991). The implication is that a construct
68
with a higher range of convenience should be considered more superordinate than a
their ways of construing. As implied by the sociality corollary, understanding others’ views
better equips an individual to extend their own personal construct system (Kelly,
1955/1991). With this corollary in mind, I asked interviewees to take the place of another
individual and describe the characteristics and the roles of these characteristics that they
believe this individual would consider pertinent to mental toughness. By taking the
perspective of another individual the interviewee can be encouraged to go beyond his or her
idiosyncrasies and further explore and consider how another individual may conceptualise
mental toughness. The endeavour, therefore, was to encourage the interviewee to take a
fresh look at events so that we could gain a more explicit and in-depth understanding about
when there is evidence to indicate that it allows for the accruement of quality descriptions
(Savage, 2006). In designing this interview, I was interested in alleviating some of the
in the context of what it is not, when mental toughness is and is not required, what mental
toughness enables one to in such situations, and the behaviours characteristic of mentally
69
Methods
years, SD = 9.62), all of whom had extensive playing and coaching experience at the
highest level, were interviewed using the interview schedule displayed in Table 1.
Interviews were semi-structured in that conversations with each participant were guided by
the questions listed in Table 1. Although each interview began with Q1 and ended with Q8,
conversations were not constrained by the interview guide so as to allow new questions or
you mean by…?”) and elaboration probes (“Can you give me an example of…?”) were
used throughout each interview to both prompt interviewees in such circumstances and
encourage clarity and richness of data. Participants were sent a copy of the interview
schedule at least three days prior to their interview and were asked to reflect on these
questions.
interviews was then presented to two independent coaching cohorts at a national (n = 58;
Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006a) and state coaching conference (n = 49; Gordon & Gucciardi,
2006b). Participants were provided with a detailed account of the key components of the
emerging theoretical model during a two-hour workshop. The primary purpose of these
workshops was to establish if the conceptualisation of mental toughness generated from the
initial interviews reflected the personal constructions of mental toughness held by a larger
and more representative group of coaches (i.e., experience, coaching level). Both coaching
groups agreed with the key characteristics, situations, and behaviours described in the
initial conceptualisation; however, several other situations were included in the final model
70
Data analysis. To address calls in the qualitative methods literature for researchers
to provide a theoretical analysis for the findings (e.g., Morse, 1994), a primary purpose of
this study was to develop an explanatory model of mental toughness in Australian football.
Therefore, the transcribed verbatim data was analysed using grounded theory analytical
techniques (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998), the aim of which is to
develop theory from data by reading (and re-reading) a textual database and “discovering”
or labelling variables (called categories, concepts and codes) and their interrelationships.
Results
Here I discuss the findings of our research in relation to the primary objective of our
research, which was to explore the content as well as the structure and organisation of
Content. Overall, 32 bipolar constructs were revealed, with one pole describing the
attribute in relation to a mentally tough footballer and the other in relation to one who is
not. These attributes were clustered into 11 key components and ranked in descending
order of importance for mental toughness in Australian football (see Figure 2). Perhaps the
most salient aspect of this data is the identification and understanding of what individuals
believe mental toughness is not. Previous research has been limited in that it has focused
only on describing the key characteristics of mental toughness without placing this
understanding in the context of what individuals believe mental toughness is not. Further
71
1. Self-belief vs. Self-doubt
2. Work Ethic vs. Lazy
3. Personal Values vs. Poor Integrity &
Philosophy
4. Self-motivated vs. Extrinsically &
un/motivated
5. Tough Attitude vs. Weak Attitude
6. Concentration/focus vs.
Distractible/unfocused
7. Resilience vs. Fragile Mindset
8. Handling Pressure vs. Anxious & Panicky
9. Emotional Intelligence vs. Emotionally
Immature
10. Sport Intelligence vs. Lack of sport
knowledge
11. Physical Toughness vs. Weak sense of
toughness
General
Injury & Rehab
Preparation
Challenges
Competition
External Pressures
Environment
Playing environment
Match variables
Internal Pressures
Fatigue/endurance
Confidence
General Competition
Recover well from injury Repeatable good performances
Preparation Play well no matter position
Consistent performances Superior decision-makers
Do the 1%er’s
72
support for the identification of these 11 keys to mental toughness came from two
& Gucciardi, 2006a) and a Level 2 Coaching Course (n = 49; Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006b).
toughness obtained previously and were asked to reflect on their own experiences in an
attempt to identify any areas that they believed needed to be clarified or was not
represented in the model. Interestingly, there was considerable overlap between the three
conceptualisations of mental toughness and only slight changes to the original model were
1. Self-belief Self-doubt
4. Self-motivated Extrinsically/Unmotivated
73
Important information was also obtained about the situations that demand mental
toughness from an Australian footballer. There was a general consensus that all aspects of
being an elite footballer required some degree of mental toughness; however, several
which included: injuries and injury rehabilitation; preparation for training and competition;
challenges (personal, on- and off-field); peer and social pressures; and internal (e.g.,
fatigue/endurance and low in confidence) and external pressures (e.g., environmental and
playing conditions, match variables and physical risk). It was interesting to note that the
because they required a footballer to apply a higher percentage of the key mental toughness
were said to require fewer of the key mental toughness characteristics. These data
represents an important contribution to the literature as there is no research to date that has
Data regarding the behaviours commonly associated with mentally tough footballers
complimented the information on the key characteristics and situations demanding mental
toughness. Several overt mentally tough general (e.g., meticulous preparers, consistent
versatility, superior decision-makers, do the 1%er’s) were also revealed. Unlike previous
research, which has provided general descriptions of mentally tough behaviours in terms of
the outcomes of being mentally tough, I was able to identify behaviours evident on and off
information about the structure and organisation of mental toughness. First, having
74
interviewees rank the key characteristics in descending order of importance provided
preliminary evidence about the hierarchical nature of these constructs. Consistent with
previous research (e.g., Jones et al., 2002; Thelwell et al., 2005), self-belief was
unanimously cited as the most important characteristic in terms of mental toughness for
Australian football. Further support for the importance of the keys to mental toughness was
obtained as part of our attempt to increase the trustworthiness of the data. Coaches
attending a National Coaching Conference (Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006a) and a Level 2
Coaching Course (Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006b) were asked to rank the keys to mental
rankings of the eleven mental toughness characteristics between the two independent
usefulness of each of the 11 keys to mental toughness for situations demanding mental
toughness served to compliment the rankings data. Those key characteristics rated as more
important for mental toughness were generally believed to be useful in dealing with a
greater variety of contexts demanding mental toughness thereby suggesting a greater range
Supporting Evidence
elicitation procedures. Of the five investigatory procedures chosen, three were derived
directly from PCP (role related persons as elements, event experiences as elements, and
Gucciardi et al.’s [2008] PCP interview protocol). A case study approach (n = 1) was
adopted whereby data were collected over a four-week period, with seven days between
each alternative procedure. Savage compared the “maps” of mental toughness that were
75
10
8
Level 3 (n=58)
7
Level 2 (n=49)
6
Average
5
Ranking
4
Figure 3. Comparison of the average ranking of perceived importance of the eleven mental toughness characteristics between
Level 2 (Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006b) and Level 3 coaches (Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006a). Note: Lower average rankings were
perceived to be more important for mental toughness.
76
obtained via each individual procedure and found that both the PCP and interview
favourably with the three PCP procedures. Although some amount of equivalence across
procedures was evident, Savage cautiously concluded that no one procedure provided a
Further evidence to support the notion that the processes and theoretical
underpinnings of the interview protocol described here allow for the accruement of quality
descriptions and explanation can be found in a recent adaptation of the interview protocol
national-level swimmers (six male, one female; Mage = 26, SD = 6.22) and seven elite swim
coaches (six male, one female; Mage = 43.43, SD = 9.52) in an attempt to better understand
whereby raw quotations were organised into interpretable and meaningful themes and
Although similar labels to those reported by Gucciardi et al. (in press) were used by
Chambers (2008), which seems to reflect the nature of the interview protocol, the content of
swimming (self-belief vs. self-doubt; bouncing back vs. overcome; motivation vs.
unmotivated; perspective vs. no perspective; knowledgeable vs. uninformed; work ethic vs.
casual; and emotional regulation vs. overtly emotional), whereas the second, situations,
77
highlighted the importance of several general, competition, and training-specific situations
demanding a swimmer’s resilience (e.g., illness, social challenges, success and failure,
coach expectations). The final category, behaviours, comprised a number of general and
several similarities with previous research on resilience from different research contexts
(e.g., academic settings, social settings) with regard to the various resilience characteristics.
Future Research
Our own research (Gucciardi et al., 2008) and that of Savage (2006) and Chambers
(2008) provides preliminary evidence demonstrating the usefulness of using tenets of PCP
usefulness of the PCP guided interview protocol in obtaining quality descriptions and
explanation above and beyond that which was previously reported in the literature (see also
Chambers, 2008), whereas Savage’s research demonstrated its equivalence with other
methods of construct elicitation. However, these are only preliminary examinations and
further research is required to provide a more thorough analysis of the effectiveness of such
a methodology. Comparisons of the PCP guided interview with the more traditional
78
an individual’s personal construct system (Savage, 2006) although no definitive evidence
exciting avenue for further research. Furthermore, other psychological phenomena need to
be investigated to determine the extent to which the proposed interview methodology can
an individual’s personal construct system. The modulation corollary postulates that some
constructs are more accommodating (i.e., permeable) of new or novel events within their
range of convenience. If an individual is not aware of these novel encounters then novelty
will be ignored and constructive revision will not take place at the end of the experience
experiences. The result of this is that a person’s construct system is often fragmented where
his or her construing of some experiences may appear inconsistent with his or her
Therefore, the meaning generated through the elaboration of a person’s system can be
inferentially incompatible with an existing subsystem of constructs; that is, there is some
inconsistency between different parts of the system which may vary according to contextual
information as the person interprets. For example, elite athletes face many adversities in
their sporting careers. The challenge for these individuals then is to resolve the
so that this personal construct (e.g., hard work vs. lazy) is consistent in its application
across a wide range of encounters (Kelly, 1955/1991). The influence of both these
79
corollaries in future research can be evidenced in questions that ask interviewees to, for
example, consider which of the constructs they have identified would prove most useful for
anticipating and dealing with a novel situation (i.e., one which they did not identify as a
context relevant for the target phenomenon previously) and those which would not be
useful.
Summary
In the PCP literature, there has been a tendency to become reliant on the traditional
construct elicitation procedures such as triadic and dyadic elicitation and laddering
interviews. The power of PCP in guiding the design of a retrospective interview protocol
for research purposes, in particular, has not featured strongly. In this paper, I have
described a case example of how I have employed several tenets of PCP to inform the
explore the entire spectrum of the mental toughness phenomenon and using specific tenets
of PCP to narrow their focus to identify those higher-level, super-ordinate constructs that
was described (Chambers, 2008; Gucciardi et al., 2008; Savage, 2006) and suggestions for
future research in determining its effectiveness in relation to the more prominent PCP
hope to have offered one alternative approach to gathering information about personal
meaning as well as stimulated novel thoughts about how PCP can guide a retrospective
interview protocol for any line of psychological inquiry. Perhaps most intriguing, is the
80
potential role that these tenets may also play in facilitating the development of questions for
an individual anticipates certain events in their life and how they actually behave when they
81
CHAPTER III – Perspectives
on Mental Toughness and its
Development
82
Overview of Chapter III
This is the first of three empirical Chapters within this thesis. Two qualitative
those factors contributing to its development are presented. Coaches’ perceptions are the
focus in these studies as they have been largely ignored in previous research. In addition to
several years of coaching experience at different levels of the game, all coaches interviewed
had also been elite footballers. Such varied experiences, as a player and coach, equip these
individuals with a wealth of information and expertise from which draw upon. In the first
manuscript, I employed the PCP guided interview protocol detailed previously (Chapter
IIc) to elicit coaches’ personal constructs on mental toughness and its conceptual opposite,
situations or events that demand mental toughness, and behaviours that are commonly
associated with mentally footballers in such situations. These coaches were then re-
interviewed about their perceptions of how the key mental toughness characteristics elicited
are and can be developed. The analysis and interpretation of the data generated from these
83
CHAPTER IIIa
84
We often hear of, or witness, enormously physically talented athletes making it to the
highest level but not performing well or living up to the expectations of others, while far
less talented athletes become champions in their chosen sport. However, with an increasing
coaches, athletes, and sport administrators now recognise that physical talent alone does not
guarantee success. In fact, within scientific and coaching communities, mental toughness is
performance excellence (Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005; Jones, Hanton, &
Connaughton, 2002; Middleton, Marsh, Martin, Richards, & Perry, 2004c; Orlick, 1998).
Generally speaking, mental toughness is the umbrella term that most athletes,
coaches, and the media use to describe the superior mental characteristics of those athletes
who excel in both practice and competitive situations, while others fail. Especially at the
elite level, it is the “mental game” that differentiates performers (Gould, Jackson, & Finch,
1993; Orlick & Partington, 1988). For example, mental skills have been shown to
discriminate between those athletes “who get there” and those “who stay there” (Kreiner-
Phillips & Orlick, 1993), those who perform on the big stage and those who do not (Gould
et al., 1993), and those who successfully develop through times of change/transition and
those who do not (Sinclair & Orlick, 1993). It may also be that mental toughness sets apart
“good” and “great” athletes when physical, technical, and tactical skills are equal. Good
athletes are those who make it to the elite level but do not achieve the performance highs
and successes that great athletes with mental toughness do. In addition to physical talent,
these great or champion athletes with mental toughness are believed to possess certain
85
mental characteristics and behavioural attributes that enable them to excel far beyond their
physical capabilities (Gordon, 2001; Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002; Orlick, 1998).
Exceptional physical talent may get athletes recruited to the elite level but it seems that
those attributes characterised as mental toughness explain how the “good” become “great.”
research, having caught the imagination of both the general sporting public and the
academic community. In fact, since Fourie and Potgieter’s (2001) pioneering qualitative
study of mental toughness in South Africa we have evidenced a burgeoning line of inquiry
from various parts of the world that include the USA (Gould et al., 2002), UK (Bull et al.,
2005; Fawcett, 2005; Jones et al., 2002; Thelwell, Weston, & Greenlees, 2005), India
(Gordon & Sridhar, 2005), and Australia (Middleton et al., 2004c). This research has
athletes and coaches and has identified a myriad of characteristics ascribed to mental
setting, determination and perseverance, and commitment. However, there are also several
characteristics unique to individual studies such as team unity, religious convictions, ethics,
sport intelligence, safety and survival, coping with success and failure, risk taking, and
The impressive research to date has supported a qualitative approach and such a
direction in the early stages of the research agenda has been argued elsewhere (Gordon,
Gucciardi, & Chambers, 2007). However, although impressive and providing some insight
into the complexity of this phenomenon, previous research has been inadequate as it has
86
focused only on describing the key characteristics of mental toughness. Research has failed
to understand when these characteristics are required, what they enable a mentally tough
athlete to do, and what overt behaviours mentally tough athletes characteristically exhibit.
To enable advancements in this area, the phenomenon of mental toughness in sport needs to
that we can better predict behaviour and provide guidelines as to how to develop or
and understood would allow for a more comprehensive examination of the mental
one such framework, as it is a theory that informs us how to go about understanding what
others and ourselves think rather than telling us what to think; that is, it offers a framework
for directing the research agenda but also a theoretical base in which to interpret the
understand and appreciate how another person theorises about his or her world. As a
psychotherapist Kelly (1955/1991) found that it was the meaning an individual saw in the
events of his or her life that distinguished the troubled from the untroubled, and that these
individual actively strives to make sense out of his or her world, the particular events he or
she encounters, and themselves. The root metaphor that Kelly (p. 4) employed for his
87
beings as “a form of motion” (p. 48) constantly engaged in actively describing and
representations (called personal constructs) so that they may anticipate and predict what
the underlying assertion and 11 subsequent corollaries, which in turn elaborate on the
construing that enables them to generate an elaborate theory of their own and others’
physical and psychological condition that directs their behaviour. It follows then that we
should focus on identifying and understanding idiosyncratic meanings, and how these
unique interpretations of the world influence one’s behaviour. In particular, PCP stipulates
that to truly understand these idiosyncratic constructs we need to identify the contrasting
pole for each so that we understand what the construct is, in the context of what it is not.
The approach also acknowledges the shared cultures we live in and, built into this theory, is
the awareness that our personal and therefore unique experiences and meanings can be
shared within these cultures and that we can identify these shared meanings. Moreover,
PCP maintains that each person develops a unique hierarchical system where some
reduce the chaos of the external world so that consistent predictions can be made. We
should also be interested, therefore, in how such constructs are organised and to what
nursing (Costigan, Ellis, & Watkinson, 2003), education (Pope & Denicolo, 2001), and
88
Table 1. An overview of PCP: The fundamental postulate and the 11 corollaries (adapted from Gordon et al., 2007).
Construction A person anticipates events by construing their replications (p. 50). These representations (personal constructs) are formed through the personal meaning we
Corollary associate with those regularities and recurring patterns in the contexts we experience.
Individuality Persons differ from each other in their construction of events (p. 55). Individuality between people arises from one’s unique and different interpretation of similar
Corollary events encompassed by his or her distinct construal systems.
Organisation Each person characteristically evolves, for his [sic] convenience in anticipating To reduce the chaos of the external world so that consistent predictions can be made each
Corollary events, a construction system embracing ordinal relationships between constructs (p. person develops a unique hierarchical system where some constructs are more important
56). (superordinate) than others (subordinate).
Dichotomy A person’s construct system is composed of a finite number of dichotomous constructs The similarities and inconsistencies we interpret form references axes or personal constructs
Corollary (p. 59). where there is a personally relevant pole (similarity) and a contrasting pole that implies some
distinction (inconsistency).
Choice Corollary A person chooses for himself [sic] that alternative in a dichotomised construct We are active in ascribing meaning to the events that we encounter by preferring one pole of a
through which he [sic] anticipates the greatest possibility for elaboration of his [sic] construct in which we align ourselves with the responses and behaviours dictated by that
system (p. 64). construct.
Range Corollary A construct is convenient for the anticipation of a finite range of events only (p. 68). Each personal construct has a focus of convenience in which it can be most useful and others
where the construct is inappropriate.
Experience A person’s construction system varies as he [sic] successively construes the By investing ourselves in the experiences we encounter we continuously recognise
Corollary replication of events (p. 72). consistencies and discrepancies between our anticipations and these events which lead to
modifications in our personal construct system.
Modulation The variation in a person’s construction system is limited by the permeability of the Constructs that are permeable allow for adjustment and integration of novel events and
Corollary constructs within whose ranges of convenience the variants lie (p. 77). experiences, while those that are impermeable are impenetrable and not open to change.
Fragmentation A person may successively employ a variety of constructions subsystems which are We may anticipate and experience a variety of situations in different ways by employing an
Corollary inferentially incompatible with each other (p. 83). assortment of construct subsystems.
Commonality The extent that one person employs a construction of experience which is similar to People can be judged as being similar or different based on the similarity or difference of their
Corollary that employed by another, his [sic] processes are psychologically similar to those of construct systems; that is, people are similar because they construe events in a similar fashion.
the other person (p. 90).
Sociality Corollary To the extent that one person construes the construction process of another he [sic] Construing how another may person may construe an event is a specific internal event that
may play a role in a social process involving the other person (p. 95). contributes to the development and modification of personal constructs.
89
psychotherapy (Winter & Viney, 2005), it has not yet made a significant impact in sport
and exercise settings (cf. Gordon et al., 2007). The purpose of this study, therefore, was to
extend previous research on mental toughness in sport by utilising the underlying principles
issues related to the phenomenon in a sport-specific context. Rather than focusing solely on
identifying and describing the key characteristics associated with mental toughness, I also
endeavoured to identify and understand what situations demand a high degree of mental
toughness and the behaviours that mentally tough athletes display in these situations. In so
takes into consideration each of these areas. Specifically, I focused on Australian Football
can and cannot be generalised to a sport not previously studied, and to provide a sport-
toughness.
Method
Participants
Eleven male coaches (M age = 42, SD = 9.62) were recruited from the Western
Australian Football League (WAFL) and the Australian Football League (AFL). All
games; SD = 17.65) and coaching experience (AFL M = 107 games, SD = 25.23; WAFL M
= 105 games, SD = 19.54) at the elite level8. Participant recruitment ceased when new data
8
Each football season comprises 22 games. The average number of AFL games played in a football career is
43 and only 14.8% and 6.8% out of the total number that have played AFL have played over 100 and 150
games, respectively (AFLPA, 2005), which places the current sample within a select group of footballers. In
addition to this extensive playing experience, each individual had the highest level (i.e., Level 3) coaching
accreditation under the AFL coaching accreditation scheme and several years of coaching experience.
90
only added to the density of the coded data but little to the emerging model, which is
Interview Schedule.
with both clarification (“What do you mean by…?”) and elaboration probes (“Can you give
me an example of…?”) used throughout each interview to both prompt interviewees and
1. What do you think “mental toughness” in Australian Football is? Can you offer a
2. What do you think are the situations in Australian Football which do and do not
mentally tough and mentally weak? What do you think are the distinguishing
characteristics and attributes between these two types of individuals? What is it they
4. Think of someone you know who you would consider as being mentally tough.
What do you think he or she would consider the characteristics and attributes of
characteristics?
6. Do you feel that there are mental toughness attributes that you consider to be unique
questions from PCP principles and corollaries. According to PCP, when a psychological
91
phenomenon involves more than one individual, assumptions about similarity of construing
Therefore, I asked each interviewee to take the place of another individual and describe
toughness. This encouraged the interviewee to go beyond his idiosyncrasies and further
Data Analysis
Overview of data analysis procedures. Data analytical procedures were based on the
methodology. Grounded theory coding techniques encourage the analyst to move from
& Strauss, 1967). In line with grounded theory procedures, data collection proceeded
concurrently with analysis and ended when theoretical saturation was achieved (Strauss &
Corbin, 1998). Constant comparison between and within the codes revealed in open coding
occurred throughout data collection and analysis. This enables the analyst to define the
basic properties and dimensions of a category or construct, its causal conditions, context,
and outcomes, and the relationships and patterns between categories (Glaser & Strauss,
1967). Essentially, each concept was compared with other concepts and categories, and
each category was compared with other categories so that similarities and variations
between and within the properties and dimensions of categories could be identified. This
ongoing process of confirmation and modification is essential to ensure that the emerging
92
Open coding. Open coding is the stage in data analysis where analysts endeavour to
reveal, specify, and label concepts that resemble the data in an attempt to discriminate and
differentiate between concepts (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Initially,
the interview transcript data were opened up by dismantling them into discrete, analytic
segments, and analysed line-by-line so that similarities and differences could be examined
and compared (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). For example, raw data
extracts relating to “work ethic” were compared and contrasted to identify similarities and
allocated to each concept to assist in the process of classifying and grouping similar types
of data under a common heading, but also for developing new concepts.
(re)assemble the codes developed through open coding in new ways (Strauss & Corbin,
1998). Specifically, similarities and differences in the codes were examined and clustered
to create categories and subcategories, which were then compared and contrasted to
develop more inclusive categories and to reveal links between them based on their
Selective coding. The concepts and categories identified through both open and
axial coding were refined and integrated into an emerging model to explain the
relationships between categories (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The three categories identified
in the present study, for example, each played a unique but interacting role in a holistic
93
diagramming were employed throughout this process to facilitate the transition from a
reflected the reports of the participants (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). First, both the doctoral
circumvent the inclusion of any bias on part of the analysts. Second, each of the 11
interviewees was provided with a detailed overview of the results of the analysis and was
asked to reflect on and verify the accuracy of the analysts’ interpretations. In addition to
conceptualisation of mental toughness that emerged from the 11 interviews was presented
to a large cohort of Level 3 coaches (n = 58) attending the AFL’s National Coaching
Conference (Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006b) was performed. During a workshop conducted
by Dr. Sandy Gordon, individuals were provided with a detailed account of the emerging
theoretical model. Each participant examined the emergent categories to determine if they
were credible according to his or her experiences. This process was replicated with a
second independent sample (n = 49) of Level 2 coaches (Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006a). In
both instances, the findings were substantiated and the participants agreed with the
findings.
Procedure
Approval for this project was granted by the university human ethics committee
prior to commencing the study. Each participant was contacted by telephone and was
informed of the mental toughness research being conducted. Once each participant agreed
to be interviewed at a time and place most convenient to him he was sent (via email) a copy
of the interview schedule at least three days prior to the interview, and was requested to
94
read the questions and consider them over the days preceding the interview. Interviews
lasted between 30 and 90 min and were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Informed
Once all interviews had been conducted each interviewee was sent (via email) a
handout detailing the major mental toughness characteristics and situations requiring
mental toughness identified through the interviews. Consistent with the PCP framework,
each participant was requested to (a) list and describe what he considered to be the
contrasting pole for each characteristic, (b) rank the characteristics in order from most
important to least important for mental toughness in Australian Football, and (c) list all the
situations which require some degree of mental toughness. In the following section I
present and discuss the findings from the qualitative analysis summarised in Figure 1 in
relation to these issues. I conclude with a discussion of the practical implications of this
research.
revealed from the analysis. Each characteristic and its contrast is presented and described in
several of the characteristics revealed here as keys to mental toughness are consistent with
95
Self-Belief
Work Ethic
Personal Values
Self-Motivated
Tough Attitude
General
Concentration & Focus Injury & Rehab
Resilience Preparation
Handling Pressure Challenges
Emotional Resilience
Sport Intelligence
Physical Toughness Competition
External Pressures
Environment
Playing environment
Match variables
Internal Pressures
Fatigue/endurance
Confidence
General Competition
Recover well from injury Repeatable good performances
Preparation Play well no matter position
Consistent performances Superior decision-makers
Do the 1%er’s
previous research. These include self-belief (Bull et al., 2005; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001;
Loehr, 1986; Middleton et al., 2004c; Thelwell et al., 2005), motivation (Bull et al., 2005;
Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones et al., 2002; Middleton et al., 2004c), tough attitude (Bull
et al., 2005; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Gould et al., 2002; Middleton et al., 2004c; Thelwell
et al., 2005), concentration and focus (Fawcett, 2005; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones et al.,
2002; Loehr, 1986; Middleton et al., 2004c), resilience (Bull et al., 2005; Fourie &
Potgieter, 2001; Gordon & Sridhar, 2005; Gould et al., 2002; Jones et al., 2002), and
96
handling pressure (Fawcett, 2005; Gordon & Sridhar, 2005; Jones et al., 2002; Middleton et
across these studies, there are several attributes and characteristics that were consistently
identified in the majority of these studies, all of which can be broadly classified under the
(concentration and focus), motivation, commitment and determination, positive and tough
attitude, resilience, enjoying and handling pressure, and quality preparation. Interestingly,
the psychological constructs covered by these seven major mental toughness categories
reflect the core of most psychological skills training programs that endeavour to integrate
these mental skills with physical, technical, and tactical skills training programs (see Morris
& Thomas, 2004; Williams, 2001). However, it is possible that the elite coaches and
athletes sampled in the research to date, who perhaps have read widely on the topic of
psychology and sport, would arrive at consistent responses that are influenced by popular
intelligence, sport intelligence, and physical toughness were unique to this sample. Despite
several authors highlighting the importance of emotional intelligence for sport performance
(e.g., Clements, 2005; Gordon, 2002) and research in organisational settings consistently
showing that individuals with more effective ways of dealing with emotions typically
outperform and achieve more success than those individuals with less effective methods
(Zeidner, Matthews, & Roberts, 2004), it is surprising that only one previous study
(Thelwell et al., 2005) has revealed emotions to be a key component of mental toughness.
The fact that characteristics such as emotions have surfaced only in sport-specific
97
Table 2. Mental toughness characteristics and their contrasts in descending order of importance and a representative quote.
2 Work Ethic A philosophy characterised by always working hard and pushing Work ethic has a lot to do with setting [mentally tough footballers] Being lazy, which is
yourself through (physically and mentally) demanding situations apart from the rest of the field, as guys who do not have a strong work characterised by a lack of
in competition, training and preparation to achieve your goals and ethic do not have the mental capacity and will not be able to push motivation and an attitude
vision through adversities of only doing the basics and
enough to get by
2a Determination An unbelievable determination to succeed, never giving up and [Player X] was able to just keep going regardless of the situation Lack of desire, accepting
endeavouring to be the best you can be because of an unbelievable determination to succeed and be the best he things as they were, and
can be being easily satisfied with
mediocrity
2b Perseverance The ability to persevere when faced with adversities and [Player X] certainly has the ability to overcome personal set-backs and Always giving up and
challenges both on and off the field to achieve your goals persevere through these hard times quitting when things get
tough
2c Goals Identifying your goals, what needs to be done to achieve those Mentally tough footballers realise and commit to goals because if you Lack direction and a vision,
goals and adjusting (re-shaping) those goals when faced with an do not have something to work towards then you probably will not be live in the moment and take
obstacle or adversity disciplined enough to work harder to be successful whatever happens without
any care in the world
2d Meticulous Preparation Doing everything in your preparation and leaving no stone [Player X] mentally and physically prepares himself, doing everything Lack of preparation and
unturned to ensure that you are prepared mentally and physically he can to ensure that he was out there on the ground doing the best he planning poorly
can for his team
2e Time-Management Managing your time efficiently to balance the many demands Becoming a champion footballer involves doing the extra things to get Disorganised, having no
associated with elite football to get the very best out of yourself the very best out of yourself, which requires an enormous amount of self-drive to manage your
commitment and time-management time efficiently and not
fully utilising your time
2f Inspirational Having the ability to let your actions speak louder than words and Both of these guys were able to do these mentally tough things and Uninspiring, insipid and
inspire your teammates influence and inspire 21 other players on their team playing for yourself; not
being selfless
3 Personal Values Placing great importance and significance on personal values [Player X] has great values. He values really simple stuff like never Poor integrity and personal
relevant to one becoming a better person and athlete giving up and busting your gut until you can’t handle it anymore. But philosophy on life and
he just personally valued these sorts of things as being important for football, and generally
succeeding in football, probably more so than the strategic and conform without any care in
physical stuff the world
3a Honesty Taking an honest stance when self-appraising your own [Player X] does not need any performance feedback from me and the Dishonest, delusional and
performances and not making excuses when you do perform other coaching staff to know how he has gone because he is that honest lacking credibility
poorly he can work it out for himself
98
3b Pride in performance Personal pride in your preparation, and training and competitive Through pride of his own personal performance he used these Careless, lacking self-
performances pressures and accepted them as challenges to test himself against respect and a “could not
care less” attitude
3c Accountability Taking ownership and responsibility for your behaviour and not Mentally tough players do not make excuses for poor performance and Selfish and more often than
making excuses for poor performances take ownership for their performance, and they accept their not attribute the blame to
responsibility for their role in the team external sources (e.g.,
teammates, coach, niggly
injury etc.)
4 Self-Motivated An internal motivation and desire for competitive challenges and One of the major differences between [Player X – mentally tough] and Lazy and unmotivated or
team success, and also having the desire to put the necessary [Player Y – mentally weak] is that [Player X] has the desire and extrinsically motivated,
things into practice to achieve your vision of success motivation to do it for himself and his teammates, whereas [Player Y] therefore, motivation and
does it for the external rewards associated with it direction needs to be forced
upon you by an external
source
4a Competitive Desire Having that competitive desire and looking forward to the When given the option [Player X] would always choose the run-with- Self-doubt and nervousness
challenge of testing your skills against the best role because he wanted to test his fitness and his mental toughness making you susceptible to
against his opponent pressure and being a “easy
beat” under the crunch
4b Team success Having the desire to be part of a successful team and putting the I think that the player who can put his team before himself and Individually oriented and
team’s objectives before individual goals, knowing that you have understand that attitude is more mentally tough than the player who is highly selfish
to do certain things, which you may not enjoy if you are to help all about himself and not the team
your team achieve success
4c Vision The desire to have an accurate vision of what it takes to succeed, [Player X] has his own vision of what he wants to achieve as a Insular, one dimensional,
what it takes to achieve that, and the desire to put that into footballer and I [the coach] do not need to push him to doing all the lacking perspective and
practice things that will make him a champion footballer foresight, and living in the
moment
5 Tough Attitude An unshakeable, tough attitude directed towards becoming a If you looked at both of these players’ lifestyles both would train as Weak attitude, which is
champion of the game hard as each other, both would have a lifestyle conducive to being the characterised by laziness,
best you can, but [Player X] turns up with a different attitude inconsistency, being easily
intimidated, and giving in
too easily and succumbing
mentally and physically
5a Discipline An enduring discipline of the mind in all situations to do Discipline of the mind to lock into a goal and to achieve it Undisciplined, selfish, and
everything in your life that needs to be done to achieve your lacking self-drive
goals
5b Commitment Having an enduring physical and mental commitment to doing To do your rehab properly, hamstring injuries for example, you have to Uncommitted, evasive, and
over and above what is required to set yourself apart from the rest go through a 21 day program and commit yourself so that you do it being unreliable and “happy
properly in the pack”
5c Positivity Maintaining a positive attitude despite the circumstances and Instead of thinking to yourself, “well I’m a bit sore and injured” its Negativity and pessimism
focusing on what can be done rather than what has happened being able to have the mindset of “I’ll be the strong person that I can
be and get through this”
99
5d Professionalism Having a professional attitude in every sense of the word – in If you take a look at [Player X] and his professionalism - the way he Unprofessional attitude,
particular, towards your diet, training, leadership, rehabilitation, trains, in his diet and rehab, and the way he is prepared to play with a which is characterised by
and competition bit of pain, play different roles laziness, carelessness and a
casual approach towards
things
5e Sacrifices Acknowledge that sacrifices (on and off the field) are inevitable Sacrificing is a huge contributor; you identify what you need to do, you Selfish, lazy and lack
if you want to achieve both individual and team success and sacrifice, and then you put yourself through those sacrifices and the commitment to the oneself
understand what the potential sacrifices you might have to make identification period and this helps give you the mental toughness to and/or the team
are survive at the highest level
6 Concentration & Focus Having that single-mindedness to focus and concentrate on the He is a guy who is just able to maintain his focus and concentration on Easily distracted and
job at hand and what you wants to achieve despite internal or what his job is in the presence of other factors that are trying to distract unfocused on the job at
external pressures, obstacles, or adversities him from that hand, which is characterised
by sporadic, erratic and
loose behaviour
7 Resilience The ability to overcome adversities with an exceptional work A word that comes through is resilience – so being good enough to Fragile mindset, which is
ethic and persevering determination to showcase your mental and keep playing and training through a lot of various things that keep characterised by the
physical ability testing you out (e.g., injuries, emotional hardships) inability to adapt to
pressure, being easily
broken and not putting a
fight in the face of adversity
8 Handling Pressure Being able to execute skills and procedures under pressure and Mentally tough players are able to handle the pressures on and off the Choking under pressure as a
stress, and accepting these pressures as challenges to test yourself field and they use these pressures as situations for demonstrating their result of anxiety, panic and
against mental toughness a loss of focus
8a Override Negative Thoughts The ability to override and block out negative thoughts and self- He is a player who can actually override all the things telling him that Succumbing to negative
doubts concerning your mental and physical state it just is not going to be his day thoughts as a result of a
weak attitude and a loss of
focus and concentration
9 Emotional Intelligence An honest and accurate self-awareness and understanding of your In addition to the mental and physical factors which contribute to Immature emotional make-
emotions when under pressure or facing an obstacle, and the overcoming adversities and performing well, mentally tough players up, which is characterised
ability to manage your emotions to enhance performance across acknowledge emotions as being an important ingredient and are by emotional insecurity,
all situations actually quite successful in using their emotions to their advantage being personally and
socially unaware of
emotions, and a one
dimensional emotional
focus
9a Self-Awareness Being able to recognise and understand the obstacles, challenges, Mentally weak footballers are the ones who are always asking Lack of awareness,
and pressures involved and accurately self-assessing your questions about their performances and if they don’t get the rating ignorance to the truth, and
individual performances which they think they should have got then they ask questions; they do needing to be told what to
not do the self-assessment that mentally tough players do and do not do
really need to know [the coach’s] viewpoint because they work it out
themselves
100
10 Sport Intelligence Having the ability to perceive and understand both the training Most of the mentally tough guys I have coached have a sound Lack of sport knowledge
and competitive environment, and having the self-awareness to understanding of the game, what I like to call “footy smarts” and understanding, and
identify and understand your role within the team and any ignorance to the sport.
potential adversities that you may face
10a Team Role Responsibility Understanding and accepting responsibility for your role in the Some players have a focus that is not team oriented and is more aimed Selfish, irresponsible and
team, which entails putting team success before individual at how they, as an individual, are performing, whereas mentally tough self-centred
success guys focus on how they are performing their role within the team
environment and how they are contributing as expected by others in the
team
10b Understanding the Game Understanding and knowing every asset of the game and the To me, what I have found is that the intelligence of the player, with Lacking understanding and
responsibilities of every player on the ground and off the field regards to footy, and his understanding of the game, his footy smarts, knowledge of the game
has a lot to do with being mentally tough (i.e., having no game sense)
11 Physical Toughness Playing to the best of your ability whilst carrying an injury, For a bloke to get bowled over from the very start, to get straight up Need to feel 100% to
consciously making the decision to attack the ball in a physically after breaking a couple of ribs and go through the process that he did perform, easily intimidated
threatening situation and pushing your body through extreme and drawing upon his mental toughness to help his team nearly win the and vulnerable to avoiding
fatigue experienced during competition and training game in a Grand Final was unbelievable physically demanding
situations
101
examinations of mental toughness suggests that while there seem to be several global
mental toughness characteristics common across the different sports sampled in these
studies, there appear to be certain characteristics that are specific to particular sports. When
compared with sports such as athletics, swimming, and tennis, for example,
adventure/explorer sports consistently involve more life threatening situations and one can
see how the characteristic of safety and survival would be considered a key component of
team unity would not be as relevant for an individual sport (e.g., tennis) when compared
with a team orientated sport (e.g., rugby). Consequently, the identification and
for both measuring and developing mental toughness within individual sports.
Identifying and describing the key characteristics of mental toughness and their
contrasts is one of the key contributions that this study makes to the literature. Previously,
the danger in conceptualising mental toughness only in the context of what individuals
believe it encompasses is that it opens the possibility for this construct to be misconstrued.
However, this is one of the strengths of a PCP framework because it encourages one to
understand personal constructs in the context of what that construct is not. Therefore, in the
contrasted with self-doubt, being lazy, having poor integrity and personal philosophy, being
unmotivated and/or extrinsically motivated, having a weak attitude, being easily distracted,
having a fragile mindset, choking under pressure, having a weak emotional make-up,
lacking sport knowledge and understanding of the game, and avoiding physically
mental toughness that takes into consideration both sides of the continuum enables coaches
102
and practitioners to more readily identify not only those individuals who are mentally tough
but also those individuals who are not. Future research examining both the key components
of mental toughness and their conceptual opposites would provide interesting comparisons
The present results further highlight that mental toughness in sport seems to be a
behaviour. Central to this multidimensional conceptualisation is the idea that the key
mental toughness characteristics are not isolated, but rather are interconnected with some
being considered more important than others. Similar to the present research, both Jones et
al. (2002) and Thelwell et al. (2005) revealed that some of the key characteristics were
perceived as being more important for mental toughness than others. However, the
the key characteristics identified, although comparable, were not exactly the same across
studies. Nonetheless, an encouraging finding from the present study which is clearly
supported by previous research (Jones et al., 2002; Thelwell et al., 2005) is that self-belief
is considered the most important component of mental toughness in sport. This trend is not
surprising given that high self-confidence and belief in one’s ability to achieve success is
commonly associated with many other positive psychological states and optimal
experiences such as flow (Jackson & Csikszentmihalyi, 1999) and peak performance
While it would seem appropriate that self-belief is at the core of mental toughness in
sport, determining the hierarchical nature and the contribution that each key characteristic
provides to mental toughness is required before any definitive conclusions can be made in
this regard. Identifying and understanding those situations that require mental toughness
103
and the behaviours that are commonly displayed by mentally tough athletes may help
further explain this hierarchy. This important endeavour represents another contribution
behaviours are presented in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. Given the demanding nature of
elite Australia Football, it is not surprising that there was a general consensus that every
aspect of being an elite footballer required some degree of mental toughness with some
situations demanding more than others. Several general and competition-specific situations
some of those situations identified here have previously been associated with athlete
attributions about the causes of burnout (Cresswell & Eklund, 2006) and sources of stress
Perhaps the most important finding in the present study is that mental toughness
was considered important not only for those situations with negative effects (e.g., injuries,
de-selection), but also for some situations with positive effects (e.g., good form, previous
heavily on the notion of adversity and how the key components enable one to deal with and
overcome such adversities (e.g., Clough, Earle, & Sewell, 2002; Middleton et al., 2004c).
Such conceptualisations suggest that mental toughness may be just another term describing
related constructs such as resilience and hardiness (cf. Maddi, 2002). The information
revealed here, however, provides the first evidence of how mental toughness can be clearly
distinguished from such constructs. While it seems that mental toughness encompasses
aspects of resilience and hardiness, where one has to deal with and overcome situations
104
Table 3. Descriptions of the general and competition-specific situations requiring mental toughness in Australian Football.
Situation Description
Consensus Statement All aspects of being an elite footballer require some degree of mental toughness
General Situations
Injury and Rehabilitation Dealing with injuries and doing rehabilitation was cited as the most common situation because injuries alter your routines, and as a
result you have to re-assess everything and make the necessary changes
Preparation Everything associated with preparing yourself for both training and competition (e.g., diet, attitude, work ethic) was another prominent
aspect of football requiring mental toughness. In particular, being able to do over and above what is required to ensure that you are
playing to the best of your ability
Challenges
Form An individual’s and the team’s form, both when things are going good and bad, were considered to require a large degree of mental
toughness. When things are going good, for example, players need to remain focused and motivated so they do not drop off in all the
important stuff (e.g., training, diet, attitude)
Peer and Social Pressure Remaining focused and committed to what you want to achieve in football and not being impacted or affected by the various peer and
social pressures (e.g., drinking, drugs) that can easily draw footballers away from football
Balancing Commitments Being able to balance football and outside football commitments (e.g., relationships, media, and work) was considered to require a
large degree of mental toughness and, in particular, time-management and discipline
Competition-specific Situations
External Pressures These included pressures which were out of the control of the individual
Environmental & Playing Several environmental and playing conditions (e.g., away ground, crowd, weather, umpiring decisions) were considered to require
Conditions mental toughness, as players from both teams are subjected to the same conditions and have to play no matter how challenging these
conditions are
Match Variables Several match variables were considered as requiring mental toughness including (a) when you are individually challenged by an
opponent, (b) when you are being tagged and targeted by the opposition, (c) physical risk, and (d) when your team is in front and
playing well
Internal Pressures These included pressures which were in control of the individual. Two prominent internal factors requiring mental toughness included
when you are fatigued and when your self-belief is low or being challenged
105
Table 4. Descriptions of the general and competition-specific behaviours displayed by mentally tough Australian Footballers.
Behaviour Description
Consensus Statement Although several of the key characteristics represent certain actions of being mentally tough (e.g., time-management, perseverance,
and inspirational) participants were able to articulate several common behaviours that are overtly displayed by mentally tough
footballers
General Behaviours
Recovering from Injury It is not surprising that participants were in agreement that one of the most common behaviours displayed by mentally tough
footballers is that they recover well from injury and, more often than not, they recover quicker than is expected
Meticulous Preparers Mentally tough footballers often do over and above what is required of them in preparing for training and competition. One participant
so aptly stated that the “mentally tough footballers cross their “T’s” and dot their “I’s” in their preparation.” This included, for
example, putting in extra weight or endurance sessions or doing more “homework” on his opponents
Consistent Performance Consistently performing at a high level was considered the most defining behaviour of mentally tough footballer. As a result, there
was a general consensus that a long and enduring career is a sign of mental toughness
Competition-specific Behaviours
Repeatable Good Performance One of the defining behaviours attributed to the mentally tough player was consistently performing to the best of his ability. On the
other hand, mentally weak players were those individuals who would play a good game when the team was playing good and winning,
but when things got tight and the team needed to, for example, man up or be more physical, mentally weak footballers would not be
the ones who would stand up. In particular, mentally tough footballers adjust the way they played the game based on the context of
that individual game
Play Well No Matter Their Position An extension of consistent performances is that mentally tough footballers play well no matter their position on the ground because
they have the right mental approach. For the mentally weak footballer who plays up forward, for example, when he is required to
change position and play up back because of on an injury or mismatch he will not be able to change his mindset of “I’m a forward and
I can not play up back”, which shows in his performance.
Superior Decision-makers A large component of being versatile was ascribed to having superior perceptual and decision-making skills, which included being
able to accurately “read the play” and anticipate game-play (e.g., opponent and teammates’ actions), make effective decisions, and
respond quickly and accurately
Do the 1%er’s There was a general consensus that mentally tough footballers consistently do the little things, the “1%er’s” as they are known in
Australian Rules football, and always rank high in these statistics despite the circumstances of the game. These 1%er’s include, for
example, blocking an opponent for your teammate, smothering an opponents kick of the ball, chasing hard and placing pressure on the
opposition when you do not have the ball, and hard ball gets from underneath a pack of players
106
with negative effects, unlike resilience and hardiness it also enables one to thrive in
situations where there are positive effects and perceived “positive pressure.”
The process of identifying and describing those situations that require mental
toughness also enabled participants to place themselves in these situations and recollect
how they felt, what they were thinking, and how they behaved in such challenging times.
Using such an approach, I was able to gain an understanding of how the key characteristics
of mental toughness influenced mentally tough footballer’s to approach these situations, but
also how they would appraise certain performances and what behaviours they exhibit in
these situations. While there was a general consensus among interviewees that mental
toughness exerted its influence in these situations in a number of ways, there were several
common processes and behaviours identified. For example, there was a common perception
that doing everything in your preparation and leaving no stone unturned to ensure that you
are prepared mentally and physically made a significant contribution to maintaining a high
degree of self-belief in that you will be able to play to your potential and overcome any
obstacle or challenge along the way. In contrast, an exceptional work ethic characterised by
overcoming adversities but also overcoming them quicker and better than expected (e.g.,
injury rehab), while an understanding of the intricacies of the game and how it is played
future research may employ observational studies, for example, in which qualitatively-
may also prove fruitful for the applied practitioner wishing to supplement the information
107
gleaned from self-report measures of mental toughness. Specifically, we need to understand
what situations (internal and external) demand mental toughness and how the key
characteristics enable an athlete to thrive in, as well as persevere through, such situations so
that we can understand how these protective and enabling factors can be enhanced.
Mental toughness was considered a quality that brings together several human
features and allows a footballer to consistently get the best out of his physical ability. The
current definition of mental toughness, therefore, seeks to reflect this position and integrate
Two important distinctions become apparent when the present definition of mental
toughness is compared with those from previous research (e.g., Clough et al., 2002; Gould
et al., 2002; Jones et al., 2002; Middleton et al., 2004c). For example, Middleton et al.
defined mental toughness as “an unshakeable perseverance and conviction towards some
goal despite pressure or adversity” (p. 6) while Jones et al. (p. 209) concluded that:
First, the current definition makes explicit the idea that mental toughness encapsulates a
various characteristics at the expense of others, thereby suggesting that mental toughness is
108
limited to such characteristics. In contrast, the current definition seeks to avoid this in an
definitions have defined mental toughness only in the presence of or response to adversity,
and further conceptualised this construct in relation to its role in overcoming such
adversities (e.g., Clough et al., 2002; Middleton et al., 2004c). The majority of the
situations an elite athlete faces during his or her career are indeed adverse and therefore
challenging (e.g., injury, de-selection, form slumps). However, such a reactive definition
casts a negative light on mental toughness and fails to acknowledge other situations, which
may have positive effects but still be construed as challenging (e.g., maintaining a high
level of performance when performing well), that can also benefit from several of the key
mental toughness characteristics. Rather, the current definition highlights the importance of
mental toughness across all situations, which in the present study included both positively
and negatively construed pressures and challenges. Defined in this sense, mental toughness
protective and enabling factors that promote and maintain adaptation to other positive (yet
Practical Implications
These results have a number of implications for practitioners working with athletic
cohorts. First, the majority of the characteristics revealed are consistent with previous
research suggesting that there seem to be several global mental toughness characteristics
and tough attitude, resilience, enjoying and handling pressure, and quality preparation).
Efforts to develop and/or enhance mental toughness should incorporate educational and
experiential workshops targeting these areas. Second, while there seem to be several global
109
mental toughness characteristics, I also evidenced several characteristics that are unique to
Australian Football. Recognising and catering for such sport-specific and individual
practitioners can utilise those principles of PCP described here to facilitate discussions with
their clients about what that individual (and the team) construes as encapsulating the
phenomenon of mental toughness in his or her sport, when (situations) it is required, and
what this means for the client’s behaviour. Given the varying degree in the nature of each
of the situations demanding mental toughness described here, some degree of variation in
the manner in which each characteristic enables an individual to deal with and thrive in
situations to help guide them through the process of understanding the implications for their
behaviour.
Conclusion
could be articulated and understood. The key characteristics resemble a majority of those
identified in previous research, suggesting that there seem to be several global mental
toughness characteristics. However, several characteristics unique to this sample were also
components of mental toughness. This study is the first to provide an understanding of what
mental toughness is in the context of what it is not, specific situations that demand mental
toughness, and specific overt behaviours commonly observed by many mentally tough
performers.
110
Although I have chosen to identify and understand mental toughness within an
Australian Football context, I hope to have conveyed the importance of not only identifying
and describing the key characteristics of mental toughness but also understanding how
these characteristics play their role in the performance process. Limitations of the study
include the use of self-report data (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977) and a reliance on sampling
important that future researchers explore alternative methods of data collection, such as
prospective and longitudinal studies, and combining self-report data with data obtained
experience, achievements, and elite vs. non-elite). Nonetheless, I hope to have provided an
important step in the quest towards a holistic understanding of the mental toughness
phenomenon in sport and stimulated further empirical attention to this elusive construct.
111
CHAPTER IIIb
112
Mental toughness is often regarded as the hallmark of many of the great athletes to have
achieving performance excellence by both coaching and academic communities (cf. Crust,
2007), it has only been in recent years that researchers have allocated greater attention to
studying this elusive construct. Pioneering research in this area (e.g., Fourie & Potgieter,
2001; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2002) focused on understanding mental toughness
and the key characteristics encompassing this construct from the perspective of athletes and
coaches in various team and individual sports (see also Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton,
2007), whereas more recent examinations have explored this psychological construct within
individual sports such as cricket (Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005) and soccer
(Thelwell, Weston & Greenlees, 2005). However, the empirical literature on mental
toughness in sport, being predominantly outcome focused and descriptive in nature, seems
weak at offering insights into the processes by which mental toughness operates.
researcher’s and practitioner’s work in the area was presented by Gucciardi, Gordon, and
Dimmock (in press). Based on interviews with 11 elite Australian football coaches, which
framework, they created a grounded theory of mental toughness which highlights the
Australian football (see Figure 1). These components were labelled characteristics,
events, both internal and external, which demand varying degrees of mental toughness.
113
1. Self-belief vs. Self-doubt
2. Work Ethic vs. Lazy
3. Personal Values vs. Poor Integrity &
Philosophy
4. Self-motivated vs. Extrinsically &
un/motivated
5. Tough Attitude vs. Weak Attitude
6. Concentration/focus vs.
Distractible/unfocused
7. Resilience vs. Fragile Mindset
8. Handling Pressure vs. Anxious & Panicky
9. Emotional Intelligence vs. Emotionally
Immature
10. Sport Intelligence vs. Lack of sport
knowledge
11. Physical Toughness vs. Weak sense of General
toughness Injury & Rehab
Preparation
Challenges
Competition
External Pressures
Environment
Playing environment
Match variables
Internal Pressures
Fatigue/endurance
Confidence
General Competition
Recover well from injury Repeatable good performances
Preparation Play well no matter position
Consistent performances Superior decision-makers
Do the 1%er’s
114
Behaviours referred to the overt indicators mentally tough footballers displayed in those
mental toughness in sport then, this research offered a preliminary insight into both the
processes and outcomes of mental toughness within the context of Australian football.
the next step in the conceptual evolution of this constructs focuses on its development.
which to nurture and maintain mental toughness (c.f. Crust, 2007), preliminary research
indicates that there are other influential factors that need to be considered. Based on
interviews with 12 male English cricketers ranked as among the most mentally tough
players in the past 20 years by 101 English cricket coaches, Bull et al. (2005) highlighted
well as secondary influences (e.g., need to earn success, have opportunities to survive early
setbacks, and exposure to foreign cricket) were key components of the environmental
influences category that was generated by these authors. However, while revealing that
In a more recent study Connaughton, Wadey, Hanton, and Jones (2008) re-
interviewed seven athletes from a previous study (Jones et al., 2002) to understand their
number of important factors such as the motivational climate, key individuals within an
115
athlete’s socialisation network (coaches, peers, parents, grandparents, siblings, senior
athletes, sport psychologists, and team-mates), sport-specific and life experiences as well as
three sources was required once mental toughness had been developed: intrinsic motivation
to succeed; social support; and the implementation of basic and advanced psychological
skill use. These findings are consistent with much of the research on the development of
gifted and talented school children (Gagné, 2004) and athletes (Bloom, 1985; Côté, 1999;
Fraser-Thomas, Côté & Deakin, 2005; Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002; Martindale,
Collins, & Daubney, 2005; Tranckle & Cushion, 2006; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005) in which
peers) are considered highly influential in the development process. Although providing
mental toughness, Connaughton et al.’s findings fail to identify how these sources and
highlights that key individuals can have both positive and negative effects on the
psychological development of individuals (e.g., Gould, Lauer, Rolo, Jannes, & Pennisi,
2006; Scanlan, Stein, & Ravizza, 1991; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005; see also Gagné, 2004).
understanding how the psychological characteristics associated with mental toughness are
developed, to date there has only been one study of which we are aware that has generated
Connaughton et al., 2008). While this investigation and the talent development literature
provides a foundation upon which we can begin to understand the sources and methods of
116
influence in the development of mental toughness, this understanding is by no means
complete and further research is required to address several important gaps within the
mental toughness literature. One limitation of the scant research to date (e.g., Bull et al.,
2005; Connaughton et al., 2008) is that coaches’ perceptions of the mental toughness
development process have yet to be examined. An approach where only coaches are
sampled to generate information on the strategies and mechanisms they use and their
perceptions of those employed by parents has been used successfully by other sport
psychology researchers (e.g., Gould et al., 2006; Gould, Lauer, Rolo, Jannes, & Pennisi,
2008). A second limitation of the aforementioned research is that it has failed to gauge how
the sources and methods of influence both facilitate and impede the development of mental
toughness. Indeed, some models of talent development (e.g., Abbott & Collins, 2004) have
been criticised for focusing on the positive influences such factors have while disregarding
that such factors also work negatively (Tranckle & Cushion, 2006).
Accordingly, this study was designed to help fill this void in the literature by
examining the mental toughness development process within an Australian football context
coaches and to determine their perceptions of the roles parents play in this process. Unlike
previous research in the area, I aim to generate an understanding of the processes by which
these important sources and methods of influence cultivate and facilitate as well as hinder
football (Gucciardi et al., in press). Given that Australian football is a sport that is rarely
studied, it also offers the opportunity to determine the extent to which previous data can be
transferred to such a unique and different sport. Moreover, to address calls in the qualitative
methods literature for researchers to provide a theoretical analysis for the findings (e.g.,
117
Morse, 1994), a second purpose of this study was to develop an explanatory model of the
development process using grounded theory methodology (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss
Method
Participants
Each of the eleven male participants (M age = 42 years, SD = 9.62) from Gucciardi
et al.’s (in press) sample were re-interviewed. These coaches were judged to be an excellent
source of information because of their reputation for nurturing mentally tough footballers at
the elite level. Furthermore, each coach recruited for this study had extensive playing and
coaching experience at all levels of the game, had achieved numerous individual and team
successes as a player and coach, and had been or currently is involved with coach and
player development within an Australian football context. At the time of interview, each
football team.
Interview Schedule
was developed specifically for this study. It served to structure the conversation around
each participant’s perception of how the key characteristics revealed previously (Gucciardi
consider the methods and strategies by which influential sources impact on the mental
strategies and mechanisms they use in their coaching as well as their perceptions of how
parents influence this process. Given that these influential sources can have both positive
and negative effects on the psychological development of individuals (cf. Gagné, 2004;
118
Gould et al., 2006; Scanlan et al., 1991; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005), I was also interested in
identifying those processes which serve to either facilitate or hinder the development of
mental toughness. Both clarification (“What do you mean by…?”) and elaboration probes
(“Can you give me an example of…?”) were used throughout each interview to prompt
interviewees and encourage clarity and richness of data (Patton, 2002). A copy of the
Data Analysis
Overview of data analysis procedures. Data analytical procedures were based on the
methodology. Grounded theory coding techniques encourage the analyst to move from
& Strauss, 1967). In line with grounded theory procedures, data collection proceeded
concurrently with analysis and ended when theoretical saturation was achieved (Strauss &
Corbin, 1998). Constant comparison between and within the codes revealed in open coding
occurred throughout data collection and analysis so that the basic properties and dimensions
of a category or construct, its causal conditions, context and outcomes and the relationships
and patterns between categories could be defined (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Essentially,
each concept was compared with other concepts and categories, and each category was
compared with other categories so that similarities and variations between and within the
reflected the reports of the participants (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). First, both the doctoral
119
student and a secondary researcher analysed the data in an attempt to circumvent the
inclusion of any bias on the part of the analysts. Second, each of the 11 interviewees was
provided with a detailed overview of the results of the analysis and was asked to reflect on
and verify the accuracy of the analysts’ interpretations. In addition to these traditional
interviews was presented to a large cohort of coaches (n = 58) attending the Australia
Football League’s National Coaching Conference (Gordon & Gucciardi, 2006a). During a
90 min workshop conducted by Dr. Sandy Gordon, conference attendees were assembled
into small groups (approximately five to seven) and asked to examine the emergent
categories to determine if they were reflective of their experiences and perceptions and to
provide written feedback. This process was replicated in a second 60 min workshop with an
independent sample (n = 49) of coaches attending a State Coaching Conference (Gordon &
elite and elite coaches thereby having worked with footballers from a variety of
backgrounds and experiences. There was minimal disagreement between and within the
two coach samples with the structure and design of the model being substantiated.
Procedure
The university human ethics committee granted approval for this project prior to
commencing the study. Each participant was contacted by telephone and was informed of
the mental toughness research being conducted. Once each participant agreed to be
interviewed at a time and place most convenient to them they were sent via email two
documents detailing (a) Gucciardi et al.’s (in press) conceptualisation of mental toughness
in Australian football and (b) the interview schedule at least three days prior to the
120
interview. They were asked to read both documents and consider the questions in relation
to the conceptualisation of mental toughness over the days preceding the interview.
Interviews lasted between 45 and 90 min and were recorded and transcribed verbatim.
Results
coaches positively and negatively influenced the mental toughness development process.
Table l provides an overview of these in relation to each of the 11 key mental toughness
accounted for the perceived strategies and mechanisms occurring during early childhood,
categories. The presentation of the results in the following section is organised around these
central categories. Verbatim quotes are included throughout to contextualise and support
There was a general consensus that mental toughness was something that was
developed or “having it in them” before one came to football. Each participant noted that
every footballer has some inherent level of mental toughness that they bring with them to
football. This “generalised” form of mental toughness was said to provide the foundation
upon which more specialised forms of mental toughness can be developed. Childhood
socialisation processes and experiences in the family context were considered particularly
relevant in this regard. Specifically, parents were perceived by all participants to play a
121
Table 1. Overview of the strategies and mechanisms associated with the development of key mental toughness characteristics.
“Mentally Tough” Pole Bipolar, Rank-Ordered Mental Toughness Characteristics “Mentally Weak” Pole
2. Work Ethic Encourage autonomy; role models (coach, parent, peers); setting expectations and Low and unrealistic expectations; negative role models (coach, parent, Lazy
standards; challenging training environment; emphasise improvement and peers); emphasise winning over enjoyment and personal development;
enjoyment over winning unchallenging training environments; parental criticisms
3. Personal Values Social support; role models (coach, parent, peers); setting expectations and Negative role models (coach, parent, peers); emphasise winning over Poor Integrity and
standards enjoyment and personal development Personal Philosophy
4. Self-motivated Exposure to various experiences; encourage autonomy; encourage discussion and Low and unrealistic expectations; emphasise winning over enjoyment and Extrinsically and/or
debate; emphasise improvement and enjoyment over winning personal development; focus on player’s weaknesses; encouragement unmotivated
pressurises demand for success
5. Tough Attitude Guidance and encouragement; role models (coach, parent, peers); open Negative role models (coach, parent, peers); unchallenging training Weak Attitude
communication; challenging training environment environments; parental criticisms
6. Concentration & Setting expectations and standards; role models (coach, parent, peers); pre- De-emphasise preparation and planning; encouragement pressurises Distractible and
Focus performance routines demand for success; parental criticisms Unfocused
7. Resilience Guidance and encouragement; role models (coach, parent, peers); exposure to Emphasise winning over enjoyment and personal development; Fragile Mindset
various experiences; social support; 1-1 conversations; challenging training unchallenging training environments; focus on player’s weaknesses; limited
environment; emphasise improvement and enjoyment over winning social support; parental criticisms
8. Handling Exposure to various experiences; encourage autonomy; challenging training Low and unrealistic expectations; emphasise winning over enjoyment and Anxious and Panicky
Pressure environment; positive reinforcement and encouragement; emphasise improvement personal development; unchallenging training environments;
and enjoyment over winning encouragement pressurises demand for success
9. Emotional Encourage discussion and debate; positive coach-athlete relationships; emotional Explanations lack reasoning and justification; democratic coaching style; Emotionally Immature
Intelligence support; open communication parental criticisms
10. Sport Intelligence Exposure to various experiences; encourage discussion and debate; competition Explanations lack reasoning and justification; democratic coaching style; Lack of Sport
simulation (physical and mental pressures); performance diaries; information de-emphasise preparation and planning; lack of feedback Knowledge
dissemination
11. Physical Competition simulation (physical and mental pressures); challenging training Unchallenging training environments; focus on player’s weaknesses; Weak Sense of Physical
Toughness environment parental criticisms Toughness
122
pivotal role by fostering a home environment that encourages the early development of
those values, attitudes, emotions, and behaviours encompassed by mental toughness (cf.
Gucciardi et al., in press). Interestingly, the coaches described these foundational key
mental toughness characteristics as being highly transferable to other life contexts such as
of the key mental toughness characteristics such as self-belief, personal values, resilience,
and handling pressure are developed was clearly evident in all of the coaches’ discourse.
Having parents that make you feel loved and cared for by talking about certain problems
and issues or providing guidance and encouragement in ways that encourage a developing
child to persist and seek new courses of action was considered particularly relevant by
several participants for nurturing self-belief, resilience and the ability to thrive through
Parents who guide and encourage their children to understand the different
and various experiences, adversities, challenges, and pressures they
encounter during their childhood and how [he or she] has dealt with them
enables [him or her] to better understand how [s/he] can do it differently
in the future.”
Participants also linked such parental processes with the development of mentally tough
attitudes: “Don’t camouflage disappointments and mistakes; parents need to help their child
understand and learn from them…this is an attitude and value in life that will be beneficial
in a great number of settings.” The strategies that were said to facilitate this process
included developing and maintaining open communication between child and parent, and
123
encouraging discussion and debate. One participant stated that “never allowing one word
answers such as no and yes but rather encouraging children to justify their response” was
Parents as role models. Coaches typically recognised that parents play a pivotal in
ethic, personal values, tough attitude, and resilience by acting as role models within the
home environment. For example, the modelling of personal values such as honesty,
taking pride in everything you do by parents was considered an important process by which
those values associated with mental toughness in Australian football (cf. Gucciardi et al., in
press) are instilled. One participant clearly captured the nature of this influence in his
comments: “We are products of our parents. If they value discipline, honesty, and being
accountable for your own actions then we as their child generally adopt those same values
and beliefs.”
Ensuring that parents model a strong work ethic and tough attitude at home was also
A kid will learn and value the importance of maintaining a strong work
ethic towards everything [s/he] does if [s/he] sees [his or her] parents do
this too…these parents take the charge and show their kids what it means
to have a strong work ethic and tough attitude in life.
Several coaches further highlighted those parents who have experienced and rebounded
from hardships and adversities (e.g., losing a close family member, motor accidents) as
well as dealing successfully with day-to-day pressures and challenges (e.g., balancing work
and family) as modelling a sense of resilience in their child. One coach remarked: “Seeing a
loved one struggle through a tough experience and come out on top says a lot to a kid
124
Parental behaviours. A myriad of parental behaviours and practices were among the
most commonly mentioned forms of nurturing key components of mental toughness such as
self-belief, work ethic, personal values, self-motivation, resilience, handling pressure and
emotional intelligence in the home. For example, exposing one’s child to as many different
and varied experiences, adversities, challenges, and pressures was considered an important
mechanism by which parents encourage their child to develop the necessary skills to deal
with and thrive through these types of events in the future. Several participants endorsed
situation was said to be “an invaluable learning experience in developing the ability to
handle pressure and resilience against adversity” as “there is only so much you can learn
without actually experiencing something first hand.” Participants believed that a great deal
of self-belief comes from dealing with the event successfully but even when the outcome is
not successful one can gain a deeper awareness of ways in which they can deal with the
independent to explore new and different situations and experiences” and “not doing
everything for their child” to be most effective in this regard. These autonomy-supportive
parents were said to facilitate this process with support and encouragement whereby the
125
child develops a sense of personal or internal locus of control and the perception that their
behaviours are self-determined. The intrinsic motivation that develops from such
development and maintenance of a hard work ethic, as illustrated by the following quote:
“…when kids are encouraged to do things for themselves it allows them to take ownership
for their behaviour…and with ownership comes the drive to work harder to achieve
something.”
parents can actually hinder the development of mental toughness. One of the most
commonly cited methods by the coaches in which this is perceived to occur involves the
Several coaches believed that such overuse of encouragement often stems from the parents
personal aspirations which they may not have achieved during their youth; that is, trying to
live vicariously their child’s life. The following quote clearly demonstrates this sentiment:
All too often I have come across parents who encourage their children
to an extent where there is too much pressure on their kid to perform
well…they mean well but their desire to see their kid be successful just
takes over this.
Contrary to these parents who offer too much encouragement and deeply immerse
themselves in their child’s sporting endeavours are those parents who lack enthusiasm and
interest in their child’s development across all areas of their life (i.e., disengagement).
Coaches discussed this idea in the following manner: “…then you have those parents who
just don’t show any interest in anything their child does…their interests [e.g., sport, music]
Parents who model negative behaviours, attitudes, and values were commonly cited
by the coaches as thwarting the development of key mental toughness characteristics. This
126
was clearly reflected in the comments of the following coach: “If you have witnessed a
parent give up in the face of an adversity [such as injury] then this says to the child that
“giving up” is ok.” Similarly, another coach indicated: “…those parents who don’t value
the importance of personal improvement in everything they do…and don’t take personal
responsibility for their actions…project these kinds of attitudes onto their children.”
Coaches also discussed the case where parents demonstrate excessive control over their
child’s direction and behaviour which can leave a child lacking the self-determined
remarks: “Parents who do everything for their child and don’t allow them the opportunity to
direct their own behaviour…such as fighting their battles for them” and “not giving
children the freedom to explore different activities that interest them for the inherent
pleasure but rather because of the parents want to them do certain activities.”
relationship were perceived by the coaches as hindering the mental toughness development
process. For example, parents who “tell their child what they want to hear as opposed to
telling them what they need to hear [i.e., being realistic but in a positive manner]” as well
as “having unrealistic or inadequate expectations and views on their child’s abilities and
personal values, and emotional intelligence. Another major discussion point prevalent
among the coaches’ discourse was related to the emotional climate that parents foster in the
home setting. In contrast to those parents who encourage open communication as well as
discussion and debate with their children, several coaches noted that a lack of such an open
following quote captures the essence of this notion: “Parents are an important emotional
127
outlet especially for developing children so not being able to discuss things with them leads
to the “bottling-up” of emotions and encourages a kid to continue doing this in other
Football Experiences
Each coach highlighted the importance of the football experiences that one is
exposed to over the course of his or her football career in transforming the generalised
forms of mental toughness formed during early childhood experiences into a more
particular, were considered to be the most important source of influence in this regard, as
reflected in the following quote: “Coaches at all levels of the game, whether they realise it
or not, are so important for the development of footballers, not only physically but also
mentally.”
Coach-athlete relationship. The relationship that exists between a coach and his or
her players was commonly discussed as an influential source in the mental toughness
development process by all of the coaches. Specifically, it was noted that “if players don’t
trust or respect their coach then they won’t be as willing to take on board what they say or
do.” The coaches highlighted several important strategies and mechanism by which to
establish and maintain positive and supportive coach-athlete relationships that were
perceived to facilitate the development of several key mental toughness characteristics. The
A number of aspects of the coach-athlete relationship were discussed by the coaches in this
regard, most of which were related to having an open line of communication between the
128
athlete and coach. For example, offering athlete’s an instructive component related to the
and cognitive aspects was considered by several participants as one of the most effective
strategies. The following quote reinforces this opinion: “the coach needs to, what I like to
call, “turn the collar around” and be there for his players to listen to personal problems in
addition to football related issues.” A major contributor in this regard was providing
athletes with various opportunities or contexts within or outside the football environment in
evident among the coaches’ discourse that there needs to be a long-term orientation towards
maintaining the relationship. This outlook was characterised by the following quote: “just
there needs to be a commitment to maintaining such a healthy relationship over time and
one ascribes to plays a pivotal role in the development of key mental toughness
and sport intelligence, and physical toughness in several important ways. A major
discussion point in this regard related to coaches prioritising athletic and personal
development over and above coaching success in the development of mental toughness.
Those coaches characterised by such a philosophy “view players as a person and athlete,
and not just a player on their team” as well as “acknowledge and accept that players are
129
going to fail at times…but focus on helping players learn from their failures so they can do
it differently in the future.” Related to this discussion point was the adoption of a “holistic
in terms of those required for performance excellence in football but also the athlete’s skills
I fully support the idea that mental toughness in football is a lot more
than what you do on the field. Of course, it has a lot to do with that but
being able to reach your potential in football is affected by other
aspects of your life, whether that is school for a developing player or
work for older footballers. Coaches need to recognise this and strive to
develop players’ football and life skills.
and the many obstacles, challenges, and pressures that one is likely to encounter was
development of mental toughness by all coaches. One participant described the nature of
this process in terms of encouraging players to understand that the better prepared they are
the better the outcome will be: “when a player knows they are fully prepared they are more
confident, as they know that they have done everything possible to perform to the best of
their ability.” Another participant described the importance of this process in “helping
developing players in acquiring an understanding of each pressure variable that can create
self-doubt.” Aside from specifically targeting the sport intelligence component of mental
toughness described by Gucciardi et al. (in press), the coaches believed that an
understanding of the game has numerous implications for the development of self-belief.
Specifically, having a greater awareness and deeper understanding of such information was
said to provide a platform of self-belief in terms of “anticipating these events in the future
and being more confident in being able to deal with them because of they are not surprised
130
Training environment. The training environment created and maintained by coaches
at all levels of the game was articulated by several participants as an important means
through which coaches contribute to the development of mental toughness. There was a
consensus that by creating a challenging environment where every player was being
continuously challenged, in terms of both on and off field issues, the importance of hard
work, self-motivation, and physical toughness was communicated. As one coach remarked:
If training was made easy then players would expect this during a
competition…and we all know that is certainly not the case. Instead, if
[coaches] create an environment that continuously pushes [footballers]
to their physical and mental limits during training sessions, then
[footballers] will be better prepared for the rigors of competition.
they are currently at in terms of physical and mental ability through various drills and
weekly tasks” and “helping players develop the necessary skills to deal with these various
challenges in the future.” Other coaches highlighted the importance of “pushing players’
limits of physical pain during training drills” whereas some described the benefits
associated with “simulating competition scenarios during training sessions so that players
can develop the necessary skills to cope with pressure and anxiety during competition.”
adverse situations as enabling players to gain experience with such situations and the best
Specific strategies. Aside from those strategies and techniques described in the
preceding sections, the coaches further identified a specific number of strategies and
techniques for developing mental toughness in their players. For example, the following
techniques and strategies were discussed by several coaches in regard to helping players
develop an awareness and understanding of the game: asking players why they are doing
131
certain drills and the implications of the drill for competitive performances during training
sessions; having players complete training diaries which include self-assessments of own
and team performance; having 1-1 conversations with players during training sessions
about aspects of the drill and their performance during such drills; and exposing players to
a variety of events that replicate the experiences involved in competitive football (e.g.,
pressure simulations). The coaches also discussed a number of specific strategies and
techniques for instilling self-belief and a strong work ethic among their players and
included: positive reinforcement and encouragement for poor and excellent performances
and effort; praising positive behaviours in front of the whole team; encouraging mistakes as
opportunities to learn from; and an “every player being equal” philosophy. Coach
behaviours such as these were said to contribute to the development of mental toughness by
as well as enabling players to acquire specific mental skills associated with mental
coaches can also hinder the development of mental toughness. Several specific strategies
and processes were highlighted in this regard. One of the most commonly cited methods by
the coaches in which this is perceived to occur was a coach letting his or her desire for
player and therefore coach success overrule the need for individual player development, as
reflected in the following extract: “Focusing on winning and success encourages us to set
standards against the things with which we are not in control of…we can control the
athletic and personal development of players so these should be our benchmarks.” The
implication of this process was said to “emphasise inappropriate values and attitudes” and
encourage coaches to “overlook the importance of developing mental and life skills.”
132
The importance of establishing and maintaining training environments that
continuously challenge players was again reinforced in the coaches’ discussions on the
ways in which coaches can hinder the mental toughness development process. In contrast to
coaches who foster challenging environments, those coaches who create “an easy
environment where players just do what is necessary and not above and beyond what is
required” fail to expose their players to important experiences that are crucial for
developing key facets of mental toughness such as self-belief, sport intelligence, physical
environments identified by the participants included: accepting excuses from players; not
encouraging them to take responsibility for their own actions; coaches solving a player’s
problems for him or her; and failing to push players through physical and emotional pain
boundaries.
Two specific processes were highlighted by the coaches as means by which coaches
negatively impact the development of key characteristics such as self-belief, work ethic,
self-motivation, and handling pressure. First, coaches who focus on and over-emphasise a
player’s weaknesses and failing to acknowledge and reinforce his or her strengths were
commonly cited by the coaches. The following excerpt captures the essence of this theme:
There was a general consensus that when coaches address a player’s weaknesses while
emphasising his or her strengths s/he is better equipped to thrive through the many
challenges, pressures and adversities s/he experiences as opposed to merely coping with
that situation.
133
Another discussion point on the ways in which coaches hinder the development of
mental toughness prevalent among the coaches’ discourse related to footballer expectations.
being extremely detrimental, as epitomised by one coach who stated that “low and
unrealistic expectations have a way of attacking one’s self-belief and motivation to achieve
[his or her] goals….and without this motivation and belief such standards become
athlete when discussing their ability to identify realistic and appealing goals to set their
playing group: “viewing and knowing my players as both footballers and people certainly
makes it easier for me to set standards and expectations that I know they can and will want
to achieve.”
Discussion
The primary purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of elite Australian
football coaches regarding the sources and methods of influence underlying the mental
toughness development process in Australian football. Unlike previous research in the area
(e.g., Bull et al., 2005; Connaughton et al., 2008) my aim was to elicit an understanding of
the processes by which these important sources of influence cultivate and facilitate as well
methodology. Consistent with the scant mental toughness research (Bull et al., 2005;
Connaughton et al., 2008) as well as related talent development research (e.g., Bloom,
1985; Côté, 1999; Fraser-Thomas et al., 2005; Gagné, 2004; Gould et al., 2002; Martindale
et al., 2005; Tranckle & Cushion, 2006; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005), parents and coaches
134
were perceived here as the two major sources of influence on the development of mental
toughness.
on a child’s participation in sport and physical activity (cf. Horn & Horn, 2007), the
information presented here links particular parental processes and strategies to the
with this body of information on positive and negative parental influences are several
reoccurring themes which are clearly paralleled in the coaches’ discussions here. These
include, but are not limited to, providing various forms of social support (Connaughton et
al., 2008; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005); unrealistic and inappropriate expectations (Gould et
al., 2006; Wolfenden & Holt, 2005); over-emphasising success (Gould et al., 2006; Gould
et al., 2008); positive and negative role modelling (Brustad, 1988); positive feedback and
encouragement (Brustad, 1996); criticisms and high expectations (Gould, Tuffey, Udry, &
Loehr, 1996); discussions that have psychological consequences (Taylor, Clayton, &
The general theme among the coaches’ discourse indicated that the aforementioned
strategies and mechanisms enable parents to create specific motivational climates in which
the developing child is exposed to a greater variety and number of opportunities for
personal development. The coaches recognised that through such socialisation experiences
pertinent to mental toughness in Australian football (e.g., self-belief, work ethic, personal
pressure, and emotional intelligence). In particular, the coaches described these nine key
mental toughness characteristics as being highly transferable to other life contexts such as
135
school and work (cf. Connaughton et al., 2008). Previously, transferable skills developed
within the sporting environment and which are applied in another facet of life or career
have been associated with facilitating “smooth” transitions out of sport (e.g., Stephan,
Bilard, Ninot, & Delignieres, 2003). Based on the present findings, it seems that parents
can foster home environments in which a “generalised” form of mental toughness can be
developed. The qualities and skills that a developing child acquires during his or her early
childhood, therefore, can be applied in a sporting context and can contribute to the
entry into Australian football but slowly diminished during his or her early years of
participation in football. It was during this time that coaches were perceived as a more
important source in the development process. Indeed, this finding is reflective of the
importance and nature of the coach-athlete relationship described by the coaches in the
present study consisting of both a professional and personal component. The importance of
developing coach-athlete relationships has been previously highlighted as one of the most
important elements for developing life skills (Petitpas, Cornelius, Van Raalte, & Jones,
2005; see also Gould, Collins, Lauer, & Chung, 2006, 2007). Research supports such
improvements, but also to the athlete’s skills in terms of psychosocial development (see
participants believed that coaches have the potential to shape the development of a
136
and their coaching philosophy. Coaches who adopt a coaching philosophy emphasising the
development over and above coaching success is consistent with award winning coaches’
perspectives on the development of life skills (Gould et a., 2007). Several other strategies
and mechanisms participants believed that coaches employ to positively and negatively
impact on the development of key mental toughness characteristics are also consistent with
previous research. They include, but are not limited to, setting clear standards and
expectations (Gould et al., 2002, 2007; Martindale et al., 2005); providing encouragement
and support (Gould et al., 2002); espousing a philosophy of winning but, at the same time,
emphasising learning, effort, and improvement (Martindale et al., 2005); modelling positive
behaviours and attitudes (Gould et al., 2007); social support (Connaughton et al., 2008;
Wolfenden & Holt, 2004); and coach leadership (Connaughton et al., 2008).
Overall then, participants agreed that parents and coaches have greater importance
at different developmental stages during an individual’s lifespan. Unlike the three distinct
stages of development proposed by Côté (1999), however, only two stages were described
here. As illustrated in Figure 2, participants believed that parents fulfil an important role
environment whereby several key characteristics are acquired and form the foundation for a
generalised form of mental toughness. Coaches, on the other hand, were said to play a
pivotal role in transforming this generalised mental toughness into a specialised form
specific to the rigors associated with participation in Australian football. The finding that
parents are the primary source of influence during one’s early childhood experiences is no
important, as they can play an integral role in how an individual approaches events and
137
develops in other life domains, which may include work, education, as well as sport
(Smircich, 1983). It seems that cognitions associated with these different attitudes, values,
and behaviours become more salient in contexts where they are modelled and reinforced,
thus cueing individuals to behave and respond in a manner that is congruent with those
Theoretical Implications
The current study makes several important theoretical contributions to the literature
on mental toughness in sport. It provides the first examination detailing information about
the sources and methods of influence which both positively and negatively impact the
understanding of positive sources and methods of influence have implications for the
sources and methods of influence. Indeed, some models of talent development (e.g., Abbott
& Collins, 2004) have been criticised for focusing on the positive influences such
influential sources have while disregarding that such sources also work negatively
(Tranckle & Cushion, 2006). A unique aspect of this study, therefore, was the generation of
information on facilitative and debilitative strategies and mechanisms that were linked with
the development of specific key mental toughness characteristics (see Table 1). From a
conceptual standpoint, understanding how mental toughness is both facilitated and hindered
provides a basis from which we can better understand why Australian footballers may
The strategies and mechanisms by which parents and coaches both positively and
negatively influence the development process revealed here parallel many of those
described previously in research on mental toughness (Connaughton et al., 2008) and talent
138
EARLY CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES FOOTBALL EXPERIENCES
Parenting
Behaviours Coaching Training
Philosophy Environment
Figure 2. A conceptual model of the mental toughness development process in Australian football.
139
development (e.g., Bloom, 1985; Côté, 1999; Fraser-Thomas et al., 2005; Gagné, 2004;
Gould et al., 2002; Martindale et al., 2005; Petitpas et al., 2005). Given that coaches’
perceptions of the mental toughness development process have yet to be examined, such
similarities are encouraging and strengthen our confidence in the validity of the
strengthening our confidence in such findings, the present results extend these findings to a
It seems that the development of each key mental toughness characteristics requires
discourse that each method of influence was not considered a sole determinant of only one
key characteristic but rather has an impact on several aspects of mental toughness. Such
strategies and mechanisms, which can be both facilitative and debilitative, occur throughout
the early years of a child’s development and contribute throughout his or her football
experiences. Taken together, these findings suggest that the development of mental
important parental and coach strategies and mechanisms (cf. Connaughton et al., 2008).
Practical Implications
These results have a number of implications for guiding educators (i.e., coaches,
sport psychologists) and parents in their attempts to foster environments that can facilitate
educating key individuals in the athletes’ socialisation network and engaging them
associated with mental toughness would seem essential (cf. Gould et al., 2002; Martindale
et al., 2005). Information on both the facilitative and debilitative mechanisms and strategies
140
generated here will enhance such an endeavour. Second, athlete-centred approaches that
involve mental skills training programs targeting the key characteristics of mental
toughness, but also life skills, represent an option for the applied practitioner (cf. Gould et
al., 2007). Finally, given that coaches are the primary source of influence outside of the
family environment, and control much of what is included in any sport program, the impact
of coach training programs for developing mental toughness from an early age warrant
Future Research
further attention. Unlike previous research in the area, which has generated only positive
impacts on the development process from athletes (Connaughton et al., 2008; see also Bull
et al., 2005), we have provided the first data set solely from a coach perspective. While
each participant had been exposed to “mental toughness development” as a player, coach,
and parent (with children now playing junior football), the extent to which the data
generated from just one viewpoint accurately captures the development process is
questionable. This may explain why participants’ placed less importance on parental
influences once an individual begins participating in football. Future research that samples
parents, athletes, and coaches and which seeks to compare and integrate the views of these
key stakeholders would help alleviate such concerns. Sampling male and female
participants from a range of other sports would also determine the degree to which the
A second limitation of this study, and mental toughness research in general, is the
141
limited by objective (e.g., win vs. loss) and subjective (e.g., enjoyment) performance
outcomes that can influence an individual’s recall of past experiences (Ross & Conway,
data collection, such as prospective longitudinal studies, and combines this data with that
(e.g., experience, achievements, and elite vs. non-elite). Examinations with individuals
recall that are inherent with those athletes who have already reached a mature level of
Conclusion
of the development process. They linked specific strategies and mechanisms which
cultivate and facilitate as well as hinder the development of the 11 keys to mental
toughness in Australian football (Gucciardi et al., in press). The theoretical and practical
implications of this research should provide a foundation for the design of developmental
programs and hopefully stimulate further research on the mental toughness development
process.
142
CHAPTER IV – Measuring
Mental Toughness
143
Overview of Chapter IV
This is the second of three empirical Chapters within this thesis. In the preceding
on mental toughness (Chapter IIIa) and those factors contributing to its development
(Chapter IIIb) were presented. The information gained from these two investigations
provided the foundation upon which I designed questions aimed at capturing the essence of
mental toughness in Australian football. Although two experiments were conducted, the
144
CHAPTER IVa
football.
145
The psychological factors involved in athletic performance have long been of interest to
athletes, coaches, and sport psychologists. Empirical examinations have largely focused on
psychosomatic skills) and their influence on performance. More recently, researchers have
adopted a holistic approach in which the whole and the interdependence of its parts are
emphasised. This approach is none more evident than in research examining the construct
Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2002), the knowledge base contributing to current
conceptualisations of mental toughness now has a scent of scientific rigour owing to the
efforts of several groups of researchers (e.g., Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005;
Gucciardi, Gordon, & Dimmock, 2008; Jones et al., 2002; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton,
2007). However, despite the conceptual advancements in this area resulting from this
burgeoning line of enquiry, few attempts have been made to develop and validate
inventories that profile and measure mental toughness among athletic cohorts.
attention control, negative energy, motivation, attitude control, positive energy, and visual
and imagery control). These seven factors are what Loehr claimed to be the most essential
characteristics of the many mentally tough athletes and coaches that he had worked with.
The PPI is a 42-item inventory that includes items describing athletes’ specific
perfectly”) and self-evaluations (e.g., “I see myself as more of a loser than a winner in
competition”), which are recorded on a five-point Likert scale anchored by “almost always”
146
and “almost never.” Seven subscale scores are obtained, with scores ranging from six (low)
to 30 (high) and a total score ranging from 42 to 210. Although the PPI has been widely
used by sport psychology consultants and researchers (e.g., Golby & Sheard, 2004; Golby,
Sheard, & Lavallee, 2003), Loehr offered no psychometric support for its use and little
rigorous research has been conducted on the psychometric properties of the PPI.
Recent research indicates that the PPI may not be a psychometrically sound measure
of mental toughness. Middleton et al. (2004) evaluated the construct validity of the PPI
with a sample of 263 (163 males; 101 females) student-athletes (aged 12 to 17) from an
elite sports high school in Sydney, Australia. Initially, a confirmatory factor analysis was
not supportive of the a priori model and was of poor fit. An exploratory factor analysis was
then performed and an alternative five-factor model was offered. However, although the
alternative structure provided a sounder model fit when compared with the original
structure, it showed weaker correlations with some of the hypothesised key correlates of
= -.03 – .33), elite athlete self-description (r = .01 – .66), and flow (r = .02 – .70).
Middleton et al. concluded that neither the original nor the alternative five-factor structure
were psychometrically sound measures of mental toughness and suggested that further
conceptual/theoretical work was required. In addition, further exploration of the PPI was
necessary given limitations associated with the small sample size (cf. Meyers, Gamst, &
Guarino, 2006) and external validity (e.g., mean age of participants being 13.8 years) in
participant sample that was more representative of a wider athlete population than that used
by Middleton et al. (2004) produced equivocal findings (Sheard, 2006). Participants in this
147
study included 303 males aged 14 to 63 (M = 25.68, SD = 6.28) and 105 females aged 12 to
44 (M = 19.78, SD = 5.95) from a variety of team (e.g., rugby union, basketball, soccer) and
individual sports (e.g., swimming, slalom canoeing). Support for the factorial structure of
the PPI as assessed via both exploratory and confirmatory factor analytical techniques was
not provided. For example, the PPI subscales demonstrated adequate internal consistency (α
= .67 – .87) and were slightly better than those found by Middleton et al. (α = .63 – .77).
The PPI was also found to be moderately correlated with hardiness (r = .06 – .48) and
analysis of the PPI suggested a six-factor solution as opposed to the seven-factor a priori
solution, a subsequent confirmatory factor analysis showed satisfactory support for the
seven-factor model with incremental fit indices showing better fit than the absolute fit
indices. Problems at the subscale level were also evidenced for the negative energy control
and attitude control subscales. Taken together with Middleton et al.’s research, it appears
that empirical support for the psychometric properties of the PPI is still warranted.
One explanation for the equivocal results regarding the PPI is that it may not
While there seem to be several keys to mental toughness common to most sports (e.g., self-
perseverance, and commitment), there are other variances in key characteristics which
swimming, and tennis, adventure/explorer sports consistently involve more life threatening
situations and one can see how the characteristic of “safety and survival” (Fawcett, 2006),
148
for example, may be considered a key component of mental toughness by
adventurer/explorers but not by athletes in the former sports. Moreover, the attribute of
“team unity” (Fourie & Potgieter, 2001) may not be as relevant to individual sports (e.g.,
tennis) when compared with team-orientated sports (e.g., rugby). Sport-specific measures
The initial design and foundation of the present investigation is based on recent
qualitative research conducted by Gucciardi et al. (2008). These authors conducted 1-1
interviews with 11 coaches, all of whom had considerable playing and coaching experience
(Kelly, 1955/1991; see also, Gucciardi & Gordon, in press-a, in press-b) to gain an
procedures (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) were employed to analyse the transcribed verbatim
data from the interviews and three central categories were identified. The first category,
toughness). The two other categories, situations and behaviours, provided an understanding
of the relationship between the key characteristics and the performance process. Specific
situations identified as demanding a large degree of mental toughness included injuries and
injury rehabilitation, preparation for training and competition, challenges (personal, on- and
off-field), peer and social pressures, and internal (e.g., fatigue/endurance and low in
confidence) and external pressures (e.g., environmental and playing conditions, match
variables and physical risk). Several overt mentally tough general (e.g., meticulous
149
good performance, versatility, superior decision-makers, do the 1%er’s) were also revealed.
behaviours, and emotions that enable you to persevere and overcome any
Using Gucciardi et al.’s (2008) research as a foundation, the purpose of this study
mental toughness for Australian football. Specifically, we describe two experiments that
utilised within-network examinations exploring the factor structure (i.e., confirmatory and
the relationship between the construct and other related constructs (cf. Marsh, 2002). The
purposes of experiment one were to examine the factorial validity of the inventory and
examine correlations between the factors and two hypothesised key correlates of mental
toughness (flow and dispositional resilience) and social desirability. The influence of age,
playing experience, and playing level (elite, sub-elite, and amateur) on mental toughness
subscale scores was also examined. Given that the key correlates employed in experiment
one were based on self-reports, the purpose of experiment two was to further explore the
construct validity of the inventory developed in experiment one via multisource ratings
(i.e., self, coach, and parent). Multisource ratings also provided a medium through which to
Experiment One
Method
150
Participants
18.97, SD = 3.71) ranging in skill, years playing (M = 10.33, SD = 3.57), and playing level
(elite, sub-elite, and amateur) who were recruited from various Australian football leagues.
Instrumentation
Australian football described by Gucciardi et al. (2008). Prior to inclusion, questions were
screened for their relevance, wording, and ordering by the authors and experienced coaches
(n = 10) and players (n = 10). Participants are asked to indicate how true or false each
statement is as a description of the way they typically feel, think, and act in football on a 7-
a short-form of the original 33-item Marlowe-Crowne scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) on
(yes), with higher scores reflecting more social desirability; that is, an individual’s tendency
to provide socially acceptable responses. Research has provided support for short-form B in
terms of model fit (Fisher & Fick, 1993; Loo & Thorpe, 2000), adequate internal
consistency (α = .74; Barger, 2002), and having sufficient correlation with the 33-item
Dispositional resilience scale (DRS; Bartone, Ursano, Wright, & Ingraham, 1989).
The DRS is a modified version of Kobasa’s (1979) hardiness scale that contains 30 items
rated on a 4-point Likert scale (0 = not at all true; 3 = completely true) designed to measure
dispositional resilience in the form of the three hardiness dimensions (control, commitment,
151
and challenge). High numerical values are associated with higher levels of hardiness, and
low values are associated with lower levels. The DRS has demonstrated adequate internal
consistency (α = .70 – .89; Funk, 1992; Maddi et al., 2002; Oulette, 1993) and there is
evidence for its convergent, discriminant, and predictive ability (Oulette, 1993).
Dispositional flow scale-2 (DFS-2; Jackson & Eklund, 2002, 2004). The DFS-2
the task, sense of control, time transformation, and autotelic (intrinsically rewarding)
experience. Participants are asked to rate how often they experience certain thoughts and
feelings during their athletic experiences on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never; 5 = always).
The DFS-2 has a well-defined factor structure and adequate internal consistency (α = .70 –
Data Analysis
AMOS 7.0 (Arbuckle, 2006) was employed to examine the 11-factor, 60 item model
derived from our previous qualitative research (Gucciardi et al., 2008). In addition to the χ2
goodness-of-fit statistic, several other traditional criteria (incremental fit index [IFI],
comparative fit index [CFI], and Tucker-Lewis index [TLI] >.90, root mean square error of
approximation [RMSEA] scores <.08; Browne & Cudeck, 1992) were adopted as indicators
of adequate fit with Hu and Bentler’s (1999) criteria (IFI, CFI, and TLI >.95, RMSEA
scores <.06) as evidence of good fit. Taken together, these indices provide a more
conservative and comprehensive evaluation of model fit than any single index alone.
Procedure
152
Approval for this project was granted by the university human ethic committee prior
to commencing the study. An information sheet describing the aims and procedures of the
research was sent to coaches and team managers via the State Manager for Coaching and
Talent. After obtaining players’ interest to participate in the research, the coach or team
manager contacted the lead researcher and organised a session where players could
complete the questionnaire package. These sessions were held before or after a training
session. During this session the lead researcher described the research project to the players
and emphasised that all footballers were free to participate or not in the study; no player
declined the invitation to participate in the study. Participants completed and returned the
Results
Overall, the hypothesised 11-factor, 60 item model provided poor fit to the data [χ2
= 4460.13 (df = 1655), IFI = .74, CFI = .74, TLI = .72, and RMSEA = .06]. Given findings
of inadequate fit for the initially hypothesised model, modifications to the model were
performed based on standardised factor loadings <.40; items having minimal cross-loadings
as evidenced by modification indices indicating the extent to which model fit would be
improved; and a subjective evaluation of the content of the item. This resulted in an 11
factor, 33 item model with each factor containing three items. Although model fit statistics
improved and were just below the minimum accepted levels, the values obtained were still
deemed inadequate [χ2 = 1071.79 (df = 435), IFI = .88, CFI = .88, TLI = .87, and RMSEA
= .06]. In an attempt to improve model fit, reliability estimates for the 11 factors of the
revised model also reduced significantly and were deemed unacceptable (α = .56 to .74).
Therefore, we chose to explore alternative models using exploratory factor analysis (EFA).
153
Exploratory Factor Analysis
Principle components analysis using both varimax and promax rotations was
employed to explore the psychometric properties of the PAfMTI. While the commonly
employed Kaiser criterion (i.e., eigenvalues >1) and scree plot test (Cattell, 1966) provided
a subjective guide as to how many factors should be retained, we also conducted a parallel
analysis (Horn, 1965) which, unlike the Kaiser criterion, adjusts for the effect of sampling
error (Hayton, Allen, & Scarpello, 2004). The parallel analysis has recently been
recommended as the best method to assess the true number of factors (Lance, Butts, &
Michels, 2006). A parallel analysis in which the actual eigenvalues were compared to
average eigenvalues derived from a series of randomly generated data sets (n = 50)
suggested the presence of four factors. Although the parallel analysis suggested a four-
factor solution, we chose to explore three, four, and five factor extraction solutions. Criteria
for item inclusion was set with factor loadings >0.40 and secondary loadings <0.20, such
that an item was retained if it loaded greater than 0.40 on one factor, but lower than 0.20 on
the other factor. After the most appropriate solution was identified, an alpha coefficient
(Cronbach, 1951) for each factor was calculated to assess internal reliability for each
subscale.
Six different solutions, three using the varimax rotation procedure and three using
the promax rotation procedure based on three, four, and five factors, were examined. The
four-factor promax solution was retained as the most psychologically and statistically
sound factorial solution because of its conceptual clarity and ease of interpretability. The
promax solution was selected over the varimax solution because the factors were
moderately correlated, and the promax solution simplifies the pattern or structure more than
the varimax solution (Meyers et al., 2006). Due to problems associated with item content,
154
factor discrimination, and internal reliability, both the three- and five-factor solutions were
resilience, and social desirability were obtained to identify potential relationships between
these constructs. The influence of age, playing experience, and playing level (elite, sub-
elite, and amateur) on mental toughness subscale scores were also examined. Participants
were divided into three categories for age and playing experience based on a median split.
these demographic variables for each of the inventory subscales. Partial eta squared ( η P2 )
provided an index of effect size. A Bonferroni adjustment was performed on the p value to
guard against inflation of Type I error rates because of multiple post hoc comparisons, and
the resulting p value was .017. Cohen’s d provided an index of effect size for post hoc
comparisons.
Factor structure of the PAfMTI. The initial results offered by the factor analysis in
terms of the Kaiser– Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.92) and the
Bartlett sphericity test (χ2 [231] = 9623.43, p < 0.001) suggested that the initial 60 items
Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). Adequate test statistics for the KMO and Bartlett
sphericity test were also observed for each stage of the analysis after items had been
removed from the analysis. The final four-factor solution, illustrated in Table 1, contained
24 items and accounted for 47% of the total variance, with the first factor accounting for a
substantial portion of the total variance (28%). The eigenvalues of the four factors were
6.80, 1.65, 1.46, and 1.38. Retained items each loaded strongly on a single factor (>.40)
while exhibiting trivial loadings on other factors (<.20). Each of the 24 items evidenced
155
acceptable corrected item–total correlations (range = .42–.93) based on the criterion of .30
percentage of variance explained are detailed in Table 1. Factor one, which we have
labelled thrive through challenge, contains eight items that describe attitudes and
behaviours associated with dealing with and thriving when challenged by internal and
external forces. Factor two, which we have labelled sport awareness, contains six items that
describe attitudes, values, and behaviours relevant to individual and team performances in
Australian football. Factor three, which we have labelled tough attitude, contains five items
that describe attitudes and behaviours essential for dealing with both positively and
negatively construed pressures and challenges. Factor four, which we have labelled desire
success, contains five items that describe values, attitudes and behaviours associated with
achievement in football. All internal reliability estimates were acceptable (α = .70 – 81)
and exceeded the minimum level of .70 recommended by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994).
The 24-item reduced data set is referred to hereafter as the Australian football Mental
Construct validity. Correlations between the four factors of the AfMTI and flow,
correlations between the AfMTI and social desirability were small and nonsignificant. In
terms of resilience and flow, thrive through challenge and sport awareness were moderately
correlated with the each of the DRS and DFS-2 subscales, except for time, while tough
attitude and desire success were moderately correlated with the majority of the DRS and
DFS-2 subscales.
156
Table 1. Item factor loadings of the AfMTI.
Item Description Factor One Factor Two Factor Three Factor Four h2
Belief in physical ability. .74 -.07 .08 -.08 .51
Belief in mental ability. .73 .01 .03 -.05 .53
Skill execution under pressure. .70 -.08 .04 -.05 .43
Pressure as a challenge. .67 .01 -.14 .11 .46
Competitiveness. .64 .11 -.12 .19 .57
Bounce back. .59 .01 -.04 .20 .49
Concentration. .58 .07 .20 -.19 .45
Persistence. .56 .17 .13 -.14 .45
Aware of individual roles. -.11 .93 .04 -.20 .69
Understand pressure. -.09 .64 .01 .20 .51
Acceptance of team role. .18 .62 -.06 -.04 .48
Personal value. .03 .55 .07 -.09 .33
Make sacrifices. .15 .46 -.21 .21 .37
Accountability. .17 .42 -.01 .21 .44
Distractible. -.03 .04 .77 -.03 .59
Discipline. -.06 -.06 .75 .17 .60
Give in to challenges. .09 -.05 .62 .12 .47
Physical fatigue and performance. -.03 .20 .55 -.16 .37
Niggly injuries and performance. .21 -.17 .49 .01 .32
Understanding the game. -.13 .05 -.08 .74 .48
Sacrifices as part of success. -.13 .13 .21 .64 .56
Desire team success. .10 -.21 -.08 .63 .35
Vision of success. -.02 .10 .21 .52 .50
Enjoy 50/50 situations. .11 -.04 .12 .49 .34
Eigenvalue (final solution) 6.80 1.65 1.46 1.38
% of variance (final solution) 28.29 6.86 6.08 5.74 46.97
Note: Coefficients greater than .40 are boldfaced and retained for that factor. h2 is the extraction communality coefficient.
157
Table 2. Correlations between factors of the AfMTI, dispositional resilience, flow and social desirability.
Mental Toughness Resilience Flow
MTtt MTsa MTta MTds PVcm PVco PVch Fbal Fmer Fgls Ffee Fcon Fcont Fcs Ftime Fauto SDS α
MTtt 1 .81
MTsa .56** 1 .73
Mtta .47** .43** 1 .70
MTds .44** .45** .41** 1 .70
PVcm .21** .45** .22* .38** 1 .57
PVco .27** .41** .15 .23** .57** 1 .50
PVch .29** .21* .10 .25** .24* .17 1 .42
Fbal .53** .54** .34** .23** .20* .24** .19* 1 .83
Fmer .27** .25** .13 .06 .11 .08 -.06 .27** 1 .76
Fgls .57** .62** .22* .21* .35** .39** .15 .59** .30** 1 .79
Ffee .24** .36** .19* .20* .27** .19* -.01 .36** .30** .38** 1 .85
Fcon .39** .56** .21* .28** .47** .45** .10 .59** .35** .60** .42** 1 .72
Fcont .43** .48** .29* .27** .28** .34** .04 .61** .45** .57** .36** .65** 1 .78
Fcs .32** .22** -.02 .01 .19* .16 .12 .08 .13 .23* -.01 .23** .24** 1 .69
Ftime .14 .09 -.02 -.10 -.01 .06 .13 .13 -.05 .03 -.09 .05 .07 .29** 1 .78
Fauto .33** .55** .27** .14 .25** .29** .21* .63** .21* .49** .23* .44** .42** .15 .26** 1 .79
SDS .01 -.04 .07 .07 .06 .05 .13 -.02 .09 .01 -.09 .01 .08 .07 .03 .11 1 .39
Note: * Significance is at p <.05. ** Significance is at p <.01. MTI correlations are based on n = 418, whereas correlations of the MTI with
dispositional resilience, flow and social desirability are based on n = 225. MTtt = thrive through challenge; MTsa = sport awareness; MTta =
tough attitude; MTds = desire success; PVcom= commitment; PVco = control; PVch = challenge; Fbal = balance; Fmer = merging; Fgls =
goals; Ffee = feedback; Fcon = concentration; Fcont = control; Fcs = consciousness; Ftime = time; Fauto = autotelic; SDS = social
desirability scale.
158
Discriminative power. Means and standard deviations on the four mental toughness
subscales based on age, playing experience, and playing level are presented in Table 3a.
ANOVA summary statistics and post hoc summary statistics are presented in Table 3b and
Table 3c, respectively. For each of the mental toughness subscales, there was a significant
effect for each of the demographic variables. Generally speaking, older footballers,
footballers with greater playing experience, and footballers who play at a higher level
reported higher levels of mental toughness than younger footballers, footballers with lesser
Discussion
performed to determine whether the 11-factor model that guided construction of the items
(cf. Gucciardi et al., 2008) would serve as an adequate model for the data. Although the
RMSEA value provided evidence of good fit, values on the IFI, CFI, and TLI were below
the minimum accepted levels for the 11-factor, 60 item model indicating poor fit to the
data. After removing the items contributing to model misspecification, model fit statistics
improved to a level just below the minimum accepted levels. However, internal reliability
estimates of the revised 11-factor, 33 item model were hampered by our attempts to
improve model fit. Overall, the CFA results do not support the existence of an 11-factor
model of mental toughness in Australian football. One explanation for the lack of fit lies in
the ability of CFA to demonstrate validity when developing new questionnaires. For
example, Worthington and Whittaker (2006, p. 808) highlight that “it is critical to have
prior knowledge of the expected relationships between items and factors before conducting
CFA–hence the term confirmatory.” Others have argued that EFA is “warranted during
instrument development, even when theoretical expectations are present regarding the
159
Table 3.
(a) Descriptive statistics on mental toughness subscales by age, playing experience, and
playing level.
(b) ANOVA summary statistics for age, playing experience, and playing level on
mental toughness subscales.
160
Table 3.
(c) Summary statistics for ANOVA post hoc comparisons for age, playing experience, and playing level on mental toughness subscales.
161
number of factors…given that a priori expectations may in fact be incorrect” (Henson &
questionnaires that are still in the initial stages of development, an EFA was performed to
identify a better fitting model. A four-factor, 24 item solution accounting for 47% of the
variance was most supportive of the data. Although the four-factor model of mental
toughness identified through the EFA is substantially different in structure from that
previously generated through qualitative methods (Gucciardi et al., 2008), each of the 11
keys to mental toughness is captured by at least one item in the 24-item inventory thereby
providing evidence for the content validity of the inventory. It also appears that items
within each factor are measuring the same construct as evidenced by adequate internal
reliability estimates. Moreover, correlations between the four subscales were moderate
suggesting that the subscales represent related but distinct components of mental toughness.
AfMTI are not strongly influenced by attempts to respond in a socially desirable manner.
Socially desirable responding is one of the most prominent sources of systematic error and
MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). For example, the failure to examine or control for
social desirability in research examining the psychometric properties of the PPI may have
contributed to the equivocal findings evidenced by Middleton et al. (2004) and Sheard
(2006). The fact that correlations between the subscales of all three measures and the SDS
were low and nonsignificant suggests that socially desirable responding had little effect on
estimates of factor loadings for each of the AfMTI subscales and that spurious relations
among the variables were minimal. However, we urge caution when interpreting the social
162
desirability data because of the inadequate internal reliability estimates evidenced. We
The correlational data between the AfMTI and dispositional resilience and flow
provided preliminary support for the construct validity of the AfMTI. Resilience is
commonly associated with mental toughness and appears to make a significant contribution
toughness that rely heavily on negative life experiences such as adversity or stress (e.g.,
Clough, Earle, & Sewell, 2002; Middleton et al., 2004) seem to be limited in their ability to
clearly distinguish mental toughness from such constructs as resilience and hardiness.
Previous research has revealed qualitative data describing the relationship and distinction
between mental toughness and resilience (Gucciardi et al., 2008) and the present data
provide quantitative support for this. In contrast, flow was included based on its conceptual
relatedness as being an outcome of mental toughness (cf. Middleton et al., 2004). Although
causality cannot be inferred, moderate and significant correlations between the AfMTI and
most of the flow subscales were evidenced suggesting the existence of a relationship
between the two constructs. Taken together, the correlational data suggests that AfMTI and
dispositional resilience and flow are conceptually related but distinct constructs.
Preliminary support for the discriminative power of the AfMTI was also provided.
It was revealed that older footballers report higher levels of mental toughness than younger
(teenage) footballers. Similarly, it seems that years of playing experience has an effect on
reported mental toughness, with higher scores reported by those footballers with more years
demonstrating that those individuals who reach an expert level of performance have done
so through many years of deliberate practice and training (Ericsson, 2007). Taken together
163
with the data on age, this research provides quantitative support for the suggestion
stemming from qualitative research that mental toughness appears to be developed over a
considerable amount of time (Connaughton, Wadey, Hanton, & Jones, 2008). Differences
between footballers from various playing levels were also observed, with elite and sub-elite
footballers reporting higher levels of mental toughness than amateur footballers do. This is
an important finding in that it is consistent with research indicating the psychological skills
distinguish experts from novice performers (e.g., McPherson, 2000) and that psychological
skills are associated with performing to one’s potential (Krane & Williams, 2006).
Experiment Two
It has been suggested that broader measures such as reports derived from significant
2004). Accordingly, the primary purpose of experiment two was to further explore the
construct validity of the inventory developed in experiment one via multisource ratings
(i.e., self, coach, and parent). This also allowed us to address limitations associated with the
Method
Participants
five coaches, and 120 parents from five youth-aged football teams recruited from the
Instrumentation
Australian football context: thrive through challenge, sport awareness, tough attitude, and
164
desire success. Responses are provided on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = false; 7 = true). Items
for the parent and coach questionnaires were re-worded to reflect the assessment
procedures. For example, “I believe I can persevere through any challenge” on the player
questionnaire was changed to “He believes he can persevere through any challenge” on the
Data Analysis
Descriptive statistics were calculated for each subscale of the AfMTI for each rating
source (i.e., self, parent, and coach) and an ANOVA was then used to examine whether
significant differences existed in the reports of mental toughness between rating sources.
Given that the parent and coach ratings were only moderately correlated with each other,
we treated each separately in the analysis rather than aggregating both as a “non-self rater”
Procedure
Initial recruitment of participants was made by contacting the head coach of each
team. Each coach discussed the research with the playing group and their parents before
agreeing to participate in the study. The coach was provided with the appropriate number of
questionnaire packages to distribute to the players so that the players and one of their
parents could complete it at a suitable time. An information sheet contained within the
questionnaire package emphasised that all footballers were free to participate or not in the
complete for each player in their team. Participants sealed the questionnaire package in a
reply-paid envelope and returned it to the first author. Consent forms included with each
165
Results
Descriptive statistics, reliabilities, and correlations between self, parent, and coach
ratings for each mental toughness subscale are presented in Table 4. Reliability estimates
for each subscale across the three rating sources exceeded the .70 minimum recommended
by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) for use in basic research. Correlations revealed
significant and moderate relationships between the four mental toughness subscales within
self (r = .28 to .58, p <.01), coach (r = .60 – .78, p <.01), and parent ratings (r = .47 – .76, p
<.01). However, correlations between self-ratings and those from parents and coaches were
inconsistent with some subscales showing significant and moderate correlations while
others showed nonsignificant and small correlations. The ANOVA revealed that no
significant group differences existed between rating sources on thrive through challenge (F
2, 238 = 1.13, ns), sport awareness (F 2, 238 = .57, ns), tough attitude (F 2, 238 = .41, ns), and
Discussion
The purpose of the experiment two was to examine the internal reliability of the
four-factor model and differences in responses across rating sources. Encouragingly, all
internal reliability estimates were acceptable (α = .73 – .89) and exceeded the minimum
level of .70 recommended by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) thereby suggesting that items
on each factor appear to be measuring the same construct for all three rating sources. Data
sources on each of the four subscales suggesting that typically there was agreement
between self-ratings and those from parents and coaches. In contrast, the correlational data
suggested that there was little relationship between self-reported mental toughness
166
Table 4. Descriptive statistics, reliability estimates, and correlations between self, parent, and coach ratings of the AfMTI.
Sa 6.06 .73 .15 .06 .01 .06 .20* .05 -.07 .02 .58** 1 .79
Self
Ta 5.12 1.01 .22* .11 .14 .13 .32** .24** .19* .16 .36** .46** 1 .73
Ds 5.49 1.16 .19* .09 .12 .14 .23** .18* .08 .08 .28** .31** .09 1 .73
Note: * Significance is at p <.05. ** Significance is at p <.01. Tt = Thrive through challenge; Sa = Sport awareness; Ta = Tough attitude; and
Ds = Desire success.
167
and ratings from coaches and parents, which may be interpreted as a disagreement
between the raters. For example, self-reports of thrive through challenge were moderately
and significantly correlated with both coach and parent ratings, whereas the other three
research in organisational settings where agreement between the focal individual and other
raters (i.e., supervisors, subordinates, peers) is generally low to moderate (Diedorff &
Surface, 2007).
Two explanations may account for the data here. First, it may be that some aspects
of mental toughness are more easily observable (e.g., thrive through challenge) than others
(e.g., tough attitude or desire success) and as such should exhibit higher convergence.
Second, ratings other than the self are said to represent the unique perspective on
act differently with coaches than with parents, and one rating source may be better suited to
General Discussion
measure of mental toughness for Australian football using both within-network and
the keys to mental toughness in Australian football (Gucciardi et al., 2008) and a
preliminary psychometric examination of the inventory using both CFA and EFA.
Correlations between the final four-factor model (AfMTI) and two hypothesised key
correlates of mental toughness (flow and dispositional resilience) and social desirability
were also explored. In addition, the influence of age, playing experience, and playing level
168
(elite, sub-elite, and amateur) on mental toughness subscale scores were examined. The
purpose of experiment two was to further explore the construct validity on the AfMTI
developed in experiment one via multisource ratings (i.e., self, coach, and parent).
Although the a priori factor structure was not supported by a CFA, subsequent
factor analyses produced a better fitting model which received preliminary support for its
reliability and validity. First, the internal consistency of the AfMTI received support
throughout both experiments suggesting that the four factors seem to be consistent across
different rating sources thereby measuring the same components of mental toughness.
subjective reviews by the authors and experienced coaches (n = 10) and players (n = 10).
Importantly, the AfMTI appears to cover the broad spectrum of mental toughness described
by Gucciardi et al. (2008) with an item designed to reflect each of the 11 keys to mental
structure to the model originally proposed, the four-factor model generated here adequately
captures a variety of values, attitudes, behaviours, and emotions as detailed in the construct
that those key characteristics rated as the most important for mental toughness in Australian
football (self-belief, work ethic, personal values, self-motivated, and tough attitude;
Second, correlations between the four subscales across the different rating sources
were moderate suggesting that the subscales represent related but distinct components of
mental toughness across rating sources, providing further support for the multidimensional
nature of mental toughness. This is consistent with previous research which has revealed
the multidimensional nature of mental toughness across a range of other sports (Bull et al.,
169
2005; Jones et al., 2002, 2007). From a practical viewpoint, practitioners and coaches
wishing to gain multisource ratings of mental toughness can be more certain that the same
construct is being assessed across raters. When obtaining multisource ratings it is important
that the same psychological constructs are being measured across raters, otherwise any
differences between the raters would be difficult to interpret (Cheung, 1999). However,
further examination of the psychometric structure of the AfMTI across rating sources using
CFA is warranted before we can be confident in using multisource ratings of the AfMTI.
Our primary goal was to provide the foundation for the development of a measure
of mental toughness for Australian football. Although not a focus of the present study, the
data presented here suggest that the grounded theory presented by Gucciardi et al. (2008)
investigations (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). Our data do support the notion that mental
constructs such as resilience and flow. The importance of the 11 key characteristics
were also supported; however, the organisation or structure revealed here is inconsistent
with the 11-factor model generated using qualitative methods. Future quantitative and
qualitative research which further examines the psychometric properties of the AfMTI will
constructs) beyond those methods described in the present study (Marsh, 1997, 2002).
Given the equivocal results regarding the structure of mental toughness in Australian
170
football obtained here, additional research is warranted to address issues beyond the limits
of the present investigation. First, further examination of the psychometric properties of the
AfMTI is required. Given that the validation process is ongoing and far from complete as
presented here, statistical techniques such as multi-sample CFA, in particular, are required
to test the strength and generalisability of the proposed factor structure more stringently.
established psychometric properties such the Personal Views Survey (Maddi & Khoshaba,
2001), performance data, and observational techniques are required to establish consistent
theoretical relationships and patterns. Indeed, one of the strengths of the present study was
the inclusion of multisource ratings demonstrating adequate internal consistencies for each
structure between the different rating sources is required before meaningful comparisons
can be made, which can be demonstrated using statistical procedures such as CFA and
multitrait-multimethod analysis (Cheung, 1999; Woehr, Sheehan, & Bennett, 2005). Third,
social desirability should be more thoroughly examined in future research on the AfMTI
Multimodal attempts to account for socially desirable responding are recommended, such
open to violation and possible bias, and that triangulation assessment procedures will
provide a more reliable indicator of mental toughness. Multisource ratings employed in the
171
Although requiring replication and extension, the results of the present study
provide preliminary support for the factor structure, internal reliability, and construct
validity of the AfMTI. However, the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the AfMTI
must be verified through further psychometric examinations before the AfMTI can be
implications for researchers and practitioners alike. From a research perspective, the
AfMTI may be used as a tool for examining the antecedents and consequences of mental
data and quantitative data using the AfMTI represents an exciting avenue in working
towards attaining conceptual clarity. From an applied perspective, the AfMTI may be
useful in assessing mental toughness among footballers, identifying areas that require
or enhance mental toughness. It is our hope that this study will provide the foundation for
172
CHAPTER V – Developing
Mental Toughness
173
Overview of Chapter V
This is the third of three empirical Chapters within this thesis. The first of the two
football coaches’ perspectives on mental toughness (Chapter IIIa) and those factors
contributing to its development (Chapter IIIb). The second included a manuscript detailing
the development and preliminary validation of the Australian football Mental Toughness
Inventory (AfMTI; Chapter IV). In this Chapter, I present two manuscripts evaluating the
among youth-aged (15’s) footballers. The first of these manuscripts presents a quantitative
analysis in which multisource ratings (i.e., self, parent, and coach) of the AfMTI and
measures of flow and resilience were employed. Key stakeholders’ perceptions about the
mental toughness training program provide a qualitative analysis in the second manuscript.
174
CHAPTER Va
I. A quantitative analysis.
175
The positive psychology movement, championed in 1998 by Martin Seligman in his
catalyzed the unprecedented growth in research examining the origins, processes, and
optimism, self-efficacy and hope, just to name a few, have been examined extensively
across a range of personal and performance settings in an attempt to discover the roles they
play in human functioning. Within sport settings, mental toughness is one construct that is
receiving considerably more research attention in recent years, despite having been cited as
Hodge, Peterson, & Petlichkoff, 1987). Although once considered a little understood
phenomenon (Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2002), the knowledge base contributing to
current conceptualizations of mental toughness now has a scent of scientific rigor owing to
the efforts of several groups of researchers (see Connaughton, Hanton, Jones, & Wadey,
Pioneering research in this area focused on understanding mental toughness and the
key characteristics encompassing this construct from the perspective of athletes and
coaches from various team and individual sports (e.g., Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones et
al, 2002, see also 2007). Following these earlier investigations, researchers conducted
James, & Brooks, 2005) and soccer players (Thelwell, Weston, & Greenlees, 2005) and
emotions, and behaviors that refer to an individual’s superior ability to thrive through both
176
positively (e.g., winning streak) and negatively (e.g., injury) construed challenges,
researcher’s and practitioner’s work in the area was presented by Gucciardi et al. (2008d).
Based on interviews with 11 elite Australian football coaches, which was guided by a
personal construct psychology framework (cf. Gucciardi & Gordon, in press-a, in press-b),
they created a grounded theory of mental toughness which highlights the interaction of
order or importance: self-belief vs. self-doubt; work ethic vs. lazy; personal values vs. poor
integrity and philosophy; self-motivated vs. extrinsically and unmotivated; tough attitude
mindset; handling pressure vs. anxious and panicky; emotional intelligence vs. emotionally
immature; sport intelligence vs. lack of sport knowledge; and physical toughness vs. weak
sense of toughness. Situations represented those events, both internal and external, which
demand varying degrees of mental toughness (e.g., injury, rehabilitation, fatigue, personal
form). Behaviors referred to the overt indicators mentally tough footballers displayed in
those situations demanding mental toughness (e.g., superior decision-making, recover well
from injury, consistent performances). In integrating these three components, the authors
177
Despite such conceptual advancements, there has been only one formal examination
of which we are aware that has sought to understand how mental toughness is and can be
participants from a previous study (Jones et al., 2002) to understand their perceptions’ of
mental toughness was a long-process that involved the interaction of a number of important
factors such as the motivational climate, key individuals within an athlete’s socialization
motivation to succeed. Participants also believed that maintenance through three sources
was required once mental toughness had been developed: intrinsic motivation to succeed;
social support; and the implementation of basic and advanced psychological skill use.
Prior to the Connaughton, Wadey et al. (2008) study, Bull et al. (2005) highlighted
means of developing mental toughness. These authors found that both primary (parental
influences, which were not actively sought out by the individuals, were considered
significant factors in the development of mental toughness. Based on their findings, Bull et
al. (2005, p. 226) advocated an indirect approach to the development of mental toughness
whereby coaches, educators, and practitioners create “an environment within which players
are given maximum opportunity to benefit in terms of character, attitude, and thinking.”
The scant research to date suggests that mental toughness may be underpinned by
innate factors (e.g., Golby & Sheard, 2006; Jones et al., 2002), factors that are caught
178
(socialized) during an individual’s upbringing, and specific techniques that are taught
(coached) (Bull et al., 2005; Connaughton, Wadey et al., 2008). Taken together with
research that has examined gifted and talented school children and athletes (e.g., Côté,
1999; Gagné, 2004; Tranckle & Cushion, 2006) as well as talent development research
(e.g., Martindale, Collins, & Daubney, 2005), the available evidence suggests that mental
toughness is largely caught from the experiences and environments an individual is exposed
to during their youth. The question remains, however, what happens if an individual has not
been exposed to such facilitative environments during their formative and junior sporting
years? Can extra efforts be made to make up for the absence of these experiences? Given
the importance placed on basic and advanced psychological skills in maintaining mental
toughness by elite performers (Connaughton, Wadey et al., 2008), here we examine the
toughness.
Psychological skills training (PST) programs endeavor to educate and equip athletes
with techniques and strategies that can be used to assess, monitor, and adjust their thoughts
and feelings to produce psychological states that both facilitate performance and foster
PST programs have focused either on single psychological skill approaches (e.g., Johnson,
Hrycaiko, Johnson, & Halas, 2004; Mellalieu, Hanton, & O’Brien, 2006) or multi-modal
packages integrating more than one intervention technique (e.g., Fournier, Calmels,
Durand-Bush, & Salmela, 2005; Sheard & Golby, 2006; Thelwell, Greenlees, & Weston,
2006). While multi-modal approaches are more prevalent in the literature and preferred by
sport psychology consultants, the most effective combination of such strategies requires
179
Earlier investigations of PST programs were largely geared towards adult elite
athletes who have already displayed their physical, technical, and tactical abilities (Vealey,
1988). In recent years, however, we have evidenced a significant increase in the number of
studies examining the efficacy of PST programs with youth-aged athletes (e.g., Fournier et
al., 2005; Sheard & Golby, 2006; Mamassis & Doganis, 2004; Papacharisis, Goudas,
Danish, & Theodorakis, 2005). In fact, several authors have argued that young athletes in
their teens are particularly suited to PST. Gould (1983), for example, highlighted “the ease
with which psychological skills are learned by children” (p. 4) as a major reason for their
suitability, while Vealey (1988) noted that “young athletes…are more ripe for PST
interventions than older athletes who have already internalized dysfunctional responses to
Taking the aforementioned literature into consideration, the objective of this study
was to evaluate the effectiveness of two different PST packages in enhancing mental
years (13 to 15 years; Côté, 1999) were targeted because this stage is thought to be a critical
period in which individuals develop strategies and processes to deal with and thrive through
many of life’s challenges and adversities (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993).
experiential workshops and activities targeting the keys to mental toughness identified
previously (Gucciardi et al., 2008d) with a more traditional PST program targeting the
control, self-efficacy, and ideal performance state) as well as a control group. Although
overlap in activities between the two programs does exist, it is important to recognize that
the mental toughness training program also contains elements specifically derived from our
180
theoretical conceptualization of mental toughness (e.g., personal values, resilience, sport
intelligence; Gucciardi et al., 2008d) which are not addressed in the general psychological
skills training program. In this way, we were able to examine standardized interventions
Multisource ratings comprising subjective ratings from a coach, parent, and the self were
obtained in an attempt to circumvent limitations associated with self-report data (e.g., social
mental toughness (Connaughton, Hanton et al., 2008; Middleton et al., 2004). We expected
to evidence enhanced levels of mental toughness, resilience, and flow in both intervention
programs when compared with the control group receiving no psychological intervention. It
was also hypothesized that these enhanced levels of mental toughness, resilience, and flow
Method
Participants
Three 15’s youth-aged football teams consisting of male footballers, a parent, and
coaching staff participated in this study. Each team was randomly assigned to one of three
Control group. Participants in this condition (n = 24; Mage = 14.46; SD = 0.36) did
not receive any psychological skills training program during the course of the study period.
181
Psychological skills training (PST) group. Participants in this condition (n = 26;
performance state. Two hour sessions were provided once per week over a six-week period
prior to the competitive season. Table 1 details the content, activities, and purposes of this
intervention.
Mental toughness training (MTT) group. Participants in this condition (n = 25; Mage
group sessions that directly and indirectly targeted the key mental toughness characteristics
identified by Gucciardi et al. (2008d). Two hour sessions were provided once per week
over a six-week period prior to the competitive season. Table 2 details the content,
Instrumentation
Multisource ratings (i.e., self-report, parent rating, and coach rating) of mental
toughness for all three conditions were obtained, while only self-reports were obtained for
Gucciardi, Gordon, & Dimmock, in press) is a 24-item inventory designed to measure the
following four factors of mental toughness in an Australian football context: thrive through
challenge, sport awareness, tough attitude, and desire success. Responses are provided on a
7-point Likert scale (1 = false; 7 = true). It has adequate internal consistency across rating
sources including self, parent, and coach as well preliminary support for its factor structure
182
Table 1. Psychological skills training (PST) program content, activities, and purposes.
2 Self-regulation a. S.M.A.R.T.E.R. Goals exercise. a. Highlight the importance of setting goals for working towards things in life that one wants to achieve and
gaining experience with the S.M.A.R.T.E.R. goals acronym.
b. Game Plan Goal Chart exercise. b. Illustrate the importance of breaking goals down into outcome, performance, and process goals.
3 Arousal Regulation a. Understanding Pressure Situations exercise. a. Increase awareness about those situations where an individual and the team perceive increased pressure to
perform, and the physical and psychological signs that indicate this.
b. Anxiety Awareness exercise. b. Increase awareness about those situations that cause one to experience anxiety, reasons for the increase in
anxiety, and how it affects subsequent performance.
c. Pre-Match Routine exercise. c. Identify thoughts and feelings to attain prior to a competition (physical, mental, and emotional goals);
identify those actions/procedures to implement to achieve this state.
4 Attentional Control a. Concentration Grid exercise. a. Develop the ability to ignore irrelevant, distracting stimuli and scan a visual array for relevant
information.
b. Concentration Techniques Awareness exercise. b. Increase awareness about those cues/stimuli that one (i) normally attends to and (ii) should be attending to
during training and competition.
c. Re-focus Routine exercise. c. Develop a routine to enable one to re-focus by identifying potential distractions, non-preferred responses,
preferred responses, and attentional and behavioral cues to facilitate this routine.
5 Self-efficacy a. General Self-belief exercise. a. Increase awareness about those things which one has done successfully recently and attributes/skills that
one has to offer.
b. Sources of Self-belief and Confidence exercise. b. Increase awareness about those things (as a person and footballer) that make one have more belief in
them; things that boost one’s confidence.
c. Daily Affirmations exercise. c. Daily reminders to boost self-belief and confidence.
6 Mental Rehearsal a. Imagery Introduction a. Explain the principles and uses of imagery.
b. Sport Equipment exercise. b. Gain experience using the five senses to reproduce an image of a physical object.
c. Imagery Script exercise. c. Gain experience integrating the five senses in reproducing an image.
7 Ideal Performance a. Best and Worst Ever Performance exercise. a. Recall and increase awareness about those times when one has performed exceptionally well and poorly.
State b. Increase awareness about helpful and harmful emotions.
b. Helpful and Harmful Emotions exercise. c. Recall and increase awareness about intensities of these emotions when one has performed exceptionally
c. Best Ever Performance Analysis exercise. well.
Note: S.M.A.R.T.E.R. goals refer to Specific, Measureable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-based, Evaluate, Recorded and Revised.
183
Table 2. Mental toughness training (MTT) program content, activities, and purposes.
2 Personal and Team a. Vision workshop. a. Increase awareness about one’s personal values and develop a set of team “core values” that are
Values associated with the desired attitudes and behaviors to drive the performances, results, and vision of the team.
b. Increase awareness about those behaviors which are and are not “below the line.”
b. Responsibility Model exercise.
3 Work Ethic a. Work Ethic Ratings exercise. a. Identify individual and team standards for work ethic; increase awareness about one’s current perception
of his work ethic standards.
Tough Attitude b. Tough Attitude Quotes exercise. b. Develop a list of phrases/statements to represent personal and team attitudes; increase awareness about
tough attitudes.
Self-motivation c. Developing Personal Motivation exercise. c. Increase awareness about why one enjoys playing football; develop cues, phrases, and images as a
reminder of these reasons.
4 Self-belief a. General Self-belief exercise. a. Increase awareness about those things which one has done successfully recently; identify attributes/skills
that one has to offer themselves and others.
b. Sources of Self-belief and Confidence exercise. b. Increase awareness about those things (as a person and footballer) that make one have more belief in
them; things that boost one’s confidence.
Concentration and c. Concentration Grid exercise. c. Develop the ability to ignore irrelevant, distracting stimuli and scan a visual array for relevant
Focus information.
d. Concentration Techniques Awareness exercise. d. Increase awareness about those cues/stimuli that one (i) normally attends and (ii) should be attending to
during training and competition.
5 Resilience a. Favorite Persister exercise. a. Increase awareness about how others have persisted and overcome adversity.
b. About Yourself exercise. b. Increase awareness about how one has (or could) persisted and overcome adversity.
c. Solution-focused Thinking exercise. c. Develop the ability to approach problems with solution-focused thinking.
6 Emotional a. Emotion awareness and management exercise. a. Recall and increase awareness about helpful and harmful emotions during those times when one has
Intelligence performed exceptionally well and poorly; recall and increase awareness about intensities of these emotions
when one has performed exceptionally well; gain experience in techniques to initiate specific emotions and
manage emotions in stressful situations.
b. Anxiety Awareness exercise. b. Increase awareness about those situations that cause one to experience anxiety, reasons for the increase in
anxiety, and how it affects subsequent performance.
c. Pre-Match Routine exercise. c. Identify thoughts and feelings to attain prior to a competition (physical, mental, and emotional goals);
identify actions/procedures to implement to achieve this emotional state.
7 Sport Intelligence a. Personal Reflection of Training and Competition a. Increase awareness about individual and team performances; aims of training sessions and competition
Performances exercise. plays; lessons learned from training and competition; areas of improvement; and reflection on performance
processes and outcomes.
Physical Toughness b. Experiencing Physical Pain exercise. b. Increase awareness about those situations that require one to push through the pain barrier; recall
situations when one has pushed through physical pain and fatigue; identify techniques to achieve assist in
pushing through the pain barrier.
184
Resilience. The Dispositional Resilience Scale (DRS; Bartone, Ursano, Wright, &
items rated on a 4-pont Likert scale (0 = not at all true; 3 = completely true) and is designed
to measure dispositional resilience. High numerical values are associated with higher levels
of resilience, and low values are associated with lower levels. The scale assesses each of
the three hardiness dimensions (control, commitment, and challenge) separately and uses
equal number of items and a balanced number of positively worded items within each
component to measure each dimension. The DRS has demonstrated adequate internal
consistency (α = .70 to .89; Maddi et al., 2002; Oulette, 1993) and there is evidence for its
Flow. The Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (DFS-2; Jackson & Eklund, 2002) measures
are asked to rate how often they experience certain thoughts and feelings during their
athletic experiences on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never; 5 = always). The DFS-2 has a
well-defined factor structure and adequate internal consistency (α = .71 to .92; Jackson &
Players and coaches from the PST and MTT groups also completed the following
(CEF; Partington & Orlick, 1987) developed by Weigand, Richardson, and Weinberg
(1999) was employed to assess the PST and MTT participants’ perspective on consultant
effectiveness. The scale has 20 questions designed to assess the consultant’s impact (e.g., “I
185
am acquiring knowledge about football mental skills”), effectiveness (e.g., “The consultant
gave good examples of the concepts”), rapport (e.g., “The consultant was approachable”),
and overall evaluation (e.g., “I would recommend this consultant to other athletes and
coaches”). The questions are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale with varying anchors used
and MTT groups at the completion of the study. Social validation questionnaires are
employed to assess participant satisfaction with the delivery of the service and outcomes of
the program (e.g., Mellalieu et al., 2006; Thelwell et al., 2006). Based on the
recommendations made by Wolf (1978) the following questions were designed to assess
social validity:
(a) How important was an improvement in mental toughness to you? (1 = not at all
(b) Do you consider the changes in mental toughness to be significant? (1 = not at all
(e) How satisfied were you with the content of the program? (1 = not at all satisfied to 7
= extremely satisfied)
Procedure
Approval for this project was granted by the University Human Ethics Committee.
An email advertisement was sent to all youth development officers via the State Manager
186
for Coaching and Talent. Community-based coaches interested in the project made contact
with the lead researcher and were informed about the nature of the research. Once three
coaches had agreed to participate, they were randomly assigned to one of three
experimental conditions and each coach was then informed about the nature of the program
in which they were participating. Having gained the coaches approval, an information
session was held to convey this information to the parents and players and to allow the
researchers to respond to any questions. Informed consent was then obtained from the
Multisource ratings of mental toughness, resilience, and flow were gathered from all
three experimental groups at similar time points during pre-season training (February,
2007) prior to the implementation of the intervention programs. Having collected a pre-
assessment for all three groups, the PST and MTT groups were then exposed to the
designated intervention program described above (February to April, 2007); the control
group was not exposed to any form of intervention by the researchers. Both intervention
programs were completed two weeks prior to the competitive season (April, 2007). During
the competitive season (April to August, 2007), all three experimental groups were not
exposed to any further intervention from the researchers. Multisource ratings of mental
toughness, resilience, and flow were gathered from all three experimental groups at the
effectiveness and satisfaction with the delivery of the service and outcomes of the program
were also obtained from both the PST and MTT groups but not the control group.
Data Analysis
The aim of our analysis was to examine changes in mental toughness, resilience,
and flow among the three experimental groups across pre- and post-intervention. A
187
corollary of this was to determine whether the observed effects were consistent across the
three rating sources (self, parent, and coach). A multivariate analysis of covariance
variable, was performed to examine changes in mental toughness, resilience, and flow. A
MANOVA is more appropriate for analyses with greater than two time points (Tabachnick
& Fidell, 2007). Given that correlations between subscales of these three psychological
constructs were low and non-significant, separate MANCOVA’s were performed for
mental toughness, resilience, and flow. An alpha level of .05 was employed and partial eta
the p value to guard against inflation of Type I error rates as a result of multiple
comparisons. The resulting p value for mental toughness, resilience, and flow was .012,
.017, and .005, respectively. All assumptions of MANCOVA were met indicating the
suitability of this analysis. A discriminant function analysis was then used to verify
membership in the three experimental groups. Only those components of mental toughness,
resilience, and flow which significantly differentiated groups in the MANCOVA were
Results
Self-Report Data
Mental toughness. Descriptive statistics and alpha coefficients for subscales of the
multivariate effect for experimental group (F8, 130 = 3.64, λ = .67, p <.01, η P2 = .18), while
188
pre-intervention scores for each subscale of the AfMTI were not revealed as covariates (p’s
>.05). It was revealed that thrive through challenge (F2, 68 = 9.89, p <.012, η P2 = .22) and
tough attitude (F2, 68 = 6.17, p <.012, η P2 = .15) but not sport awareness (F2, 68 = .74, p = .48,
η P2 = .02) and desire success (F2, 68 = 2.93, p = .06, η P2 = .22) contributed to the significant
multivariate effect. An examination of the estimated marginal means for thrive through
challenge indicates that both the MTT and PST groups reported significantly more positive
scores than the control group (p <.001) while significant differences between the MTT and
PST groups were not observed. For tough attitude, significant differences were observed
between the MTT and control groups (p <.001) but not between the PST and control groups
Resilience. Descriptive statistics and alpha coefficients for subscales of the DRS by
experimental group was evidenced (F6, 134 = 14.88, λ = .36, p <.001, η P2 = .40), while pre-
intervention scores for each subscale of the DRS were not revealed as covariates (p’s >.05).
Commitment (F2, 69 = 41.82, p <.001, η P2 = .55), control (F2, 69 = 21.44, p <.001, η P2 = .38)
and challenge (F2, 69 = 7.77, p <.001, η P2 = .18) all contributed to the multivariate effect. An
examination of the estimated marginal means for commitment revealed the MTT group
reported more positive scores than both the PST and control groups (p <.001) and that the
PST group reported more positive changes than the control group (p <.001). Both the MTT
and PST groups reported more positive changes in the control subscale than the control
group (p <.001), while there were no significant differences between the MTT and PST
groups. Similar trends in self-reported control were observed for the challenge subscale.
189
Table 3. Descriptive statistics and alpha coefficients for subscales of the AfMTI by
experimental condition for self, parent, and coach ratings pre- and post-intervention.
PST
Tt 4.47 .84 .93 5.19 .63 .89 .72 1.09
Sa 5.03 .72 .82 5.30 .63 .80 .27 .85
Ta 4.12 1.07 .81 4.67 .59 .77 .55 1.12
Ds 4.73 .90 .75 4.95 .74 .73 .22 1.11
MTT
Tt 4.50 .53 .80 5.18 .62 .91 .68 .63
Sa 4.98 .58 .72 5.46 .54 .80 .48 .69
Ta 4.29 .69 .69 5.06 .54 .69 .77 .45
Ds 4.92 .74 .73 5.22 .59 .74 .30 .81
Parent Data
Control
Tt 5.25 .52 .88 5.41 .42 .86 .16 .65
Sa 5.52 .43 .73 5.49 .48 .74 -.03 .59
Ta 4.89 .59 .84 4.85 .53 .84 .04 .71
Ds 5.50 .65 .80 5.68 .62 .87 .18 .86
PST
Tt 5.67 .59 .81 5.82 .75 .92 .15 .89
Sa 5.53 .86 .88 5.59 .86 .87 .06 1.35
Ta 4.93 1.17 .67 5.79 .81 .76 .86 1.49
Ds 5.58 1.08 .71 5.74 .86 .85 .16 1.52
MTT
Tt 5.43 .87 .90 6.01 .64 .85 .58 1.27
Sa 5.65 .86 .81 6.23 .81 .85 .58 1.25
Ta 5.15 .90 .79 5.90 .81 .82 .75 1.16
Ds 5.66 1.07 .85 5.99 1.05 .89 .33 1.48
Coach Data
Control
Tt 4.66 .88 .93 4.60 .65 .89 -.06 1.00
Sa 5.08 .69 .80 5.19 .67 .90 .09 .92
Ta 4.74 .77 .77 4.60 .65 .81 -.14 1.05
Ds 4.44 .64 .67 4.67 .85 .75 .23 1.07
PST
Tt 4.68 .81 .93 5.25 .62 .93 .57 1.04
Sa 5.03 .77 .87 5.41 .74 .72 .38 1.15
Ta 3.90 1.19 .86 4.54 .64 .70 .64 1.56
Ds 4.68 .87 .76 5.14 .55 .68 .46 1.09
MTT
Tt 4.76 .53 .77 5.27 .71 .89 .51 .89
Sa 5.21 .73 .84 5.53 .51 .69 .32 .96
Ta 4.38 .83 .86 5.23 .70 .87 .85 .54
Ds 5.14 .57 .75 5.45 .54 .74 .41 .87
190
Table 4. Self-report descriptive statistics and alpha coefficients for subscales of the DRS
and DFS-2 by experimental condition for pre- and post-intervention.
PST
Cm 1.77 .28 .64 2.14 .31 .59 .37 .15
Co 1.69 .32 .73 2.16 .33 .63 .47 .27
Ch 1.82 .37 .76 2.08 .32 .59 .26 .24
MTT
Cm 1.75 .25 .64 2.32 .25 .59 .57 .24
Co 1.68 .28 .62 2.04 .28 .55 .36 .27
Ch 1.84 .30 .65 2.17 .34 .62 .33 .23
PST
Bal 3.88 .57 .87 3.87 .61 .90 -.01 .88
Mer 3.53 .65 .83 3.58 .60 .90 .05 .70
Goal 4.11 .58 .85 4.47 .33 .69 .36 .55
Fee 4.04 .63 .87 3.88 .64 .91 -.16 .84
Conc 4.06 .51 .67 4.45 .33 .82 .39 .60
Cont 3.98 .56 .86 4.42 .42 .86 .44 .66
Cons 3.42 .76 .71 3.61 .56 .81 .19 .97
Time 3.30 .86 .88 3.51 .64 .90 .21 1.07
Auto 4.42 .57 .86 4.39 .61 .88 -.03 .92
MTT
Bal 4.04 .50 .79 4.48 .37 .67 .44 .52
Mer 3.56 .59 .69 3.99 .64 .91 .43 .88
Goal 3.76 .47 .80 4.28 .60 .71 .52 .68
Fee 3.94 .54 .84 4.15 .66 .86 .19 .87
Conc 4.04 .63 .74 4.48 .33 .69 .44 .75
Cont 3.66 .54 .73 4.14 .53 .81 .48 .86
Cons 4.32 .54 .80 4.35 .54 .86 .03 .15
Time 3.35 .75 .76 3.81 .45 .77 .46 .92
Auto 3.96 .63 .91 4.40 .59 .89 .44 .87
191
Flow. Descriptive statistics and alpha coefficients for subscales of the DFS-2 by
effect for experimental group (F18, 110 = 4.65, λ = .32, p <.01, η P2 = .43), while pre-
intervention scores for each subscale of the DFS-2 were not revealed as covariates (p’s
>.05). Only the concentration (F2, 63 = 8.58, p <.001, η P2 = .21) and control (F2, 63 = 13.80, p
<.001, η P2 = .31) subscales of the DFS-2 contributed to the significant multivariate effect.
An inspection of the estimate marginal means revealed that both the MTT and PST groups
reported more positive changes in concentration than the control group (p <.017) while
significant differences between the MTT and PST groups were not observed. For the
control subscale, the PST group reported more positive changes than both the MTT and
control groups (p <.017) while the MTT reported more positive changes the control group
Parent Data
experimental group was evidenced (F8, 130 = 4.27, λ = .62, p <.001, η P2 = .21), while pre-
intervention scores for each subscale of the AfMTI were not revealed as covariates (p’s
>.05). It was revealed that thrive through challenge (F2, 68 = 6.03, p <.012, η P2 = .15), sport
awareness (F2, 68 = 8.02, p <.012, η P2 = .19), and tough attitude (F2, 68 = 13.20, p <.012, η P2
= .28) contributed to the significant multivariate effect; desire success did not. An
inspection of the estimate marginal means revealed that the MTT group reported more
positive changes in thrive through challenge than the control group (p <.017) but not the
PST group, while there were no significant differences between the control and PST
192
groups. For sport awareness, the MTT group reported more positive changes than both the
control and PTT groups (p <.017), while there were no significant differences between the
PST and control groups. Both the MTT and PST groups reported more positive changes in
tough attitude than the control group (p <.017), while no significant differences were
Coach Data
effect for experimental group (F8, 130 = 5.88, λ = .54, p <.001, η P2 = .27), while pre-
intervention scores for each subscale of the AfMTI were not revealed as covariates (p’s
>.05). Thrive through challenge (F2, 68 = 8.31, p <.012, η P2 = .20), tough attitude (F2, 68 =
10.79, p <.001, η P2 = .24), and desire success (F2, 68 = 9.93, p <.001, η P2 = .23) contributed
to the multivariate effect; sport awareness did not. An inspection of the estimate marginal
means revealed that both the MTT and PST groups reported more positive changes in thrive
through challenge than the control group (p <.017), while there were no significant
differences between the MTT and PST groups. For the tough attitude subscale, the MTT
group reported more positive changes than both the control and PST groups (p <.017),
while no significant differences were evidenced between the PST and control groups. Both
the MTT and PST groups reported more positive changes in desire success than the control
group (p <.017), while there were no significant differences between the MTT and PST
groups.
137.38, df = 26, p <.001) accounted for 76.22% of the variance in the discriminant function
193
and differentiated the control group from both PST and MTT groups as a function of self-
rated commitment, control (DRS), and concentration (DFS-2) as well as parent-rated tough
attitude (AfMTI). As expected, the control group had lower scores than the PST and MTT
on all four components; the PST and MTT had comparable scores. The second function (λ
= .52, χ2 = 42.77, df = 12, p <.001) accounted for 47.77% of the variance in the discriminant
function and differentiated the PST from the MTT group on coach-rated tough attitude
(AfMTI) and parent-rated sport awareness (AfMTI). Specifically, the MTT group has
higher scores on these two components. When predicting group membership, 85% of the
individuals in the sample were correctly classified. The highest percentage of correctly
classified individuals was in the control group (92%) followed by the MTT group (84%)
and finally the PST group (81%). Of the incorrectly classified individuals in the control
group, 4% were placed in the both the PST and MTT groups. Incorrectly classified
individuals in the PST group were placed in both the MTT (15%) and control groups (4%).
Finally, participants from the MTT group were incorrectly placed in the PST group only
(16%).
Consultant Effectiveness
effectiveness was extremely positive. For the PST group, average responses were as
0.56), rapport (M = 4.52; SD = 0.42), and overall evaluation (M = 4.26; SD = 0.63). Similar
responses were forwarded by the MTT group: consultant impact (M = 4.03; SD = 0.75),
Social Validation
194
Social validation was assessed among the PST and MTT groups using a brief
questionnaire designed specifically for this study based on the recommendations of Wolf
(1978). When asked to rate the importance of an improvement in mental toughness, the
average response was 5.63 (SD = 0.76) and 5.97 (SD = 0.84) for the PST and MTT groups
both the PST (M = 5.89; SD = 0.91) and MTT groups (M = 6.02; SD = 0.63). Similar
participants. On average, the PST average response was 6.24 (SD = 0.52) while the MTT
was 6.38 (SD = 0.46). The final question suggested the both the PST (M = 5.92; SD = 0.85)
and MTT (M = 6.16; SD = 0.65) groups were satisfied with the content of the program they
received.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of two different
educational and experiential workshops and activities targeting the keys to mental
psychological skills training program targeting the usual suspects (i.e., self-regulation,
mental toughness, resilience, and flow in both intervention groups when compared with the
control group receiving no psychological intervention. It was also hypothesised that these
enhanced levels of mental toughness, resilience, and flow would be evidenced more so in
195
The findings here lend support for the general effectiveness of multimodal
psychological skills training programs with youth-aged athletes (Fournier et al., 2005;
Sheard & Golby, 2006; see also Gould, 1983) and extend this notion to Australian
footballers. Overall, it was demonstrated that both the mental toughness training (MTT) and
psychological skills training (PST) programs reported more positive changes in subjective
ratings of mental toughness, resilience, and flow than the control group. A visual inspection
of the difference scores across rating sources for the AfMTI shows that only one AfMTI
subscale (sport awareness – parent rating) evidenced minimal changes (0.6). Similarly, self-
reports of all three subscales of the DRS resulted in positive changes. The self-report data
on flow, however, was somewhat equivocal. Positive changes for each of the nine
subscales, except for consciousness, occurred for the MTT group, whereas difference
scores for both the PST and control groups included a mixture of positive and negative
changes. One potential explanation for the equivocal data on flow is that the majority of
self-reports at pre-intervention were high, thus presenting only a small potential for
improvement.
Statistical analyses of the data revealed some encouraging results regarding the
specific effects of the interventions. In terms of mental toughness, both the PST and MTT
groups reported statistically significant increases in thrive through challenge and tough
attitude when compared with the control group, whereas desire success and sport awareness
did not. As it has been shown (Bull et al., 2005; Gucciardi et al., 2008d; Jones et al., 2002),
being able to deal with and overcome adversities, challenges, and pressures as well as
having a tough attitude are key components of mental toughness in sport. The enhancement
of both these dimensions is an important finding for the applied practitioner and coaches
given that attitudes affect our cognitions, emotions, behaviors, and beliefs, which facilitate
196
our adaptation to the environment (Ajzen, 2001). On the other hand, rebounding or
“bouncing back” from adversity, challenge, and pressure facilitates learning and growth
through conquering such circumstances (Luthar, 2006). The self-report data on resilience
supported this finding with both the PST and MTT groups evidencing significant changes
in all three dimensions of resilience (control, commitment, and challenge) while scores for
the control group remained relatively stable. Caution is urged when interpreting the data
from the DRS, however, due to the questionable internal reliability estimates observed here.
important that future research examines the applicability of such measures in the sport
There are a number of explanations for the lack of change in the desire success and
sport intelligence dimensions of mental toughness. Specifically, it may be that the effects of
those components specific to the MTT (and therefore not addressed in the PST) program
need more time to develop and solidify. The activities and tasks designed to help develop
sport awareness, for example, may actually have been effective and with long-term
experiential use would become actualized in questionnaire data. In regards to desire for
success, one explanation for the lack of statistically significant changes may be that youth-
aged footballers are not particularly focused on achieving success at this stage in their
sporting career. Rather, self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) suggests that the
fulfillment of psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness may be more
important. However, this finding may have been different had we sampled a youth-aged
development squad in which the majority of players are selected based on their physical
ability and, therefore, want to make it to the highest level of football they can.
197
Flow was included in the present study as it has previously been conceptualized as
an outcome of being mentally tough (Middleton et al., 2004). The flow experience
athletes perceive the situation as demanding but believe they have the skills to effectively
cope with such demands (Jackson, 1995). Despite previous research showing that mental
toughness is related to flow (Gucciardi et al., in press; Middleton et al., 2004), the data here
indicated that both psychological interventions had little impact on the nine flow
dimensions, with significant effects observed for the concentration and control dimensions
of flow only. This finding is surprising given that several of the parameters previously
confidence and positive attitude, optimal arousal, optimal physical preparation, focus, and
motivation (Jackson, 1995) were all addressed in both the PST and MTT programs here. As
previously mentioned, pre-intervention data for flow was high thereby limiting the potential
for improvement. Alternatively, given that the DFS-2 was developed within a sport-general
(as opposed to a sport-specific) context, it may be that those flow experiences targeted by
determine if either of the two multimodal intervention programs were more effective in
enhancing mental toughness. Overall, the data reported here indicated that increases in self,
parent, and coach ratings of mental toughness, and self-reports of resilience and flow for
both the PST and MTT were not significantly different from each other. Aside from the
variables in distinguishing the PST and MTT groups, the data suggests that neither the PST
198
nor the MTT program was more effective in enhancing mental toughness. Our results
regarding the lack of superiority could be interpreted as providing support for the
contention that the common components of these programs (i.e., self-regulation, arousal
regulation, mental rehearsal, attentional control, self-efficacy, and ideal performance state)
are responsible for the positive effects of both interventions observed here. However,
further research on the mechanisms and processes contributing to the observed effects is
warranted before making this conclusion. Another issue which may have influenced the
findings is that of the group methodology. Due to the nature of Australian football (i.e.,
targeted psychological skills which each team received. Individualized programs that meet
The most original and significant contribution of the present study was the
means by which to address concerns associated with socially desirable responding. Socially
desirable responding is one of the most prominent sources of systematic error and when
MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). The fact that we evidenced similar changes in ratings
across three different sources (self, parent, and coach) alleviates some of the concerns
associated with socially desirable responding inherent with self-report data thereby adding
considerable support to the reliability of the findings. Moreover, results from the
sources of information with a combination of self, parent, and coach reports combining to
best explain membership in the experimental groups. To our knowledge, this is the first
199
study within the sport psychology literature to employ multisource ratings to evaluate the
model presented by Murphy and Tammen model (1998). These authors suggest that an
increased self-awareness about one’s strengths and weaknesses coupled with training in
methods for monitoring one’s thoughts and behaviors enables one to become self-directive
in utilizing learned skills and techniques to manage and facilitate performance. Consistent
with this thinking, footballers in both intervention programs engaged in exercise and
activities that skilled them in self-analysis and provided them with tools and methods for
participants in the MTT group supports such a conclusion (Gucciardi, Gordon, &
skilled in all three aspects of the performance management process. Ben, for example, may
be proficient in knowing what emotions enable him to enter “the zone” (i.e., self-
awareness) and yet have problems managing his emotions during a match (i.e., self-
regulation). Chris, on the other hand, is skilled in imagery (i.e., self-regulation) but
unskilled in knowing when imagery can be used to facilitate his performance (i.e., self-
awareness). Indeed, this may account for some of the equivocal findings reported here; that
is, some footballers may have become more self-aware about their levels of mental
toughness, resilience, and flow by the end of the intervention than others. It is seems
200
analysis and self-monitoring as well as self-regulatory skills when designing and
avenues for future research. First, the multimodal nature of the two intervention programs
reported here limits our ability to clearly identify those aspects which contributed most to
importance for the applied practitioner and future research that addresses this issue will
of participants’ perspectives on the goals, procedures, and results of the MTT intervention
(cf. Gucciardi et al., 2008c). Related to the first is a second limitation in which the
nomothetic design focusing on information obtained from the study of many persons did
not allow us to “tease out subtle behavioural change that perhaps would be undetected
using nomothetic methods” (Vealey, 1988, p. 329). Future research employing single-
subject designs such as A-B-A-B and multiple baseline will greatly compliment the data
The third limitation of the study relates to the dependant variables being subjective
in nature. From a positive youth development perspective (cf. Holt, 2008), the
improvements in psychological variables observed here across the three different rating
sources are an important finding. But in terms of talent development within a sporting
improvements and, due to the subjective nature of the data, we were unable to gauge this.
201
predicting performance (e.g., Bartone, Roland, Picano, & Williams, 2008; Stavrou,
Jackson, Zervas, & Karteroliotis, 2007) and behaviour (e.g., Sage & Kavussanu, 2007),
there is some evidence to suggest that this may not always be the case (e.g., Blakeslee &
Goff, 2007). Therefore, it is important that future research obtains both subjective and
such links exist (cf. Fournier et al., 2005; Sheard & Golby, 2006; Mamassis & Doganis,
2004).
Finally, the limited duration of the assessment period and absence of follow-up
experience the benefits of new skills, techniques, and behaviours through multiple trials
over an extended period of time for them to adopt and internalize these newly acquired
methods (Meichenbaum & Turk, 1987). Longitudinal research would prove useful in this
regard.
Conclusion
The results from this study provide preliminary support for the premise of offering
Australian footballers. Overall, it was apparent that both the PST and MTT programs
enabled each group to achieve improvements for each of the dependant variables. In
contrast, scores for the control group receiving no psychological intervention remained
relatively stable across the study period. The reliability of these findings was enhanced as
these general trends in the data were consistent across three independent rating sources. In
addition, the consultant effectiveness and social validation data were highly supportive of
the efficacy of the intervention procedures. Further research is required to delineate those
202
aspects of multimodal interventions which contribute most to the effects observed using a
objective data.
203
CHAPTER Vb
204
In the last decade, we have evidenced widespread, international attention focused on
psychological construct (e.g., Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005; Gucciardi,
Gordon, & Dimmock, 2008d; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton, 2002, 2007). It seems that
practitioners have used these findings, together with personal intuition and experience, in
an attempt to better equip coaches and sporting organizations in their efforts to develop this
desirable construct among athletic cohorts. While research suggests that mental toughness
may incorporate some inherent dispositional qualities (e.g., Golby & Sheard, 2006), it
seems that it is generally developed through, and influenced by experiences with and
interpretations of, an individual’s internal and external environment (Bull et al., 2005;
Connaughton, Wadey, Hanton, & Jones , 2008; Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002;
Jones et al., 2002). Yet despite this recent influx of empirical contributions, our
understanding and applied efforts remain limited by the lack of evidence-based information
on best practices regarding the processes and mechanisms by which mental toughness is
developed.
more than one intervention technique may prove fruitful in efforts to develop or enhance
mental toughness (cf. Connaughton et al., 2008). Both forms of PST have been shown to be
effective in enhancing psychological and life skills associated with mental toughness as
Fournier, Calmels, Durand-Bush, & Salmela, 2005; Johnson, Hrycaiko, Johnson, & Halas,
2004; Mellalieu, Hanton, & O’Brien, 2006; Papacharisis, Goudas, Danish, & Theodorakis,
205
2005; Thelwell, Greenlees, & Weston, 2006). For example, Sheard and Golby (2006)
recently demonstrated the positive effects of a seven-week PST program involving sessions
Recent research has extended this line of inquiry by demonstrating the effectiveness
footballers (Gucciardi, Gordon, & Dimmock, 2008b) with a control group receiving no
intervention. The first package consisted of six psychological skills commonly employed in
self-efficacy, and ideal performance state; PST program). In contrast, the second targeted
the keys to mental toughness in Australian football (self-belief, work ethic, personal values,
emotional intelligence, sport intelligence, and physical toughness; MTT program) identified
by Gucciardi et al. (2008d). Overall, the results showed that participation in both programs
(Bartone, Ursano, Wright, & Ingraham, 1989), and flow (Jackson & Eklund, 2002).
Parents’ and coaches’ also reported similar improvements in footballers’ mental toughness.
significant changes in mental toughness, resilience, and flow across each of the three rating
sources.
206
Although research consistently demonstrates the positive effects of PST, the vast
majority of evaluative PST research to date has been primarily limited to quantitative
methods. This is surprising given that it has been two decades since calls were made for
more qualitative evaluative research on PST and applied sport psychology research
(Vealey, 1988). The lack of qualitative research on PST is even more surprising given its
ability to compliment traditional quantitative methods (cf. Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007).
Conversations with participants, for example, can reveal information about the lived
experience of key stakeholders within the program and the processes by which these
literature are limited (e.g., Calmels, D’Arripe-Longueville, Fournier, & Soulard, 2003;
Dunn & Holt, 2003, 2004; Evans & Hardy, 2002; Thelwell & Greenlees, 2003). It should
be noted however, that attempts have been made within most quantitative evaluative
which researchers have gone about doing this are rather simplistic. For example, some
researchers have attempted to obtain qualitative data via a simple open-ended question at
the end of established questionnaires (e.g., Fournier et al., 2005), while most (generally)
adopt a social validation rating scale for certain aspects of the program (cf. Martin &
Toogood, 1997).
207
Given the lack of qualitative research examining the effectiveness of PST programs,
the general purpose of the present study was to follow-up on quantitative data regarding the
understanding of key stakeholders’ (i.e., athletes, parents, and coaches) perspectives on the
goals, procedures, and results of the mental toughness training (MTT) intervention.
Method
Participants
Players, parents, and coaches from the MTT program (cf. Gucciardi et al., 2008b)
were invited to take part in this study. Ten players (M = 14.43; SD = .53), one of their
parents (five fathers and five mothers), and three coaches agreed to participate. Informed
consent was obtained prior to the interviews. Approval for this study was granted by the
Interview Schedule
recommendations made by Martin and Hrycaiko (1983) for researchers to seek responses to
three questions from participants about their involvement in intervention research: thoughts
about the goals of the intervention, the procedures that were applied, and the results
produce by those procedures. A copy of the interview guide can be obtained by contacting
Data Analysis
The interviews were transcribed verbatim yielding 264 pages of data. Given that
the primary purpose of the analysis was to understand the participants’ perspectives and
208
experiences of the MTT program, a thematic content analysis was chosen to search for
themes across the data set on the basis of content (Kvale, 1996). First, we identified
individual codes in the data by breaking the text down to small units and organizing it
according to category, thus creating a large mass of data segments and annotations.
Following this, we refined the categories into broader themes to establish category
each category, and search for negative cases. The purpose of this second step was to reveal
patterns. Throughout the entire data analysis, care was taken to ensure that the categories
reflected the data and that the categories fit the data rather than forcing the data to fit in
with the categories using the constant comparison method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss
& Corbin, 1998). As interviews were being undertaken they were transcribed and analysed,
Trustworthiness. Three techniques were employed to demonstrate that the data was
grounded in the reports of participants (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). First, both the primary and
inclusion of any bias on part of the analysts. Second, participant-member checks were
performed in which each interviewee was provided with their transcribed verbatim as well
as a detailed overview of the results of the analysis and asked to reflect on and verify the
accuracy of the analysts’ interpretations. Third, the data was triangulated from three
note that contact between the interviewer and participants in the present study was limited
to that which occurred during the intervention period (approx. 15 hours) of our previous
209
study (Gucciardi et al., 2008b) and the interviews in the present study. Prior to this, the only
other contact between the research team and participants occurred during an hour
information session evening (see Gucciardi et al., 2008b). All other contact was avoided so
Procedure
The coaches, players, and parents of Gucciardi et al.’s (2008) MTT program group
were invited to take part in the interviews. Participants were informed that the purpose of
the interviews was to obtain their opinions on the goals of the intervention, the procedures
that were applied, and the results, if any, produced by those procedures. Specifically, it was
highlighted that we were interesting in hearing about the “lived experience” of those
individuals who participated in the program. Participants were also informed that their
information would assist the researchers in developing and tailoring procedures to produce
more effective programs in the future. Those participants agreeing to take part in the study
were sent (via email) a copy of the interview schedule at least three days prior to the
interview and were requested to read the questions and consider them over the days
preceding the interview. A time and place most convenient to each interviewee was also
established to conduct the 1-1 interviews. All interviews took place between one and three
weeks following the completion of the football season at the participant’s home. To ensure
consistency across participants, interviews were conducted in the afternoon once each
footballer had returned home from school. Interviews lasted between 45 and 90 min and
were recorded and transcribed verbatim prior to data analysis. Informed consent was
210
Results and Discussion
The present study sought to compliment and extend previous quantitative research
gaining an understanding of the key stakeholders’ (i.e., athletes, parents, and coaches)
perspectives on the goals, procedures, and results of the mental toughness training (MTT)
program. In the following section, we present and discuss the findings from our analysis of
the data. After first describing participants’ perceptions of the benefits of the program, we
next discuss participants’ perceptions of the processes by which the program had an effect
how the program could be improved in the future. Similar to previous qualitative research
(e.g., Gould et al., 2002; Hays, Maynard, Thomas, & Bawden, 2007), the number of quotes
falling into each theme is included in brackets next to the label of each theme [F =
Program Benefits
understanding football and the skills that each player has available to them (i.e., strengths
and weaknesses) to perform to his optimal level. There was a general consensus that this
was a major benefit of having participated in the MTT program. One player indicated that
“the skills we have learnt in this program have had an extremely positive impact on how I
prepare mentally and physically for training and competition…this was the biggest benefit
for me.” For the present sample, quality preparation was about valuing and understanding
well as you possibly can to perform to your potential and, therefore, being able to deal with
211
any situation that you may face. The nature of this theme was clearly captured in the
The program helped me better prepare mentally and physically for training
and competition…the routine exercises helped me reduce anxiety before our
games…the attentional cue exercise helped me focus during games and
training…the goal setting activities helped me think more clearly about what
I needed to do.
Coaches and parents also recognized changes in footballers’ preparation for games and
training. For example, the head coach noted, “I see some player’s who had a tendency to
show up late to training being more punctual now…and showing a renewed interest about
their role in our team strategies for competition.” Parents discussed this theme with regard
to changes in player’s behaviour before a match: “I told my son off one morning for
listening to his iPod on the way to a game when he was ignoring me; he tells me that he
For most individual athletes and sporting teams, preparation would largely focus on
physical, technical, and tactical skills with which the coach would have knowledge on.
However, both the player and coach are responsible for quality preparation (Voight, 2002).
The skills and knowledge gained through participation in this program were considered
highly beneficial in developing each player’s own ability to prepare mentally and
physically for both training and competition in Australian football. Central to this theme
were skills and knowledge that enabled players to get the most out of their preparation prior
to training and competition (e.g., goal setting and time management) as well as during
“quality preparation gives you a sense of control over what you do.” Indeed, this finding
was reflected in the quantitative data in which footballer’s reported positive changes in the
control subscale of measures of dispositional resilience and flow. This finding is consistent
212
with research revealing quality preparation as a source of self-belief among athletes in that
they will be able to thrive through pressure, challenge, and adversity and perform to the
best of their ability (Gucciardi et al., 2008d; see also Hays et al., 2007).
dynamics take place, perhaps none more important than team cohesion. The positive impact
of the program on team cohesion for the football team here was largely unexpected because
team-building activities per se were not a specific focus of the MTT program. However, the
fact that participants perceived that the team bonded more because of the program is not
surprising given that a substantial component of the program involved group activities and
exercises where the players shared personal information and provided feedback on
teammates. Participants were in agreement that the MTT program helped create an
environment in which individual and team goals, visions, and processes were able to be
communicated and strategies for working towards these could be developed. One of the
coaches noted:
We had eight out of 25 boys this year who were new players to this group
and this program helped the boys mix with the existing group and fit right
in…we have even had opposition coach’s comment on the chemistry
between the boys.
This sentiment was also evident among the playing group: “We have got to know each
other on completely different levels…as footballers and as teenage boys going through the
same things as each other…there seems to be more respect for each other now.” Parents
described this theme with regard to the increased social networks among players: “I have
noticed that the boys joke around with each other a lot more now and are more inclusive of
others that they may not have associated with in the past.”
Team unity was said to occur when the players trust and respect each other, when
they have common goals, and when they have confidence in themselves as individuals and
213
as a team. Research shows that the development of team goals and group norms or
collective standards of behaviour (training, competition, and social settings) that are
expected among a group, which was included in the MTT program, represent a key
contribution to the development of team cohesion (Patterson, Carron, & Loughead, 2005).
facilitated the development of mental toughness in the current sport team setting, as
individuals within the team who perceive a strong expectation of such (mentally tough)
attitudes and behaviours behave in a manner consistent with those expectations and become
with the players themselves, acknowledged that the footballers were more receptive to
receiving feedback and criticism from other people, and showed an increased willingness to
know, understand, and use this information in developing themselves and reaching their
goals. This program benefit was clearly evident among the coaches’ discourse. For
example, one coach mentioned, “I have noticed that most of the boys are better able to deal
with criticism and turning criticism into a positive outlook…probably because they are
more willing to debate these issues.” Another coach indicated that “most of the boys have
shown more willingness and response to our [the coaches] criticisms over the season…I
think they see this now as constructive feedback for working on their strengths and
weaknesses.” Similar sentiments were also evident among the playing group: “I use to take
some of the things that the coach said to me a bit personally before but now I try to use this
with the learning process in that players were gaining more from the feedback that others
214
were providing and not missing out on essential directives for maintaining their strengths
Of particular interest was the multisource feedback process that Gucciardi et al.
(2008b) employed as part of their methodology. Several parents noted the benefits of
having a parent and coach rate each individual on the mental toughness questionnaire: “It
[obtaining multiple sources of information] signalled to the boys that the opinions of others
should be seen as a valued source of information about themselves” and that others views
“can be used as a platform for initiating debate about certain topics that we [the parents and
son] would never discuss.” The emotional intelligence construct, which has been defined as
“the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ emotions, to discriminate among them, and to
use the information to guide one’s thinking and actions” (Mayer & Salovey, 1993, p. 433),
offers a useful interpretation of this finding. Developing skills and abilities associated with
the perception of emotions, the regulation of emotions, and the capacity to utilize or reason
with emotions in thought may have enabled the participants to develop the ability to view
For example, the ability to understand how contextual influences (e.g., message content,
verbal, and nonverbal cues) facilitate the transition from one emotional state to another is
importance of hard work sets an important foundation upon which an individual can
develop goals that strive for personal growth and performance excellence. There was a
general consensus among participants that the players had become more personally
responsible and accountable for a strong work ethic in working towards the goals and
vision that they had set from the outset of the season. One coach noted changes in the
215
players’ effort in this regard: “The boys’ effort during competition has been consistently
high no matter the score, and this has also been the case pre and post training.” There was
also an agreement that the players had become more aware of the idea that working hard
has an inherent ability to develop your skills as a footballer and reflects a strong personal
character. For example, one parent in the present study noted that the MTT program
“helped the boys realize that hard work does not necessarily imply success, but if they do
not work hard they will, more often than not, fail.” This sentiment was also evident among
the playing group: “I have to come realize that if I want to get better than I have to work
hard rather than just letting things happen naturally.” This qualitative theme is reflective of
the unanimous finding from all three rating sources reporting significant quantitative
Elite athletes recognize the need to train and work hard (Mallett & Hanrahan, 2004)
whereas Olympic champions have highlighted a hard work ethic as a key psychological
characteristic in their success (Gould et al., 2002). The importance of working hard was
said to be emphasized through several of the workshop activities, however, one was
commonly highlighted: “The team values exercise has helped us [the coaches] gauge the
players’ beliefs on working hard…and having them [the players] develop their own team
values and standards has reinforced the value of working hard on and off the field.” In the
present study, work ethic implies working diligently towards set goals to improve
aspects pertaining behaviour. From a self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985)
perspective, it seems that the MTT program was beneficial in helping the players locate
216
their inherent orientation towards growth and development energized and sustained by the
(e.g., a never say die or go the extra mile mindset, determination, willing to take risks,
toughness in cricket (Bull et al., 2005) and Australian football (Gucciardi et al., 2008d).
Specifically, attitudes that represent one’s desire to grow as a footballer and person through
one’s experiences and which are implemented in achieving one’s goals were commonly
discussed by participants as having surfaced from participation in the MTT program. For
example, one coach talked about such attitudes in the context of competition: “The never
give in attitude has strengthened among the playing group…in several matches this year
they kept going when they were getting thrashed, and did not stop doing the one percenters
until the final siren.” Parents described changes in players’ attitudes off the field: “I have
noticed that the night before and the morning of a match, [Player X] is extremely more
disciplined about what food he eats and the liquids he drinks.” It was also obvious from one
footballer’s discourse that the playing group had become more positive in regards to facing
certain obstacles and challenges throughout the season: “There is a much more positive
vibe among the playing group…even after a few of the bigger losses this year we focused
on the positives while acknowledging the weaknesses of our performance.” Taken together
with the quantitative data in which all three rating source reported significant improvements
on the AfMTI tough attitude subscale for footballer’s (Gucciardi et al., 2008b), it appears
that the intervention program facilitated the enhancement of these attitudes among the
footballers. The ability to assist athletes in developing these attitudes becomes an important
217
goal for coaches and practitioners, as attitudes affect our cognitions, emotions, behaviours,
and beliefs, which facilitate our adaptation to the environment (Ajzen, 2001).
program here represent an important vehicle in which participants are provided with the
opportunity to develop a good standard of transferable skills that will be with them in every
aspect of life. Although the awareness and acquisition of transferable skills was not a
specific aim of the MTT program, the footballers, coaches, and parents noted that many of
the skills and techniques that the footballers learned in the program proved to be effective
As a parent, I think that the most obvious benefit of a program such as this is
that it equips the boys with building blocks or foundational skills for what
lies ahead in life, in and out of sport…that will help carry them through the
rest of their lives.
The coaching staff reinforced this sentiment: “Programs such as this, especially at this age,
help the boys understand how these skills and knowledge can be used in footy as well as in
skills (e.g., work ethic, handling pressure, concentration and focus, resilience, emotional
example, one coach emphasized that “with more positive levels of work ethic, they now
understand the value of working hard in everything they do…they acknowledge that it will
help them at every turn, in every challenge, and for their entire life.”
For the footballers, this theme was largely about identifying and understanding how
skills acquired through certain activities in life can be applied to others areas. Specifically,
they believed that they were more aware of the value and types of transferable skills in the
program and how they could implement these skills and techniques in other endeavours.
One of the footballers noted, “The thing that I gained most from this program was an
218
understanding of how important these skills are for footy but also in life too…where I can
use them and how.” The importance of these skills attached by participants should also
provide a strong motivation to acquire, develop and practice these skills during their
sporting experiences. Given the evidence that such skills do not transfer automatically from
one domain to another (e.g., Danish, Fazio, Nellen, & Owens, 2002), it is important that
programs not only assist individuals in identifying and developing these transferable skills
but also develop awareness within each individual of how to apply as well as implement
Contributing Processes
fundamental processes highlighted by participants about which the results occurred. Models
of mental skills for athletes and coaches (Vealey, 1988, 2007) highlight the importance of
self-awareness as a foundational skill upon which success in sport is built. Elite athletes
(Bull et al., 2005; Calmels et al., 2003) and sport psychology consultants (Ravizza, 2006)
recognize the value of self-awareness. For the participants in the present study, becoming
self-aware was largely about understanding yourself, what you enjoy doing and being able
to recognize you strengths, weaknesses, and your effect on others around so that you can
more readily adapt what you do. For example, “throughout the course of this program I
learned a lot about myself such as what gets me going…my strengths and how these
contribute to the team…[and] the impact that I can have on others.” One parent described
this in regards to its relation with mental toughness: “Having the boys explicitly discuss and
become more aware about what mental toughness is was essential for the enhancement of
their own mental toughness.” Interestingly, the self-awareness exercises were something
that the players in the MTT group had never been exposed to previously, as one coach
219
described: “The boys were put in a position where they were required to assess their
strengths and weaknesses; this is something that they have never had to do before.”
others) made up of, but not limited to, perceptions of ourselves in action and the evaluative
sense of self as perceived by others (Rochat, 2004). In this instance, self-awareness was
largely about engaging in introspection and retrospection to understand yourself, what you
enjoy doing and being able to recognize your strengths, weaknesses, and your effect on
others around so that you can more readily adapt what you do. This was evident among the
of mental toughness: “I think that being more aware about my strengths and weaknesses
have made me more receptive to criticisms that my parents, the coaches, or even my
teammates have said to me.” The ability to self-monitor and to change one’s current
behaviours and thought processes largely depends on one’s capacity to objectively examine
the self (Silva & O’Brien, 2004). Moreover, being able to examine the self is a foundation
for many unique human qualities (e.g., self-regulation) and is required for identifying
progress towards goals (Carver & Scheier, 1998) and for targeting areas for self-
in the development of one’s self-awareness: the self, the social world (e.g., interpersonal
interaction), and physical stimuli (e.g., video cameras, diaries). Each of these three
components was addressed by at least one workshop activity. For example, the self-talk and
imagery exercises addressed the self-component, multisource ratings satisfied the social
world, and the application of such skills during training reflects the physical stimuli
component. Based on the present results it seems that athletes can be taught methods for
220
developing their self-awareness if they lack the necessary skills and be encouraged to use
these methods if they do not realize on their own that they are appropriate. This has
important implications for applied practitioners and coaches given that a certain level of
ability to monitor progress towards his or her goals by paying attention to a specific aspect
of behaviour or performance and then recording whether the behaviour being monitored has
occurred (Agran, 1998). Participants in the present study were in agreement that by
observing and tracking their own performances and associated outcomes the footballers
were encouraged to extract insightful information from their experiences that can be used
for improved practice and performance. One footballer described the importance of the
I reckon one of the biggest positives for me this season has been completing
the diaries on a weekly basis. They have helped me monitor all of the things
we went through in the program. Without the diaries, I reckon a lot of what
we did would have been lost on me.
The coaches recognized the usefulness of the training diaries in helping the player’s
identify discussion points with the coaches: “Throughout the course of the year player’s
demonstrated an increased willingness to ask me [the coach] questions about some of the
things that they noticed about themselves in their training diaries.” Such activities were said
to give the footballers a sense of personal control and enabled them to more thoroughly
understand the content of the program, how it can be applied, and how they were
progressing throughout the program. This was clearly evident among the footballers
discourse: “Monitoring myself throughout the season has given me a better understanding
of my strengths and weaknesses than I did before… [and] how the drills and exercises we
221
have done here and on the track help us to develop our skills.” Parents’ discourse supported
such sentiments suggesting that “the goal setting exercises provided the player’s with a
method for identifying their goals but also continuously monitoring their progress towards
Research indicates that self-monitoring mediates the teaching and learning process
(Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001). Although training diaries were the only method used in the
MTT program, there are a number of strategies available to coaches, athletes, and
practitioners that can be used to self-monitor performance and behaviour. Included among
can be embedded with other types of monitoring techniques including goal setting,
planning, evaluation, and other types of cognitive processes. For example, athletes may be
asked to set goals, determine if their performance on the desired skill or task is moving
along lines consistent with achieving these goals, and evaluate whether their approach to
the problem is successful in helping them solve other problems not specifically targeted.
strategies and tailor the techniques they use according to the learning phase. Zimmerman
(2000) suggests that self-monitoring should focus on learning strategies during the initial
practice phase and then shift to learning outcomes once the strategy has become habitual.
proactively direct their behaviour and strategies to achieve self-set goals by taking more
responsibility for managing their own learning (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001). Participants
were in agreement that the MTT program facilitated this developmental process: “Most of
222
the boys have become more willing to seek information and assistance from us [the
coaches] about their performances.” This sentiment was echoed in the parents’ discourse:
“Sitting on the sideline during training, I have noticed that the player’s are initiating
discussions with the coaches during training more often than they use to.” Self-regulated
adjust their strategies and behaviours to achieve self-set goals (Zimmerman, 2000).
Participants’ responses reflected this line of thinking and highlighted the development of
beliefs (e.g., self-efficacy, intrinsic desire) as being a core mechanism contributing to the
changes evidenced. One footballer noted, “I have gained some important skills and
techniques for identifying a clear vision of what I want to achieve and how I can go about
Being able to control and manage negative cognitive and emotional states is a key
mental skill for elite athletes (e.g., Bull et al., 2005; Gould et al., 2002; Gucciardi et al.,
2008d; Jones et al., 2002). This sentiment was evident among the players’ discourse: “I
found the pre-performance and pre-shot routine stuff to be really helpful in organizing
several of the skills I learnt to control my thoughts and emotions….prior to a match and
actually during the match.” The processes, task strategies, and self-motivational beliefs
included as part of the MTT program were considered to be a crucial ingredient in being
able to more effectively manage these states (e.g., arousal, anxiety, pressure, fatigue). The
current findings extend previous research by demonstrating the importance of these self-
regulatory processes in managing cognitive and emotional states arising from both negative
and positive experiences to perform to the best of one’s ability. The importance of self-
223
regulatory processes and strategies in the development of mental toughness becomes even
more salient when one considers how crucial they are for personal functioning as well as
persons in the footballers’ socialization network, in particular, about the content and ideas
of the MTT program were considered an important means by which the program had an
effect. Specifically, participants noted that by having the footballers think about the causes
and consequences of their behaviour with a number of individuals, they were better
equipped to modify or change their behaviour. It was clear from the parents discourse that
these discussions provided a medium through which they could discuss certain topics with
their son more effectively: “Both my wife and I have noticed that [Player X] is more
willing to debate things with us now, rather than giving a simple yes or no answer.” The
importance of these discussions for the development of team cohesion and learning within
the team was highlighted by one coach: “Having the boys discuss things with each other
and having them share their own perspectives on things contributed greatly to them
understanding themselves and their teammates…the team became a lot closer because of
these group discussions.” This sentiment was echoed in the players’ discourse: “I learnt
some things about my teammates that I never knew before…understanding that someone
else can view the same thing [e.g., anxiety] differently from me was a huge learning curve.”
involving messages that encourage an individual to engage in processing why and how an
action emerges from, and serves to create, the affective and psychological environment that
follows the action (Applegate, Burke, Burleson, Delia, & Kline, 1985). Research shows that
224
social-cognitive and functional communication skills and promotes the development of
and logic (Applegate et al., 1985). It makes intuitive sense that such skills would better
Program Improvement
participants regarding the potential benefits of involving parents more in programs of this
nature. Specifically, participants believed that having parents more cognizant of program
content would have provided more opportunity for parents to contribute by being able to
discuss these issues at depth with their son outside of the program and football.
We [parents] were largely ignorant to the content of the program, aside from
what was discussed at the information session prior to the program…I think it
would be extremely beneficial if we were made aware of this…perhaps
weekly emails or handouts would have helped.
This sentiment was evident among the player’s discourse with one footballer noting, “I
found it difficult to explain some of the things we did in this program with my parents…it
would have been great if you [researcher] did something to keep my mum and dad
informed.” Participants discussed the potential that informing and keeping parents informed
about their son’s progress through the program would have placed them in a better position
to discuss these issues with their child. This sentiment was clearly captured in the following
coach quote: “It would have been great for you [consultant] to let the parents know how
their son was progressing through the program…they could have use that feedback to
discuss the program with the boys.” Indeed, educational researchers have demonstrated the
225
capacities relevant to the educational careers of children (see Fan & Chen, 2001, for
review).
initiatives, which focus on equipping athletes with a range of skills and knowledge to
facilitate personal and athletic development, parent and coach education programs become
the obvious compliment to such programs. The coaches’ willingness for these programs
was clearly evident among their discourse: “We [the coaches] learnt a lot from sitting in on
the sessions that you [consultant] conducted with the boys…sessions like this for us would
help us in developing mental toughness through our coaching methods.” The parents
further echoed this sentiment: “I have spoken to a few of the other parents throughout the
year about this program and one thing commonly came up was having educational sessions
for us about how we can develop mental toughness with our boys.” Players recognized the
importance of such initiatives in their discussions. As one player so aptly stated, “My
coaches and parents have a huge impact on my development so it would great if they could
be informed about how they can do [develop mental toughness] that better.”
Previous research with elite athletes, coaches, and parents (Connaughton et al.,
2008; Gould et al., 2002) highlights the importance of educating key individuals within the
mental toughness. Educational programs should aim to increase parents’ and coaches’ skills
build a consensus about appropriate behaviours and ways of thinking that can be effectively
communicated to footballers during football and at home. This can help reduce confusion
about expectations of the footballers when they receive similar messages across settings
226
Holistic assessments and feedback [F = 6; P = 5; C = 2]. Given that multisource
discussions surfaced as a means by which the program had an effect on the enhancement of
mental toughness among the footballers, it is not surprising that obtaining a greater variety
and number of perspectives for performance and mental toughness was considered one way
in which programs such as these could be enhanced. One parent spoke of this theme in the
following manner: “I think that it was unfortunate that boys were not rated by both parents
on the mental toughness questionnaire…we both have an opinion about this and I believe
[Player X] would have benefited greatly from understanding both perspectives.” The
coaches too were convinced about the potential benefits of such a process: “Given that
these sessions helped develop a great amount of respect among the boys it would have been
interesting for them to receive ratings on the mental toughness questionnaire from their
teammates too.” The players discussed this theme in regard to the potential benefits of
receiving multisource feedback: “I was expecting that we would receive feedback about
how our coach and parent rated us on mental toughness…this feedback would help me
in the US and is steadily proliferating in other parts of the world (Atwater et al., 2007), the
method has yet to make its mark in the sport psychology literature. The idea behind
multisource feedback is that individuals who interact routinely with the footballer have
data from a number of sources it is possible to construct a more complete picture of the
footballer’s strengths, weaknesses, and development needs. However, as we did not provide
the footballers with feedback regarding parent and coach ratings we cannot make any
judgments regarding the efficacy of providing participants with such information (cf.
227
Gucciardi et al., 2008b). Rather, we gathered multiple sources of information in the
desirable responding as well as provide a more holistic assessment. This data collection
methodology represents a significant departure from previous research and is one of the key
Negative Cases
Aside from the aforementioned comments describing how similar programs could
be enhanced in the future, participants expressed one major concern with the program. This
concern related specifically to the amount of information that was included in the program
and the short timeframe in which it was delivered to the players [F = 4; P = 1; C = 2]. One
footballer spoke of this theme in the following manner: “I was pretty happy with what we
learnt in the program but at times it was overwhelming….there was a lot of information in
there but I reckon a lot of it when over some of the guys’ heads.” Coaches reinforced this
sentiment noting, “A weakness of this program was that I believe some of the information
got lost on some of the boys…a 14/15 year-old boy can only handle so much of this kind of
information in a two week period.” Indeed, one parent anticipated this limitation from the
After the information session I was left wondering whether all these boys will
be able to take in all that information in two weeks…there was a lot of good
stuff in there but you have to remember the learning capabilities of these boys
aren’t all developed to the same level.
Concerns associated with the amount of information presented during the two week
designing programs in the future. Periodisation refers to cycling the structure and delivery
of PST programs with physical training to maximize the potential effects (Holliday, Burton,
228
training regimes in the design of PST programs is an important issue, and one which is
discussed in length elsewhere (e.g., Balague, 2000; Holliday et al., 2008), the concerns
raised by participants here highlight the importance of considering learning abilities when
perspectives on the goals, procedures, and results of the mental toughness training (MTT)
program. Participants highlighted a number key benefits associated with the program,
inferences about the processes by which the program had an effect, and identified several
areas for improving intervention programs in the future. From a research perspective, the
cohesion, work ethic, tough attitudes, and transferable skills) offer an insight to what other
measures should be included when examining the effectiveness of such training programs
those components of mental toughness that may be more important for youth-aged
footballers. Given that no specific attempt was made to gauge participants’ perspectives of
what they believe constitutes mental toughness for their age cohort, further research is
required with youth-aged athletes and key individuals in their socialization network to more
fully address this issue. Importantly, examinations with youth-aged athletes currently
are less susceptive to limitations of retrospective recall that are inherent with those athletes
229
identified here as among the primary processes by which the activities and exercises
contributed to the enhanced levels of mental toughness. After increasing one’s awareness of
mental toughness, monitoring one’s strengths and weaknesses across a variety of contexts
(e.g., training, competition, and lifestyle) will enable the individual to determine areas for
information an athlete can initiate the process of addressing those areas using a variety of
participants also recognized the importance of providing players with feedback pertaining
aware of a number of issues prior to feedback (e.g., perceptions of process), about the
feedback (e.g., format and reactions), and after the feedback (e.g., method of feedback
Despite these encouraging findings, the exact contribution of each mechanism cannot be
determined from the present study. Future applied-based research that isolates each of these
processes and examines their effectiveness through both quantitative and qualitative
methods is warranted.
The importance of educating parents and coaches for improving future initiatives
with talent development research highlighting the important roles both coaches and parents
Deakin, 2005; Gould et al., 2002). Despite parent and coach education programs being
230
further research is required to ascertain the most effective content and method of delivery
for these programs. Armed with such information, the applied practitioner will be in a
better position deliver such programs. For example, the applied practitioner could initiate
provided by adults in a youth’s socialization network if the athlete does not perceive
mental toughness, resilience, and flow evidenced by the MTT group are induced by either
interaction of both is limited without gaining similar perspectives from the control group
The qualitative data presented here compliments the quantitative data (Gucciardi et
contributing processes, and suggestions for improving multimodal interventions that aim to
enhance mental toughness among youth-aged footballers. This information may have
considerable potential for directing future research and helping practitioners who seek to
231
CHAPTER VI – Summary and
Conclusion
232
The general purpose of this thesis was to examine issues pertaining to the understanding,
personal construct psychology (PCP; Kelly, 1955/1991) framework. The specific purposes
of this thesis were threefold. First, I aimed to elicit elite coaches’ perspectives about mental
second endeavour was to use this information in the development and validation of a sport-
specific mental toughness inventory. My final aim was to examine the usefulness of
footballers. A corollary of this was to determine the applied usefulness of the sport-specific
inventory. Each of the chapters within this thesis addressed a particular aspect of this
research program. After summarising the findings from each of the five investigations
within the three empirical chapters, the methodological contributions of PCP to this thesis
are presented. I conclude this chapter with a discussion of the implications of the findings
Recent attempts to understand mental toughness and its development in sport have
definition still plagues this line of inquiry (Gordon, Gucciardi, & Chambers, 2007). In
Chapter III, two qualitative investigations endeavouring to address several conceptual and
methodological limitations associated with previous research were presented. The first
mental toughness in the context of its conceptual opposite; those situations that demand a
large degree of mental toughness; and the behaviours that mentally tough footballers
display in such situations. These coaches were re-interviewed in the second study to gain
233
their perceptions on those factors that contribute to the development of those key mental
of this study was to explore definitional and conceptual issues related to mental toughness
in a sport-specific context. Eleven male coaches with considerable playing and coaching
experience at the elite level were interviewed using the PCP-based interview protocol. The
transcribed verbatim data was analysed using grounded theory procedures (Strauss &
Corbin, 1998) and three independent categories emerged (characteristics, situations, and
behaviours).
Eleven key characteristics and their contrasts reflected the content of mental
motivation, tough attitude, concentration and focus, resilience, and handling pressure) are
consistent with previous research (Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005; Fourie &
Potgieter, 2001; Jones, Hanton, & Connaughton 2002, 2007; Thelwell, Weston, &
Greenlees, 2005), whereas personal values, emotional intelligence, sport intelligence, and
There was a general consensus that every aspect of being an elite footballer required
some degree of mental toughness with some situations demanding more than others.
a high degree of mental toughness. Interestingly, some of those situations identified here
have previously been associated with athlete attributions about the causes of burnout
(Cresswell & Eklund, 2006) and sources of stress for Australian footballers (Noblet &
Gifford, 2002). The important finding from the data on situations demanding mental
234
toughness, however, was the perception that mental toughness is useful for situations or
events with both negative (e.g., injuries) and positive connotations (e.g., success) for a
footballer.
commonly display in these situations demanding mental toughness. While there was a
general consensus among interviewees that mental toughness exerted its influence in these
situations in a number of ways, there were several common processes and behaviours
identified. For example, there was a common perception that doing everything in your
preparation and leaving no stone unturned to ensure that you are prepared mentally and
you will be able to play to your potential and overcome any obstacle or challenge along the
way.
understanding each component individually and the relationship between these three central
categories was emphasised. Conceptualised in the context of these three categories, mental
toughness in Australian football can be considered as a buffer against adversity but also as
a collection of enabling factors that promote and maintain adaptation to other challenging
Unlike previous definitions of mental toughness (e.g., Clough, Earle, & Sewell, 2002;
Jones et al., 2002), the current definition makes explicit what mental toughness is (i.e., a
235
combination of several different human characteristics) as well as what it enables one to do
(i.e., persevere and overcome, and maintain concentration and motivation). Moreover, the
The purpose of this study was to generate elite coaches’ perceptions of how the mental
toughness characteristics identified previously (Chapter IIIa) are acquired and can be
development of mental toughness (Connaughton, Wadey, Hanton, & Jones, 2008), the ways
toughness were elucidated. Coaches from the previous study (Chapter IIIa) were re-
interviewed and the transcribed verbatim data was analysed using grounded theory
procedures (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Participants acknowledged some innate disposition of
mental toughness, however, the findings indicated that parents and coaches play the most
through the following mechanisms: guiding and encouraging children to understand their
actions and thoughts so they can learn from both positive and negative life experiences;
exposing their child to as many different and varied experiences, adversities, challenges,
and pressures; creating a home environment where autonomy is encouraged and expected;
perseverance, respecting the opinions of others, and taking pride in everything you do. The
ways in which parents hindered its development included: modelling inappropriate values
and behaviours; doing everything for or on behalf of their child; having unrealistic
236
expectations and views of their child’s abilities and attitudes; trying to live vicariously
through their child’s sporting lives; lacking enthusiasm and interest in their child’s
development across all areas of their life (i.e., disengagement); and telling their child what
they want to hear as opposed to telling them what they need to hear.
of the game, how it is played, and the many obstacles, challenges, and pressures that one is
likely to encounter; establishing individual and team standards and expectations; creating a
challenging environment where every player is being continuously challenged (on and off
the field); and prioritising athletic and personal development over and above coaching
success. The ways in which coaches hindered its development included: letting their desire
for player and therefore coach success overrule the need for individual player development;
allowing an easy environment where players do just what is necessary; and not combining
physical training programs with effective mental and life skills training.
football (Chapter IIIa) – self-belief, work ethic, personal values, and self-motivation – were
also inductively-derived as among the primary effects of the processes and strategies in
intrapersonal qualities and environmental sources makes the most significant contribution
has meant there have been few attempts to develop inventories that profile and assess
mental toughness in sport. Loehr’s (1986) Psychological Performance Inventory (PPI) has
237
been the most influential and widely employed inventory for measuring mental toughness
in both applied and research settings (e.g., Golby & Sheard, 2004, 2006; Golby, Sheard, &
Lavallee, 2003; Sheard & Golby, 2006). However, two recent examinations suggest that the
PPI may not be a psychometrically sound measure of mental toughness (Golby, Sheard, &
Van Wersch, 2007; Middleton et al., 2004d). One explanation for the equivocal results
regarding the PPI is that it may not effectively capture sport-specific components of mental
Australian football. The purpose of this study was to describe the development and
Questionnaire items were generated from the qualitative data on mental toughness in
Australian football described previously and were designed to capture the 11 keys to mental
toughness (Chapter IIIa). Preliminary data on the factor structure, internal reliability, and
performed to determine whether the 11-factor model that guided construction of the items
(cf. Gucciardi et al., 2008) would serve as an adequate model for the data. Overall, the CFA
results did not support the existence of an 11-fator model. Accordingly, EFA was employed
to identify a better fitting model. The final four-factor solution (thrive through challenge,
sport awareness, tough attitude, and desire success) contained 24 items and accounted for
47% of the total variance. All internal reliability estimates were acceptable (α = .70 to 81)
and exceeded the minimum level of .70 recommended by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994).
Moderate correlations between the four-factor inventory (termed the Australian football
Mental Toughness Inventory; AfMTI) and flow as well as resilience were observed,
238
whereas correlations between the AfMTI and social desirability were small and
Multisource ratings (self, parent, and coach) of the AfMTI were examined in
experiment two. The data was somewhat equivocal; correlational data suggested a
Encouragingly, internal reliability estimates for self (α = .73 to 86), parent (α = .76 to 87),
and coach ratings (α = .80 to 89) exceeded the minimum level of .70 recommended by
Nunnally and Bernstein (1994). Although requiring replication and extension, the results of
the present study suggest that the AfMTI shows promise as a measure of mental toughness
in Australian football.
empirical evidence describing those factors contributing to its development. Taken together
with research that has examined gifted and talented school children and athletes (e.g.,
Gagné, 2004; Tranckle & Cushion, 2006) as well as talent development research (e.g.,
Martindale, Collins, & Daubney, 2005) the available evidence (Connaughton et al., 2008;
Chapter IIIb) suggests that mental toughness is largely caught from the experiences and
environments an individual is exposed to during their youth. However, not all individuals
will be exposed to such facilitative environments during their youth. In this chapter, two
studies are reported that examine the potential usefulness of psychological skills training
footballers: I. A quantitative analysis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the
239
effectiveness of two different PST packages in enhancing mental toughness among three
involving psycho-educational and experiential workshops and activities targeting the keys
to mental toughness identified previously (Chapter IIIa) with a more traditional PST
program (n = 26) targeting the usual family of mental skills (i.e., self-regulation, arousal
regulation, mental rehearsal, attentional control, self-efficacy, and ideal performance state)
as well as a control group (n = 24). Multisource ratings (i.e., coach, parent, and self ratings)
of mental toughness as well as self-reported flow and resilience were taken pre- and post-
intervention.
ratings of mental toughness, resilience, and flow than the control group. Similar findings
for mental toughness were reported by the parents and coaches. These findings lend support
for the general effectiveness of multimodal psychological skills training programs with
youth-aged athletes (Fournier, Calmels, Durand-Bush, & Salmela 2005; Sheard & Golby,
2006; see also Gould, 1983) and Australian footballers. However, neither intervention
package appeared to be more effective than the other in enhancing mental toughness.
Specifically, the data indicated that increases in self, parent, and coach ratings of mental
toughness, and self-reports of resilience and flow for both the PST and mental toughness
training (MTT) programs were not significantly different from each other.
The multisource ratings methodology represents the most original and significant
contribution of this study. Multisource feedback, in isolation, has been shown to produce
modest, yet positive changes in an individual’s behaviours and attitudes (Smither, London,
& Reilly, 2005) and when combined with systematic coaching these changes show greater
value (Luthans & Peterson, 2003). However, participants were not provided with feedback
240
about parent and coach ratings. Instead, I obtained multisource data as a means by which to
address concerns associated with socially desirable responding. The fact that I evidenced
similar changes in ratings across three different sources (self, parent, and coach) alleviates
some of the concerns associated with socially desirable responding inherent with self-report
footballers: II. A qualitative analysis. The purpose of this study was to enhance the
athletes, parents, and coaches) perspectives about the goals, procedures, and results of the
mental toughness training intervention were obtained. Seven players, one of their parents
(three fathers and four mothers), and three coaches were interviewed. Transcribed verbatim
data was analysed using a combination of inductive content analysis and the constant
quality preparation; being more receptive to criticism; team cohesion; an increased work
ethic; tougher attitudes; and the development and identification of transferable skills.
Consistent with previous models of the performance-management process (e.g., Murphy &
among the primary processes by which the activities and exercises contributed to the
241
Finally, increased parent involvement, parent and coach education programs as well as
programs. These findings have several conceptual (e.g., other measures to be included
when assessing similar intervention programs) and practical implications (e.g., potential
human phenomena across various settings (Kuhn, 1962). Unfortunately, one of the major
the ability of theory-based research in working towards conceptual clarity and consensus in
this thesis employed PCP (Kelly, 1955/1991) as its guiding theoretical framework in an
a phenomenon emerging from interpersonal and intrapersonal interactions and one’s sense-
throughout the course of this thesis. Although traditional methods of a personal construct
enquiry such as the repertory grid and laddering techniques have been used successfully by
previous researchers (e.g., Clarke, 1995, 2005; Cripps, 1999; Feixas, Marti, & Villegas,
1989; Furnham, Titman, & Sleeman, 1994: Hopper & Rossi, 2001; Jones & Harris, 1996;
Jones, Harris, & Waller, 1998; Klenosky, Templin, & Troutman, 2001; Russell & Salmela,
1992), they were not employed for eliciting the personal constructs of participants in this
242
thesis. Instead, aspects of Kelly’s (1955/1991) psychotherapy interview and the repertory
grid technique as well as the fundamental postulate and its corollaries provided a
foundation upon which a retrospective interview was developed that endeavoured to elicit
influence of PCP, in particular the sociality corollary, was also evident in the development
of the mental toughness inventory in which multisource ratings were obtained as part of its
validation (Chapter IV). Multisource ratings were subsequently employed as part of the
section.
PCP research interview (cf. Gucciardi & Gordon, in press). At the outset of this
thesis, I suggested that to better understand mental toughness in sport, efforts were required
to understand the processes involved, the constructs driving these processes, and what
explored, my intention was to draw upon PCP to inform the design of open-ended interview
questions that could generate information on these important issues. In designing the
interview protocol I was concerned with how I could use the 11 corollaries, other
established methodologies of a personal construct enquiry (e.g., the repertory grid), and
questions aimed at addressing the aforementioned issues. In so doing, I was able to obtain a
greater insight into mental toughness and its conceptual opposite in Australian football (cf.
toughness from Australian footballers (cf. range corollary, contexts as elements), how the
243
key characteristics drive one to be mentally tough when in such situations/events, and what
insights into several aspects of that person’s behaviour (Smither et al., 2005). Although
(Atwater, Brett, & Charles, 2007), the methodology has yet to make its impact in the sport
psychology literature. The decision to adopt this methodology in this thesis was based
largely on the sociality corollary and not as an adaptation of this methodology from
organisational settings. It is in this corollary that Kelly (1955/1991) portrayed one aspect of
another’s behaviour and interpret what that behaviour means to us by construing another
person’s construction of events. Accordingly, any attempt to construe what another person
is construing also influences our own construction of that event. It was in this context that
multisource ratings were employed in the construct validation process of the AfMTI
(Chapter IV) as well as in the quantitative assessment of the effectiveness of two PST
beneficial, for example, in increasing the reliability of the findings of the intervention study
given similar changes in mental toughness, flow, and resilience were observed by all three
those factors contributing to its development and measurement within this thesis, we can
244
move beyond the largely descriptive and outcome-focused research pioneering this
developing line of inquiry and facilitate theory development for mental toughness in sport.
Although generated from within an Australian football context, the findings of this thesis
have several important implications for researchers who intend to further examine mental
toughness in sport, especially in regard to theory development. After summarising the key
findings of this thesis for theory development, PCP is used to integrate these findings into a
model of mental toughness that conceptualises the processes and outcomes of mental
toughness (e.g., Bull et al., 2005; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones et al., 2002, 2007;
Thelwell et al., 2005) has failed to compliment findings on mental toughness with an
understanding of what it is not, leaving open the possibility for it to be misconstrued. Kelly
(1955/1991) noted that to truly understand one pole of a construct we need to understand it
in the context of its contrast; thus, good cannot exist without bad. In other words, the
contrast pole of a construct gives meaning to the similarity pole. The construct solution-
focused coping vs. problem-focused coping, for example, can represent a completely
different set of characteristics and behaviours when compared with the construct solution-
presented in this thesis (Chapter IIIa) is the first within the mental toughness literature to
achieve this.
had not previously been studied. Several characteristics identified as keys to mental
245
toughness in sport in previous research were revealed here as keys to mental toughness in
Australian football (e.g., self-belief, motivation, tough attitude, concentration and focus,
resilience, and handling pressure). These characteristics seem to represent the core
components of mental toughness which perhaps would not vary across sports. However,
characteristics unique to this sample (e.g., personal values, emotional intelligence, sport
intelligence, and physical toughness) as well those stemming from previous sport-specific
investigations of mental toughness (Bull et al., 2005; Thelwell et al., 2005) suggest that
apparent from the multitude of key characteristics commonly reported to encapsulate this
phenomenon – has stemmed largely from qualitative research. Data analytical techniques
employed within this dissertation to develop the mental toughness inventory as well as
(Golby, Sheard, & Van Wersch, 2007; Middleton et al., 2004d) provide preliminary support
conceptualisation is the idea that the key mental toughness characteristics are not isolated
but rather are interconnected with some being considered more important than others
(Gucciardi et al., in press; Jones et al., 2002, 2007; Thelwell et al., 2005).
What events demand mental toughness? Although previous research has eluded to
the notion that mental toughness enables one to deal with the rigours of an athletic career
which stem from both sport-related and lifestyle issues (Jones et al., 2002) as well as
research has identified specific situations or events that demand mental toughness. The
central role that the contexts or events of our lives play in the development and
246
modification of personal constructs is highlighted within PCP’s experience cycle. It is in
the cycle of experience that Kelly (1955/1991) underscores the idea that our drive to make
sense of human behaviour occurs by interpreting it within the context in which it occurs.
Because we are in constant and continual engagement with the external world we are
encouraged to actively seek out, describe, and evaluate the phenomena we experience in an
attempt to anticipate and predict what will occur in the future (Kelly, 1955/1991). The
findings within this thesis support and extend previous research (Jones et al., 2002, 2007)
by detailing specific situations or events within each of these contexts that demand mental
toughness from an Australian footballer (e.g., injury, peer and social pressures).
How do the key characteristics drive one to be mentally tough? The empirical
descriptive in nature (e.g., Bull et al., 2005; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones et al., 2002;
Thelwell et al., 2005), seems weak at offering insights into the processes by which mental
toughness operates. The research in this thesis has revealed preliminary information about
the ways in which the key characteristics drive one to be mentally tough (Gucciardi et al.,
in press; see also Jones et al., 2007). Although these processes were presented in a general
manner, the information was obtained from an understanding of how mentally tough
demanding large degrees of mental toughness. Specifically, this enabled each participant to
place himself in those situations and recollect how he felt, what he was thinking, and how
What eventuates as a result of this process? Although this is the area where
previous research has seemingly contributed most, the majority of theorising on this aspect
of mental toughness has been in relation to beating an opponent and, therefore, success-
247
focused (e.g., Jones et al., 2002). This seems to reflect the preoccupation of sampling elite
athletes who have been successful in their respective sports. The question remains then, can
one be mentally tough only by achieving success? Are successful athletes the only cohort
from which mentally tough athletes can be found? Despite elite footballers reporting higher
levels of mental toughness than sub-elite and amateur footballers, the qualitative findings
from this thesis as well as that from recent research revealing that handling both failure and
success is an essential aspect of being mentally tough (Jones et al., 2007) suggest not.
Having identified several situations or contexts in which mental toughness is required from
an Australian footballer I was able to probe participants about what mental toughness
enables one to do in such situations. This included several covert (e.g., self-talk, imagery)
as well as overt behaviours (e.g., 1%er’s, consistent performance, versatile). The pertinent
finding from these discussions was that success was not defined in relation to beating an
How is mental toughness developed? The only research to date which has
2008). These included key individuals within the athlete’s socialisation network; exposure
to a variety of experiences (both within and outside of sport); usage of basic and advanced
psychological skills; and intrapersonal influences resulting from the motivational climate
succeed. Prior to this, Bull et al. (2005) highlighted the interaction of a performer’s
thinking as a possible means of developing mental toughness, whereas Jones et al. (2002)
248
Consistent with this line of research and thinking, the qualitative evidence presented
in this thesis supports the importance of intrapersonal variables (e.g., self-belief, work
ethic, personal values, and self-motivation) and key individuals within a footballer’s
socialisation network (Chapter IIIb) as well as psychological skills training (Chapter Va, b)
Unlike previous research (Connaughton et al., 2008), however, the ways in which the
factors both facilitate and hinder its development were revealed in this dissertation.
Quantitative evidence emerging from the validation of the AfMTI provides further support
for some of the qualitative findings. For example, its was shown that scores on the AfMTI
improve with age and playing experience, suggesting that mental toughness appears to be
developed through learning and experiences that occur over a considerable period of time
(Chapter IV).
current understanding of mental toughness for Australian football. For these findings to
they need to be integrated in a coherent model that highlights the links between these key
findings. It is at this point where I again draw on PCP to offer a theoretical lens or
“skeleton” upon which the data obtained in this thesis can be understood. The model of
and outcomes of mental toughness in Australian football. This model integrates the
independent contributions of this thesis within a PCP perspective in a manner that allows
for testable hypotheses to be formed and empirically tested. Such a model is timely in that
there has been no attention given to theory-based, conceptual models to guide the
249
identification and understanding of factors that contribute to an understanding of mental
Multisource
EVENT (internal Feedback
or external) (Self and others)
Mental
Toughness
Characteristics
Emotions Values
Attitudes Cognitions
9
It should be noted that Jones et al. (2007) recently presented a mental toughness framework. However, this
framework reinforces the notion that mental toughness manifests itself in three specific contexts: training,
competition, and post-competition. The model does little to identify and describe the processes involved.
250
Located at the base of this model are those factors which have been revealed as key
highlighting intrapersonal (e.g., attitudes and beliefs) and environmental (e.g., individuals
in socialisation network) factors (Connaughton et al., 2008; Chapter IIIb) is consistent with
related research on gifted and talented school children (Gagné, 2004) and athletes (Bloom,
1985; Côté, 1999; Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002), the exact contribution of each is
currently unknown. However, it seems likely that both environmental and intrapersonal
issues play a more dominant role in the development of mental toughness than genetic
issues (cf. Golby & Sheard, 2006). It may be that one’s innate disposition to be mentally
tough, which perhaps represents “raw” or natural abilities, may interact with an individual’s
mental toughness (Chapter IIIb). Consider the following quote from Dweck (2006, pp. 5-7):
Of course, each person has a unique genetic endowment. People may start
with different temperaments and different aptitudes, but it is clear that
experience, training and personal effort take them the rest of the
way…Although people may differ in every way – in their initial talents and
aptitudes, interest, or temperaments – everyone can change and grow
through application and experience.
This aspect of the model encourages us to consider the origins or sources of mental
toughness which determine it’s observable and non-observable qualities related to aspects
of cognition, emotion, attitudes, and personal values. Preliminary research on those factors
that contribute to its development (Connaughton et al., 2008; Chapter IIIb) suggest that
processes (e.g., modelling personal values, encouraging autonomy, and setting standards
and expectations) and can both facilitate as well as hinder its development (Chapter IIIb).
However, the available data does little to indicate what the athlete being exposed to in these
251
The cycle of experience located at the top of the model provides a template to better
understand how this occurs. It suggests that our attitudes, cognitions, emotions, and
personal values are in constant evolution as a result of increased (internal and external)
interactions with our environment throughout our development. Indeed, this is consistent
with the finding that exposing young footballers to a variety of experiences, challenges, and
adversities facilitates the development of mental toughness (Chapter IIIb). What becomes
apparent from this cyclical process is the way in which such change occurs as an individual
makes senses of the experiences during their youth, adolescent and adult years. For
example, experiences that confirm our constructs may lead to these becoming more fixed,
whereas those that disconfirm our constructs may lead to change or the development of new
constructs (Kelly, 1955/1991). Arguably, this is what makes the most significant
cognitions.
The model also provides a platform from which we can begin to better understand
the processes and outcomes of being mentally tough. The PCP perspective, in particular,
the cycle of experience, when applied to the concept of mental toughness in Australian
football, emphasises the role that the key mental toughness characteristics have on how an
individual approaches and appraises as well responds to situations/events that demand some
What is highlighted in this section of the model is that mental toughness should not
characteristics that influence an individual’s covert (e.g., self-talk, imagery) and overt (e.g.,
252
1%er’s, pre-shot routine) approaches and appraisals of both negative and positive events
they experience. These experiences are both internal (e.g., self-doubt) and external (e.g.,
injury) and may be related to training, competition, or lifestyle issues. Ultimately, these
Although requiring replication and further validation, the AfMTI developed in this
thesis (Chapter IV) represents an important tool by which testable hypotheses derived from
this model may be tested. For example, one would expect that mentally tough footballers,
who seem to be characterised by a positive and tough attitude and who seem to enjoy and
1991) and be less likely to “choke under pressure” (see Beilock & Gray, 2007, for review).
Indeed, construct validation is an ongoing process (Marsh, 2002) and establishing the
AfMTI’s ability to evaluate such hypotheses would provide further support for the utility of
this inventory.
identify and understand the processes and outcomes of being mentally tough may also
prove fruitful (cf. Oades & Viney, 2000). This would involve having an athlete identify a
range of situations or events that he or she perceives as demanding mental toughness, then
proceeding through various questions that address the following sequences of the
experience cycle: anticipation (e.g., what did you anticipate or predict would happen?),
preparation (e.g., how did you prepare for the outcome?), encounter (e.g., describe what
actually happened, who as there, what was done, by whom and the context) ,
253
dis/confirmation (e.g., did things go as expected), and constructive revision (e.g., what did
The PCP perspective on mental toughness presented in this model also provides a
platform from which the empirical evidence obtained from this research can be combined
with established psychological theory (i.e., PCP; see Walker & Winter, 2007, for review) to
following definition:
Importantly, both the outcomes and processes of being mentally tough are central to this
addresses a major concern associated with the Jones et al. (2002) definition mentioned
previously (see Chapter IIa). Because of its focus on the outcomes of mental toughness, for
example, the Jones et al. definition does little to suggest what the “natural or developed
psychological edge” is. This psychological edge is adequately described in the current
cognitions, and emotions). In addition to describing what mental toughness is, the current
definition highlights the processes by which these key characteristics work to enable one to
be mentally tough (i.e., approaches, responses, and appraisals). The processes by which
mental toughness enabled one to “cope better” and “be more consistent and better” than his
or her opponents were not described in the Jones et al. definition. Finally, benchmarks for
success or failure are not related to an opponent as is the case with the Jones et al.
definition but rather in terms of one’s progress towards achieving his or her goals.
Accordingly, athletes of all skill levels, irrespective of whether or not they beat their
254
opponent, can be classified as being mentally tough if they are consistently achieving their
goals. At the elite level, of course, being successful is one of the more common goals for
most athletes.
This following section summarises specific limitations associated with the research
program that have been highlighted in each individual paper of this thesis. The list is by no
means exhaustive but rather attempts to preface the section that follows in which
previously, the use of single interviews as opposed to multiple interviews with participants
across time does not permit for the generation of in-depth data that is required to adequately
they are less susceptive to limitations of retrospective recall that are inherent with those
athletes who have already reached a mature level of performance (Côté, 1999). Another
limitation was that only coaches were sampled; data triangulation in which footballers,
parents, and coaches opinions were generated would have alleviated such concerns.
Given that the AfMTI was developed and validated with a male sample of
footballers, further examination of the psychometric properties of the AfMTI with both
male and female footballers is required to test the strength and generalisability of the factor
structure more stringently. As with the qualitative research in this thesis, attempts to
address socially desirable responding should be addressed in future examinations using the
255
remain open to violation and potential bias, and that triangulation assessment procedures
will provide a more reliable indicator of mental toughness. Finally, the predictive utility of
the AfMTI is unknown as psychological constructs were the only included correlates in the
Chapter V need to be considered when interpreting the findings. For example, the
nomothetic design focusing on information obtained from the study of many persons did
not allow for an examination of the subtleties which contributed to those changes observed.
Moreover, due to the subjective nature of the data (i.e., self-reports) I was not able to
improvements in performance. Finally, the limited duration of the assessment period and
limitations of the current research are highlighted within each individual empirical
general recommendations arising from this thesis as well as from previous research. In
keeping with the general organisation of this thesis, these recommendations are discussed
into consideration the unique social and cultural contexts of each individual sport by
conducting sport-specific examinations (e.g., Bull et al., 2005; Thelwell et al., 2005).
256
conceptualisations of mental toughness within specific sports will go a long way towards
highlighting those characteristics which can be generalised across sports but also those
which are unique to individual sports. Such conceptualisations will have important
Like any area in applied psychology, sport psychology is only effective and
useful if it recognises the context in which the work is done. The sport
environment is very specific, and each sport is different, with its own
culture, rules (written and unwritten), and expectations.
dependant upon the socio-cultural conditions of each individual sport, does a construct
really exist? Even within sport-specific examinations of mental toughness in cricket (Bull et
al., 2005; Gordon & Sridhar, 2005), for example, we are evidencing inconsistencies in
(i.e., England and India). However, these inconsistencies are outweighed by those major
characteristics consistently associated with mental toughness across these studies which are
irrespective of sample demographics such as age, sex or sport. Rather, by conducting sport-
common and unique key mental toughness characteristics, which will make significant
meta-syntheses (Finfgeld, 2003; Paterson, Thorne, Canam, & Jillings, 2001) that seek to
explain the findings of a group of similar qualitative studies represent an exciting avenue of
Perhaps the most significant limitation of the research to date is that it has relied
heavily on the perspectives of elite athletes and coaches. Retrospective accounts are
257
inherently limited by objective (e.g., win vs. loss) and subjective (e.g., enjoyment)
(Brewer, Van Raalte, Linder, & Van Raalte, 1991; Ross & Conway, 1986). Nisbett and
Wilson (1977) also argue that people generate reasons that are consistent with cultural and
personal theories that are accessible in memory because we do not have complete access to
the actual reasons behind our thoughts, feelings, attitudes and judgments. Consequently, it
is important that future research includes alternative methods of data collection, such as
prospective longitudinal studies, and combines this data with that obtained through
Associated with the reliance upon the retrospective accounts of elite athletes and
coaches is that to date researchers have only studied the perceptions of those individuals
who have achieved ultimate performance success in their chosen field. If we continue to
study mental toughness in such a manner we leave ourselves open to the criticism that
mental toughness simply reflects superior athleticism rather than a superior ability to deal
with and overcome the many challenges and pressures associated with an athletic career.
Indeed, it is possible that the elite coaches and athletes sampled in the research to date, who
perhaps have read widely on the topic of psychology and sport, would arrive at consistent
interesting to examine what amateur and other elite athletes and coaches (i.e., those who
have not achieved ultimate sporting success) associate with the phenomenon of mental
toughness in sport, for example, and compare those conceptualisations with those from
toughness from those key individuals in an athlete’s socialisation network (e.g., parents,
258
siblings, sport psychologists, coaches, significant others) will provide considerable
research.
developing mental toughness inventories that can profile (identify) and monitor mental
toughness among elite and non-elite athletic cohorts, and further research is required to
develop and refine such inventories. Psychometricians (e.g., Marsh, 1997, 2002) as well as
sport and exercise psychology researchers (e.g., Ostrow, 1996) consistently highlight the
this framework are both within-network studies examining the internal structure of a
construct through factor analytical techniques (e.g., EFA, CFA) and/or multitrait-
constructs that are hypothesised to have some logical, theoretical relationship with mental
toughness.
inventories have been through rigorous statistical procedures (e.g., EFA and CFA) in
processes should assess whether the internal factor structure of such inventories are
invariant across various athlete demographics, such as age, gender, skill level, sport,
experience, and success. It is also important for researchers to acknowledge the limitations
inherent within self-report data that come with the desire to respond in a socially desirable
manner, and some effort needs to be made to address these concerns when developing and
obtaining multisource, or 360-degree, ratings (i.e., coach, peer, parent) when assessing the
259
validity of such inventories (for a review see Smither, London, & Reilly, 2005). The
Implicit Association Test (cf. Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998), may afford
researchers and practitioners with an indirect method for assessing mental toughness.
The few between-network validation studies that have been conducted thus far have
positive psychological constructs, such as flow (Jackson & Csikszentmihalyi, 1999) and
athlete self-concept (Marsh, Hey, Johnson, & Perry, 1997). Future research also needs to
consider examining the predictive validity of such scales, particularly with respect to
behavioural measures that might be related to mental toughness for improved validation
procedures. Indeed, research on mental toughness seems to share several parallels with
research concerning peak performance (Harmison, 2006; Krane & Williams, 2006) and
psychological skills training (e.g., Smith & Christensen, 1995) in that psychological skills
can be important predictors of (physical and mental) performance and success. In order to
truly demonstrate the usefulness of such inventories we also need to show that these
inventories correlate with both behavioural measures of mental toughness and predict
performance.
may be underpinned by innate factors (e.g., Jones et al., 2002; Chapter IIIb), factors that
can be caught (socialised) during a child’s upbringing, and specific techniques that can be
taught (coached; Connaughton et al., 2008; Chapter IIIb). In other words, an important
distinction that should be made is psychological skills training (i.e., specific) vs. mental
toughness development (i.e., coach and parent education) and whether one is better than the
260
other, or whether a combination of both is more superior to either one individually.
Although preliminary, the available research suggests that intervention programs should
combine education components illustrating the important role parents, coaches, and
sporting organisations play in developing mental toughness and how they can create an
(e.g., mental skills training programs and event simulations) aimed at the athletes
themselves (e.g., Connaughton et al., 2008; Gould et al., 2002; Chapter IIIb).
mental toughness has been and can be developed as well as what needs to be taught and
caught and how so that specific pedagogical recommendations for designing intervention
programs that endeavour to develop (or enhance) mental toughness can be made. One line
of inquiry that may prove fruitful is to understand and compare the developmental histories
of those performers who are considered mentally tough and those who are not. In so doing,
important distinctions and differences can be identified that will contribute to our
understanding of what works and what does not. Like the research of Gould et al. (2002)
socialisation network (e.g., parents, grandparents, siblings and coaches). Examinations with
retrospective recall that are inherent with those athletes who have already reached a mature
level of performance (Côté, 1999). Côté and colleagues (1999; Côté, & Fraser-Thomas,
2007) developmental model of sport participation, which identifies three distinct but
such issues.
261
Future research should also consider comparing various multimodal and singular
intervention programs that involve psychological skills training (PST) targeting the key
mental toughness characteristics with a range of other intervention programs. These may
include interventions that involve education and training components for key personnel in
an athlete’s socialisation network (e.g., coach, parent) and general PST as well as a
switched replication, case studies, and longitudinal) should be employed to evaluate such
methods offer an important avenue by which one can reveal information about the lived
experience of key stakeholders within an intervention program and the processes by which
these mechanisms and strategies contribute to the development of psychological skills (cf.
Chapter Vb).
Applied Implications
Although there is an obvious need for caution when generalising the findings from a
sport-specific sample to other athletic cohorts, there are a number of practical implications
manuscript as well as some additional and central recommendations across this thesis and
to identify those footballers who are mentally tough and those who are not. An
262
identify those components of mental toughness where one may be lacking and
thriving.
these situations may also assist coaches in simulating experiences that mimic the
3. The development and preliminary validation of the AfMTI will prove fruitful
AfMTI will also enable practitioners to identify areas that require immediate
and handling pressure, and quality preparation) while recognising and catering
parents about how they can both facilitate as well as constrain the development
of mental toughness (cf. Conroy & Coatsworth, 2006; Gould, Lauer, Rolo,
Jannes, & Pennisi, 2006). The processes and strategies elucidated in Chapter
263
IIIb as well as information stemming from the qualitative analysis of the
parents and coaches. Given the encouraging results relating to internal reliability
estimates of the AfMTI reported here (Chapter IV), practitioners and coaches
can be more certain that the same construct is being assessed across raters. In
can gain a greater insight into his or her own mental toughness. Similarly,
parents and coaches can become more cognisant about their own current status
7. Practitioners can utilise the PCP perspective of mental toughness described here
to facilitate discussions with their athletes about what that individual (and the
her sport, when (situations) it is required, and what this means for the client’s
behaviour. Given the varying degree in the nature of each of the situations
264
Final Comments
elite Australian football coaches’ perceptions of mental toughness (Chapter IIIa) and how it
has been and can be developed (Chapter IIIb). The results of these investigations were then
used as a basis to generate items for a questionnaire designed to measure mental toughness
was presented in Chapter IV. In the final empirical chapter, the effectiveness of PST
targeting the keys to mental toughness identified previously (Chapter IIIa) was compared
with traditional PST as well as a control group. Quantitative and qualitative data provided
preliminary support for the use of PST in enhancing mental toughness among youth-aged
Australian footballers. Findings from this thesis indicate that theoretically guided empirical
for interpreting and understanding mental toughness in sport. It is my hope that other
here and that practitioners will use this information to inform their professional endeavours.
265
References
266
Abbott, A., & Collins, D. (2004). Eliminating the dichotomy between theory and practice in
AFLPA [Australian Football League Player’s Association]. (2005, July). AFL player’s
Melbourne, Australia.
Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27-
58.
Applegate, J.L., Burke, J.A., Burleson, B.R., Delia, J.G., & Kline, S.L. (1985). Reflection-
enhancing parental communication. In I.E. Sigel (Ed.), Parental belief systems: The
Associates.
Atwater, L.E., Brett, J.F., & Charles, C. (2007). Multisource feedback: Lessons learned and
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/ProductsbyReleaseDate/0B14D86E14A1215
ECA2569D70080031C?OpenDocument.
267
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Barger, S.D. (2002). The Marlowe-Crowne affair: Short forms, psychometric structure, and
Bartone, P.T., Roland, R.R., Picano, J.J., & Williams, T.J. (2008). Psychological hardiness
Bartone, P.T., Ursano, R.J., Wright, K.M., & Ingraham, L.H. (1989). The impact of a
military air disaster on the health of assistance workers. Journal of Nervous & Mental
Beilock, S.L., & Gray, R. (2007). Why do athletes choke under pressure? In G. Tenenbaum
& R.C. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (pp.425-444). New York:
Wiley.
Blainey, G. (2003). A game of our own: The origins of Australian football. Melbourne,
Blakeslee, M.L., & Goff, D.M. (2007). The effects of a mental skills training package on
Bloom, B.S. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballentine.
Brannen (Ed.), Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative (pp. 3-39). Avebury,
England: Ashgate.
Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod research: A synthesis of styles. Newbury
268
Brewer, B.W., Van Raalte, J.L., Linder, D.E., & Van Raalte, N.S. (1991). Peak
intrapersonal and socialisation factors. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10,
307-321.
socialisation and gender influences. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 67,
316-323.
Horn (Ed.), Advances in sport psychology (2nd ed., pp. 21-37). Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Bull, S.J., Shambrook, C.J., James, W., & Brooks, J.E. (2005). Towards an understanding
17, 209-227.
Butler, R.J. (1991). The performance profile: Developing elite performance. London:
Butler, R.J., & Hardy, L. (1992). The performance profile: Theory and application. The
Butler, R.J., Smith, M., & Irwin, I. (1993). The performance profile in practice. Journal of
8, 227–236.
269
Calmels, C., D’Arripe-Longueville, F., Fournier, J.F., & Soulard, A. (2003). Competitive
Carver, C.S., & Scheier, M.F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behaviour. New York:
Cattell, R.B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioural
Research, 1, 245-276.
Clarke, P.T. (1995). The perception of coaching qualities held by professional soccer
toward the 21st century (pp. 273-284). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Baptist University.
Clarke, P.T. (2005). The use of laddering technique to assess coaching qualities in
Kolt, & P. Tremayne (Eds.), Psychology promoting health & performance for life:
270
Clough, P., Earle, K., & Sewell, D. (2002). Mental toughness: The concept and its
London: Thomson.
Cochrane, J.L., Lloyd, D.G., Buttfield, A., Seward, H., & McGivern, J. (2007).
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:
Connaughton, D., Hanton, S., Jones, G., & Wadey, R. (2008). Mental toughness research:
Key issues in the area. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 39, 192-204.
Connaughton, D., Wadey, R., Hanton, S., & Jones, G. (2008). The development and
Conroy, D.E., & Coatsworth, J.D. (2006). Coach training as a strategy for promoting youth
Costigan, J., Ellis, J.M., & Watkinson, J. (2003). Nursing. In F. Fransella (Ed.),
Côté, J. (1999). The influence of the family in the development of talent in sport. The Sport
Côté, J., Ericsson, K.A., & Law, M.P. (2005). Tracing the development of athletes using
271
Côté, J., & Fraser-Thomas, J.L. (2007). Youth involvement in sport. In P.R.E. Crocker
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods
Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L., Guttman, M., & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced mixed
methods in the behavioural and social sciences. (pp. 209-240). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Cresswell, S.L., & Eklund, R.C. (2006). The nature of player burnout in rugby: Key
Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika,
16, 297-334.
Crowne, D.P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of
Cripps, B. (1999). Constructing the athlete's world. In H. Steinberg & I. Cockerill (Eds.),
Sport psychology in practice: The early stages (pp. 8-15). Leicester, England: British
Psychological Society.
Crust, L. (2007). Mental toughness in sport: A review. International Journal of Sport &
Crust, L., & Clough, P.J. (2005). Relationship between mental toughness and physical
272
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of
Dalton, P., & Dunnett, G. (2005). A psychology for living: Personal construct theory for
Danish, S.J., Fazio, R.J., Nellen, V.C., & Owens, S.S. (2002). Teaching life skills through
Raalte & B.W. Brewer (Eds.), Exploring sport and exercise psychology (pp. 269-
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
Diedorff, E.C., & Surface, E.A. (2007). Placing peer ratings in context: Systematic
Doyle, J., & Parfitt, G. (1996). Performance profiling and predictive validity. Journal of
Doyle, J., & Parfitt, G. (1997). Performance profiling and construct validity. The Sport
Dunn, J.G.H., & Holt, N.L. (2003). Collegiate ice hockey players' perceptions of the
delivery of an applied sport psychology program. The Sport Psychologist, 17, 351-
368.
273
Dweck, C.S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.
Ericsson, K.A. (2007). Deliberate practice and the modifiability of body and mind: Toward
Evans, L., & Hardy, L. (2002). Injury rehabilitation: A qualitative follow-up study.
Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., MacCallum, R.C., & Strahan, E.J. (1999). Evaluating the
4, 272-299.
Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A
Faulkner, G., & Finlay, S.J. (2002). It’s not what you say, it’s the way you say it!
winning” elite athlete and elite coach perspectives: A grounded theory analysis. In T.
Psychology promoting health & performance for life: Proceedings of the ISSP 11th
274
Feixas, G., Marti, J., & Villegas, M. (1989). Personal construct assessment of sport teams.
Feltz, D.L., Short, S.E., & Sullivan, P.J. (2008). Self-efficacy in sport. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Finfgeld, D.L. (2003). Metasynthesis: The state of the art – so far. Qualitative Health
Fischer, D.G., & Fick, C. (1993). Measuring social desirability: Short forms of the
Fortunato, V., & Marchant, D. (1999). Forced retirement from elite football in Australia.
Foster, C.A., & Law, M.R.F. (2006). How many perspectives provide a compass?
Fourie, S., & Potgieter, J.R. (2001). The nature of mental toughness in sport. South African
Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education & Recreation, 23, 63-72.
Fournier, J.F., Calmels, C., Durand-Bush, N., & Salmela, J.H. (2005). Effects of a season-
Fransella, F. (2003). Some skills and tools for personal construct practitioners. In F.
Fransella, F., & Bell, R., & Bannister, D. (2004). A manual for repertory grid technique.
275
Fransella, F., & Dalton, P. (2000). Personal construct counselling in action (2nd Ed.).
London: Sage.
Fraser-Thomas, J.L., Côté, J., & Deakin, J. (2005). Youth sport programs: An avenue to
foster positive youth development. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 10, 19-40.
Funk, S. (1992). Hardiness: A review of theory and research. Health Psychology, 11, 335-
345.
Furnham, A., Titman, P., & Sleeman, E. (1994). Perception of female body shapes as a
Gagné, F. (2004). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory.
Giacobbi, P.R., Poczwardowski, A., & Hager, P. (2005). A pragmatic research philosophy
Gill, D.L. (2001). Feminist sport psychology: A guide for our journey. The Sport
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
Golby, J., & Sheard, M. (2004). Mental toughness and hardiness at different levels of rugby
Golby, J., & Sheard, M. (2006). The relationship between genotype and positive
143-148.
276
Golby, J., Sheard, M., & Lavallee, D. (2003). A cognitive-behavioural analysis of mental
toughness in national rugby league football teams. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 96,
455-462.
Golby, J., Sheard, M., & Van Wersch, A. (2007). Evaluating the factor structure of the
Goldberg, A.S. (1998). Sports slump busting: 10 steps to mental toughness and peak
Gordon, S. (2002). Facilitating emotional intelligence in elite sport. New Zealand Journal
Gordon, S., & Gucciardi, D. (2006a). Mental toughness in Australian football. Invited
Gordon, S., & Gucciardi, D. (2006b). Mental toughness. Invited presentation and workshop
Gordon, S., Gucciardi, D., & Chambers, T. (2007). A personal construct psychology
toughness. In T. Morris, P. Terry, & S. Gordon (Eds.), Sport psychology and exercise
Information Technology.
Gordon, S., & Sridhar, C. (2005). Identification and development of mental toughness in
Tremayne (Eds.), Psychology promoting health & performance for life: Proceedings
277
of the ISSP 11th World Congress of Sport [CDROM]. Sydney: International Society
Update, 4-13.
Gould, D. (2002). Sport psychology in the new millennium: The psychology of athletic
Gould, D., Collins, K., Lauer, L., & Chung, Y. (2006). Coaching life skills: A working
Gould, D., Collins, K., Lauer, L., & Chung, Y. (2007). Coaching life skills through
football: A study of award winning high school coaches. Journal of Applied Sport
Gould, D., Dieffenbach, K., & Moffett, A. (2002). Psychological characteristics and their
204.
Gould, D., Hodge, K., Peterson, K., & Petlichkoff, L. (1987). Psychological foundations of
Gould, D., Jackson, S., & Finch, L. (1993). Life at the top: The experiences of U.S. national
Gould, D., Lauer, L., Rolo, C., Jannes, C., & Pennisi, N. (2006). Understanding the role
parents play in tennis success: A national survey of junior tennis coaches. British
278
Gould, D., Lauer, L., Rolo, C., Jannes, C., & Pennisi, N. (2008). The role of parents in
tennis success: Focus group interviews with junior coaches. The Sport Psychologist,
22, 18-37.
Gould, D., Tuffey, S., Udry, E., & Loehr, J. (1996). Burnout in competitive junior tennis
340.
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V.J., & Graham, W.F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for
255-274.
Greenwald, A.G., McGhee, D.E., & Schwartz, J.L.K. (1998). Measuring individual
Gucciardi, D., & Gordon, S. (2007). Mental toughness in sport: Current perspectives and
future directions. Paper presented at the Annual Association for Applied Sport
Gucciardi, D.F., & Gordon, S. (in press-a). Construing the athlete and exerciser: Research
Sport Psychology
Gucciardi, D.F., & Gordon, S. (in press-b). Personal construct psychology and the research
interview: The example of mental toughness in sport. Personal Construct Theory &
Practice.
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., Dimmock, J.A. (in press). Development and validation of a
Exercise.
279
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., Dimmock, J.A. (2008a). Australian football coaches’
publication.
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J.A. (2008b). Evaluation of a mental toughness
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., Dimmock, J.A. (2008c). Evaluation of a mental toughness
Gucciardi, D.F., Gordon, S., Dimmock, J.A. (2008d). Towards an understanding of mental
Hagans, C.L., Neimeyer, G.J., & Goodholm, R., Jr. (2000). The effect of elicitation
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate data
Harmison, R.J. (2006). Peak performance in sport: Identifying ideal performance states and
280
Hays, K., Maynard, I., Thomas, O., & Bawden, M. (2007). Sources and types of confidence
identified by world class sport performers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 19,
434-456.
Hayton, J.C., Allen., D.G., & Scarpello, V. (2004). Factor retention decisions in exploratory
191-205.
Hedge, J.W., Borman, W.C., & Birkeland, S.A. (2001). History and development of
for designing and implementing MSF processes (pp. 15-32). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Hinkle, D.N. (1965). The change of personal constructs from the viewpoint of a theory of
University.
Holliday, B., Burton, D., Sun, G., Hammermeister, J., Naylor, S., & Freigang, D. (2008).
Holt, N.L. (2008). Positive youth development through sport. London: Routledge.
Hopper, T.F., & Rossi, T. (2001). Using personal construct theory and narrative methods to
Routledge.
281
Horn, J.L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis.
Horn, T.S., & Horn, J.L. (2007). Family influences on children’s sport and physical activity
Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (3rd Ed.) (pp. 685-711). New York:
Wiley.
Huck, S.W., & McLean, R.A. (1975). Using a repeated measures ANOVA to analyse the
Jackson, S.A. (1995). Factors influencing the occurrences of flow state in elite athletes.
Jackson, S.A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M.C. (1999). Flow in sports: The keys to optimal
Jackson, S.A., & Eklund, R.C. (2002). Assessing flow in physical activity: The flow state
scale-2 and dispositional flow scale-2. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 24,
133-150.
Jackson, S.A., & Eklund, R.C. (2004). The flow scales manual. Morgantown, MV: Fitness
Information Technology.
Jankowicz, D. (2004). The easy guide to repertory grids. Chichester, England: John Wiley
& Sons.
Johnson, J.J.M., Hrycaiko, D.W., Johnson, G.V., & Halas, J.M. (2004). Self-talk and
Jones, F., & Harris, P. (1996). The use of repertory grid technique in exercise psychology.
282
methods in sport and exercise psychology (pp. 3-9). Leicester, England: British
Psychological Society.
Jones, F., Harris, P., & Waller, H. (1998). Expectations of an exercise prescription scheme:
277-289.
Jones, G., Hanton, S., & Connaughton, D. (2002). What is this thing called mental
Jones, G., Hanton, S., & Connaughton, D. (2007). A framework of mental toughness in the
S. Jowett & D. Lavallee (Eds.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 3-14). Champaign,
Kelly, G.A. (1991). The psychology of personal constructs: A theory of personality (Vol 1).
Kelly, G.A. (2003). A brief introduction to personal construct theory. In F. Fransella (Ed.),
Klenosky, D.B., Templin, T.J., & Troutman, J.A. (2001). Recruiting student athletes: A
283
Kobasa, S.C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into
Kobasa, S.C., Maddi, S.R., & Kahn, S. (1982). Hardiness and health: A prospective study.
Krane, V., & Williams, J.M. (2006). Psychological characteristics of peak performance. In
Kreiner-Phillips, K., & Orlick, T. (1993). Winning after winning: The psychology of
Sage.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Lance, C.E., Butts, M.M., & Michels, L.C. (2006). The sources of four commonly reported
cutoff criteria: What did they really say? Organisational Research Methods 9, 202-
220.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Loehr, J.E. (1982). Athletic excellence: Mental toughness training for sports. New York:
Plume.
Loehr, J.E. (1986). Mental toughness training for sports: Achieving athletic excellence.
284
Loehr, J.E. (1995). The new mental toughness training for sports. New York: Plume.
Loo, R., & Thorpe, K. (2000). Confirmatory factor analyses of the full and short versions of
628-635.
Luthans, F., & Peterson, S.J. (2003). 360-degree feedback with systematic coaching:
42, 243-256.
Vol.3. Risk, disorder, and adaptation (pp. 739–795). New York: Wiley.
Maddi, S.R. (2002). The story of hardiness: Twenty years of theorising, research and
Maddi, S.R. (2006). Hardiness: The courage to grow from stresses. Journal of Positive
Psychology, 1, 160-168.
Maddi, S.R., & Khoshaba, D.M. (2001). Personal views survey (3rd ed., Rev.). Newport
Maddi, S.R., Khoshaba, D.M., Persico, M., Lu, J., Harvey, R., & Bleecker, F. (2002). The
Mallett, C.J., & Hanrahan, S.J. (2004). Elite athletes: Why does the “fire” burn so brightly?
Mamassis, G., & Doganis, G. (2004). The effects of a mental training program on juniors
285
Marsh, H.W. (1997). The measurement of physical self-concept: A construct validation
approach. In K. Fox (Ed.), The physical self: From motivation to well-being (pp. 27-
Marsh, H.W., Hey, J., Johnson, S., & Perry, C. (1997). Elite athlete self description
Martens, R. (1987). Science, knowledge and sport psychology. The Sport Psychologist, 1,
29-55.
Martin, G.L., & Hrycaiko, D. (1983). Effective behavioural coaching: What’s it all about?
Martin, G.L., & Toogood, A. (1997). Cognitive and behavioural components of a seasonal
psychological skills training program for competitive figure skaters. Cognitive &
Martindale, R.J.J., Collins, D., & Daubney, J. (2005). Talent development: A guide for
Mayer, J.D., & Salovey, P. (1993). The intelligence of emotional intelligence. Intelligence,
17, 433–442.
McCann, S. (2005). Roles: The sport psychologist. In S. Murphy (Ed.), The sport psych
singles tennis competition. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 22, 39-62.
286
Meichenbaum, D., & Turk, D.C. (1987). Facilitating treatment adherence: A practitioner’s
Mellalieu, S.D., Hanton, S., & O’Brien, M. (2006). The effects of goal setting on rugby
Meyers, L.S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A.J. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design
Middleton, S.C., Marsh, H.W., Martin, A.J., Richards, G.E., & Perry, C. (2004a).
Developing a test for mental toughness: The mental toughness inventory (MTI).
Middleton, S.C., Marsh, H.W., Martin, A.J., Richards, G.E., & Perry, C. (2004b).
Developing the mental toughness inventory (MTI). Paper presented at the 3rd
Middleton, S.C., Marsh, H.W., Martin, A.J., Richards, G.E., & Perry, C. (2004c).
Middleton, S.C., Marsh, H.W., Martin, A.J., Richards, G.E., Savis, J., Perry, C., & Brown,
287
Morse, J.M. (1994). Emerging from the data: The cognitive processes of analysis in
Morris, T., & Thomas, P. (2004). Applied sport psychology. In T. Morris, & Summers, J.
(Eds.), Sport psychology: Theory, applications and issues (2nd ed., pp. 236-277).
Murphy, S., & Tammen, V. (1998). In search of psychological skills. In J. Duda (Ed.),
Neimeyer, G.J., Bowman, J.Z., & Saferstein, J. (2005). The effects of elicitation techniques
Neimeyer, G.J., Neimeyer, R.A., Hagans, C.L., & Van Brunt, D.L. (2002). Is there madness
Neimeyer, R.A., Anderson, A., & Stockton, L. (2001). Snakes versus ladders: A validation
Newman, I., Ridenour, C.S., Newman, C., & DeMarco, G.M.P., Jr. (2003). A typology of
Teddlie (Ed.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp.
288
Nisbett, R.E., & Wilson, T.D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on
Noblet, A.J., & Gifford, S.M. (2002). The sources of stress experienced by professional
Noblet, A., Rodwell, J., & McWilliams, J. (2003). Predictors of strain experienced by
193.
Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oades, L., & Viney, L. (2000). Experience cycle methodology: A new method for personal
Orlick, T. (1998). Embracing your potential. Lower Mitchum, SA: Human Kinetics.
Orlick, T.D., & Partington, J. (1988). Mental links to excellence. The Sport Psychologist, 2,
105-130.
Ostrow, A.C. (1996). Directory of psychological tests in the sport and exercise sciences.
Oulette, S.C. (1993). Inquiries into hardiness. In L. Goldberger & S. Breznitz (Eds.),
Handbook of stress: Theoretical and clinical aspects (pp. 77-100). New York: Free
Press.
Papacharisis, V., Goudas, M., Danish, S.J., & Theodorakis, Y. (2005). The effectiveness of
Partington, J., & Orlick, T. (1987). The sport psychology consultant evaluation form. The
289
Paterson, B.L., Thorne, S.E., Canam, C., & Jillings, C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative
Patterson, M.M., Carron, A.V., & Loughead, T.M. (2005). The influence of group morns
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Petitpas, A.J., Cornelius, A.E., Van Raalte, J.L., & Jones, T. (2005). A framework for
planning youth sport programs that foster psychosocial development. The Sport
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common method
Ravizza, K. (2006). Increasing awareness for sport performance. In J.M. Williams (Ed.),
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Reynolds, W.M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-
290
Rochat, P. (2004). The emergence of self-awareness as co-awareness in early development.
Ross, M., & Conway, M. (1986). Remembering one’s own past: The construction of
Russell, S.J., & Salmela, J.H. (1992). Quantifying expert athlete knowledge. Journal of
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
Sage, L., & Kavussanu, M. (2007). Multiple goal orientations as predictors of moral
Salovey, P., Mayer, J.D., & Caruso, D.R. (2002). The positive psychology of emotional
intelligence. In C.R. Snyder, & S.J. Lopes (Eds.). Handbook of positive psychology
Savage, D. (2006). Mapping mental toughness. Paper presented at the 8th European
Scanlan, T.K., Stein, G.L., & Ravizza, K. (1991). An in-depth study of former elite figure
skaters: III. Sources of stress. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 13, 103-120.
291
Sedikides, C., & Strube, M.J. (1997). Self-evaluation: To thine own self be good, to thine
own self be sure, to thine own self be true, and to thine own self be better. Advances
Seligman, M.E.P. (1999). The president’s address. American Psychologist, 54, 559–562.
Sheard, M., & Golby, J. (2006). Effect of a psychological skills training program on
Shultz, K.S., & Whitney, D.J. (2005). Measurement theory in action: Case studies and
Revisiting “the human dilemma.” Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 23, 475–
489.
Sinclair, D.A., & Orlick, T. (1993). Positive transitions from high performance sport. The
Smith, R.E., & Christensen, D.S. (1995). Psychological skills as predictors of performance
survival in professional baseball. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 17, 399-
415.
Smither, J.W., London, M., & Reilly, R.R. (2005). Does performance improve following
292
Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organisational analysis. Administrative
Stavrou, N.A., Jackson, S.A., Zervas, Y., & Karteroliotis, K. (2007). Flow experience and
athletes’ performance with reference to the orthogonal model of flow. The Sport
Stephan, Y., Bilard, J., Ninot, G., & Delignieres, D. (2003). Repercussions of transition out
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures
Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston:
Taylor, L.C., Clayton, J.D., & Rowley, S.J. (2004). Academic socialisation: Understanding
Thelwell, R.C., & Greenlees, I.A. (2003). Developing competitive endurance performance
Thelwell, R.C., Greenlees, I.A., & Weston, N.J.V. (2006). Using psychological skills
254-270.
293
Thelwell, R., Weston, N., & Greenlees, I. (2005). Defining and understanding mental
Tranckle, P., & Cushion, C.J. (2006). Rethinking giftedness and talent in sport. Quest, 58,
265-282.
Veale, J.P., Pearce, A.J., & Carlson, J.S. (2007). Player movement patterns in an elite junior
Australian Rules Football Team: An exploratory study. Journal of Sports Science &
Medicine, 6, 254-260.
Vealey, R.S. (1988). Future directions in psychological skills training. The Sport
Psychologist, 2, 318-336.
Vealey, R.S. (1994). Current status and prominent issues in sport psychology interventions.
Vealey, R.S. (2007). Mental skills training in sport. In G. Tenenbaum & R.C. Eklund
Voight, M. (2002). Improving the quality of training: Coach and player responsibilities.
Walker, B.M., & Winter, D.A. (2007). The elaboration of personal construct psychology.
Weigand, D.A., Richardson, P.A., & Weinberg, R.S. (1999). A two-stage evaluation of a
Weston, N.J.V. (2005). The impact of Butler and Hardy’s (1992) performance profiling
United Kingdom.
Williams, J.M. (2001). Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance
294
Winter, D. (2003). The evidence base for personal construct psychotherapy. In F. Fransella
Winter, D., & Viney, L. (2005). Personal construct psychotherapy: Advances in theory,
Woehr, D.J., Sheehan, M.K., & Bennett Jr., W. (2005). Assessing measurement
Wolf, M.M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement. Journal of
Wolfenden, L.E., & Holt, N.L. (2005). Talent development in elite junior tennis:
17, 108-126.
Young, W.B., Newton, R.U., Doyle, T.L.A, Chapman, D., Cormack, S., Stewart, G. et al.
and playing positions in elite Australian Rules football: A case study. Journal of
Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2004). Emotional intelligence in the
399.
295
Zimmerman, B.J. & Schunk, D.H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic
296
Appendices
297
Appendix A – Psychometric Inventories
298
Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Reynolds, 1982)
01. I sometimes feel resentful when I don’t get my way True False
02. On a few occasions, I have given up doing something because I True False
thought to little of my ability
03. There have been times when I felt like rebelling against people in True False
authority even though I knew they were right
04. No mater who I’m talking to, I’m always a good listener True False
05. I can remember “playing sick” to get out of something True False
06. There have been occasions when I took advantage of someone True False
07. I’m always willing to admit it when I make a mistake True False
08. I sometimes try to get even rather than forgive and forget True False
09. I am always courteous, even to people who are disagreeable True False
10. I have never been irked when people expressed their ideas very True False
different from my own
11. There have been times when I was quite jealous of the good True False
fortune of others
13. I have never deliberately said something that hurt someone’s True False
feelings
299
Dispositional Resilience Scale (Bartone, Ursano, Wright, & Ingraham, 1989)
INSTRUCTIONS: Below are statements about life that people often feel differently about.
Circle a number to show how YOU feel about each one. Read the items carefully and
indicate how much you think each one is true in general. There are no right or wrong
answers – just give your own honest opinions.
Completely
Quite true
Not at all
A little
True
true
true
01. Most of my life gets spent doing things that are worthwhile. 0 1 2 3
06. Working hard doesn’t matter, since only the bosses profit by it. 0 1 2 3
09. When I make plans, I’m certain I can make them work. 0 1 2 3
13. I won’t answer a question until I’m really sure I understand it. 0 1 2 3
17. Trying your best at work really pays off in the end. 0 1 2 3
300
18. My mistakes are usually very difficult to correct. 0 1 2 3
20. Most good athletes and leaders are born, not made. 0 1 2 3
27. Most days, life is really interesting and exciting for me. 0 1 2 3
301
Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (Jackson & Eklund, 2002, 2004)
Frequently
Sometimes
Always
Rarely
Never
1 2 3 4 5
01. I am challenged, but I believe my skills will allow me to
meet the challenge.
302
16. I am not concerned with how others may be evaluating me. 1 2 3 4 5
31. I can tell by the way I am performing how well I’m doing. 1 2 3 4 5
303
Appendix B – Generic Consent Form
304
Dr. Sandy Gordon
I understand that all information provided will be treated as strictly confidential, and will
not be released by the investigator unless this is required by law. I have been advised as to
what data are being collected, what the purpose is, and what will be done with the data
upon completion of the research.
I agree that research data gathered for the study may be published provided that neither my
name, nor other identifying information, is used.
Participant Date
The Human Research Ethics Committee at The University of Western Australia requires
that all participants are informed that, if they have any complaint regarding the manner in
which a research project is conducted, this may be given to the Secretary, Human Research
Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling
Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone 6488-3703). All study participants will be
provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.
305
Appendix C – Participant Information Sheets
306
Dr. Sandy Gordon
Information Sheet
Purpose of Study: The purpose of this research is to generate an understanding of coaches’
perceptions of mental toughness and its development in the context of Australian football.
Procedure: As a participant, you are invited to take part in two separate 1-1 interviews. Upon
receiving your consent to participate in the research, you will receive a copy of the interview
via email at least three days prior to the scheduled interview time. You will be asked these
questions along with other questions to provide further information about your responses
during the interview. You will be asked questions such as: “What do you think is ‘mental
toughness’ in football? Can you offer a definition, phrase or quote to describe it?” and “What
do you think are the situations in football which do and do not require an individual to be
mentally tough?” The interview will last approximately 45 – 90 min and will be transcribed
verbatim and analysed at a later date. You will be provided with a copy of the transcribed
verbatim data from your interview to verify its accuracy. This same process will be repeated for
the second interview. There are no foreseeable adverse effects or risks of participation.
Confidentiality: Any information about you that is obtained in connection with this study will
remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your written permission. However, the
results of the study may be published or disclosed to other people in a way that will not identify
you. Audio tapings of the interviews will be used for data analysis then safely and securely
stored at the School of Human Movement and Exercise Science in a locked office.
Consent: The study will be carried out in a manner conforming to the principles set out by the
National Health and Medical Research Council. You are free to withdraw your consent and
discontinue with your participation at any time for any reason and you do not need to justify
your decision. If you do withdraw we may wish to retain the data that we have recorded from
you but only if you agree, otherwise your records will be destroyed. Your participation in the
study is voluntary and does not prejudice any right to compensation, which you may have
under statute law.
Further Information: If you have any questions regrading this study you can contact Dr.
Sandy Gordon (6488 2375) or Daniel Gucciardi (6488 1075 or 0401 914 066). You will be
given a copy of this information sheet and a consent form to read and keep prior to indicating
your consent to participate by signing the consent form.
307
Dr. Sandy Gordon
Purpose of Study: The aim of this study is to develop and validate an Australian football
Mental Toughness Inventory (ARMTI) that can be used to assess and monitor mental toughness
among Australian Rules footballers. This instrument is envisaged to have enormous potential
for many aspects of coaching and talent development and identification at all levels of the
game.
Procedure: As a participant, you are invited to take part in a research project endeavouring to
develop a mental toughness performance profile for Australian football. Based on previous
qualitative research, we have generated a preliminary pool of items representing the
underpinning characteristics that expert sources have ascribed to the concept of mental
toughness. Upon receiving your consent to participate in the study, you will receive a package
containing this questionnaire and another questionnaire. There will be specific instructions for
completing both questionnaires and we ask that you complete these questionnaires as honestly
and truthfully as possible. You will notice that there is some degree of similarity or
repetitiveness in questions; this is designed to assess the reliability and validity of the MT
performance profile. It will take approximately 15 min to complete both questionnaires. There
are no foreseeable adverse effects or risks of participation.
Confidentiality: Any information about you that is obtained in connection with this study will
remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your written permission. However, the
results of the study may be published or disclosed to other people in a way that will not identify
you. Completed questionnaires will be used for data analysis then safely and securely stored at
the School of Human Movement and Exercise Science in a locked office.
Consent: The study will be carried out in a manner conforming to the principles set out by the
National Health and Medical Research Council. You are free to withdraw your consent and
discontinue with your participation at any time for any reason and you do not need to justify
your decision. If you do withdraw we may wish to retain the data that we have recorded from
you but only if you agree, otherwise your records will be destroyed. Your participation in the
study is voluntary and does not prejudice any right to compensation, which you may have
under statute law.
Further Information: If you have any questions regrading this study you can contact Dr.
Sandy Gordon (6488 2375) or Daniel Gucciardi (6488 1075 or 0401 914 066). You will be
given a copy of this information sheet and a consent form to read and keep prior to indicating
your consent to participate by signing the consent form.
308
Dr. Sandy Gordon
Information Sheet
Purpose of Study: The purpose of this research is to evaluate the effectiveness of
psychological skills training in developing or enhancing mental toughness among youth-aged
footballers.
Procedure: Upon receiving your consent to participate in this study, you will be randomly
allocated to one of three experimental groups. Once allocations have been made, you will be
asked to complete a questionnaire package which will ask you a number of statements that
expert sources have used to describe those characteristics encompassing performance
excellence in Australian football. This will take approximately 45 min to complete. Over the
course of several weeks both two groups will receive an intervention program involving
psychological skills training, which will include educational and experiential workshops. The
third group receiving no psychological skills training will be offered the same program at the
competition of the research. Players from all three groups will complete the same questionnaire
package at the end of the competitive season. Parents and coaches will also be evaluating each
player at both assessment time points. You will be free to ask questions at any stage during the
study. There will be NO costs for the services and products provided to those individuals
participating in this research. There are no foreseeable adverse effects or risks of participation.
Confidentiality: Any information about you that is obtained in connection with this study will
remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your written permission. However, the
results of the study may be published or disclosed to other people in a way that will not identify
you. Completed questionnaires will be used for data analysis then safely and securely stored at
the School of Human Movement and Exercise Science in a locked office.
Consent: The study will be carried out in a manner conforming to the principles set out by the
National Health and Medical Research Council. You are free to withdraw your consent and
discontinue with your participation at any time for any reason and you do not need to justify
your decision. If you do withdraw we may wish to retain the data that we have recorded from
you but only if you agree, otherwise your records will be destroyed. Your participation in the
study is voluntary and does not prejudice any right to compensation, which you may have
under statute law.
Further Information: If you have any questions regrading this study you can contact Dr.
Sandy Gordon (6488 2375) or Daniel Gucciardi (6488 1075 or 0401 914 066). You will be
given a copy of this information sheet and a consent form to read and keep prior to indicating
your consent to participate by signing the consent form.
309
Dr. Sandy Gordon
Information Sheet
Purpose of Study: The purpose of this research is to generate an understanding of players,
parents, and coaches’ perceptions of the goals, procedures, and results of the mental toughness
training program.
Procedure: As a participant, you are invited to take part in a 1-1 interview. Upon receiving
your consent to participate in the research, you will receive a copy of the interview via email at
least three days prior to the scheduled interview time. You will be asked these questions along
with other questions to provide further information about your responses during the interview.
You will be asked questions such as: “Do you believe that the content of the program was
relevant for developing mental toughness? Why do you think it was/was not?” and “How
would you improve the quality of a program designed to develop/enhance mental toughness for
youth-aged footballers?” The interview will last approximately 45 – 90 min and will be
transcribed verbatim and analysed at a later date. You will be provided with a copy of the
transcribed verbatim data from your interview to verify its accuracy. This same process will be
repeated for the second interview. There are no foreseeable adverse effects or risks of
participation.
Confidentiality: Any information about you that is obtained in connection with this study will
remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your written permission. However, the
results of the study may be published or disclosed to other people in a way that will not identify
you. Audio tapings of the interviews will be used for data analysis then safely and securely
stored at the School of Human Movement and Exercise Science in a locked office.
Consent: The study will be carried out in a manner conforming to the principles set out by the
National Health and Medical Research Council. You are free to withdraw your consent and
discontinue with your participation at any time for any reason and you do not need to justify
your decision. If you do withdraw we may wish to retain the data that we have recorded from
you but only if you agree, otherwise your records will be destroyed. Your participation in the
study is voluntary and does not prejudice any right to compensation, which you may have
under statute law.
Further Information: If you have any questions regrading this study you can contact Dr.
Sandy Gordon (6488 2375) or Daniel Gucciardi (6488 1075 or 0401 914 066). You will be
given a copy of this information sheet and a consent form to read and keep prior to indicating
your consent to participate by signing the consent form.
310