ATHLETES

Anxiety In Athletes

Anxiety In Athletes

Introduction

Perfectionism is a personality trait distinguished by striving for flawlessness and setting excessively high measures for performance, escorted by tendencies in the direction of overly critical evaluations of one's behavior (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). In sports, some researchers glimpse perfectionism as an adaptive trait that assists to accomplish elite performance (Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002). Other researchers, although, glimpse perfectionism as a maladaptive trait that hinders, other than assists athletic performance (Flett & Hewitt, 2005).

Consequently, athletes may face what Hewitt and Flett call the “perfectionism paradox”. Although in numerous sports athletes are anticipated to consign perfect performance conclusions, perfectionism in athletes has been shown to be associated to characteristics that may destabilise performance, especially comparable anxiety. Consequently, perfectionism in athletes may avert the very conclusions that it hunts for to encourage (Flett & Hewitt, 2005).

Data Analysis

A researcher is interested in identifying the predictors of competitive anxiety in athletes. Along with anxiety, measured athletes' Confidence, perceived Threat, fear of negative evaluation and perceived Control.

Statistics

NegEval

Anxiety

Confidence

Control

N

Valid

273

273

273

273

Missing

2

2

2

2

Mean

2.8558

1.9106

7.4541

5.2210

Median

2.7500

1.7000

7.5000

5.3333

Mode

2.50

1.00

7.81

5.00

Std. Deviation

.60274

.71947

1.14553

1.14600

Range

3.50

3.10

7.06

7.33

Correlations

NegEval

Threat

Anxiety

Confidence

Control

NegEval

Pearson Correlation

1

.257**

.418**

-.305**

.065

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.288

N

273

273

273

273

273

Threat

Pearson Correlation

.257**

1

.553**

-.354**

.025

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.686

N

273

273

273

273

273

Anxiety

Pearson Correlation

.418**

.553**

1

-.598**

.127*

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.036

N

273

273

273

273

273

Confidence

Pearson Correlation

-.305**

-.354**

-.598**

1

-.100

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.101

N

273

273

273

273

273

Control

Pearson Correlation

.065

.025

.127*

-.100

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.288

.686

.036

.101

N

273

273

273

273

273

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Model Summary

Model

R

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

1

.424a

.179

.170

.54905

a. Predictors: (Constant), Control, Confidence, Anxiety

ANOVAb

Model

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

1

Regression

17.725

3

5.908

19.600

.000a

Residual

81.090

269

.301

Total

98.816

272

a. Predictors: (Constant), Control, Confidence, Anxiety

b. Dependent Variable: NegEval

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t

Sig.

B

Std. Error

Beta

1

(Constant)

2.577

.381

6.765

.000

Anxiety

.306

.058

.366

5.288

.000

Confidence

-.045

.036

-.085

-1.232

.219

Control

.005

.029

.010

.174

.862

a. Dependent Variable: NegEval

NegEval

Threat

Anxiety

Confidence

Control

All the Normal Probablity (NPP) plots follows a straight line which indicates that all the variables anxiety, confidence, perceived threat, fear of negative evaluation and perceived control follow normal distribution.

Finally, partial correlations were inspected. Across all trials, striving for perfection throughout affrays displayed inverse correlations with cognitive anxiety throughout affrays, one time contradictory responses to imperfection throughout affrays were partialled out. Moreover, striving for perfection displayed inverse correlations with somatic anxiety in two and positive correlations with self-confidence in three of the four variables.

Whereas the partial correlations of striving for perfection displayed a more positive convention of correlations than the zero-order correlations, contradictory responses to imperfection proceeded to display important positive correlations with cognitive and somatic anxiety and important contradictory correlations with self-confidence over all trials, one time striving for perfection was partialled out. Thus, only striving for perfection brandished a markedly distinct convention when partial correlations were computed. This is especially apparent for cognitive anxiety. When zero-order correlations were considered, striving for perfection emerged to be unrelated (or even positively related) to cognitive anxiety, because the overlap with contradictory responses to imperfection stifled the inverse connection between striving for perfection and comparable anxiety. Once the leverage of contradictory responses to imperfection was partialled out, although, striving for perfection throughout affrays was inversely correlated with cognitive and somatic anxiety and furthermore displayed positive correlations with self-confidence, showing that “pure striving for perfection” is associated to smaller comparable anxiety.

Discussion

The aim of the present research was to farther enquire the connection between perfectionism and comparable anxiety in athletes, focusing on perfectionism throughout affrays and differentiating two facets of perfectionism: striving for perfection and contradictory responses ...