↓ Skip to main content

The Development of a New Sport-Specific Classification of Coping and a Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Different Coping Strategies and Moderators on Sporting Outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Development of a New Sport-Specific Classification of Coping and a Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Different Coping Strategies and Moderators on Sporting Outcomes
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01674
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam R. Nicholls, Natalie J. Taylor, Sean Carroll, John L. Perry

Abstract

There is an ever growing coping and sports performance literature, with researchers using many different methods to assess performance and different classifications of coping. As such, it makes it difficult to compare studies and therefore identify how coping is related to performance. Furthermore, there are no quantitative syntheses of the results from these studies. A quantitative synthesis would facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of how coping is associated with athletic performance. In order to accurately compare studies, our first aim was to develop a new coping classification that would make this possible. Firstly, we reviewed the strengths and limitations of the different coping classifications and then identified the commonalities and differences between such classifications. We opted for a three-factor classification of coping, because the evidence suggests that a three-factor classification provides a superior model fit to two-factor approaches. Our new classification of coping was based on an existing model from the developmental literature, which received an excellent model fit. We made some adaptations, however, as our classification was intended for an athletic population. As such, we classified coping as mastery (i.e., controlling the situation and eliminating the stressor), internal regulation (i.e., managing internal stress responses), or goal withdrawal (i.e., ceasing efforts toward goal attainment). Undertaking a meta-analysis, our second aim was to identify which coping strategies correlated with sports performance and whether this relationship varied according to moderator variables. Articles were sourced from online electronic databases and manual journal searches. PRISMA guidelines were used to search, select, and synthesize relevant studies. Random effects meta-analyses were performed to identify associations between coping classification and sport performance. Q, I(2), and R(2) values assessed heterogeneity. Eighteen published investigations, including 3900 participants and incorporating fifty-nine correlations, indicated an overall positive effect for mastery coping, a negligible negative effect for internal regulation coping, and a negative effect for goal withdrawal strategies. The findings of this meta-analysis could be used by sports practitioners to help them deliver effective coping interventions. In order to maximize performance, practitioners could encourage the use of mastery coping, but advise their athletes not to use goal withdrawal strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 104 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Researcher 5 5%
Lecturer 5 5%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 43 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 22 21%
Psychology 21 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 45 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 May 2023.
All research outputs
#6,544,564
of 23,821,324 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,325
of 31,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,469
of 313,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#184
of 446 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,821,324 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,779 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 446 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.