Research
In relation to performance, there are two main areas in which we currently conduct research: SOCIAL SUPPORT and ATTRIBUTIONS. Please click on the topic to read more
Social Support
What is social support?
Social support involves a complex combination of multiple processes. In sport, this means that the existence of a caring and supportive network, including family, friends, teammates, coaches, managers, fitness trainers, physiotherapists, and psychologists, should have a positive effect on an athlete’s cognitions, emotions, and behaviors. The athlete should be helped by the perception that others are available to provide help and support in times of need and by the actual receipt of help and support. The quality and type of social support an athlete perceives or receives could presumably affect such things as performance level, resistance to dropping out, enjoyment, and coping with and recovering from injury.
The beneficial effects of social support may occur through a number of mechanisms, such as protecting individuals from the harmful effects of stress, fostering resiliency and acting as an environmental protective factor, contributing to adjustment and development, raising self-esteem (and self-efficacy and self-confidence), and reducing uncertainty. We are particularly interested in trying to demonstrate the links between social support and performance in sport.
What do we know?
Our research so far has focused primarily upon effects of social support within the theoretical framework of stress, appraisal and coping. Thus far, we have demonstrated links between social support and objective task performance, self-reported performance processes, and self-confidence. Most of our studies have been of a survey-based design, using questionnaire assessment of social support.
Future Research
We are now conducting experimental studies in the laboratory and in the field to try to demonstrate how social support may be used as an intervention in a therapeutic setting to impact upon sports performance. Within this framework, we have examined the influence of both perceived social support and received (sometimes referred to as enacted) social support. There is still much to learn from this perspective. What are the key types of social support for matching specific types of stressors and stress? Is it important to note who provides support, as well as noting what types of support are perceived and received? What mechanisms mediate the effects of social support on performance?
We are now seeking to extend our work to take in the influence of social support within social cognition, relational cognition, relationship issues, and social identity. Key issues arising from these issues are: how are perceptions of social support formed and how are these perceptions cognitively represented? Are perceptions of social support influenced by personality factors, attachment concepts, or relational schemas? Can social support really be divorced from the more general concepts of relationships and communication? Does social identity provide a key environnment for the provision and receipt of social support?
Some key readings from our research programme are provided below. Please note, if you do not already have it installed on your computer, you will need to download ADOBE Reader 7 to read these articles. You can download this free from http://www.adobe.com/
Freeman, P., & Rees, T. (2008). The effects of perceived and received support on objective performance outcome. European Journal of Sport Sciences, 8, 359-368. click here
Rees, T. (2007). Influence of social support on athletes. In S. Jowett & D. Lavallee, Social Psychology in Sport (pp. 223-231). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. To view a pdf of this chapter, click here
Rees, T., & Freeman, P. (2007). The differential impact of perceived and received support upon confidence. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25, 1057-1065. To view a pdf of this article, click here
Rees, T., Hardy, L., & Freeman, P. (2007). Stressors, social support and effects upon performance in golf. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25, 33-42. To view a pdf of this chapter, click here
Rees, T ., & Hardy, L. (2004). Matching social support with stressors: Effects on factors underlying performance in tennis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5, 319-337. To view a pdf of this chapter, click here
Rees, T., & Hardy, L. (2000). An examination of the social support experiences of high-level sports performers. The Sport Psychologist, 14, 327-347. There is no pdf for this article
Rees, T., Ingledew, D. K., & Hardy, L. (1999). Social support dimensions and components of performance in tennis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 17, 421-429. To view a pdf of this chapter, click here
Future projects that need to be run:
1. The main and stress-buffering impact of perceived and received support upon objective task performance in different sports.
2. The role of confidence, self-efficacy, and emotions as mediators of the relationship between social support and objective task performance in different sports.
3. We need to run field studies and experiments to look at these effects.
4. The role of different support providers in impacting upon performance and mediating processes.
What are attributions?
Attributions are the explanations people give for the causes of events in their lives. By explaining the causes of events, people create an understanding that they take with them into future situations, and this helps them develop mastery over their lives. The reflections of Heider (1944, 1958) addressed these issues and initiated interest in attributions. Heider considered people naïve psychologists, who try to better understand their own and others’ behaviour by piecing together information helping them to link behaviour to its root cause. In a similar way, people also try to derive explanations for their performances in sport. The issues for sport psychology are how people do explain these performances and pinpoint the root cause of them, and what impact an in-depth search for these causes has on future emotions, expectations and performance.
What do we know?
Attributions impact upon efficacy expectations both independently and interactively.
Future Research
It is our contention that the central emphasis of future research in this area should be on controllability attributions. The secondary focus is then on how controllability attributions generalise across time, situations, and people. This is an under-researched, but nonetheless very important topic. At present, we have just a few articles on this topic. These are:
Coffee, P., & Rees, T. (2008). The CSGU: A Measure of Controllability, Stability, Globality, and Universality Attributions. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30, 611-641. To view a pdf of this paper, click here
Coffee, P., & Rees, T. (2008). The main and interactive effects of attribution dimensions upon efficacy expectations in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 9, 775-785. To view a pdf of this paper, click here
Rees, T. (2007). Main and interactive effects of attribution dimensions upon efficacy expectations in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences. To view a pdf of this chapter, click here
Rees, T., Ingledew, D. K., & Hardy, L. (2005). Attribution in sport psychology: Seeking congruence between theory, research and practice. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6, 189-204. This is a review and position paper. To view a pdf of this chapter, click here
Rees, T., Ingledew, D. K., & Hardy, L. (2005). Attribution in sport psychology: Further comments. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6, 213-214. To view a pdf of this chapter, click here
Future projects that need to be run:
1. The main and interactive effects of attribution dimensions upon efficacy expectations, emotions and performance/motivated behaviour in sport (using both the CDSII and new attribution measures). This would include replication studies
2. The main and interactive effects of attribution dimensions upon efficacy expectations, emotions and performance/motivated behaviour in sport within Vallerand’s (1987) intuitive and reflective appraisal model.
3. Although cross-sectional studies might help our understanding of the attributions people make and their subsequent effects on emotions, expectations and performance, longitudinal studies could reveal much more important information about how attributions alter over time. One might consider the process of attributional thought as a dynamic, transactional process over time, with attributions affecting responses, responses affecting future appraisal of the environment, and appraisal leading to altered attributions. Instead of further cross-sectional studies, or even longitudinal studies using just two or three time points, one might consider methods such as ecological momentary assessment, or experience sampling. These methods would allow a much more detailed observation of naturally occurring attributions over time, the interaction with the environment and the reattribution process.