The Relationship between Evaluation of Stress and Coping Style of Athletes and the Effect of General Self-efficacy.

Li Jing, SONG Hong-wei(School of Physical Education, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029,China)
The paper study the relationship between evaluation of stress and coping style of athletes and the effect of general self-efficacy based on the methods of questionnaire and statistics. The result shows:
①Athletes mainly evaluate the stress of competition range as challenge and threatening pressure. When athletes evaluate the stress as challenge, their copying style tend to be motion and question; when athletes evaluate the stress as threatening, their copying style tend to be avoidance.
②There is no marked correlativity between the self-efficacy and challenge and threatening pressure, but it can adjust remarkably the relationship between evaluation of stress and coping style.
③ The adjustment of general self-efficiency could mainly be observed following: with the rising of challenge pressure, the coping style of athlete with higher self-efficacy tend to be question; with the rising of threatening pressure, the coping style of athlete with higher self-efficacy tend to be motion and exceeding, while the coping style of athlete with lower self-efficacy tend to be avoidance
                               




 

  HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

An analysis is presented of selected aspects of stress theory and research in biology and medicine, both before and after the introduction of Selye's stress formulations, which have been of major importance in the development and popularity of this research area. An attempt is made to explore some possible sources of present confusion and controversy in the stress field, with a view to the development of new research strategies that may enable us to clarify, update, and revise stress concepts and to facilitate future progress.
 In particular, it is suggested that an experimental reevaluation of the concept of the nonspecificity of pituitary-adrenal cortical response is a matter of particular strategic importance, if we are to move out of the present prolonged period of stalemate and confusion over stress theory and terminology. Recent experimental studies which suggest that the nonspecificity concept may have been applied erroneously to lower level physiological mechanisms, rather than to higher level psychological processes, are reviewed. The possible implications of this development are discussed in terms of clarifying current concepts and providing guidelines for future lines of approach in stress research

In this introductional contribution, (1) model‐theoretical backgrounds and directions of the actual approaches in sport injury research are clarified, (2) the resulting criteria and research desiderata are summarized, and (3) conclusions and perspectives for future research are outlined. Emphasis is given to trait and interactional concepts and approaches derived and closely linked to stress research.
 Considering the process of recovery and the reinjury phenomenon, various aspects are discussed, which have been neglected or have not been integrated in conceptualizations on injury until now. The action‐theory perspective is outlined and suggested to build a framework for a more sophisticated approach. Following this model, it is recommended to focus more on process analyses and also to refer to single case studies in future research on sports injuries.
Keywords:
 injury, rehabilitation, action theory, stress, anxiety, emotion, coping.
Research has attempted to examine the psychological impact of athletic injury to assist rehabilitation personnel when treating injured athletes. Sports trainers, sports therapists, physiotherapists, medical staff and sports psychologists should be aware of psychological factors impacting on the injury experience when involved in an athlete's rehabilitation. A number of models have been proposed as useful frameworks for investigating and describing the psychological response to athletic injury.
 Many researchers have relied upon applying or adapting grief and cognitive appraisal models originally derived from the clinical and stress related psychology literature in an attempt to describe the psychological response to athletic injury. This article provides an overview of these models and offers a critical appraisal of this research, specifically focusing on the grief response models and the integrated model of response to sport injury and rehabilitation.
 Criticisms focus on the lack of research supporting a uniformed sequence of stages as a feature of response to athletic injury. Further grief criticisms centre on the absence of denial in much of the research to date. The article then focuses on the dynamic core of the integrated response to sport injury and rehabilitation model. It is argued that the interrelationships between emotional responses, behavioural responses, cognitive appraisals and recovery outcomes are not as simple as suggested in the model.