Short-Term International Sport for Development and Peace Programs: A Retrospective Analysis and Critique Informed by Stakeholders’ Perspectives in a Two-Year Follow-Up : WVU.
For more information, please contact researchrepository@mail.wvu.edu.
Running head: RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
Short-Term International Sport for Development and Peace
Programs: A Retrospective Analysis and Critique Informed by
Stakeholders’ Perspectives in a Two-Year Follow-Up
Adam H. Hansell
Dissertation submitted to the College of Applied Human Sciences at West Virginia University in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sport, Exercise,
& Performance Psychology
Dana K. Voelker, Ph.D., Chair
Jack C. Watson, Ph.D.
Cheyenne Luzynski, Ph.D.
Kristen Dieffenbach, Ph.D.
Lindsey Blom, Ed.D.
Department of Sport, Exercise, & Performance Psychology
Morgantown, West Virginia
2022
Keywords: sport diplomacy, community, culture, power, social change
Copyright (2022) Adam H. Hansell
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
ABSTRACT
Short-Term International Sport for Development and Peace Programs: A Retrospective Analysis
and Critique Informed by Stakeholders’ Perspectives in a Two-Year Follow-Up
Adam Hansell
Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) programs are a popular approach to promoting positive
development throughout the world, spanning health, education, peace, and social issues.
However, scholars have identified critical shortcomings of SDP work, including the potential to
reinforce neoliberalist tendencies and values imposition from the Global North to the Global
South. Deporte y Cambio Social was a short-term SDP program established through partnership
between American and Mexican constituent groups with aims to empower girls and women
through soccer. Through six semi-structured, two-year retrospective interviews, the purpose of
the present study was to explore cross-cultural understandings of power and intercultural power
relations from the voices of Mexicans and Americans involved in the program to offer reflective
critique of, and generate participant-informed strategies for improving, the design and
implementation SDP programs broadly. Using thematic analysis from a critical constructivist
orientation, the meanings generated from the data showed that Mexican and American
participants similarly defined power and acknowledged power imbalances informed by a limiting
project framework and a sociocultural-informed deference to Americans as experts. Strong,
positive intercultural experiences between Mexican and American constituent groups were
reported amid often unseen social biases that can be experienced abroad and perpetuated in SDP
programs. Critical reflexivity, prolonged cultural preparation, longer-term engagement, and
careful construction of SDP leadership teams and program participants were among the strategies
informed by the data that were further interpreted to account for the complex realities of SDP
programs.
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
Table of Contents
iii
Page
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..1
The Setting: Deporte y Cambio Social……………………………………………………4
Method…………………………………………………………………………............................5
Research Design & Positionality………………………………………………….….......5
Participants………………………………………………………………………….…....6
Procedures…………………………………………………………………………….….7
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….10
Results and Discussion…………………………………………………………………………..12
General Discussion………………………………………………………………………………26
Practical Implications……………………………………………………………………………29
Limitations and Future Research Directions…………………………………………………….32
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….33
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
1
Short-Term International Sport for Development and Peace Programs: A Retrospective
Analysis and Critique Informed by Stakeholders’ Perspectives in a Two-Year Follow-Up
Organized sport has played an integral role in human societies for ages, and it continues
to be one of the most popular forms of social interaction and entertainment throughout the world.
Experts in public health and exercise science have published an extensive body of literature
suggesting participation in organized sport can promote the development of a myriad of positive
physical, psychological, and social outcomes for youth, including improved health, social
interactions, and the development of essential life skills such as discipline, accountability,
teamwork, and responsibility that can be transferred to life outside sport (e.g., Holt, 2016). At the
elite level, global sport competitions, such as the Olympics and the FIFA World Cup, attract
millions of supporters worldwide to observe sporting phenomena believed to transcend race,
religion, socioeconomic status, and politics (Murray, 2012).
Due to the global popularity of sport, researchers, international organizations, and
government agencies have increasingly advocated for sport for development and peace (SDP)
programs which use sport to promote positive development in non-sport spheres (Schulenkorf et
al., 2016), including social cohesion, health promotion, education, livelihoods, peace, gender
equality, and disability (Giulianotti et al., 2016; Svensson, Andersson, & Faulk, 2018). Although
improvement across these areas is ubiquitously beneficial, scholars have encouraged the use of
SDP programs with individuals from underserved communities domestically and internationally
(e.g., Coalter, 2010; Kidd, 2008; United Nations, 2003; Whitley, Forneris, & Barker, 2014).
In an integrated literature review, Schulenkorf et al. (2016) found that SDP programs
have been most commonly conducted with underserved youth participants, used soccer as the
sport of choice, and incorporated either qualitative or mixed method approaches for evaluation.
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
2
Among the critical gaps limiting their effectiveness, however, was the use of apolitical and
outcome-focused theoretical frameworks, such as positive youth development (PYD) or social
capital, within which culture and context are peripheral. While the authors recognized the use of
any theoretical framework as a noted strength, they suggested sole reliance on frameworks that
neither acknowledge, nor deepen, understanding of the sociopolitical and cultural landscape
within which SDP programs occur, is misguided. Schulenkorf et al. further noted a significant
gap related to the intentional engagement of multi-level stakeholders in the evaluation of SDP
programs. Thus, evaluation is often limited to understanding whether program participants
changed according to a predefined outcome, yet other stakeholders with considerable influence
in shaping the SDP experience, including funders, researchers, and program developers, are
seldom examined.
Other scholars have highlighted critical directions for the field (e.g., Darnell et al., 2018;
Giulianotti et al., 2019; Welty-Peachey, Schulenkorf, & Spaaj, 2019). Among these
recommendations, researchers have been encouraged to move beyond solely outcome-based
approaches that measure short-term, transactional ‘impact’ of SDP initiatives on underserved
program participants (e.g., pre-posttests), toward critical reflection of how extant SDP
approaches, intended to empower participants, may counterintuitively reinforce dominant
ideology. International SDP programs, for example, are often conducted in low- and middle
income communities located in the Global South but are typically funded and evaluated by
Western stakeholders from the Global North and often rooted in neoliberal beliefs and values
(Darnell et al., 2018; Giulianotti et al., 2019; Schulenkorf et al., 2016). Neoliberalism is broadly
characterized as the belief that disadvantaged nations, most of which are located in the Global
South, would benefit from the adoption of Western systems, values, and institutions (Brown,
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
3
2019; McCarthy & Prudham, 2004). Despite the intention of helping other nations, critics assert
a neoliberal approach can reinforce systems of subordination and disempowerment (Svensson &
Loat, 2019). Although SDP programs are frequently advertised as meeting the needs of
underserved communities, they often entail the imposition of Western expertise and assumed
truths about a different culture without the careful and intentional involvement of local voices –
an immersive process that would offer the best opportunity for positive change, as defined by the
local community, as well as the development of meaningful intercultural relationships (Darnell et
al., 2018; Harris, 2018; Hayhurst, 2016; Oatley & Harris, 2020; Welty-Peachey et al., 2019).
Importantly, neoliberalist critiques are not unique to SDP, but are rather reflective of a
complex, global sociopolitical and cultural landscape across societal sectors. Nilsen (2016)
asserted neoliberalism is one of the primary, yet hidden, drivers of any international development
agenda. Similarly, scholars of anthropological phenomena have critiqued monolithic definitions
of power within international collaborations and encouraged conceptualizations that increasingly
consider complexity, fluidity, and context (Adler & Aycan, 2018). Some evidence, for example,
suggests cultural perceptions are influenced by the balance, or imbalance, of power observed
between members of the same or different cultural groups such that greater power symmetry may
be a primary determinant of positive cultural perceptions (Heijes, 2010).
Collectively, these critiques call into question how SDP programs can be better designed,
implemented, and evaluated to prioritize the expertise of local communities and meaningful
intercultural relationships that maximize contextual understanding of local culture, values,
norms, and long-term aims. The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively critique a
short-term international SDP program from the voices of varied stakeholders involved in the
program’s development and implementation, and related specifically to cross-cultural
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
4
understandings of power and intercultural power relations, to generate participant-driven
strategies that meaningfully inform future SDP engagement.
The Setting: Deporte y Cambio Social
Deporte y Cambio Social was an international SDP and sport diplomacy initiative
developed to promote girls’ and women’s empowerment and leadership in Mexico using soccer
as a platform – a topic selected based upon a sub-award received from a larger grant funded by
the U.S. Department of State. Academic professionals and graduate students from two large
public universities in the United States (U.S.) and Mexico developed and implemented the
program using a train-the-trainer model designed for current and future sport coaches of girls and
women based on the Social Change Model of Leadership Development (SCM) – a values-based
model that views leadership development and social change as a dynamic process within
individual, group, and community domains (HERI, 1996). The program involved two phases
with 56 days in-between: the first in Mexico for seven days and the second in the U.S. for 13
days.
The American constituent group included faculty members, graduate students, and
community coaches who were native U.S. citizens or originally from regions of the Global
South, including Mexico. Collectively, this group selected the guiding theoretical framework,
managed the budget, coordinated the international travel, designed the program in consultation
with members of the partnering institution in Mexico, and facilitated the workshops. The
Mexican constituent group included faculty members who were native to Mexico. Together, they
recruited participants (e.g., community coaches, college and graduate students, and girl youth
soccer players from the community), procured facilities and supplies, and facilitated the
workshops in a supporting role (e.g., providing directions, explaining activities) for the
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
5
programming in Mexico. Program participants were current and future sport coaches of girls and
women who were predominantly Mexican in addition to a small sample of Americans in similar
coaching or student roles. In addition to outcomes-based assessment of the program (i.e.,
quantitative and qualitative examination of learning relative to the program’s content; España
Pérez et al., 2021), Hansell et al. (under review) explored a subsample of Mexican participants’
impressions of the U.S. and Americans immediately following their program participation via
focus groups. Participants reported feeling connected to Americans in realizing they experience
some of the same struggles and shared optimism in forming future intercultural partnerships.
Interestingly, participants also described considerable deference to Americans as ‘experts’ in
sport-related professions and idealized sport training and resources in the U.S. Hansell et al.
purported it is possible the mere structure of the program reinforced a perceived imbalance of
power, in what was meant to be a shared intercultural exchange, which inspired the present
study.
Research Design & Positionality
Method
A critical constructivist epistemological framework was used to frame the present study,
which acknowledges the influential role of culture, context, and power, both hidden and overt,
across human social interactions as individuals navigate, and make meaning of, their experiences
(Amineh & Asl, 2015; Bentley, 2003; Hopf, 1998; Levers, 2013; Price & Reus-Smit, 1998;
Stetsenko & Arievitch, 1997). Within qualitative research, assuming a critical constructivist lens
entails the co-creation of meaningful information through interactions between researchers and
participants to promote transformation, critique, and the generation of novel ideas (McCabe &
Holmes, 2009). Scholars have highlighted the importance of adopting a critical lens to challenge
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
6
existing societal status quos by questioning, untangling, and constantly reevaluating entrenched
ideologies, beliefs, values, and assumptions (Denzin & Giardina, 2016). From this perspective, a
critical lens not only welcomes diversity, disagreement, and dissent, but views them as essential
components of the research process to garner new theoretical insights, possibilities, and
explanations. Qualitative researchers have highlighted the philosophical similarities between
constructivism and critical theory (Price & Reus-Smit, 1998). Both are rooted in ontological
relativism, which posits that reality is constructed through an individual’s unique interpretation
of their environment, context, and identity, and therefore multiple realities can exist
simultaneously (De Ronde & Mouján, 2019). From this orientation, semi-structured individual
interviews were conducted to provide participants with opportunities to respond to the same
questions within a flexible framework and, in turn, promote rapport building, depth of responses,
exploration of unique insights, and co-construction of meaning with participants through
elaborative discussion (Dearnley, 2005). The present study was informed by a seven-person
research team with various roles to include two interviewers and two critical friends whose
respective roles are discussed herein as well as an auditor who oversaw the project with the
consultative support of a dissertation committee representing experience in SDP, PYD,
intercultural collaboration, girls’ and women’s leadership, and the youth sport experience and
who offered insights iteratively through the writing process.
Participants
Participants (n = 6; Mage = 41.5 years; SD = 10.4 years) were a purposive sample of
Mexican and American citizens (n = 3 self-identified women; n = 3 self-identified men)
involved in both phases of Deporte y Cambio Social in Mexico and in the U.S., respectively.
Using maximum variation sampling methods, participants were selected according to select
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
7
variables that influence, or are influenced by, power (i.e., nationality, gender, professional role,
role in the program). The participant sample included two Mexican university students training
to become sport coaches and/or physical activity teachers of girls and women at the time of their
program participation; two Mexican faculty members and one American faculty member from
the collaborating universities who were involved in the design and implementation of both
program phases; and an American coach of girls and women involved in the program’s
implementation.
Procedures
Following IRB approval for this study, eligible participants (i.e., involved in design,
implementation, and/or participation in both phases of Deporte y Cambio Social; 18 years or
older) were contacted via email, text message, or private social media message with invitation to
participate in the study. This communication described the purpose and nature of the study, the
tasks involved in participating, and invited them to further discuss the study via video call.
Participants were also provided informed consent and a background questionnaire asking them
their name, age, hometown, place of residence, current occupation, and occupation at the time
they were involved in Deporte y Cambio Social. All eligible individuals responded to the initial
inquiry; participants who opted out cited personal events. Six participants agreed to participate
through electronic return of a signed consent form and scheduled their virtual interview.
Each interview, ranging from 28 to 60 minutes (M = 45 minutes), was conducted
collaboratively by two research team members. The first interviewer was an American citizen
and doctoral student at the American university who identifies as a White man. He has been
passionate about the potential role of sport in promoting positive social change through his
experiences traveling internationally, his soccer career, and his continued non-profit work in a
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
8
rural community in Ghana. Although he is fluent in Spanish, he acknowledged his role as a
cultural ‘outsider’ given his limited immersion in Mexican cultures, customs, and traditions. The
second interviewer was a Mexican citizen who completed her doctoral degree at the American
university and identifies as a Latina woman. Born and raised in Mexico for 18 years before
attending university in the U.S. as a student-athlete, she had personal experience with gender
inequity in Mexico both within and outside sport, and openly acknowledged her role as a cultural
‘insider’ given her lived experience as a Mexican citizen. Both were involved in the program
development and implementation across the two phases of Deporte y Cambio Social. They
attended all planning meetings and provided feedback connecting sport-based activities with
program objectives and their alignment with Mexican cultural norms. Each assisted the primary
workshop facilitators and served as translators between Spanish and English speakers.
The interviewers stayed in contact with many of the representatives, Mexican and
American, who were involved in Deporte y Cambio Social in the time since the program ended.
These continued personal relationships primarily consisted of occasional (e.g., bi-weekly)
conversations in-person or via text messaging services and social media. The formation of
sustained relationships beyond participation in SDP programs has been labeled as ‘friendship
potential,’ which is a common outcome stemming from SDP programs involving stakeholders
from different cultures (Dixon et al., 2019). Having relationships (e.g., personal, professional)
beyond traditional researcher-participant dynamics is not uncommon in ethnographic studies
within anthropology. Day (2012) asserted that role conflicts for qualitative researchers are not
inherently problematic, as long as the researchers engage in a robust reflexive process to
understand their different roles, their impact on the research, and how and when they alternate
between multiple, and sometimes conflicting, roles. Other scholars have noted that pre-existing
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
9
relationships between researchers and participants can counteract perceived power imbalances,
enhance vulnerability and honesty, and foster more meaningful discussions during qualitative
interviews (Eide & Kahn, 2008; Råheim et al., 2016).
Following guidance outlined by Whiting (2008) for facilitating semi-structured
interviews, the interviewers began each interview by explaining the study purpose, use and
dissemination of findings, their rights as research participants, and protection of confidentiality.
The interviewers additionally encouraged discussion of concerns or questions to allow
participants to explore the prompts freely and interact with the interviewers comfortably.
Interview items (See Appendices D and E) were developed to prompt critical reflection related to
participants’: (a) experiences in the program (e.g., describe your experience participating in
Deporte y Cambio Social); (b) understandings of power (e.g., what does power mean to you?);
(c) perceptions of power within the present intercultural collaboration (e.g., during the program,
tell us when you perceived a power balance/imbalance); and (d) additional hypothetical prompts
related to intergroup dynamics and power (e.g., would you ever consider coming/returning to the
U.S./Mexico to deliver a similar program?).
The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and translated into English by a
professional editor who is fluent in Spanish and English. Each participant was contacted to
complete a virtual, individual member reflection with the interviewers (Smith & McGannon,
2018) during which participants were prompted with questions regarding their initial interview
experience (i.e., what was it like for you to critique, with strengths and areas of improvement, the
Deporte y Cambio Social program?). Participants were then provided with a case summary,
developed by the interviewers, with initial interpretations from their first interview and
encouraged to question, clarify, or expand. All participants engaged in member reflections,
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
10
ranging from 10 to 17 minutes (M = 13 minutes), which were additionally transcribed as data
and integrated into the remaining phases of data analysis (Smith & McGannon, 2018).
Data Analysis
The core data analysis team included the interviewers, as well as two individuals with
‘critical friend’ roles, both of whom are American citizens who identify as White women; the
first is pursuing her doctoral degree, and the second is the primary author’s doctoral advisor, at
the American institution. Neither critical friend was involved in the design or delivery of Deporte
y Cambio Social and, accordingly, were well-positioned to offer perspectives external to direct
programmatic experiences. Given the analysis teams’ variable roles, experiences, and
relationships to the participants, reflexivity was prioritized – a critical thinking practice to
identify and bring into conscious awareness specific personal, cultural, social, theoretical, and
political factors that influence the research so meaning can be understood and evaluated in
context (Attia & Edge, 2017; Day, 2012; Georgiadou, 2016; Lazard & McAvoy, 2017). The
researchers followed guidance provided by Meyer and Willis (2019) to intentionally engage in a
structured and reflexive process using journaling and critical collective discussions to elucidate
unconscious biases and tendencies that may influence their interactions with participants and the
data (Cunliffe, 2004; Malacrida, 2007; McNair, Taft, & Hegarty, 2008). Prior to data collection,
analysis team members discussed their role in the program, identity, and positionality (Day,
2012; e.g., What are your underlying assumptions about the production of knowledge? How does
my role/identity/education/experience influence my perspective and interpretation?). They
additionally responded to prompts, in written form, related to power (e.g., in my community,
power means…) and their views on SDP (e.g., my impressions of SDP work are…). The purpose
of the analysis team’s engagement with themselves and each other was to process, clarify, and be
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
11
transparent about what each member brought to the analysis and explore how the study, in turn,
would be informed by that awareness. This process encouraged exploration of multiple
interpretive possibilities while supporting participants’ voices as the primary source of meaning
derived from the data (Halcomb & Peters, 2016).
The data were analyzed using a reflexive thematic approach (Braun & Clarke, 2019;
2020). Importantly, Braun and Clarke (2020) asserted their guidance is not meant to be followed
rigidly, as the process should be fluid, recursive, and flexible. Prior to reading transcripts, the
analysis team met to discuss, establish, and clarify norms, roles, and expectations for the coding
process that were subsequently revisited at the start of each analysis meeting. These initial
conversations included sharing from each member’s reflexive journals (e.g., What thoughts and
feelings emerged for you as you read the data this week?); invitations to respectfully dissent with
another member’s perspective (e.g., Could this interpretation more deeply consider the
sociocultural context?); and acknowledging insights from each team member as equally valuable
regardless of their role (e.g., What was it like as a student to receive that feedback from me, as
your doctoral advisor? What resonates? What doesn’t?).
Each member of the analysis team reviewed the data individually and pre-coded, one
transcript at a time, using open coding (Charmaz, 2014; Saldaña, 2006) and an analytic memo to
document impressions before discussing as a group. Together, the analysis team deductively
organized the codes according to all facets of the study purpose and inductively organized them
according to meanings generated. Over several months, the organization of codes, drafted in text
form and via conceptual mapping, were iteratively revised, refined, and re-defined as new
transcripts were read via constant comparison (Braun & Clarke, 2020) as well as throughout the
writing of the study in which all research team members were consulted for clarity,
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
12
interpretation, and context based on their unique role in the program and the study. In the
following narrative, participants’ names were replaced with pseudonyms to protect
confidentiality (i.e., Mexican participants were Fran, Guillermo, Mariana, and Miguel; American
participants were Jennifer and Jeremy).
Results and Discussion
The following narrative begins with participants’ broad impressions of the program.
Understandings of power and culture that shaped their experience are then examined and
interpreted to inform recommendations for SDP engagement. Within each section, main ideas
generated from the data are italicized for emphasis. Participants’ names were replaced with
pseudonyms to protect confidentiality (i.e., Mexican participants were Fran, Guillermo, Mariana,
and Miguel; American participants were Jennifer and Jeremy).
General Impressions of the Short-Term SDP Experience
Mexican and American participants expressed significant enjoyment of, and deep
gratitude for, their experience in Deporte y Cambio Social. Participants reported sentiments such
as: “…Everyone who travelled, based on what I saw, they really enjoyed the trip. They really
had a great cultural experience” (Jeremy); “This trip was an example of how relationships that
are formed in sport can be lifelong and life changing” (Jennifer); and “…we still talk on some
occasions about the subject of [state]. The truth is we loved the treatment we received from all of
you. What happened is that a very nice, very fraternal integration was made” (Miguel). Miguel
elaborated: “The truth is that it is an experience I will cherish throughout my life.” Participants’
gratitude for their rich intercultural experiences was deeply rooted in their belief that sport can be
used as a powerful, unifying mechanism that can “…teach that sort of balance and
responsibility” (Jennifer). Miguel shared: “Sport moves masses. Sport prevents crime. Sport
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
13
unites cultures...Sport creates values. If I am a child, a six-year-old or seven-year-old, and I learn
teamwork, communication, friendship, honesty, tolerance, respect, companionship, etc., society
is going to be better.”
Such positive reflections of participants’ overall experience are much like those reported
in response to similar SDP programs conducted between, for example, the U.S. and China
(LeCrom & Dwyer, 2013), Jordan and Tajikistan (Blom et al., 2019), as well as countries in
Latin America and the Caribbean (Baker et al., 2018). Although belief in the power of sport to
support positive and productive social change is hopeful, Coakley (2015) cautioned against
overcommitment to the Great Sport Myth that assumes participation in sport is automatically
good. According to Coakley, policymakers and others in positions of power have historically
taken advantage of this assumption, particularly because sporting endeavors generate significant
popular and financial support. While describing the positive “impact on society” that sport can
have for “all the problems that currently exist in terms of violence, drugs, dropping out of school,
etc...,” Miguel also emphasized “it all depends on the people involved." Germane to Coakley’s
(2015) assertion and Miguel’s poignant perspective, sport does not inherently ‘do good;’ its
potential depends on how people within a socially and culturally-informed sport context, are
positioned to promote positive change. In turn, though often unexplored in broad stroke
assessments of participants’ impressions of SDP programs, astute consideration of ways to
acknowledge and address power-related disparities within SDP partnerships are additionally vital
to the integrity and sustainability of SDP work (Darnell et al., 2018; Giulianotti et al., 2019;
Svensson & Loat, 2019). In the following sections, we share insights from participants of
Deporte y Cambio Social with respect to the dynamic intersections of power and culture that are
foundational to the impact of SDP programs and, based on the data, explore how these programs
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
14
can be approached to maximize cultural understanding, and minimize the reproduction of
inequities, while acknowledging the constraints under which SDP work is often conducted.
Understandings of Power and Power Relations with the Short-Term SDP Experience
Mexican and American participants described power as a paradoxical concept.
Guillermo reported:
If you want to know a person, you give them power. It’s going to give us the best of
themselves or it’s going to give us the worst of themselves. Power…is a great
responsibility that can lead us to a positive or negative side with a very thin line.
When used appropriately, power was characterized as involving the “capacity to influence
others” (Jeremy); a “basic need” that “defines our safety overall” (Jennifer); and a “tool” that can
“break barriers and help other[s] grow alongside you” (Miguel), allow one to “do things for
others…or society” (Fran), and “reach your goals” (Mariana). Two participants, both of whom
were Mexican women, further described power as an aspiration; that is, “a strong word that we
should all have in our minds as a value” (Mariana) because it can lead to “more educational and
economic opportunities” (Fran). Although acknowledged by everyone, only Mexican
participants robustly elaborated on the negative potential of power with contextual examples
(i.e., “…in Mexico, power means to do what you want whether it is right or wrong…Many
powerful people do things only for them and their family and not their community. I think it’s
wrong” [Miguel] and “power in the Mexican context can be understood as an abuse” and a
“negative authority” [Guillermo]).
Within Deporte y Cambio Social specifically, power dynamics between Mexican and
American stakeholders were informed by a complex intersection of privileges rooted in
nationality, language, culture, race, sex, and gender. Foundationally, Mexican and American
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
15
participants acknowledged that SDP programs involving a partnership between a country from
the Global North, like the U.S., and a developing country, like Mexico, are inherently built upon
a pre-existing power imbalance. Jeremy shared: “I think the imbalance of power started from
day 1...you’re an American university, so you are automatically considered good.” In reflection
of a mandated visit to the U.S. Consulate during the first program phase in Mexico, including its
“nice” appearance, “ready to respond” formalities in case of emergencies, and resources “had I
needed anything,” Jennifer shared: “I think that just speaks to the power that Americans have and
also think we’re entitled to…” Miguel explained:
Maybe I'm a little biased because personally I’m a big fan of American culture. I can say
that I grew up with their philosophy that I learned through their movies, through their
sports, their leagues, but I think that the university issue is amazing; how they live, how
they get to campus, how doors are opened for people to be able to be in these institutions
of such high prestige.
Deference to Americans and other Global North actors and institutions regarding
knowledge, ideals, and expertise is well-documented in the SDP literature (i.e., Dao & Chin,
2021; Hansell et al., under review; Hayhurst et al., 2021d). Such deference fuels a foundational
imbalance of power on which SDP programs are often built that, despite intentions to facilitate
equitable partnerships, nonetheless influences the process through which SDP programs are
designed and delivered (Dao & Chin, 2021; Harris, 2018). In the present study, Jeremy shared: “I
think we sort of like were dictating the program…the program was in our, the ball was on our
side.” Concordantly, Mariana observed: “I noticed Americans had a lot of power.”
Mexican participants, however, did not perceive the control that Americans had over the
program and its implementation as problematic. Mariana elaborated: “I did not notice any
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
16
[power imbalance]. It was more like [Americans] reached an agreement, you talked about it and
told us, and we had to do it no matter what. It was not like an option.” Fran similarly
acknowledged the American constituent as the leaders who arrived to “present” while Mexicans
“participate,” but only problematized the observed power imbalance between Americans who
could and could not speak Spanish: “When you [Americans] came [to Mexico], you were the
ones who were organizing everything. So, it could be a number one imbalance, the language,
because [American] spoke Spanish and English and had more decision-making power on that
side.” Together, these findings suggest that, as an identified world power, ‘American expertise’
and leadership were expected (Collison et al., 2016; Darnell et al., 2018).
Further, Mexican participants reported they were treated as equals by the American
constituent, which strengthened their cultural perceptions. Feelings of equality were observed
most when Mexicans and Americans were jointly engaged in the program’s functions (i.e.,
“When we were doing the activities in the field I believe that was more of a power balance”
[Mariana]; “…in all the activities, those that were done in classrooms, when you shared a talk
with us, when we had practices on the fields, when we were in the camp” [Miguel]). Fran
reflected positively on Mexicans’ homestay experiences during the program phase in the U.S.,
which she believed were met with not only equality, but also consideration:
I told them that we Mexicans must eat together at least once a day, and what they did was
to invite their son to dinner so that I wouldn't feel so out of my house. They told me ‘We
have dinner together on a few occasions, but we are inviting him for you to see what a
family dinner is like because we do not really have them often.
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
17
Despite positive interpersonal connections with the American contingent in the program,
Mexican participants also candidly described, with expectation and acceptance, experiences of
racial discrimination while in the U.S. Guillermo explained:
…when we were at [name] airport, there was a dark-skinned policeman who just noticed
that we were Mexicans and threw our bags. Then I said, ‘I will do it and put it up.’ He
saw what I did, returned it, and threw it back again. It seems to me that there was an
abuse of power from an authority there. He wanted to show, here I command…However,
I insist, we are in the process of social development, and we must be tolerant of this type
of action and just understand the reasons why these things occur, only that. But I'm not
talking about a generality, it was simply an isolated event that that occurred on that trip,
but at least in Deporte y Cambio Social we were treated wonderfully.
Fran shared:
…we have an idea of the profile of the nationalities in Mexico. Unfortunately many times
we see racism, that you are not being loved, that they don't see you as equal, but we see
that in this type of program, it was super good, and this perception was not in it…this
paradigm that many people have was changed...Many Mexicans think that Americans are
not interested in us. But, they were quite interested in knowing our culture, in knowing
our food, how we thought and how we interacted with each other. I saw it as a good
thing…I see that in this type of program, nationality does not matter, the important thing
is people...
While intercultural interactions within the insulated context of SDP programs are positive, they
also serve as barriers to meaningfully identifying, discussing, and working through authentic
intercultural conflict in real world settings. Jeremy, for example, cautioned that the American
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
18
contingent who partook in Deporte y Cambio Social was largely comprised of individuals who
were already educated with significant travel experience:
…I really would have liked to actually take kids that actually maybe think that Mexicans
are rapists, Mexicans are bad people. These are the people that actually we should have
selected to really go there, because that’s the aim of the program, the people to people.
Although defaulting to university-affiliated professionals and students is a convenient
recruitment tool, it prevents the expansion of SDP opportunities to a more diverse group of
Global North participants without prior access to this type of exposure and learning and who
might benefit most. Further, other literature cautions that marketing SDP volunteer positions to
college students as opportunities to enrich their educational experience and boost future
employment prospects detracts from the intended purpose of these programs to serve with
another cultural community (Clarke & Norman, 2021; Giulianotti, Collison, & Darnell 2021).
Specific to sex and gender, Mexican and American participants observed when biases
were perpetuated, and at other times challenged, amid program execution. Jennifer shared:
…sexism showed up in the management of our trip in that it was too hot for the women’s
event to happen, so we didn’t get to connect with just women only…It’s like we’re here
for [women’s empowerment] and you’re telling a bunch of women that it’s too hot for us
to play instead of asking us if we want to do it.
In observation of the American constituent group, Mariana reported: “In the case of [American
woman], who was with us a lot, she would say something and then later it was changed to what
[American man] wanted; then yes, I saw two unequal powers.” Other scholars have described
how, although SDP programs are intended to facilitate positive social change, often unseen
biases, specifically with respect to sex and gender that are deeply entrenched in our sociocultural
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
19
worlds, still manifest in program execution. For instance, del Socorro Cruz Centeno (2021)
reflected on ways in which the prescribed curriculum of an established SDP program that used
soccer to target gender equity and environmental stewardship in Nicaragua subtlety reinforced
existing gender norms in the local context. Specifically, women program participants assumed
cleaning and organizational tasks (traditionally feminine) while men program participants
neglected these chores to play soccer (traditionally masculine). Chawansky (2015) used
autoethnographic vignettes to similarly reflect on ways in which her identity as an American
White woman influenced her experience and interactions as a Global North SDP researcher;
specifically, she recounted experiences of gender bias and sexualization while aiming to
empower girls and women in a Global South context.
Parallel to these types of experiences were instances in which sex and gender disparities
were contemplated and challenged. Mariana explained how, in response to a training received in
the U.S., the Mexican girls reflected on the differences in societal norms regarding the legal
protection of girls and women:
…the girls were saying, ‘so, here, if somebody turns to see you, it is almost a felony, if
somebody touches your hair, it is a felony.’ They didn´t know that. Some had the
openness to tell me some very strong things that happened in their community [in
Mexico], and I think it doesn’t happen here in the United States, not even half of it,
because you would be taken to jail or arrested...
Such reflections suggest that takeaways for Mexican participants from this training included
being more conscious observers of their surrounding environment as well as an awareness of
differences in gender protections across cultures. However, although the presence of institutional
systems intended to protect the rights of girls and women was both surprising and inspiring,
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
20
these structures have been frequently criticized for operating under the guise that they protect
girls and women, when, that is not always the case. For instance, critics of Title IX, which was
designed to provide institutional protection for girls and women within higher education, assert
that navigating it’s policies can be complicated, traumatic, and unsuccessful for many survivors
of sexual violence. Instead of taking firm, no tolerance stance on sexual misconduct,
administrators, and others in positions of power often maintain a silent, neutral position to
protect their own public image as well as their institution’s (Cruz, 2021: Delaet & Mills, 2018).
Thus, Mexican participants may have been left with an incomplete idea of the effectiveness and
procedures for complex institutional policies designed to protect girls and women in the U.S.
Explicating the Realities of SDP Programs with Recommendations Forward
Despite perceptions of Deporte y Cambio Social being generally “well-designed” and
“super well-organized,” time was a significant barrier (e.g., “…it was just too much to fit into a
week” [Jennifer]; “…everything was in a hurry” [Mariana]). Mexican participants reflected on
the busy daily itineraries developed by the American cohort. Miguel shared:
…honestly, nobody wanted to go back home. We all wanted to stay a few more days
because a very good atmosphere was created...Why do I tell you more time? Because
almost every day was very busy and went by very fast.
Mariana echoed: “Take it more slowly, only that. I know it was tight since you had to fulfill a lot.
But you can give them time to relax or do their own things and let them be with each other.”
Mexican participants’ observations of the program itinerary, which largely aligned with
American cultural norms on productivity and punctuality, are one example of the problematic
discordance between meeting the demands of a grant originating from a Global North context
and norms of local culture in many Global South communities (Hayhurst et al., 2021c; Oxford &
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
21
McLachlan, 2018). Within the noted time constraints, participants also explained they had
limited role clarity (e.g., “I feel like if [my role] was a test question, I would probably not get it
correct” [Jennifer]; “I believe that knowledge, to know what we were going to do and why,
would have facilitated everything that happened” [Mariana]).
Concordantly, Jeremy described the coordination of lodging, meals, budgeting, and
transportation as a significant constraint on time and resources that made for an “intense”
experience. He further acknowledged significant investment from the Mexican constituent
group: “We were just asking them to be partners, collaborators without any cost, but of course
they had costs… not only during the event but prior to the event…if you put money into the time
of the people.” Thus, the very structure of the funding opportunity and its associated demands
were believed to significantly complicate the ability to more meaningfully engage with the
Mexican stakeholders during the program’s design. Jeremy added:
…it was not a program that I would say was totally built with them…at the very
beginning, we talked about ‘we need to build this program with them, so it’s going to be
more inclusive’…I think it was more a logistics issue…I think we had the intentions to
build something with them, but it was so complicated to really have a clear idea of what
we want to do...we were moving, right? Because of the logistics, because of the time…
Managing complex logistical barriers, including navigating the landscape of SDP funding
sources, has been discussed extensively in the literature as a competitive, detailed, and
exhausting process (e.g., Darnell et al., 2018; Svensson & Loat, 2019). Scholars have identified
considerable discordance between the primary, outcome-focused objectives of funders (e.g., to
demonstrate evidence of pre-post change and positive experiences) and additional, process
focused objectives of SDP researchers and practitioners (e.g., empowering communities and
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
22
building sustainable programs; Giulianotti et al., 2019). To this point, Jeremy explained: “It’s a
little bit artificial…when you create this positive feeling. And by creating these positive feelings,
I think you are achieving in a certain way the [funder’s] purposes...” He elaborated: “…They
require a lot of time and involvement into setting up the programs with all these demands, but
sometimes you lose focus of what is the core problem.” Jennifer reflected on the broader
implications of a short-term SDP program: "With more time and experience we could have made
this a richer experience about women, coaching, social change, and sport.” She added:
…I don’t really think we impacted another generation of women. We just impacted the
women that were there. So, I would have liked to be able to encourage females more
specifically to take and apply what they learned. I thought we were kind of able to
encourage the group generally, but I would have liked more in that.
Although a subsample of Mexican participants designed and implemented abbreviated
workshops with pupils at two Mexican high schools following their own workshop participation,
there may not have been sufficient opportunity for participants to apply and/or share their
knowledge and experience from the program.
Indeed, Mexican participants described their cultural learning, including site seeing, as
their “favorite” or “best parts of the trip.” While cultural learning is foundational to any SDP
initiative, coupling an immersive, first-time cultural experience with a social change program
simultaneously is a known challenge of short-term SDP endeavors (e.g., Dao & Chin, 2021;
Giulianotti et al., 2021; Whitley et al., 2018). Scholars have also problematized the frequent
prioritization of funding new investigators that make learning from experience and sustained
careers in SDP difficult (Coalter, 2010; Harrison & Boehmer, 2020; Kidd, 2008). Jeremy
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
23
explained: “I think I would like to really take the time to understand how people have done it.
Because I think many of the programs probably experienced the same as we did.”
Accordingly, participants offered their ideas toward SDP programs that can reasonably
accomplish their central purposes to support meaningful intercultural engagement while fostering
culturally relevant learning and reflection of key social issues. Among these recommendations,
members of the Mexican contingent suggested SDP programs be longer in duration and that the
experiences across countries be increasingly parallel. Fran explained:
I saw how an American family lived. I realized the great differences. Maybe if you had
stayed with a family when you came to Mexico, you would have also realized it too. You
would not only have seen it from the outside…I would not change anything more than to
see the way that, when you come, you could stay in the house of Mexicans and not in a
hotel because it is very different.
Guillermo similarly reported:
[I wish] that Americans had more time in our country, that it was at least balanced.
Because we stayed two weeks and it seems to me that you were only six or seven days.
Then I would like it to be the same time so that it was wider, be calmer, and we could
enjoy it a little more, and that this opportunity could be used to present more things about
our country…of its people who are wonderful, that you could live it in a better way…
Other Mexican participants added, “…it would have been better if it would have been more days,
obviously. I know it is not simple to be accepted one month” (Mariana) and “at least four weeks
instead of two” (Miguel).
Relatedly, participants reflected on the importance of follow-up opportunities for
continued, long-term engagement with program stakeholders and the programming. Mariana
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
24
shared: “I believe there should be a follow up...Let’s see what we did or how this has impacted.”
Jennifer similarly explained: “…had there not been a global pandemic, I would have really
hoped that there was some sort of follow-up, because I think that would have been where we saw
how sustainable this was or how to make this sustainable.” Interpersonally, Miguel noted
Mexicans and Americans “are still in contact” and “developed a very nice friendship.” As an
indicator of the importance of sustained engagement, several Mexican participants expressed
sincere appreciation for the opportunity to discuss their experiences toward the present research.
Mariana reported: “…you are considering me in something that maybe can be of impact on the
next generation, then I feel great; I feel considered.” Without strategic and intentional continuity,
however, the ability to transfer ownership and responsibility of the program to local communities
is compromised. Fran explained: “Since we came back, 80% of participants asked if there was
going to be something similar and if they could volunteer for another program or another
visit...We told them ‘We did not bring the program, it isn’t ours.’”
Participants further described the importance of engaging in considerable introspection,
reflection, discussion, cultural preparation, and relationship building prior to travel and
throughout the experience. Jennifer explained: “When we design programs, we have these great
ideas, but we don’t know the participants yet. I see more successful mentoring programs being
more organic where there’s possibility for connection.” Fran stated:
Maybe [more preparation] on what our culture is like. Although you do not know a
person well, even if they have just been introduced to you, we greet with a kiss and a
hug…Telling Americans this would have been useful so they wouldn't be scared…
Guillermo added:
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
25
It probably would have been good if the [Mexicans] who visited knew more about [the
United States]. Maybe 80% had never visited the United States before. Many had never
left Mexico before. The ones for whom it was the first time did not know practically
anything about it…Maybe if they knew a little about the cultural aspect before going.
Jennifer, in her interview, reflected upon her experience as an English-speaking American in
Mexico that serves as an example of the type of critical reflection that is warranted throughout
the SDP experience from beginning to end:
I was in the middle of a group, and I suddenly could not remember anything in Spanish. I
had been speaking in Spanish, I mean not well, but at least enough that the group
understood me. And as I kept talking, I was like ‘yeah…I don’t know anymore’
(laughter). It’s just this silly example but in that moment, I felt a distinct shift in how
much power I had and how much I could help. I pretty much felt worthless to the group
and to the project.
She added: “This expectation that we went there and didn’t have to speak Spanish speaks so
much to our power and privilege. People wanting to learn from us regardless of if they can
understand us is pretty amazing.”
Central to the core purpose of SDP programs, women participants across cultures
recommended considerable attention to understandings of sex and gender and the intentional
construction of representative leadership teams. Specifically, Mexican and American women
participants discussed the prominent role of women within the project, but also wished more had
been involved given the program’s emphasis on women’s empowerment. Fran shared:
I saw when you visited Mexico that most of the visitors were women; both the girls who
coached soccer, the organizers, and many of the researchers who came were women, so I
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
26
think it was already focused on women’s empowerment and all the activities that were
done were usually led by women.
Mariana added:
I would have liked more women teachers and not as many men teachers. Also, more
people from the sports arena, because if your goal is to use sport and empower women
through that sport, more sport professionals should have been [involved]…there were
teachers that had nothing to do with that sport and they were men. I don’t mean that only
women should be included, but I think that if we want to empower girls, we [the Mexican
constituent group] should have taken more women teachers.
General Discussion
Although our findings suggest that Mexican and American participants valued their
experience in Deporte y Cambio Social, our subsequent analysis underscores the importance of
engaging in critical and constructive reflection as a vital component of the SDP experience for
all stakeholders. Indeed, garnering participants’ perspectives on some of the common challenges
and related power dynamics within the SDP sphere is a noted strength of the current study, as is
the significance of the candid accounts shared by participants and the humility of those engaged
in the project who were willing to critique their own work and experience. To create dissonance
with the potentially unsettling data shared in this study, it is easy to perceive the challenges
discussed herein as unique and isolated to Deporte y Cambio Social. However, the alignment of
the present data with a preponderance of recent conceptual critiques of SDP work (Darnell et al.,
2018; Giulianotti et al., 2019; Hayhurst et al., 2021a; Whitley et al., 2018) suggest the
conclusions are indeed transferable to a larger body of SDP programs that have, and continue to
be, conducted. Following a process of critical and admittedly difficult introspection and
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
27
reflection, we encourage others associated with SDP programs to engage in a similar reflexive
experience as a solution toward greater awareness, understanding, and increasingly effective
navigation of known challenges. Indeed, the purpose of this study was not to dismiss the
important potential of SDP programs and the overwhelmingly positive experiences that have
been described here and in other literature (Baker et al., 2018; Blom et al., 2019; LeCrom &
Dwyer, 2013), but rather to suggest that the broad stroke impressions of SDP programs capture
only one chapter of a much longer and more nuanced story that will meaningfully inform the
future of SDP work, if told.
To begin, while the Mexican participants in this study reported enjoying and appreciating
the opportunity to interact with and learn from Americans and engage in American culture, at a
deeper level, these cultural experiences also served to reinforce a neoliberal view of Americans
as experts and the U.S. as ideal compared to Mexicans and Mexico (Hansell et al., under review).
In fact, when Mexican participants were asked whether they would consider leading a similar
program in which they would share their expertise with Americans, they responded with repeated
confusion over the question to suggest this possibility was difficult to conceive. As a world
power, Americans assuming the role of deliverers of expertise and experience, mostly in English,
was expected, which reflects the larger power disparities upon which this, and other SDP
programs are built. While positive interpersonal exchanges with those directly in the American
constituent promoted feelings of value, worth, and equality, discriminatory experiences while
abroad were also expected and viewed as a normal aspect of human existence and development.
Other research has highlighted understandings of power as core foundations of SDP programs
(e.g., Hayhurst et al., 2021a). Our findings suggest that conceptualizations of power can differ
across stakeholders and cultures, which underscores the importance of explicitly discussing
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
28
power (im)balances both within and across cultural groups and how they will be addressed,
potentially as part of the relationship-building and familiarization process early on. As one
example, understanding that others may come to know power as abusive comes with tremendous
responsibility to attend to power dynamics so as not to reproduce harm.
Participants’ responses further suggest that the most rewarding elements of the program
were the cultural experiences and the person-to-person activities. Interestingly, Mexican
participants’ responses related to their experiences during the second program phase in the U.S.
were almost entirely about the cultural activities, which included excursions to local landmarks,
tours of the university campus, spending an entire day in a major American city where
participants were given money to shop, and tours of professional baseball and American football
stadiums, all of which were included as part of the program’s itinerary. Mexican participants’
responses suggest what was unaddressed was a truly parallel experience in Mexico that would
have allowed Americans to similarly engage and learn about Mexican culture more deeply.
Aligned with contact theory (Allport, 1954) and SFDT (Dixon et al., 2019; Lyras &
Welty-Peachey, 2011), the person-to-person interactions within the program seemingly helped
members of each group connect over shared human experiences, which resulted in the formation
of personal and professional interpersonal relationships across cultures, many of which have
been sustained since the program ended. Admiration of American ideals such as work ethic and
motivation were described by Mexican participants in focus group interviews conducted
immediately after the first program phase in Mexico (Hansell et al., under review), and findings
from the present study suggest the cross-cultural experiences were valued by both Mexican and
American stakeholders within Deporte y Cambio Social. Yet, while the program’s emphasis on
cultural activities emphasized by the funder is an important part of intercultural engagement, it
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
29
also served to distract from the program’s emphasis on women’s empowerment in attempting to
accomplish both simultaneously. Such distraction is evidenced across participants’ responses that
were largely devoid of commentary about the program itself and is an important indicator of how
to position SDP work differently in the future.
Practical Implications
Participants’ recommendations for future endeavors to have longer-term opportunities to
engage with program stakeholders and materials corresponds with a common critique of SDP
programs and their typical short duration. Limited information exists regarding the long-term
implications of SDP programs, and researchers have asserted that collecting follow-up data over
time is a major challenge due to barriers such as misunderstandings of the role of data collection
among community members, logistical constraints for Western researchers in the balance of
other professional responsibilities such as teaching, and limited professional and financial
support for long-term objectives (Blom et al., 2015; Schulenkorf et al., 2016; Welty-Peachey &
Cohen, 2016). Within the present study, and particularly in the member reflections, participants’
expressions of appreciation and gratitude toward the researchers for including them in the
present study demonstrates a willingness to, or even desire for, such opportunities as well as
acknowledgement of the significant logistical barriers (e.g., costs, travel, time, etc.) that
accompany longer-term endeavors. Collectively, our experiences underscore the importance of
allocating more time and resources toward relationship-building, cultural learning, and
examination of power across intercultural stakeholders and a prolonged period through which
organic intercultural connection, collaboration, and sustained involvement can truly occur.
Approaching SDP work differently is largely dependent upon significant transformation
of the strategic priorities and structure of dominant funding mechanisms. Other researchers have
RETROSPECTIVE SDP CRITIQUE
30
suggested, for example, that funding opportunities move away from short-term programs with
aims to demonstrate positivist evidence of ‘impact,’ which has been critiqued as an extension of
neoliberalism, and toward more comprehensive and holistic approaches that acknowledge power
and culture as core components of the SDP experience (Darnell et al., 2018; Hayhurst et al.,
2021b; Giulianotti et al., 2019). Multi-year funding that supports seasoned professionals,
Les avis et les commentaires de Google AI
Drivers of Change in Mindfulness- and Acceptance-Based : Drivers of Change in Mindfulness- and Acceptance-Based
Interventions with Athletes: Investigating the Influence of Dosage,
Readiness, and Attitudes
Interventions with Athletes: Investigating the Influence of Dosage,
Readiness, and Attitudes
Thomas O. Minkler
tom0007@mix.wvu.edu
Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd
Part of the Exercise Science Commons, Other Kinesiology Commons, Other Psychology Commons,
and the Sports Sciences Commons
Recommended Citation
Minkler, Thomas O., "Drivers of Change in Mindfulness- and Acceptance-Based Interventions with
Athletes: Investigating the Influence of Dosage, Readiness, and Attitudes" (2023). Graduate Theses,
Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 11968.
https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/11968
This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research
Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is
permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain
permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license
in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses,
Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU.
For more information, please contact researchrepository@mail.wvu.edu.
Drivers of Change in Mindfulness- and Acceptance-Based Interventions with Athletes:
Investigating the Influence of Dosage, Readiness, and Attitudes
Tommy Minkler, MA
A Dissertation submitted
to the College of Applied Human Sciences
at West Virginia University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in
Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology
Sam Zizzi, Ed.D., Chair
D. Jake Follmer, Ph.D.
Johannes Raabe, Ph.D., CMPC
Zenzi Huysmans, Ph.D., CMPC
Department of Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology
Morgantown, West Virginia
April 2023
Keywords: Mindfulness, MABI, Student-Athlete, Dosage, Readiness, Attitudes
Copyright 2023 Thomas O. Minkler
Abstract
Drivers of Change in Mindfulness- and Acceptance-Based Interventions with Athletes:
Investigating the Influence of Dosage, Readiness, and Attitudes
Tommy Minkler, MA
Mindfulness- and Acceptance-based interventions (MABIs) are being used with increasing
frequency with sport participants. Research suggests that such interventions may promote sport
performance and impact performance-relevant factors, although the current quality and quantity
of research is low. Specifically, questions about intervention engagement (i.e., dosage),
potentially impacted by stage of change and attitudes toward sport psychology, need
clarification. The present study utilized a multi-method, quasi-experimental longitudinal design
with female- and male- identified NCAA collegiate athletes to investigate the effects of an
MABI. Specifically, one NCAA Division II team (n = 16) and three NCAA Division III teams (n
= 43) from two universities in the Appalachian region engaged in 6-week Mindful Sport
Performance Enhancement (MSPE) interventions during their offseason or pre-season training
period. Two teams served as the primary treatment group while two others served as the non
randomized waitlist control group; they were all assessed on measures of flow, psychological
distress, mindfulness, emotion regulation difficulties, satisfaction with life, readiness to engage
in mindfulness practice, attitudes toward sport psychology, and subjective ratings of performance
and enjoyment. Mindfulness dosage was also measured throughout and following the
intervention. Compared to controls, initial MSPE participants reported reductions in depressive
symptoms and emotion regulation difficulties, and improvements in self-rated sport
performance; at 6-week follow-up, initial MSPE participants reported significant increases in
mindfulness and sport enjoyment, in addition to sustained reductions in emotion regulation
difficulties. Though pre-intervention readiness did not predict changes across the intervention,
higher post-intervention readiness classification was associated with improvements in
mindfulness, life satisfaction, and sport enjoyment. Higher post-intervention readiness was also
associated with significantly more engagement (i.e., dosage), though neither dosage nor attitudes
toward sport psychology demonstrated evidence of moderation on the relationship between
readiness and outcomes. These data suggest that readiness may impact engagement in MABIs,
though it is still unclear whether there are indirect effects of dosage and attitudes toward sport
psychology on outcomes in MABIs with athletes.
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
Acknowledgements
iii
For the support I have received from all who have been a part of my journey so far, I am
exceedingly thankful. My path had been forged in large part because of my family. I would not
be doing what I am without the memory of my dad—thank you for modeling decency and
integrity, and for igniting a fierce curiosity in me. I owe an incalculable debt of gratitude to my
mom for her strength and unselfishness in her vital role in our family. I am also especially
grateful for Jamie, Annie, Patrick, Adam, Meg, Lilly, and Sophie, who have kept me grounded
and continue to remind me what is truly important in life. I love you all and deeply value the
unique contributions you all provide to me and the world.
Liefje Megan: I am so fortunate to have been supported by you over the last five years. Your
presence in my life elevates me and helps me to be a better person every day. Louie and I love
you, and I am so thankful for all you do, and have done, in helping me and us grow. One day I’ll
find the words, in Dutch, to describe how I feel, but for now—Ik hou van ons leven samen.
To Dr. Zizzi: My doctoral studies were made exponentially more enjoyable due to the support
and mentorship I received from you. Your ability to connect with and support people where they
are is exceptionally rare. My development under your guidance has left an indelible mark, and I
will aspire to be the kind of person and professional that you are for the remainder of my life.
To Carol and my friends at Catholic: Without your mentorship, Carol, I would not be in the
position I am today. Your support has catalyzed my growth and development. I cannot thank you
enough for introducing me to this field and continuing to mentor me through retirement. Your
devotion to your students is something I will always take with me.
To Laurel, Josh, Ashley and everyone at Whole Brain Solutions: Thank you for taking a chance
on me and supporting my growth process in so many ways. My professional excitement has
grown considerably since having the opportunity to learn from and collaborate with you all.
To Coach P, Jay, Todd, and my other mentors and friends from Ohio Wesleyan: My time in
Delaware, OH launched me on a path I could have never imagined. The experiences I had and
lessons I learned with and from you all have shaped me in countless ways, and I am grateful.
To BR, Coach Bordley, and my mentors and friends from Landon: Thank you for nurturing and
pushing me to pursue curiosity and excellence when I needed it most. The foundation I gained
during my time within the white rocks was formative in every way possible.
To friends, colleagues, and mentors at West Virginia: Before starting at WVU, I heard how
phenomenal our program and the community was from so many people—from exceptional
training and mentorship opportunities to professional connections, I knew that I would be
learning from and with the best in our field. What I did not fully comprehend was the
camaraderie and connection that I would be getting, which has been integral in my completion of
this program. To my cohort, Blake and Luna, in particular, I feel so incredibly grateful for your
friendship. You have supported me in ways that words cannot describe.
“This is a fine chance to let go, to ‘win my life by losing it,’ which means not recklessness but
acceptance, not passivity but nonattachment” – Peter Matthiessen
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
Table of Contents
iv
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………. 1
Method…………………………………………………………………………………… 9
Research Design………………………………………………………………………
Sampling and Recruitment……………………………………………………………
9
9
Participants…………………………………………………………………………… 10
Assessments…………………………………………………………………………… 11
Intervention…………………………………………………………………………… 19
Procedure………………………………………………………………………………. 19
Consulting Orientation, Experience, Education, and Positionality…………………….
22
Data Analysis………………………………………………………………………….. 24
Results……………………………………………………………………………………... 25
Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………. 36
Limitations and Future Directions………………………………………………………… 42
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………… 45
References…………………………………………………………………………………. 46
Tables……………………………………………………………………………………… 58
Extended Review of the Literature………………………………………………………... 71
Extended References……………………………………………………………………… 136
Appendices………………………………………………………………………………... 153
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
1
Drivers of Change in Mindfulness- and Acceptance-Based Interventions with Athletes:
Investigating the Influence of Dosage, Readiness, and Attitudes
Mindfulness, which “has to do with particular qualities of attention and awareness that
can be cultivated and developed through meditation” (Kabat-Zinn, 2003, p. 145), is associated
with a range of psychological benefits (Keng et al., 2011). Due to the positive outcomes
connected to the cultivation of mindfulness, interest in the construct and practice among sport,
exercise, and performance psychology (SEPP) researchers and practitioners has grown
tremendously in the past two decades. Systematic reviews in SEPP suggest that mindfulness may
confer benefits for sport participants, including heightened levels of mindfulness and flow, and
reductions in sport anxiety (Noetel et al., 2019; Sappington & Longshore, 2015), with less robust
evidence suggesting that mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions (MABIs) can directly
benefit sport performance (Bühlmayer et al., 2017). Although many professionals in SEPP and
other related fields have raised concerns about quality and standards of reporting in MABI
research (McAlarnen & Longshore, 2017; Noetel et al., 2019; Van Dam et al., 2017), extant
literature with athletes evaluating the effectiveness of MABIs is promising. Due to their rising
popularity, it is important for both researchers and practitioners to understand with a more
nuanced perspective how and under what circumstances such interventions may benefit sport
participants. While there is evidence that MABIs lead to change on outcomes related to
performance-relevant factors and well-being, much less is known about who changes, and why.
In Bühlmayer and colleagues’ (2017) meta-analysis, consisting of nine studies with 290
adolescent and adult sport participants, MABI length ranged from just four weeks to almost two
years using a variety of protocols and comparison groups. While it may be reasonable to assume
that longer interventions lead to more robust change, that statement is yet to be empirically
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
2
validated in SEPP. Investigating a seven-week mindfulness-acceptance-commitment (MAC)
intervention (see Gardner & Moore, 2007) compared to an active control group with 18 NCAA
Division III female-identified basketball players, Gross and colleagues (2018) suggested that
more time to practice mindfulness could have contributed to their findings—which included little
change from pre- to post-intervention but significant improvements with large effects (η2 > .19)
from post-intervention to 1-month follow-up on measures of emotion regulation, hostility, and
substance use (but not mindfulness) for the MAC group. Also notable is that both the MAC
group and the active control (a traditional psychological skills training intervention) reported
improvements over time in symptoms of anxiety, eating concerns, psychological distress,
psychological flexibility, and self-rated sport performance, with large effect sizes (η2 > .17),
suggesting that MABIs may be similarly affective as more-commonly integrated interventions
(e.g., positive self-talk, goal-setting).
Goodman and colleagues (2014) used a similar eight-week MAC intervention with 13
NCAA Division I male-identified basketball players but added an extra 60 extra minutes per
week of hatha yoga. MABI participants reported significant improvements on measures of
perceived stress and mindfulness with small to moderate effect sizes (d = .26 and .48,
respectively) immediately after the intervention. While both Gross et al. (2018) and Goodman et
al. (2014) clearly described the amount of in-session mindfulness practice in which participants
engaged, the amount of between-session practice was not evident. Josefsson and colleagues
(2019) also evaluated the effectiveness of a seven-week MAC intervention compared to an active
control group consisting of traditional psychological skills training (PST) with 69 elite athletes in
Sweden. MAC participants reported significantly greater improvements compared to controls on
measures of mindfulness and emotion regulation, with moderate to large effect sizes (d = .96 and
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
3
.74, respectively). Moreover, mindfulness and emotion regulation were found to independently
mediate the association between intervention condition and self-rated performance, such that
greater increases in mindfulness and decreases in emotion regulation difficulties were associated
with higher subjective performance ratings for MAC participants compared to controls. MAC
sessions were 50-minutes in length resulting in just under six total hours of intervention dosage,
although the degree of home practice was not reported.
More condensed MABI have also been evaluated, including a study by Rooks and
colleagues (2017). With 100 male-identified NCAA Division I football players, researchers
assigned participants to either a 4-week MABI or a time-matched relaxation training control
group during the high intensity pre-season period; both interventions included 5.4 hours of
instruction and proctored training, and 3.6 hours of assigned home practice over the intervention
period. Within-groups analyses indicated that attention decreased, and depressive symptoms,
anxiety, and positive affect increased during the intervention—which was described as a high
intensity physical training period. Although they failed to reject the null hypothesis in aggregate
(i.e., the MABI would promote positive outcomes related to attention and wellbeing), the
researchers observed that greater adherence to home mindfulness practice was inversely related
to anxiety; moreover, adherence was associated with smaller decreases—and in some cases
increases—in attention. Scott-Hamilton and Schutte (2016) similarly observed that competitive
adult athletes (Mage = 33.57) who engaged in more home practice between sessions of an MABI
improved more on measures of mindfulness, flow, and anxiety with large effects (η2 > .38),
though results were not statistically significant—potentially due to a small size (n = 12). Glass
and colleagues (2019) also reported that college athletes who engaged in more frequent
mindfulness practice reported significant improvements in flow and self-rated sport performance.
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
4
Regardless of dosage, the 43 athletes who completed the intervention—a six-week Mindful Sport
Performance Enhancement (MSPE) training—reported improvements in flow, mindfulness, life
satisfaction, and aspects of sport anxiety, with moderate to large effects (|0.47| < d > |0.81|; Glass
et al., 2019). These studies support the idea that dosage could influence MABI outcomes with
athletes, though more investigations studying dosage more specifically and as a moderator are
needed.
The potential dose-response relationship in MABIs has been explored more explicitly
outside of sport with varied populations. A review by Parsons and colleagues (2017) found that
28 studies (out of 43) reported positive associations between amount of home mindfulness
practice (i.e., dosage) and outcomes, indicating significant pooled results. Reported effects,
though significant, were small (r = .26). Although these data indicate that dosage may be related
to outcomes, Parsons et al. (2017) reported evidence for publication bias as well as broad
variability in the amount of practice across studies. In a sample of 174 adults (Mage = 47.05) who
had been referred to an eight-week Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) group based on
their clinical diagnoses, Carmody & Baer (2008) observed that between-session mindfulness
practice was associated with reductions in unhelpful psychological symptoms and stress and
improvements in wellbeing, which were mediated by increases in mindfulness. They also found
that specific practices were correlated with different reported outcomes (e.g., positive association
between minutes practicing body scans and psychological wellbeing). In a cross-section of 1,668
meditators (Mage = 45) across various traditions of practice, Bowles et al. (2022) observed a non
linear effect of lifetime meditation practice on outcomes related to psychological wellbeing;
specifically, the largest effects of meditation were observed in the first 500 hours practice before
plateauing. Though causal claims are impossible, these data further suggest that dosage is a
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
5
useful avenue to explore particularly early in one’s practice. Little attention has been placed on
this issue in the SEPP literature, and it is unknown if these effects will translate to non-clinical
samples.
Related to, yet distinct from, research with sport performers is the growing body of
MABI and dosage research with tactical populations (e.g., EMS, military). Stanley and
colleagues (2011) conducted an MABI with pre-deployment marines—following a structured
protocol that resembled a shortened MBSR protocol—and observed that more mindfulness
practice between intervention sessions contributed to significant increases in mindfulness;
mindfulness was also inversely associated with perceived stress among the group of marines that
engaged in more mindfulness practice. Jha et al. (2017) observed that mindfulness training
emphasizing practice of specific exercises (as opposed to didactic instruction) contributed to a
protective effect against working memory degradation in a military cohort including 80 soldiers.
The body of work produced by Amishi Jha and her colleagues suggests that ~12 minutes per day
of mindfulness practice between four and eight weeks is a threshold at which mindfulness
practice begins to produce salutary effects related to cognitive functioning and stress (Jha et al.,
2017, Stanley et al., 2011, Stanley, 2014). This number has not been confirmed in SEPP studies
of MABIs, but was partially replicated by Basso et al. (2019) in a sample of healthy adults
between the ages of 18 and 45 who had no previous meditation experience. Compared to control
group participants who listened to a daily 13-minute podcast, participants engaging in 13 minutes
per day of meditation (i.e., breathing meditation and body scan) reported significant reductions in
mood disturbances and emotion regulation difficulties, and improvements on a range of
cognitive functioning tasks. (e.g., Stroop task, Mnemonic Similarity Task). Future research
would benefit from replication studies with more targeted samples—like sport participants. It is
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
6
also important to note that Dr. Jha’s work has primarily been conducted with tactical populations
using an MABI that is slightly different than MABIs typically integrated with athlete populations
(e.g., MSPE, MAC). Up to this point, MABIs have been discussed more generally, but it is
important to note that the structure, content, and delivery of MABIs differs depending on the
program; further study is needed to compare opposing MABI training programs to determine
potential differential effects.
In addition to the possible influence of dosage, readiness to engage in MABIs is another
possible driver of change—which also may be related to dosage such that readiness may impact
the degree of engagement, which ultimately could influence outcomes. In the context of PST,
readiness has been assessed via The Transtheoretical Model (TTM) of behavior change which
proposes that individuals progress through different stages of change as they work toward
adopting or extinguishing a specific behavior (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1984). From early to
later readiness, the stages of change include precontemplation, contemplation, preparation,
action, maintenance, and termination (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1984). TTM, which includes
the aforementioned stages of change as well as specific processes of change associated with
movement between the different stages, has been used as a theoretical model with various
populations and presenting concerns that people wish to change; some of these presenting
concerns include dependence on alcohol, tobacco, or other substances, unhealthy exercise and
health behaviors, and engagement in psychotherapy (Krebs et al., 2018; Prochaska et al., 2008).
Some research in SEPP has used TTM to understand engagement in sport psychology consulting
and use of psychological skills, though the evidence base is small. For example, Leffingwell and
colleagues (2001) found circumstantial evidence suggesting that stage of change as measured by
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
7
TTM predicted future mental skills consultation—participants in the action stage were more
likely than contemplators and pre-contemplators to seek consultation at follow-up.
Keeler and Watson (2009) also found that no pre-contemplators sought individual sport
psychology consultation after a five-day intervention period (consisting of team-based sport
psychology workshops) with their team of 31 elite, female-identified rugby players in the U.S.
Though readiness has been used sparingly to understand how participants may engage in
interventions in the context of PST, it has not been used as a moderator to predict if and how
participants engage with and change following PST interventions—and has not been used at all
to understand change following MABIs in sport. Outside of sport, Krebs and colleagues (2018)
observed in the clinical literature that pre-psychotherapy stage of change might predict
outcomes; specifically, later pre-treatment stage of change was associated with better post
treatment outcomes. Therefore, it is reasonable to predict that later stage of change may predict
more engagement in, and better outcomes following, an MABI with athletes.
While quantitative studies provide details about possible MABI effects or mechanisms
through which they may influence athletes, qualitative investigations provide another perspective
on athlete experiences with and attitudes toward MABIs. Baltzel et al. (2014) interviewed seven
female-identified NCAA Division I soccer players who participated in a 12-session Mindfulness
Meditation Training for Sport (MMTS) intervention consisting of 30-minute modules. Many
participants reported benefits related to the training, while also noting that they were hesitant to
participate in the training at first and found meditation more difficult to engage in at the start of
the intervention. Interviewees experienced a positive shift in their attitudes as they practiced
more and were able to connect the practice to sport participation. This finding could suggest that
pre-intervention attitudes or readiness influenced engagement or outcomes to some degree, and
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
8
that attitudes and readiness may change through an MABI. Cote and Colleagues (2019) similarly
interviewed nine collegiate tennis players following an MMTS 2.0 intervention, and while they
observed many benefits in practicing mindfulness, they also observed some associated
difficulties and discomfort. This important perspective is less often reported in the MABI
literature in sport, which tends to focus more on the benefits of mindfulness practice than
drawbacks or negative experiences. Research investigating attitudes toward sport psychology
services suggests that some sport participants are still hesitant to engage in sport psychology
consultation (Martin et al., 2012), though athletes with previous experience to sport psychology
services generally have more positive attitudes toward sport psychology (Martin et al., 2005). It
is thus reasonable to expect that not all athletes would be open to engaging in an MABI.
Understanding how readiness and attitudes potentially interact to influence outcomes following
MABIs with athletes could clarify questions about for whom MABIs are more effective. It would
also be useful to understand how athlete readiness and attitudes related to mindfulness changes
over the course of an intervention. These issues are of particular salience in SEPP research
because randomization often occurs at the team level, and interventions are delivered to groups.
Though some studies have explored the role that dosage and attitudes could play in
influencing outcomes, no specific study in the MABI and sport literature has investigated the
explanatory power of these variables either as predictors or moderators. Therefore, the present
study has three primary aims. The first aim is to replicate previous findings associated with
change following an MABI—specifically related to flow, psychological distress, mindfulness,
emotion regulation, performance, and other constructs empirically linked to MABIs (Glass et al.,
2019; Josefsson et al., 2017; Kostrna & D’Addario, 2022)—using a comparison group and a
manualized protocol (Mindful Sport Performance Enhancement; Kaufman et al., 2018). The
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
9
second aim is to understand if stage of change regarding engagement in mindfulness training
(i.e., readiness) and attitudes toward sport psychology impact change during an MABI. The third
and final aim of the present study is to explore the potential associations between readiness,
dosage, and outcomes, and specifically whether dosage (i.e., between-session practice of
mindfulness exercises) and attitudes toward sport psychology moderate any associations between
readiness and outcomes.
Research Design
Method
To address the aims of the study, a longitudinal, non-randomized control group design
was utilized to evaluate the immediate and short-term follow-up effects (i.e., six weeks) of an
MABI. Quantitative outcomes of interest in the present study included flow, psychological
distress (i.e., depression, anxiety, and stress), mindfulness, emotion regulation, attitudes toward
sport psychology, self-rated sport performance and enjoyment, stage of change as it relates to
engagement in mindfulness practice (referred to as “readiness” from this point forward), and life
satisfaction. Another relevant outcome was the amount of between-session mindfulness practice
(referred to as “dosage” of mindfulness) in which participants engaged—measured by weekly
self-report.
Sampling and Recruitment
Convenience sampling was utilized to recruit study participants. Specifically, 28 head
coaches at two NCAA Division II and III universities in the Appalachian region were contacted
in the fall of 2021 via email and offered mindfulness training for their teams in their spring 2022
preseason or offseason periods (i.e., January-May of 2022) in one of two six-week timeframes:
either mid-January to late-February, or late-February to early April. Additionally, the first author
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
10
and one research associate attended athletics department staff meetings at both universities to
share details about the intervention and research opportunity. Research participation was
introduced as a voluntary component, and athletes would be able to opt out of the research and
still participate in the MABI. Five coaches from two universities demonstrated interest, and
ultimately four coaches (one men’s team and three women’s teams) agreed to have their teams
participate. Though randomization to condition (i.e., intervention or waiting-list (WL) control)
was initially communicated as a requirement to their participation in recruitment messages, all
four coaches said that only one of the two timeframes was feasible, so randomization was not
possible. Thus, all teams were assigned to the intervention or WL groups based on availability.
Participants
Sixty-five student-athletes (SAs) from Acrobatics and Tumbling (Acro; N = 22),
Women’s Volleyball (Volleyball; N = 13), Men’s Soccer (MSOC; N = 13), and Women’s Soccer
(WSOC; N = 17) initially consented to research participation, though there was a 12.31%
attrition rate during the intervention period and a 26.15% attrition rate between pre-intervention
and follow-up; 57 SAs across all four teams completed MSPE and pre- and post-intervention
assessments, and 48 SAs completed MSPE as well as pre-, post-, and follow-up assessments. The
sub-sample that completed both pre- and post-intervention assessments (i.e., n = 57) consisted of
13 male-identified SAs and 45 female-identified SAs, with a mean age 19.36 (SD = 1.10). The
sub-sample that completed pre-, post-, and follow-up data (i.e., n = 48) consisted of eight male
identified athletes and 40 female-identified athletes, with a mean age of 19.44 (SD = 1.15). Most
of the participants who completed the intervention identified as Caucasian (n = 49). A fraction of
participants practiced mindfulness or meditation at the start of the MABI (9.23%), though a
larger number had been exposed to sport psychology in some capacity (23.08%). Volleyball,
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
11
MSOC, and WSOC competed for an NCAA Division III institution, and Acro competed for an
NCAA Division II institution.
Assessments
Background Questionnaire (Appendix A)
A ten-item background questionnaire assessing demographic data was included before
the first round of data collection. Participants were asked to provide information related to age,
gender identity, ethnicity, grade level, sport history, and experience with mental skills training
and mindfulness. Because engagement in meditation has been linked with trauma re
experiencing (Britton et al. 2021; Farias et al., 2020), two trauma screening measures were
included on the background questionnaire to flag participants who were at-risk for adverse
experiences: participants were asked to respond to a close-ended (i.e., yes or no) question
inquiring if they had a history of trauma. An abbreviated, two-item PTSD Checklist-Civilian
(PCL-C; Lang & Stein, 2005) was used as a PTSD screening tool. Though normed when the
DSM-IV was still in use, Lang and Stein (2005) observed that the two-item measure was
strongly correlated with the original 17-item PCL-C measure (r = .89) in use at the time. The two
items also included in the trauma re-experiencing sub-scale of the current 20-item PTSD
Checklist for DSM-V assessment (Blevins et al., 2015). Lang et al. (2012) commented that the
two-item PCL-C can serve as an effective screening tool, though they recommend using the six
item PCL or the full version for symptom monitoring (which was not done in the present study).
The Cronbach’s alpha value for PCL-C items used in the present study was .86.
Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale – Revised (CAMS-R; Appendix B)
Feldman and colleagues (2007) created the 12-item CAMS-R as a multi-dimensional
assessment of mindfulness, including four first-order factors: attention, present focus, awareness,
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
12
and acceptance. Participants respond to each item on a four-point Likert scale ranging from one
(“rarely/not at all”) to four (“almost always”), yielding one total score; higher scores indicate
higher levels of mindfulness. A CFA, conducted by Feldman et al. (2007), indicated that the data
fit the hypothesized model, χ2(50) = 110.58, p < .0001, RMSEA = .064, SRMR = .052, CFI =
.92. Evidence of convergent validity was observed through strong correlations with existing
mindfulness measures (i.e., Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory, Mindful Attention and Awareness
Scale), with correlation coefficients greater than .50 (Feldman et al., 2007). With college
students, Baer and colleagues (2006) reported acceptable internal consistency of the CAMS-R (α
= .81) and found that the CAMS-R was moderately and positively associated with three other
commonly used mindfulness measures (.51 < p > .67; Mindful Attention Awareness Scale,
Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory, and Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills, respectively).
Internal consistency reliability from CAMS-R data the present study was acceptable at all three
time points. See Table 1 for a list of Cronbach’s alpha values for all measures included in the
present study.
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales (DASS-21; Appendix C)
The 21-item DASS-21, used to assess three dimensions of psychological distress, was
adapted by Lovibond and Lovibond (1995) from the original 42-item measure (Lovibond &
Lovibond, 1993). Three seven-item subscales assess participant levels of depression, anxiety,
and stress on a four-point Likert scale ranging from zero (“did not apply to me”) to three
(“applied to me very much, or most of the time”). Higher scores on each subscale indicate higher
levels of psychological distress, and a total score is taken and multiplied by two to correspond
with scores on the original DASS measure. A CFA conducted by Henry and Crawford (2005)
indicated that this 21-item measure of psychological distress had adequate factor loadings, with a
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
13
mean loading of .60 on the general factor and a mean loading of .34 on specific factors. Though
some individual factor loadings were low (i.e., below the .40 convention), DASS-21 subscale
scores demonstrated evidence of convergent validity with other commonly used inventories (e.g.,
Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory; Henry and Crawford, 2005). Henry and
Crawford (2005) also reported acceptable Cronbach’s alpha estimates in their study of a non
clinical sample of adults in the UK, with values ranging from .82 to .93. Like Henry and
Crawford, Osman and colleagues (2012) observed that some individual items loaded onto
individual factors below the .40 guideline (Kline, 2016). Because second order factor loadings
were all above .60, and because the total DASS-21 score was moderately to strongly associated
with other measures of psychological distress (e.g., Beck Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression
Inventory-II, respectively), Osman et al. (2012) recommend utilizing a total score. Both sub
scale scores and a total score were calculated and utilized in analyses in the present study.
Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale – Short Form (DERS-SF; Appendix D)
The 18-item DERS-SF was adapted by E. A. Kaufman et al. (2015) from the original,
well-validated 36-item DERS (Gratz & Roemer, 2004) assessing emotion regulation difficulties.
The measure yields one total score and scores on six, three-item subscales of emotion regulation
strategies, non-acceptance, impulse control, goals, awareness, and clarity where higher scores
indicate more emotion regulation difficulties. Participants respond to each item on a one (“almost
never”) to four (“almost always”) Likert scale. A CFA with a sample of 797 American college
students indicated acceptable data fit to the hypothesized model, RMSEA = .05, TLI = .96,
SRMR = .04; Cronbach’s alpha estimates for each subscale and total score in the study by E. A.
Kaufman et al. (2015) all exceeded .70, demonstrating acceptable reliability, and correlations
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
14
coefficients between the DERS-SF and DERS ranged from .90 to .97—indicating strong
associations.
Mindfulness Dosage and Between-Session Practice Assessment (Appendix E)
Mindfulness dosage (i.e., amount of mindfulness practice between intervention sessions)
was assessed at seven different time points: before sessions two through six, one week after the
final session, and 6 weeks after the conclusion of the intervention. Prior to MABI sessions two
though six, participants were asked to complete either a paper/pencil or Qualtrics questionnaire
assessing how many times they completed the home practice exercises as described by Kaufman
et al. (2018; see appendix L), as well as the type and duration (e.g., YouTube meditation for five
minutes) of any other mindfulness practice in which they engaged above and beyond the
recommended home practice. Three markers of dosage were thus derived: total dosage (minutes
per day) between pre- and post-intervention, total dosage between pre-intervention and six-week
follow-up, and percentage of prescribed home practice completed by participants between pre-
and post-intervention.
Because adverse effects can occur during or after mindfulness practice, particularly when
interventions are not tailored to meet the needs of specific populations (Farias et al., 2020; van
Dam et al., 2018), researchers have suggested that it may be best practice to actively monitor for
negative experiences as to mitigate harm (Britton et al., 2021). For monitoring purposes,
participants were asked after the dosage assessment on a yes/no question whether they had
experienced an adverse effect during mindfulness practice between sessions. If they had, they
were invited to describe the negative experience and posed with a yes/no question assessing
whether they would like to be referred to support services. Open-ended questions also assessed
barriers and/or benefits associated with home practice.
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
15
Program Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ; Appendix F)
The seven-item post-intervention PEQ—derived from previous investigations of the
intervention under study (i.e., Mindful Sport Performance Enhancement; Glass et al., 2019)—
was used to understand participant experiences with the program. On the assessment, participants
were first asked to indicate the number of intervention sessions they attended. They were then
invited to rate their perceived success of the program in helping them make improvements in
flow, anxiety, focus, nonjudgement, awareness, and emotion regulation on a one (“not helpful at
all”) to seven (“extremely helpful”) Likert scale. These questions were followed by an
assessment of how confident participants were that they would continue utilizing mindfulness in
sport and everyday life. Finally, open-ended responses assessed what they found most
challenging about the intervention, what benefits they felt they received from engaging in the
training, and whether they consented to being contacted for a follow-up interview.
Readiness
University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA; Appendix G). Readiness to
engage in mindfulness practice was assessed by adapting a version of the URICA used by
Massey et al. (2015), who evaluated the utility of their adapted version to understand readiness in
the context of traditional psychological skills training with college athletes. The original URICA
(McConnaughy et al., 1983) was developed as a 32-item measure to assess behavior change
using the Transtheoretical Model (TTM). Massey et al. (2015) used a variation of Leffingwell et
al.’s (2001) version of the URICA as a 12-item measure, and found that a four factor (pre
contemplation, contemplation, action, maintenance) structure demonstrated acceptable model fit,
RMSEA = .078, CFI = .92. Participants are asked to respond to comments on a five-point Likert
scale ranging from one (“strongly disagree”) to five (“strongly agree”), with three questions
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
16
corresponding to one of four separate factors. The highest sub-scale score indicates the stage of
readiness (e.g., if participants score highest on the pre-contemplation sub-scale, the participant is
labelled as such). Though the URICA provides continuous data, it was treated as categorical for
analyses (i.e., participants fell into one of four possible stages depending on the highest subscale
score). The language of the URICA was modified to assess readiness to practice mindfulness as
opposed to readiness to use of mental skills (e.g., “I have used mindfulness for at least six
months and plan to continue working on being mindful” was modified from the original “I have
used the mental skills I have learned for at least 6 months and plan to continue working on
them”). Cronbach’s alpha values for time one subscales in the present study were .68, .70, .88,
and .90 for precontemplation, contemplation, action, and maintenance, respectively.
Single-Item Readiness Assessment. A second, single-item assessment of readiness used
by Minkler et al. (2022) was also included. The item includes a brief description of mindfulness,
after which participants are invited to indicate one of five responses that best categorizes their
relationship to mindfulness. The five responses are based on one of five stages of change as
described by TTM. This item was included on the Background Questionnaire (Appendix A), and
it was primarily used to help with categorization if participants had reported equal scores on
multiple sub-scales of the URICA. For example, if a participant reported equal scores on the
contemplation and action sub-scales and indicated that they were in contemplation on the single
item readiness measure, then they were categorized as contemplators given that there was more
evidence for that stage classification.
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Appendix H)
The five-item SWLS (Diener et al., 1985) assesses global life satisfaction on a seven
point Likert scale ranging from one (“strongly disagree”) to seven (“strongly agree”); higher
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
17
scores indicate greater life satisfaction. In the original validation study, Diener et al. (1985)
found that the SWLS demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with other assessments of
well-being (r > .30). In summarizing the updated psychometric information from over two
decades of research, Pavot and Diener (2008) reported a high degree of internal consistency
reliability across several studies (Cronbach’s alpha levels greater than .80). Divergent validity
has been demonstrated via strong, significant inverse correlations between the SWLS and
clinical measures of distress (e.g., BDI, Symptom Checklist-90; Pavot & Diener, 2008).
Short Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (SDFS-2; Appendix I)
The SDFS-2, adapted by Jackson and colleagues (2008) from the original 36-item DFS,
includes nine items assessing each of the nine elements of flow as described by
Csikszentmihalyi’s (1990) conceptualization. Participants are asked to rate how often they
experience each component of flow during their sport on a five-point Likert scale from one
(“never”) to five (“always”). One total score is reported, with higher scores indicating more
frequent flow experiences. There is good evidence for reliability and validity of this measure:
through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Jackson et al. (2008) provided evidence of validity
and internal consistency reliability, demonstrating that that the nine-item measure had acceptable
model fit, RMSEA = .08, CFI = .95, SRMR = .04. Moreover, Martin et al. (2006) reported an
acceptable Cronbach’s alpha estimate of .82.
Sport Performance, Enjoyment, and Expectancy Effects (Appendix J)
Self-rated sport performance was assessed with one-item on a 1 one (very poor) to 9
(very good) Likert Scale. Josefsson and colleagues (2019) assessed sport performance in a
similar fashion, although they utilized a 10-point Likert scale. On the same nine-point Likert
Scale, participants are also asked to rate their sport enjoyment. Moreover, to assess pre
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
18
intervention expectancy effects, participants were also asked to assess how they expected to rate
their performance and enjoyment after the MABI.
Sport Psychology Attitudes – Revised Form (SPA-R; Appendix K)
The 25-item SPA-R, developed by Martin and colleagues (2002), assesses athlete
attitudes toward sport psychology services on a seven-point Likert scale from one (“strongly
disagree”) to seven (“strongly agree”) with four sub-scales: stigma tolerance, confidence,
personal openness, and cultural preference. Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes toward
sport psychology and the utilization of services on all sub-scales except stigma tolerance—where
lower scores indicate higher tolerance of stigma (and therefore better attitudes toward sport
psychology). A CFA with over 1,000 athletes from the United States, Germany, and British
athletes was conducted by Martin et al. (2002), testing a four-factor solution, which indicated
acceptable fit indices, RMSEA = .06, CFI = .96, SRMR = .05.
With a similar population of athletes from the United States, Germany, and Great Britain,
Martin et al. (2005) reported Cronbach alpha values of .82 and .84 for confidence in sport
psychology consulting and stigma tolerance, respectively; for personal openness and cultural
preference, alpha values were below the .70 guideline at .61 and .66, respectively. A recent study
by Ballesteros and colleagues (2019) using the SPA-R with high school athletes also reported
low Cronbach alpha values on the personal openness (.56) and cultural preference (.60); due to
the repeatedly low Cronbach alpha values, those subscales were not included; only the
confidence in sport psychology consulting and stigma tolerance subscales were used (15 items in
total). Compared to previously studied samples of college student athletes (i.e., Martin et al.,
2005), athletes at baseline in the current study reported higher confidence in sport psychology
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
19
and less stigma (5.5 compared to 4.9, and 2.00 compared to 2.46 on confidence and stigma
tolerance, respectively).
Intervention
Participants engaged in a 6-week Mindful Sport Performance Enhancement (MSPE)
training, using the protocol created by Kaufman and colleagues (2018). Each session was 60
minutes in duration. In this structured yet adaptable MABI that includes elements from Jon
Kabat-Zinn’s Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy
(MBCT), sport participants are taught mindfulness both didactically and experientially in
weekly, hour-long sessions. Exercises are initially sedentary in nature (e.g., diaphragmatic
breathing, sitting meditations) and evolve to include practices during which mindfulness is
practiced in motion (i.e., mindful walking, mindful hatha yoga). The culminating practice is a
sport-specific mindfulness exercise. The sport-specific meditation is typically practiced in the
final two sessions, but the protocol had to be adapted for MSOC and WSOC because of weather
and availability of space—therefore the sport meditation for those teams was only practiced in
session five and discussed (but not practiced) in session six. In addition to various mindfulness
practices, a discussion component is also included in each session. Prescribed home practice
includes roughly 377 minutes between weeks one through five (~11 minutes per day), with no
practice assigned after the final session. See Appendix L for an outline of each session, with
prescribed home practice included.
Procedure
Coaches were contacted about receiving a free sport psychology workshop before
Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained. After teams agreed to participate and
schedules were finalized, final IRB materials were submitted, which included documents signed
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
20
by each coach agreeing to have their teams participate and recognizing the optional nature of
research participation. Once IRB approval was received, the first author held informational
meetings with each team, where participants were informed about the conditions of research
participation and that they could engage in the MABI without participating in the research
component. The initial MSPE teams (Acro and Volleyball) were given details about MSPE and
information about mindfulness at the informational meeting, including the range of experiences
they might have while engaging in mindfulness practices. In consultation with the counseling
centers at each institution, referral plans were also established based on institutional policies.
Participants were given information about how to seek help if they had a negative or adverse
experience; weekly dosage assessments served as regular monitoring for adverse experiences
needing clinical intervention.
To protect against expectancy effects and limit the degree to which they could learn about
and potentially begin practicing mindfulness before the intervention, WL control participants
were given less information about the MABI at time one. Instead, at the initial informational
meeting, control participants were told they would be engaging in a sport psychology mental
skills training program during their off-season training period (which was set to begin six weeks
later), and that we would be collecting pre-intervention data at two time points and comparing
that data to teams who would be engaging in the same intervention before them. One week
before they were to engage in the MABI, WL control participants were given details about the
nature of the intervention (as described in the previous paragraph) and provided with another
opportunity to opt out.
After describing the voluntary research component and the fact that the intervention
leader would be blind to those who agreed to participate and those who did not agree, the first
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
21
author left the room for participants to review and choose to sign (or not sign) the informed
consent document. After reviewing the consent document, participants were invited to complete
the battery of pre-intervention assessments described previously. The informed consent
document served as the cover page of the questionnaire booklets, which were placed in
individual envelopes and sealed by each athlete upon completion. Each participant created a six
digit identification number based on the last four digits of their cell-phone numbers and the first
two digits of their home ZIP code for anonymization. All identifying information was removed
from questionnaire booklets by the senior author, who recorded names and identification
numbers in a Microsoft Excel File to which the first author did not have access (to keep the
intervention leader blind to research participation). De-identified questionnaires were kept in a
locked file cabinet.
The questionnaires were completed by initial MSPE participants at three time points (pre
intervention, post-intervention, six-week follow-up) and four times by WL control participants
(pre-intervention 1, pre-intervention 2, post-intervention, six-week follow-up). Questionnaires
were completed via pencil and paper at times one through three, and via Qualtrics at time four
(as WL control participants had gone home for the semester). The questionnaires were
counterbalanced using a Latin Square design at each time point. Following the intervention,
participants were asked to complete the same battery of assessments minus the background
questionnaire but including the PEQ. Immediately preceding sessions two through six,
participants were asked to complete the dosage and between-session practice assessment via
paper and pencil or Qualtrics; the intervention leader left the room during that time.
Because the initial MSPE group concluded their training in the middle of the semester,
one of the conditions recommended by initial MSPE group coaches was that follow-up meetings
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
22
be scheduled after the conclusion of the formal MSPE program. Kaufman et al. (2018, p. 14)
recommend that practitioners avoid “parachuting in”—in other words, dropping in for the
duration of the intervention and then ceasing contact upon program completion. For meaningful
integration of mindfulness into the culture of the team, according to Kaufman et al. (2018), the
MSPE protocol is meant to set the foundation for continued future contact and engagement.
Considering the recommendations of Kaufman et al. (2018) and meeting the needs of the
coaches in the study, initial MSPE teams had weekly follow-up meetings ranging in duration
from 30-60 minutes where sedentary MSPE exercises were practiced, and discussions of home
practice and application took place. These follow-up meetings took place between post
intervention and follow-up data collection, and they were voluntary. Because WL control teams
concluded the training at the end of their semesters, follow-up meetings were not feasible. See
Appendix L for a description of MSPE and follow-up sessions.
Consulting Orientation, Experience, Education, and Positionality
The first author, who also served as the intervention leader, has been engaged in
supervised mental performance consulting for nearly five years, having worked as a collegiate
coach prior to pursuing formal education in SEPP. He also currently works as a mental health
counseling intern, providing individual and group psychotherapy to emerging adults in a college
counseling center and a private practice. His consulting theoretical orientation is largely
humanistic and person-centered, though he draws heavily on mindfulness- and acceptance-based
interventions and principles (e.g., Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Dialectical Behavior
Therapy, Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy) and Polyvagal Theory (Porges, 2001) in his
applied work and conceptualizes cases through the lens of the Adaptive Information Processing
(AIP; Shapiro, 2018) model. Crane and colleagues (2012) have commented on the need to
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
23
develop a certain level of competence with regards to training and education for mindfulness
teachers; to that end, the first author has taken formal mindfulness courses, pursued and
completed MSPE teacher training, consulted with and continues to seek supervision in both his
delivery and personal practice of mindfulness, and has maintained a consistent personal
mindfulness practice for over five years. Moreover, the first author and the senior author have
been engaged in mindfulness research, applied work, and practice for nearly three decades
combined.
The intervention leader’s experiences all contribute to an important perception and
expectation about what might be expected to occur during and after mindfulness training with
athletes. His position as a mindfulness researcher, applied practitioner, teacher, and student of
mindfulness and Buddhist philosophy in general colors the lens through which he and the
research team have approached this study and the data that has been produced. To balance the
degree to which these experiences might influence data analysis and interpretation, the project
includes authors with expertise in SEPP applied practice and clinical psychotherapy as well as an
external author from another field (i.e., Educational Psychology). Including these differing
perspectives was intentional in an attempt view the data and results from a less biased
perspective and compartmentalize personal values as much as possible. A postpositivist stance
was adopted in the data analysis and interpretation, which posits that an objective reality exists
but can only be imperfectly understood (Ponterotto, 2005), and attempts at triangulation were
sought by including multiple perspectives and bracketing of personal expectations and biases
(first becoming aware of and documenting such biases through reflexive journaling).
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
24
Data Analysis
In addition to computing descriptive statistics regarding baseline characteristics, data
were analyzed in four separate approaches. First, to assess between-group change over time (i.e.,
MSPE vs. WL control), a series of 2x2 and 2x3 mixed repeated-measures analyses of covariance
(RM ANCOVAs) were conducted using SPSS (IBM, 2020). Time and condition (MSPE or WL
control) served as independent variables (IVs), and both attitudes SPA-R sub-scales served as
covariates (unless the independence of the covariate assumption was violated, indicated in
Tables 3 and 4). Dependent variables (DVs) included flow, psychological distress (i.e.,
depression, anxiety, and stress), mindfulness, emotion regulation difficulties (and associated sub
scales), life satisfaction, sport performance, and sport enjoyment. Sport psychology attitudes
were also examined as DVs in RM analyses of variance (ANOVAs) For sport performance and
enjoyment RM ANCOVAs, post-intervention expectations were also included as covariates.
Second, to investigate the potential effects that readiness had on DVs, a series of within
groups RM ANCOVAs were conducted in which readiness served as the IV. Pre-intervention,
post-intervention, and 6-week follow-up data from all participants regardless of condition was
combined across three time points. Due to low numbers in most of the readiness conditions,
readiness was condensed from four stages to two; therefore, participants fell into either high
(action or maintenance) or low (contemplation or pre-contemplation) readiness to preserve
power. RM ANCOVAs explored differential effects of both time one and time two readiness on
outcomes over time, with sport psychology attitudes modelled as covariates.
Third, to explore moderation effects of attitudes toward sport psychology and dosage on
the potential relationship between readiness and outcomes, a series of bivariate Pearson
correlations, independent samples t-tests, and regressions using the PROCESS macro (Hayes,
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
25
2022) were conducted in SPSS (IBM, 2020). Descriptive statistics regarding dosage during the
intervention were calculated, as well as percent of home prescribed home practice completed by
participants. Bivariate Pearson correlations explored associations between sport psychology
attitudes and dosage, and between dosage and change scores on outcomes. Independent samples t – tests were used to examine potential differences in dosage depending on readiness and group
(i.e., initial MSPE or WL control). Finally, the PROCESS macro was used to explore moderation
effects of dosage and attitudes.
Finally, PEQ ratings of program success were explored with descriptive statistics;
moreover, potential differences in ratings of program success depending on readiness and
attitudes toward sport psychology were probed using independent samples t – tests and bivariate
Pearson correlations, respectively. Qualitative data assessing benefits, barriers, and challenges
faced throughout the intervention was coded using inductive thematic analysis (Braun et al.,
2016) and influenced by the coding used by Minkler and colleagues (2022).
Results
Descriptive Statistics and Baseline Characteristics
Independent samples t-tests were conducted at baseline (N = 65) to determine if any
differences existed between conditions on DVs. The initial MSPE group, compared to the WL
control group, reported significantly higher confidence in sport psychology services, t(63) =
2.28, p < .05), and less stigma associated with sport psychology service provision (though not
statistically significant) at time one, with small effects. There was also a significant difference
between the initial MSPE group and WL control group on the DASS-21 sub-scale of depression,
t(63) = 2.04, p < .05, such that MSPE participants reported significantly higher depression scores
than control participants. There were no other statistically significant between-groups differences
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
26
at baseline on outcomes (see Table 1). For readiness frequencies at times one through three, see
Table 2. Regarding dosage, initial MSPE participants practiced MSPE exercises for an average
of 6.54 minutes per day (SD = 4.84) between time one and time two and 5.17 minutes per day
(SD = 4.00) between time one and time three; WL control participants—once they had
completed the intervention—practiced MSPE exercises for an average of 6.67 minutes per day
(SD = 5.70) between time two and time three and 5.10 minutes per day (SD = 5.67) between time
two and time four. There were no significant differences in amount of practice between groups.
With the overall sample (N = 65), a series of within-groups Pearson correlations also
probed the degree to which expectancy effects and attitudes toward sport psychology were
associated. There were significant inverse correlations between stigma tolerance and expected
improvements in both performance and enjoyment (r = -.59 and -.50, respectively), such that
higher ratings of expected post-intervention performance and enjoyment were associated with
less stigma. Moreover, there was a significant, positive association between expected
improvements in sport enjoyment and confidence in sport psychology (r = .32). See tables 8, 9,
and 10 for means, standard deviations, and correlations among primary outcomes at each time
point.
Between-Groups Differences: Time 1 and Time 2
A series of 2 x 2 repeated measures analyses of covariance (RM ANCOVAs) were
conducted to compare change between time 1 and time 2 on DVs between conditions. The sub
sample supporting these analyses was 57. Due to statistically significant differences between
groups at baseline on attitudes toward sport psychology (i.e., confidence in sport psychology
services and stigma), they were included as covariates in these analyses. See Table 3 for RM
ANCOVA results and estimated marginal means, including notations indicating when certain
DRIVERS OF CHANGE IN MABIS
27
assumptions were violated (the independence of the covariate assumption was violated on
analyses of anxiety, depression, DERS-SF impulse control, DERS-SF awareness, and sport
enjoyment; covariates that violated the assumption were thus removed). There were no
significant condition-by-time effects on flow, anxiety, stress, and life satisfaction, and effect
sizes were negligible. There were also no significant condition by time effects on sport
enjoyment and mindfulness, though effect sizes were small to moderate, respectively; the MSPE
group reported
Exploring the Conceptualizations and Utilizations of Learning Theories in Sport Settings : Kevin R. Lou
West Virginia University, krl0018@mix.wvu.edu
Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd
Part of the Education Commons, Psychology Commons, and the Sports Studies Commons
Recommended Citation
Lou, Kevin R., "Exploring the Conceptualizations and Utilizations of Learning Theories in Sport Settings"
(2023). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 12214.
https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/12214
This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research
Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is
permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain
permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license
in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses,
Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU.
For more information, please contact researchrepository@mail.wvu.edu.
Exploring the Conceptualizations and Utilizations of Learning Theories in Sport Settings
Kevin R. Lou, M.S., M.A.
Dissertation submitted
to the College of Applied Human Sciences
at West Virginia University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in
Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology
Jack Watson II, Ph.D., Co-Chair
Valerie Wayda, ED.D., Co-Chair
Scott Barnicle, Ph.D.
Matthew Campbell, Ph.D.
School of Sport Sciences
Morgantown, West Virginia
2023
Keywords: learning theories, qualitative, coaching, sport psychology, education
Copyright 2023 Kevin Lou
Abstract
Exploring the Conceptualizations and Utilizations of Learning Theories in Sport Settings
Kevin Lou
The purpose of this study was to identify how integrating learning theories into the design of a
formal university course helps facilitate students’ resources, goals, and orientations (Schoenfeld,
2011) of learning theories for their future career work in coaching, sport psychology consulting,
or other sport-related professions. Sixteen students signed up for a fifteen-week fall semester
course at a Mid-Atlantic university in America and were asked to annotate, create, and reflect
upon examples of future work in their desired fields for their three major written assignments in
the course. Students reflected on their learning experience through pre-and-post semistructured interviews and most stated that they benefitted from the way the course was
designed with learning theories in mind and that it helped their understanding and application
of learning theories. Results showed large increases in resources associated with learning
theories, changes in goals from being ego-centric to learner-centric and shifts in orientations to
recognize how helpful learning theories could be to participants’ future careers. Future
directions include increasing the number of face-to-face meetings each week, making this
course available for Master’s level students, and improving clarity around the definition of
orientations shared with participants from Schoenfeld’s framework (2011). Practical implications
include adding learning theories courses to sport-related programs which could increase the
quality of the work that coaches, sport psychology consultants, and other sport-related
professionals will engage in with their athletes after taking a learning theories course.
Keywords: learning theories, qualitative, coaching, sport psychology, education
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS iii
Acknowledgements
I could not have undertaken this journey without my advisor and (former) chair of my committee, Dr.
Scott Barnicle, for his guidance, support, and help throughout this entire process. It has been a long five
and half years but I am happy to say that we reached the finish line after all the ups and downs together.
I am also grateful to my current co-chair of my committee, Dr. Jack Watson, for all your help and support
over these five and half years. Although more recently, it has become more hands on, I have always felt
that you were there to support me throughout my time at West Virginia and to that I am very grateful.
I would also like to thank my other co-chair, Dr. Valerie Wayda, for being a support throughout this
journey as well and for being the only person left on my committee who is still in the department. I
would like to thank you for your time and support even from when I first came to you with this idea.
I would also like to thank Dr. Matthew Campbell for being willing to guide me through this qualitative
journey. It has been a wonderful last three years working with you and learning how to conduct
qualitative research from never having done it before. I always appreciated your time and weekly calls!
I would like to thank the person who first took me on and gave me a job when I moved to Morgantown
when I had thought I had missed all GTA deadlines and gave me the inspiration for this project in the
first place, Dr. Malayna Bernstein. There was a big hole when you left WVU but I am proud to say that I
saw this project through to the finish line and was able to put what we talked about into reality.
I would like to thank Megan Hut for her time and support through not just this qualitative project, but
my qualifying project as well. Thank you for your time and support throughout both projects and I
couldn’t have done all this without you! I am eternally grateful for your qualitative and editing support!
I would also like to thank Kristen Bowman, David Lerner, Joe Wargo, and Matthew DiFonzo for all their
time and help with my research. I also wouldn’t have been able to make all this happen without you.
Thank you to my sixteen students who trusted me to go on this semester-long journey with me. It was
your curiosity, eagerness, and engagement that made teaching a course for my dissertation possible and
I had a joy showing up each week getting to work with you all. I know you all will do well in your futures!
I would like to thank my cohort members (Karly and Andrea) and all my friends and colleagues that I met
while in Morgantown at WVU. My life and five-year experience wouldn’t have been the same without
you all and the bonds made and time spent together have helped me get through the tough times but
also made me the person and professional I am today and I couldn’t have done it without you all.
Thank you to my mom (Emily), my sister (Sophia), and my dad (Chad) for their support over all these
years. I don’t think we all knew what was going to happen when I moved from a block from the beach in
San Diego to Morgantown, West Virginia but after five and a half years, I am happy to say I did it!
And last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank my partner, Ashley, for all her time and support
throughout this process. When we first met, this project had just barely started and what a journey it
has been to go through all this together. I couldn’t have done this without your love and support, and I
can’t wait to see what the future has in store for us!
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS iv
Table of Contents
Exploring the Conceptualizations and Utilizations of Learning Theories in Sport Settings ........................1
Learning Theories in Sport-Related Professions ................................................................................1
Learning Theories in Formal Sport-Related Course Settings...............................................................3
Methods............................................................................................................................................7
Design............................................................................................................................................7
Positionality Statement...................................................................................................................7
Setting ...........................................................................................................................................9
Participants....................................................................................................................................9
Data Collection Instruments ..........................................................................................................10
Assessments from the course.............................................................................................................10
Individual interviews...........................................................................................................................10
Quantitative objective self-report scales in interviews......................................................................12
Weekly journals...................................................................................................................................12
Instructor logs.....................................................................................................................................12
Procedures...................................................................................................................................13
Recruitment ........................................................................................................................................13
Data Analyses...............................................................................................................................13
Results.............................................................................................................................................14
Increases in Resources ..................................................................................................................14
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS v
Discussion........................................................................................................................................24
References.......................................................................................................................................72
Appendix A: Positionality Statement..................................................................................................32
Appendix B: List of Semi-Structured Interview Questions....................................................................45
Appendix C: Written Assessment Rubric Example ...............................................................................32
Appendix D: Syllabus ........................................................................................................................39
Appendix E: Review of the Literature .................................................................................................46
Learning Theories in Education ......................................................................................................46
Learning Theories in Physical Education .........................................................................................49
The Sport Coaching Profession.......................................................................................................50
Sport Coaches’ Various Roles.........................................................................................................52
Coach as a Performer..........................................................................................................................53
Coaches as Counselors........................................................................................................................55
Learning Theories in Coaching Education........................................................................................56
Applied Strategies of Learning Theories.............................................................................................56
Learning Theories in Sport Psychology ...........................................................................................61
Learning Theories in Athletic Training ............................................................................................66
Learning Theories in Physical Therapy ............................................................................................67
Learning Theories and Positive Youth Development........................................................................68
Conclusion and Future Directions ..................................................................................................71
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 1
Exploring the Conceptualizations and Utilizations of Learning Theories in Sport Settings
The Evolution of Learning Theories Across Research Fields
Learning is often at the core of many daily activities and largely goes unnoticed or done without
awareness or intention (Collins et al., 1991; Rumelhart, 1980). Most current research on learning
theories resides within the field of education (Woolfork Hoy et al., 2013) as the research emphasis
naturally started with youth learning in school settings. Learning theories can be defined as theories that
“guide one’s actions in terms of how one goes about learning new skills, knowledge and attitudes”
(Wang, 2012, p. 5).
Drawing from the field of education, learning theories became more prevalently researched
after the turn of the 21st century in the fields of physical education (Light, 2011; Moura et al., 2020),
sport coaching (Cushion et al. 2010; Lyle, 2007; Roberts & Potrac, 2014), athletic training (Peer &
McClendon, 2002), physical therapy (Jensen et al., 2016), and sport psychology (Barker-Ruchti et al.,
2016). Aspiring sport-related professionals can utilize learning theories when developing practices,
training sessions, or mental skills sessions by focusing beyond the content of the sport or mental skill,
and more on how the concept is introduced and transferred to usable knowledge for the athlete. This
relates to Shulman’s (1986) work of identifying the differences between content knowledge (what one
knows) and pedagogical knowledge (how to teach that knowledge) and may differ depending on one’s
previous experience, education, or role. Implementing learning theories from educational psychology
can help sport-related professionals develop pedagogical skills to help athletes learn and improve their
performance (Barker-Ruchti et al., 2016).
Learning Theories in Sport-Related Professions
At their core, learning theories can be helpful tools while to enhance the quality of
communication and interaction between sport-related professionals and their athletes. Learning
theories can be used by instructors to focus their attention on how their athletes learn in an attempt to
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 2
better convey information in a manner that is most likely to result in learning and skill improvement. In
the professions of sport coaching and sport psychology, learning theories have received differing
amounts of attention. For sport coaching, as demands on sport coaches increase, so have the number of
coaches who have made coaching their full-time profession. As of 2016, there were 276,100 full-time
sport coaches in the United States and many more who were volunteer coaches (Fawver et al., 2020).
This is an increase of approximately 60,000 full-time coaches over seven years, when in 2009, 217,000
individuals reported themselves to be full-time coaches in the United States (Duffy et al., 2011). Not all,
and possibly not even most, of these coaches have received formal coach education. To help coaches
draw upon more than just their own personal experience (Lou et al., 2023), learning theories could help
coaches provide the best learning environments for their athletes and enhance their training.
In previous literature, researchers have explored which learning theories would be useful in the
coaching realm. Knowles and colleagues (2005) identified expert and novice coaching differences that
are linked to a coach’s critical thinking and decision-making skills. Mesquita and Riberio (2014) identified
that reflection is a vital skill to help coaches grapple with new and modifying information. Bowes and
Jones (2006) discussed scaffolding, first introduced as an educational concept by Vygotsky (1978), as one
theory that could benefit coaches in their work as reflective facilitators to make sense of their own and
other’s actions within a particular culture. Learning theories help provide a theoretical basis for coaches
to help facilitate information and learning for athletes. Although some current research on learning
theories in coaching exists, researchers (Lyle, 2007; Stodter & Cushion, 2016) contend that coach
learning research is insubstantial and coach education could be bettered by incorporating more learning
theories into formal coach education coursework.
On the other hand, in the field of sport psychology, very few studies have examined the use of
learning theories on mental skills instruction. Gilbert (2007) wrote an applied article that bridged the
gap for coaches and their use of sport psychology concepts when working with teams. Gilbert (2007)
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 3
recommended the use of a 12-week sport psychology curriculum called UNIFORM which emphasized
goal setting, imagery, relaxation, and routines. Although not specifically related to learning theory, the
researcher recommended a game-plan format, a teaching system, that helped make sport psychology
concepts more applicable for coaches to use when working with teams.
To evaluate a graduate level sport psychology program, Kraft and colleagues (2021) asked three
participants through semi-structured interviews to reflect upon what was helpful to their learning
experience. The researchers found that reflection and experiential learning theory were most helpful to
the overall graduate sport psychology program experience. Headrick and colleagues (2015) identified
that learning and affect would be a fruitful avenue of research to help create the most effective learning
environments. Outside of a few research studies, future recommendations have emphasized the
importance of continued research in mental skills instruction that incorporates the use of learning
theories (Barker-Ruchti et al., 2016). Across the sport psychology and sport coaching fields, some initial
research has been conducted, however, more research is needed to identify the impact of using learning
theories in practice. Such information would help to design formal coursework to effectively train
aspiring professionals in these fields.
Learning Theories in Formal Sport-Related Course Settings
In sport-related professions, there have been some initial studies that have examined the
implementation of learning theories on formal course design. In sport coaching educational programs,
students often learn in formal settings (coach education courses and certifications), informal settings
(knowledge acquired from personal experiences and social interactions), or semi-formal settings
(conferences, clinics, seminars and workshops provided to coaches; Pope et al., 2015). However, in the
United States, “one of every three youth sport coaches have been trained in sport skills or tactics and
fewer than one in five are trained in effective communication techniques” (Fawver et al., 2020, p. 240).
Coaches are not typically required to complete or attain a certain level of education, experience, or
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 4
certification and if they are mandated to complete any training, it is usually related to first aid safety and
safe sport training, but this varies by state and league (Fawver et al., 2020). In a review of literature
conducted by Cushion and colleagues (2010), coaches generally believed that formal learning
opportunities are overwhelming with the amount of information taught at once and that theories that
are provided in an abstract way do not seem relatable to their practices. Cushion and colleagues (2010)
found that only one study as of 2010 had investigated formal learning implications on coach
development and that many approaches to coach learning were without a focus of how people learn.
Jones and Turner (2006) did investigate how problem-based learning was used in a formal course setting
for eleven undergraduate coaches over the course of a semester in the United Kingdom. The course was
split in half including groups of students assigned to work with each other and getting a problem to work
through in their groups. Problem-based learning entails students grappling with realistic and
problematic scenarios to challenge thinking and potentially be used in future similar situations (Jones &
Turner, 2006). The students provided reflection and participated in semi-structured group interviews as
the researchers used continuous observation throughout the course. The researchers found that
students started to think differently about coaching after being in the problem-based learning
intervention and recommended that future research could help coaches with their learning, transfer
knowledge, and create effective practices. These calls to action provide rationale for a formal learning
theories course structured around how people learn in sport related academic programs.
Sport psychology researchers have recommended that more focus be placed upon learning
theories in the sport performance literature (Barker-Ruchti et al., 2016) and that formal course settings
could be improved by offering opportunities to directly apply the theories learned (Ardelean, 2019;
Hutter et al., 2017). Sato and Laughlin (2018) implemented Kolb’s experiential learning theory to teach
sport psychology theories to nine students using weekly golf-putting tournaments to create sport
psychology-based learning situations throughout the course. After the 15-week course, the authors
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 5
found that experiential learning was helpful in teaching students about sport psychology theories like
goal setting and imagery. The researchers recommended instructors be more flexible by including more
learning theories when teaching sport psychology. Other research has looked at structuring weekly
coursework to teach in a formal setting as well. One such study utilized the implementation of a 15-
week course focused on sport psychology theories (Aoyagi, 2013). The instructor recommended future
courses focus on just one theory a week instead of trying to fit many theories in at a time. Other
approaches were used with gamification of the classroom to build learning opportunities (Shipherd &
Burt, 2018), an active learning approach to improve engagement in the classroom (Stowe & Whitfield,
2020), and assessing sport psychology students’ employability (Heaviside et al., 2018). However, no
other studies have focused on learning theories being implemented into the course design while also
being the main course content to improve athlete learning.
Within the sport-related fields of physical therapy and athletic training, researchers have
assessed the implementation of learning theory into educational curriculum. For athletic training,
Gillette (2017) used problem-based learning in a 15-week athletic training course to evaluate its impact
upon the learning environment. During this course, problem-based learning was utilized to help provide
a framework with which to develop a beneficial and effective learning environment. These researchers
recommended educators work to include or incorporate learning theories into their future instruction.
In another investigation into pedagogic strategies used in a classroom setting, Mensch and Ennis (2002)
identified through interviews students’ and instructors’ perceptions of their educational experiences
that case studies, genuine experiences, and creating a positive classroom environment were key to the
learning of 21 athletic training students. Similar incorporation of learning theories were done with
sociocultural learning theory in athletic training courses (Peer & McClendon, 2002) as well as Kolb’s
experiential learning theory in a 15-week athletic training course (Schellhase, 2008). Research has also
been conducted to explore the effect of analogy learning, implicit learning, and explicit learning in
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 6
physical therapy settings (Bobrownicki et al., 2019; Lam et al., 2009; Liao & Masters, 2001; Lola &
Tzetzis, 2021; Tzetzis & Lola, 2015). Graham (1996) also explored the factors that help develop
conceptual knowledge in a 15-week sport-related course and identified that sociocultural elements of
group learning, collaboration and cognitive apprenticeship were influential in physical therapy students’
learning. Across the sport-related fields, more studies exist on learning theories in athletic training and
physical therapy literature than in sport coaching and sport psychology. Due to the benefits of
implementing learning theories into the classroom on student learning and application seen in other
fields, it would be beneficial for sport coaching and sport psychology research to explore how
engagement with learning theories related coursework could help improve the training of future
professionals and move the fields forward. To address these gaps in the literature, this study provided
aspiring sport professionals with a formal university introductory course designed by learning theories
to help novice practitioners use learning theories in their future work with athletes.
Essential Framework for Study
Two studies from the field of education were used to frame the current study. The first study,
conducted by Schoenfeld (2011), researched teachers’ abilities to make decisions while teaching in the
classroom. Through this study, Schoenfeld identified that teachers relied on their resources, goals, and
orientations while teaching. When referring to resources, Schoenfeld defined resources as, “his or her
knowledge, but also the social and material resources that are available to him or her” (p. 459). This also
includes the “knowledge inventory that he or she can potentially bring to bear in a teaching situation”
(p. 459). Goals are defined as “things that people consciously or unconsciously set out to achieve” and
help the decision-making process as “decision making can be seen as the selection of goals consistent
with the teacher’s resources and orientations.” Schoenfeld defines orientations as “beliefs, values,
preferences, and tastes” (Schoenfeld, 2011, p. 460). These three categories help provide a framework
through which students’ learning will be assessed in this study. Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy is the second
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 7
framework being used to frame the current study. Within this framework, the stages of learning are
described as remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. This is a very
commonly used framework for understanding learning in educational settings and this framework was
used in this study to identify how learning could be measured with aspiring sport professionals.
The purpose of the current study is to identify how learning theories utilized in the design of a
formal course impacts students’ resources, orientations, and goals for their future career work in sportrelated professions. To be clear, the aim of this study is not to identify or prescribe particular learning
theories to use over others, but to provide sport-related professionals with an understanding of how
people learn and implement learning theories into practice. This study will aim to answer the following
research questions: 1) How did students’ resources change over the span of the course for engaging in
their work? 2) How did students’ goals change over the span of the course for engaging in their work? 3)
How did the students’ orientations change over the span of the course for engaging in their work?
Method
Design
This qualitative study utilized a descriptive single case study design (Baxter & Jack, 2008). The
single case in this study focused on a learning theories course offered for fifteen weeks at a kinesiologybased Mid-Atlantic university during the fall semester of 2022. The case study approach offered the
ability to chronicle the instructional design of the course, pedagogical decisions made throughout the
course, and the students’ learning experience within the course. The descriptive case study design also
lent itself to answering “how” questions and being able to describe the intervention in the real-life
context in which it occurred (Baxter & Jack, 2008).
Positionality Statement
The lead author occupied both the role of the main instructor for the course and lead researcher
for this study. The lead author had previously taught pedagogical studies courses as a graduate assistant
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 8
within an educational psychology department. As the main instructor and researcher of this study, the
lead researcher accounted for his insider positionality by engaging in reflexive journaling to establish
transparency and trustworthiness. A single-blind consenting process was also utilized to help eliminate
any knowledge of which participants were involved in the research study from the instructor so as not to
have an impact upon grading. The instructor used an objective rubric (Appendix A) while grading to help
minimize any preferences that were developed with students while interacting with them in class.
Instructor logs were also kept reflecting upon decisions about course design and the first author’s
positionality statement can be found in Appendix B. Critical friends helped process the data to improve
trustworthiness. The second author is a fourth-year Ph.D. student in educational theory and practice
who served as a critical friend in the data analyses, bringing perspectives that were distinct from the
other researchers. The third author was a senior undergraduate student who helped transcribe
interviews and provided support as a critical friend during data analysis. The fourth author is an
associate professor in the School of Education who served as a critical friend and mentor of the
qualitative framing of the study. Given the nature of the work, the varied perspectives of the members
of the research team helped build trustworthiness during data analysis.
Regarding an epistemological perspective and theoretical framework, the main researcher
primarily aligns with interpretive and constructivist perspectives that the social world is constantly being
constructed by group interactions and can be understood through the actors and their own experiences
(Creswell et al., 2003). This belief drives the methodology to understand the learning experience of the
students and the instructor who both shape the learning environment. To understand how the students’
understanding changed over the course of the semester’s class, interviews were conducted with
students both at the beginning and end of the course to examine their learning. This constructivist
approach aligned well with the main researcher’s insider positionality as the instructor and researcher,
who was a part of the active change of students’ conceptualizations of learning theories.
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 9
Setting
The course ran once a week for 15 weeks in a hybrid format where readings, interviews, and
assignments were distributed and completed online while lectures were conducted in person weekly.
Participants were provided with all information about the course and its requirements in a syllabus and
students were given an opportunity to opt out of the study or drop the course on the first day. The inperson class lasted two hours weekly and allowed students to engage with the material and provided
students with an opportunity to share with one another and how they foresaw using learning theories in
their work. The course was adapted from a previously taught Educational Psychology course that was
used to teach learning theories to aspiring undergraduate teacher candidates in an education program.
Participants
Originally, eighteen junior and senior standing students signed up for this learning theories
course. However, one student never showed up to class and withdrew from the course while another
student dropped the course after not completing any of the assignments. This left sixteen
undergraduate students in the course, with each of the students majoring or minoring in sport and
exercise psychology. Of the sixteen students, one’s future professional aspirations included being a
university professor and another a physical therapist. These students were treated as outliers. Two
other students did not complete all the work necessary and were left out of the final participant group
of twelve. In total, six students with aspirations of working in coaching and six students with aspirations
of working in sport psychology were included in the study (Table 1). To participate in this study,
participants needed to: (1) be enrolled in this special topic course, (2) have interest in working in either
the coaching or sport psychology profession, (3) be at least 18 years old, and (4) have completed all
work required in the course. Screening for the course occurred during the enrollment process as
students expressed interest, demonstrated they met the criteria, and understood the goals of the class.
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 10
Data Collection Instruments
Assessments from the course
The main three assessments from the course occurred throughout the semester (Syllabus for course
included as Appendix C). The three assessments included 1) an annotation of an example utilized within
their aspiring profession that uses learning theories, 2) a created artifact implemented with a group of
athletes or with other students as athletes during class, and 3) a reflection of participants’ resources,
goals, and orientations of learning theories while implementing their created artifact using learning
theories. These written summative assessments were graded according to a rubric (Appendix A) that
assessed the participants’ abilities to identify or use learning theories, its disciplinary authenticity,
responsiveness to athletes, ability to be athlete-focused, and amount of detail.
Individual interviews
Two semi-structured interviews were conducted with each student, one at the beginning and
another at the end of the course, to provide the most efficient use of time. The semi-structured
interviews asked questions flexibly while gathering specific data for previously prepared questions but
did not have a predetermined order (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Due to the nature of developed
relationships over the course of the semester and insider orientation as the instructor, the inclusion of a
research team and critical friends with varying backgrounds helped build trustworthiness in the process.
T1 interview with students. The initial semi-structured interview served to understand the
participant’s history, collect demographic information, student’s aspiring career goals, and their
experiences working with athletes. This initial interview helped build rapport with students as these
interviews occurred over the first week of class. The interview guide for the initial interview (Appendix
D) was adapted from a previous project exploring teacher-coaches’ conceptualizations of learning
theories in both athletic and classroom settings (Lou et al., 2023).
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 11
Table 1
Participant Demographics
Participant
“Name”
Year Gender Group Ideal Future Career Goals Majors Minors? Objective
Change
from Beg
to End
P3 (Nina) S F SP CMPC & Master’s in
Counseling (University
Sport Setting)
Sport Psych Scholastic
Coaching,
Human Services
& Counseling (2)
0 – 6
P6 (Cathy) S F SP Mental Health Counseling
for Clients in Pageants
Sport Psych
& Exercise
Physiology
None 4 – 8.5
P7 (Neil) S M SP Applied Sport Psychology
Consultant (Cycling)
Sport Psych Leadership
Studies,
Professional
Sales (2)
3.5 – 7.5
P13
(Elaine)
S F SP Applied Sport Psychology
Consultant (Olympics)
Sport Psych Nutrition &
Food Studies
0 – 8.5
P15 (Bella) S F SP Applied Sport Psychology
Consultant (Professional
Sport)
Sport Psych Human
Services, Sport
Communication,
Communication
Studies (3)
2 – 9
P16
(Carlos)
S M SP Applied Sport Psychology
Consultant (Professional
Sport)
Sport Psych None 1 – 7.5
P4 (Joe) S M C Collegiate College
Basketball Coach
Athletic
Coaching
Education
Strength &
Conditioning,
Sport Psych,
Sport
Communication
(3)
5.5 – 8.5
P5 (Zane) S M C Division I Power 5 Football
Coach
Coaching
Performance
Sciences
Strength &
Conditioning,
Sport Psych (2)
1.5 – 7.5
P8 (Elena) S F C Personal Training &
Professor
Sport Psych Personal
Training
4 – 8
P9 (Eliza) S F C Professor & Applied Work
with Twirlers
Sport Psych Human Services
and Addiction
Studies
0 – 7
P10
(Trent)
S M C Director of Player
Personnel & Recruiting for
DI Football
Athletic
Coaching
Education
Sport Psych &
Sport
Communication
(2)
2.5 – 9
P11 (Cade) J M C Football Coach
(Professional)
Sport Psych Sport Coaching,
Sport
Communication
(2)
3.5 – 8.5
SP =
Sport
Psych
C=Coaching
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 12
T2 interview with students. The second interview occurred during the last week of the course
and operated as an evaluation of students’ overall learning in the course. The semi-structured interview
recounted students’ experiences within the course, identified which learning theories they found most
applicable to their future career, and identified future settings where they may use learning theories.
Questions were more open-ended and asked about student’s understanding of learning theories.
Quantitative objective self-report scales in interviews
Additionally, as a part of this case study, participants were asked to create objective self-reports
in both the beginning interview and end of class interview. Participants were asked to assess their
understanding of learning theories on a scale of 1-10 at the time. During the second interview
participants watched a 3-minute video clip of how they answered the same question during their first
interview prior to answering this question. Answers were included in Table 1.
Weekly journals
Participants engaged in weekly journal writing activities for each week’s reading. The weekly
journal prompted students to pull one quote from the reading, tie the quote to a personal experience
where they may have encountered that learning theory, and identify how that week’s learning theory
could be helpful in their future work. These weekly journals helped chronicle students’ engagement and
metacognition as they read and learned about each learning theory.
Instructor logs
The instructor kept weekly logs to keep track of explicit decisions about course content and
course design. As part of an instructional design approach, the pedagogical decisions made with learning
theories in mind helped facilitate students’ learning throughout the course. The instructor logs helped
assess if certain pedagogical moves impacted the learning experience for students. In addition, weekly
reflexive journaling was included as part of the instructor logs to help increase trustworthiness.
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 13
Procedures
Recruitment
Participants were recruited via convenience sampling. The main researcher asked academic
advisors to advertise the course to students. Students were offered course credits in exchange for their
participation in the course. After obtaining IRB approval, participants were given a syllabus for the
course and were notified on the first day that the information from the course may be used for research
purposes. Participants were given an opportunity to opt out of the study or drop the course if desired.
This consent process was conducted with the main researcher’s advisor and the students’ consent status
was blinded from the researcher until after the course was completed to not bias any grading.
Data Analyses
Qualitatively, a document analysis process was used to illuminate the experiences of
participants shared in the semi-structured interviews and written assignments (Bowen, 2009). The
document analysis combed over the instructor logs, semi-structured interviews, and the three major
assessments student completed as a part of the course. The main researcher and two critical friends
utilized an iterative three-step process for document analysis: skimming, reading, and interpretation,
combining elements of both content and thematic analysis (Bowen, 2009).
The analysis of the transcripts and the students’ interviews used a three-step process: 1) gaining
familiarity, 2) selecting and focusing, and 3) interpreting. After interviews were transcribed verbatim
from Zoom, the first step of gaining familiarity included the main researcher and critical friends taking
time to read over all transcripts and assignments from each participant. Two critical friends were
included in these reviews to help balance any biases. The critical friends helped look over all material
collected throughout the course and how the instructor shaped the overall learning experience.
The second step of the analysis included the research team selecting and focusing on parts of
the interviews and assignments that were meaningful. Analytic questions were developed to help the
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 14
research team as a more practical and actionable extension of the research questions. Using an
inductive approach, the research team read over all the data and then utilized an open coding process
to answer the analytic questions. As each interview was coded, there were certain themes that provided
meaningful moments of information (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Each member of the research team
identified their own open codes and themes to answer the analytic and research questions and brought
them to the joint interpretation process.
The third step included joint interpretation meetings where the lead researcher and two critical
friends met weekly to discuss codes and themes gained from step two. Elements of the interview
gleaned multiple themes that were tracked and discussed within the research team. The data were
analyzed together to see how conceptions of learning theories changed over the course of the semester.
Using this inductive approach, meaningful units were identified through an interpretive approach to
data analysis.
Results
To explore the research questions, Schoenfeld’s framework of decision making (resources, goals,
and orientations; Schoenfeld, 2011) and Bloom’s Taxonomy were used to identify the different levels of
learning that participants in the course engaged in (i.e., remember, understand, apply, analyze,
evaluate, & create; Bloom, 1956). Students from the course identified, either implicitly or explicitly, their
stage through their responses in an interview or through their written work on their three major
assignments throughout the course.
Increases in Resources
To answer the first research question (How did students’ resources change over the span of the
course for engaging in their work?), the findings indicate a large increase in students’ resources or
knowledge about learning theories from when they started the course to the end of the course. The
findings of the current study suggest that students’ ability to interplay with learning theories increased
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 15
from just being able to remember learning theories in the beginning of the semester to being able to
evaluate and create plans as they moved through the course throughout the semester. Three themes
that were discovered about students’ resources include: (1) students’ resources changing from
remembering to creating using learning theories through Bloom’s taxonomy; (2) students’ increased
resources helping provide confidence as a future professional and (3) improved resources helped
identify learning theories from other theories.
Remembering to Creating: Changes in Resources through Bloom’s Taxonomy
Nina, a senior sport psychology student, who had previous experience with many sport
psychology courses, was able to name the sport psychology theory of the inverted U when asked about
learning theories. However, during her second interview at the end of the semester, she stated:
I don’t think I learned a learning theory until this class, like I’ve learned sport psychology
theories, and, like I guess they could apply to learning. But this was actually about learning.
Well, I've heard of like schema and stuff like that. But I didn’t know it was a theory, you know.
And, yeah, I know the difference between sports psychology theory and learning theory now.
This quote demonstrates that after completing the course, Nina was much better able to tell and
evaluate the difference between a learning theory and a sport psychology theory. Similarly, Neil,
another sport psychology student, also conveyed an increase in resources. When asked about this
during his second interview. Neil responded, “being able to see the theories in action. Before that, I had
a very academic understanding, and I could probably regurgitate an academic example, but actually
getting to see where they would be used in daily life was huge.” Neil’s understanding changed from a
regurgitation, which is oftentimes how college students are evaluated through multiple choice tests, to
being able to use his increased understanding of learning theories to create and teach imagery to
swimmers whom he conducted his second annotated assignment with.
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 16
These increases in resources were conveyed not only during interviews, but also through
student writing assignments that asked students to annotate, create, and analyze an artifact in their
future career field. In an annotation associated with her created artifact, Bella wrote:
A major part of pedagogical knowledge is knowing students' zone of proximal development,
which is where individual students fall on a learning continuum for a particular task, in this case
attentional focus. My students are in the zone of proximal development throughout the entire
lesson since attentional focus is a new concept to the class. Different levels of scaffolding are
shown throughout the lesson, as I teach the students what attentional focus is and guide them
in skills to improve and induce attentional focus. They are not out of the zone of proximal
development until learners elicit articulation, by proving their understanding.
This quote demonstrated that Bella not only understood various learning theories gained from the
course but was able to apply what she had learned to a sport psychology session on attentional focus.
With this understanding and awareness of her learners’ zones of proximal development, Bella was able
to do a better job of creating and implementing a plan that actively bolstered her athletes’ learning.
Changes in Resources Helped Improve Confidence as a Future Professional
Students came into the course with different levels of previous knowledge, which was important
for the course design to be responsive to. Bella, a sport-psychology student, shared how she used
behaviorism, previous to the course, while working at a daycare where they would reward or take
rewards away from children based on their behavior. Naturally, with younger children, behaviorism can
be a default learning theory to use. As a result of the course, Bella gained self-efficacy and confidence in
her ability to work in the sport psychology field:
I have more confidence in being able to teach sports psychology. Like before I felt like I had all
the content in my brain, but I didn't know how to present it or explain it to anyone. But now I
can actually give a description, and I feel like I know what I’m talking about.
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 17
In this example, Bella was able to describe her increased confidence compared to the start of the
semester when she only had subject matter knowledge. After this course, she believed she had the
ability to teach, present, or explain what she knows to athletes better than before.
Joe, a coaching student with a minor in sport and exercise psychology, seemed to have come in
with more initial resources. In the initial interview, Joe succinctly described the concept of scaffolding as
something that he did in his coaching:
One thing I've always loved to do in my practice plans when you’re doing a drill is a progression
model. I think if you just start with the basic form, you can get more complex as time goes on.
So basically, just starting where it's easy and where everybody can understand it, and then
moving on to making it more complex. If you’re doing a dribbling drill, start out with the simple
form of it and then start to add more combinations to it.
It is evident that Joe entered the course with some baseline knowledge about learning theories even
though he did not explicitly name scaffolding as a theory he knew. As he self-reported in his first
interview, on a scale of 1-10, Joe felt like he came in with a quantified knowledge base of 5.5. As he
moved through the course, he was able to improve his knowledge base to 8.5 which is evidenced by his
response in his third assignment where students were asked to reflect on their created coaching plan:
For my plan, there was a group of athletes that was struggling with the second portion of the
drill in terms of how to move around the cones. The first level of support I offered was
demonstration of the actions. The athletes still struggled after this instruction, so the second
level of support was slowing down the action. After this, the group athletes showed
improvement and could complete the drill successfully without me. Finding the zone in which
these athletes felt the most comfortable was paramount to their success in the drill.
Joe accumulated a good understanding of the Zone of Proximal Development to add to his incoming
knowledge of scaffolding and combined these concepts to change goals while executing his coaching
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 18
plan. This level of awareness and thoughtfulness during his coaching is an ideal outcome of Joe’s
understanding of how learning theories could be beneficial to his work and increased his confidence to
apply this in future settings.
Changes in Resources Improved Understanding of Learning Theories from other Theories
Eliza, a sport psychology student who had coaching interests, was able to name SelfDetermination theory that is commonly used in motivational research but mistook it for a learning
theory in her first interview. Through her learning during the course, Eliza articulated in her second
interview how she has a changed understanding of learning theories because of the course:
I know what they're called and how to apply them better and make a plan that utilizes them
specifically. But yeah, I think I learned what they were called, and I also learned that they're all
connected. It's not just one singular thing. It's all connected, and then they all work together to
create the perfect plan.
Eliza summarizes her change in Bloom’s taxonomy from going from not even being able to remember
the learning theories to now being able to understand how multiple learning theories work together.
She had characterized her own self-reported knowledge as a 0 initially but at the end of the course Eliza
perceived that her knowledge had grown to a 7 on a scale of 1-10.
Lastly, in Cade’s final written assignment for the course where students were asked to reflect on
their changes in learning theories, Cade was able to articulate:
When designing my plan, the biggest resources that I drew upon were implementing my plan
with the use of all types of knowledge (pedagogical, curricular, subject matter) … to best convey
understanding and to add a purposeful display of information. I also wanted to scaffold the
information so that the learners could gradually learn and understand the skill from its very
basic to its complex form in a game situation. I found this important, as many of the learners
could be from varying skill levels of the sport as a whole, and by starting at its basic and
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 19
scaffolding towards the more complex concept, it allows for growth as a group regardless of the
past understanding and skill level of the sport or concept of this particular skill.
Cade’s description of his growth of understanding of learning theories was evident as he weaved the
various learning theories from the class in his description of what helped him when implementing his
coaching plan. Additionally, Cade was able to articulate in his second interview:
I think I had an idea about those concepts, but not the specifics of them, and how to apply them.
Specifically, for scaffolding I understood, how the building on top of knowledge on top of each
other, but I didn't understand how to actually make that effective, and what information to
utilize when that was kind of important for me to learn and how I can potentially even use that
in my future field now.
Cade articulated the difference between understanding the basics of the concepts of learning theories
and being able to apply them and utilize them in the work he wanted to do in his future field. The
changes in resources that students experienced also helped shape the goals for learning with athletes.
Goals Changed from Egocentric to Learner-Centric
To answer the second research question (How did students’ goals change over the span of the
course for engaging in their work?), the findings indicated that students were able to change from
focusing on what they, as the instructor, were doing (egocentric) compared to what their students were
learning or experiencing (learner-centric). As a theme, it was found that students tended to change from
worrying about what they were doing or trying to achieve to what the learner was going to be able to
take away from either the sport psychology or coaching session. For this section of results on students’
goals, results were split by either participants’ interests in being future sport psychology consultants or
future coaches as the goals they had in mind while working with athletes were driven by what role they
were working towards and what they were trying to accomplish in each session. Students’ previous
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 20
experiences and the course helped build their existing content knowledge while the course also helped
students increase their pedagogical knowledge (Shulman, 1986) to fit the goals of their future ideal role.
Sport Psychology Group
As Elaine, a sport psychology student, was creating a session plan to help gymnasts work
through mental blocks while doing a beam routine, she did a wonderful job of articulating her goals for
how the learning theory would impact how she was designing her session plan. Elaine says:
I wanted to scaffold it up as much as possible because I feel if you start from learning the skill
from the basics and get comfortable it will help the athlete feel more comfortable. In my plan I
had it organized in levels. As the levels went up, the difficulty did as well. I feel this helped the
athlete feel more comfortable doing cartwheels so when they were on the high beam, they
would have confidence in their abilities to do a cartwheel. I used scaffolding at the meso-level.
Having the plan athlete-focused was my main goal while still asking questions so I could better
improve their learning and their abilities to complete the skill.
When Elaine came into the course, she was only thinking about what to do as the instructor but now, as
evidenced by the quote, Elaine was able to explicitly explain how she used scaffolding as a learning
theory to help her athletes as they worked through mental blocks.
Similarly, Bella also stated her change in goals for her session plan when creating an attentional
focus plan for athletes with physical disabilities. In her third written assignment, she wrote:
My goal was to prime students with ideas surrounding attentional focus and initiate thoughts on
their focus-abilities. The change in my goal, benefitted my lesson and the students because I
was able to add more real-life examples outside of sports, which allowed for an easier
understanding of attentional focus and created more opportunities for transfer. The theory I
structured my lesson plan around was Vygotsky’s Scaffolding Theory.
Furthermore, Bella also talked about how her increased resources in learning theories helped her goals:
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 21
For students to have the ability to transfer their attentional focus skills from activities they enjoy
to more challenging tasks or activities. I was able to accomplish this through pedagogical
knowledge I gathered on the students before and during the lesson. While implementing the
relation to hobbies/interests activity, I thought of Schulman’s types of knowledge and the
importance of my own pedagogical knowledge. I used it in the moment by asking the bowlers to
share their experience with attentional focus while bowling. I then thought of Jonassan’s ideas
of problem-solving while implementing my plan. I used her theory in the moment by setting up
a problem of being unfocused. They then solved the problem through the breathing activity and
came to this conclusion through the questions I asked, initiating procedural facilitation.
In a similar way to how Schoenfeld (2011) describes how math teachers make decisions during their
teaching to help meet the goals they have set out for a lesson plan, Bella is able to explicitly identify
which learning theories she is aware of or is considering when making decisions during her session plan.
In Bella’s initial interview, she was able to name some overlying categories of learning theories due to
the first day of class coming the day beforehand. However, throughout the span of the course, it is
evident that Bella was able to internalize her understanding of the theories and think of them in the
moment when making decisions about her session plan.
Coaching Group
After Joe created a basketball practice plan, he reflected upon his goal for the session:
The main idea and goal I had in mind when creating this plan was to effectively teach defensive
technical concepts while steadily increasing the complexity of the task at hand. Increasing the
complexity of the tasks allows me as a coach to scaffold my athletes’ learning and tailor the
practice plan to their levels of understanding. Once I, as the coach, am able to analyze and
determine where my athletes are the most comfortable, skill wise, then I can start to help them
improve. Putting the athletes in a comfortable environment gives them a sense of security.
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 22
Joe talked about his own learning process in the initial interview when he was faced with a question
asking about his goals for utilizing learning theories. But as he reflected upon his practice plan, it
became clear that Joe was able to think about how his athletes were going to go through the lesson and
conceptualize it in a way that was best for them.
Another coaching student, Zane, entered class with some baseline knowledge using a type of
coaching method he referred to as the “EDGE method”, which included explaining, demonstrating,
guiding, and enabling his athletes while coaching them. Zane talked about how important it was for him
to recognize a shift in how he was conceptualizing his goals about coaching:
I think [the course] shifted my mindset from more of what I’m teaching to how I teach it. I just
knew that athletes needed to know certain things and I talked about a lot at the beginning of
the course, about EDGE. But I didn't think there were all these different learning theories that I
could use, that could be applied in different settings that could enhance the athletes learning.
Zane summarized his takeaways from the course well, shifting from content knowledge to pedagogical
knowledge and stated that the course helped provide him with background and knowledge that he
could use. Although Zane didn’t talk about “in the moment goal shifts” as Bella did, it seems like his shift
was more of a global change and outlook upon how learning theories could be better implemented in
his future coaching work. Overall, there were large shifts in goals from the beginning of the course to
the end for both groups. This demonstrates the change in some students being able to consider what is
best for the goals of their students and how imbedding learning theories influenced their decisions and
goals when implementing a session plan.
Shift in Orientations
To answer the third research question (How did the students’ orientations change over the span
of the course for engaging in their work?), the results indicate that students’ beliefs, ideas, and attitudes
about learning became more robust and more applicable to their future work. For example, Carlos, a
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 23
sport psychology student, talked about his beliefs and recognition of how helpful learning theories could
be to his future work when he asked about how he would design a session plan after the course:
Well, designing it now, before I would have, I guess … put things that I would have thought
would be helpful to the athletes and I wouldn't have thought about how they would be learning
the things. I think I would have just used my own reference before, but now I can use things like
scaffolding, which I think is really helpful when working with athletes, especially youth athletes. I
think that's super important, with the skill difference and their schemas, and even the transfer
to like when, I guess, working with youth athletes, the transfer to their like real-life skills.
Carlos talked about how he used to think about learning and how he might have just relied upon his
own experience to reference how to help his athletes. But after going through the course, Carlos
recognized that he now has learning theories at his disposal to help him better structure and create an
environment that best fits the athletes’ learning experience.
Nina also shared a shift in her beliefs and attitudes about learning. Nina was able to explicitly
share her perceptions of her change when asked about her orientations for learning:
Learning is more fluid than I expected if you can engage with the way everyone learns best,
which is not always in lecture. Some need activities, some need discussion, some need to face
failure or discomfort to understand the importance of learning altogether. I definitely see more
of a need to scaffold practices as a coach after seeing the way understanding blossomed when it
became impactful personally, starting in a small manner and slowly growing.
Nina shared some of her changes in beliefs about learning and how the course was able to help with
that shift. The course design was intentionally scaffolded to provide students with a way to first
understand the theories, then apply and create their understanding in a created plan and to actually
implement that plan with athletes. Walking away from the course, Nina shared that she felt capable of
using these learning theories to inform and improve her future.
LEARNING THEORIES IN SPORT SETTINGS 24
Cade also talked about a change in his orientation that was similar to the themes from the goals
section. When asked to describe his changes in beliefs about learning in the last interview, Cade shared: