CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEWS

Transcription

1 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEWS In this chapter, a definition of mental toughness and development of psychometric measurement of mental toughness are presented. Then it outlines the explanation of twelve dimensions that encompass the instrument later use in this research. In the measurement section, approaches that have been proposed to assess mental toughness are addressed. Particularly it emphasizes the development of questionnaires to measure dimensions and characteristics of mental toughness in sport and physical activity. Then information regarding the research on mental toughness, concerning the connection between this concept and performance is presented. Synthesis and discussion on central literature that contextualizes this research and that forms the basis of the study are presented. The evolution and development of the mental toughness construct is explored with a focus on key definitions of the terms as well as the theory on how it is measured. Following the above mentioned, psychological skills training part as is another important issue in the study. The working theory of self-talk and goal-setting and its use will be presented. Next it is to raise the concerns about approaches and researches that are most relevant and they describe the use of these techniques to develop psychological characteristics that supports its use with mental toughness. Lastly, this chapter states the aims of the present dissertation. Perspectives of mental toughness in sport performance A former Georgetown basketball coach and current NBA commentator, John Thompson, stated, "Being mentally tough is just as important as being physically tough". Training is undertaken across a long period of time and involves many physiological, psychological, and sociological variables. Athletes peak performance depends on four factors: technical, tactical, physical, and psychological (Moran, 2004, p. 7). We, coaches, researchers and athletes are all know that on top of the training pyramid is about psychological training; also it is the hardest part to be trained for athletes (Bompa, 2002) (Figure 2). Since the physical abilities of most athletes at high

2 11 levels (elite, college, or Olympic level) are more homogeneous than their mental abilities, the distinguishing feature of successful athletes competing at high levels is often their exceptional mental skills (Silva, 1984). Also, psychological attributes are now generally accredited as being an important part of athletes success. And, coaches and athletes alike are searching continuously for knowledge that is going to give them a competitive edge and make them successful. This search has typically led to the development of physical or technical training programs. Physical training is the foundation of the pyramid, the base on which to build performance. The winning athlete or team is often the one with better psychological and mental qualities when the athletes or teams share similar physical, technical and tactical backgrounds. Psychological and mental training Tactical training Technical training Physical training Figure 2 The training factors pyramid (Bompa, 2002). Recently, many coaches and athletes have become aware of the importance of mental skills in sport and are placing more emphasis on the development of these skills. The development of these mental skills is not only important for those with the desire to win, but for those with a desire to become more consistent performers. Although a great deal of time in sport is spent on developing the physical skills, more and more coaches are beginning to preach the importance of mental preparation to their athletes and are learning important mental strategies that can help their team (Cote, Salmela, Trudel, Baria, & Russell, 1995). Mental toughness is an important concept in psychology in general and more specific in sport psychology, which describes an individual s capacity or ability to deal with stressors, pressure and challenges. Talent and skill are important contributors to achievement in sport, but they are not the most important factors.

3 12 There are many talented athletes who have not won when it really counts, at Olympics, World Champs. So what is the critical factor in athletic achievement? The answer is toughness. More than fifty-percent of success relevant with psychological factors that reflect mental toughness was what coaches and athletes felt in early work of Loehr (1982, 1986). Nowadays, you can hear and see this term everyday through channels of television, newspapers, or in interviews with sport stars, etc. For instance, a comment on NBC Sports of Tracy Austin about championship title of Maria Sharapova after she defeated Serena Williams was: Maria Sharapova s mental toughness and her physical power led her to win the Wimbledon Ladies single title. the 17-year-old Russian is so mentally tough and she s not awed by anyone two things she proved in defeating Serena in straight sets. She had total belief in herself, and that's a very rare quality. Mental toughness is more than just mental. It's also physical and emotional. In order to be mentally tough on the field, you must have talent and be in peak physical condition. Your technical skills have to be sharp. It is also important to recognize that the physical, emotional and mental sides of yourself affect each other. Mental toughness training allows players to tap into emotional and mental resources that keep play at its prime as often and consistently as possible. Upon reviewing the literature on mental skills, mental toughness consistently emerged as one of the most important psychological characteristics of sport. The literature clearly shows that mental toughness is imperative for peak sport performance. Performing with the maximum potential is the core of the mental toughness (Williams, 1988; Gould et al., 2002). Being mentally tough is what separates winners from losers, and people who persist versus quitters. Everybody, no matter what their level of competition is, can benefit from mental toughness training, said JoAnn Dahlkoetter, a sports psychologist who practices in San Carlos, California, and a world-class triathlete. It appears therefore, that virtually any positive psychological characteristic associated with sporting success has been labeled as mental toughness at one time or another (Jones

4 13 et al., 2002, p. 206). Mental toughness is an important psychological characteristic of sport performance. The question often asked is can mental toughness be developed? Performance standards have increased drastically within elite sport (Bull, Albinson, and Shambrook, 1996) and the demands of the elite sporting environment places the athlete in highly stressful situations both physically and psychologically. Such situations leading athletes to take into account how they respond and adapt to stressful environment places are much important to their performance due to side distractions (Hanton, Evans & Neil, 2003). Sport at the highest level is heavily characterized by a demand to excel at superior levels and perform under conditions that are considered extremely demanding and testing (Jones et al., 2007, p. 243). For this reason, psychological attributes as well as mental skills such as self-confidence and the ability to cope, two characters intrinsically imbedded in the mental toughness construct, are becoming commonly accepted as major contributors to overcoming adversity and achieving performance success. Definitions of mental toughness Literature from the 1950s to present day has included diverse definitions and explanations of Mental Toughness, all of which are largely associated with positive psychological characteristics and the use of mental skills in performance (Connaughton, Jones, & Hanton, 2007). Due to these diverse definitions and explanations of the concept no clear or broadly accepted definition emerged until 2002 (Connaughton et al., 2007, p. 193), and despite a broad and global acceptance of the term, there is still no universal definition of what mental toughness entails with specific reference to a sporting sphere. The assortment of definitions that has saturated the sporting world only serves to confuse the understanding of mental toughness, particularly as the majority of the definitions generated based on investigators opinions rather than on any scientifically rigorous examination (Connaughton et al., 2007, p. 193). Thus, despite the advancement of this concept, this serves to instead undermine it.

5 14 Unfortunately, many acknowledge the importance of mental toughness, but few fully understand it. While athletes and coaches often talk about mental toughness, seldom has it been precisely defined. (Gould et al., 2002, p. 199). Coaches and athletes use this term daily without a clear understanding of its components or what it means to be mentally tough. The term mental toughness is probably one of the most used, but least understood terms used in applied sport psychology (Jones et al., 2002, p. 205). Several definitions of mental toughness have been defined through time by different researchers. With such contradictory definitions of the term mental toughness, there was no clearly or widely agreed only one clear explanation in such circumstance. Loehr is a noted sport psychologist who has worked with many top athletes over years. He suggests the following definition for toughness: Toughness is a constellation of mental skills, all of which are learned that are characteristic of mentally tough competitors (Loehr, 1982, p. 11). "Toughness is the ability to consistently perform toward the upper range of your talent and skill regardless of competitive circumstances". Toughness is not about having a "killer instinct" or being mean or cold. By being mentally tough, you can bring all your talent and skill to life consistently. Being able to use your emotional life effectively will help you perform at your prime more consistently. As to Fourie and Potgieter (2001) stated, the characteristics of athletes who possess to be tough are as follows: motivation level, coping skills, confidence maintenance, cognitive skills, discipline and goal-directedness, competitiveness, prerequisite physical and mental skills, team unity, preparation skills, psychological skills, psychological hardiness, religious convictions and ethics. Then, Jones et al. (2002) suggested a definition of mental toughness derived from their rigorous scientific approaches to his research as follows: Mental toughness is having the natural or developed psychological edge that enables you to:

6 15 1. Generally, cope better than your opponents with the many demands (competition, training, life style) that sport places on a performer; and 2. Specifically, be more consistent and better than your opponents in remaining determined, focused, confident, and in control under pressure (Jones et al. p. 209). This qualitative study resulted in a definition of mental toughness and the identification of twelve attributes of mentally tough performer. Such attributes included self-belief, an unshakeable focus, high levels of desire and determination. Recently, Middleton, Marsh, Martin, Richards, and Perry (2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2005c) defined mental toughness as an unshakeable perseverance and conviction towards some goal despite pressure or adversity and pointed out 12 characteristics of mental toughness (self-efficacy, future potential, mental selfconcept, task familiarity, value, personal best motivation, goal commitment, task specific attention, perseverance, positivity, positive comparisons, and stress minimization). Gucciardi, Gordon, and Dimmock (2009a, 2009b) raised that the characteristics of mental toughness consists of: the ability to regulate one s emotions and moods in any circumstance to facilitate performance; an internalized, insatiable desire and commitment to consistently improve one s performance levels and achieve success; the ability to withstand and bounce back from situations in which negative outcomes are experienced (i.e., pressure, adversity, challenge); the ability to manage one s attention and focus over extended periods of play involving various distractions; an unshakeable self-belief in one s physical ability to perform in any circumstance; an awareness and understanding of the game and the processes required to perform well; also physical toughness as well. The above are some definitions of mental toughness that make sense and upto-date in our field, although some sport psychologists would not totally agree but accepted so far. Mental toughness is often included in discussions related to a successful performer and multi-dimensional as is. Mental toughness is a collection of values, attitudes, behaviors and emotions, which enable an individual to persevere and

7 16 overcome any obstacle, adversity or pressure experienced, but also to maintain concentration and motivation when things are going well, to consistently produce high levels of performance (Gucciardi et al., 2008). Characteristics of mental toughness This part was been designed to interrogate some of these findings and unpack selected influential research endeavors. Providing an insight into what theorists consider mental toughness to entail offers a reference point for discussing the degree to which mental toughness has been achieved as a result of the psychological intervention implemented during this research report. Some sport professionals believe that the mental part of athletics is the hardest to train. Mental toughness is often included in discussions related to traits of a successful performer. Opposing results have been obtained on this matter of mental toughness through several researches and studies.. Loehr (1986) suggested that given the raw talent, the mental and emotional control needed for consistent performance is learned. Norris (1999) also emphasized the importance of mental toughness in the making of a champion athlete. This raises a question: If mental toughness can be learned and fostered, are there really any differences in mental toughness between elite athletes, such as Olympians, and nonelite athletes? To find out the truth, Gould, Hodge, Peterson, and Petlichkoff (1987) conducted a study in which 82% of coaches rated mental toughness as the most important psychological attribute or characteristic in determining success in wrestlers. Unfortunately, the results showed that only 9% of those same coaches had been successful in developing mental toughness in their athletic skills. Continuing on the gap of mental toughness characteristics and development Gould et al. (2002) questioned if these characteristics can be taught and improved. They studied the psychological characteristics of Olympic champions, and identified mental toughness as a significant contributor to sports performance enhancement. Gould et al. (2002) interviewed ten Olympic champions from the United States, their

8 17 coaches, and a parent, guardian or significant others, in order to ascertain how these champions became such mentally tough athletes. Gould et al. (2002) determined that there were many key reasons as to why these athletes were successful, including general mental toughness and resiliency, the ability to cope with and control anxiety, confidence, optimism, and the ability to focus and block out distractions. The authors found that these characteristics were learned throughout their athletic development from their family, community, coaches, and even the athletes themselves.the characteristics were learned directly through teaching methods or indirectly through modeling of behavior (Gould et al., 2002). Tibbert, Morris, and Andersen (2009) found that seven MT attributes were positively associated with capacity to benefit from recovery time and to perceive a non-competition period as less stressful, and they suggested that psychological skills training to modified aspects of mental toughness could help elite performers to manage stress-recovery imbalance during intensive periods of training and competition. The use of thinking skills, imagery, confidence building and other skills described later can be powerful techniques in reaching a high level of mental toughness. Marchant, Hamlin, and McNally (2009) suggested that mental toughness can be developed through appropriate training programs and generally increased with age. Furthermore, colleagues in India also found that psychological interventions could help enhance mental toughness dimensions of sport persons (Bhambri et al. 2005). In result of a research, Omar-Fauzee, Daud, Abdullah and Rashid (2009) concluded that: there were factors that gave a lot of impact on the player especially in motivating them to attain their best achievement and also affect their mental toughness. This means that the mental toughness of the players could be enhanced if the players really understand the professionalism of the game and put it into practice. A study involving young soccer players evaluated the effectiveness of two different psychological skills training programs over six weeks (Gucciardi et al. 2009b). They found that both of the psychological skills training programs enhanced

9 18 mental toughness and resiliency in the youth soccer players compared to control subjects, who received no psychological skills training. In conclusion for the definitions and development of mental toughness, from those above researches together with the provided definitions has supported to an understanding that mental toughness can be developed with properly training through athletes career phases. Also, through intervention we can help athletes develop and maintain their levels of mental toughness, and its characteristics. Thus, sport psychologists and performers should be advised to earn an early age mental toughness training whereas support in the later stages of their sporting careers (Connaughton, Wadey, Hanton, and Jones, 2008). Sport psychologists, and coaches should take the following characteristics into account: long-term process that begins before sporting and continues throughout a sporting career (Connaughton & Hanton, 2009; Gucciardi et al., 2009a). Both facilitative and debilitative mechanisms (Gucciardi et al., 2009b), mechanisms` operate in a combined, rather than an independent, fashion. Both caught (i.e., indirectly through experience) and taught (i.e., directly through coaching, psychological skills training). Psychological skills training alone is not mental toughness training, it needs critical training and support from coaches, sport psychologists, social support altogether. If mental toughness can be learned and fostered, are there really any differences in mental toughness between elite athletes, such as Olympians, and nonelite athletes? As with many research topics, opposing results have been obtained on this subject. According to a study by Nicholls et al. (2009) there are no differences in mental toughness as delineated by performance levels. Based on their results, Nicholls et al. (2009) concluded that there were no significant differences in mental toughness between the 677 athletes performing at the international, national, county, club/university or beginner levels. These results contradict those by Golby and Sheard (2004), who found differences in mental toughness scores between three different levels of rugby players. The rugby athletes participating at the international level scored higher on levels of mental toughness as compared to the sub-elite athletes.

10 19 Thus, more researches should be done to clarify whether there are significant differences between classes of athletes. Measurement of mental toughness In addition to the attempts at defining mental toughness, various endeavors have been aimed at developing measurements of the concept too. To date, several measures have been developed and aimed to examine mental toughness. It is very important that we do seem not having a sound psychometric measurement that is mostly agreed by colleagues, this is also because the absence of a suitable, clear definition of mental toughness itself that can help to build a good measurement tool. Loehr (1986) developed the Psychological Performance Inventory (PPI) based on interviews with a large number of athletes, and since then various researchers have utilized the measurement in their studies. The PPI has, however, been subjected to criticism regarding its proposed weak psychometric properties and its lack of an adequate conceptual grounding (Connaughton & Hanton, 2009; Crust, 2007, 2008; Gucciardi & Gordon, 2009; Middleton et al., 2004) This particular issue will be unpacked in greater detail now. Following the PPI, a number of alternate measures have been developed focus on various models. Later, grounded in Kobasa, 1979 concept of hardiness and their applied work with rugby league players, Clough and Earle (2002) proposed the 4Cs model of mental toughness and developed the Mental Toughness Questionnaire 48 (MTQ48) to assess their proposed characteristics of mental toughness. The MTQ48 assesses an individual s total mental toughness and the four proposed subcomponents: (a) control (emotional and life), a tendency to feel and act as if one is influential, (b) commitment, a tendency to involve oneself in rather than experience alienation from an encounter, (c) challenge, a belief that life is changeable and to view this as an opportunity rather than a threat, and (d) confidence (interpersonal and in abilities), a high sense of self-belief and unshakable faith concerning one s ability to achieve success. Adequate reliability, face, construct, and criterion validity has been

11 20 reported for the MTQ48 (Clough, Earle, & Sewell, 2002). An 18-item (MT18) was additionally developed and utilized to allow increased accessibility for sports people (Clough et al., 2002). The year of 2004 saw great strides in regard to the mental toughness construct with several researches done by our colleagues. Here, consideration will be given to the influential work by Middleton et al. (2004). The first study considered is titled Mental Toughness: Is the Mental Toughness Test Enough? The aim of this study was to evaluate the construct validity of responses to Loehr s (1986) Psychological Performance Inventory (PPI) (Middleton et al., 2004). The PPI is a 42- item self-report instrument developed to measure reflecting Mental Toughness factors. Seven factors were presented by means of six questions each and these factors included: self-confidence, negative energy, attention control, visual and imagery control, motivation level, positive energy and attitude control (Middleton et al., 2004). All the presented questions in the PPI were answered by means of a 6 point Likert scale ranging from 1 representing false to 6 representing true (Middleton et al., 2004). The main purpose of developing the PPI was to identify the inherent mental toughness factors. In this study, Middleton et al. (2004) believed that the factors were proven to have face validity and to further be conceptually compelling (Middleton et al., 2004). An alternative restructured five-factor solution was then considered and the researchers found a better fit to the data than the PPI (Middleton et al., 2004). Despite the new approved alternative model fitting the data more appropriately its conceptual underpinning and validity were not as strong as the PPI (Middleton et al., 2004). Also, Golby and Sheard (2004) conducted the following two research efforts: A Cognitive-Behavioral Analysis of Mental Toughness in National Rugby League Football Teams and Mental Toughness and Hardiness at Different Levels of Rugby League. The intricacies and results of these two studies are beyond the scope of this research endeavor; however, there is some doubt that needs to be expressed regarding the measurement technique utilized for measuring Mental Toughness Another instrument is called Sports Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ) (Sheard, Golby, & Wersch, 2009). To date, the researcher yielded that this

12 21 instrument was not as reliable and validate as compared with another instrument like MTQ48. A second study presented by Middleton et al. (2005a) was been titled Developing the Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI) and the purpose of their study was to introduce the Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI). At the beginning of their study Middleton et al. stated that despite the existence of the widespread agreement regarding the importance, influence, and benefits mental toughness presents, there still exists a substantial dearth of high quality research (Middleton et al., 2005a). Middleton et al. utilized a 117-item self-report MTI instrument aimed at measuring: self-efficacy, task value, potential, task familiarity, personal bests, stress minimization, mental self-concept, positivity, perseverance, positive comparison, task specific attention, goal commitment and global mental toughness. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the psychometric properties of the MTI (Middleton et al., 2005a). The reliability coefficients for each of the factors ranged from.82 to.94 across both sub-elite and elite athlete samples Goodness of fit for the CFA was good for each sample individually, but also multi-group CFA proved the MTI factor structure to be stable across both groups. The conclusion of this study was that the MTI is a valid and reliable measure of mental toughness and the researchers confirmed that the MTI has direct relevance and benefit in research contexts (Middleton et al., 2005a). The final study by Middleton et al. (2005c) considered is titled Making the Leap from Good to Great: Comparisons between Sub-Elite and Elite athletes on Mental Toughness. In the previous study conducted by Middleton et al. (2005b), the MTI was validated and the purpose of their next study therefore was to utilize the recently validated MTI to determine how mental toughness varies across age, gender and between elite and sub-elite athletes (Middleton et al., 2004). More specifically, this study was an investigation into the differences in mental toughness between elite versus sub-elite athletes, older versus younger athletes and male versus female athletes (Middleton et al., 2005b). The results of this study revealed some interesting and significant results. Mental toughness proved to be more prominent in older

13 22 athletes, male athletes and sub-elite athletes. Furthermore, mental toughness was shown to decrease in both sub-elite and elite athletes from the age of 12 to 16 and continue right into adulthood for sub-elite athletes before making significant improvements (Middleton et al., 2005c). The development of effective programs designed specifically to help athletes learn, develop and maintain mental toughness may assist with improving this decreasing rate. A subsidiary result of this research endeavor was to further validate the MTI as a suitable test for mental toughness and regarded the MTI as highly valid and reliable test of mental toughness (Middleton et al., 2005c). A particular strength of the MTI is its conceptual basis. The factors identified by Middleton et al. (2005b) have face validity, are intuitively appealing, and have support from recent qualitative research into mental toughness (Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Jones et al., 2002). Furthermore, the current quantitative evaluation of the MTI demonstrates the strong psychometric properties (Crust & Swann, 2011). Taken together, the MTI represents a sound instrument, strong in theory, conceptualization, and internal properties. The development of the MTI has benefited greatly through the combination of both qualitative and quantitative research methods. There are numerous advantages to multi-method research encompassing both quantitative and qualitative approaches (Brewer & Hunter, 1989) and particularly in an area in which there is a need for strong conceptual and theoretical foundations, the use of both these complementary methods is recommended. Taking the best of qualitative and quantitative approaches has resulted in the development of a reliable and valid MTI, one that is based on a conceptual and theoretical foundation. Furthermore, the MTI provides a reliable and valid measure of that model. Taken together, these data suggest the MTI is strong on both conceptual, between-network, and within-network grounds, and the MTI will have direct relevance and benefit in both applied and research contexts. To date, this instrument proved that it can be widely appropriate to be used to measure mental toughness in research. Thus, we attempt to use it as one of the instruments in this study along with other tools to access mental toughness. Overall,

14 23 research and theory on measuring mental toughness suggests that there is still no fully sound measure of the concept and that further work is required in this regard. It is highly recommended, therefore, that further research be done to rectify the absence of a universally accepted, reliable and valid measure of the multifaceted concept of mental toughness. To this point, I draw an assumption that mental toughness is recognized as a key ingredient in achieving success, and it is really needed for athletes to overcome their adversity and coping with pressure to win their opponents, and is multidimensional. But, still its definition and psychometric instrument need more researches to clear the gap between the use of this term and the support of literature surrounding, and raised the need to develop or validate a standard instrument that can be used to assess mental toughness in the future. Also, more researches need to find out if mental toughness can be developed through time, age, together with other criteria, and how it can be developed with the relationship with athletes performance and competitive environment in the specific sport- context. Lastly, the Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI) appeared to be a sound instrument to measure mental toughness with strong psychometrics. Research on mental toughness Currently there is much concern and debate over whether these mental skills or psychological characteristics of mental toughness are teachable/ trainable. There is no conclusive empirical research that shows whether these attributes are inherited. The lack of clarity and consistency regarding mental toughness is due, in part, to a significant gap in the literature. A study titled Mental Toughness and Performance Success and Failure was conducted to determine an athlete s level of mental toughness. This study examined the interactive effects of mental toughness and success and failure instructions upon subsequent performance, a Motivational Rating Scale was administered to 238 undergraduate physical education participants and the underlying rationale was that if

15 24 this supposed personality trait did contribute towards performance excellence, then individuals at two extremes should respond differently under failure conditions (Dennis, 1978). Fourie and Potgieter (2001), conducted a qualitative study of mental toughness; analyzed responses from 131 expert coaches and 160 athletes from 31 team and individual sports. This resulted in the identification of 12 components of mental toughness including motivation level, coping skills, confidence maintenance, cognitive skill, discipline and goal-directedness, competitiveness, possession of prerequisite physical and mental requirements, team unity, preparation skills, psychological hardiness, religious convictions and ethics. Coaches regarded concentration as the most important characteristic, while the athletes regarded perseverance as most important. The coaches rated the effectiveness of coaches and sport psychologists in strengthening the characteristics of mental toughness higher than athletes did. In his research, Nicholls et al. (2008, 2009) tested mental toughness among athletes of different: (a) achievement level, (b) gender, (c) age, (d) sporting experience, and (e) sport type (team vs. individual and contact vs. non-contact sports). Participants were 677 athletes including sports performers competing at international (n = 60), national (n = 99), county (n = 198), club/university (n = 289), and beginner (n = 31) levels. Results revealed a significant relationship between mental toughness and gender, age, and sporting experience. However, achievement level and the type of sport an athlete participated were not significantly associated with mental toughness. According to a study by Nicholls, Polman, Levy and Backhouse (2009) there are no differences in mental toughness as delineated by performance levels. Based on their results, Nicholls et al. (2009) concluded that there were no significant differences in mental toughness between the 677 athletes performing at the international, national, county, club/ university or beginner levels. These results contradict those by Golby and Sheard (2004), who found differences in mental toughness scores between three different levels of rugby players. The rugby athletes

16 25 participating at the international level scored higher on levels of mental toughness as compared to the sub-elite athletes. Many popular literature sources such as Loehr (1986) Kuehl, Kuehl, and Tefertiller, (2005) attempted to define and develop mental toughness programs. These sources provide inconsistent descriptions of mental toughness, not essential components. The empirical research on the construct of mental toughness is sparse. In fact, Jones et al. (2002) is the first empirical source that attempted to identify the components or attributes of mental toughness or a construct surrounding mental toughness. Prior to 2002, the research done on mental toughness was characterized by a lack of conceptual clarity and little consensus surrounding the definition of mental toughness. In 2002, Jones et al. (2002) recognized the need for clarification of mental toughness and attempted to define and identify the attributes of mental toughness as perceived by ten elite sport performers. From the applied perspective it is required to extend beyond broader terminology of mental toughness and focus on the fundamental areas of mental toughness: Self-confidence, Control of negative energies, Attention control, Imagery program, Motivation, Positive energy control, and Attitude control (Loehr, 1986). The focus on single sport research was popularized with Thelwell, Weston and Greenlees (2005), in their work: Defining and Understanding Mental Toughness within Soccer. These authors noted that their research within soccer was in response to Jones et al. s. (2002) request for single sport research efforts within the domain of mental toughness. These researchers therefore embarked on two studies: the first being an investigation into mental toughness examining the characteristics of mentally tough soccer players, and the second being a confirmation of the definition and the importance of attributes for mentally tough soccer players (Thelwell et al., 2005). The participants were exposed to semi-structured interviews encompassing five specific areas involving: demographic details, mental toughness definitions within the context of professional soccer, comparisons between participant definitions and definitions forwarded by Jones et al. (2002), areas of modification on individually-prescribed definitions,

17 26 participant perceptions regarding the attribute make up of mentally tough soccer players, and finally areas of general commentary (Thelwell et al., 2005). Following this, the researchers, initially independently and then later collectively, agreed upon a definition for mental toughness stemming from the information collated from the interviewees perceptions prior to their exposure to the definition offered by Jones et al. (2002). Additional significance of this study was that it presented one of the first justifications behind the development and implementation of mental toughness programs with Thelwell et al. (2005) who expressed that there was a strong and important need for platforms and frameworks to be put in place for developing mental toughness (Thelwell et al., 2005). In the meanwhile, Gordon and Sridhar (2005) conducted a study aiming at identifying and developing mental toughness in elite cricketers. The aim of this study was to develop an understanding of mental toughness within the context of Indian cricket coupled with an attempt to determine specific mental toughness attributes (Gordon & Sridhar, 2005). Content analysis was conducted on the data collected and revealed seven higher order categories or responses that collectively represented the key attributes of mentally tough Indian cricketers as described by expert commentators (Gordon & Sridhar, 2005, p. 2). In conclusion, they facilitated a study to present culturally specific insights regarding development and identification of mental toughness and the seven key attributes identified by the experts contributed to the development of a program designed for the elite genre of players (Gordon & Sridhar, 2005). They did, however, state that further research is required to refine a cricket mental toughness inventory that can be used both to identify and develop mental toughness among genders. Mental toughness is a descriptive term that describes the use of a series of cognitive, behavioral and emotional processes in response to some pressure or adversity. Mental toughness is about a continuation to believe in oneself, effective coping, unshakeable focus, and in pursuit of a goal with conviction, despite adversity. Chiefly, mental toughness is best understood in context. This gives rise to questions for further research. Do the strategies used for mental toughness change depending on

18 27 the context? Do the various mental toughness characteristics change depending on various stages of interaction with a stressor? It might be predicted that increased mental toughness would correlate positively with increased success. The results of such study would prove beneficial to coaches and athletes, by illuminating the mental toughness characteristics most related to enhancing athletic success. Examining the degree of interaction between mental toughness characteristics and factors within the stressor or environment will help to further understand how mental toughness plays out in real time. Mentally tough athletes require a sound and solid belief in their capacity to achieve in their sport. Accordingly, when mentally tough athletes are under pressure in their sport, they continue to believe in themselves. Despite performance pressure, mentally tough athletes believe in their potential to achieve, in their ability to do the task, and in their overall mental strength. On the other hand, athletes lower in mental toughness doubt themselves. When the going gets tough, these athletes question themselves and their abilities, sometimes looking for excuses or ways to avoid the situation. Self-belief factors are routinely reported here in mental toughness research, and also in related resilience research that seeks to explore how individuals bounce back from adversity. We help our athletes develop mental fitness. At the top level it is not your physical or technical expertise which separates you from the competition but your mental toughness. To be outstanding you have to hold your nerve, perform under the most intense pressure, and consistently turn it on even when you don't feel at your best. Mental toughness is what makes Michael Jordan and Pete Sampras so special. These athletes know their real battle is not so much on the court, but inside their heads. We know from countless studies that mental skills are acquirable and you can, with practice, learn to perform mentally. You can improve your confidence, concentration, motivation and anxiety levels if you choose to. The mind and the body are inextricably linked - how you feel physically affects how you feel emotionally. This means that we can improve our mental performance using physical interventions and vice versa.

19 28 The findings also supported Gucciardi et al. (2009b) process model of mental toughness. A winning mentality and desire was identified as a key attribute of mentally tough soccer players in addition to other previously reported qualities such as self-belief, physical toughness, work ethic/ motivation, and resilience. Key cognitions reported by mentally tough soccer players enabled them to remain focused and competitive during training and matches and highlighted the adoption of several forms of self-talk in dealing with challenging situations. Minor revisions to Gucciardi and colleagues' definition of mental toughness are proposed. Theories of Bandura (1977) stipulates that self-efficacy is directly related to athletic performance. Increases in self-efficacy are mirrored by improvements in performance, subsequently decreases in performance limit both performance and training. Prior experiences affect efficacy expectations, the probability performing to a high standard is much greater if you believe in your abilities; therefore, efficacy has tremendous explanatory power when comparing fluctuations in performance (Silva & Stevens, 2002). Many athletes report that heightening levels of arousal facilitates their performance (Gould, Finch, & Jackson, 1993). It is reported to increase anaerobic power (Jones et al., 2002). The PST program will focus on optimizing performance by improving self-efficacy and emotional control. To improve these psychological skills, the athlete will complete sessions using goal setting, imagery and relaxation. The program will follow an educational approach as advised by Gill (2000), and Horn (2002). The program consists of three main phases: Educational Phase Athletes develop the understanding and importance of PST and how it can affect performance. Acquisition Phase - Athletes learn how to use PST methods and how best to implement them. Practice Phase Athletes devote time and effort to PST and complete training in both competition and practice (Horn, 2002). Fournier, Calmels, Durand-Bush, and Salmela (2005) reported that four out of nine gymnasts improved on the vault by 10% and seven out of nine on the asymmetrical bars improved by 10%.

20 29 According to Connaughton et al. (2007, p. 193) research conducted on Mental Toughness can be categorized into four dimensions: mental toughness as a personality trait, mental toughness as an important contributor toward success, mental toughness as a defense mechanism against adversity, and finally mental skill development designed to enhance performance by increasing mental toughness. The researchers of this study regard mental toughness as a construct capable of being taught, learnt and further developed and maintained. Psychological skills training in sport Mental Skills Training and Psychological Skills Training are psychological interventions designed to help athletes improve, develop and maintain levels of particular mental skills needed in sport. Recent times, sport has been going further from the physical aspect to the mental or psychological aspect of competing and there is growing realization that peak performance in sport can only be achieved through taking help from those psychological techniques, which enhance players' psychological strength. It plays a vital role in producing positive states of mind which in turn help the athlete in delivering optimal level of performance (Weinberg & Gould, 2010). The crucial mental skill of self-efficacy, or self-confidence, has been shown to be enhanced through mental training (Lai, 2001). Mental training can involve several different techniques and strategies, including imagery, self-talk, goal setting, relaxation, focus training, and energy management (Frey, Laguna, & Ravizza, 2003; Lai, 2001; Vealey, 2005). Within the realm of sport psychology and sporting professionals it is believed that specific psychological skills and mental skills can in fact be taught and further developed, ultimately meaning that a construct, previously believed to be possessed by elites only, is now obtainable by all levels of athletes at all levels of sport participation. It is not a lack in knowledge regarding the psychological skills involved or required in superior sports performance that is the problem, but more on

21 30 the lack of knowledge surrounding the methods available to enhance such skills and the success rate of psychological performance interventions. Teaching and developing mental toughness has many benefits. By increasing knowledge of the methods available to develop one s mental toughness, athletes can begin laying groundwork for enhancing performance and increasing the chances of success. The main objective behind mental skills training is to help athletes, of any level within any sporting discipline, develop their mental skills in order to assist them achieve success in performance and personal well-being. Mental training involves the process of training specific mental skills required to strengthen and condition the mind in pursuit of an athlete s performance potential (Vealey, 2007). By learning to train mentally, athletes will essentially be gaining a degree of control in coordinating effective movement through various psychological states of performance, and having the ability to control mental and emotional states has various benefits. In addition to assisting task performance and creating psychological foundations for improving confidence and well-being (Behncke, 2004), developing one s mental strength will allow athletes to develop momentum for performing successfully more consistently. Through mental training, athletes will become aware of the power of their minds and as they learn to control and create their own sporting experience they will soon improve their mental toughness and be better equipped to deal appropriately with the emotions associated with winning and losing within sport. Mental toughness is a term that's often used in sports, but it's such an elusive concept. Research on the subject is still in its infancy, and only recently have some operational definitions been advanced. Until you have a definition, how can you have accurate measurement tools to assess someone's mental toughness? That's what coaches and athletes want. That's the tangible aspect to it. Sheard (2008), in his book The Achievement Mindset: Understanding Mental Toughness, presents some critical questions that modern-day athletes should consider: Why is it that some athletes are able to succeed in the face of adversity while others cannot? Why can some athletes resist and disregard negative effect in competition while others let it influence and weaken their competitive performance? Many suggest that the answers

22 31 to these questions lie in the successful development, implementation and continuous maintenance of the concept of mental toughness. A common question among sport psychologists today and even more among mental toughness theorists, is whether champions and elite performers have inherited the dominant psychological characteristics critical for success or whether this mental toughness can be acquired through training and experience. Recent research has attempted to explore the concept of mental toughness in sport more thoroughly and it appears that, while some people are naturally more tough-minded than others, people can be toughened up with the correct approach to training (Crust, 2009). Alderman (1974) suggested that athletes are, in addition to being taught to be physically tough, and being taught to be mentally tough as well. Whenever athletes face with situations that require an enhanced level of performance, the immediate reaction is generally to make an adjustment to all levels and phases of their physical training routine long before the mental aspect of performance is even considered. Every athletic contest is a contest of control, control of the delicate mind and body connection, yet athletes consistently and persistently continue to train harder and harder physically at the expense of mental training (Loehr, 1982). Mental toughness is an important characteristic contributing to athletic excellence (Jones et al., 2007), yet little research has examined how psychological skills contribute to its development, providing support for use as a potential strategy for developing or enhancing mental toughness in athletes. Aimed to clear the gap and add the knowledge to the field of mental toughness as it s still on developing a way to explore. There is an increasing demand for strategies aiming at the development of mental toughness and the clear relationship with performance development, so it's essential to clarify precisely which techniques should be included in psychological skills training programs aimed at developing or enhancing this construct. (Crust & Clough, 2005). In his paper titled Physiological models to understand exercise fatigue and the adaptations that predict or enhance athletic performance, Noakes presented what is known as the psychological/motivational model. This model emphasizes that the

23 32 ability to sustain exercise performance results from a conscious effort and that exercise performance is regulated at a subconscious level. Both terms conscious and subconscious refer to states of the mind, and he suggested that sustaining and regulating exercise performance stems from inside the mind. One must question that if the mind has such a powerful influence over the reaction, movements, maintenance and responses of our physical body, why then are athletes not training the mental side of performance more regularly and intensely? According to Noakes findings, athletes who are able to engage in the mental side of training and performing have a greater advantage than those who are unable to (Noakes, 2006). The biology of the human body is designed to regulate its very existence and this regulation stems directly from the central control system, the brain and the mind. Regardless of the physical attributes that athletes may possess, the tougher athlete will most often prevail and the determining factor between success and failure is often more easily, and perhaps more appropriately, attributable to psychological factors (Golby & Sheard, 2003, p. 455). Gucciardi et al. (2008, p. 262) stressed that Mental toughness sets apart good and great athletes when physical, technical and tactical skills are equal. It is important to note, however, that developing and improving one s mental side of performance by no means negates or trivializes the important role of developing and maintaining physical or technical abilities (Bull, Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005). The point being stressed here is that an athlete who has physical talent, skill and ability can become an even greater athlete and increase their chances of a more successful performance and sporting career if they begin to train mentally. An athlete who does not share equal physical ability as other athletes and who is perhaps considered slightly weaker in this regard may even become a better athlete if they learn to engage in mental toughness development, improvement and maintenance. The psychological factors involved in athletic performance have long been of interest to athletes, coaches, sport psychologists and sports scientists. Empirical studies have largely focused on individual psychological factors and their influence on performance which includes confidence, motivation, attention, visualization, and

24 33 psychosomatic skills (Gucciardi et al., 2009c). Similarly, some studies indicated that the use of mental skills such as goal setting, imagery, relaxation, and self-talk are important areas in the field of sport psychology (Vealey, 2007; Williams & Krane, 2001). They also asserted that goal setting as attaining a specific standard of proficiency on a task, usually within a specified time limit can increase performance during competition. In addition, self-talk has been defined as occurring verbalizations or statements about something as well as increase performance and skills in sport (Howland, 2006; Vealey, 2007). As a consequence, mental training can improve performance of athletes in order to achieve championship in competition. Goal-setting Goal-setting has received some attention and its use has been supported by personal trainers and popular fitness magazines (Williams, 2001). Locke, Shaw, Saari, and Gary (1981) indicated goals setting affect performance by directing attention, mobilizing effort, increasing persistence, and motivating strategy development. This fact was supported by Burton and Raedeke (2008). Goals are like a magnet that attracts athletes to higher grounds and new horizons. They give their eyes a focus, their mind an aim, and their strength a purpose. Moreover, they also asserted that both motivational and emotional mechanisms were important mediators in improving the efficacy of goal-setting in endurance sports (Bueno, Weinberg, Fernandez-Castro, & Capdevila, 2008). Rationale for goal-setting According to Bandura (1977) 'performance accomplishment' is the most effective method for improving self-efficacy. The most commonly used tool utilized by sports psychologists is goal-setting. Setting goals provide this focus and direct attention by agreeing a timed end point to their action (Locke et al., 1981). Researchers and practitioners in both sports and organizational literature have argued that a combination of both short-term and long-term goals is most effective for improving performance and changing behavior, short-term goals should be enforced to directly reach the long-term goal of the client/ performer (Weinberg, Butt, Knight, & Perritt, 2001). Miller and McAuley (1987) tested free throw self-efficacy in 18

25 34 undergraduate students. The goal-training condition reported higher free throw efficacy when compared to the no-goal condition. Kingston and Hardy (1997) suggest that in sports which are highly complex (gymnastics) process goals should provide the framework for improving technical aspects of difficult skills. The support for the use of process goals is also evident as it is suggested that process goals are more beneficial for increasing self-efficacy as they are more controllable and flexible, this allows the coach/psychologist to mold goals so that the athletes constantly achieves their goals. This constant achievement will improve self-efficacy via increasing the performance accomplishments (Horn, 2002). Another research found that goal-setting improved performance, stated self-confidence and perceived satisfaction within 25 female junior high school gymnasts (Pierce & Burton, 1998). Self-talk One of the mental skills that researches have been conducted in the mental training domain is self-talk (Williams & Krane, 2001; Vealey, 2007; Burton & Raedeke, 2008). Typically, self-talk has been defined as occurring any time one thinks about something (Gammage, Hardy, & Hall, 2001). On the other hand, self-talk is defined as (a) verbalizations or statements addressed to the self; (b) multidimensional in nature; (c) having interpretive elements associated with the content of statements employed; (d) is somewhat dynamic; and (e) serving at least two functions, instructional and motivational, for the athlete (Edwards, Tod, & McGuigan, 2008). Researchers have found that self-talk enhances performance and skills in sport (e.g., Hardy, 2006; Hardy, Hall, & Alexander, 2001). Influences on vertical jump male Rugby union players (Edwards et al., 2008), affects female youth soccer performance (Johnson, Hrycaiko, Johnson, & Halas, 2004). Furthermore, Vealey (2007) suggested that creative self-talk is also effective for using a strategy, psyching up emotion and effort, relaxation, attention focusing, maintaining selfconfidence and self-assessment. In this type of mental training, athletes make their feeling and perception clear, evaluate themselves, and give themselves instructions or reinforcement.

26 35 Research conducted by Tremayne (2004) looked at the Swedish and Australian school systems in order to understand how the teaching of goal-setting, stress management and relaxation techniques have been successfully implemented in these contexts. These methods have been proven to advance one s physical fitness, self-confidence and self-esteem (Sheard & Golby, 2006, p. 150), all of which are very important in the development of mental toughness. The combination of various psychological skills intervention techniques can result in effective performance outcomes; something that has been demonstrated in intervention skill packages such as goal-setting (Wanlin, Hyrcaito, Martin, & Mahon, 1997), self-talk, goal-setting, focusing and visualisation (Fournier et al., 2005). The increased flow of academic interest in the mental toughness phenomenon clearly indicates the significance and importance that sport psychologists, coaches and athletes themselves place on mental toughness (Crust, 2008). The influence that psychological factors have on athletic performance is becoming increasingly important and prominent today so much, so that coaches, athletes and sport administrators recognize that success cannot be guaranteed by raw physical talent alone (Gucciardi et al., 2008). Although this view is endorsed by various researchers, there is still a concerning lack of belief in the influence of psychological intervention and the impact it has on performance. Researchers conducting studies using mental toughness and psychological intervention frameworks are still trying to capture the faith of a somewhat stubborn audience. Many researchers have attributed mental toughness as being a significant influencing factor contributing to successful performance and performance excellence, as well as mental toughness acting as a performance enhancer (Loehr, 1982; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Gould, Dieffenbach & Moffett, 2002; Gould et al., 2002; Golby & Sheard, 2003; Middleton et al., 2004; Bull, Shambrook et al., 2005; Connaughton, Wadey, Hanton, & Jones, 2008; Kuan & Roy, 2007; Crust, 2008; Gucciardi et al., 2008; Nicholls et al., 2008; Crust & Kayvon, 2009).

27 36 A well-known quote a healthy mind in a healthy body alludes to the fact that there is a positive connection between a healthy body and a healthy mind. The state of one s physical condition can affect the state of their mental condition and vice versa. Exercise performed on a regular basis has significant effects not only on aspects such as athlete s cardiovascular systems but also on the athlete s mood and sense of well-being. Exercise has been correlated to a decline in depression states as well as the amelioration of anxiety and furthermore assists in improving aspects such as self-esteem, socialization, self-belief and confidence, all of which relate to improvements in the mental and emotional side of functioning (Hays, 1995). Most athletes understand the importance of training physically, without the physical training the athlete would simply have no place in their sporting arena. There seems to be a two way relationship between physical training and mental training. Improving one s physical training will assist athletes in developing such psychological/ mental aspects like self-belief and confidence as they become better at their sport and can compete at higher levels. This in turn motivates them more and empowers them with a greater drive to succeed, therefore improving their mental toughness (Frey, Laguna, & Ravizza 2003; Garza & Feltz, 1989). Mental training relies heavily on athletes having a sense of self mastery as this self-mastery in turn serves to motivate continuous efforts in attempting to increase performance (Behncke, 2004). Loehr (1982) believed that what happens with mental skills is similar to what happens with physical skills (Loehr, 1982, p. 85). According to Hays (1995), Programs are based on the assumption that aspects of thoughts and feelings can inhibit optimal performance, and likewise, that certain mental skills, used effectively, can enhance optimal performance. According to Greenspan and Feltz 1989 (as cited in Hays, 1995, p. 35), considerable research, especially with competitive athletes, suggests that educational psychological skills interventions improve competitive performance. You can improve your confidence, concentration, motivation and anxiety levels if you choose to. The mind and the body are inextricably linked - how you feel physically affects how you feel emotionally.

28 37 This means that we can improve our mental performance using physical interventions and vice versa. The wall-sit test This is a simple test of lower body muscular strength and endurance. Purpose: to measure the strength endurance of the lower body, particularly the quadriceps muscle group. Equipment required: smooth wall and a stopwatch Procedure: Stand comfortably with feet approximately shoulder width apart, with your back against a smooth vertical wall. Slowly slide your back down the wall to assume a position with both your knees and hips at a 90 angle. The timing starts when one foot is lifted off the ground and is stopped when the subject cannot maintain the position and the foot is returned to the ground. After a period of rest, the other leg is tested. Advantages: This test requires minimal equipment and can be conducted with large groups all at once. Figure 3 The wall-sit test