Achievement despite adversity: A qualitative investigation of undrafted national hockey league players
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The extent to which athletes from various sports and competition levels overcome adversity has been a topic of interest in sport psychology for some time. In recognizing the theoretical and practical implications derived from this line of inquiry, the current study sought to further our understanding by investigating a sample of elite athletes who were expected to share long-term objectives, and who had experienced a common adversity. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 professional athletes (Mage = 27.25; SD = 3.28) who had reached the National Hockey League (NHL; i.e., long-term objective) despite not being selected in the annual NHL Amateur Entry Draft (i.e., common adversity). As a general summary, four higher-order themes were gleaned from participant responses, including information pertaining to experienced adversities and stressors (e.g., organizational stressors), long-term objectives of playing in the NHL, psychological attributes (e.g., passion, focus) and mechanisms for goal attainment (e.g., deliberate practice, perceived social support). Interestingly, contextually relevant information emerged pertaining to the developmental stream that participants had taken (i.e., NCAA vs. Major Junior). Overall, our findings are in concert with previous literature that suggests the influence of various psychosocial factors for goal achievement when faced with adversity (e.g., Howells & Fletcher, 2015; Tamminen, Holt, & Neely, 2013). Additionally, our findings indicate that an athletes’ ability to identify and address weaknesses following adversity is a main contributor to their subsequent success. Although undrafted NHL players were recruited because of their shared adversity, participants shared similar experiences as other elite athletes in describing a variety of adversities that contributed to their eventual achievement (e.g., Sarkar & Fletcher, 2014a). Future research could benefit from a longitudinal approach building from this study’s design, whereby athletes are interviewed prior to, during, and following the draft process, to gain insight into the timing and implementation of the factors and experiences that facilitate achievement despite adversity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».