Editorial: Adaptation to Psychological Stress in Sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptation to Psychological Stress in SportPsychological stress is ubiquitous in sport.Unsurprisingly then, research that examines the antecedents, correlates, consequences, and interventions pertaining to psychological stress in sport is sizable and broad.With this Research Topic we aimed to capture the breadth and depth of work taking place around the theme of adaptation to psychological stress in sport.Pleasingly, 111 authors responded to our call for papers, contributing 25 papers between them.In this Editorial we undertake the difficult task of synthesizing these contributions, and highlight important implications that could influence future research and practice.One thing that is clear from this Research Topic, is that adaptation to psychological stress is truly a biopsychosocial phenomenon.Whether papers explore biological (bio), psychological (psycho), or social constructs, or a combination of the three, any collective conclusions drawn from the contributions here must involve an appreciation of all three facets.The multiple ways in which these facets interact to predict and impact upon affective and behavioral outcomes within a sport setting is complex, which is one of the reasons we do not have a single unified way of understanding adaptation to psychological stress.In this Research Topic we have some useful theories that capture this biopsychosocial perspective, including two revised theories of challenge and threat states in sport.Indeed, numerous papers within this Research Topic align with and draw upon challenge and threat theory.Britton et al. provide an important piece of work that speaks to the complex interaction of constructs that are implicated within challenge and threat theory.They recruited adolescent athletes who completed self-reported stress reactivity and cognitive appraisals on approach to competition and a retrospective assessment of emotions, coping strategies, and subjective performance.The path analysis revealed that perceived stress reactivity had direct and indirect effects on the appraisal of higher stressor intensity, lower perceived control, higher perceived threat, negative emotions, and maladaptive coping.Increased threat, positive and negative emotions, and maladaptive coping were associated with performance satisfaction.The complex interaction of cognitive appraisal constructs and affect is also captured by Harwood et al. in their study of stress among parents of competitive British tennis players, in which they consider the primary appraisals, emotions, and coping strategies associated with self-disclosed stressors.The mixed methods analyses showed that a range of organizational, competitive, and developmental stressors were predominantly appraised as harm or challenge, and that anxiety and anger were the most prominent emotions experienced by parents.In particular, parents experienced greater anger in
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.015 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".