Strength-Based Therapy: Empowering Athletes' Self-Efficacy and Life Satisfaction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While it is known that focusing on positive attributes and capabilities can enhance psychological resilience, the specific effectiveness of strength-based therapy in improving self-efficacy and life satisfaction among athletes remains unexplored. By emphasizing positive attributes and capabilities, strength-based therapy aims to enhance athletes' psychological resilience and overall well-being, which are crucial in the highly competitive and physically demanding world of sports. Therefore, this study investigates the effectiveness of strength-based therapy in enhancing the self-efficacy and life satisfaction of athletes. The study used a quasi-experimental design with 50 competitive athletes aged 18-35. The methodology included an 8-week intervention focusing on leveraging individual strengths, goal setting, and resilience building. Outcomes were measured using the General Self-Efficacy Scale and the Satisfaction with Life Scale. To examine these differences, an analysis of variance with repeated measures, coupled with Bonferroni’s post-hoc test, was conducted using SPSS-26. Results indicated significant improvements in both self-efficacy and life satisfaction in the experimental group compared to the control group. The study concludes that strength-based therapy positively impacts athletes' psychological well-being, suggesting its potential for broader application in sports therapy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it