A Mixed Methods Evaluation of a Pressure Training Intervention to Develop Resilience in Female Basketball Players

Abstract

Resilience has gradually gained attention in sport psychology. However, there remains a lack of knowledge on how this psychological characteristic can be developed. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a pressure training intervention for resilience. In order to develop resilient qualities, the central feature of this intervention was the regular exposure to increased pressure during daily practice. This intervention was set up as a quasi-experimental switching replications design, delivered within an elite female basketball academy. The mixed methods evaluation combined individual and team resilience measures with semi-structured interviews with athletes and coaches. Quantitative results demonstrated that the intervention was effective in reducing team level vulnerabilities, but did not necessarily lead to increased individual or team resilience characteristics. Qualitative evaluations demonstrated that the participants perceived the intervention to be effective in a real-world setting. More specifically, it was believed that the intervention led to increased awareness, emerging leadership, stronger communication channels, and the development and execution of collective plans. Furthermore, the participants addressed potential avenues for intervention improvement. Lay summary This study aimed to test a resilience training intervention based on pressure exposure during practice. Results within a female elite basketball academy indicated that both athletes and coaches believed the team became more resilient to in-game stressors and less susceptible to team level vulnerabilities.

The impact of identity leadership on team functioning and well-being in team sport: Is psychological safety the missing link?

“…Higher scores on the 'resilient characteristics' subscale indicated greater team resilience, whereas higher scores on the 'vulnerabilities under pressure' subscale suggested lower team resilience. Previous research has demonstrated evidence for the reliability and validity of data derived from this measure (Decroos et al, 2017;Gorgulu et al, 2018;Kegelaers et al, 2020). In the current study, Cronbach's alpha was .90 for resilient characteristics and .86 for vulnerabilities under pressure.…”

The sporting resilience model: A systematic review of resilience in sport performers

“…Assessment and formulation principles from CBT and REBT, which aim to secure quantitative/qualitative/situational information on “who-what-where-when” shows promise. Psychometrics used as part of mixed-method, longitudinal designs have already shown promise in evaluating resilience (see Kegelaers et al, 2019 ; Chandler et al, 2020 ). Qualitative evidence in extant literature rates highly and has provided insight into the dynamic process of resilience across various sport samples and contexts (see Fletcher and Sarkar, 2012 ; Brown et al, 2015 , 2020 ; Morgan et al, 2015 , 2019 ; Timm et al, 2017 ).…”

Effective Delivery of Pressure Training: Perspectives of Athletes and Sport Psychologists

“…Taken together, this study's findings can advance the trend in the literature toward more holistic PT interventions. Early studies focused on the effect of pressure in controlled experimental conditions (e.g., Oudejans & Pijpers, 2010), but recent studies have incorporated elements such as workshops and debriefs that supplement pressurized drills and better represent how practitioners may conduct PT in applied practice (e.g., Kegelaers et al, 2021;van Rens et al, 2021). Still, research has largely remained "practitioner-evacuated" (Ivarsson & Andersen, 2016).…”

“…Exploring delivery is especially pertinent now because of the recent increase in applied PT intervention studies. With the involvement of coaches, researchers have conducted PT in teams' training sessions for basketball (Kegelaers et al, 2021), cricket (van Rens et al, 2021, and soccer (Kent et al, 2021). Effective delivery is necessary for accurate evaluation of interventions.…”