No abstract

This study examined the reciprocal relationship between collective efficacy and team performance over a season of competition in American football. Efficacy beliefs of offensive football players from 10 teams were assessed prior to 8 consecutive games to form 2 team-level measures of collective efficacy: aggregated self-efficacy and aggregated collective efficacy. Game-level performance indexes produced a team-level measure of offensive performance for each game. Within teams and across games, aggregated collective efficacy prior to performance was a positive predictor of subsequent offensive performance; however, previous offensive performance was a negative predictor of subsequent aggregated collective efficacy. Within weeks and across teams, aggregated collective efficacy prior to performance also was a positive predictor of subsequent offensive performance, and previous offensive performance was a positive, rather than negative, predictor of subsequent aggregated collective efficacy.Beliefs individuals hold regarding their own ability to successfully execute given levels of individual performance affect the choices they make, the amount of effort they expend, the degree to which they persevere in the face of adversity, and their thought patterns (Bandura, 1977). Self-efficacy, the belief in one's capabilities to produce given levels of performance, has been significantly correlated with performance across a number of sport tasks (Feltz & Lirgg, 2001). Furthermore, experimental and path-analytic studies suggest that self-efficacy is a major determinant of individual athletic performance (

This book provides a reference for sport psychology lecturers, students, coaches and other professionals with an interest in the field. Self-belief, known as 'self-efficacy' by sports psychologists is widely believed to be an essential component of sporting success. This book examines the nature of efficacy as it applies to sporting behaviour in coaches, athletes and teams. It is the first reference book entirely devoted to the concept of self-efficacy in sport. It provides readers with a basic background of research on the topic, as well as current and future trends; offers research-tested guidelines and recommendations for using efficacy techniques with individual athletes and teams; and, includes a comprehensive annotated bibliography of references on the topic.

Sullivan & Feltz (2003) offered a preliminary multidimensional measure of communication in team sports, the Scale for Effective Communication in Team Sports (SECTS). The current research attempted to further the development and support for the psychometric properties and validity of the measure. In one study, 350 athletes completed an updated version of the SECTS. Confirmatory factor analyses showed good support for the 4-factor structure. Correlations to team cohesion offer construct validity for the scale. A second study, with an independent sample (N = 79), revealed that team performance was negatively related to the communication of Distinctiveness at the team level. This updated version of the SECTS represents a parsimonious, valid, and reliable operational definition of sports-specific effective team communication.j asp_722 471..487

This experiment examined the interaction between two imagery functions (Cognitive Specific, CS; and Motivation - General Mastery, MG-M) and two imagery directions (facilitative, debilitative) on self-efficacy and performance in golf putting. Eighty-three participants were randomly assigned to one of 7 conditions: (a) CS + facilitative imagery, (b) CS + debilitative imagery, (c) MG-M + facilitative imagery, (d) MG-M + debilitative imagery, (e) CS imagery only, (f) MG-M imagery only, (g) no imagery (stretching) control group. A 3 (imagery direction) X 3 (imagery function) X 2 (gender) ANCOVA with pretest scores used as the covariate was used. Results showed a main effect for performance; means were higher for the facilitative group compared to the debilitative group. For self-efficacy, there was a significant imagery direction by imagery function by gender interaction. These findings suggest imagery direction and imagery function can affect self-efficacy and performance and that males and females respond differently to imagery interventions.

Imagery in sport has been studied extensively (for a review see Martin, Moritz, & Hall, 1999). Researchers have described the what, why, where, when, and how athletes use imagery (e.g., Martin et al., 1999; Munroe, Giacobbi, Hall, & Weinberg, 2000). Most of the current research in this area has supported Paivio's (1985) conceptualization of imagery into cognitive and motivational functions that operate on specific and general levels. These functions are Cognitive Specific (CS: imaging skills), Cognitive General (CG: imaging strategies), Motivation Specific (MS: imaging goal oriented responses and activities), and Motivational General (MG: affect and arousal). Based on this framework, the Sport Imagery Questionnaire (SIQ; Hall, Mack, Paivio, & Hausenblas, 1998) was developed to assess the frequency with which athletes use these imagery functions. In contrast to Paivio's original model, the SIQ contains 5 subscales as a result of the splitting of the MG function into MG-Mastery (MG-M: imaging being confident, for example) and MG-Arousal (MG-A: imaging physiological and emotional arousal). Researchers have suggested that for imagery to be an effective performance enhancing technique, the imagery content must match the function (cf. Denis, 1985). Martin et al. (1999) also highlighted the importance of using different types of images to achieve different outcomes. In short, the premise behind imagery use

The factors that influence whether an athlete chooses to engage in imagery are largely unknown. One reason may be the amount of confidence athletes have in their ability to image. The aim of this study was to examine the relationships among efficacy in using imagery, imagery use and imagery ability. Consistent with Bandura's (1986, 1997) theory, it was hypothesized that there would be a positive correlation between efficacy in using imagery and imagery use, and that efficacy in using imagery would mediate the relationship between imagery ability and imagery use. Participants were 74 female athletes from various sports. The instruments we used were the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-Revised (Hall & Martin, 1997) for imagery ability, the Sport Imagery Questionnaire (Hall, Mack, Paivio, & Hausenblas, 1998) for imagery use, and a modified version of the latter questionnaire for efficacy in using imagery. Correlations showed that the more athletes were confident in their ability to use a certain image, the more they used it. Efficacy in using imagery was found to mediate only the relationship between imagery ability and cognitive imagery use.

No abstract