Experience, Effectiveness, and Perceptions Toward Sport Psychology Consultants: A Critical Review of Peer-Reviewed Articles

Abstract

The first scientific papers on sport psychology consultants (SPCs) focused primarily on the professional practice of experienced SPCs. Since then, the scientific literature on SPCs has greatly diversified. The purpose of this review is to summarize and critically examine the findings of three scientifically studied topics on SPCs: SPCs' experiences, perceptions toward SPCs, and SPCs' effectiveness. Peer-reviewed scientific articles published in English were found in the main sport and psychology databases. The primary results in relation to each topic and the limitations of these papers are presented. The discussion examines future avenues from which to develop research on SPCs. Since Norman Triplett's first publication on the social facilitation of cyclists in 1897, the scientific study of sport psychology has greatly diversified. One aspect that has emerged from this field focuses on sport psychology consultants (SPCs) and their work. There are two main definitions of SPCs in the scientific literature. They can be seen as complementary because one focuses on the training requirements to become a SPC and the other on their role in applied sport psychology. Morris, Alfermann, Litunen, and Hall (2003) defined a SPC as a person trained in both psychology and sport science. Donohue et al. (2004) as well as Wrisberg, Simpson, Loberg, Withycombe, and Reed (2009) defined a SPC rather as a person who, during sport psychology consultations, supports athletes and coaches (stakeholders 1) in their development of mental and emotional skills with the aim to achieve optimal performance and improved well-being. A SPC might therefore be defined as a person who is trained in both psychology and sport and exercise science and who provides psychological support to stakeholders involved in sport. Note that, in addition to the term SPC, different terms in the

Psychological models in sport psychology: A preliminary investigation

“…From an applied sport psychology perspective, the cognitive-behavioural model has frequently been cited as the dominant approach within this field (e.g., McArdle & Moore, 2012;Winter & Collins, 2015a). In support of this, Fortin-Guichard et al (2018) critically reviewed the scientific literature on sport psychologists' experiences and reported the cognitive-behavioural approach to be the most widely used in practice, regardless of level of experience. Therefore, it seems Stage-1 students are favouring this approach, which is mirrored from the experienced practitioners within the sport psychology literature.…”

“…The psychological model most frequently reported, both in terms of the evidence-base and as employed by sport psychology practitioners, is the combination of the cognitive and behavioural paradigms (Fortin-Guichard, Boudreault, Gagnon, & Trottier, 2018;Ravizza, PSYCHOLOGICAL MODELS 5 2002;Winter & Collins, 2015a). Implementing this approach requires not only concrete changes in problem behaviour, but also the allocation of appropriate techniques to allow the performer to transform maladaptive cognitions to those that are readily adaptable (McArdle & Moore, 2012).…”

“…In so doing, the present study can inform the development of sport psychology education, supervision of training routes, and subsequent professional delivery. Based on the previous literature (e.g., Fortin-Guichard et al, 2018;Ravizza, 2002;Winter & Collins, 2015a), it was expected that (a) overall, participants would endorse the cognitive-behavioural models significantly more than the biological and psychosocial models, thus differing from the pattern of endorsement for Harland et al's (2009) psychiatrists and Reid et al's (2017) clinical psychologists; the extent to which attitudes reflected endorsement of models would vary with diagnostic category, e.g., cognitive and behavioural models were expected to be favored in attitudes to anxiety and confidence, whereas biological models would receive greater endorsement for depression and eating disorders.…”

Things Ain’t What They Used to Be? Coaches Perceptions of Commitment in Developing Athletes

“…From an applied sport psychology perspective, the cognitive-behavioral model has frequently been cited as the predominant approach within this field (e.g., Fortin-Guichard et al 2018;McArdle & Moore, 2012;Winter & Collins, 2015). The approach lends itself to the issues identified by the coaches in this study, in that the cognitive-behavioral model advocates allocating appropriate techniques to focus on both changes in problem behavior and transforming maladaptive cognitions to those that are readily adaptable (Burton & Raedeke, 2008).…”

A Preliminary Investigation into Collegiate Student-Athletes’ Attitudes towards Athletic Trainers and Sport Psychology Consultants

“…In collegiate athletics, sports medicine professionals such as athletic trainers provide injury prevention and management services for athletes (Brumels & Beach, 2008). Less common, but growing in interest, is the provision of psychological services, provided by sport psychology consultants (Filion, Munroe-Chandler, & Loughead, 2019;Fortin-Guichard, Boudreault, Gagnon, & Trottier, 2018). Given the importance of providing patient-centered holistic care within helping professions, a limited body of literature has attempted to investigate the role of patient/client attitudes towards these professionals (e.g., Arvinen-Barrow, Clement, & Bayes, 2012;Harwood & Woolway, 2015).…”