Abstract
Informed by and drawing on both the integrated model of response to sport injury (Wiese-Bjornstal et al., 1998) and the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat states (Blascovich, 2008), this multi-study paper examined whether preinjury adversity affected postinjury responses over a 5-year time period. Study 1 employed a prospective, repeated measures methodological design. Non-injured participants (N = 846) from multiple sites and sports completed a measure of adversity (Petrie, 1992); 143 subsequently became injured and completed a measure of coping (Carver et al., 1989) and psychological responses (Evans et al., 2008) at injury onset, rehabilitation, and return to sport. MANOVAs identified significant differences between groups categorized as low, moderate, and high preinjury adversity at each time phase. Specifically, in contrast to low or high preinjury adversity groups, injured athletes with moderate preinjury adversity experienced less negative psychological responses and used more problem- and emotion-focused coping strategies. Study 2 aimed to provide an in-depth understanding of why groups differed in their responses over time, and how preinjury adversity affected these responses. A purposeful sample of injured athletes from each of the three groups were identified and interviewed (N = 18). Using thematic analysis, nine themes were identified that illustrated that injured athletes with moderate preinjury adversity responded more positively to injury over time in comparison to other groups. Those with high preinjury adversities were excessively overwhelmed to the point that they were unable to cope with injury, while those with low preinjury adversities had not developed the coping abilities and resources needed to cope postinjury. Practical implications and future research directions are discussed.
Highlights
For over 20 years, two models have been at the forefront of research into the psychology of sport injury: Williams and Andersen’s (1998) multicomponent theoretical model of stress and injury and Wiese-Bjornstal et al.’s (1998) integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process
Post hoc comparisons indicated that the moderate preinjury adversity group (M = 54.28, SD = 9.94) reported significantly more problem-focused coping than the high (M = 45.11, SD = 12.62) and low groups (M = 44.69, SD = 12.82); emotion-focused coping, F(2, 140) = 9.3, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.18
Post hoc comparisons indicated that the moderate preinjury adversity group (M = 26.74, SD = 8.81) reported significantly more emotion-focused coping than the high (M = 21.33, SD = 6.99) and low groups (M = 20.89, SD = 6.32); and avoidance coping, F(2, 140) = 17.4, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.20
Summary
For over 20 years, two models have been at the forefront of research into the psychology of sport injury: Williams and Andersen’s (1998) multicomponent theoretical model of stress and injury and Wiese-Bjornstal et al.’s (1998) integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process. According to Wiese-Bjornstal et al.’s (1998) integrated model, preinjury factors that predispose athletes to injury can continue to exert their effects postinjury by influencing injured athletes’ emotional and behavioral responses, and their recovery outcomes. In one of the few studies, Albinson and Petrie examined the effect of a number of preinjury factors (i.e., preinjury adversity, social support satisfaction, and dispositional optimism) on postinjury responses (i.e., appraisals, mood disturbance). Findings identified a positive and significant correlation (r = 0.64) between preinjury adversity (i.e., major negative life events) and greater postinjury mood disturbance 1 day after injury occurrence. This finding supported WieseBjornstal et al.’s integrated model and the importance of accounting for preinjury factors when examining postinjury responses
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.