Content uploaded by Rui Gomes
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rui Gomes on Nov 07, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Scand J Med Sci Sports 2017; 1–11 wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/sms
|
1
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
1
|
INTRODUCTION
Cognitive appraisal is a central construct used to explain
human adaptation to stress and life contexts, indicating
the personal meaning and significance that an individual
attributes to a potentially stressful event.1 The analysis
of cognitive appraisal allows us to understand whether
the stressful event will be a positive or negative experi-
ence for the individual.2 This depends on how the person
evaluates the situation (ie, primary cognitive appraisal)
and how the person copes with the situation (ie, secondary
cognitive appraisal). The possibility of cognitive appraisal
being involved in human adaptation to stress in sports has
been discussed in the literature3 and was considered in this
study to be a key variable mediating the characteristics
of athletes (eg, trait anxiety) and their reaction to sports
activity (eg, burnout).
Based on the work of Lazarus,1,2 some authors have
reinforced the value of cognitive appraisal when adapting
to stressful situations. For example, Smith4 was one of the
first authors analyzing burnout in sports using the cognitive–
affective model of athletic burnout. Smith proposed a four-
stage model in which stress and burnout evolve in parallel.
In the first stage, athletes are exposed to situational demands
that overcome potential resources; this raises the experience
of stress that can lead to burnout if the demand continues over
time. The second stage involves cognitive appraisal of the
situation, describing how the athletes interpret and appraise
the situation, meaning that some may feel the demands as
more threatening or more challenging than others. More spe-
cifically, feelings of helplessness may arise when athletes
evaluate the situation as exceeding personal resources, con-
tributing to the physiological response (eg, arousal) of the
Accepted: 9 January 2017
DOI: 10.1111/sms.12841
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Anxiety and burnout in young athletes: The mediating role of
cognitive appraisal
A. R. Gomes1
|
S. Faria2
|
C. Vilela1
The authors would like to thank to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful
comments on earlier versions of this study.
1School of Psychology,University of
Minho, Braga, Portugal
2Centre of Mathematics,Department of
Mathematics and Applications ,University
of Minho, Braga, Portugal
Correspondence
A. Rui Gomes, Escola de Psicologia,
Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Email: rgomes@psi.uminho.pt
Funding
This study was conducted at Psychology
Research Centre (UID/PSI/01662/2013),
University of Minho, and supported by the
Portuguese Foundation for Science and
Technology, the Portuguese Ministry of
Science, Technology and Higher Education
through national funds and co- financed by
FEDER through COMPETE2020 under the
PT2020 Partnership Agreement (POCI- 01-
0145- FEDER- 007653), and “Guimarães,
European City of Sport 2013”.
This study tested the relationship between trait anxiety, cognitive appraisal, and ath-
letes’ burnout proposing two hypotheses: (a) there is a direct relationship between
athletes’ trait anxiety and cognitive appraisal and burnout, and (b) cognitive appraisal
mediates the relationship between trait anxiety and burnout, and this mediation oc-
curs despite the competitive level and sport records of athletes. The study included
673 young athletes and provided measures of trait anxiety, cognitive appraisal, and
burnout. Structural equation modeling indicated that cognitive appraisal mediates the
relationship between trait anxiety and burnout, confirming hypothesis 2, and this
model provided better fit than the direct model of hypothesis 1. However, the media-
tion also indicated that the direct relationship between trait anxiety and burnout
should be considered. The mediating model was invariant according to competitive
levels and sport records. In conclusion, cognitive appraisal is an important variable
in explaining athletes’ burnout.
KEYWORDS
burnout, cognitive appraisal, trait anxiety, young athletes
2
|
GOMES Etal.
next stage. Therefore, the third stage identifies physiological
responses that can occur if an athlete evaluates the situation
as harmful or threatening (ex: feelings of tension, irritability,
and fatigue). The final stage includes behavioral responses
that occur after physiological responses, and may comprise
behavioral consequences or coping such as poor performance,
interpersonal conflicts, and even withdrawal from sports.
Also, personality and motivational factors can moderate the
athletes’ reactions to stress in sports, helping to determine
whether the athlete will burnout or cope. Considering these
four stages, Smith4 suggests that athlete burnout is a result of
chronic stress due cognitive appraisal of personal resources
as insufficient to meet achievement demands. Despite this
central role of cognitive appraisal in the experience of burn-
out, it is interesting to note that research has dedicated much
more effort to understand the personality and motivational
factors that impact cognitive appraisal and then burnout5–7
than trying to understand the processes of cognitive appraisal
itself.
In fact, this interest for cognitive appraisal has been recog-
nized more recently in other theoretical proposals. This is the
case of the Theory of Challenge and Threat States in Athletes
(TCTSA)8 which proposes that athletes can approach their
performance either adaptively (ie, in a challenge state) or
maladaptively (ie, in a threat state). Challenge states occur
if athletes believe they have sufficient, or nearly sufficient,
resources to meet the demands of the situation, whereas a
threat state occurs if athletes believe they have insufficient
resources to meet the demands of the situation.9 This same
idea is included in the biopsychosocial (BPS) model of chal-
lenge and threat of Blascovich and Mendes10 which defends
that adaptive responses to stress are characterized by a chal-
lenge state, and maladaptive responses to stress are charac-
terized by threat states. Some evidence supports TCTSA and
BPS models and suggests that challenge states are better pre-
dictors of athletic performance than threat states.11–13 There
is also evidence that challenge and threat states are related
to emotions (eg, anxiety). Based on Lazarus’s theoretical
assertions, Nicholls et al.14 in a study with 11 professional
rugby union players, found that challenge/benefit apprais-
als were associated with pleasant emotions, whereas threat/
loss appraisals were associated with unpleasant emotions.
Nicholls et al.15 confirmed these findings with a sample of
557 athletes, suggesting that pleasant emotions were posi-
tively associated with a challenge, whereas unpleasant emo-
tions were positively associated with a threat.
Despite the value of these findings that demonstrate the dif-
ferential effects of threat and challenge states, less is known
of the mediating role of cognitive appraisal in human adap-
tion to stressful situations and life contexts. As referred by
Martinent and Ferrand16 previous research on the importance
of cognitive appraisal in sport settings is limited. For exam-
ple, research has analyzed the dimensions of the cognitive
appraisal involved in athletes’ stressful situations17,18 but not
if and to what extent cognitive appraisal can contribute to
athletes’ adaptation to sports and if can mediate the relation
between the individual and their reaction to sport activity, as
is the case of burnout. As stated by Lazarus and Folkman1
the experience of psychological stress depends on situational
characteristics (eg, the type of organization and culture), per-
sonal characteristics (eg, personality traits), and cognitive
appraisal, which represents the key factor in understanding
the impact of stress on human functioning. Transferring this
idea to sports, considering cognitive appraisal of athletes
can help to understand differential responses to situational
demands and why they adapt in a positive or negative way to
sport contexts.
These three factors were incorporated into this study by
analyzing whether and to what extent cognitive appraisal
mediates the relationship between the personal characteris-
tics of athletes (eg, trait anxiety) and their reaction to sport
activity (eg, burnout). Although individuals with a higher
propensity for anxiety can be more exposed to burnout, the
central role of cognitive appraisal in this relationship is not
evident. That is, can cognitive appraisal (ie, evaluating the
sport activity as more threatening or more challenging) medi-
ate the relationship between trait anxiety and burnout? This
study analyses this question in a sample of young athletes,
testing the mediating role of cognitive appraisal on the rela-
tionship between trait anxiety and burnout. As said, there is
a lack of knowledge about the role of cognitive appraisal in
the adaptation to stressful contexts (as is the case of sports);
this lack of knowledge is extended to youth sports despite
evidence that it can produce equal demands when compared
to adult sports.6
Before describing the specific hypotheses for this study,
some conceptual background is required on the variables
selected for analysis in conjunction with cognitive appraisal.
The variables are trait anxiety and burnout. These dimensions
were chosen for this study because of their central role in
explaining typical emotions in sports (anxiety) and reactions
to chronic stress (burnout).
Anxiety is one of the most common emotions analyzed
in sports contexts,19 and burnout is one of the most debili-
tating states that athletes can experience due to exposure to
the chronic effects of stress.20 Trait anxiety refers to a pre-
disposition to a state of high anxiety under conditions of
threat.21 This implies that when exposed to stressful competi-
tive situations, athletes with high trait anxiety will experience
higher levels of somatic arousal, worry, and/or concentration
disruption.22
Burnout is considered a psychological syndrome of emo-
tional/physical exhaustion, a reduced sense of accomplish-
ment, and sport devaluation caused by intense demands of
training and competition.23 Although burnout represents a
subject of interest in work settings and human services,24 less
|
3
GOMES Etal.
evidence exists for athletes25 and on the relationship estab-
lished between trait anxiety and cognitive appraisal. However,
the growing interest on the topic of burnout in sports demon-
strates that athletes that drop out of a sport due to burnout
feel severe exhaustion and health problems25–27 that results
from exposure to prolonged and excessive stress.28 These
results confirm the need of understanding better the phenom-
enon of burnout in sports and their underlying factors. For
example, there are indications that some positive psychology
constructs, such as healthy valence of perfectionism, opti-
mism, passion, and hope, can decrease the tendency of ath-
lete burnout.5,6,29–31 Conversely, some negative psychology
constructs, such as anxiety and chronic stress, are related to
an increase in the tendency of athlete burnout.25,32,33 Taking
into consideration this intensification of interest in burnout in
sports, it becomes important to determine whether this neg-
ative experience is also related to the way athletes evaluate
their activity. In our study, we highlight the construct of cog-
nitive appraisal as a possible mediator between trait anxiety
and burnout.
Considering all these aspects, we formulated two hypoth-
eses to test the relationships between trait anxiety (as a per-
sonality trait), cognitive appraisal, and burnout (as a response
to chronic stress in sport contexts).
First, we tested the direct relationship between trait anx-
iety and cognitive appraisal on athletes’ burnout. That is,
before testing the mediating role of cognitive appraisal on the
relationship between trait anxiety and burnout, we considered
important to test whether there is a direct relation between
these two dimensions and athletes’ burnout. This provides
the opportunity to identify which model (direct or media-
tion) best describes the burnout experience of athletes. Thus,
Hypothesis 1 stated that trait anxiety is positively related to
burnout, threat perception is positively related to burnout, and
challenge perception is negatively related to burnout. There
is some empirical evidence that sustains this hypothesis, sug-
gesting that higher levels of anxiety are related to psycholog-
ical problems in athletes,27,32–34 and that higher levels of trait
anxiety predispose athletes to the risk of burnout.25,35,36 This
hypothesis is also supported by the conceptual models pre-
sented before, which suggested the central role of cognitive
appraisal in the athletes’ feelings of burnout,4 and the differ-
ential effects of challenge and threat states in performance
and adaptation to stress in sports.8,10 In fact, according to the
transactional model of Lazarus,2 positive or negative patterns
of cognitive appraisal are related to different levels of psycho-
logical well- being among individuals; however, a lack of evi-
dence exists regarding the direct relationship between both
trait anxiety and cognitive appraisal and athletes’ burnout.
Second, hypothesis 2 stated that cognitive appraisal medi-
ates the relationship between anxiety (as an antecedent vari-
able) and burnout (as a consequent variable), and this medi-
ation provides better fit than the direct model of hypothesis
1. In this case, we tested a partial mediation model (in which
direct paths from anxiety to cognitive appraisal are assumed)
and a full mediation model (in which the direct path from
anxiety to burnout is removed). Thus, this hypothesis anal-
yses if and to what extent cognitive appraisal accounts for
the relationship between the predictor variable (trait anxiety)
and the criterion variable (burnout). If the mediation reduces
the link between the independent (predictor) and dependent
(criterion) variables, partial mediation is assumed to exist. If
the mediation eliminates the link between both variables, full
mediation is assumed to exist.37 There is some evidence that
cognitive appraisal can assume a mediating role in human
adaptation to stress at work,38 military,39 and in sport con-
texts.40,41 However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no
evidence of the specific relation between trait anxiety, cogni-
tive appraisal, and burnout in sports, particularly for young
athletes.
In the final step of data analysis of this study, we explored
whether cognitive appraisal mediates the relationship
between trait anxiety and burnout according to characteris-
tics of sports and athletes (eg, competitive level and sport
records). Although we tested the possibility of cognitive
appraisal to be a key variable in explaining athletes’ reactions
to sports, it is also important to test in what conditions this
mediation occurs. Thus, we tested the invariance of cognitive
appraisal as a mediating variable between trait anxiety and
burnout, considering the characteristics of sport contexts and
the characteristics of athletes of this study. Again, findings
on this subject are scarce, but competitive level and sport
records are important variables in the explanation of athletes’
reactions to sports.42
In summary, this study highlights the importance of cog-
nitive appraisal on athletes’ adaptation to sports considering
the relation between trait anxiety and burnout. To the best
of our knowledge, this study is the first to test these specific
mediating relations.
2
|
METHODS
2.1
|
Participants
The total sample consisted of 673 young athletes of Northern
Portugal, of which 588 were males (87.4%) and 85 were
females (12.6%). Participants’ ages varied between 12 and
19 years (M=14.78 years; SD=1.86 years), and all partici-
pants were practicing either soccer (n=323, 48%), volley-
ball (n=86, 12.8%), basketball (n=76, 11.3%), soccer with
teams of 7 players (n=45, 6.7%), rugby (n=36, 5.3%), futsal
(n=33, 4.9%), handball (n=33, 4.9%), water- polo (n=27,
4%), or roller hockey (n=14, 2.1%). Athletes were prac-
ticing sports at an official level, distributed by the second
national division (n=436, 64.8%) and first national division
(n=229, 34%); eight athletes did not provide information
4
|
GOMES Etal.
on this subject. The majority of athletes did not achieve any
sport title in their careers (n=406, 60.3%), and 225 athletes
(33.4%) had been champions at least one time at regional
and/or national levels.
2.2
|
Measures
2.2.1
|
The Sport Anxiety Scale- 2 (SAS- 222;
adapted by Cruz and Gomes43)
This scale evaluates cognitive and somatic trait anxiety in
sport performance settings and includes 15 items distrib-
uted across three dimensions: (a) somatic anxiety: evalu-
ates indices of autonomic arousal centered in the stomach
and muscles (five items; α=0.84 for this study); (b) worry:
evaluates concerns of poor performance and the resulting
negative consequences (five items; α=0.86 for this study);
and (c) concentration disruption: evaluates the difficulties in
focusing on task- relevant cues (five items; α=0.71 for this
study). The items were measured on a 4- point Likert scale
(1=Not at all; 4=Very much). The authors scored the scales
by individually adding and dividing each result. Therefore,
high scores on each scale indicate higher perceptions of
somatic anxiety, worry, and concentration disruption. It is
also possible to obtain a global score of sport trait anxiety
by adding and dividing the total scores of each dimension
of this instrument (fifteen items; α=0.87 for this study).
Confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable fit for
the three- factor model of trait anxiety (χ2(87 df)=350.82,
P<.001; RMSEA=0.067, 90% CI [0.060; 0.075]; CFI=0.93;
NFI=0.91; TLI=0.92).44
2.2.2
|
Cognitive Appraisal Scale (CAS45)
This instrument evaluates primary and secondary cognitive
appraisals and was adapted for sport contexts for this study
by replacing the word “work” for “sport” in the instructions
given to athletes to complete the scale. For this study, it was
evaluated three dimensions of primary cognitive appraisal:
(a) sport importance: indicates the extent to which the ath-
lete evaluates the sport activity as significant and important
for their personal well- being (three items; α=0.85 for this
study); (b) threat perception: indicates the extent to which
the athlete evaluates the sport activity as disturbing and nega-
tive for their personal well- being (three items; α=0.76 for
this study); and (c) challenge perception: indicates the extent
to which the athlete evaluates the sport activity as stimulat-
ing and exciting for their personal well- being (three items;
α=0.68 for this study). Each item was measured on a 7- point
Likert scale (example: 0=Means nothing to me; 6=Means
a lot to me). The authors scored the scales by individually
adding and dividing each result. Therefore, high scores on
each scale indicate greater importance, threat, and challenge
perceptions. Confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable
fit for the three- factor model of primary cognitive appraisal
(χ2(24 df)=39.28, P<.001; RMSEA=0.031, 90% CI [0.011;
0.048]; CFI=0.99; NFI=0.98; TLI=0.99).44
2.2.3
|
Athlete Burnout Questionnaire
(ABQ25,41; adapted by Vilela and Gomes46)
The questionnaire evaluates burnout as a psychological syn-
drome represented using three dimensions: (a) emotional/
physical exhaustion: evaluates emotional and physical feel-
ings of exhaustion associated with the intense demands of
training and competing (five items; α=0.88 for this study);
(b) reduced sense of accomplishment: evaluates a reduced
sense of accomplishment among athletes regarding their
sport skills and abilities (five items; α=0.66 for this study);
and (c) sport devaluation: evaluates negative and uncaring
attitude of athletes toward sport and their own performance
(five items; α=0.83 for this study). The items were meas-
ured on a 5- point Likert scale (1=Almost never; 5=Almost
always). The authors scored the scales by individually add-
ing and dividing each result. Therefore, high scores on each
scale indicated higher perceptions of burnout on the three
described dimensions. It is also possible to obtain a global
score of burnout by adding and dividing the total scores of
each dimension of this instrument (fifteen items; α=0.89 for
this study). Confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable
fit for the three- factor model of burnout (χ2(84 g.l.)=364.17,
P<.001; RMSEA=0.070, 90% CI [0.063; 0.077]; CFI=0.94;
NFI=0.92; TLI=0.92).44 However, these values were
achieved only by correlating the error values between
two pairs of items (2- 4 and 1- 14). In the case of items 2
and 4, both items evaluate feelings of tiredness regarding
sport participation, which may explain the athletes’ similar
responses (eg, “I feel so tired from my training that I have
trouble finding energy to do other things” and “I feel overly
tired from my sport participation.”). In the case of items
1 and 14, they evaluate feelings of accomplishment/suc-
cess regarding sport participation, and they were the only
exception of items formulated in a positive way that may
have also contributed to similar athletes’ responses (“I’m
accomplishing many worthwhile things in sport” and “I feel
successful at sport”). This similarity between items 1 and
14 probably explains the relatively low value of alpha of the
reduced sense of accomplishment scale. Nevertheless, the
factor structure and alpha values were accepted in this study
because the global score of the three scales seems a reliable
measure of burnout.
2.3
|
Procedure
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the
university, to which the first author of this study belongs
|
5
GOMES Etal.
(ref. CEUM 030/2014). The data collection involved
three steps. First, sport teams were contacted in order to
explain the goals of this study and data collection proce-
dures. Second, after receiving the approval from teams,
parents and athletes who were invited to participate in the
study, the participants were assured that the data would
remain anonymous and confidential. The parents who
agreed to be part of this study gave informed consent
for their children to participate in this study. Third, after
obtaining authorization from the parents and athletes, we
began the data collection, which included the evaluation
protocol with the described psychological measures and
a letter with specific information about the study’s goals.
Data collection occurred in a reserved room of each sport
team and in the presence of researchers of this study and
athletes.
2.4
|
Data screening
First, we checked for missing values and concluded that the
loss of cases was small with no more than 3%.47 Thus, the
mean substitution was used to calculate the values of vari-
ables with no answers from participants. Then, we checked
univariate and multivariate outliers.48 Standardized z- scores
were inspected, and scores greater than 3.29 (P<.001) were
removed. Cases with a Mahalanobis distance greater than
χ(8)
2=26.12 (P<.001) were also removed. Twenty par-
ticipants were removed. Thus, a total of 653 athletes were
included in the following analysis.
2.5
|
Data analysis
The adequacy of the proposed models (ie, direct and media-
tion) were assessed by structural equation modeling (SEM)
using AMOS 21. Although SEM requires that all variables
be of a continuous scale, it is also acceptable to use it with
ordinary scales that typically characterize psychological data,
which is the case in our study.49 In addition, SEM represents
a comprehensive method for assessing, modifying, and test-
ing theoretical relations between variables.44 As referred by
Anderson and Gerbing,50 calculating the measurement model
in conjunction with the structural model provides a com-
prehensive and confirmatory assessment of construct valid-
ity. The analysis consisted of two steps. In the first step, the
measurement model was tested to assess its construct valid-
ity, and in the second step, the structural models (direct and
mediated) were tested.
To assess model fit, we used the chi- square goodness-
of- fit statistic, the root- mean- square error of approxima-
tion (RMSEA), the standardized root- mean- square residual
(SRMR), the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), and the compara-
tive fit index (CFI). The cutoff criteria used in this study fol-
lowed generally accepted indices appearing in the literature:
RMSEA values <.05 indicate excellent fit, ≤.08 indicates
acceptable fit; SRMR values <.05 indicates excellent fit,
≤.08 indicates acceptable fit; TLI values greater than .90 are
considered an acceptable fit; CFI values close to .95 indicate
excellent fit and those ≥.90 are interpreted as a good fit.44
Finally, the bootstrap procedure of AMOS was also used
to obtain 95% confidence intervals around parameter esti-
mates.51 Bootstrapping is considered a powerful resampling
method to obtain parameter estimates and confidence inter-
vals because the method does not assume that the variables
are normally distributed.
Note that the scores of sport importance of the CAS sub-
scale were used to analyze whether athletes attributed some
personal value to the sport activity. More specifically, it was
assumed that it makes sense to study the relationship among
trait anxiety, cognitive appraisal, and burnout if athletes
attributed some importance to the sport. This assertion is
based on the idea that only events considered significant have
the potential to cause stress or strain or, conversely, can result
in a positive personal growth experience.52 Thus, participants
with values less than or equal to two points on the Likert
scale for the sport importance dimension were checked in the
database for potential removal from the study, but all partici-
pants had these established values.
Finally, to reduce chance capitalization, we randomly
divided the total sample into an exploration sample (Sample
1, n=326), which was used to test the measurement and
structural models, and a model validation sample (Sample 2,
n=327), which was used to cross- validate the final model.
3
|
RESULTS
3.1
|
Relations between the variables
The means, standard deviations, and Spearman correla-
tions between the variables are presented in Table 1. The
most frequent symptom of anxiety was concerns of poor
performance. The principal indicator of cognitive appraisal
was challenge perception. The main indicators of burnout
include emotional/physical exhaustion and a reduced sense
of accomplishment.
For the correlation values, the three dimensions of trait
anxiety (SAS- 2) correlated positively with each other, pos-
itively with the threat perception of the cognitive appraisal
instrument (CAS), and negatively with challenge percep-
tion (although not all values were significant). Additionally,
the three dimensions of trait anxiety correlated positively
with the three dimensions of burnout (except for the non-
significant result between worry and sport devaluation
dimensions). Finally, threat perception correlated positively
with the three dimensions of burnout, and challenge per-
ception correlated negatively with the three dimensions of
burnout.
6
|
GOMES Etal.
3.2
|
Trait anxiety and burnout:
preliminary analysis
To simplify the models to be tested, we reduced the num-
ber of manifest variables in the analysis for trait anxiety
and burnout dimensions, creating a single variable for trait
anxiety (resulting from the conjunction of somatic anxiety,
worry, and concentration disruption dimensions) and burn-
out (resulting from the conjunction of emotional/physical
exhaustion, reduced sense of accomplishment, and sport
devaluation). The possibility of a single latent variable for
trait anxiety and burnout dimensions followed indications
of the authors for both instruments22,25,41 and are explained
by four reasons: the augment of factor reliability, the higher
possibility of normally distributed factors, the reduction of
idiosyncratic variance, and the reduction of the ratio of meas-
ured variables to subjects.53
Regarding the trait anxiety dimensions, the confirmatory
factor analysis revealed good fit (χ2(83)=144.75, P<.001;
RMSEA=0.048; SRMR=0.050; CFI=0.97; TLI=0.96). For
the burnout dimensions, the confirmatory factor analysis
revealed good fit (χ2(76)=164.85, P<.05; SRMR=0.053;
RMSEA=0.060; CFI=0.96; TLI=0.94).
3.3
|
Measurement models
Before testing our hypotheses, we tested the measurement
model to support the adequacy of the operationalization
of the study’s variables. The measurement model was
tested in Sample 1. Regarding the model that tested the
relation between trait anxiety, primary cognitive appraisal,
and burnout, the fit of the one- factor model with all items
from the eight study variables loading on a single latent
variable was compared with that of a four- factor model
that included trait anxiety, threat perception, challenge
perception, and burnout. The four- factor model fit well
with the data χ2(560)=888.10, P<.01; RMSEA=0.042
(Pclose=.992); SRMR=0.054; CFI=0.93; TLI=0.92,
and its fit was superior to that of the one- factor model
(Δχ2(28)=1838.16; P<.001). All standardized factor load-
ings were significant, ranging from 0.29 to 0.83. These
results confirmed the validity of the four- factor specified
measurement model.
3.4
|
Testing the structural models
In this step of the data analysis, we tested whether a medi-
ated model (hypothesis 2) showed a better fit than the direct
effects models (hypothesis 1) and which type of mediation
(eg, partial or full) could better describe the data. In the direct
model, we established a relation from trait anxiety and cogni-
tive appraisal to burnout. In the partial mediation model, we
added direct paths from trait anxiety to cognitive appraisal
(eg, threat perception and challenge perception). Finally, in
the full mediation model, we removed the direct paths from
trait anxiety to burnout.
The direct effects model showed nearly acceptable fit indi-
ces (χ2(580 g.l.)=999.09, P<.001; RMSEA=0.047, 90% CI
[0.042; 0.045]; SRMR=0.075; CFI=0.91, TLI=0.90), and the
full mediation model showed acceptable fit indices (χ2(579
g.l.)=979.4, P<.001; RMSEA=0.046, 90% CI [0.041; 0.051];
SRMR=0.072: CFI=0.91; TLI=0.90), but the partial medi-
ation model, which included all direct and indirect effects,
appeared to have the best fit (χ2(578 g.l.)=968.98, P<.001;
RMSEA=0.046, 90% CI [0.041; 0.051]; SRMR=0.066;
CFI=0.91; TLI=0.90).
TABLE 1 Means, standard deviations, and correlations between trait anxiety (SAS- 2), cognitive appraisal (CAS), and burnout (ABQ)
(n=653)
Variables M (SD) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. SAS- 2: somatic anxiety 1.66 (.61) –
2. SAS- 2: worry 2.79 (.78) .40*** –
3. SAS- 2: concentration
disruption
1.77 (.53) .58*** .39*** –
4. CAS: threat perception 0.71 (1.15) .20*** .04 .23*** –
5. CAS: challenge
perception
5.32 (0.88) – .03 .08* – .10** – .14*** –
6. ABQ: emotional/physical
exhaustion
2.04 (0.86) .36*** .14*** .32*** .23*** – .13** –
7. ABQ: reduced sense of
accomplishment
2.06 (0.69) .17*** .09* .29*** .31*** – .24*** .43*** –
8. ABQ: sport devaluation 1.68 (.83) .24*** .02 .28*** .29*** – .20*** .61*** .64*** –
*P<.05.
**P<.01.
***P<.001.
|
7
GOMES Etal.
The difference in chi- square between the direct effects
model and the partially mediated model was significant,
Δχ2(2)=30.11; P<.001, indicating that the mediation
effects should not be ignored. The difference in chi- square
between the fully and partially mediated models was sig-
nificant, Δχ2(1)=10.72; P<.01, indicating that the direct
effects should not be ignored. Based on the results from the
model exploration in Sample 1, the partial mediation model
was cross- validated in Sample 2. The fit indices of the par-
tial mediation model showed good fit to the data (χ2(578
g.l.)=1045.10, P<.001; RMSEA=0.050, 90% CI [0.045;
0.055]; SRMR=0.071; CFI=0.90; TLI=0.90).
For the assessment of the invariance of the research
model across the two samples, the partial mediation model
was simultaneously tested with the data of the two sam-
ples, and all structural paths were constrained to be equal
across samples. The fit of the resulting constrained mul-
tigroup model, χ2(1229)=2076.33, RMSEA=0.033, 90%
CI [0.030; 0.035]; SRMR=0.071, CFI=0.91, TLI=0.91,
was compared with that of the freely estimated model,
χ2(1156)=1156, RMSEA=0.034, 90% CI [0.031; 0.036],
SRMR=0.071, CFI=0.90, TLI=0.90. Compared with
the fit of the constraint model, the fit of the freely esti-
mated model was not significantly worse, Δχ2(73)=62.23;
P=.81, demonstrating the invariance of the research model.
Figure 1 presents the standardized effects for the partial
mediation model, namely, the parameter estimates of the
structural paths’ coefficients and the squared multiple cor-
relation coefficients. The estimates of the direct and indirect
effects were based on 1,000 bootstrap samples. The corre-
sponding 95% confidence intervals of these bootstrap esti-
mates are presented in parentheses. The partial mediation
model explained 15% of the variance associated with threat
perception, and 1% of the variance associated with chal-
lenge perception. Additionally, this model explained 40%
of the variance in burnout.
3.5
|
Analysis of multigroup invariance
Finally, we tested the invariance of cognitive appraisal
as a mediating variable between trait anxiety and burnout
according to the competitive level (eg, first and second
national divisions) and sport records of athletes (with and
without titles of champion at regional and/or national lev-
els). An analysis of multigroup invariance was conducted to
examine whether the model showed equivalence for these
variables. For each variable, five models were successively
tested for the invariance of parameters of factor loadings
(FL), factor variances (FV), and path coefficients (PC). The
findings support the invariance of the proposed model with
respect to competitive level and sport records: the chi- square
difference between the successive invariance models was
non- significant (see Table 2).
4
|
DISCUSSION
This study analyzed the relationships between trait anxiety,
cognitive appraisal, and burnout in a sample of youth athletes,
and defined two hypotheses. First, we proposed that both trait
anxiety and cognitive appraisal were directly related to ath-
letes’ burnout. Second, we proposed that cognitive appraisal
mediates the relationship between trait anxiety and athletes’
burnout and that this model would have better fit than the
model proposed in hypothesis 1. Third, as for exploratory
analysis, we tested the invariance of the mediated model of
cognitive appraisal on the relationship between trait anxiety
and burnout according to the athletes’ competitive level and
sport records. The results provided some positive indications
about the hypotheses, mainly for hypothesis 2, sustaining
the potential value of cognitive appraisal as a mechanism to
explain the adaptation of young athletes to sports.
Hypothesis 1 demonstrated that higher trait anxiety and
threat perception associated with lower challenge perception
are related to higher levels of burnout. That is, if young ath-
letes perceive the sport activity as less stressful and threat-
ening and more challenging, they experience less burnout.
This final model explained 28% of the variance of athletes’
burnout experience. Literature has shown that negative emo-
tions (as is the case of anxiety) are related to less positive
experiences for athletes34,54 and can increase the experi-
ence of burnout.35,55 In addition, different patterns of cog-
nitive appraisal (eg, perceive sports as more challenging or
more threatening) also impact the attitude of athletes toward
FIGURE 1 The partial mediation model: Adjusted model with
standardized regression coefficients. **P<.01; ***P<.01. Confidence
intervals of parameter estimates of the structural paths’ coefficients
were as follows: Trait anxiety to threat perception [0.244; 0.533];
trait anxiety to challenge perception [−0.280; 0.072]; trait anxiety to
burnout—indirect effect [0.058; 0.234]; threat perception to burnout
[0.111; 0.428]; challenge perception to burnout [−0.362; −0.087].
Confidence intervals of squared multiple correlation coefficients were
as following: threat perception [0.059; 0.284]; challenge perception
[0.000; 0.069]; burnout [0.278; 0.509].
Threat
perception
(R2
=.15)
Challenge
perception
(R2=.01)
Burnout
(R2=.40)
.391**
–.228**
.128***
Trait
anxiety
–.097
.271**
8
|
GOMES Etal.
sports3,56 and from a conceptual point of view can increase
or decrease burnout.4,8,10 Our results confirmed these indi-
cations of literature, adding the notion that both trait anxiety
and cognitive appraisal impact feelings of burnout in athletes,
meaning that stable dimensions of psychological functioning
of athletes (as proposed by Smith4) and also dynamic dimen-
sions related to the way situations are appraised by athletes
(as proposed again by Smith4 and by Lazaus2 can influence
athletes’ burnout.
Hypothesis 2 demonstrated that cognitive appraisal medi-
ates the relationship between trait anxiety and burnout, and
this relationship is better explained by the partial model
where direct paths from trait anxiety to cognitive appraisal
continue to be significant. The partial model, which included
cognitive appraisal as a mediator of the relationship between
trait anxiety and burnout and which removed the direct path
from trait anxiety to burnout, explained 40% of the variance
of athletes’ burnout experience, which is slightly better than
the variance explained in the direct model of hypothesis 1. In
other words, the relationship between trait anxiety and burn-
out is mediated by cognitive appraisal of athletes, meaning
that higher threat perception is related to increased burnout
and, conversely, higher challenge perception is related to
decreased burnout. This implies that cognitive appraisal is an
important variable to consider when explaining the relation-
ship between trait anxiety and burnout.
However, this conclusion should not ignore the direct
effects of trait anxiety on athletes’ burnout, which also rein-
forces previous findings suggesting the negative effects of
anxiety on athletes’ well- being34,57 and burnout.25,36 For
example, Cremades et al.35 in a study with collegiate athletes
found that cognitive anxiety predicted burnout (more specif-
ically the dimension of reduced sense of accomplishment)
and the directional scale of self- confidence predicted the
three dimensions of burnout (reduced sense of accomplish-
ment, emotional/physical exhaustion, and devaluation). Also,
Wiggins and colleagues in two studies about the relationship
between trait anxiety and burnout found that athletes inter-
preting anxiety as debilitative to performance experienced
higher burnout.32,33 Despite the interest of these findings,
our results confirm above all that the way athletes perceive
the sport (eg, as less threatening and more challenging) is an
important underlying mechanism in explaining adaptation to
sports.
This central role of cognitive appraisal is according to
theoretical models of human adaptation to stress. In fact, we
verified a relationship between cognitive appraisal and ath-
letes’ burnout (as suggested by Smith, 1986) and found that
challenge and threat states of athletes correspond to differen-
tial adaptive and maladaptive responses of athletes to sports
(as suggested by Blascovich & Mendes10 and Jones et al.8).
However, our results extend these proposals by establishing
cognitive appraisal as a mediator variable between trait anx-
iety and burnout, meaning that promoting positive patterns
of approaching competition and sports may, indeed, protect
young athletes from the negative consequences of burnout.
Scarce findings exist concerning the mediation of cogni-
tive appraisal on the relationship between trait anxiety and
burnout, but some evidence exists regarding the importance
of cognitive appraisal as a mediator of other related variables.
For example, Meijen et al.58 in a study with collegiate athletes
found that threat appraisal partially mediates the relationship
between anxiety and avoidance goals. Also, Raedeke and
Smith41 in a study with swimmers found that general coping
behaviors and social support satisfaction mediate the rela-
tionship between stress and strain in athletes. Despite these
scarce findings, the indications so far suggest that cognitive
appraisal can represent an important variable in reducing
athletes’ tendency to experience burnout. This is important
because there is evidence indicating negative effects of burn-
out on the well- being of young athletes in different domains
as, for example, passion,30 motivation,7,59 and hope.31
TABLE 2 Fit indices for the tested models
Invariance analysis χ2df RMSEA and 90% CI SRMR CFI TLI Δχ2Δdf
Competitive level
No invariance 2117.73 1160 0.036 (0.033–0.038) 0.067 0.90 0.89
FL 2158.84 1188 0.036 (0.033–0.038) 0.067 0.90 0.89 41.11 n.s. 28
FL+FV 2168.45 1192 0.036 (0.033–0.038) 0.068 0.90 0.89 9.61 n.s. 4
FL+FV+PC 2185.23 1201 0.036 (0.033–0.038) 0.069 16.78 n.s. 9
Sport records
No invariance 1991.52 1160 0.034 (0.032–0.037) 0.063 0.90 0.90
FL 2027.54 1188 0.034 (0.031–0.037) 0.065 0.90 0.90 36.02 n.s. 28
FL+FV 2036.06 1192 0.034 (0.032–0.037) 0.065 0.90 0.90 8.52 n.s. 4
FL+FV+PC 2043.31 1201 0.034 (0.031–0.036) 0.065 0.90 0.90 7.52 n.s. 9
FL, Factor loading invariance; FV, Factor variance invariance; PC, Path coefficients invariance; n.s., non- significant.
|
9
GOMES Etal.
The final set of analysis of this study demonstrated that
the mediation of cognitive appraisal between trait anxiety and
burnout was invariant according to characteristics of sport
contexts and athletes (eg, competitive level and sport records).
It is interesting to note that individual attributes of athletes
and characteristics of sports are involved in emotional expe-
riences and adaptation of athletes to sports.42,60 For exam-
ple, there is evidence that elite players interpret their anxi-
ety symptoms as more facilitating than non- elite players.61
However, our results confirm that, when considered together,
the relation between anxiety, cognitive appraisal, and burnout
is invariant, meaning that cognitive appraisal is a key variable
in explaining athletes’ burnout experiences in sports despite
their level of competition or sport success. Once again, this
reinforces the main propositions of theoretical models ana-
lyzing adaptation to stressful events2,8,10 and stresses the need
of working at earlier ages the way young athletes perceive
their sport activity. In fact, more than having athletes com-
peting at higher levels of competition or having athletes with
sport success, it is important to promote positive patters of
cognitive appraisal toward sports.
In sum, the findings from this study support the role
of cognitive appraisal as an important factor in explaining
young athletes’ burnout experience, suggesting its utility in
explaining adaptation to life contexts and stressful situations,
as indicated by some theoretical models.2,8,10,52 However, our
results also indicate that the direct effects of trait anxiety on
burnout should not be neglected, which supports the need
to study the mechanisms of how anxiety and other emotions
interfere with athletes’ performance and well- being with
respect to sports.
The main limitation of this study was the cross- sectional
nature of data collection that did not allow cause–effect con-
clusions on the relationship between trait anxiety, cognitive
appraisal, and burnout. This is important due the dynamic
and transactional relation established between emotions,
cognitive appraisal, coping, and the well- being of athletes.
However, our goal was to demonstrate the mediating role of
cognitive appraisal on the relationship between trait anxiety
and burnout, and the results seem to support this possibility.
Additionally, the significant imbalance between males and
females of our sample should be mentioned.
Finally, these results have practical implications for sport
psychology consultants. Developing athlete strategies to con-
trol the levels of anxiety in competition and implementing
adaptive forms of perceiving sport activities as a challenge
are important. In fact, sport psychologists may use cognitive
behavioral therapy62 to help athletes do deal with irratio-
nal beliefs that lead to dysfunctional emotions (ie, anxiety)
and to perceive competition and sports as more threatening
than challenging. A scarcity of findings exist on changing
primary cognitive appraisals of athletes, but there is some
evidence that disputing and changing irrational beliefs can
turn the sport experience into a more positive experience for
athletes63. Importantly, athletes should have the opportunity
to improve psychological skills that can be useful during the
stressful event (ex: emotion and arousal regulation, imag-
ery, concentration plans, among others).9 For example, set-
ting internal performance goals can help athletes to focus on
improving their skills and performance64 and may help them
to approach competition in a more challenging way.
4.1
|
Perspectives
This study demonstrated that cognitive appraisal mediates
the relationship between trait anxiety and burnout, and this
result was better than the one obtained by the direct relation-
ship between trait anxiety and burnout. Also important, the
mediation occurred despite the competitive level and sport
records of athletes. Thus, sport psychology consultants can
intervene in attending to the specific characteristics of stress-
ful events (eg, how can the negative effects of stress derived
from youth sport practice be prevented), and the role of cogni-
tive appraisal on adaptation to stress (eg, how can the percep-
tion of challenge in sport practice be promoted). Researchers
interested in studying cognitive appraisal of young athletes
should consider the dynamic and long- term relationship
established between the stressful event and the way athletes
perceived their sport activity. Additionally, future research
should include processes of secondary appraisal in order to
understand not only the way sports is perceived by athletes
(ie, primary cognitive appraisal) but also the way they cope
with stressful events and negative emotions, which is the
cause of anxiety.
REFERENCES
1. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New
York: Springer; 1984.
2. Lazarus RS. Stress and Emotion: A New Synthesis. New York:
Springer; 1999.
3. Lazarus RS. How emotions influence performance in competitive
sports. Sport Psychol. 2000;14:229–252.
4. Smith RE. Toward a cognitive- affective model of athletic burn-
out. J Sport Psychol. 1986;8:36–50.
5. Hill AP. Perfectionism and burnout in junior soccer players: a test
of the 2 x 2 model of dispositional perfectionism. J Sport Exerc
Psychol. 2013;35:18–29.
6. Martin EM, Horn TS. The role of athletic identity and passion in
predicting burnout in adolescent female athletes. Sport Psychol.
2013;27:338–348.
7. Martinent G, Decret JC, Guillet-Descas E, Isoard-Gautheur S. A
reciprocal effects model of the temporal ordering of motivation
and burnout among youth table tennis players in intensive training
settings. J Sports Sci. 2014;32:1648–1658.
8. Jones MV, Meijen C, McCarthy PJ, Sheffield D. A theory of chal-
lenge and threat states in athletes. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol.
2009;2:161–180.
10
|
GOMES Etal.
9. Turner MJ, Jones MV. Stress, emotions and athletes’ positive
adapation to sport: contributions from a transactional perspective.
In: Gomes AR, Resende R, Albuquerque A, eds. Positive Human
Functioning from a Multidimensional Perspective, vol. 1. New
York: Nova Science Publishers; 2014:85–111.
10. Blascovich J, Mendes WB. Challenge and threat appraisals: the
role of affective cues. In: Forgas JP, ed. Feeling and Thinking: The
Role of Affect in Social Cognition. Paris: Cambridge University
Press; 2000:59–82.
11. Blascovich J, Seery MD, Mugridge CA, Norris RK, Weisbuch M.
Predicting athletic performance from cardiovascular indexes of
challenge and threat. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2004;40:683–688.
12. Moore LJ, Wilson MR, Vine SJ, Coussens AH, Freeman P.
Champ or chump? Challenge and threat states during pressurized
competition. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2013;35:551–562.
13. Turner MJ, Jones MV, Sheffield D, Cross SL. Cardiovascular indi-
ces of challenge and threat states predict performance under stress
in cognitive and motor tasks. Int J Psychophysiol. 2012;86:48–57.
14. Nicholls AR, Levy AR, Jones L, Rengamani M, Polman RCJ. An
exploration of the two- factor schematization of relational mean-
ing and emotions among professional rugby union players. Int J
Sport Exerc Psychol. 2011;9:78–91.
15. Nicholls AR, Polman RCJ, Levy AR. A path analysis of stress
appraisals, emotions, coping, and performance satisfaction among
athletes. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2012;13:263–270.
16. Martinent G, Ferrand C. A field study of discrete emotions: ath-
letes’ cognitive appraisals during competition. Res Q Exerc Sport.
2015;86:51–62.
17. Graham TR, Kowalski KC, Crocker PRE. The contributions of
goal characteristics and causal attributions to emotional experience
in youth sport participants. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2002;3:273–291.
18. Thatcher J, Day MC. Re- appraising stress appraisals: the
underlying properties of stress in sport. Psychol Sport Exerc.
2008;9:318–335.
19. McCarthy PJ, Allen MS, Jones MV. Emotions, cognitive interfer-
ence, and concentration disruption in youth sport. J Sports Sci.
2013;31:505–515.
20. Gustafsson H, Hancock DJ, Côté J. Describing citation structures
in sport burnout literature: a citation network analysis. Psychol
Sport Exerc. 2014;15:620–626.
21. Smith RE, Smoll FL, Wiechman SA. Measurement of trait anx-
iety in sport. In: Duda JL, ed. Advances in Sport and Exercise
Psychology Measurement. Morgatown: Fitness Information
Technology; 1998:105–128.
22. Smith RE, Smoll FL, Cumming SP, Grossbard JR. Measurement
of multidimensional sport performance anxiety in children
and adults: the Sport Anxiety Scale- 2. J Sport Exerc Psychol.
2006;28:479–501.
23. Raedeke TD. Is athlete burnout more than just stress? A sport com-
mitment perspective. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 1997;19:396–417.
24. Leiter MP, Frame KA. Burnout and engagement at work: from the-
ory to intervention. In: Gomes AR, Resende R, Albuquerque A, eds.
Positive Human Functioning from a Multidimensional Perspective,
vol. 1. New York: Nova Science Publishers; 2014:37–56.
25. Raedeke TD, Smith AL. Development and preliminary vali-
dation of an athlete burnout measure. J Sport Exerc Psychol.
2001;23:281–306.
26. Goodger K, Gorely T, Lavallee D, Harwood C. Burnout in sport:
a systematic review. Sport Psychol. 2007;21:127–151.
27. Gould D, Tuffey S, Udry E, Loehr J. Burnout in competitive
junior tennis players: I. Qualitative analysis. Sport Psychol.
1996;10:341–366.
28. Gould D, Tuffey S, Udry E, Loehr J. Burnout in competitive
junior tennis players: III. Individual differences in the burnout
experience. Sport Psychol. 1997;11:256–276.
29. Chen LH, Kee YH, Tsai Y-M. Relation of dispositional opti-
mism with burnout among athletes. Percept Motor Skill.
2008;106:693–698.
30. Curran T, Appleton PR, Hill AP, Hall HK. Passion and burnout in
elite junior soccer players: the mediating role of self- determined
motivation. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2011;12:655–661.
31. Gustafsson H, Skoog T, Podlog L, Lundqvist C, Wagnsson S.
Hope and athlete burnout: stress and affect as mediators. Psychol
Sport Exerc. 2013;14:640–649.
32. Wiggins MS, Cremades JG, Lai C, Lee J, Erdmann JB.
Multidimensional comparison of anxiety direction and burnout
over time. Percept Motor Skill. 2006;102:788–790.
33. Wiggins MS, Lai C, Deiters JA. Anxiety and burnout in female
college ice hockey and soccer athletes. Percept Motor Skill.
2005;101:519–524.
34. Wilson MR, Vine SJ, Wood G. The influence of anxiety on visual
attentional control in basketball free throw shooting. J Sport
Exerc Psychol. 2009;31:152–168.
35. Cremades G, Wated G, Wiggins MS. Multiplicative measure-
ments of a trait anxiety scale as predictors of burnout. Meas Phys
Educ Exerc Sci. 2011;15:220–233.
36. Tenebaum G, Jones CM, Kitsantas A, Sacks DN, Berwick JP.
Failure adaptation: an investigation of the stress response process
in sport. Int J Sport Psychol. 2003;34:27–62.
37. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator- mediator variable distinc-
tion in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and
statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51:1173–1182.
38. Gomes AR, Faria S, Gonçalves AM. Cognitive appraisal as a
mediator in the relationship between stress and burnout. Work
Stress. 2013;27:351–367.
39. McCuaig Edge HJ, Ivey GW. Mediation of cognitive appraisal
on combat exposure and psychological distress. Mil Psychol.
2012;24:71–85.
40. Nicholls AR, Perry JL, Calmeiro L. Precompetitive achievement
goals, stress appraisals, emotions, and coping among athletes. J
Sport Exerc Psychol. 2014;36:433–445.
41. Raedeke TD, Smith AL. Coping resources and athlete burnout:
an examination of stress mediated and moderation hypotheses. J
Sport Exerc Psychol. 2004;26:525–541.
42. Campo M, Mellalieu S, Ferrand C, Martinent G, Rosnet E.
Emotions in team contact sports: a systematic review. Sport
Psychol. 2012;26:62–97.
43. Cruz JF, Gomes AR. Escala de Ansiedade no Desporto (EAD-2)
- Versão para investigação [The Sport Anxiety Scale-2: Version
for research]. Unpublished manuscript. Braga: Universidade do
Minho; 2007.
44. Bentler PM. On tests and indices for evaluating structural models.
Pers Individ Dif. 2007;42:825–829.
45. Gomes AR, Teixeira P. Stress, cognitive appraisal, and psycho-
logical health: testing instruments for health professionals. Stress
Health. 2016;32:167–172.
46. Vilela C, Gomes AR. Ansiedade, avaliação cognitiva e esgot-
amento na formação desportiva: estudo com jovens atletas
|
11
GOMES Etal.
[Anxiety, cognitive appraisal and burnout in sport: a study with
young athletes]. Motricidade. 2015;11:104–119.
47. Graham JW. Missing data analysis: making it work in the real
world. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:549–576.
48. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th edn.
Boston: Pearson; 2013.
49. Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic
Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum; 2001.
50. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW. Structural equation modeling in prac-
tice: a review and recommended two- step approach. Psychol Bull.
1988;103:411–423.
51. MacKinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS. Mediation analysis. Annu
Rev Psychol. 2007;58:593–614.
52. Gomes AR. Positive human functioning in stress situations: an
interactive proposal. In: Gomes AR, Resende R, Albuquerque
A, eds. Positive Human Functioning from a Multidimensional
Perspective: Promoting Stress Adaptation, vol. 1. New York:
Nova Science; 2014:165–194.
53. Marsh HW, Richards GE, Johnson S, Roche L, Tremayne P.
Physical self- description questionnaire: psychometric properties
and a multitrait- multimethod analysis of relations to existing
instruments. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 1994;16:270–305.
54. Neil R, Wilson K, Mellalieu SD, Hanton S, Taylor J. Competitive
anxiety intensity and interpretation: a two- study investigation into
their relationship with performance. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol.
2012;10:96–111.
55. Vealey RS, Udry EM, Zimmerman V, Soliday J. Intrapersonal and
situational predictors of coaching burnout. J Sport Exerc Psychol.
1992;14:40–58.
56. Moore LJ, Vine SJ, Wilson MR, Freeman P. The effect of chal-
lenge and threat states on performance: an examination of poten-
tial mechanisms. Psychophysiology. 2012;49:1417–1425.
57. Koivula N, Hassmén P, Fallby J. Self- esteem and perfectionism in
elite athletes: effects on competitive anxiety and self- confidence.
Pers Indiv Differ. 2002;32:865–875.
58. Meijen C, Jones MV, McCarthy PJ, Sheffield D, Allen MS.
Cognitive and affective components of challenge and threat states.
J Sports Sci. 2013;31:847–855.
59. Smith AL, Gustafsson H, Hassmén P. Peer motivational climate
and burnout perceptions of adolescent athletes. Psychol Sport
Exerc. 2010;11:453–460.
60. Cerin E, Szabo A, Hunt N, Williams C. Temporal pattern-
ing of competitive emotions: a critical review. J Sport Sci.
2000;18:605–626.
61. Neil R, Mellalieu SD, Hanton S. Psychological skills usage and
the competitive anxiety response as a function of skill level in
rugby union. J Sport Sci Med. 2006;5:415–423.
62. Hofmann SG, Asmundson GJG, Beck AT. The science of cogni-
tive therapy. Behav Ther. 2013;44:199–212.
63. Turner MJ, Slater MJ, Barker JB. Not the end of the world: the
effects of rational- emotive behavior therapy (REBT) on irratio-
nal beliefs in elite soccer academy athletes. J Appl Sport Psychol.
2014;26:144–156.
64. Weinberg RS. Goal setting in sport and exercise: research to
practice. In: Van Raalte JL, Brewer BW, eds. Exploring Sport
and Exercise Psychology, 3rd edn. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association; 2014:33–54.
How to cite this article: Gomes AR, Faria S, Vilela C.
Anxiety and burnout in young athletes: The mediating
role of cognitive appraisal. Scand J Med Sci Sports.
2017;00:1–11. doi:10.1111/sms.12841.
