1 / 25

Relationships between Mental Toughness, Physical Activity, and Barriers to Exercise in Undergraduate Students

This presentation provides an overview of the relationship between mental toughness, physical activity levels, and barriers to exercise in undergraduate students. It discusses the findings of a study and provides recommendations based on the results.

russellkirk
Download Presentation

Relationships between Mental Toughness, Physical Activity, and Barriers to Exercise in Undergraduate Students

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Relationships between mental toughness, physical activity and barriers to exercise in undergraduate students Elizabeth Stamp¹, Lee Crust¹, Christian Swann1,2 ¹University of Lincoln, UK ² University of Wollongong, Australia

  2. Overview of the presentation • Provide a background of mental toughness and physical activity levels in university students. • Explain the method of the current study. • Discuss the findings in relation to previous literature. • Provide recommendations based on the findings.

  3. Mental toughness “The personality trait which determines in large part how people deal effectively with challenges, stressors, and pressure…irrespective of circumstances” (Strycharczyk& Clough., 2015). 4 C’s model of mental toughness (Clough et al., 2002)

  4. One of the most important attributes for successful performance is mental toughness (Gould et al.,1987). Senior management mental toughness is significantly higher than that of junior management and clerical staff (Marchant et al., 2009). Mental toughness is significantly and positively related to academic achievement, and progression in first year university students (Crust et al., 2012). Mental toughness is associated with higher levels of physical activity in university students (Gerber et al., 2012).

  5. University students • Physical activity levels decline when students begin university (Bray & Born, 2004).

  6. University students • Physical activity levels decline when students begin university (Bray & Born, 2004). • Common barriers include access to facilities, lack of family support, and lack of time (Gyurcsik et al., 2006).

  7. University students • Physical activity levels decline when students begin university (Bray & Born, 2004). • Common barriers include access to facilities, lack of family support, and lack of time (Gyurcsik et al., 2006). • Those with a higher mental toughness have somewhat different perceptions of the barriers (Crust et al., 2014).

  8. Method • In total, 167 undergraduate students (female = 123, male = 44; m age = 20.79, SD ± 3.38 years) completed an online questionnaire. • Demographic information • Mental Toughness Questionnaire (MTQ48; Clough et al., 2002) • Exercise Barriers Scale (Schreist, 1969)

  9. Method • In total, 167 undergraduate students (female = 123, male = 44; m age = 20.79, SD ± 3.38 years)completed an online questionnaire. • Demographic information • Mental Toughness Questionnaire (MTQ48; Clough et al., 2002) • Exercise Barriers Scale (Sechrist, 1987) • Data analysis included Pearson bivariate correlation, and hierarchal multiple linear regressions.

  10. Results • Average mental toughness was 3.35 • 44% did not participate in regular physical activity • Out of the 167 students: 31% 41% 28%

  11. Correlations and hierarchal multiple linear regression * p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

  12. Correlations and hierarchal multiple linear regression * p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

  13. Exercise milieu • Life control was the strongest predictor of exercise milieu. • Internal attributions are associated with life control (Clough & Strycharczyk, 2012).

  14. Correlations and hierarchal multiple linear regression * p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

  15. Time expenditure • Confidence in abilities was the strongest predictor of time expenditure. • Confidence in abilities is associated with and logical analysis (Nicholls et al., 2008) and planning (Kaiseler et al., 2009).

  16. Correlations and hierarchal multiple linear regression * p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

  17. Physical exertion • Commitment was the strongest predictor of physical exertion. • Commitment is associated with directly coping with pain and negatively associated with pain catastrophizing(Levy et al., 2006). • Commitment is negatively related to resignation (Nicholls et al., 2008).

  18. Correlations and hierarchal multiple linear regression * p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

  19. Family discouragement • Smallest perceived barrier to exercise. • 77% of the sample had moved away from home.

  20. Applied recommendations • Screening device for students ‘at risk’.

  21. Applied recommendations • Screening device for students ‘at risk’. • Commitment and life control are the least hereditable components (Horsburgh et al., 2009).

  22. Applied recommendations • Screening device for students ‘at risk’. • Commitment and life control are the least hereditable components (Horsburgh et al., 2009). • More encouraging environment.

  23. Applied recommendations • Screening device for students ‘at risk’. • Commitment and life control are the least hereditable components (Horsburgh et al., 2009). • More encouraging environment. • Future directions could include an intervention study.

  24. Thank you for listening Any Questions?

  25. References • Bray, S. R. & Born, H. A. (2004). Transition to university and vigorous physical activity: implications for health and psychological well-being. Journal of American Health, 52(4) 181 – 188. doi: 10.3200/JACH.52.4.181-188 • Clough, P., Earle, K., & Sewell, D. (2002). Mental toughness: the concept and its measurement. In I. Cockerill, Solutions in sport psychology, (pp. 32-43). London: Thomson. • Clough, P. J. & Strycharcyck, D. (2012). Developing Mental Toughness. London: Kogan Page Limited. • Crust, L., Earle, K., Perry, J. L., Earle, F., Clough, A., & Clough P. (2014). Mental toughness in higher education: Relationships with achievement and progression in first-year university sports students. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 87 – 91. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.016 • Crust, L., Swann, C., aLLEN=-Collinson, J., Breckon, J. & Weinberg, R. A pheenomological exploration of exercisemental toughness: perceptions of exercise leaders and regular exercisers. Qualtitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health,. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2014.901986 • Gyurcsik, N. C., Spink, K. S., Bray, S. R., Chad, K., & Kwan, M. (2006). An ecologically based examination of barriers to physical activity in students from grade seven through first year of University. Journal of Adolescent Health, 38 (6) 704 – 711. doi 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.06.007 • Horsburgh, V. A., Schermer, J. A., Veselka, L. & Vernon, P. A. (2008). A behavioural genetic study of mental toughness and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 46 (2), 100 – 105. • Kaiseler, M., Polman, R., & Nicholls, A. (2009). Mental toughness, stress, stress appraisal, coping and coping effectiveness in sport. Personality and Individual Differences. 47(7), 728 – 733. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2009.06.012 • Levy, A. R., Polman, C. J., Clough, P. J., Marchant, D. C., & Earle, K. (2006). Mental toughness as a determinant of beliefs, pain, and adherence in sport injury rehabilitation. Journal of Sports Rehabilitation, 15(3) 246 – 254. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00704.x • Nicholls, A. R., Polman, R. C. J., Levy, A. R., & Backhouse, S. H. (2008). Mental toughness, optimism, pessimism, and coping among athletes. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(5), 1182 – 1192. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.11.011

More Related