The Spott Psychologist, 1991, 5, 140-151 A Survey of Coaches and Athletes About Sport Psychology in New Zealand Jane Sullivan and Ken P. Hodge University of Otago This investigation examined the current use and status of sport psychology in New Zealand. National coaches (n=46) and elite athletes (n=68) com- pleted appropriate c~uestionnaires that assessed their perceptions of sport psy- chology. They also indicated the importance of and the success they felt they had in changing andlor developing 21 psychological skills. Finally they were asked about their actual use of sport psychology and any problem areas. A general definition of sport psychology was given and sport psychology was rated by both coaches and athletes as being very important. Most coaches and athletes reported using it regularly. A positive response was received, with virtually all coaches and most athletes indicating they would be interested in having a sport psychologist work with them. Implications of the results are discussed and future research and practical recommendations are made. Sport psychology in New Zealand (NZ) is in a developmental stage. To date there does not appear to be any research that has directly investigated what sport psychology means to NZ sportspeople, or for that matter the actual use of sport psychology in this country. In order to enhance sport psychology practice and foster the beneficial development of the field, some formal study is required. The intention of this investigation was to examine the current use and status of sport psychology in New Zealand. Gross (1985, 1989) reports that a growing contemporary interest in sport psychology is evident in New Zealand, and he points to the need to promote an understanding of what sport psychology is and how it can be best used. In a similar vein, Williams (1982) notes that "if we are serious about making a contribution to society in the area of sport psychology then a systematic and a coordinated approach is desirable" @. 25). The major goal of this investigation was to determine the New Zealand sportsperson's perspective of sport psychology and to investigate whether those receiving sport psychology services are well informed and well served. Conse- quently, we needed to assess whether current sport psychology services required by NZ athletes and coaches were being met sufficiently, Strategies to achieve this goal were drawn from Silva's (1984) survey of national coaches to deter- The authors are with the School of Physical Education at the University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedim, New Zealand.
Transcript
The Spott Psychologist, 1991, 5, 140-151
A Survey of Coaches and Athletes About Sport Psychology in New Zealand
Jane Sullivan and Ken P. Hodge University of Otago
This investigation examined the current use and status of sport psychology in New Zealand. National coaches (n=46) and elite athletes (n=68) com- pleted appropriate c~uestionnaires that assessed their perceptions of sport psy- chology. They also indicated the importance of and the success they felt they had in changing andlor developing 21 psychological skills. Finally they were asked about their actual use of sport psychology and any problem areas. A general definition of sport psychology was given and sport psychology was rated by both coaches and athletes as being very important. Most coaches and athletes reported using it regularly. A positive response was received, with virtually all coaches and most athletes indicating they would be interested in having a sport psychologist work with them. Implications of the results are discussed and future research and practical recommendations are made.
Sport psychology in New Zealand (NZ) is in a developmental stage. To date there does not appear to be any research that has directly investigated what sport psychology means to NZ sportspeople, or for that matter the actual use of sport psychology in this country. In order to enhance sport psychology practice and foster the beneficial development of the field, some formal study is required. The intention of this investigation was to examine the current use and status of sport psychology in New Zealand.
Gross (1985, 1989) reports that a growing contemporary interest in sport psychology is evident in New Zealand, and he points to the need to promote an understanding of what sport psychology is and how it can be best used. In a similar vein, Williams (1982) notes that "if we are serious about making a contribution to society in the area of sport psychology then a systematic and a coordinated approach is desirable" @. 25).
The major goal of this investigation was to determine the New Zealand sportsperson's perspective of sport psychology and to investigate whether those receiving sport psychology services are well informed and well served. Conse- quently, we needed to assess whether current sport psychology services required by NZ athletes and coaches were being met sufficiently, Strategies to achieve this goal were drawn from Silva's (1984) survey of national coaches to deter-
The authors are with the School of Physical Education at the University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedim, New Zealand.
Sport Psychology in New Zealand 141
mine the status of sport psychology in America. The purposes of Silva's survey were threefold: to identify both general and specific areas of sport psychology deemed important by coaches; to gain greater insight into how coaches would like to integrate sport psychology into their programs; and to increase the visibility of sport psychology to the coaching community and thus facilitate future inter- action between academic and professional colleagues.
Gould, Hodge, Peterson, and Petlichkoff (1987) also recognized that it was appropriate to tap the experience of coaches who employ psychological principles and strategies every day. Gould et al. (1987) assessed the psychological prin- ciples used by elite coaches (n= 101) to determine whether various categories of coaches differed in the psychological skills and strategies they employed. They found that mental factors were most important in determining success at the higher levels of competition (M=9.39 for postcollegiate/intemtional levels, and M=9.26 for college level; 1-to-10 Likert scales, 1 = not important, 10 = extremely important).
Mechikoff and Kozar (1983) and Silva (1984), although not able to gener- alize to larger coaching populations, also revealed some important descriptive findings about the sport psychology information required by coaches. In Silva's (1984) study, for example, coaches identified lack of player confidence, player misunderstanding of role, emotional control, personal problems, and selfishness as critical issues in sport psychology.
It appears, then, from a brief review of the related literature, that coaches rate sport psychology as important in determining sporting success. Various categories of coaches differ in the psychological skills and strategies they em- ploy, and critical issues in coaching psychology such as lack of player confidence have been identified. It would also seem important to gain the athletes' perspec- tive of sport psychology. Orlick and Partington (1987) have suggested that if there is a clear understanding of the athletes' perspective regarding their psychological needs, then both the field and practice of sport psychology would benefit.
In summary, the specific objectives of this study were (a) to survey nation- al coaches and elite athletes regarding a general definition of sport psychology and its status in New Zealand, and (b) to determine the actual use of sport psy- chology by both coaches and athletes as well as the problem areas in sport psy- chology practice.
Methodology The subjects in this study consisted of 75 national coaches and 123 elite athletes. The coaches of 27 sports were identified from the Coaches Association of New Zealand directory of sporting bodies and from several contact people. Coaches from 20 sports responded to the address requests. The 46 coaches who responded to the questionnaire represented the following sports: athleticsttrack and field (1 I), badminton (2), basketball (2), canoeing (I), cricket (2), cycling (2)' golf (4), gym- nastics (3), netball (3)' rugby (I), soccer (I), softball (2), swimming (2), synchronized swimming (I), tennis (2), trampoliig (I), triathlon (I), volley- ball (3), waterpolo (I), and yachting (1).
Similarly, the names of 123 athletes were obtained from mailing lists sent in by the national coaches and from addresses provided by contact people. Sixty-eight athletes from 16 sports responded. The breakdown is as follows: athletics/track
142 Sullivan and Hodge
and field (ll), basketball (5), canoeing (4), cricket (I), cycling (2), golf (2), gym- nastics (6), judo (I), netball (12), rugby (9), softball (2), swimming (I), tram- polining (3), triathlon (5), volleyball (3), and yachting (1). Not all athletes and coaches listed on the mailing lists were contacted. We endeavored to obtain a balance across the sports, taking into consideration both team and individual sports. The sports included range from team contact and noncontact to individual pur- suits, endurance events, and aesthetic sports.
The sample groups were chosen to depict the status and use of sport psy- chology in New Zealand among our most successful athletes and coaches. The descriptive data provided by this sample would enable us to determine whether or not sport psychology is regarded as an active ingredient in the success formula of NZ sport.
Sample Characteristics
Coaches. The return rate for the coaches' questionnaire was 61.3% (n =46). The mean age of the coaches was 4 1.4 years (SD=9.6). There were 36 men and 10 women. In addition, 36 of the coaches were married. The ethnic background of the national coaches was predominantly NZ European (91.7 %), with 2.2% NZ Maori and 2.2% Cook Island Maori. Over half of the coaches (52.2 %) had obtained a university degree, 47.8 % had professional occupations, and 21.7 % were teachers.
Coaching-based questions revealed that the coaches averaged 16.4 years (SD=9.4) coaching their particular sport and slightly more than half of that time, 8.8 years (SD= 7.6), at the national level. Mean hours coaching per week totaled 17.4 (SD= 11.3). The highest level at which the coaches had competed as par- ticipants was 34.7% at world championships, 18.2 % at nationals, and 13.6% as New Zealand representatives.
Athletes. The return rate for the athletes' questionnaire was 55.3 % (n=68). Athletes averaged 22.2 years of age (SD=4.3). There were 40 men and 28 women. Their marital status was predominantly single (83.8%). Most were students (47.1 %), several had professional occupations (1 1.8 %), and 10.3 % were either full-time athletes or unemployed. The athletes' ethnic background was largely NZ European (82.4%), with a minority being NZ Maori (7.4%). More than half (68.7%) had a high school diploma or higher academic qualifications. Major sports represented in this sample included netball (17.6%), athleticsttrack and field (14.7%), and rugby (13.2%). Some 72% of the athletes had represented New Zealand. The athletes averaged 3.5 years (SD=2.42) competing at their highest level.
Procedure and Questionnaire
A survey package was mailed to the subjects between late April and late July 1989. The package contained a cover letter from the investigators that introduced the questionnaire and assured confidentiality, the appropriate questionnaire (ath- lete or coach), and a stamped self-addressed return envelope.
Two questionnaires were developed to survey sport psychology in New Zealand. Both were essentially the same, with one addressing the coaches and the other the athletes (these are available from the second author upon request). The mail-return questionnaires consisted of four sections, each consisting of a
Sport Psychology in New Zealand 143
number of individual items. The first part covered background information while the remaining three sections addressed the two objectives stated previously. Several of the questions were adapted and modified from the USA Wrestling Coaching Psychology Survey (Gould et al., 1987). Also, several questions were based on a review of sport psychology literature including previous research by Orlick and Partington (1987), Silva (1984), and Mechikoff and Kozar (1983).
Results Coaches' Questionnaire
S W s of Sport Psychology. In this section the coaches were asked, "De- fine what sport psychology means to you, using 5-10 key words." They were also asked to rate the importance of sport psychology in training and for elite sporting success. The most frequent key words the coaches used in an open-ended question to define a personal meaning of sport psychology included the following: (a) attitude (e.g., determination, discipline, attitude, and concentration) (n=47), (b) confidence/positiveness (n=45), (c) control and coping (e.g., mental, physical, emotional, and stress) (n=33), (d) mental preparation (n= 19), (e) motivation (n= 17), (f) goal setting (n=16), (g) focus/visualization/imagery (n=14), and Q relaxation (n = 13). Key words were classified according to consensual valida- tion between co-investigators (Patton, 1980).
The importance of sport psychology in the training of elite athletes was rated on a 1-to-10 Likert scale, with 1 representing "not at all important" and 10 "extremely important." Coaches rated sport psychology as being very im- Dortant in training (M=8.37, SD= 1.85). On the same scale, coaches also rated ~sychological skill; to be v&y impoknt to elite sporting~success (M=8.64, , SD=2.07).
Knowledge of sport psychology was also ascertained in this section of the questionnaire. Results revealed that while 45 % of the coaches claimed to be aware of the differences between clinical and educational sport psychology, several of them had an incorrect understanding of the differences. Over half of the coaches (56.5%) had attended organized clinics/courses on sport psychology, mostly in New Zealand, yet 73 % of the coaches felt that they did not have adequate sport psychology knowledge. Textbooks were the most common source of sport psy- chology information.
Specific Psychological Attributes and Skill Responses. The coaches' ratings of the importance and success in changing or developing 21 psychologi- cal attributes or skills are contained in Table 1. AU ratings were made on 1-to-7 Likert scales, with 1 representing "not important" and "not successful," respec- tively, and 7 representing "very important" and "very successful, " respectively.
Table 1 reveals that positive attitude (M=6.44), attentionlconcentration (M= 6.42), individual motivation (M=6.35), pregame mental preparation (M=6.1 l), goal setting (M=6.17), and mental toughness (M=6.33) were the psychological skillslattributes judged to be the most important in determining suc- cess or failure. Attributes or skills deemed to be less important were over- confidence (M=4.18), negative attitude (M=4.23), underachievement (M=4.60), leadership (M=4.67), and fear of failure (M=4.65). However, it should be noted that even the items judged to be less important received moderate ratings on the 7-point Likert scales ( W . 0 ) .
144 Sullivan and Hodge
Table 1
Coaches: lmportance Ratings and Success in Changing Psychological Attributes or Skills
Note. lmportance and success ratings were made on Likert scales, with 1 representing not importantlsuccessful and 7 very important/successful.
Table 1 also reveals that coaches were more successful in changing or devel- oping the athletes' attributes of positive attitude (M=5.64), team cohesionlteam harmony (M= 5.59), individual motivation (M= 5.50), and sportsmanship1 character (M=5.48). Skills or attributes that the coaches reported they were not so successful in changing were overconfidence (M=4.39), amiety/competitive stress control (M=4.50), emotional control (M=4.73), aggression/assertive be- havior (M=4.78), mental practice imagery (M=4.71), and attention/concentration (M=4.80). Again, these items received a moderate rating(M>4.0).
Actual Use and Problems. In this section of the questionnaire the prac- tice of sport psychology was reported and five frequent problems were listed. Forty-three coaches (95.6%) reported that sport psychology was included in their coaching program. They spent an average of 2.25 hours (SD=2.27) per week on coaching psychological areas, the range being from 1 to 12 hours.
The method of instruction/consultation most employed by coaches for sport psychology was individuallcoach consultation, with 91.3 % of them indicating
Sport Psychology in New Zealand 145
their use of this method. Group/coach consultation was employed by 58.7% of the coaches, while only 6.5 % employed either individuallsport psychologist or grouplsport psychologist methods of consultation. The five problem areas most frequently reported in an open-ended question format were anxietylcompetitive stress control, attentiodconcentration, mental toughness, pregame mental prepara- tion, and lack of confidence.
Who is Providing Psychological Services? Virtually all coaches indicated their interest in having a sport psychologist work d t h them (97.6%). Only 37.2% of the coaches felt that they adequately met their athletes' sport psychology needs, yet 65.7 % reported that they felt comfortable dealing with their athletes' psycho- logical needs. The coaches also thought that their athletes would perform better if they had a qualified sport psychologist working with them (94.9%). Personal recommendation was the most common way of identifying a sport psychologist (84.4%).
Athletes' Questionnaire
S m s of Sport Psychology. In this section of the questionnaire the athletes were asked, "Define what sport psychology means to you, using 5-10 key words. " They were also asked to rate the importance of sport psychology in training and for their sporting success. The most frequent key words they used to defme a personal meaning of sport psychology included the following: (a) attitude (e.g., concentration, determination, attitude, toughness, aggression) (n =52), (b) con- fidencelpositiveness (n = 52), (c) motivation (n =26), (d) visualization/dreaming/ imagery (n =26), (e) mental preparation (e.g., pregame) (n = 17), (f) goal setting (n = 15), (g) mind associations (e.g., awareness, thinking) (n= 15), and (h) control (e.g., emotions, thoughts and energy) (n= 13). Key words were classified accord- ing to consensual validation between co-investigators (Patton, 1980).
The importance of sport psychology in the training of elite athletes was rated on a 1-to-10 Likert scale with 1 representing "not at all important" and 10 "extremely important." Athletes rated sport psychology as being very irn- portant in training (M= 8.0, SD= 1.86). On the same scale, they also rated psy- chologicaI skills to be very important (M=7.93, SD= 1.92) to elite sporting success. Knowledge of sport psychology was also ascertained in this section of the questionnaire. Results revealed that only 16.2 % of the athletes said they were aware of any differences between clinical and educational sport psychology. Most (76.5 %) did not feel they had adequate sport psychology knowledge. Only 37.3 % of the athletes had attended any organized clinics or courses on sport psychol- ogy, and mostly in New Zealand (e.g . , NZ Rugby Development Squad). The sources for sport psychology knowledge reported were mainly textbooks, coaches, and experience.
Specific Psychological Attributes. The athletes' ratings of the importance and success in changing or developing 21 psychological attributes or skills are contained in Table 2. All ratings were made on 1-te7 Likert scales, with 1 representing "not important" and "not successful," respectively, and 7 represent- ing "very important" and "very successful, " respectively.
Table 2 reveals that positive attirude (M=6.67), individual motivation (M=6.55), mental toughness (M=6.30), attentiodconcentration (M=6.12), pre- game mental preparation (M=6.12), and goal setting (M=6.10) were the psy- chological skillslattributes rated very important in determining success or failure.
146 Sullivan and Hodge
Table 2
Athletes: Importance Ratings and Success in Changing Psychological Attributes or Skills
Psychological attribute or skill
Importance Success rating rating
M SD M SD
Positive attitude Individual motivation Mental toughness Attentionlconcentration Pregame mental preparation Goal setting Team cohesionlunit harmony Mental practice imagery Anxietylcompetitive stress control Coachability Emotional control Sportsmanshiplcharacter Aggressionlassertive behavior Fear of failure Leadership Communication problems Poor practice behavior Overconfidence Lack of confidence Underachievement Negative attitude
Note. lmportance and success ratings were made on Likert scales, with 1 representing not importantlsuccessful and 7 very importantlsuccessful.
Attributes or skills rated not so important were negative attitude (M=3.51), under- achievement (M=3.77), lack of confidence (M= 3.82), and overconfidence (M=3.94). Mean ratings were all below M=4.0 for these.
Table 2 also reveals that athletes were more successful in changing or de- veloping individual motivation (M= 5.54), goal setting (M= 5.54), mental tough- ness (M= 5.37), sportsmanship/character (M=5.35), and team cohesionlunit harmony (M=5.31). Skills or attributes they reported as not being so successful in changing were negative attitude (M=4.14), overconfidence (M=4.26), lack of confidence (M=4.41), and underachievement (M=4.46). Note that these were all given moderate ratings (i.e., M>4.0).
Actual Use and Problems. In this section of the questionnaire the prac- tice of sport psychology was reported and five frequent problem areas were listed. Forty-five athletes (66.2 %) reported that sport psychology was included in their training program. A mean of 3.24 (SD= 5.21) hours per week were spent on train- ing psychological skills, the range being from 1 to 30 hours. The method of
Sport Psychology in New Zealand * 147
instruction/consultation employed by athletes for sport psychology was mostly individuallself-instructed (87.2 %) . Individual/coach consultation was edployed by 27.7 %. The five problem areas most frequently reported were lack of confi- dence, anxietylcompetitive stress control, fear of failure, attentionlconcentration, and pregame mental preparation.
Who is Providing Psychological Services? The majority of athletes (73.8 %) indicated their interest in having a sport psychologist work with them. One-third of them felt that their psychological needs were being met adequately at present. Almost two-thirds thought they would perform better if they had a sport psychologist working along with their coach. Two-thirds of them felt comfort- able dealing with their psychological needs individually, 38.5% with their coach, and 30.3 % with sport psychologist and coach together. Personal recommenda- tion was the most common way of identifying a sport psychologist (85.2%).
Discussion In general, the findings of this study may be interpreted as being extremely support- ive of sport psychology's role in enhancing sporting success. Nevertheless, one has to take into account the sample characteristics of this study in assessing the generalizability of these findings. The subjects selected were all elite coaches and athletes and, while return rates (coaches, 61.3%; athletes, 55.3%) were satisfac- tory by survey research standards, it must be recognized that it may have been only those with a working knowledge of sport psychology who elected to com- plete and return the questionnaires. Consequently the sample in this study may be somewhat biased toward a favorable attitude about sport psychology. This limi- tation has important implications for the generalizability of these findings, but in no way does it detract from the veracity of the results for this sample of elite coaches and athletes.
Status of Sport Psychology Sport psychology has different meanings for different people. A general defini- tion of what sport psychology means to the New Zealand sportsperson was deter- mined by asking elite coaches and athletes to use key words to define sport psychology. Those used most frequently by both coaches and athletes came under two major categories: attitude (e.g., determination, discipline, attitude, and con- centration) and positiveness/confidence.
Coaches mentioned "control" and "coping" more often than athletes did. This may reflect how coaches perceive their role as a coach, that is, helping athletes to control psychological problems and to cope with stress. Visualizationlimagery was the key word used more frequently by athletes. It could be that our athletes are into this more "fashionable" contemporary area of sport psychology. Mental preparation, motivation, and goal setting were key words used by both coaches and athletes. In general, the common key words used to define sport psychology also reflect most of the areas that coaches and athletes alike rated as important in determining success or failure (e.g., positive attitude, individual motivation, goal setting).
The importance of sport psychology in the training of elite athletes was rated very highly by both coaches (Mz8.37) and athletes (M=8.0), t(l11) = 1.317, NSD. In addition, both coaches (M=8.64) and athletes (M=7.93) rated psycho-
148 Sullivan and Hodge
logical skills as being very important for elite sporting success, t(ll1) = 1.860, NSD. This is an encouraging result and reflects the high status that sport psy- chology has among our leading coaches and athletes.
Coaches and athletes in New Zealand appear to have a somewhat limited knowledge of sport - psychology, however. Most coaches (73 %) and athletes (76.5 %) felt they did not have adequate sport psychology knowledge. Titles such as clinical or educational sport psychologist may be of little relevance since only a small percentage of athletes (16%) and coaches (45 % , of which several had inconect understanding) were aware of any differences between these titles. Educa- tion is needed in this area.
With sport psychology rated as very important to New Zealand sportspeople, efforts should be made to ensure that those who use sport psychology services are well informed. Textbooks were the main source of sport psychology infor- mation for coaches and athletes. Perhaps more applicable information could be transmitted in coaching schools and clinics where there is an opportunity for inter- action between the sport psychologist and the athlete. For example, Gould et al. (1987) found that coaching education efforts were positively associated with the use and success of some psychological skill training strategies.
Specific Psychological Attributes and Skill Responses
Both coaches and athletes rated positive attitude, individual motivation, mental toughness, attention/concentration, pregame mental preparation, and goal setting as very important in determining success or failure. These findings lend support to Silva's (1984) survey of high school and college coaches, from which he con- cluded that the more traditional areas of attitudes, individual motivation, and atten- tion/concentration were of most interest to coaches.
This frnding is also supported by Gould et al. (1987), with the more tradi- tional areas in their study of mental toughness, positive attitude, individual motiva- tion, and attentionlconcentration being rated as very important (by 59 to 82 % of all coaches). However, in the present study all 2 1 skills or attributes were rated as being moderately important for success (e.g., coaches M=4.18 or above, ath- letes M=3.51 or above). Hence both athletes and coaches felt that all 21 items played a relatively important role in sporting success.
As suggested by Gould et al. (1987), these results emphasize that the sport psychologist, coach, and athlete must look at the mental statelathletic performance relationship as a multivariate rather than a univariate phenomenon. Therefore it is important that coaches and athletes have knowledge of the diverse mental training strategies available for use with different individuals in different situa- tions and at different times.
The skills or attributes that both coaches and athletes felt they had the most success in changing andlor developing were individual motivation, goal setting, sjmrkmanshlp/character, and team cohesionlunity harmony. Coaches also reported most perceived success in changing positive attitude, and athletes in changing mental toughness. Coaches reported the least perceived success in developing andlor changing overconfidence, anxietylcompetitive stress control, emotional control, aggressionlassertive behavior, mental-practice imagery, and attention1 concentration.
Athletes reported the least perceived success in developing and/or changing
Sport Psychology in New Zealand 149
negative attitude, overconfidence, lack of confidence, and underachievement. These results reflect findings similar to those of Gould et al. (1987). Nevertheless, as Gould et al. point out, it is encouraging that contemporary sport psychology texts (e.g., Orlick, 1986; Williams, 1986) have identified a number of applied tech- niques that coaches can employ to change many of the behavioral attributes that coaches perceived little success in changing (e.g., mental-practice imagery, anxi- etylstress control, lack of confidence). Thus efforts should be made to disseminate this information to both coaches and athletes via coaching schools and clinics.
Actual Use of Sport Psychology
Virtually all the coaches and most of the athletes reported that sport psychology was included in their coaching and training programs. This result implies that sport psychology is being used regularly by our top New Zealand sportspeople. Coaches spent approximately 12% (M=2.25 hrs per week) of their coaching time on psychological areas while athletes devoted one-fifth of the time spent on physical training to psychological training (M=3.24 hrs per week). It should be noted that coaches may also feel they are developing psychological skills during actual physical training.
Bearing in mind the different requirements of individuals, it is not surpris- ing to find a wide range of hours reported for psychological skills training (e.g., 1-30 hrs per week). However, this wide range of hours may also reflect differ- ing definitions of psychological training; some athletes tend to regard thinking or daydreaming about their sport as psychological training.
The main method of sport psychology instruction/consultation that coaches reported was individuallcoach consultation, followed by grouplcoach consulta- tion. The main method that athletes employed was individuallself-instructed. It appears that coaches are the main people imparting sport psychology to their ath- letes. However, 73% of the coaches in this study indicated that they felt they did not have adequate sport psychology knowledge. Consequently, provisions shodd be made to educate coaches and athletes. Roberts and Kimiecik (1989) state that "not until all coaches receive adequate training in sport psychology can they be expected to initiate and maintain quality mental training for their athletes" @. 77). This should ensure that those who use sport psychology services are well informed and have the opportunity to acquire sport psychology knowledge.
Problem Areas The problem areas that both coaches and athletes reported most frequently were anxietylcompetitive stress control, attention/concentration, pregame mental prepa- ration, and lack of confidence, with coaches also reporting mental toughness and athletes reporting fear of failure. As Gould et al. (1987) suggest, anxiety, attention/ concentration, and confidence may be fruitful topics on which to disseminate scien- tific findings and applied techniques to coaches and athletes. These areas have received much attention from researchers in applied sport psychology, and prac- tical techniques are available to enhance each area. Efforts must be made by sports- people, particularly coaches, to become well informed about sport psychology. This leads to the question of who is providing psychological services to coaches and sportspeople.
150 Sullivan and Hodge
Who is Providing Psychological Services to NZ Sportspeople?
Virtually all coaches (97.6%) and most athletes (73.8%) indicated their interest in having a sport psychologist work with them. This would be a very positive step, as only 37.2% of the coaches felt they adequately met their athletes' psy- chological needs and only 33.3 % of the athletes felt that their psychological needs were being met adequately. Nearly all the coaches (94.9%) thought that their athletes would perform better if they had a sport psychologist working with them.
Athletes indicated they felt more comfortable dealing with the sport psy- chologist and coach together than directly with the sport psychologist. This finding has quahfied support from Partington and Orlick (1987), who state that coaches are very concerned that sport psychology consultants should fit in well with the team and the program (see also Gould, Tammen, Murphy, & May, 1989; Wrisberg, 1990). Hence, efforts to foster sport psychology practices in New Zealand would appear most beneficial if the coach, athlete, and sport psychologist work together as a team.
Clearly one can infer from these findings that sport psychology is moving in a positive direction. Coaches and athletes want some assistance from sport psy- chologists. This result reflects the status that sport psychology is gaining. New Zealand sportspeople want to ensure that they are well informed consumers of sport psychology.
Summary and Future Research Directions Collectively, these results are very supportive. The findings indicate that national coaches and elite athletes in New Zealand rank sport psychology as very important in determining sporting success. As a result, most coaches and athletes reported using sport psychology regularly in their training programs. Important problem areas were identified as needing particular attention by sport psychologists in future educational efforts.
It must be recognized that while these descriptive findings provide impor- tant untapped data on sport psychology in New Zealand, a self-report question- naire was the only methodological approach employed in this investigation. As Gould et al. (1987) suggest, only through a multidimensional approach, includ- ing actual 0bSe~ations of coaches and athletes in practices and competitions and in-depth intemiews that allow for the acquisition and interpretation of rich qualita- tive data, can more accurate data be obtained. This study provides an important foundation for this future research.
References Gould, D., Hodge, K., Peterson, K., & Petlichkoff, L. (1987). Psychological foundations
of coaching: Similarities and differences among intercollegiate wrestling coaches. 7ke Sport Psychologist, 1, 293-308.
Gould, D., Tammen, V., Murphy, S., & May, J. (1989). An examination of U.S. Olympic sport psychology consultants and the services they provide. The Sport Psycholo- gist, 3, 300-312.
Gross, J. (1985). Training sport psychologists for a community role. New Zealand Journal of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 18, 15-18.
Sport Psychology in New Zealand 153
Gross, J. (1989). Creating a sport psychology association for New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Sports Medicine, 17, 19-21.
Mechikoff, R., & Kozar, B. (1983). Sportpsychology: Zhe mach'spequecrive. Springfield, IL: C.C Thomas.
Orlick, T. (1986). Coaches training manual topsychingfbr sport. Champaign, IL: Leisure Press.
Orlick, T., & Partington, J. (1987). The sport psychology consultant: Analysis of critical components as viewed by Canadian Olympic athletes. The Sport Psychologist, 1, 4-17.
Partington, J., & Orlick, T. (1987). The sport psychology consultant: Olympic coaches' views. The Sport Psychologist, 1, 95-102.
Patton, M. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Roberts, G., & Kimiecik, J. (1989). Sport psychology in the German Democratic Republic:
An interview with Dr. Gerd Konzag. The Sport Psychologist, 3, 72-77. Silva, J. (1984). The status of sport psychology: A national survey of coaches. Journal
of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 55, 46-49. Williams, J.M. (Ed.) (1986). Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak peflor-
mance. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield. Williams, L.R.T. (1982). Innovations in behaviour research: Implications for elite perfor-
mance. New Zealand Journal of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 15, 19-26.
Wrisberg, C. (1990). An interview with Pat Head Summitt. The Sport Psychologist, 4, 180-191.
Manuscript submitted: June 1 1, 1990 Revision received: November 5, 1990
