How consistent are challenge and threat evaluations? A generalizability analysis

Lee Moore, Paul Freeman, Adrian Hase, Emma Solomon-Moore, Rachel Arnold

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Viewing stressful situations as more of a challenge than a threat (i.e., coping resources match or exceed situational demands) has been associated with better performance and long-term health. However, to date, little research has examined if individuals have tendencies to evaluate all stressful situations as more of a challenge or threat. Thus, this study used generalizability analyses to investigate the consistency (or variability) of challenge and threat evaluations across potentially stressful situations. 1813 roller derby players (89.0% female; Mage = 33 years, SD = 7) read nine stressful vignettes (e.g., injury, non-selection, family illness), before completing self-report items assessing challenge and threat evaluations. Generalizability analyses revealed that the Athlete x Stressor interaction accounted for the greatest amount of variance in challenge and threat evaluations (51.9%), suggesting that athletes had idiosyncrasies in their tendency to view particular stressors as more of a challenge or threat. The Athlete (15.4%) and Stressor (21.9%) components also accounted for a significant amount of variance. While the Athlete component suggested some consistency in challenge and threat evaluations, and that differences existed between athletes in whether they tended to view stressors as more of a challenge or threat, the Stressor component indicated some agreement among the athletes in their tendency to view some stressors as more of a challenge or threat than others. The findings offer direct support for transactional stress theories, and have important implications for practitioners developing stress management interventions.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1778
JournalFrontiers in Psychology: Movement Science and Sport Psychology
Volume10
Issue numberJULY
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Aug 2019

Cite this

How consistent are challenge and threat evaluations? A generalizability analysis. / Moore, Lee; Freeman, Paul; Hase, Adrian; Solomon-Moore, Emma; Arnold, Rachel.

In: Frontiers in Psychology: Movement Science and Sport Psychology, Vol. 10, No. JULY, 1778, 02.08.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{10bfa93e9007456a8cafd418d909dccf,
title = "How consistent are challenge and threat evaluations? A generalizability analysis",
abstract = "Viewing stressful situations as more of a challenge than a threat (i.e., coping resources match or exceed situational demands) has been associated with better performance and long-term health. However, to date, little research has examined if individuals have tendencies to evaluate all stressful situations as more of a challenge or threat. Thus, this study used generalizability analyses to investigate the consistency (or variability) of challenge and threat evaluations across potentially stressful situations. 1813 roller derby players (89.0{\%} female; Mage = 33 years, SD = 7) read nine stressful vignettes (e.g., injury, non-selection, family illness), before completing self-report items assessing challenge and threat evaluations. Generalizability analyses revealed that the Athlete x Stressor interaction accounted for the greatest amount of variance in challenge and threat evaluations (51.9{\%}), suggesting that athletes had idiosyncrasies in their tendency to view particular stressors as more of a challenge or threat. The Athlete (15.4{\%}) and Stressor (21.9{\%}) components also accounted for a significant amount of variance. While the Athlete component suggested some consistency in challenge and threat evaluations, and that differences existed between athletes in whether they tended to view stressors as more of a challenge or threat, the Stressor component indicated some agreement among the athletes in their tendency to view some stressors as more of a challenge or threat than others. The findings offer direct support for transactional stress theories, and have important implications for practitioners developing stress management interventions.",
author = "Lee Moore and Paul Freeman and Adrian Hase and Emma Solomon-Moore and Rachel Arnold",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "2",
doi = "10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01778",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
journal = "Frontiers in Psychology: Movement Science and Sport Psychology",
issn = "1664-1078",
publisher = "Frontiers Media S.A.",
number = "JULY",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How consistent are challenge and threat evaluations? A generalizability analysis

AU - Moore, Lee

AU - Freeman, Paul

AU - Hase, Adrian

AU - Solomon-Moore, Emma

AU - Arnold, Rachel

PY - 2019/8/2

Y1 - 2019/8/2

N2 - Viewing stressful situations as more of a challenge than a threat (i.e., coping resources match or exceed situational demands) has been associated with better performance and long-term health. However, to date, little research has examined if individuals have tendencies to evaluate all stressful situations as more of a challenge or threat. Thus, this study used generalizability analyses to investigate the consistency (or variability) of challenge and threat evaluations across potentially stressful situations. 1813 roller derby players (89.0% female; Mage = 33 years, SD = 7) read nine stressful vignettes (e.g., injury, non-selection, family illness), before completing self-report items assessing challenge and threat evaluations. Generalizability analyses revealed that the Athlete x Stressor interaction accounted for the greatest amount of variance in challenge and threat evaluations (51.9%), suggesting that athletes had idiosyncrasies in their tendency to view particular stressors as more of a challenge or threat. The Athlete (15.4%) and Stressor (21.9%) components also accounted for a significant amount of variance. While the Athlete component suggested some consistency in challenge and threat evaluations, and that differences existed between athletes in whether they tended to view stressors as more of a challenge or threat, the Stressor component indicated some agreement among the athletes in their tendency to view some stressors as more of a challenge or threat than others. The findings offer direct support for transactional stress theories, and have important implications for practitioners developing stress management interventions.

AB - Viewing stressful situations as more of a challenge than a threat (i.e., coping resources match or exceed situational demands) has been associated with better performance and long-term health. However, to date, little research has examined if individuals have tendencies to evaluate all stressful situations as more of a challenge or threat. Thus, this study used generalizability analyses to investigate the consistency (or variability) of challenge and threat evaluations across potentially stressful situations. 1813 roller derby players (89.0% female; Mage = 33 years, SD = 7) read nine stressful vignettes (e.g., injury, non-selection, family illness), before completing self-report items assessing challenge and threat evaluations. Generalizability analyses revealed that the Athlete x Stressor interaction accounted for the greatest amount of variance in challenge and threat evaluations (51.9%), suggesting that athletes had idiosyncrasies in their tendency to view particular stressors as more of a challenge or threat. The Athlete (15.4%) and Stressor (21.9%) components also accounted for a significant amount of variance. While the Athlete component suggested some consistency in challenge and threat evaluations, and that differences existed between athletes in whether they tended to view stressors as more of a challenge or threat, the Stressor component indicated some agreement among the athletes in their tendency to view some stressors as more of a challenge or threat than others. The findings offer direct support for transactional stress theories, and have important implications for practitioners developing stress management interventions.

U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01778

DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01778

M3 - Article

VL - 10

JO - Frontiers in Psychology: Movement Science and Sport Psychology

JF - Frontiers in Psychology: Movement Science and Sport Psychology

SN - 1664-1078

IS - JULY

M1 - 1778

ER -