Examining Injury-Related Differences in Motivation Sources in NCAA Division II Student-Athletes during COVID-19

Mindy H. Mayol, Claire Tabit, Sydney Irvine, L. Hunter Stafford, Riggs Klika, Gary M. Long, Nathanial R. Eckert, Richard Robinson, Brian Reagan, Trent E. Cayot
{"title":"Examining Injury-Related Differences in Motivation Sources in NCAA Division II Student-Athletes during COVID-19","authors":"Mindy H. Mayol, Claire Tabit, Sydney Irvine, L. Hunter Stafford, Riggs Klika, Gary M. Long, Nathanial R. Eckert, Richard Robinson, Brian Reagan, Trent E. Cayot","doi":"10.53520/rdpb2023.10768","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Few studies have explored motivation using the Self-Determination Theory in injured collegiate student-athletes (SAs). The purpose of this research was to assess differences in six motivation sources during the COVID-19 pandemic between SAs who experienced an injury versus those that did not. It was hypothesized that differences would be seen in intrinsic-based motivation between injured and non-injured SAs with non-injured SAs demonstrating higher intrinsic motivation.\nMethods:  NCAA Division II SAs (n=158) from 12 teams composed of injured (n=66) and non-injured (n=92) SAs were recruited to complete an online demographics/historical questionnaire and the 18-item Sport Motivation Scale II measuring six motivation sources at one time point: intrinsic, integrated, identified, introjected, external, and amotivation regulation/motivation. Independent samples t-tests were performed with an alpha level of p≤0.05 to examine differences for each motivation source.\nResults: No significant differences were observed between injured and non-injured SAs among the six motivation sources, respectively (p>0.05). Specifically, no intrinsic motivation differences were observed between the injured (15.89±3.88) and non-injured SAs (16.22±3.68, t(154)=-0.53, p=0.60).\nConclusions: Study findings suggested no difference between the SA groups indicating that the collegiate athletics professionals worked diligently and equally with injured and non-injured SA’s motivation and care during the pandemic. ","PeriodicalId":263608,"journal":{"name":"Research Directs in Psychology and Behavior","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Directs in Psychology and Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53520/rdpb2023.10768","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Few studies have explored motivation using the Self-Determination Theory in injured collegiate student-athletes (SAs). The purpose of this research was to assess differences in six motivation sources during the COVID-19 pandemic between SAs who experienced an injury versus those that did not. It was hypothesized that differences would be seen in intrinsic-based motivation between injured and non-injured SAs with non-injured SAs demonstrating higher intrinsic motivation. Methods:  NCAA Division II SAs (n=158) from 12 teams composed of injured (n=66) and non-injured (n=92) SAs were recruited to complete an online demographics/historical questionnaire and the 18-item Sport Motivation Scale II measuring six motivation sources at one time point: intrinsic, integrated, identified, introjected, external, and amotivation regulation/motivation. Independent samples t-tests were performed with an alpha level of p≤0.05 to examine differences for each motivation source. Results: No significant differences were observed between injured and non-injured SAs among the six motivation sources, respectively (p>0.05). Specifically, no intrinsic motivation differences were observed between the injured (15.89±3.88) and non-injured SAs (16.22±3.68, t(154)=-0.53, p=0.60). Conclusions: Study findings suggested no difference between the SA groups indicating that the collegiate athletics professionals worked diligently and equally with injured and non-injured SA’s motivation and care during the pandemic. 
在COVID-19期间,NCAA II级学生运动员在动力来源方面的损伤相关差异
引言:很少有研究利用自我决定理论探讨受伤大学生运动员(SAs)的动机。本研究的目的是评估在COVID-19大流行期间,经历过伤害的sa与没有经历过伤害的sa之间的六种动机来源的差异。假设受伤和未受伤的sa在内在动机上存在差异,未受伤的sa表现出更高的内在动机。方法:从受伤(66)和未受伤(92)的12支球队中招募NCAA二级联赛的体育运动员(158名),完成在线人口统计/历史调查问卷和18项体育动机量表II,测量一个时间点的六个动机来源:内在、综合、识别、内源性、外部和动机调节/动机。采用独立样本t检验,α水平p≤0.05,检验各动机源的差异。结果:6种动机源中sa损伤与未损伤的差异均无统计学意义(p>0.05)。其中,内因动机损伤组(15.89±3.88)与非损伤组(16.22±3.68,t(154)=-0.53, p=0.60)无显著差异。结论:研究结果表明,SA组之间没有差异,这表明在大流行期间,大学体育专业人员在受伤和非受伤SA的动机和护理方面工作勤奋,平等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信