What Can Affect Competition Anxiety in Athletes? The Role of Self-Compassion and Repetitive Negative Thinking

Abstract

Identifying the correlates of competition anxiety is fundamental to athletes’ well-being and performance. Self-compassion is gaining attention in sport psychology because of its associations with positive outcomes, while repetitive negative thinking (i.e. worry and rumination) is associated with negative conditions, such as anxiety. Building on previous evidence in the general population of associations between self-compassion, repetitive negative thinking, and trait anxiety, we investigated these relations in athletes of different sports. A total of 263 athletes (Mage = 23.72, SD = 6.97, 141 males) completed scales measuring self-compassion, repetitive negative thinking, and trait competition anxiety. Regression models showed the effects of self-compassion and worry on concern (the cognitive component of anxiety), and of worry on somatic anxiety. Gender, number of competitions a year, and years of practice were also associated with trait competition anxiety. A subsequent mediation model revealed significant direct and indirect effects of self-compassion on anxiety, mediated by worry. Results are discussed theoretically and considering their practical implications for athletes.

Keywords

Anxiety athletes rumination worry self-compassion

Introduction

Anxiety in the sport context

The role of anxiety in the sport context has received lot of attention in the literature (see Ford et al., 2017 for a review). Several relationships between anxiety and sports performance have been hypothesized, the inverted U (Yerkes & Dodson, 1908) probably being the most influential. Multidimensional theories (e.g., Hanin, 1997; Martens et al., 1990; Smith et al., 1990) have suggested the anxiety-performance relationship to be influenced by different cognitive, physiological, and behavioral factors. For instance, Hanin (1997) in his Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning (IZOF) makes a distinction between functional and dysfunctional emotion intensity and recognizes the interpretation the athlete attributes to their arousal (as either anxiety or excitement) as an important correlate of performance. Furthermore, according to the multi-dimensional anxiety theory (Martens et al., 1990), competition anxiety can be separated into two components: cognitive and somatic (Martens et al., 1990). Cognitive anxiety includes elements such as negative expectations and concern, while somatic anxiety refers to the physiological-affective elements of the experience of anxiety (Mellalieu et al., 2006). This theory posits cognitive state anxiety as negatively associated to performance and somatic state anxiety as related to performance in an inverted-U fashion. Smith et al. (1990) introduced another type of cognitive competition anxiety, i.e. concentration disruptions due to intrusive thoughts, also expected to negatively affect performance.

Overall, research findings (Ford et al., 2017) support the idea that while anxiety can, to a certain degree, benefit performance and help athletes achieving their maximum potential; nevertheless, when not recognized and left unaddressed, it can lead to clinically significant psychological disturbances and be detrimental to athletes’ well-being and performance. Interestingly, trait competition anxiety, i.e. a general disposition to experience anxiety prior to competition, has been repeatedly identified as a strong correlate of injury occurrence (Cagle et al., 2017). For these reasons, identifying individual features associated to various components of competition anxiety can help athletes to recognize and work on these features to maximize the benefits of anxiety while reducing potential associated risks.

Among the several individual features potentially influencing anxiety in the sport context, in this study we will focus on self-compassion and repetitive negative thinking, which have been related to each other as well as to competition anxiety (Noetel et al., 2017). Self-compassion can favor a non-judgmental attitude to oneself (Neff, 2003), and this can help athletes to handle their sport-related thoughts and emotions, such as competition anxiety.

Self-compassion in the sport context

Self-compassion is a relatively new construct (Neff, 2003) that entails positive emotional and cognitive attitudes to oneself. More specifically, self-compassion is a disposition describing a tendency to be self-caring, or to be a good friend to oneself. A greater degree of self-compassion entails high rates in the three positive aspects of self-kindness, mindfulness and common humanity, and low rates in the three negative aspects of self-judgment, over-identification and isolation (Neff, 2003).

Self-compassion is a relatively broad construct that may influence athletes’ life in general (e.g.levels of general psychological distress; Walton et al., 2020), as well as sport-related emotions and cognitions (Huysmans & Clement, 2017). More specifically, it can protect against athletes repeatedly focusing on their distress and problems, and against the fallout of repetitive negative thinking (e.g., rumination, Neff, 2003). Jansen (2021) provides an example of how self-compassion can relate to athletes’ thinking and emotions: in football players assessed during the Covid-19 pandemic, she showed that the three negative components of self-compassion (self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification) were related to more worry, which was in turn associated with fear of the future. Similarly, self-compassion might make athletes less preoccupied with possible future failures in the sport context. In this sense, it is plausible to suggest that a generally self-compassionate disposition may help athletes to cope with sport-related emotions, such as the anxiety experienced before competitions, for instance.

Consistently, self-compassion is becoming more and more relevant in sports because it seems to help athletes optimize their performance and maintain higher levels of well-being (Mosewich, 2020; Mosewich et al., 2019; Röthlin et al., 2019). For instance, a study on collegiate athletes (Huysmans & Clement, 2017) evidenced significant correlations between self-compassion and all three trait competition anxiety components (i.e. cognitive, somatic and concentration disruptions); no effect emerged with respect to injuries’ frequency. Moreover, self-compassion seems to be negatively associated with psychological symptoms such as anxiety and depression (e.g., Huysmans & Clement, 2017; Magnus et al., 2010; Mosewich et al., 2011; Walton et al., 2020) that can in turn negatively affect performance (Reardon et al., 2019). Accordingly, a brief (one-week) intervention targeting self-compassion in a group of female athletes using psychoeducation and writing assignments resulted in a moderate-to-strong effect on self-compassion for the training group (compared with a control group trained on attention), and lower levels of state self-criticism and state rumination (Mosewich et al., 2013).

Repetitive negative thinking in the sport context

Repetitive negative thinking is another construct that has been object of debate in sport psychology. Repetitive negative thinking can be separated into two aspects, worry and rumination, that differ mainly in their respective future and past orientation (e.g., Ehring & Watkins, 2008). Worry means persistently thinking about risks that lie ahead (Borkovec et al., 1998). According to the response styles theory (Nolen-Hoeksema & Morrow, 1991), rumination means pondering about oneself and the possible reasons why one failed at something in the past (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2008); it can be further subdivided into brooding, which is a passive contemplation of one’s failures, and reflection, which instead is deliberate inward cognitive problem solving to alleviate depressive symptoms (Treynor et al., 2003). Rumination and worry have been found to be related to one another and to be associated to anxiety in clinical and non-clinical populations (see Olatunji et al., 2013 meta-analysis). It should be noted that rumination is a characteristic of depression, but – since depression and trait anxiety are often in comorbidity (e.g.,Lamers et al., 2011) – also rumination, other than worry, has been found related to anxiety (Olatunji et al., 2013).

Although rumination and worry could be associated with higher levels of competition anxiety, these two constructs have rarely been investigated in relation to sports. One study showed that professional male soccer players from Germany, and female field hockey players from the US national team scored lower for rumination than non-athletes, and lower levels of rumination were associated with a longer career at a higher level for the soccer players (Roy et al., 2016). It has also been demonstrated that ruminative cognitions are related to state orientation, which is an individual’s tendency to focus on their own emotions while performing under pressure, as opposed to action orientation, which involves focusing on taking action. State orientation has been associated with a worse performance compared with action orientation (Kröhler & Berti, 2019).

Self-compassion, repetitive negative thinking, and competition anxiety

What has so far remained to be investigated is the extent to which repetitive negative thinking and self-compassion relate to competition anxiety in athletes. What we do know is that dispositional mindfulness is associated negatively with rumination, and positively with emotion regulation in athletes; through their mediation, it also shows an indirect association with sport-related coping (Josefsson et al., 2017). Insight on how these variables are related to one another – outside the sport context – comes from a study by Raes (2010) on how self-compassion, repetitive negative thinking and trait anxiety were related in healthy university students. In this population, the association between self-compassion and trait anxiety was mediated by both ruminative brooding and worry; this mediating effect on trait anxiety was higher for worry than for brooding. Within the sport context, self-compassion may help athletes face the anxiety generally experienced before competitions by making them focus less on possible mistakes, and increasing their acceptance of potential failures (Huysmans & Clement, 2017), possibly by reducing their general repetitive negative thinking (Josefsson et al., 2017; Kröhler & Berti, 2019).

Aim and hypotheses

The aim of the present study is to examine the relations between self-compassion, repetitive negative thinking (worry and rumination), and trait competition anxiety in athletes. This is investigated by: (a) analyzing the direct impact of self-compassion and repetitive negative thinking on trait competition anxiety in athletes; (b) examining a model in which self-compassion is conceived as a personal disposition (predictor) affecting both repetitive negative thinking (mediator), and the degree of trait competition anxiety (final dependent variable). We expect self-compassion to be negatively associated with trait competition anxiety (Huysmans & Clement, 2017); repetitive negative thinking (worry and rumination) to be positively related to trait competition anxiety (Josefsson et al., 2017; Kröhler & Berti, 2019), and to mediate the relationship between self-compassion and trait competition anxiety, as already suggested in other populations (Raes, 2010). Therefore, the following two hypotheses are tested:

Hypothesis 1: self-compassion and repetitive negative thinking are significant predictors of trait competition anxiety.

Hypothesis 2: repetitive negative thinking mediates the relationship between self-compassion and trait competition anxiety.

We also examine whether the above relations depend on the characteristics of the sport concerned, whether it is played as a team or individually (Evans et al., 2012), since athletes competing in individual sports seem more likely to suffer from anxiety (Pluhar et al., 2019).

Based on a previous meta-analysis (Rocha & de Osório, 2018), the amount of exposure to a sport (in terms of the number of training sessions a week and of competitions a year, and the years of practice) is also considered, as it might be negatively associated with the degree of trait competition anxiety. The role of competitive level is examined as well, because athletes competing at higher levels seem to experience less anxiety (Rice et al., 2019). Finally, two demographic variables are taken into account, i.e., age and gender, as younger people and females reportedly experience more severe competition anxiety (Correia & Rosado, 2019; Rocha & de Osório, 2018).

Method

Participants

The study involved 263 athletes aged 17–49 (M = 23.72, SD = 6.97, 141 males). Participants were recruited from different sports clubs in various Italian regions. They practiced individual sports in 132 cases, and team sports in 131. To be more specific, they engaged in volleyball in 102 cases, track and field sports in 38, archery in 37, swimming (different styles in lane) and rugby in 29, and martial arts in 28. There were 173 athletes who competed at regional level, 66 athletes who competed at national level, and 24 who engaged in local competitions. Their years of practice ranged from 1 to 37 years (M = 11.6, SD = 6.31), the number of training sessions a week from 1 to 10 (M = 3.44, SD = 1.25), and the number of competitions a year from 0 to 45 (M = 19.86, SD = 12.38), see Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic and sport-related characteristics by sports discipline.

Variable	Archery	Martial arts	Swimming	Track and field	Rugby	Volleyball
Gender	19 M, 18 F	18 M, 10 F	15 M, 14 F	13 M, 25 F	29 M	47 M, 55 F
Age range	17–32	17–49	17–40	17–49	18–38	17–39
Age (SD)	20.59 (3.77)	27.71 (9.62)	28.86 (8.17)	23.24 (8.14)	25.31 (5.02)	22.03 (5.22)
Competitive level	24 national, 13 regional	3 national, 4 regional, 21 local	29 regional	23 national, 13 regional, 2 local	16 national, 13 regional	101 regional1 local
Years of practice (SD)	6.46 (3.85)	13.29 (8.33)	16.07 (7.36)	10.21 (5.54)	12.21 (5.38)	12.08 (5.29)
Training sessions a week (SD)	2.73 (.80)	3.14 (1.58)	3.59 (1.05)	4.89 (1.31)	3.93 (1.67)	3.07 (.45)
Competitions a year (SD)	12.22 (5.08)	1.64 (2.44)	9.72 (4.83)	15.97 (8.93)	18.31 (5.7)	32.53 (5.58)

Note. Standard Deviations (SD) are reported in brackets.

The study was approved by the University of Padova’s Ethics Committee for Research in Psychology (N. 3405).

Materials

Demographic questionnaire

This contained questions on gender, age, sport, years of practice, number of training sessions a week, number of competitions a year, and competitive level.

Self-compassion scale (SCS, Neff, 2003; Italian validation by Veneziani et al., 2017). This consists of 26 items measuring six facets of self-compassion: self-kindness (5 items, e.g., “I try to be loving towards myself when I’m feeling emotional pain”); common humanity (4 items, e.g., “I try to see my failings as part of the human condition”); mindfulness (4 items, e.g., “When something upsets me I try to keep my emotions in balance”); self-judgment (5 items, e.g., “I’m disapproving and judgmental about my own flaws and inadequacies”); isolation (4 items, e.g., “When I fail at something that's important to me, I tend to feel alone in my failure”); and over-identification (4 items, e.g., “When I’m feeling down I tend to obsess and fixate on everything that’s wrong”). Respondents indicate how frequently they act as indicated in difficult times on a 6-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 6 (almost always). Mean scores are computed for each subscale, then averaged (reversing the three scores for negative subscales) to obtain a total score. Therefore, scores can range from a minimum of 1 to a maximum of 5. The total score showed a good internal consistency in the original version (Cronbach’s alpha = .92), as well as in the present study (α = .88).

Ruminative Responses Scale (RRS, Nolen-Hoeksema & Morrow, 1991; Italian validation by Palmieri et al., 2007). This consists of 22 items measuring a stable tendency to ruminate when feeling low. The questionnaire comprises three subscales, i.e. brooding (11 items, e.g., “Think about a recent situation, wishing it had gone better”), depression (6 items, e.g., “Think about how alone you feel”), and reflection (5 items, e.g., “Analyze recent events to try to understand why you are depressed”). Responses are given on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always). A total score is computed from the sum of the items, and subscale scores can also be calculated. The overall score can range from a minimum of 22 to a maximum of 88. The original version showed a good internal consistency (α = .89), and so did the Italian validation (α = .85), and the present study (α = .89).

Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ, Meyer et al., 1990; Italian validation by Morani et al., 1999). This consists of 16 items measuring how often a person feels worried (e.g., “I worry all the time”). Answers are given on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). Scores for 5 items are reversed to obtain the total score. The total score can range from a minimum of 16 to a maximum of 80. The original version showed a good internal consistency (α = .93), as did the Italian validation (α = .85) and the present study (α = .90).

Trait Competition Anxiety Inventory (Brand et al., 2009; translated for this study as there is no validated Italian version available). This consists of 12 items investigating dispositional sport-specific competition anxiety. It covers three dimensions, somatic anxiety (4 items, e.g., “Before a competition, my heart pounds because of excitement”), concern (4 items, e.g., “Before a competition, I have self-doubts”), and concentration disturbances (4 items, e.g., “Before a competition, I am prone to distractions”). Answers are given on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 4 (almost always). For each dimension, scores can range from a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 16. The original version shows satisfactory consistencies (α > .70). In the present study, reliability was satisfactory for the somatic anxiety and concern subscales (α = .71 and α = .81), but not for the concentration disturbances subscale (α = .56), which was consequently excluded from the analyses.

Procedure

After the athletes signed the consent form, they completed all the questionnaires in small groups at their sports club before a training session.

Statistical analysis

All data were analyzed using RStudio (RStudio Team, 2020). The reliability of each scale was ascertained, and all variables were standardized (i.e., mean-centered) before proceeding with the analysesin order to make the beta coefficients easier to interpret. Two different four-step linear regression models were run to examine the contribution of the SCS, PSWQ, and RRS (total scores) to trait competition anxiety (i.e. somatic anxiety and concern). The baseline model (m0) contained only the demographic (i.e., age, gender) and sports-related variables, i.e., type of sport (individual/team), years of practice, competitive level, training sessions a week, and number of competitions a year. Then, for each model, SCS (total score) was the initial predictor, based on its hypothesized direct relationship with trait competition anxiety (Huysmans & Clement, 2017)– also supported by significant correlations between SCS and trait competition anxiety (Table 2). Worry (PSWQ) and rumination (RRS) were theninserted as predictors based on the magnitude of their correlations with trait competition anxiety.

Table 2.

Means, standard deviations and correlations between questionnaires.

	M (SD)	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.
1. PSWQ	45.27 (12.45)	–
2. RRS	42.29 (13.82)	.45***	–
3. SCS	3.03 (0.58)	.48***	−.37***	–
4. Competition anxiety – somatic	9.06 (2.61)	.31***	.23***	−.23***	–
5. Competition anxiety – concern	9.22 (3.01)	.39***	.24***	−.38***	.39***	–
6. Competition anxiety – concentration disturbances^a	7.08 (2.33)	.24***	.20**	−.21***	.15*	.23***

Note for Tables 2 and 3 and Figure 1. PSWQ = Penn State Worry Questionnaire; RRS = Ruminative Responses Scale; SCS = Self-Compassion Scale.

^aValues are reported only for descriptive purposes.

* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001.

It should be noted that, as a control, regression models were also carried outbasingthe order of predictors on the magnitude of the correlation between variables (shown in Table 2) with the competition anxiety subscale (i.e.PSWQ for model 1, SCS for model 2, RRS for model 3) and results showed the same significant predictors. Successive models were compared using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC, Wagenmakers & Farrell, 2004): if adding a predictor to a model lowered the AIC, that became the baseline model to compare with the next one; if not, the predictor was rejected. Using the lavaan package in R (Rosseel, 2012), we then fitted a mediation model to study the direct and indirect relations between SCS and trait competition anxiety.

Results

Preliminary analyses

Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics and correlations between all the scores in the questionnaires.

Effects on competition anxiety subscales

Model selection for competition anxiety – somatic

In the first step (m1), the model was run adding SCStotal score as a predictor of somatic anxiety and the AIC decreased compared with m0 (m1: AIC = 715.36; m0: AIC = 725.57). In the second step (m2), PSWQ was added to m1 as a predictor of somatic anxiety and the AIC decreased further (AIC = 703.99). In a final step (m3), RRS total score was added to m2 as a predictor and the AIC increased slightly (AIC = 705.86), so m2 remained the best model. The final model showed an effect of gender (more somatic anxiety in females), number of competitions a year (less somatic anxiety with more competitions) and PSWQ (worry was positively associated with somatic anxiety); and it explained 20.21% of the variance in somatic anxiety (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Results of the final regression models.^a

	Competition anxiety – somatic		Competition anxiety – concern
	β	CI 95%	β	CI 95%
Age	−.01	[−.17 ; .14]	−.04	[−.11; .19]
Gender	.31*	[.07; .55]	.22	[−.02; .46]
Type of sport	−.04	[−.42; .34]	−.05	[−.32; .42]
Years of practice	−.08	[−.23; .07]	−.18*	[−.32; .03]
Competitive level	.18	[−.04; .40]	.11	[−.01; .33]
Training sessions a week	−.07	[−.06; .19]	.04	[−.08; .16]
Competitions a year	−.23*	[−.42; −.05]	−.04	[−.22; −.15]
PSWQ	.24***	[.11; .37]	.25***	[.12; .38]
SCS	−.10	[−.23; .03]	−.24***	[−.37; −.11]

β = standardized beta value, CI = confidence intervals, * p < .05, *** p < .001.

^aFor control purposes, we ran the same analyses with the concentration disturbances subscale. The best regression model was the one containing PSWQ and SCS total score (m2; AIC = 731.42), which showed an effect of training sessions a week (β = −.15, p = .029) and PSWQ (β = .15, p = .03) on concentration disturbances, that explained a rather low total variance (11.98%).

Model selection for competition anxiety – concern

In the first step (m1), the model was run adding SCS total score as a predictor of concern and the AIC decreased compared with m0 (m1: AIC = 705.86; m0: AIC = 738.63). In the second step (m2), PSWQ was added to m1 as a predictor of concern and the AIC decreased further (AIC = 692.7). In the final step (m3), RRS total score was added to m2 as a predictor and the AIC increased (AIC = 694.41), so m2 remained the model. The final model showed an effect of years of practice (less concern with more years of practice), and of PSWQ and SCS (concern increasing with worry and decreasing with self-compassion). The model explained 23.46% of the variance in concern (see Table 3).

Mediation model

Following Raes (2010), we fitted a mediation model in which SCS scores were related to the two competition anxiety subscales (somatic anxiety and concern), both directly and indirectly through the mediation of PSWQ, which was expected to raise the scores for the two competition anxiety subscales. RRS was not included as a mediator because it had no significant effects on these two subscales. The model considered SCS total score as the initial variable, PSWQ as the mediator, and the somatic anxiety and concern subscales as the (correlated) dependent variables. The model also included the covariates that emerged as significant in the regression models (i.e. gender and number of competitions a year for somatic anxiety, years of practice for concern). The model displayed good fit indices, CFI = .98, NNFI = .96, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .04. The results (see Figure 1) show that SCS total score had a significant direct effect on concern (β = −.24, p < .001), but not on somatic anxiety (β = −.12, p = .102). The SCS total score also had a significant direct effect on PSWQ (β = −.48, p < .001). The indirect effects of SCS on somatic anxiety (β = −.11, p = .001) and concern (β = −.13, p < .001) through the mediation of PSWQ were also significant. The model also showed – as the regression models highlighted – that: females experienced more somatic anxiety (β = .29, p < .01); number of competitions a year was significantly associated with somatic anxiety (β = −.25, p < .001); and years of practice was significantly associated with concern (β = −.12, p < .05).

Figure 1.

Mediation model. Running the mediation model with the concentration disturbances subscale as well gave rise to a lower goodness fit indices (CFI = .97, NNFI = .93, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .04), with the same effects for the somatic anxiety and concern, a significant direct effect of SCS on concentration disturbances (β = −.14, p = .034), and the mediation of PSWQ (β= −.08, p = .023). *** p < .001. Note: The effects of covariates on the competition anxiety subscales are omitted for the sake of readability.

Discussion

Trait competition anxiety can negatively affect athletes’ performance when excessive and unrecognized (Ford et al., 2017; Hanin, 1997) and possibly increase the risk for musculoskeletal injuries (Cagle et al., 2017). There is evidence in the general population of self-compassion and repetitive negative thinking being associated with trait anxiety, the former with a positive effect, the latter with a negative one (Raes, 2010). Some consistent findings (Huysmans & Clement, 2017; Josefsson et al., 2017; Kröhler & Berti, 2019) suggest that analyzing these constructs in athletes could enable the identification of relevant factors related to trait competition anxiety.

The aim of the present work was to study the associations between the degree of self-compassion (SCS), repetitive negative thinking (rumination – RRS; worry –PSWQ) and trait competition anxiety in a large group of athletes.

Two regression models were run (to test Hypothesis 1), considering self-compassion (SCS) as the initial predictor and negative thinking (worry – PSWQ; rumination – RRS) as subsequent predictors of the somatic anxiety and cognitive (concern)components of trait competition anxiety (dependent variables), disregarding concentration disturbances due to reliability issues. The results showed that somatic anxiety and concern anxiety are both predicted by worry, but not by rumination. Only concern is also predicted by self-compassion. Regression models showed that female gender was positively associated with trait competition anxiety (somatic dimension); competitions per year and years of practice were inversely related to trait competition anxiety (concern). Age, type of sport, competitive level, and training sessions per week were not related to trait competition anxiety.

Amediation model was run (Hypothesis 2) to better substantiate the pattern of relations between the variables. The results showedthat self-compassion indirectly affects both concern and somatic anxiety through the mediation of worry, i.e., high degrees of self-compassion are associated with less worry, which in turn positively affects trait competition anxiety. The mediation model also showed that self-compassion has a direct effect on concern (as shownin the regression model), but not on somatic anxiety. Theseresults are worth discussing further, highlighting the consistency between previous reports and the new evidence emerging from the present study.

First,our results confirm thatin athletes, as in the general population, self-compassion and repetitive negative thinking are negatively related, and have opposite effects on trait anxiety, i.e., more self-compassion and less repetitive negative thinking coincide with less trait anxiety (Raes, 2010). In the current sample of athletes, self-compassion seems to be negatively associated with symptoms of trait competition anxiety, especially those related to concern (e.g., doubts about oneself or one’s performance). This points to a potentially important role for self-compassion in reducing negative cognitions in athletes, as suggested by some previous evidence (Josefsson et al., 2017). Self-compassion may directly affect the cognitive component of trait competition anxiety by allowing athletes to mentally distance themselves from these stressful situations, and to be non-judgmental about their potential failures (Huysmans & Clement, 2017); this may also explain the direct effect on worry. Intriguingly, using psychoeducation to inform athletes about the benefits of self-compassion seems to significantly reduce their self-criticism and rumination (Mosewich et al., 2013).Instead, the effect of self-compassion on the somatic component seems to be indirect: self-compassion affects worry (repetitive future-oriented thoughts) and worry in turn has an effect on bodily sensations linked to competition anxiety, possibly due to the cognitive interpretation of these symptoms, which may be viewed as challenging rather than threatening (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).

Another finding worth discussing is that, in the present sample, only the role of worry –not rumination – emerged as significant (as shown by both the regression and the mediation models). This differs from findings in the general population, where both worry and rumination affected anxiety (Raes, 2010). It should be noted that, while general trait anxiety was measured in the general population (Raes, 2010), a specific type of trait anxiety (competition anxiety) was assessed here.When athletes approach a competition, they may be predisposed to anxious feelings (Rice et al., 2019). Worry expresses preoccupation with risks and uncertainties and may become more relevant in this setting than rumination, which refers to repetitive negative thoughts about the causes, meaning and implications of one’s own feelings. This is consistent with the conceptualization of worry describing thoughts about the future (an action or set of actions going to be taken), while rumination focuses on possible reasons for past failures (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2008), which might be more relevant after a competition, when athletes think about their performance. The greater role of worry in our sample is also in line with meta-analytical evidence of worry being more strongly related to anxiety, while rumination is more related to depression (Olatunji et al., 2013).

Overall, the present study suggests the idea that worry is significantly related to both the somatic and the cognitive dimensionof trait competition anxiety, and self-compassion is significantly associated with worry and with cognitive concerns generally experienced by athletes before competitions.

The analysis of demographic and sport-related factors deserves some further comments too. The present findings confirm that females experience higher levels of somatic (e.g. increased heart rate, sweating) competition anxiety (Correia & Rosado, 2019). On the other hand, the number of competitions per year, and the number of years of practice were found negatively related to trait competition anxiety: more competitions a year were associated with less somatic anxiety; and more years of practice with less concern. This lesser anxiety with increasing exposure is in line with previous evidence (Bozkus et al., 2013) and may be due to arousal levels declining with more practice (Strahler et al., 2010).

No significant effect emerged for the other factors considered. Thatthe effect of competitive level was not significant may be because our sample was not homogeneous in its distribution by competitive level (most participants competed at regional or local levels). A sample of all elite athletes might be more informative regarding competition anxiety (Rice et al., 2019) and its associations with other correlates. Going against our expectations, age did not influence trait competition anxiety. This may be because we used a trait measure of competition anxiety, on which the effect of age seems to be smaller than for state competition anxiety (Rocha & de Osório, 2018). Another unexpected finding was that the type of sport did not influence the pattern of relations, i.e. individual and team sports showed similar associations with trait competition anxiety. A previous study (Pluhar et al., 2019) found a difference in anxiety between team and individual sports, but it referred to adolescents, and did not specifically measure competition anxiety. Another study on 52 males identified no difference between different sports in terms of competition anxiety, but only in trait anxiety (Radzi et al., 2013).

In line with this, we should mention some limitations of our study and related proposals for future research. The measure used in the present study focused on a predisposition to anxiety before a competition, not during a competition or afterwards, so it may not capture potential differences between different sports (individual vs team), levels of experience (or competitive level), or aspects of repetitive negative thinking (worry vs rumination). Finally, concentration disturbances need to be better examined as a part of competition anxiety to ascertain whether this factor relates to self-compassion and repetitive negative thinking.

Conclusions

To conclude, our study suggests that trait competition anxiety (usually experienced before a competition) is associated inversely with self-compassion and directly with worry in athletes practicing various sports. Self-compassion is a personal disposition that affects trait competition anxiety directly, and through the mediation of worry. Despite its limitations, this study offers new insight on the feasibility of nurturing self-compassion to help athletes experiencing excessive levels of competition anxiety (Mosewich et al., 2013) by reducing their degree of general worry, with a potentially positive impact on athletes’ performance and risk of injuries. Furthermore, worry, rather than rumination, seems to significantly affect trait competition anxiety, and thus may be also considered as a suitable target for intervening with athletes experimenting dysfunctional negative emotions prior to competitions. Lastly, it may be the case that female athletes and athletes with less experience (in terms of years of practice) are at increased risk for experiencing competition anxiety and could therefore benefit from interventions specifically designed to address these concerns, possibly by working on self-compassion and worry.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The present work was conducted as part of the Dipartimenti di Eccellenza research program (DM 11/05/2017 n. 262).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by a grant from the Italian Ministry of Education to the Department of General Psychology, University of Padova.

Data Accessibility Statement

The dataset presented in this study can be found in online repositories: doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.13580624

ORCID iDs

Nicole Casali

Tommaso Feraco

Author Biographies

Nicole Casali: Interested in individual characteristics related to mental health and positive outcomes.

Marta Ghisi: Expert in clinical and sport psychology.

Petra Jansen: Expert in sport psychology.

Tommaso Feraco: Interested in individual characteristics related to academic achievement and subjective well-being.

Chiara Meneghetti: Expert in visuospatial abilities and individual characteristics related to performance and well-being.

References

Borkovec

T. D.

Ray

W. J.

Stober

(1998). Worry: A cognitive phenomenon intimately linked to affective, physiological and interpersonal behavioral processes. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 22, 561–576. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018790003416

Bozkus

Turkmen

Kul

(2013). The effects of age, sports experience and physical self-perception on competition anxiety levels of female football players. International Journal of Academic Research, 5(4), 509–513. https://doi.org/10.7813/2075-4124.2013/5-4/b.72

Brand

Ehrlenspiel

Graf

(2009). Wettkampf-Angst-Inventar (WAI) (Competition Anxiety Inventory - Trait): Manual zur komprehensiven Eingangsdiagno- stik von Wettkampfangst, Wettkampfängstlichkeit und Angstbewältigungsmodusim Sport (1. Aufl.). BundesinstitutfürSportwissenschaft [Manual for the comprehensive initial diagnosis of competition anxiety and fear management in sport. Federal Institute for Sport Science].

Cagle

J. A.

Overcash

K. B.

Rowe

D. P.

Needle

A. R.

(2017). Trait anxiety as a risk factor for musculoskeletal injury in athletes: A critically appraised topic. International Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training, 22, 26–31. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijatt.2016-0065

Correia

Rosado

(2019). Anxiety in athletes: Gender and type of sport differences. International Journal of Psychological Research, 12, 9–17. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.3552

Ehring

Watkins

E. R.

(2008). Repetitive negative thinking as a transdiagnostic process. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 1, 192–205. https://doi.org/10.1521/ijct.2008.1.3.192

Evans

B. M.

Eys

M. A.

Bruner

M. W.

(2012). Seeing the “we” in “me” sports: The need to consider individual team environments. Canadian Psychology, 53, 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030202

Ford

Ildefonso

Jones

Arvinen-Barrow

(2017). Sport-related anxiety: Current insights. Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, 8, 205–212. https://doi.org/10.2147/oajsm.s125845

Hanin

Y. L.

(1997). Emotions and athletic performance: Individual zones of optimal functioning model. European Yearbook of Sport Psychology, 1, 29–72.

10.

Huysmans

Clement

(2017). A preliminary exploration of the application of self‐compassion within the context of sport injury. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 39, 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2016‐0144

11.

Josefsson

Ivarsson

Lindwall

Gustafsson

Stenling

Böröy

Mattsson

Carnebratt

Sevholt

Falkevik

(2017). Mindfulness mechanisms in sports: Mediating effects of rumination and emotion regulation on sport-specific coping. Mindfulness, 8, 1354–1363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0711-4

12.

Jansen

(2021). Self-compassion and repetitive thinking in relation to depressive mood and fear of the future during the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic in semi-professional football players. German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12662-021-00712-y

13.

Kröhler

Berti

(2019). Taking action or thinking about it? State orientation and rumination are correlated in athletes. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 576. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00576

14.

Lamers

van Oppen

Comijs

H. C.

Smit

J. H.

Spinhoven

van Balkom

A. J. L. M.

Nolen

W. A.

Zitman

F. G.

Beekman

A. T. F.

Penninx

B. W. J. H.

(2011). Comorbidity patterns of anxiety and depressive disorders in a large cohort study. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 72(03), 341–348. https://doi.org/10.4088/jcp.10m06176blu

15.

Lazarus

R. S.

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Publishing Company.

16.

Magnus

C. M. R.

Kowalski

K. C.

McHugh

T. L. F.

(2010). The role of self‐compassion in women’s self-determined motives to exercise and exercise‐related outcomes. Self and Identity, 9, 363–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860903135073

17.

Martens

Burton

Vealey

R. S.

Bump

L. A.

Smith

D. E.

(1990). Development and validation of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2). In Martens

Vealey

R. S.

Burton

(Eds.), Competitive anxiety in sport (pp. 117–213). Human Kinetics.

18.

Mellalieu

S. D.

Hanton

Fletcher

(2006). A competitive anxiety review: Recent directions in sport psychology research. In Hanton

, Mellalieu

S. D.

(Eds.), Literature reviews in sport psychology (pp. 1–45). Nova Science Publishers.

19.

Meyer

T. J.

Miller

M. L.

Metzger

R. L.

Borkovec

T. D.

(1990). Development and validation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 28, 487–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(90)90135-6

20.

Morani

Pricci

Sanavio

(1999). Penn State WorryQuestionnaire e Worry Domains Questionnaire. Presentazione delle versioni italiane ed analisi della fedeltà. Psicoterapia cognitiva e comportamentale, 5, 13–34.

21.

Mosewich

A. D.

(2020). Self-compassion in sport and exercise. In Tenenbaum

, Eklung

R.C.

(Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (4th ed.) (pp. 158–176). John Wiley & Sons.

22.

Mosewich

A. D.

Crocker

P. R. E.

Kowalski

K. C.

DeLongis

(2013). Applying self-compassion in sport: An intervention with women athletes. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 35, 514–524. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.35.5.514

23.

Mosewich

A. D.

Ferguson

L. J.

McHugh

T. L. F.

Kowalski

K. C.

(2019). Enhancing capacity: Integrating self-compassion in sport. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 10, 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520704.2018.1557774

24.

Mosewich

A. D.

Kowalski

K. C.

Sabiston

C. M.

Sedgwick

W. A.

Tracy

J. L.

(2011). Self‐compassion: A potential resource for young women athletes. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 33, 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.33.1.103

25.

Neff

K. D.

(2003). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2, 223–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860309027

26.

Noetel

Ciarrochi

Van Zanden

Lonsdale

(2017). Mindfulness and acceptance approaches to sporting performance enhancement: A systematic review. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 12, 139–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984x.2017.1387803

27.

Nolen-Hoeksema

Morrow

(1991). A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms after a natural disaster: The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 115–121. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.1.115

28.

Nolen-Hoeksema

Wisco

B. E.

Lyubormirsky

(2008). Rethinking rumination. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 400–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00088.x

29.

Olatunji

B. O.

Naragon-Gainey

Wolitzky-Taylor

K. B.

(2013). Specificity of rumination in anxiety and depression: A multimodal meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 20, 225–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12037

30.

Palmieri

Gasparre

Lanciano

(2007). Una misura disposizionale della ruminazione depressiva: la RRS di Nolen-Hoeksema e Morrow. [A dispositional measure of depressive rumination: the RRS of Nolen-Hoeksema and Morrow]. Psychofenia, 17, 15–33.

31.

Pluhar

McCracken

Griffith

K. L.

Christino

M. A.

Sugimoto

Meehan

W. P.

(2019). Team sport athletes may be less likely to suffer anxiety or depression than individual sport athletes. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 18, 490–496.

32.

Radzi

J. A.

Yusof

Zakaria

A. A.

(2013). Pre-competition anxiety levels in individual and team sports athletes. In Proceeding of the international conference on social science research (pp. 1197–1206). ICSSR e-Journal of the Social Science Research. WorldConferences.net.

33.

Raes

(2010). Rumination and worry as mediators of the relationship between self-compassion and depression and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 757–761. https://doi.org/10-1016/j.paid.2010.01.023

34.

Reardon

C. L.

Hainline

Aron

C. M.

Baron

Baum

A. L.

Bindra

Budgett

Campriani

Castaldelli-Maia

J. M.

Currie

Derevensky

J. L.

Glick

I. D.

Gorczynski

Gouttebarge

Grandner

M. A.

Han

D. H.

McDuff

Mountjoy

Polat

, . . . Grandner

M. A.

(2019). Mental health in elite athletes: International Olympic Committee consensus statement. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53, 667–699. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-100715

35.

Rice

S. M.

Gwyther

Santesteban-Echarri

Baron

Gorczynski

Gouttebarge

Reardon

C. L.

Hitchcock

M. E.

Hainline

Purcell

(2019). Determinants of anxiety in elite athletes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53(11), 722–730. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-100620

36.

Rocha

V. V. S.

, & de Osório

F. L.

(2018). Associations between competitive anxiety, athlete characteristics and sport context: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of Clinical Psychiatry (São Paulo), 45, 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-60830000000160

37.

Rosseel

(2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

38.

Röthlin

Horvath

Birrer

(2019). Go soft or go home? A scoping review of empirical studies on the role of self-compassion in the competitive sport setting. Current Issues in Sport Science, 4, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.15203/CISS_2019.013

39.

Roy

M. M.

Memmert

Frees

Radzevick

Pretz

Noel

(2016). Rumination and performance in dynamic, team sport. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2016. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02016

40.

RStudio Team. (2020). Integrated Development for R. http://www.rstudio.com/

41.

Smith

R. E.

Smoll

F. L.

Schutz

R. W.

(1990). Measurement and correlates of sport-specific cognitive and somatic trait anxiety: The sport anxiety scale. Anxiety Research, 2, 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/08917779008248733

42.

Strahler

Ehrlenspiel

Heene

Brand

(2010). Competitive anxiety and cortisol awakening response in the week leading up to a competition. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11, 148–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.10.003

43.

Treynor

Gonzalez

Nolen-Hoeksema

(2003). Rumination reconsidered: A psychometric analysis. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 27, 247–259. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023910315561

44.

Veneziani

C. A.

Fuochi

Voci

(2017). Self-compassion as a healthy attitude toward the self: Factorial and construct validity in an Italian sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.06.028

45.

Wagenmakers

E. J.

Farrell

(2004). AIC model selection using Akaike weights. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 192–196. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03206482

46.

Walton

C. C.

Baranoff

Gilbert

Kirby

(2020). Self-compassion, social rank, and psychological distress in athletes of varying competitive levels. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 50, 101733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101733

47.

Yerkes

R. M.

Dodson

J. D.

(1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.920180503