Introduction

Stress is a factor of ways of life that impacts everybody, but according to Parkes, Athletes and competitors by and large will in general experience the ill effects of it more than non-competitors, because of the sum they might be required to adjust, among homework, practices and games, just as hover of family member’s weights and customary presence.

Stressors can be characterised as reasons for pressure (Armario, 2020). A broad scope of substantial upgrades goes about as stressors; for example, work out, limitation, heat, cold, clamour, torment, stun, damage and contamination. These can evoke pressure reactions that are an essential monotonic quality of the force of the substantial boost (Hockey, 1983). Scientists perusing sports exercises pressure see Stressors as variables in sports exercises that intrude on a male or female powerful and enthusiastic nation that may at long last affect his general execution (Hudson, 2012). Stressors might be a final product of the game nature itself, dispatch with individual coaches and different competitors, and repayment and advantages. Absence of overseeing and nonattendance, of course, among the group, constructors and mentors is a not surprising issue in sports exercises that prompts worry among the competitors (Gill, 2017).

Mental strain is directly depicted as a base in two unique ways. It alludes first to the risky, possibly perilous or unattractive outside circumstances or conditions (stressors) that produce strain responses, and to the internal considerations, decisions, emotional states and physiological procedure which can be evoked by distressing upgrades (Spielberger, 1979). Bainbridge (1974) has characterised data preparing potential as the handling activities and handling procedures which somebody has accessible. A character’s level of execution will be a component of the preparing limit and the task requests, and an individual’s encounter will be fundamental in expressions of the handling activities and handling strategies which have been created. Most people work beneath most outstanding exertion limit of the time, and, notwithstanding the way that they can develop their push to the greatest for short interims of time (Bainbridge, 1974), relentless artistic creations all things considered phases of endeavour impacts in the additional rapid beginning of weakness. Jones (1993) likewise proposed that a gigantic level of the competitors neglected to perform to limit since they had been not able to keep their focus notwithstanding interruptions. This is practically not just a problem for first-class competitors; it’s far an issue for every single genuine game exercises entertainers, regardless of what their potential degree.

In his private reflections on generally speaking execution greatness in diversion and business endeavour, Jones (2002) reasoned that hierarchical difficulties perhaps have the best impact of any single issue on execution. Taking into account this perception it’s far maybe now to be expected that such cases included noticeably in his consultancy work: My initial desires as an applied game therapist had been that I could be taking care of by and large execution related issues. Despite the fact that there has been no lack of such cases, the dominant part [italics added] of requesting circumstances I even have experienced might be portrayed as hierarchical issues only like the ones found in the business endeavour world (e.g., loss of assets, poor correspondence, and inability to appoint) [these] regularly are significant, undesirable mindfulness for entertainers in each [sport and business] spaces. (Jones, 2006) In a similar vein guessed that tip top competitors experience more significant stressors related by and large and without a moment’s delay with the game partnership than with forceful general execution. They recognised, nonetheless, that this guess was put together absolutely in enormous part with respect to their reasonable stories and recounted proof, as opposed to observational research discoveries. Therefore, trying to take a gander at their reason, this examination analysed the substance material and measure of forceful and hierarchical stressors in first-class amusement entertainers. All the more explicitly, the assortment and dissemination of requests, the quantity of various stressors, the recurrence with which requests are referenced, and the probability that man or lady stressors are reviewed were completely analysed. To the account of Hanton et al. their expertise, the current examination is the first to recognise, and look at, wellsprings of serious and authoritative strain. It is going past just changing the game(s) tested so one can inspect in more prominent component the pressure involved with amusement entertainers. Such a methodology gives the likelihood to test and cross-reference each inside and between the kinds of strain. An extra in-depth and more extensive skill of the stressors that live in the first-class game will permit researchers, mentors and offices to plan extra appropriate intercessions to deal with the requirements situated on entertainers.

4. Methodology:

The primary objective of this study is to examine the Organisational Stressors in Sport and There Effect on Performance. Therefore, the objective of this segment will be to determine the methodological structure of the research. This study has collected secondary information from several secondary sources. There are some explanations for the collection of secondary information. One of the main explanations for this procedure is the simple overloading of existing data or in other words relevant information related to the objectives of the study. According to Hox and Boeije (2005), most analysts find information collected from secondary sources efficient compared to primary sources. This type of assortment method is gradually accurate and saves the inspector time. Another explanation for the application of this assortment technique is the range of models offered or in other words establishing criteria is easy in secondary methodology as compared to primary. As Heaton (2003) points out, setting standards for the range of information collected from secondary sources is easy compared to primary sources.

4.1 Data Collection Technique:

It is equally important that the specialist selects an appropriate data assortment table as part of the analysis in order to gather the basic data for the study in detail. In this study, which is a study of the organisational stressors in sport and there effect on performance, the table of the selected data set will be a secondary report. In this case, along with a plan to collect secondary information for the relevant study, the device will be used as a social event, important data from books and popular documents. For collecting relevant information from several secondary sources three online databases will be used such as Google Scholar, Jstor and CORE.

4.2 Sample Size:

The main expressions to be used in this study are “Sports”, “Stressors”, “organisation”, “Performance” and “influential factors”. The secondary sources that will be selected will have a publishing year in the range of 2010 till 2020.

4.3 Ethical Consideration:

There are certain moral considerations to be taken into account before selecting secondary relevant information regarding the research objectives. The most important perspective is the information obtained from the study, which must be disaggregated before a specialist is available. Another perspective would be beneficial from the point of view of exploitation, which could be considered reasonable and, finally, the information from the study should not cause harm or problems. Another moral issue to be considered when selecting a major work is the classification of the writer in terms of the confidentiality of his or her research. As emphasized by Yu (2008), the term “confidentiality” refers to the creative relationship between the subject of the intelligence and the subject of the research. Furthermore, every person has the right to communicate or restrict the use of his or her personal data to another person.

Data Analysis

The meeting transcripts have been designed for assessment inside the QSR N5 (2000) PC programming bundle. [QSR N5 (2000) is the fifth adaptation of the Nonnumerical Unstructured Information Ordering, Looking and Hypothesising (NUD*IST) programming for subjective information analysis.] A total of inductive and deductive substance investigation changed into employed to inspect the information (Biddle, 2001). In particular, this stressed utilising QSR N5 to filter out, and bunch extricates from the transcripts (For example costs speaking to an important point) around regular hidden strings, which at long last formed into crude issues. This procedure changed into then rehashed with the region of standard basic strings inside these new rising topics, coming about inside the progressive method driving forward with to higher-request issues. At each advanced phase of the (inductive) content assessment, triangular accord between all the creators transformed into looked for, before driving forward to the evaluation to issues of best reflection. While the topics rose up out of the transcripts themselves, their creation and sobriquet were affected by the method of the structure and marks utilised in past examinations (Fletcher, 200). The absolute last topics were (deductively) sorted underneath post hoc measurements, which have been chosen based absolutely at the interface between the emanant stressors and surviving writing. Henceforth, it is incredibly worth accentuating that these general measurements had been picked subsequent to finishing the inductive segment of the substance investigation and, in this manner, had no effect at the realities assortment section. This way transformed into followed to diminish the impact of the analysts’ from the earlier understanding and next inclinations, which may have hued people’s reactions. In detecting the different methodologies of achieving and detailing subjective research, a procedural connection became permitted to widen among the realities assortment segment and early scopes of the inductive assessment (Biddle et al., 2001). This stressed altering present tests and acquainting new tests with correspondingly research inconveniences as they were revealed all through the investigations procedure. Such procedural adaptability transformed into followed in want to the more noteworthy resolute work of explicit explanation and elaboration tests, which may have guaranteed consistent power of intuition all through members and themes. This analytical strategy considered a more profound commitment with entertainers’ encounters and, as a result, a progressively successful test of the examination question (Biddle et al., 2001). Without a doubt, Schwandt (1997) saw that meetings are gradually all the more turning into ”a phonetic event wherein the implications of inquiries and reactions are relevantly grounded and together built by method of questioner and respondent” (p. 75). To completely adapt to the examinations question, the cardinal number of requests related comprehensively and without a moment’s delay with serious execution (#CS) and the game association (#OS) changed into recorded. This cost changed into enhanced by utilising a recurrence investigation to delineate the number of members referencing every stressor. What’s more, the whole scope of notices of stressors (S) and the basic assortment of individuals referencing man or lady serious and hierarchical stressors (M) had been likewise determined.

Findings

Prisma Chart

Results

In the first stage of data collection 78 studies were identified. 42 studies were identified from Google Scholar, 22 studies were identified from Jstor and 24 studies were identified from CORE. A total of 93 unmistakable stressors rose up during this process. These had been preoccupied into 23 higher-request topics lastly organised under one of the accompanying 5 studies indicated several organisational factors: execution issues, real issues, individual difficulties, administration issues and group inconveniences (Fletcher, 2003). Execution issues epitomised the entirety of the requests related for the most part and immediately with serious execution (Jones, 2002), and ecological, individual, the board and group issues typified all the requests related as a rule and immediately with the game association. These set up hoc measurements have been chosen since they top of the line contemplated the substance material and amount of the emanant stressors and furthermore because of the reality there has been a solid reasonable and experimental reason for their utilisation fundamentally based at the surviving writing. Regarding the cardinality of the weight classes, examination uncovered that there have been almost 4 fold the number of authoritative requests (#OS = 72) than forceful requests (#CS = 21). The recurrence assessment discovered that the members expressed the serious stressors (S = 95) substantially less than the hierarchical stressors (S = 215). Further assessment inside these classes affirmed that the normal wide assortment of individuals referring to character forceful stressors (M = 4.52) was more than the basis for individual hierarchical stressors (M = 2.99). The discoveries are accounted for to a great extent looking like ”thick elucidating” cites (the sum total of what names have been changed) to permit the peruser to sympathise with, and advantage a ”vibe” for, the setting of the entertainers’ pressure understanding. In embracing this sort of account story, we endeavour to uphold the sharp essayist persuader who, in accordance with Barone (1995), ”comprehends the need of giving up control, of allowing perusers the freedom to decipher and think about the printed content from their specific vantage focuses. In various words, the writer allows the peruser an additional confirmation of trust” (p. 67). Serious stressors: Execution inconveniences epitomised all the serious stressors relating straightforwardly to serious execution (see Figure 1). The higher-request subjects inside this measurement have been: Readiness, Injury, Weight, Rivals, Self, Occasion and Strange Notions. The most extreme much of the time referenced subjects inside Readiness were ”inadequate scholarly planning” and ”lacking physical arrangement”. It appears that in any event, for world-class entertainers impression of Readiness can be a flexibly of enduring rivalries.

Figure 1

This is delineated inside the accompanying statement: You do fear about whether you’re genuinely prepared or now not. Be that as it may, at that point it’s almost whether you may do equity on your exhibition, or your capacity, in the rivalry. You know that is a significant stressor. You can be colossal in tutoring anyway there’s, in any case, a concern weather’s everything going to go legitimate when you truly exit there and do it. The most regularly referred to subjects inside Injury had been ”risk of mischief” and ”possibility of being intentionally harmed by a rival”. The threat of continuing harm transformed into consistent trouble for a considerable lot of the entertainers examined in this investigation. The accompanying record gives knowledge into why this danger can get amplified before rivalry: When you contend at dark belt level, the dangers are obviously there. Essentially the possibility of having harmed is such a lot higher. There is additional contact. You could be competing for an individual that has been tutoring for a long time on the dark belt, and you can have recently gotten on. The individuals that contend at dark belt level are generally the world-class and had been around for a very long time. They should turn you around and take you out like that. The most oftentimes referred to subjects inside Weight had been ”worry of worldwide rivalry” and ”performing under pressure”. Weight is a characteristic issue of the forceful game at any stage.

Hierarchical stressors: Natural difficulties Ecological difficulties exemplified all the authoritative stressors relating to the game condition wherein the entertainer becomes working (see Figure 2). The higher-request subjects inside this measurement had been: Choice, Funds, Preparing Condition, Convenience, Travel, Rivalry Condition and Wellbeing. The main topic alluded to inside Determination become ”seen injustice all through choice”. The determination technique transformed into not normally viewed as a wellspring of worry inside the current investigation. This is perhaps to some degree astounding given the unmistakable disappointment communicated through this entertainer: I disregarded out on various the open doors that the inverse folks have been getting. They have been getting picked because of the reality they were in contact with the national mentors. I guess that I passed up an assortment of internationals since they continued conveying the indistinguishable individuals that had completed it before. That is consistently an issue.

Figure 2

The most as often as possible noted subjects inside Funds were ”absence of budgetary help” and ”differential financial guide”. Money related issues rose as a specifically delicate test for the tip-top entertainers on this examination. As the resulting quote recommends, venture, a tip-top games profession might be troublesome: Being a [performer in sport], it’s extremely, costly. Until you arrive at the zenith degree, you don’t get an adequate degree of the financial guide. However, you need monetary assistance to get among the awards. So it resembles a ”catch twenty-two circumstance”. You’re continually getting, on the off chance that you like, ”thumped back” and not being given an opportunity since you basically can’t bear to purchase hardware (Rumbold et al. 2012).

Discussion

In this investigation, content and frequency analysation is used for comparing athletes’ experiences of viable and structure stressors. This study looks to go ahead merely determining ‘‘reason of stress’’ through comparison of the content and quantity of needs in an abstract structure based on current stress theory (Sarkar and Fletcher 2014). More precisely, the domain and delivering of needs, the number of various stressors, the occurrence with which needs are cited, and the chances stressors are remembered were analysed. Certainly, though at initial look the outcome of this investigation may look same as those of last works, it is worthy of focusing that the emphasis in this study was not to determine stressors but to compare them.

Two primary points are accosted here:

• Initially, works have focused athletes response of competitive stress instead of organisational anxiety sources (Jones, G., 2002) and,
• Proof illustrate that organisational problems can have an important influence on performance, possibly assures the greater impact than competitive issues (cf. Jones, 2002).

Therefore, one of the most vital upshots of this study is that the psychology society of sport needs to protect against emphasising its overall focus to tackle the competitive stressors while ignoring the management of organisational stressors.

Viewing the comparative part of the work, the findings espouse Fletcher and Hanton’s evidence that excellent sportspersons experience (and recalling) more needs to be related mainly and straightly with the sporting institution than with competitive functioning. (Sarkar and Fletcher 2014). Therefore, the nature and modelling of competitive stressors seem mainly persistent around sports and balance by duration, while organisational stressors are mostly environmentally different and uneven for a temporary time. Though not the main aim of this study, it is worthy of giving a brief view on the way the stressors described here in comparison with those recognised in the present literature (see, for instance, Mellalieu et al., 2009; Holt & Hogg, 2002).

This progress additionally weighted that psychologists should persist in widening their work to show the continuously-changing orientation in which athletes performance, especially the way sociocultural-associated factors structure the organisational settings in elite sport (Sarkar and Fletcher, 2014). Entirely, this study gives robust cross-cultural aid for precedent discoveries in the elite United Kingdom performers from a broad domain of sports, with stress subjects commonly shares same characteristics and, as a person may think, showing an extent of eccentricity with regard to particular stressors recognised (Fletcher et al. 2012).

Various experts have currently recommended that applied practitioners might make their abilities wider to deal with the complete stress confronted by elite athletes (Sarkar and Fletcher 2014). We avoid, however, recommending professional assertiveness here, but instead the more competent making of interventions for matching the particular demands faced by athletes. Therefore, it might be wise for guiders to emphasise mainly on reactive or coping interventions to reorganise sportspersons’ reply to competitive stressors and, in opposition, to emphasise mainly on hand-on and pre-emptive interventions to prevent or lower organisational stressors (Sarkar and Fletcher 2014)It is significant to identify that though the abstract structure in this study gives a handy mean to examine sources related to the stress, these similar stressors need not be seen as distinct phenomena, as these kind of demands are a function of a dynamic procedure (Hanton et al. 2012).

Thelwell et al. (2017) have suggested that a basic but successful approach to this concept should be to clearly distinguish between classifications that are important to athelets, such as serious and hierarchical pressure. The basis of this calculated classification is presented, with three dominant themes emerging: “the specific origins and nature of the stressors encountered”, “the differences in the cognitive processes underlying the responses to these demands” and “the appropriateness of interventions to manage competitive anxiety versus organisational strain” (Sarkar and Fletcher, 2014 and Thelwell et al., 2017).

In light of these assumptions, the strong pressures can be described as “a gradual interchange between individual and environmental requirements that are fundamentally and legally linked to strong law enforcement” (Fletcher et al., 2012). The clear discrepancy between these investigations and the available assets leads to a very tense response. As a result of this definition, data that are not usually associated with sports performance (e.g. invoices) are not considered serious stressors, although they may be hierarchical stressors (Sarkar and Fletcher, 2014; Thelwell et al., 2017 and Arnold et al. 2017). Problems directly related to sports performance (e.g. of players) are considered serious stressors. Analysis of severe stress scenarios indicates that tests tend to use a nomotic form to assess the response of athletes to nervousness in order to obtain results (Arnold et al. 2017). Some researchers have gradually adopted a comprehensive approach, using idiographic strategies to identify sources of concern within the broader framework of competitive conditions. Although these tests undoubtedly improved therapists’ information about the requirements of first-class performers, most of them did not separate the specific onset of these stressors. For example, some of the sources of stress in Sarkar and Fletcher (2014) radiated high scores associated with serious performance (e.g., “pace of play”), while others were directly identified with the player relationship (e.g., “coach/player interaction”). The reactions of the coaches to serious concerns, such as fears and tensions, were also regularly placed in this line of questioning under the heading of “stress pits” (Thelwell et al., 2017). However, this methodology is not credible with the assumption of contemporary pressures that recognize the causes or properties of the causes (reinforcements) that people experience (e.g., stressors) and their passionate and emotional responses to these demands (e.g., tensions). Regardless of these shortcomings, this work began by revealing the perception of the serious and hierarchical stressors that first-class artists face (Fletcher et al., 2012).

Instead of the impressive perceptions of serious nervousness, the researchers largely ignored the territory of hierarchical problems in sport. Sarkar and fletcher (2014) initiated an examination, creating a hypothetical structure of hierarchical responsibility in sport that emphasized individual collaboration with a sports federation. Their conceptualization was expanded by Arnold et al. (2017), who describe hierarchical care as “a continuous exchange between individual and environmental requirements, which are fundamental and directly related to the association in which the individual works operate. In developing this definition, they argued that issues not usually identified with gaming associations (e.g., family) may be close to national stressors but should not be considered authoritarian stressors (Fletcher et al., 2012). Sarker and Flectcher (2014) and Thelwell et al. (2017), joint research suggests that authoritarian pressure is a major problem in world-class sport. For example, relational relationships and poorly controlled definition methodology can lead to imperfect reasons for significant global competition (Kristiansen et al. 2012).

Indeed, stressors mostly happen not alone but in groups (Cooper et al., 2001). Many of the elite athletes communicated in this study remembered times when they at the same time experienced competitive stressors (possibly the demand for qualification for a primary international contest) and organisational stressors (for example personal disputes with managing authorities) (Hanton et al. 2012). When combining the findings of a study of this type, it is vital to identify a few of the strengths and restriction in the methodology. In our perspective, the main robustness of this work associated with the method in which we chose to gather, assess and state the data (Thelwell et al. 2017). Initially, by permitting the people who took part the autonomy to go along the motion of the talk and through avoidance of probing to a constant extent but instead to saturation on a problem, the athletes were able to remember and explain in more detail those stressors that were noticeable in the experience they shared. Secondly, complementing the outcomes of what we found about the content analysis with the frequency analysis gave additional depth about the athlete experience regarding stress. Finally, with the outcomes displayed in the structure of hierarchy content diagram and sample illustrative quotes, the viewers were not just subjected to the collection of problems that were studied but also to the complication of these problems (Fletcher et al. 2012).

Nevertheless, these robust points, also, it is worthy of focusing that the sample features unavoidably restrict the generalizability of what we find to another sample, like women and sub-elite athletes. The theoretical bases of this framework would, as per our views, be considerably strengthened through combining and involving empirical progress in the area of organisational discipline and sport psychological aspect. This advancement would give a strong foundation through which a consistent and useable psychometric tool can be made (Arnold et al. 2017).

The relation among organisational strain and competitive anxiety is lucidly one more undeveloped section that needs to explore. Apt research queries in this part involve: What mechanism is responsible through which organisational strain can influence athlete symptoms that are faced in the contest? What asserts more impact on anxiety before the performance; the competition environment and organisation or the other sources of organisational stress? In what way the signals of precompetitive anxiety cam impact athlete views about the competitive environment and organisation? In this study, a key element of the stress procedure is explored and discussed as can be seen in sportspersons (Rumbold et al. 2012). Though this work has revealed important knowledge regarding stress feeling in this sample, it is vital to focus that stress needs to be taken into account from a transactional point of view. (Fletcher and Scott 2010).

References

Armario, A., Labad, J. and Nadal, R., 2020. Focusing attention on biological markers of acute stressor intensity: empirical evidence and limitations. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

Arnold, R., Fletcher, D. and Daniels, K., 2017. Organisational stressors, coping, and outcomes in competitive sport. Journal of sports sciences, 35(7), pp.694-703.

Bainbridge, LISANNE, 1974. Problems the assessment of mental load. Le travail humain, pp.279-302.

Barone, T., 1995. Persuasive writings, vigilant readings, and reconstructed characters: The paradox of trust in educational storysharing. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), pp.63-74.

Biddle, S.J., Markland, D., Gilbourne, D., Chatzisarantis, N.L. and Sparkes, A.C., 2001. Research methods in sport and exercise psychology: Quantitative and qualitative issues. Journal of sports sciences, 19(10), pp.777-809.

Dugdale, J.R., Eklund, R.C. and Gordon, S., 2002. Expected and unexpected stressors in major international competition: Appraisal, coping, and performance. The Sport Psychologist, 16(1), pp.20-33.

Endler, N.S. and Kocovski, N.L., 2001. State and trait anxiety revisited. Journal of anxiety disorders, 15(3), pp.231-245.

Fletcher, D. and Hanton, S., 2003. Sources of organisational stress in elite sports performers. The sport psychologist, 17(2), pp.175-195.

Fletcher, D. and Scott, M., 2010. Psychological stress in sports coaches: A review of concepts, research, and practice—Journal of sports sciences, 28(2), pp.127-137.

Fletcher, D., Hanton, S. and Wagstaff, C.R., 2012. Performers’ responses to stressors encountered in sport organisations. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30(4), pp.349-358.

Gill, D.L., Williams, L. and Reifsteck, E.J., 2017. Psychological dynamics of sport and exercise. Human Kinetics.

Hanton, S., Fletcher, D. and Coughlan, G., 2005. Stress in elite sport performers: A comparative study of competitive and organisational stressors. Journal of sports sciences, 23(10), pp.1129-1141.

Hanton, S., Wagstaff, C.R. and Fletcher, D., 2012. Cognitive appraisals of stressors encountered in sport organizations. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 10(4), pp.276-289.

Hockey, R., 1983. Stress and fatigue in human performance (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Holt, N.L. and Hogg, J.M., 2002. Perceptions of stress and coping during preparations for the 1999 women’s soccer world cup finals. The Sport Psychologist, 16(3), pp.251-271.

Hudson, J. and Day, MC, 2012. Athletes’ experiences of expressive writing about sports stressors. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(6), pp.798-806.

Jones, G. and Spooner, K., 2006. Coaching high achievers. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 58(1), p.40.

Jones, G., 1993. The role of performance profiling in cognitive behavioral interventions in sport. The Sport Psychologist, 7(2), pp.160-172.

Jones, G., 2002. What is this thing called mental toughness? An investigation of elite sports performers. Journal of applied sport psychology, 14(3), pp.205-218.

Kristiansen, E., Halvari, H. and Roberts, G.C., 2012. Organizational and media stress among professional football players: testing an achievement goal theory model. Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports, 22(4), pp.569-579.

Mellalieu, S.D., Neil, R., Hanton, S. and Fletcher, D., 2009. Competition stress in sport performers: Stressors experienced in the competition environment. Journal of sports sciences, 27(7), pp.729-744.

Parkes, K.R. and Hughes, E.L., Individual Differences in Coping with Stress.

Rumbold, J.L., Fletcher, D. and Daniels, K., 2012. A systematic review of stress management interventions with sport performers. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 1(3), p.173.

Sarkar, M. and Fletcher, D., 2014. Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and protective factors. Journal of sports sciences, 32(15), pp.1419-1434.

Sarkar, M. and Fletcher, D., 2014. Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and protective factors. Journal of sports sciences, 32(15), pp.1419-1434.

Schwandt, T.A., 1997. Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Sage Publications, Inc.

Spielberger, C.D., 1979. Understanding stress and anxiety. Harper & Row.

Spielberger, C.D., 2010. State‐Trait anxiety inventory. The Corsini encyclopedia of psychology, pp.1-1.

Thelwell, R.C., Wagstaff, C.R., Chapman, M.T. and Kenttä, G., 2017. Examining coaches’ perceptions of how their stress influences the coach–athlete relationship. Journal of sports sciences, 35(19), pp.1928-1939.

Wann, D.L. and Schrader, M.P., 1997. Team identification and the enjoyment of watching a sporting event. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84(3), pp.954-954.

Woodman, T. and Hardy, L., 2001. Stress and anxiety. Handbook of sport psychology.