THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MENTAL TOUGHNESS AND BASKETBALL PERFORMANCES OF UNIVERSITY BASKETBALL TEAM PLAYERS IN HONG KONG LIU KWOK PO

Transcription

1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MENTAL TOUGHNESS AND BASKETBALL PERFORMANCES OF UNIVERSITY BASKETBALL TEAM PLAYERS IN HONG KONG BY LIU KWOK PO AN HONOURS PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FILFILMENT OF THE REQIRMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND RECREATION MANAGEMENT (HONOURS) HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY APRIL 2015

2 HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY 24 th April, 2015 We hereby recommend that the Honours Project by Mr. Liu Kwok Po entitled The relationship between mental toughness and basketball performances of university basketball team players in Hong Kong be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Bachelor of Arts Honours Degree in Physical Education and Recreation Management. Dr. Chen Kuan Chou Dr. Huang Yajun Chief Adviser Second Reader

3 DECLARATION I hereby declare that this honours project The relationship between mental toughness and basketball performances of university basketball team players in Hong Kong represents my own work and had not been previously submitted to this or other institution for a degree, diploma or other qualification. Citations from the other authors were listed in the references. Liu Kwok Po 24 th April, 2015

4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my chief advisor, Dr Chen Kuan Chou, for his professional guidance, patient, assistance, and encouragement throughout the entire study. Also, I would like to express my gratitude to my second reader, Dr. Huang Yajun, for her effort to review this study. In addition, I would like to give great appreciation to all male university basketball team players who participated in this study. Last but not least, I would like to give thanks to my classmates and friends for their care and support. Liu Kwok Po Department of Physical Education Hong Kong Baptist University Date: 24 th April, 2015

5 ABSTRACT The main purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between mental toughness and basketball performances of university basketball team players participated in basketball competitions organized by The University Sports Federation of Hong Kong. The differences of mental toughness and basketball performances between close games and unbalanced games were also examined in this study. A total of 91 participants responded to this study while all of them were male. The findings showed that mental toughness had a partial relationship with basketball performances in university basketball games. Additionally, the results showed that there were partially significant differences of basketball performances of players between close games and unbalanced games. The results also proved that mental toughness played an important role in basketball performances and training of mental toughness could be an alternative method to improve a player s performance.

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page 1. INTRODUCTION P.1-8 Statement of the Problem P.5 Definition of Terms P.5-6 Delimitation P.6-7 Limitations P.7 Hypotheses P.7 Significance of the Study P.8 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE P.9-14 Derivation of Mental Toughness P.9-11 Sport-Specific Research in Mental Toughness P Mental Toughness in Basketball P METHODS P Participants P.15 Measuring Instruments P Procedures P.16 Method of Analysis P.17

7 4. ANALYSIS OF DATA P Reliability of the MTS P.19 Descriptive statistics of Personal Data P Correlation of MTS Score and Basketball Performances P ANOVA Test Results of MTS Score P Summary of Results P DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS P.32- Discussion P Conclusion P Recommendations of Further Study P.35 REFERENCES P APPENDIX P A. Mental Toughness Scale P.40 B. Questionnaire (English version) P C. Questionnaire (Chinese version) P.43-44

8 LIST OF TABLES TABLE Page 1. Reliability Analysis of the MTS P Demographic Statistics of Personal Data P Correlation Matrix of Total Games P Correlation Matrix of Unbalanced Games P Correlation Matrix of Close Games P ANOVA Table P.32

9 1 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION For many years, to improve athletes skills and performances, coaches would train them through mainly physical training. However, nowadays only physical training may not enough for athletes to reach their maximum potential and performance. It may also require the development of mental training. Mental toughness is a recent topic for researchers to investigate from different prospects, including development of expertise (Ericsson, 1996), the psychology of excellence (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), psychological development of Olympic champions (Gould, Dieffenbach & Moffett, 2002) and peak performance (Krane & Williams, 2006). With different researches on mental toughness, the definition varies. The concept of mental toughness has lacked clarity but it is one of the most critical elements to performance excellence considered by both players and coaches (Weinberg, Butt & Culp, 2011). Clough, Earle & Sewell (2002) mentioned that 75 percent of coaches and athletes interviews comprise developing mental toughness. Besides, twenty years ago, a research found that 82% of wrestling coaches thought that mental toughness was the most important psychological aspect in determining wrestling success (Gould, Hodge, Peterson & Petlichkoff, 1987). Nevertheless, there were only nine percent of coaches thought that they were successful in changing or developing the mental toughness of athletes they worked with (Gould et

10 2 al., 1987). This showed that there is a need for further investigation into defining and understanding mental toughness. During the past decade, there was an increase in mental toughness research. These researches aimed to target on the conceptualization of mental toughness in order to give a clearer definition. Fourie and Potgieter (2001) studies was one of the first research to identify the psychological characteristics connected with mental toughness in sport, for example, characteristics like competitiveness, coping skills, being motivated and maintaining confidence. Another research was from Clough et al. (2002), its purpose of study was to provide a definition and a framework of mental toughness, which was known as the 4C s model. The 4C were control, confidence, challenge and commitment. These findings had developed some similar characteristics of mental toughness, but they still lack the conceptual clarity and general agreement as to the definition of mental toughness. In 2002, Jones, Hanton & Connaughton attempted to develop a standard definition for mental toughness. They conducted a qualitative study with a sample of ten international competitors with Olympic Games experience. The method used was in-depth interview and focus groups. The definition finally explained as follow: Mental toughness is having the natural or developed psychological edge that empowers you to generally, handle better than your opponents with the demands (competition

11 3 training, lifestyle) that sport places on the performer, and specifically, be more consistent and better than your opponents in remaining determined, focused, confident, and in control under pressure. After this definition was established, further researches and studies were made focusing on sport-specific research, such as studies related to cricket (Bull, Shambrook, James & Brooks, 2005) and soccer (Thelwell, Weston & Greenless, 2005). The results of these two studies were similar to the study by Jones et al. (2002). For instance, Bull et al. (2005) stated that important aspects to mental toughness were self-belief, coping with pressure, dedication, personal responsibility and commitment, while Thelwell et al. (2005) stated aspects like remaining calm under pressure, self-belief and staying positive were crucial to mental toughness. These researches showed that there was a certain degree of consistency of knowledge of mental toughness with elite athletes. However, we only found a study conducted by Connole (2010) on American high school boys basketball. The purpose of the study was to develop a better understanding of mental toughness in America high school boys basketball through analysis of coaches perceptions. Yet, this study was similar to researches by Bull et al. (2005) and Thelwell et al. (2005). Still, there were no researches relating to the mental toughness and basketball performance. In the world, basketball is the second most favored sport. There were a number of

12 4 over 450 million people playing basketball (International Basketball Federation, 2009). In Hong Kong, basketball is also one of the most popular sport, others are soccer, swimming and badminton. By investigating the relationship of mental toughness and basketball performance in Hong Kong, Hong Kong basketball players can recognize the importance of mental toughness, which can affect their basketball performance. Studies from Crust (2008) and Bull et al. (2005) stated that mental toughness can be recognized and experienced in different levels of players, and it also exist in these levels of players. Some may think that players at higher level were mentally better. However, there may be more failure and pressure-packed situation in high level of sports. All levels of players need sports psychology or mental toughness training for better mental skills. For instance, some world greatest athletes have sport psychologist to help them, like the United States Olympic Committee hired hundreds of qualified and professional sports psychologist for US athletes. Taking these factors and reasons into consideration, this study aims to explore the relationship of mental toughness and basketball performances in university basketball players and the impact difference of mental toughness on basketball performances of these players in close and unbalanced games.

13 5 Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between mental toughness and basketball performances of university basketball team players in Hong Kong. Moreover, it aimed to do a comparison of mental toughness and basketball performances among close basketball games and unbalanced games. Definition of Terms To give a better understanding of commonly used terms in this study, the terms were defined as: Mental Toughness Mental Toughness is viewed as one of the most important psychological attributes in determining success in sport, which is an inner focus and commitment to rise above challenges when facing adversity,. (Madrigal, L., Hamill, S. & Gill, D. L.) Basketball Performances In this study, statistics of player including two point field goal percentage, three point field goal percentage, free throw percentage, rebound, assist, steal, block, turnover, foul and points were classified as categories of basketball performances. Moreover, free throw percentage, rebound, turnover and points were basketball performances which were more related to mental toughness.

14 6 University Basketball Team Players In this study, the university basketball team players were students who participate in basketball competitions organized by The University Sports Federation of Hong Kong and play for average 10 minutes or above per game. Close Games Close games are matches with differentiate score with lower than or equal to 10 points between both teams. Unbalanced Games Unbalanced games are matches with differentiate score with higher than 10 points between both teams. Delimitations The delimitations of this study were: 1. The subjects were participants of basketball competitions organized by The University Sports Federation of Hong Kong. 2. The match data were based on data collected by private organizations: Openball Sports and Entertainment Limited. 3. Only preliminary round of the competition were used as data for the study. 4. The questionnaire was distributed and collected by the researcher in two months

15 7 from February to March Identified names were designed in the questionnaire to match players level of mental toughness with their game performance. 6. Convenience sampling method was used for sample selection. 7. The mental toughness scale were used to access the subjects degree of mental toughness Limitations Several limitations were set: 1. Different subjects may have different perception of each item in the questionnaire. The answer quality of questionnaire was not guaranteed. 2. Statistics from Openball.com may have errors due to personal record. Hypotheses The following hypotheses were 1. There is a significant impact between mental toughness and performances of university basketball team players in Hong Kong. 2. There is a significant impact difference of mental toughness on basketball performances between close games and unbalanced games.

16 8 Significance of Study This study provided information on the correlation of mental toughness and basketball performance of participants of basketball competitions organized by The University Sports Federation of Hong Kong. It also provided comparisons of mental toughness and basketball performance in close games and unbalanced games, in addition with comparisons of gender mental toughness and basketball performance. These information was useful for both coaches and players to have a deeper understanding of mental toughness. Coaches could provide mental toughness training for players in order to improve their on-court performance. On the other hand, players could aware of mental toughness so that they could train not only from the physical side but also from the mental side. A more comprehensive training would improve a player significantly.

17 9 Chapter 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE The present study was to investigate the relationship of mental toughness and basketball performances of university basketball team players. This review mainly focused on (1) Derivation of Mental Toughness, (2) Sport-Specific Research in Mental Toughness, (3) Mental Toughness in Basketball and (4) Mental Toughness Scale. Derivation of Mental Toughness According to Crust (2008), the beginning of the study of mental toughness was ambiguous, and there was no definition that was globally accepted. Nevertheless, when some studies were derived, researchers had gained some clarity in the conceptualization of mental toughness. Mental toughness was a psychological aspect, so many of these work was connected to other psychological areas, such as hardiness and talent development to dig deeper of what mental toughness is, the origin of mental toughness and the impact of mental toughness to athletes. Loehr (1982) proposed that the concept of mental toughness was about certain psychological attributes, for example, self-motivation, self-direction, self- confident, emotional control, determination, mentally alert and focused, calm and relaxed and responsibility. He categorized these attributes as mental toughness, and conducted that

18 10 a mentally tough athlete was able to remain calm, but energized and maintained right and positive attitudes to respond to difficult situations. In 2001, Fourie and Potgieter conducted the first massive qualitative research of mental toughness. They invited 131 expert coaches and 160 elite athletes from various sports to complete an inductive analysis of written statements. From the analysis, they identified 12 characteristics of mental toughness, which were coping skills, cognitive skills, preparation skills, motivational level, discipline and goal-directedness, team unity, confidence maintenance, competitiveness, psychological hardiness, ethics, possession of prerequisite physical and mental requirements and religious convictions. Similarly, in 2002, Jones et al. identified 12 characteristics of mental toughness too. Nonetheless, there were some unique aspects in Jones et al. s (2002) research, for instance, accepting competition anxiety, psychological control and overcoming both emotional and physical pain. Seven primary attributes were overlapped with Fourie and Potgieter s (2001) study, which was motivation, determination, concentration and focus, self-belief, self-confidence, will to win and perseverance. Jones et al. (2002) added different general categories related to mental toughness, such as focus (performance-related), anxiety (internal), dealing with competition-related pressure (external), desire and motivation, self-belief, and dealing with physical and emotional pain. This study became the standard for future mental toughness studies since they

19 11 were the first to investigate through scientific qualitative method through focus groups and interview with elite athletes. This study also raised other researches into the topic, like Bull et al. (2005), Thelwell et al. (2005) and Gucciardi, Gordon & Dimmock (2008). With the raise of interest in the study of mental toughness, together with the understanding of mental toughness influences to different sports, more studies were narrowed to sport-specific research. Sport-Specific Research in Mental Toughness Stimulated by the research of Fourie and Potgieter (2001) and Jones et al. (2002), several studies investigated mental toughness in specific sports, including cricket (Bull et al., 2005), elite soccer (Thelwell et al., 2005) and Australian Football (Gucciardi et al., 2008). The study of Thelwell et al. (2005) was based on the definition of mental toughness developed by Jones et al. (2002), and applied it within elite soccer community. There were a total of six professional male soccer players with international competition experiences participated in the study, they were required to define mental toughness from soccer point of view, compare with the definition developed from Jones et al. (2002), revise their own definitions and prioritize their perceptions of characteristics of mentally tough players. The definition of these players

20 12 matched the attributes from Jones et al. (2002). This study provided a further support for Jones et al. s (2002) study. The study of Bull et al. (2005) expanded a better understanding of mental toughness in cricket sport. Moreover, it identified the method of developing mental toughness of English cricketers. Interviews were made with twelve players who were the most mentally tough players in past twenty years determined by current English cricket coaches. Bull et al. (2005) identified Tough Attitudes, Tough Character, and Tough Thinking as aspects of mental toughness characteristics from the interviews. To be a mentally tough cricketer, the need for interaction between attitudes, thinking, character and environment were essential. The study of Gucciardi et al. (2008) was a qualitative research of mental toughness. The objective was to define mental toughness in Australian Football. They interviewed eleven male elite coaches with open-ended questions. The results indicated a definition of Australian Football including attitudes, values, emotions and behaviors. Mental Toughness in Basketball Previously reviewed studies investigated specific sports of soccer, cricket and Australian football. There was a study investigating mental toughness for basketball (Connole, 2010). The study was an in-depth qualitative research with six high school

21 13 basketball head coaches from the United States. The study provided an insight for athletes on how to develop mental toughness, in addition to coaches who could provide a direction to bring positive impact for high school basketball players. It provided a clear procedure to teach psychological attributes of mental toughness, such as focus, confidence and facing adversity for the development of United States high school basketball players. The results of the study supported previous researches about mental toughness. Coaches believed that a mentally tough player had high ratings in three categories: mental, physical and intellectual. Mental included elements like drive, coping skills, character, drive and belief, while physical included physical toughness and sport intelligence for intelligence. Mental Toughness Scale According to Madrigal et al. (2013), there were some mental toughness scale published in recent years, however, only few had built psychometric properties. Some mental toughness scale focused on other factors such as physical endurance, pain tolerance and performance enhancement, but not the psychometrics of mental toughness (Crust & Clough, 2005). The mental toughness scale used in this study was developed based on Jones, Hanton & Connaughton s (2007) studies and created by

22 14 Madrigal et al. (2013). There were fifty four items developed directly from characteristics recorded under the dimensions of training (12 items), mindset (21 items), competition (14 items) and post competition (7 items). A five-point likert scale (1= strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) was provided for participants responds. To reduce undesirable response, nine items were reverse-scored. Although the above scale emerged four dimensions, the results were knocked into each of the dimensions. To be a more specific in training and competition scale, the 11-item mental toughness scale was created based on the 54-item scale.

23 15 Chapter 3 METHODS In this chapter, the method of study was divided into the following sections: 1) Participants, 2) Measuring instruments, 3) Procedures, and 4) Data Analysis. Participants In this study, the participants were male university basketball team members participating in basketball competitions organized by The University Sports Federation of Hong Kong who played for average 10 minutes or above per game. Measuring instruments To examine the relationship of mental toughness and basketball performances of university basketball team players and game and gender difference of mental toughness, questionnaire with (1) the mental toughness scale (MTS) developed by Madrigal et al. (2013) and (2) game statistics from Openball.com were used. The Mental Toughness Scale (MTS) The 11-item MTS developed by Madrigal et al. (2013) was used to measure mental

24 16 toughness. It was developed based on the framework of mental toughness from Jones et al. (2007). The 11-item MTS interpreted specific elements of training and competition. The item scores are from 1 to 5. A higher score represents a higher level of mental toughness. Game Statistics from Openball.com All game statistics were collected and done by Openball.com. These statistics are published online for free. Statistics include game total scores and player statistics. Procedures Questionnaires were distributed to players directly through online channel for convenience. Players were required to fill in the name in order to match their mental toughness score with their game statistics. The purpose of the study and instructions of completing the questionnaire were given and explained clearly before participants started filling the form. No more than 15 minutes were given for participants to fill in the questionnaire. Participants would also be explained that information collected would be kept confidential and exclusively used for this study.

25 17 Method of Analysis After all data were collected, inputting data would be the next step for further data analysis. Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS program) for Windows was used. The level of significance was set at an alpha level of 0.05 for the whole statistical analyses. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic information of participants, for example, gender, mental toughness score and basketball performance score. To examine the relationship between mental toughness and players basketball performance, Pearson Production Moment Coefficient of Correlation (r) was used. To examine the difference of mental toughness and players basketball performance between balanced and unbalanced games, Pearson Production Moment Coefficient of Correlation (r) was also used. To investigate the relationship of mental toughness and players demographic information, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tests were used. To analyze the reliability of the mental toughness scale, Cronbach s alpha coefficient test was used.

26 18 Chapter 4 Analysis of Data The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between mental toughness and basketball performance of university basketball team players in Hong Kong. Cronbach s alpha coefficient was examined to test the reliability of the MTS scale, while descriptive data analysis was used to show the composition of the sample, and Pearson Production Moment Coefficient of Correlation (r) were used to analyze relationship of the data obtained. Lastly, Analysis of Variance Test (ANOVA) were used to analyze the independent variables in the study. The analysis and presentation of data were presented in following orders: 1. Reliability and Descriptive statistics of the MTS 2. Descriptive statistics of personal data, including age, position, school year, school team experiences, basketball experiences, coaching experiences, levels of playing off campus, and training hours of university basketball team players 3. Results from Pearson Production Moment Coefficient of Correlation (r) test of MTS score and basketball performance of total games, unbalanced games and close games. 4. Results from Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Test of MTS score on each

27 19 independent variable, including school year, basketball experiences, coaching experiences, level of playing off campus, training hour per week of personal, school team practice and off campus practice. Reliability of the MTS The 11-item mental toughness scale (MTS) was used in this study. The Cronbach s alpha coefficient of MTS was.750 (α=.750). This showed that the mental toughness scale (MTS) has an acceptable level of internal consistency. (See Table 1) Scores were calculated by adding the scores of 11 items as the total scores. The mean score of subjects was ± 4.37, and the minimum and maximum score were and respectively. (See Table 1) Descriptive Statistics of Personal Data In this study, there were a total of 91 respondents. All subjects are male and are participants of basketball competition organized by the University Sports Federation of Hong Kong, China. For playing position, 16.5% (n=15) was playing for the center position, 13.2% (n=12) playing for the power forward position, 18.7% (n=17) playing for the small forward position, 23.1% (n=21) playing for the shooting guard position and 28.6% (n=26) playing for the point guard position. The study year

28 20 of subjects were divided in four years, with 34.1% (n=31) of them studying year 1, 39.6% (n=36) studying year 2, 25.3% (n=23) studying year 3 and 1.1% (n=1) studying year 4. For school team experiences, there were 35.2% (n=32) of the subjects had 1 year of university school team experiences, 37.4% (n=34) of them had 2 years of experiences, 22.0% (n=20) of them had 3 years of experiences and 5.5% (n=5) of them had 4 years of experiences. For basketball experiences, most of the subjects 45.1% (n=41) had less than 10 years of basketball experiences and 34.1 (n=31) of the subjects had equal to or more than 10 years of basketball experiences. Totally 79.1% (n=72) of basketball players playing in university basketball competition also played off campus competition. 23.1% (n=21) of the subjects played in Division A1 level, 16.5% (n=15) of the subjects played in Division A2 level and 39.6% (n=36) played in Division B level. Only 20.9% (n=19) of the subjects did not play an off campus team. The personal training hours of subjects varied, most of them 37.4% (n=34) trained less than 8 hours per week and 25.3% (n=23) trained less than 12 hours per week. For school team practice training hours, most of the subjects 38.5% (n=35) and 36.3% (n=33) had less than 5 hours and 8 hours per week respectively. For off campus practice, most of the players trained less than twelve hours 27.5% (n=25) per week. The mean age of subjects was ± 1.539, the minimum age is 18 and the maximum age is 25. (See Table 2)

29 21 Correlation of MTS Score and Basketball Performances The relationship of MTS score and basketball performances were divided into three categories: (1) MTS score and total games basketball performances, (2) MTS score and unbalanced games basketball performances and (3) MTS score and close games basketball performances. Based on the results of the tests, the hypothesis of there was a significant impact between mental toughness and performances of university basketball team players in Hong Kong was rejected partially. The tests showed that mental toughness had an impact with some performances category in total games, close games and unbalanced games. Moreover, the hypothesis of there was a significant impact difference of mental toughness on basketball performances between balanced games and unbalanced games was also rejected partially. The results showed were different from this study s prediction. MTS score and total games basketball performances There were significant positive relationships between MTS score and two point field goal percentage (r =.241, p < 0.05), assist (r =.301, p < 0.01) and steal (r =.290, p < 0.01). However, there were no significant relationships between MTS score and three point field goal percentage (r =.109, p > 0.05), free throw percentage (r =.203, p > 0.05), rebound (r =.053, p > 0.05), block (r = -.187, p > 0.05), turnover (r = -.075,

30 22 p > 0.05), foul (r = -.064, p > 0.05) and points (r =.190, p > 0.05). (See Table 3.1) These showed that mental toughness had an impact on some categories of basketball performances in university basketball team players. MTS score and unbalanced games basketball performances There were significant positive relationships between MTS score and two point field goal percentage (r =.246, p < 0.05), assist (r =.277, p < 0.01) and points (r =.225, p < 0.05). However, there were no significant relationships between MTS score and three point field goal percentage (r =.123, p > 0.05), free throw percentage (r =.203, p > 0.05), rebound (r =.038, p > 0.05), steal (r =.185, p > 0.05), block (r = -.192, p > 0.05), turnover (r = -.117, p > 0.05) and foul (r = -.048, p > 0.05). (See Table 3.2) These showed that university team players had higher two field goal percentage, assist and points with higher mental toughness score in unbalanced games. MTS score and close games basketball performances There were significant positive relationships between MTS score and rebound (r =.299, p < 0.05) and steal (r =.391, p < 0.01). However, there were no significant relationships between MTS score and two point field goal percentage (r =.187, p >

31 ), three point field goal percentage (r = -.196, p > 0.05), free throw percentage (r =.229, p > 0.05), assist (r =.114, p > 0.05), block (r = -.116, p > 0.05), turnover (r =.031, p > 0.05), foul (r =.136, p > 0.05) and points (r =.205, p > 0.05). (See Table 3.3) These showed that university team players had higher rebound and steal with higher mental toughness score in close games. ANOVA Test Results of MTS Score There were significant relationship of MTS score and school year, level of playing off campus, training hours per week of personal, school team practice and off campus practice. For school year, the mental toughness score of players studying year one were higher than players studying year two (F = 3.398, P < 0.05). It was surprised to find that students who should have more experience scored lower in mental toughness score. For level of playing off campus, players from Division A1 and Division A2 had a higher mental toughness score than Division B players (F = 4.285, P < 0.05). It was an important result to show that mental toughness was a factor for players to play higher level. For training hour per week including personal, school team practice and off campus practice, players training different hours had significant differences. In personal training hours, players training less than 12 hours and more than 12 hours scored higher in MTS than those training less than 3 hours (F = 4.570, P

32 24 < 0.05). In school team practice, players training less than 8 hours and 12 hours had a higher MTS score than those training less than 5 hours (F = 4.756, P < 0.05). In off campus practice, players training less than 8 hours and 12 hours had a higher MTS score than those training less than 3 hours. These showed that the longer training hour a player has, no matter personal, school practice or off campus practice, the better in mental toughness he would be. In addition, Division A1 player and A2 player had a higher mental toughness score than Division B player, these also showed that the higher level of a player plays in Hong Kong, the better mental toughness he has. Summary of Results The results showed that there was a positive relationship in some basketball performance in total games including two point field goal percentage (r =.241), assist (r =.301) and steal (r =.290). However, other performances such as 3 point field goal percentage, free throw percentage, rebounds, blocks, turnover and points did not have a relationship with mental toughness. These showed that mental toughness had partial impact to players performances. For the difference of mental toughness between close games and unbalanced games, the prediction of a positive relationship between mental toughness and basketball performance which were more related to mental toughness such as free

33 25 throw percentage, rebound, turnover and points in close games were rejected, though it had a significant relationship with rebounds and steals. However, in unbalanced games, the correlation changed to two point field goal percentage, assist and points. This rejected the hypothesis.

34 26 Table 1. Reliability Analysis of the MTS Variables M SD α M SD Mental Toughness Scale (MTS) I have an inner arrogance that makes me believe I can achieve anything I set my mind to. I know when to celebrate success but also know when to stop and focus on the next challenge. I have a killer instinct to capitalize on the moment when I know I can win. I know what needs to be done to achieve the level of performance required to win. I have the patience and discipline to control my efforts to achieve each goal along the ladder of success. Even though I am tired, I continue to train to achieve my goal. I use all my aspects of a very difficult training environment to my advantage. I am able to increase my effort if it is required to win. When an obstacle is in my way I find a way to overcome it. I accept, embrace, and even welcome the elements of training that are considered painful. I have total commitment to my performance goal until every possible opportunity of success has passed

35 27 Table 2. Demographic Statistics of Personal Data Variables Category N % Age Position Center Power Forward Small Forward Shooting Guard Point Guard School Year School Team Experiences (Year) Basketball Experiences (Year) Less than seven years Less than ten years Equal to or more than ten years

36 28 Table 2 (Continued) Variables Category N % Coaching Experiences (Year) None Less than one year One to three years Three to five years More than five years Levels of Playing Off Campus Division A Division A Division B None Training Hours (Personal) Less than one hour Less than three hours Less than five hours Less than eight hours Less than twelve hours More than twelve hours Training Hours (School Team) Less than one hour Less than three hours Less than five hours Less than eight hours Less than twelve hours More than twelve hours 0 0 Training Hours (Off Campus) Less than one hour Less than three hours Less than five hours Less than eight hours Less than twelve hours More than twelve hours 7 7.7

37 29 Table 3.1. Correlation Matrix of Total Games Factor MTSS 2PFG% 3PFG% FT% R A S B TO F P Mental Toughness Scale Score * **.290 ** Two Point Field Goal Percentage *.344 **.274 ** ** Three Point Field Goal Percentage * Free Throw Percentage ** * Rebound * ** **.463 ** Assist ** ** Steal ** Block * Turnover **.326 ** Foul * Points 1 Note. MTSS = Mental Toughness Scale Score; 2PFG% = Two Point Field Goal Percentage; 3PFG% = Three Point Field Goal Percentage; FT% = Free Throw Percentage; R = Rebound; A = Assist; S = Steal; B = Block; TO = Turnover; F = Foul; P = Points. * Significant at.05 level ** Significant at.01 level

38 30 Table 3.2. Correlation Matrix of Unbalanced Games Factor MTSS 2PFG% 3PFG% FT% R A S B TO F P Mental Toughness Scale Score * ** * Two Point Field Goal Percentage *.304 **.232 * ** Three Point Field Goal Percentage Free Throw Percentage ** * Rebound * ** **.370 ** Assist ** ** Steal * ** Block Turnover **.184 Foul Points 1 Note. MTSS = Mental Toughness Scale Score; 2PFG% = Two Point Field Goal Percentage; 3PFG% = Three Point Field Goal Percentage; FT% = Free Throw Percentage; R = Rebound; A = Assist; S = Steal; B = Block; TO = Turnover; F = Foul; P = Points. * Significant at.05 level ** Significant at.01 level

39 31 Table 3.3. Correlation Matrix of Close Games Factor MTSS 2PFG% 3PFG% FT% R A S B TO F P Mental Toughness Scale Score * ** Two Point Field Goal Percentage * ** * Three Point Field Goal Percentage * ** ** Free Throw Percentage Rebound **.520 ** Assist Steal Block * Turnover ** Foul ** Points 1 Note. MTSS = Mental Toughness Scale Score; 2PFG% = Two Point Field Goal Percentage; 3PFG% = Three Point Field Goal Percentage; FT% = Free Throw Percentage; R = Rebound; A = Assist; S = Steal; B = Block; TO = Turnover; F = Foul; P = Points. * Significant at.05 level ** Significant at.01 level

40 32 Table 4 ANOVA Table Independent Variable F P Post hoc School Year *.038 Year 1 > Year 2 Basketball Experiences (Year) Coaching Experiences (Year) Level of Playing Off Campus *.018 Division A1, Division A2 > Division B Training Hour Per Week (Personal) *.001 Less than 12 hours, More than 12 hours > Less than 3 hours Training Hour Per Week (School Team Practice) *.002 Less than 8 hours, Less than 12 hours > Less than 5 hours Training Hour Per Week (Off Campus Practice) *.000 Less than 8 hours, Less than 12 hours > Less than 3 hours * Significant at.05 level

41 33 Chapter 5 Discussion and Conclusion In this study, the purpose was to examine the relationship between mental toughness and basketball performance of university basketball team players in Hong Kong. Also, this study was to investigate the difference of mental toughness and basketball performance between close games and unbalanced games. Discussion Correlation of MTS and basketball performance in total games In this study, significant relationship of mental toughness score and basketball performance were two point field goal percentage, assist and steal only. They all had a positive relationship with players mental toughness score. It was predicted that there were positive relationship with free throw percentage, rebound, points and negative relationship with turnover. However, the results rejected the prediction. In fact, free throw percentage, blocks and points were nearly significant in the correlation tests. The reason for these may be insufficient matches in preliminary round of teams (only four and five matches for group A and B) and the small sample size (n=91). If there are more matches and players in university basketball competition, the results may be varied and may show more significant results. Correlation of MTS and basketball performance between close games and unbalanced games In this study, a player scored high in MTS was predicted to have better basketball

42 34 performance in close games than unbalanced games. Nevertheless, there were only correlation between mental toughness and rebounds and steal in close games, and two point field goal percentage, assist and points in unbalanced games. The free throw percentage and blocks were nearly significant in unbalanced games. These correlation tests rejected the prediction and there are various reasons. The schedule of the games was restricted to hold on Saturday and some teams had one game per week or even one game per month. The preliminary round of games was also divided from October to February for only four to five games for each team. The schedule was too loose for players to keep their conditions so that their basketball performances were different in each game. Another reason was that some teams had big difference in levels, for example, top teams such as Hong Kong University and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University had players playing for Division A1 and A2, while lower teams did not have any. One more reason was the unstable conditions for players. Higher level players should have more stable conditions than lower level players, however, since the loose schedule and lots of factor including academic and working, the conditions of these players varied in each match. These might also affect the test results. Mental Toughness and level of playing off campus In this study, players playing in Division A1 and A2 scored higher in mental toughness scale than players in Division B. This showed that mental toughness was a factor apart from skills affecting a player s level of playing basketball. The tougher in mental aspects of a player, the better he is in playing basketball.

43 35 Mental toughness and training hours per week Training hours per week, including personal, school team practice and off campus practice had a relationship with mental toughness. Players who trained more than five hours per week had a higher mental toughness score than players who trained less than three hours per week in personal, school team and off campus practice. This showed that basketball training for university players might also train their mental toughness at the same time. The more time a player trains, the better mental toughness he has. Mental toughness training and basketball performances From the above results, they showed that mental toughness had a partial impact on basketball performances. They also showed mental toughness training could be applied for players to improve their basketball performances, no matter in close games and unbalanced games. One training method was also showed in the results. The longer time a player practices, the higher mental toughness score he has. Therefore, it could be predicted that mental toughness could be trained while practicing, for example, giving a player a tougher drill or a more difficult drill could train a player s skills as well as mental toughness. On the other hand, mental toughness could also be trained through psychological training, such as focus training and mental toughness training. Conclusion In Hong Kong university basketball competition, players performances were unstable since the loose schedule of the competition. Although the results were not significant in this study, there were still some proves that mental toughness was a factor

44 36 affecting basketball performances. Therefore, providing mental toughness training can be a method for players to improve their mental strength so that they can have better performances in competitions. We recommended coaches to focus not only on basketball skills training, but also mental toughness training of players. Recommendations for Further Study For further study, a larger sample size is recommended to investigate deeper impact and relationship between mental toughness and basketball performances, such as including female data or collecting data from different years of players. Moreover, the definition of close games and unbalanced games can be changed to 6 to 8 points in order to increase more close games to examine the differences of impact of mental toughness between close and unbalanced games.

45 37 References Bull, S. J., Shambrook, C. J., James, W., & Brooks, J. E. (2005). Towards an understanding of mental toughness in elite English cricketers. Journal ofapplied Sport Psychology, 17, Clough, P. J., Earle, K., & Sewell, D. (2002). Mental toughness: the concept and its measurement. In I. Cockerill (Ed.), Solutions in sport psychology (pp ). London: Thomson Publishing. Connole, I. (2010). Towards an understanding of mental toughness in high school boys basketball. Masters Abstracts International, Crust, L. (2008). A review and conceptual re-examination of mental toughness: Implications for fixture research. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, Crust, L., & Clough, P. (2005). Relationship between mental toughness and physical endurance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 100, /pms PubMed doi: /pms Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.

46 38 Ericcson, A. (Ed.). (1996). The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts, sciences, sports, and games. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Findlay, L.C., & Bowker, A. (2009). The link between competitive sport participation and self-concept in early adolescence: A consideration of gender and sport orientation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, /s PubMed doi: /s Fourie, S., & Potgieter, J. R. (2001). The nature of mental toughness in sport. South African Journalfor Sport, Physical Education and Recreation, 23, Gould, D., Hodge, K., Peterson, K., & Petlichkoff, L (1987). Psychological foundations of coaching:similarities and differences among intercollegiate wrestling coaches. The Sport Psychologist, 1, Gould, D., Dieffenach, K., & Moffett, A (2002). Psychological characteristics and development of Olympic champions. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, Gucciardi, D. F., Gordon, S., & Dimmock, J. A. (2008). Towards an understanding of mental toughness in Australian football. Journal ofapplied Sport Psychology, 20,

47 39 International Basketball Federation (2009). FIBA: International Basketball Federation Quick Facts. Retrieved January 28, 2009, from FIBA Website: /962/quicFacts.html Jones, G., Hanton, S., & Connaughton, D. (2007). A framework of mental toughness in the world s best performers. The Sport Psychologist, 21, Jones, G., Hanton, S., & Connaughton, D. (2002). What is this thing called mental toughness? An investigation of elite sport performers. Journal ofapplied Sport Psychology, 14, Krane, V., & Williams, J (2006). Psychological characteristics of peak performance. In J. M. Williams (Ed.),Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (5th ed., pp ). New York: McGraw Hill. Loehr, J. E. (1982). Athletic excellence: Mental toughness trainingfor sports. Denver, Co: Forum Publishing Company. Madrigal L., Hamill S., & Gill D. L. (2013). Mind Over Matter, The Development of The Mental Toughness Scale (MTS). The Sport Psychologist, 27(1), 65-67