In e na ional Jou nal o
En i onmen al Resea ch
and Public Heal h
A icle
Resilien Resou ces in You h A hle es and Thei
Rela ionship wi h Anxie y in Di e en Team Spo s
Juan González-He nández 1, Ma cial Goma iz-Gea 2, Al onso Vale o-Valenzuela 2,3 and
Manuel Gómez-López 2,3,*
1Depa men o Pe sonali y, E alua ion and Psychological T ea men , Uni e si y o G anada,
18071 G anada, Spain; jgonzalez@ug .es
2Depa men o Physical Ac i i y and Spo , Facul y o Spo Sciences, Uni e si y o Mu cia,
San iago de la Ribe a, 30720 Mu cia, Spain; ma [email p o ec ed] (M.G.-G.); a ale [email p o ec ed] (A.V.-V.)
3Campus o In e na ional Excellence “Ma e Nos um”, Uni e si y o Mu cia, 30720 Mu cia, Spain
*Co espondence: [email p o ec ed]; Tel.: +34-868-888-674
Recei ed: 29 June 2020; Accep ed: 29 July 2020; Published: 1 Augus 2020


Abs ac :
The objec i e o his s udy is o show he links and di e ences in he exp essions o
compe i i e anxie y in he ace o he exis ence o esilien esou ces in young a hle es, acco ding
o spo ing (yea s o expe ience) and pe sonal (gende ) cha ac e is ics. To mee hese aims, he
pa icipan s answe ed he Resilience Scale (RS-14) and he Compe i i e S a e Anxie y In en o y-2R
(CSAI-2R). The sample consis ed o 241 adolescen handball and baske ball playe s be ween 14 and
17 yea s old. Di e en analyses we e pe o med, including a di e en ial and mul i a ia e desc ip i e,
a co ela ion, and a mul iple eg ession. The esul s showed ha anxie y was nega i ely ela ed o
esilience in i s accep ance dimension. I was shown ha gi ls showed highe le els o soma ic anxie y,
while boys showed highe le els o accep ance. S a is ically signi ican di e ences we e ound in he
esou ces o accep ance in a o o boys, while he e we e signi ican ly di e en indica o s in soma ic
anxie y and sel -con idence in a o o gi ls. The spo s expe ience was posi i ely ela ed o esilience
and nega i ely o anxie y. Al hough he exis ence o indica o s o cogni i e anxie y (e.g., ecu en
hough s o hyming), coaches and a hle es need o unde s and ha hey a e also indica o s o a
necessa y ac i a ion o psychological unc ioning. Channeling such a p ocess h ough psychological
aining o di e en skills will enhance he capaci ies o sel -con idence.
Keywo ds: handball; baske ball; esilience; sel -con idence; accep ance; compe ence
1. In oduc ion
The abili y o ob ain an op imal and s able psychological s a e du ing compe i ion is o u mos
impo ance o coaches and a hle es [
1
–
3
]. Physical, social, cogni i e, and emo ional ac o s ac o in o
such unc ioning, as hese esou ces es o e balance when a young a hle e is in he ace o ad e si y [
4
–
6
].
In his sense, he s udy o anxie y has been one o he mos p oli ic lines o esea ch, due o he emo ional
esponses i p o okes and ha can a ec a hle es’ pe o mance [7].
Anxie y, which is conside ed a psychological esponse p oduced as a consequence o he di e ences
be ween an a hle e’s esponse capaci y and he demands o he en i onmen , accompanied by a high
deg ee o psycho-physiological ac i a ion [
8
], shows unc ional condi ions ha acili a e adap a ion (e.g.,
helps o p epa e o ac ion) bu also o he dys unc ions ha weaken o hinde beha io (e.g., ne ousness,
impulsi eness o umina ion) [9].
Among he di e en classi ica ions ha exis a ound his psychological esponse and he
ins umen s used in esea ch o measu e i , we mus highligh soma ic anxie y (physiological ac i a ion
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569; doi:10.3390/ije ph17155569 www.mdpi.com/jou nal/ije ph
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 2 o 11
ha a pe son pe cei es when aced wi h a s ess ul si ua ion) and cogni i e anxie y (nega i e
expec a ions and conce ns abou onesel and he cu en si ua ion and i s possible consequences) [
10
].
In spo s si ua ions, soma ic anxie y o en occu s in compe i ions pe cei ed as signi ican whe e
he e a e uncon ollable elemen s and unde condi ions o social e alua ion ha lead o s ess and
a ho monal esponse, such as inc eased le els o co isol in sali a, o physiological aspec s, such as
inc eased hea a e o muscle ension [
11
,
12
]. To unde s and he ela ionship be ween anxie y and
spo s pe o mance, Ma ens, Vealey and Bu on [
13
] es ablished he mul idimensional heo y, in which
hey p oposed ha he e is a nega i e ela ionship be ween cogni i e anxie y and pe o mance on he
one hand, and a cu ilinea ela ionship be ween soma ic anxie y and spo s pe o mance on he o he .
Anxie y is also ela ed o sociodemog aphic a iables such as age and gende in ela ion wi h
spo con ex s, due o i being mul i ac o ial. Di e en s udies ca ied ou in he spo s con ex ha e
shown ha he olde he a hle e, he g ea e he expe ience and compe i i e le el in p ac icing a spo ,
and he lowe hei le els o anxie y, because mo e expe ienced a hle es ha e g ea e and be e con ol
o e hei emo ions [
14
,
15
], g ea e echnical- ac ical mas e y, and g ea e expe ience in s ess ul and
ad e se compe i i e si ua ions ha a o sel -con idence [
16
] and cogni i e abili ies [
17
]. Wi h ega d
o gende , a e an ex ensi e e iew o he li e a u e, no s udies we e ound ha show s a is ically
signi ican di e ences, al hough i is ue ha some s udies ha e shown ha women ha e highe le els
o anxie y and less sel -con idence han men, and ha he p oduc ion o anxie y in men and women
can come om di e en ou es. In men i is be p oduced by he poo managemen o a si ua ion, and
in women by hei le el o mo i a ion [
12
,
18
,
19
]. Likewise, wi h ega d o he ype o spo p ac iced,
he esul s o he li e a u e e iew indica e ha a hle es who p ac ice eam spo s in which he e is
physical con ac show highe le els o anxie y han a hle es who p ac ice indi idual spo s [17,20].
In a con luen di ec ion wi h anxie y, esilience p o ec s young a hle es om s ess ul si ua ions
o h ea ening scena ios, gi ing a hle es he means o a oid hem [
21
]. Among he many de ini ions
o esilience, Deen, T une and Wong [
22
] explained i as a se o cogni i e aspec s and beha io al
esponses o acu e o ch onic ad e si y. Lu ha , Ciche i and Becke [
23
] de ined i as a dynamic p ocess
o posi i e adap a ions wi hin a con ex o ad e si y. Fle che and Sa ka [
24
] a gued ha esilience
is based on o e coming ad e si y and on posi i e adap a ion. On he o he hand, Wu e al. [
25
]
highligh ed e ec i e e o s o en i onmen al challenges and ul ima e esis ance o he unheal hy
e ec s o s ess.
S udied in spo s con ex s, esilience, like anxie y, is a a iable ha is dependen on di e en
ac o s, such as emo ions, suppo s, expe iences, s a egies, mo i a ion, and sel -concep [
5
,
26
,
27
], all o
which acili a e op imal spo s pe o mance. This concep is eally impo an in you h, wi h impo an
implica ions in cogni i e, physical, and social de elopmen ha occu s in he adolescence [
28
], and i s
in luence on g ow h on he pe sonal le el and in spo ing abili ies [5,29].
As o he ela ionship be ween esilience and he sociodemog aphic a iables o age and gende ,
i has no been possible o es ablish i m conclusions since esilience has been li le s udied in he
con ex o spo s [
30
]. Howe e , some s udies ha e shown ha a hle es a e mo e esilien , which is
p obably due o hei g ea e expe ience in he ace o ad e si y bo h in p o essionals [
15
] and you h
a hle es [
28
,
31
,
32
]. Wi h espec o hei ela ionship wi h gende , he e a e con adic ions, as he e a e
s udies ha ha e no shown signi ican di e ences in he le els o esilience be ween men and women,
and o he s ha poin o highe le els o esilience in men caused by a be e pe cep ion o pe sonal
compe ence [33].
Wi h ega d o he ela ionship be ween esilience and spo s a iables such as spo ing expe ience
o he spo s modali y p ac iced, he esul s o he e iew ca ied ou on he i s o he a iables
show con adic o y esul s, since he e a e s udies ha , al hough hey ha e no ob ained s a is ically
signi ican ou comes, ha e ound ha p o essional a hle es wi h highe le els o compe ence a e mo e
esilien han ama eu a hle es [
34
,
35
]; on he o he hand, he e a e wo ks ha ha e e lec ed ha
a hle es wi h less spo ing expe ience, like you h a hle es, had mo e esilience capaci y [
32
]. As o he
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 3 o 11
spo p ac iced, di e en s udies ha e shown ha a hle es who p ac ice indi idual spo s ha e highe
le els o esilience [28,36].
Sel -con idence is unde s ood as con ic ion (based on wha has been lea ned and li ed be o e)
abou he abili y o pe o m a ce ain ask success ully. I is e iden ha young people ha e less
spo ing expe ience and a g ea e p obabili y o no being con iden in hei own skills and esou ces
(e.g., se e al consecu i e e o s o ailu es would a ec he pe cep ion o sel -con idence), which
would lead o li ing wi h g ea e pe cep ions o anxie y. Howe e , di e en aspec s could gene a e
hei imp o emen by looking o sel - e lec ion be o e he asks [
37
], educing he d ama ism o he
mis ake [
38
] o gene a ing suppo bonds wi h colleagues [
39
] and a ional exp ession o emo ions [
40
].
Mo eo e , ega ding he ela ionship be ween anxie y and esilience in spo s con ex s, i should
be no ed ha based on he li e a u e e iew, he e is li le scien i ic e idence on his issue in adolescen
samples and ou side he clinical se ing. As an example, Ma in-K umm, Sa azin, Pe e son and
Famose [
41
], in a s udy conduc ed in F ance wi h adolescen child en, demons a ed he ela ionship
be ween esilience and anxie y, since he esul s e lec ed ha child en wi h a highe le el o esilience
con olled hei anxie y le els be e when pe o ming an abili y. Likewise, O
í
n-Mon e o, De la Vega
and Gons
á
l ez-Bo ella [
42
], in hei s udy abou op imism, anxie y, and sel -con idence in handball
playe s, showed ha he mos esilien playe s aced he compe i ion wi h g ea e con idence and wi h
lowe le els o anxie y.
The e o e, and on he basis o wha has been e iewed so a , he objec i es o he s udy a e as
ollows: (a) o desc ibe he le els o esilience and compe i i e anxie y, (b) o analyze he di e ences in
e ms o gende and yea s o spo s expe ience, (c) o s udy he ela ionship be ween esiliency esou ces
and compe i i e anxie y, and (d) o examine he a iables ha p edic bo h esiliency esou ces and
sel -con idence in playe s.
2. Ma e ials and Me hods
2.1. Pa icipan s
A o al o 241 eam spo s playe s (handball and baske ball) belonging o di e en clubs in he
Mu cia egion and Valencia communi ies pa icipa ed (160 boys, 66.4%; 81 gi ls, 33.6%), wi h an
a e age age o 15.36 yea s (SD =1.07). Acco ding o age, 60.6% (n=146) o he pa icipan s we e
<15 yea s, while 39.4% (n=95) we e >15 yea s old. Mos o hem s a ed ha hey had an a e age o
1.56 yea s o expe ience as a ede a ed playe in hei spo (SD =0.50) and hey spen 1.93 aining
sessions pe week (SD =0.36).
2.2. Measu emen Ins umen s
Resilience scale. The Spanish e sion o he Resilience Scale (RS-14) [
43
] was used, along wi h
he 14-I em Resilience Scale (ER-14) [
44
], which is an abb e ia ed e sion o he o iginal 25-i em
e sion [
45
]. This scale measu es a pe son’s deg ee o indi idual esilience when such is conside ed a
posi i e pe sonali y cha ac e is ic, one ha allows people o adap o ad e se si ua ions. The scale
is composed o 14 i ems g ouped in wo dimensions ha measu e pe sonal compe ence (11 i ems:
sel -con idence, independence, decision, ingenui y and pe se e ance, e c.; e.g., “I am no a aid o
su e di icul ies because I ha e al eady expe ienced hem in he pas ”), and he accep ance o onesel
and li e (3 i ems: adap abili y, balance, and lexibili y and s able li e pe spec i e; e.g., “I am a pe son
wi h adequa e sel -es eem”). E e y i em on he scale should co espond wi h he esponden ’s eelings.
The answe s we e on a 7-poin Like - ype scale ha anged om s ongly disag ee (1) o s ongly
ag ee (7). The in e nal consis ency o he sample collec ed was sa is ac o y (α=0.80).
Compe i i e S a e Anxie y In en o y-2R. The Compe i i e S a e Anxie y In en o y-2R
(CSAI-2R) [
46
] comes om he o iginal CSAI-2 e sion consis ing o 27 i ems [
20
]. The Spanish e sion
o his second e ision, which was alida ed o a hle es, was used in his s udy [
47
]. The CSAI-2R is a
speci ic in en o y o he spo s con ex , bu wi h a one-dimensional concep ion o he s a e o anxie y.
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 4 o 11
The scale is composed o 16 i ems g ouped in h ee dimensions ha measu e soma ic s a e anxie y
(6 i ems; e.g., “My hea is acing”), sel -con idence (5 i ems; e.g., “I am con iden ”), and cogni i e s a e
anxie y (5 i ems; e.g., “I wo y ha o he s will be disappoin ed wi h my pe o mance”). Each i em o
he scale had o be answe ed in e ms o how he playe el jus be o e he compe i ion. The answe s
we e collec ed on a 4-poin Like - ype scale anging om none (1) o e y much (4). The in e nal
consis ency o he collec ed sample was sa is ac o y (α=0.78).
2.3. P ocedu e
The s udy was ca ied ou in di e en clubs and spo ede a ions o Mu cia egion and Valencia
communi y (Spain). A le e explaining he objec i es o he esea ch and how i was o be ca ied ou ,
accompanied by wo models o in o med consen and pe mission (one o he pa en s and ano he
o he young a hle es), oge he wi h a copy o he measu es, was sen o he clubs and ede a ions
( i s o p esiden s) be o e he da a collec ion. The ques ionnai e was adminis e ed by he esea che s
in he spo s acili ies o he clubs du ing he aining sessions and comple ed by he pa icipan s in
20–30 min. All he pa icipan s we e in o med o he objec i es and o hei igh s as pa icipan s in he
s udy, as well as o he olun a y na u e and he absolu e con iden iali y o he answe s and handling
o he da a. I was explained ha he e we e no co ec o inco ec answe s, so ha pa icipan s would
answe wi h he mos since i y and hones y. This s udy was ca ied ou in acco dance wi h he e hical
guidelines o he Ame ican Psychological Associa ion (APA). The p o ocol was app o ed by he E hics
Commi ee o he Uni e sidad de Mu cia (ID: 1494/2017). All subjec s ga e w i en in o med consen
in acco dance wi h he Decla a ion o Helsinki [48].
2.4. S a is ical Analysis
Th ough he analysis ca ied ou wi h he s a is ical so wa e SPSS. 23.0, desc ip i e measu es and
homogenei y (X
2
Chi-squa ed) we e ob ained o he dis ibu ion o he obse ed sample, in e nal
consis ency o he ins umen s (C onbach’s alpha), di e en ial analysis ( - es , mul i a ia e analysis
and e ec size wi h e ha-squa e) o desc ibe any di e ences in he sample (acco ding o gende and
spo expe ience), co ela ions, and mul iple eg essions (5000 boo s ap samples wi h bias-co ec ed
con idence in e als 95.00) o he de e mina ion o he s eng h o he ela ionship be ween he
s udy a iables.
3. Resul s
3.1. Desc ip i e and Di e en ial Analysis
The sample dis ibu ion e lec ed he exis ence o a s a is ically signi ican associa ion be ween
bo h a iables (Table 1) o he achie emen o no mali y, which was assumed o be a link o dependence
be ween he dis ibu ions by gende and spo expe ience (yea s). Simila ly, his ci cums ance was
again ob ained when conside ing he dis ibu ion by gende and he hou s o weekly aining.
As can be seen in Table 2, he sample e lec ed highe means o sel and li e accep ance in e ms o
esilience, while highe means o sel -con idence we e obse ed in he pe cep ion o anxie y. Pa icipan s’
esponse endency (asymme y) ended o be concen a ed be ween 5 and 7 poin s (Like esponse
o ien a ion was 1–7) o pe sonal compe ence as well as o accep ance, wi h p onounced peaks a
5 and 8 (ku osis). Likewise, he pa icipan s’ esponse endency in anxie y pe cep ion ended o
concen a e (wi h a Like esponse o ien a ion om 1 o 4), be ween 2 and 3 poin s o soma ic anxie y,
and be ween 2.5 and 3.5 o cogni i e anxie y and sel -con idence, wi h p onounced peaks a 2.5 o
soma ic anxie y and 3 o cogni i e anxie y and sel -con idence.
Di e en ial analysis (Table 3) showed he exis ence o s a is ically signi ican di e ences wi h
espec o gende and spo s expe ience. By gende , esou ces o accep ance (p<0.02) we e shown
in a o o gi ls and sel -con idence (p=0.00) in a o o boys. The e ec size o he es ablished
compa isons indica ed ha all he a iables a e e y high, excep o compe i ion and cogni i e anxie y,
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 5 o 11
aspec s ha we e epea ed in he analyses ca ied ou bo h by gende and by yea s o spo s expe ience.
Acco ding o spo s expe ience, he mos expe ienced young a hle es showed di e ences in accep ance
(p<0.03) and sel -con idence (p<0.01).
Table 1.
Dis ibu ion and homogenei y o in e a iable a iances (gende , spo expe ience, and weekly
aining hou s).
Chi-squa ed (X2)2=19.26;
p=0.402 *
Spo Expe ience
≤5 yea s (n=106) >5 yea s (n=135)
Mean (SD) age n(%) Mean (SD) age n(%)
15.67 (0.51) 15.14 (0.49)
Boys =160 (66.39%) Boys n(%) 78 (73.58%) 82 (60.74%)
Gi ls =81 (33.61%) Gi ls n(%) 28 (26.42%) 53 (39.26%)
Chi-squa ed (X2)2=14.39;
p=0.236 *
Weekly T aining Hou s
≤2 h/week (n=17) >2 h/week (n=224)
Mean (SD) age n(%) Mean (SD) age n(%)
15.71 (1.05) 15.33 (1.07)
Boys n(%) 17 (100%) 143 (63.84)
Gi ls n(%) 0 81 (36.16%)
*p<0.05.
Table 2.
Means, s anda d de ia ions, and measu es o dispe sion o he a iables s udied o he sample.
n=241 Means S anda d De ia ion Asymme y Ku osis
Compe ence 5.46 0.79 −0.47 0.29
Accep ance 7.37 1.56 −0.20 0.10
Soma ic anxie y 2.45 0.77 0.18 −0.85
Sel -con idence 3.01 0.59 −0.34 −0.05
Cogni i e Anxie y 2.75 0.71 −0.29 −0.37
Table 3.
Di e en ial analysis ( - es ), acco ding o he gende and spo s expe ience o he pa icipan s.
n=241; gl2.239
(n=160)
Gi ls
(n=81)
Boys (p) d (n=106)
≤5 yea s
(n=135)
>5 yea s (p) d
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
Compe ence 5.39
(0.79)
5.58
(0.86) −3.43 0.40 5.45
(0.81)
5.46
(0.78) 1.03 0.03
Accep ance 7.83
(0.78)
7.05
(0.86) 2.25 (0.02 *) −0.64 7.33
(0.70)
7.90
(0.64)
−1.62
(0.03 *) 0.07
Soma ic anxie y 3.21
(0.73)
3.14
(0.76) −3.21 0.98 2.48
(0.75)
2.43
(0.78) 1.08 −0.11
Cogni i e anxie y 3.04
(0.58)
2.94
(0.62) −4.13 −0.28 3.03
(0.66)
3.00
(0.54) 1.48 −0.07
Sel -con idence 2.61
(0.68)
3.02
(0.68) −4.32 (0.00 **) 1.01 2.68
(0.73)
3.40
(0.69)
−1.83
(0.01 *) 0.78
* p <0.05; ** p<0.01
In o de o check whe he he e we e di e ences in esiliency esou ces and anxie y esponses
based on gende and yea s o spo s expe ience, an analysis o mul i a ia e a iance (MANOVA) was
ca ied ou wi h he sco es ob ained in all he a iables unde s udy (Table 4). The esul s (Pillai’s T ace)
indica ed s a is ically signi ican di e ences in a o o gi ls (F
(5.232)
=9.08; p<0.01) wi h he highes
magni ude o he e ec (
η2
=731; =0.46). S a is ically signi ican di e ences we e shown based on
yea s o spo s expe ience in a o o he younge , mos expe ienced ones, bu he in e ac ion wi h
he gende a iables was signi ican (F
(5.232)
=7.512; p>0.03), wi h a mode a e e ec size (
η2=779
;

In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 6 o 11
=0.51). Mo e speci ically, analysis o he a iance o e ec s be ween subjec s showed signi ican
di e ences in compe ence, accep ance, cogni i e anxie y, and sel -con idence by gende (in compe ence
and sel -con idence in a o o boys, and in cogni i e anxie y and accep ance in a o o gi ls). In he
yea s o spo s expe ience, he di e ences we e in accep ance, cogni i e anxie y, and sel -con idence in
a o o he younge , mo e expe ienced ones. No signi ican di e ences we e shown in he gende *spo
expe ience in e ac ion.
Table 4.
Analysis o mul i a ia e a iance o esiliency esou ces and anxie y, acco ding o gende and
yea s o ede a ed spo expe ience.
≤5 Yea s >5 Yea s
F(5.232)
Gende
F(5.232)
Yea s
F(5.232)
Gende ×Yea s
Boys
(n=78)
Gi ls
(n=28)
Boys
(n=82)
Gi ls
(n=53)
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
Compe ence 5.85 (0.79) 5.18 (0.83) 5.72 (0.78) 5.33 (0.77) 0.05 *
Accep ance 6.51 (0.59) 7.26 (0.88) 7.32 (0.38) 7.68 (0.52) 0.01 * 0.03 *
Soma ic anxie y 2.41 (0.73) 2.64 (0.75) 2.23 (0.73) 2.75 (0.77)
Cogni i e anxie y 2.61 (0.73) 2.94 (0.65) 2.93 (0.64) 3.26 (0.70) 0.02 ** 0.02 *
Sel -con idence 3.10 (0.62) 2.82 (0.72) 3.53 (0.53) 3.21 (0.56) 0.00 ** 0.00 **
*p<0.05; ** p<0.01
3.2. Co ela ional Analysis
S a is ically signi ican wo-way ela ionships appea ed be ween he a iables unde s udy
(Table 5), so ha olde a hle es had highe pe cep ions o compe ence as shown in hei lowe le els
o managing esilien ly. Accep ance was in e sely and signi ican ly ela ed o bo h cogni i e and
soma ic anxie y. Con e sely i was di ec ly ela ed o sel -con idence and logically o a high pe cep ion
o compe ence. All his led us o hink ha highe pe cep ions o esilien accep ance had a di ec
in luence on he a hle e’s abili y o in e p e anxie y. The ela ionship be ween he wo esilien
a iables (accep ance and compe ence) wi h he de elopmen o sel -con idence in a young handball
playe is e y signi ican , in a posi i e way.
Table 5. Co ela ional analysis be ween esilience dimensions and anxie y esponses.
M 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Soma ic anxie y 2.45 (0.77) 1 0.533 ** −0.123 −0.073 −0.193 ** −0.110
2. Cogni i e anxie y
3.01 (0.59) 1 0.049 0.013 −0.144 * −0.125
3. Sel -con idence 2.75 (0.71) 1 0.547 ** 0.387 ** −0.033
4. Compe ence 5.46 (0.79) 1 0.494 ** −0.164 *
5. Accep ance 7.37 (1.59) 1 0.051
6. Age
15.36 (1.07)
1
*p<0.05; ** p<0.01
3.3. Mul iple Reg ession Analysis
The esul s o he eg ession analysis (Table 6) indica ed a model in which as he a hle es showed
be e le els o accep ance, compe ence, and cogni i e anxie y, hey also educed hei soma ic anxie y
indica o s, and inc eased in sel -con idence, whe e F
2.239
=23.59; p<0.01 explains 33.5% o he
o al a iance.
The esul s o he eg ession analysis (Table 7) also indica e a model in which younge a hle es
had be e le els o accep ance and sel -con idence and mo e compe ence, whe e F
2.239
=33.96;
p<0.01
explains 42.1% o he o al a iance. On he o he hand, accep ance was achie ed h ough he p edic i e
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 7 o 11
model es ablished by an inc ease in compe ence and sel -con idence, and he exis ence o low le els o
cogni i e anxie y.
Table 6. Va iable p edic o s o young playe s’ sel -con idence.
Dependen Va iable S ep Independen Va iables Be a p
Sel -con idence
R=0.579; R2=0.335;
F2.239(p)=23.59(0.00)
1 Age 0.023 0.34 0.46
2 Compe ence 0.354 7.46 0.00 **
3 Accep ance 0.057 2.35 0.01 *
4 Soma ic anxie y −
0.100
−2.02 0.04 *
5 Cogni i e anxie y 0.112 2.09 0.03 *
*p<0.05; ** p<0.01
Table 7. P edic ing a iables o esiliency esou ces in playe s.
Dependen Va iable S ep Independen Va iables Be a p
Compe ence
R=0.648; R2=0.421;
F2.239(p)=33.96 (0.00)
1 Age −
0.123
−3.30 0.63
2 Accep ance 0.177 6.31 0.00 **
3 Soma ic anxie y 0.021 0.34 0.73
4 Cogni i e anxie y 0.018 0.26 0.79
5 Sel -con idence 0.543 7.46 0.00 **
Dependen Va iable S ep Independen Va iables Be a p
Compe ence
R=0.648; R2=0.421;
F2.239(p)=33.96 (0.00)
1 Age −
0.150
1.836 0.68
2 Accep ance 0.823 6.308 0.00 **
3 Soma ic anxie y −
0.154
−
1.159
0.24
4 Cogni i e anxie y −
0.217
−
1.515
0.02 *
5 Sel -con idence 0.407 2.358 0.06 *
*p<0.05; ** p<0.01
4. Discussion
The objec i es o his s udy we e as ollows: (a) o desc ibe he le els o esilience and compe i i e
anxie y, (b) o analyze he di e ences in e ms o gende and yea s o spo s expe ience, (c) o s udy he
ela ionship be ween esiliency esou ces and compe i i e anxie y, and (d) o examine he a iables
ha p edic young playe s’ esiliency esou ces and sel -con idence.
4.1. Resilience Le els and Compe i i e Anxie y
The esul s indica ed ha bo h he le els o sel -accep ance and li e and compe ence we e high.
These ou comes imply ha a hle es bes ace ad e si y wi h high le els o esilience [
21
]. This inding
is also consis en wi h p e ious s udies, mos o which we e conduc ed in eam spo s such as handball
and oo ball wi h young spo eam a hle es [
28
,
30
–
32
,
35
]. As o anxie y le els, he esul s e lec ed
mode a e and high le els o sel -con idence. I should be no ed ha mode a e le els o anxie y could
op imize a hle es’ pe o mance [
49
]. These esul s a e consis en wi h hose ound in o he s udies
conduc ed wi h samples belonging mos ly o indi idual spo s [
12
,
16
,
18
,
50
] and con adic he high
le els o soma ic [14,17] and cogni i e [19] anxie y eached by o he s.
4.2. Di e ences in Le els o Resilience and Compe i i e Anxie y Depending on Gende and Yea s o
Spo s Expe ience
In ela ion o esilience, he esul s showed ha accep ance le els we e highe in boys, while
compe ence le els we e highe in gi ls. The li e a u e indica es ha i is usually boys who show highe
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 8 o 11
le els o esilience due o an inc ease in physical sel -concep and ha gi ls a e much mo e a ec ed by
he spo s con ex [
51
]. In e ms o spo s expe ience, i was shown ha bo h accep ance and compe ence
le els we e highe in playe s wi h g ea e spo s expe ience. These esul s a e consis en wi h indings
in p e ious s udies in simila samples, mos o which we e conduc ed wi h eam spo s [31,32].
On he o he hand, highe le els o soma ic anxie y we e ound in gi ls and cogni i e anxie y in
boys. The li e a u e p o ides di e en explana ions o why gi ls end o ha e highe le els o anxie y
han boys. Ab ahamsen e al. [
12
] a ibu ed he di e ence o boys’ in e p e a ion o pe o mance;
B une and Sabis on [
18
] a ibu ed i o a g ea e pe cep ion o compe ence and mo i a ion in boys;
Peñaloza e al. [
50
], Le
ó
n-P ados, Fuen es and Cal o [
51
], and A binaga and Ca acuel [
52
] a ibu ed i
o gi ls’ g ea e conce n abou he loss o social ecogni ion caused by poo pe o mance. In ega d o
sel -con idence and gende , s udies we e ound ha di e ed om he esul s epo ed. Mo illo e al. [
19
]
and Peñaloza e al. [
50
] e ealed highe le els o sel -con idence in boys. The con o e sy be ween he
esul s o he s udy and hose ound in he li e a u e may be due o he age di e ence o he analyzed
sample. Finally, in o he s udies such as he one conduc ed by Mon e o, Mo eno-Mu cia, Gonz
á
lez,
Pulido, and Ce ell
ó
[
53
] he e we e no s a is ically signi ican di e ences in ela ion o gende , no in
he le els o anxie y o sel -con idence.
As ega ds he ela ionship be ween anxie y le els and spo s expe ience, al hough no s a is ically
signi ican esul s we e ound, highe le els o soma ic anxie y and cogni i e anxie y and lowe
le els o sel -con idence we e epo ed in a hle es wi h less spo s expe ience, hus coinciding wi h
indings om p e ious s udies conduc ed wi h samples belonging o bo h eam and indi idual spo s.
Han on e al. [14]
wi h adul s and He n
á
ndez e al. [
16
] wi h you hs showed ha a hle es wi h g ea e
spo s expe ience aced anxie y wi h highe le els o sel -con idence and managed o in e p e anxie y
be e han hose wi h less expe ience.
4.3. Rela ionship be ween Resiliency Resou ces and Compe i i e Anxie y
The esul s o he co ela ional analysis e lec ed a nega i e associa ion be ween he wo dimensions
o anxie y (cogni i e and soma ic anxie y) and o accep ance, showing ha compe ence was nega i ely
ela ed o soma ic anxie y and posi i ely o cogni i e anxie y. The pape s e iewed showed ha he
wo dimensions o esilience we e nega i ely ela ed o hose o anxie y [37,38,54,55]. Simila s udies
we e conduc ed in eam spo s such as handball, baske ball, oo ball, and ugby, and ound ha
you h a hle es wi h highe le els o esilience managed o mode a e hei anxie y le els signi ican ly,
eco e ing o adap ing be e o h ea ening si ua ions [
38
,
41
,
42
,
54
]. In addi ion, esilien a hle es may
be be e able o p o ec hemsel es in he ace o ad e si y, while hose wi h lowe le els may ha e
g ea e ailu es, hus causing low sel -con idence and highe le els o anxie y [41].
4.4. Resiliency Resou ces and Sel -Con idence P edic ing Va iables
The eg ession analysis showed ha sel -con idence is likely o inc ease as a hle es ha e be e
le els o accep ance, compe ence, and cogni i e anxie y and ha i is likely o educe hei indica o s
o soma ic anxie y. These esul s a e in line wi h he indings o O in-Mon e o e al. [
42
] in hei
s udy o handball playe s, in which he playe s wi h highe le els o esilience showed highe le els o
sel -con idence and coped be e wi h ad e se si ua ions.
Fu he mo e, he eg ession analysis also indica ed ha younge a hle es ha e highe le els o
compe ence wi h highe le els o accep ance and sel -con idence. In addi ion, he accep ance was
g ea e when combined wi h compe ence, sel -con idence, and less cogni i e anxie y. The li e a u e
e iewed shows ha young a hle es end o be he mos esilien [32,55].
The p esen s udy, in addi ion o p o iding new in o ma ion on he ela ionship be ween esiliency
esou ces and anxie y le els in a hle es, has some limi a ions ha should be highligh ed. One o hem
is ha he gene aliza ion o he esul s is limi ed, due o he sample (cade s and junio s), so hese esul s
should be conside ed as p elimina y, needing u u e eplica ion in o he ca ego ies such as child en and
o he spo s, hus co e ing all ages o adolescence and spo s, and bo h eam and indi idual spo s.
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2020,17, 5569 9 o 11
In e ms o s eng hs, i is impo an o highligh he no el in o ma ion p o ided in ela ion o
he ield o s udy and he ins umen s used, as hese ha e been used in a mul i ude o wo ks and
wi h a high deg ee o consis ency. Likewise, i would be necessa y o complemen u u e s udies wi h
he analysis o o he a iables ela ed o anxie y and esilience such as s ess and op imism. Finally,
ano he in e es ing aspec would be o be able o con as esiliency esou ces and anxie y le els in
collec i e and indi idual spo s and see he possible di e ences ha a e gene a ed.
5. Conclusions
The consequen nega i e ela ionship be ween esilience esou ces (especially accep ance and
compe i ion) and le els o compe i i e anxie y, is a e lec ion ha o enhance he o me makes i
possible o egula e up o con ol he la e . Despi e he exis ence o indica o s o cogni i e anxie y
(e.g., ecu en hough s o hyming), coaches and a hle es need o unde s and ha hey a e also
indica o s o a necessa y ac i a ion o psychological unc ioning. Channeling such a p ocess h ough
psychological aining o di e en skills will enhance he capaci ies o sel -con idence. Making young
a hle es g ow up on sel -accep ance (e.g., educing he belie ha hey canno lose), o he younge
ones, and on he pe cep ion o compe i ion (e.g., lea ning o obse e hei imp o emen s) al eady in
adolescence, will undoub edly consolida e key aspec s o an e ec i e and adap ed psychological
esponse o spo s si ua ions.
Highligh ing how o wo k on skills, such as unde s anding si ua ions o unce ain y, coope a ion,
o he sea ch o social suppo a ea ly ages and wi h s a egies ha in eg a e such esou ces in he
dynamics o aining and spo s g ow h, will enhance he esou ces o he much needed coping wi h
s ess and anxie y, as well as consolida e belie s and a i udes ha can educe dys unc ional esponses
ha al e (e.g., blaming o he s o onesel , c ea ing ea s o ailu e a e se e al mis akes).
Au ho Con ibu ions:
Concep ualiza ion, J.G.-H. and M.G.-L.; da a cu a ion, J.G.-H. and M.G.-G.; o mal analysis,
J.G.-H.; in es iga ion, M.G.-G. and M.G.-L.; me hodology, J.G.-H.; p ojec adminis a ion, M.G.-L.; supe ision,
M.G.-L.; w i ing—o iginal d a , J.G.-H., M.G.-G., and M.G.-L.; w i ing— e iew and edi ing, J.G.-H., A.V.-V., and
M.G.-L. All au ho s ha e ead and ag eed o he published e sion o he manusc ip .
Funding: This esea ch ecei ed no ex e nal unding.
Acknowledgmen s:
We a e g a e ul o he suppo ecei ed om he Royal Spanish Handball Fede a ion
(RFEBM) which allowed his s udy o be ca ied ou .
Con lic s o In e es : The au ho s decla e no con lic o in e es .
Re e ences
1.
Galli, N.; Gonzalez, S.P. Psychological esilience in spo : A e iew o he li e a u e and implica ions o
esea ch and p ac ice. In . J. Spo Exe c. Psychol. 2015,13, 243–257. [C ossRe ]
2.
Ne es, A.N.; Ba bosa, F.P.; Da Sil a, M.P.; B and
ã
o, M.R.; Zane i, M.C. Con i ma o y ac o analysis o he
B ie Resilience Scale o B azilian a hle es. Cuad. Psicol. Depo e 2018,18, 103–110.
3.
G
ó
mez-L
ó
pez, M.; Bo ego, C.C.; da Sil a, C.M.; G ane o-Gallegos, A.; Gonz
á
lez-He n
á
ndez, J. E ec s o
mo i a ional clima e on ea o ailu e and anxie y in een handball playe s. In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h
2020,17, 592. [C ossRe ]
4.
Faigenbaum, A.D.; F ench, D.N.; Lloyd, R.S.; K aeme , W.J. 7 S eng h and powe aining o young a hle es.
In S eng h and Condi ioning o Young A hle es: Science and Applica ion; Lloyd, R.S., Oli e , J.L., Eds.; Rou ledge:
London, UK, 2019; pp. 131–151.
5.
Ga c
í
a, X.; Moline o, O.; Ruiz, R.; Salgue o, A.; De la Vega, R.; M
á
quez, S. Resilience in spo : Theo e ical
ounda ions, ins umen s and li e a u e e iew. Cuad. Psicol. Depo e 2014,14, 83–98.
6.
Whi e, R.L.; Bennie, A. Resilience in you h spo : A quali a i e in es iga ion o gymnas ics coach and a hle e
pe cep ions. In . J. Spo s Sci. Coach. 2015,10, 379–393. [C ossRe ]
7.
Ye likaya, K.; Tok, S.; Ta a , A.; Binboga, E.; Balyan, M. The ela ionship among pe sonali y, compe i i e
anxie y, soma ic anxie y, physiological a ousal, and pe o mance in male a hle es. J. Clin. Spo Psychol.
2016
,
10, 48–58. [C ossRe ]