Cited by 13Sport Psychology and PerformanceStress and Burnout ResearchPsychological Treatments and Assessments

The Roles of Different Appraisals in Anxiety and Emotional Exhaustion: A Case of NCAA Division I Head Coaches

Lee, Ye Hoon·2021·The American Journal of Psychology

Abstract

The complex and unpredictable nature of sport competitions causes athletic coaches to experience a substantial amount of anxiety, which can be detrimental to their well-being and performance. Therefore, it is important to identify the psychological process of how coaches manage their anxiety. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationships between the four different cognitive appraisals, anxiety, and emotional exhaustion among coaches. To accomplish this objective, 203 head coaches in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I were recruited to complete an online questionnaire. The findings indicate that the goal incongruence appraisal positively predicts reported anxiety, whereas the coping efficacy appraisal negatively predicts it. Furthermore, reported anxiety is positively associated with subjective ratings of emotional exhaustion. The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of the cognitive appraisal process of emotion by demonstrating how different appraisals are associated with anxiety. Additionally, the finding can help coaches use more effective cognitive appraisals to enhance their emotional experience.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5406/amerjpsyc.134.3.0269

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Goal incongruence was a significant predictor of self-reported anxiety.

    “both goal incongruence and coping efficacy were found to be significant predictors of self-reported anxiety [103]”
  • Coping efficacy was a significant predictor of self-reported anxiety.

    “both goal incongruence and coping efficacy were found to be significant predictors of self-reported anxiety [103]”
  • Elite-level coaches experiencing symptoms associated with anxiety may encounter challenges in pursuing short- and long-term goals.

    “For example, it was reported that elite-level coaches experiencing symptoms associated with anxiety may encounter challenges in pursuing short- and long-term goals [100, 103].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 75 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, Y. H.
Affiliations
Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (KR)
Corresponding author
Lee, Ye Hoon
Venue
The American Journal of Psychology
Published
2021-10-01
Volume
134
Issue
3
Pages
269-283
ISSN
  • 0002-9556 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-8298
OpenAlex
W4210775885
Cited by
12
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3
FWCI
3.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The American Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
cognitive appraisal, anxiety, emotional exhaustion, head coaches, NCAA Division I, goal incongruence, coping self-efficacy, sports coaches, coach well-being, emotion regulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review