CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEWS

In this chapter, a definition of mental toughness and development of

psychometric measurement of mental toughness are presented. Then it outlines the
explanation of twelve dimensions that encompass the instrument later use in this
research. In the measurement section, approaches that have been proposed to assess
mental toughness are addressed. Particularly it emphasizes the development of
questionnaires to measure dimensions and characteristics of mental toughness in sport
and physical activity. Then information regarding the research on mental toughness,
concerning the connection between this concept and performance is presented.
Synthesis and discussion on central literature that contextualizes this research and that
forms the basis of the study are presented. The evolution and development of the
mental toughness construct is explored with a focus on key definitions of the terms as
well as the theory on how it is measured.
Following the above mentioned, psychological skills training part as is
another important issue in the study. The working theory of self-talk and goal-setting
and its use will be presented. Next it is to raise the concerns about approaches and
researches that are most relevant and they describe the use of these techniques to
develop psychological characteristics that supports its use with mental toughness.
Lastly, this chapter states the aims of the present dissertation.

Perspectives of mental toughness in sport performance

A former Georgetown basketball coach and current NBA commentator,
John Thompson, stated, "Being mentally tough is just as important as being physically
tough". Training is undertaken across a long period of time and involves many
physiological, psychological, and sociological variables. Athletes’ peak performance
depends on four factors: technical, tactical, physical, and psychological (Moran, 2004,
p. 7). We, coaches, researchers and athletes are all know that on top of the training
pyramid is about psychological training; also it is the hardest part to be trained for
athletes (Bompa, 2002) (Figure 2). Since the physical abilities of most athletes at high
 11

levels (elite, college, or Olympic level) are more homogeneous than their mental
abilities, the distinguishing feature of successful athletes competing at high levels is
often their exceptional mental skills (Silva, 1984). Also, psychological attributes are
now generally accredited as being an important part of athletes’ success. And, coaches
and athletes alike are searching continuously for knowledge that is going to give them
a competitive edge and make them successful. This search has typically led to the
development of physical or technical training programs. Physical training is the
foundation of the pyramid, the base on which to build performance. The winning
athlete or team is often the one with better psychological and mental qualities when
the athletes or teams share similar physical, technical and tactical backgrounds.

Psychological and mental training

Tactical training
Technical training
Physical training

Figure 2 The training factors pyramid (Bompa, 2002).

Recently, many coaches and athletes have become aware of the importance
of mental skills in sport and are placing more emphasis on the development of these
skills. The development of these mental skills is not only important for those with the
desire to win, but for those with a desire to become more consistent performers.
Although a great deal of time in sport is spent on developing the physical skills, more
and more coaches are beginning to preach the importance of mental preparation to
their athletes and are learning important mental strategies that can help their team
(Cote, Salmela, Trudel, Baria, & Russell, 1995).
Mental toughness is an important concept in psychology in general and more
specific in sport psychology, which describes an individual’s capacity or ability to
deal with stressors, pressure and challenges. Talent and skill are important
contributors to achievement in sport, but they are not the most important factors.
 12

There are many talented athletes who have not won when it really counts, at
Olympics, World Champs. So what is the critical factor in athletic achievement? The
answer is toughness. More than fifty-percent of success relevant with psychological
factors that reflect mental toughness was what coaches and athletes felt in early work
of Loehr (1982, 1986). Nowadays, you can hear and see this term everyday through
channels of television, newspapers, or in interviews with sport stars, etc. For instance,
a comment on NBC Sports of Tracy Austin about championship title of Maria
Sharapova after she defeated Serena Williams was:
“Maria Sharapova’s mental toughness and her physical power led her to win
the Wimbledon Ladies’ single title…. the 17-year-old Russian is so mentally
tough and she’s not awed by anyone – two things she proved in defeating
Serena in straight sets…. She had total belief in herself, and that's a very rare
quality.”
Mental toughness is more than just mental. It's also physical and
emotional. In order to be mentally tough on the field, you must have talent and be in
peak physical condition. Your technical skills have to be sharp. It is also important to
recognize that the physical, emotional and mental sides of yourself affect each other.
Mental toughness training allows players to tap into emotional and mental resources
that keep play at its prime as often and consistently as possible. Upon reviewing the
literature on mental skills, mental toughness consistently emerged as one of the most
important psychological characteristics of sport. The literature clearly shows that
mental toughness is imperative for peak sport performance. Performing with the
maximum potential is the core of the mental toughness (Williams, 1988; Gould et al.,
2002). Being mentally tough is what separates winners from losers, and people who
persist versus quitters. Everybody, no matter what their level of competition is, can
benefit from mental toughness training, said JoAnn Dahlkoetter, a sports psychologist
who practices in San Carlos, California, and a world-class triathlete. “It appears
therefore, that virtually any positive psychological characteristic associated with
sporting success has been labeled as mental toughness at one time or another” (Jones
 13

et al., 2002, p. 206). Mental toughness is an important psychological characteristic of

sport performance. The question often asked is “can mental toughness be developed?”
Performance standards have increased drastically within elite sport (Bull,
Albinson, and Shambrook, 1996) and the demands of the elite sporting environment
places the athlete in highly stressful situations both physically and psychologically.
Such situations leading athletes to take into account how they respond and adapt to
stressful environment places are much important to their performance due to side
distractions (Hanton, Evans & Neil, 2003). Sport at the highest level is heavily
characterized by a demand to excel at superior levels and perform under conditions
that are considered extremely demanding and testing (Jones et al., 2007, p. 243). For
this reason, psychological attributes as well as mental skills such as self-confidence
and the ability to cope, two characters intrinsically imbedded in the mental toughness
construct, are becoming commonly accepted as major contributors to overcoming
adversity and achieving performance success.

Definitions of mental toughness

Literature from the 1950s to present day has included diverse definitions and
explanations of Mental Toughness, all of which are largely associated with positive
psychological characteristics and the use of mental skills in performance
(Connaughton, Jones, & Hanton, 2007). Due to these diverse definitions and
explanations of the concept “no clear or broadly accepted definition emerged until
2002” (Connaughton et al., 2007, p. 193), and despite a broad and global acceptance
of the term, there is still no universal definition of what mental toughness entails with
specific reference to a sporting sphere. The assortment of definitions that has
saturated the sporting world only serves to confuse the understanding of mental
toughness, particularly as the majority of the definitions generated based on
investigators’ opinions rather than on any scientifically rigorous examination
(Connaughton et al., 2007, p. 193). Thus, despite the advancement of this concept,
this serves to instead undermine it.
 14

Unfortunately, many acknowledge the importance of mental toughness, but

few fully understand it. “While athletes and coaches often talk about mental
toughness, seldom has it been precisely defined.” (Gould et al., 2002, p. 199).
Coaches and athletes use this term daily without a clear understanding of its
components or what it means to be mentally tough. “The term mental toughness is
probably one of the most used, but least understood terms used in applied sport
psychology” (Jones et al., 2002, p. 205).
Several definitions of mental toughness have been defined through time by
different researchers. With such contradictory definitions of the term mental
toughness, there was no clearly or widely agreed only one clear explanation in such
circumstance. Loehr is a noted sport psychologist who has worked with many top
athletes over years. He suggests the following definition for toughness:
“Toughness is a constellation of mental skills, all of which are learned that
are characteristic of mentally tough competitors” (Loehr, 1982, p. 11).
"Toughness is the ability to consistently perform toward the upper range of
your talent and skill regardless of competitive circumstances".
Toughness is not about having a "killer instinct" or being mean or cold. By
being mentally tough, you can bring all your talent and skill to life consistently. Being
able to use your emotional life effectively will help you perform at your prime more
consistently.
As to Fourie and Potgieter (2001) stated, the characteristics of athletes who
possess to be tough are as follows: motivation level, coping skills, confidence
maintenance, cognitive skills, discipline and goal-directedness, competitiveness,
prerequisite physical and mental skills, team unity, preparation skills, psychological
skills, psychological hardiness, religious convictions and ethics.
Then, Jones et al. (2002) suggested a definition of mental toughness derived
from their rigorous scientific approaches to his research as follows:
Mental toughness is having the natural or developed psychological edge that
enables you to:
 15

1. Generally, cope better than your opponents with the many demands
(competition, training, life style) that sport places on a performer; and
2. Specifically, be more consistent and better than your opponents in
remaining determined, focused, confident, and in control under pressure (Jones et al.
p. 209).
This qualitative study resulted in a definition of mental toughness and the
identification of twelve attributes of mentally tough performer. Such attributes
included self-belief, an unshakeable focus, high levels of desire and determination.
Recently, Middleton, Marsh, Martin, Richards, and Perry (2004, 2005a,
2005b, 2005c) defined mental toughness as an unshakeable perseverance and
conviction towards some goal despite pressure or adversity and pointed out 12
characteristics of mental toughness (self-efficacy, future potential, mental self-
concept, task familiarity, value, personal best motivation, goal commitment, task
specific attention, perseverance, positivity, positive comparisons, and stress
minimization).
Gucciardi, Gordon, and Dimmock (2009a, 2009b) raised that the
characteristics of mental toughness consists of: the ability to regulate one’s emotions
and moods in any circumstance to facilitate performance; an internalized, insatiable
desire and commitment to consistently improve one’s performance levels and achieve
success; the ability to withstand and bounce back from situations in which negative
outcomes are experienced (i.e., pressure, adversity, challenge); the ability to manage
one’s attention and focus over extended periods of play involving various distractions;
an unshakeable self-belief in one’s physical ability to perform in any circumstance; an
awareness and understanding of the game and the processes required to perform well;
also physical toughness as well.
The above are some definitions of mental toughness that make sense and up-
to-date in our field, although some sport psychologists would not totally agree but
accepted so far. Mental toughness is often included in discussions related to a
successful performer and multi-dimensional as is. Mental toughness is a collection of
values, attitudes, behaviors and emotions, which enable an individual to persevere and
 16

overcome any obstacle, adversity or pressure experienced, but also to maintain

concentration and motivation when things are going well, to consistently produce high
levels of performance (Gucciardi et al., 2008).

Characteristics of mental toughness

This part was been designed to interrogate some of these findings and
unpack selected influential research endeavors. Providing an insight into what
theorists consider mental toughness to entail offers a reference point for discussing the
degree to which mental toughness has been achieved as a result of the psychological
intervention implemented during this research report.
Some sport professionals believe that the mental part of athletics is the
hardest to train. Mental toughness is often included in discussions related to traits of a
successful performer. Opposing results have been obtained on this matter of mental
toughness through several researches and studies. .
Loehr (1986) suggested that given the raw talent, the mental and emotional
control needed for consistent performance is learned. Norris (1999) also emphasized
the importance of mental toughness in the making of a champion athlete. This raises a
question: If mental toughness can be learned and fostered, are there really any
differences in mental toughness between elite athletes, such as Olympians, and non-
elite athletes? To find out the truth, Gould, Hodge, Peterson, and Petlichkoff (1987)
conducted a study in which 82% of coaches rated mental toughness as the most
important psychological attribute or characteristic in determining success in wrestlers.
Unfortunately, the results showed that only 9% of those same coaches had been
successful in developing mental toughness in their athletic skills.
Continuing on the gap of mental toughness characteristics and development
Gould et al. (2002) questioned if these characteristics can be taught and improved.
They studied the psychological characteristics of Olympic champions, and identified
mental toughness as a significant contributor to sports performance enhancement.
Gould et al. (2002) interviewed ten Olympic champions from the United States, their
 17

coaches, and a parent, guardian or significant others, in order to ascertain how these
champions became such mentally tough athletes. Gould et al. (2002) determined that
there were many key reasons as to why these athletes were successful, including
general mental toughness and resiliency, the ability to cope with and control anxiety,
confidence, optimism, and the ability to focus and block out distractions. The authors
found that these characteristics were learned throughout their athletic development
from their family, community, coaches, and even the athletes themselves .The
characteristics were learned directly through teaching methods or indirectly through
modeling of behavior (Gould et al., 2002).
Tibbert, Morris, and Andersen (2009) found that seven MT attributes were
positively associated with capacity to benefit from recovery time and to perceive a
non-competition period as less stressful, and they suggested that psychological skills
training to modified aspects of mental toughness could help elite performers to
manage stress-recovery imbalance during intensive periods of training and
competition. The use of thinking skills, imagery, confidence building and other skills
described later can be powerful techniques in reaching a high level of mental
toughness.
Marchant, Hamlin, and McNally (2009) suggested that mental toughness can
be developed through appropriate training programs and generally increased with
age. Furthermore, colleagues in India also found that psychological interventions
could help enhance mental toughness dimensions of sport persons (Bhambri et al.
2005). In result of a research, Omar-Fauzee, Daud, Abdullah and Rashid (2009)
concluded that: there were factors that gave a lot of impact on the player especially in
motivating them to attain their best achievement and also affect their mental
toughness. This means that the mental toughness of the players could be enhanced if
the players really understand the professionalism of the game and put it into practice.
A study involving young soccer players evaluated the effectiveness of two
different psychological skills training programs over six weeks (Gucciardi et al.
2009b). They found that both of the psychological skills training programs enhanced
 18

mental toughness and resiliency in the youth soccer players compared to control
subjects, who received no psychological skills training.
In conclusion for the definitions and development of mental toughness, from
those above researches together with the provided definitions has supported to an
understanding that mental toughness can be developed with properly training through
athletes’ career phases. Also, through intervention we can help athletes develop and
maintain their levels of mental toughness, and its characteristics. Thus, sport
psychologists and performers should be advised to earn an early age mental toughness
training whereas support in the later stages of their sporting careers (Connaughton,
Wadey, Hanton, and Jones, 2008). Sport psychologists, and coaches should take the
following characteristics into account: long-term process that begins before sporting
and continues throughout a sporting career (Connaughton & Hanton, 2009; Gucciardi
et al., 2009a). Both facilitative and debilitative mechanisms (Gucciardi et al., 2009b),
mechanisms` operate in a combined, rather than an independent, fashion. Both caught
(i.e., indirectly through experience) and taught (i.e., directly through coaching,
psychological skills training). Psychological skills training alone is not mental
toughness training, it needs critical training and support from coaches, sport
psychologists, social support altogether.
If mental toughness can be learned and fostered, are there really any
differences in mental toughness between elite athletes, such as Olympians, and non-
elite athletes? As with many research topics, opposing results have been obtained on
this subject. According to a study by Nicholls et al. (2009) there are no differences in
mental toughness as delineated by performance levels. Based on their results, Nicholls
et al. (2009) concluded that there were no significant differences in mental toughness
between the 677 athletes performing at the international, national, county,
club/university or beginner levels. These results contradict those by Golby and Sheard
(2004), who found differences in mental toughness scores between three different
levels of rugby players. The rugby athletes participating at the international level
scored higher on levels of mental toughness as compared to the sub-elite athletes.
 19

Thus, more researches should be done to clarify whether there are significant
differences between classes of athletes.

Measurement of mental toughness

In addition to the attempts at defining mental toughness, various endeavors
have been aimed at developing measurements of the concept too. To date, several
measures have been developed and aimed to examine mental toughness. It is very
important that we do seem not having a sound psychometric measurement that is
mostly agreed by colleagues, this is also because the absence of a suitable, clear
definition of mental toughness itself that can help to build a good measurement tool.
Loehr (1986) developed the Psychological Performance Inventory (PPI)
based on interviews with a large number of athletes, and since then various
researchers have utilized the measurement in their studies. The PPI has, however,
been subjected to criticism regarding its proposed weak psychometric properties and
its lack of an adequate conceptual grounding (Connaughton & Hanton, 2009; Crust,
2007, 2008; Gucciardi & Gordon, 2009; Middleton et al., 2004) This particular issue
will be unpacked in greater detail now.
Following the PPI, a number of alternate measures have been developed
focus on various models. Later, grounded in Kobasa, 1979 concept of hardiness and
their applied work with rugby league players, Clough and Earle (2002) proposed the
4Cs model of mental toughness and developed the Mental Toughness Questionnaire
48 (MTQ48) to assess their proposed characteristics of mental toughness. The
MTQ48 assesses an individual’s total mental toughness and the four proposed sub-
components: (a) control (emotional and life), a tendency to feel and act as if one is
influential, (b) commitment, a tendency to involve oneself in rather than experience
alienation from an encounter, (c) challenge, a belief that life is changeable and to view
this as an opportunity rather than a threat, and (d) confidence (interpersonal and in
abilities), a high sense of self-belief and unshakable faith concerning one’s ability to
achieve success. Adequate reliability, face, construct, and criterion validity has been
 20

reported for the MTQ48 (Clough, Earle, & Sewell, 2002). An 18-item (MT18) was
additionally developed and utilized to allow increased accessibility for sports people
(Clough et al., 2002).
The year of 2004 saw great strides in regard to the mental toughness
construct with several researches done by our colleagues. Here, consideration will be
given to the influential work by Middleton et al. (2004). The first study considered is
titled Mental Toughness: Is the Mental Toughness Test Enough? The aim of this
study was to evaluate the construct validity of responses to Loehr’s (1986)
Psychological Performance Inventory (PPI) (Middleton et al., 2004). The PPI is a 42-
item self-report instrument developed to measure reflecting Mental Toughness
factors. Seven factors were presented by means of six questions each and these factors
included: self-confidence, negative energy, attention control, visual and imagery
control, motivation level, positive energy and attitude control (Middleton et al., 2004).
All the presented questions in the PPI were answered by means of a 6 point Likert
scale ranging from 1 representing false to 6 representing true (Middleton et al., 2004).
The main purpose of developing the PPI was to identify the inherent mental toughness
factors. In this study, Middleton et al. (2004) believed that the factors were proven to
have face validity and to further be conceptually compelling (Middleton et al., 2004).
An alternative restructured five-factor solution was then considered and the
researchers found a better fit to the data than the PPI (Middleton et al., 2004). Despite
the new approved alternative model fitting the data more appropriately its conceptual
underpinning and validity were not as strong as the PPI (Middleton et al., 2004).
Also, Golby and Sheard (2004) conducted the following two research
efforts: A Cognitive-Behavioral Analysis of Mental Toughness in National Rugby
League Football Teams and Mental Toughness and Hardiness at Different Levels of
Rugby League. The intricacies and results of these two studies are beyond the scope
of this research endeavor; however, there is some doubt that needs to be expressed
regarding the measurement technique utilized for measuring Mental Toughness
Another instrument is called Sports Mental Toughness Questionnaire
(SMTQ) (Sheard, Golby, & Wersch, 2009). To date, the researcher yielded that this
 21

instrument was not as reliable and validate as compared with another instrument like
MTQ48.
A second study presented by Middleton et al. (2005a) was been titled
Developing the Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI) and the purpose of their study
was to introduce the Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI). At the beginning of their
study Middleton et al. stated that despite the existence of the widespread agreement
regarding the importance, influence, and benefits mental toughness presents, there
still exists a substantial dearth of high quality research (Middleton et al., 2005a).
Middleton et al. utilized a 117-item self-report MTI instrument aimed at measuring:
self-efficacy, task value, potential, task familiarity, personal bests, stress
minimization, mental self-concept, positivity, perseverance, positive comparison, task
specific attention, goal commitment and global mental toughness. A confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the psychometric properties of the MTI
(Middleton et al., 2005a). The reliability coefficients for each of the factors ranged
from .82 to .94 across both sub-elite and elite athlete samples Goodness of fit for the
CFA was good for each sample individually, but also multi-group CFA proved the
MTI factor structure to be stable across both groups. The conclusion of this study was
that the MTI is a valid and reliable measure of mental toughness and the researchers
confirmed that the MTI has direct relevance and benefit in research contexts
(Middleton et al., 2005a).
The final study by Middleton et al. (2005c) considered is titled “Making the
Leap from Good to Great: Comparisons between Sub-Elite and Elite athletes on
Mental Toughness”. In the previous study conducted by Middleton et al. (2005b), the
MTI was validated and the purpose of their next study therefore was to utilize the
recently validated MTI to determine how mental toughness varies across age, gender
and between elite and sub-elite athletes (Middleton et al., 2004). More specifically,
this study was an investigation into the differences in mental toughness between elite
versus sub-elite athletes, older versus younger athletes and male versus female
athletes (Middleton et al., 2005b). The results of this study revealed some interesting
and significant results. Mental toughness proved to be more prominent in older
 22

athletes, male athletes and sub-elite athletes. Furthermore, mental toughness was
shown to decrease in both sub-elite and elite athletes from the age of 12 to 16 and
continue right into adulthood for sub-elite athletes before making significant
improvements (Middleton et al., 2005c). The development of effective programs
designed specifically to help athletes learn, develop and maintain mental toughness
may assist with improving this decreasing rate. A subsidiary result of this research
endeavor was to further validate the MTI as a suitable test for mental toughness and
regarded the MTI as highly valid and reliable test of mental toughness (Middleton et
al., 2005c).
A particular strength of the MTI is its conceptual basis. The factors
identified by Middleton et al. (2005b) have face validity, are intuitively appealing,
and have support from recent qualitative research into mental toughness (Fourie &
Potgieter, 2001; Jones et al., 2002). Furthermore, the current quantitative evaluation
of the MTI demonstrates the strong psychometric properties (Crust & Swann, 2011).
Taken together, the MTI represents a sound instrument, strong in theory,
conceptualization, and internal properties. The development of the MTI has benefited
greatly through the combination of both qualitative and quantitative research methods.
There are numerous advantages to multi-method research encompassing both
quantitative and qualitative approaches (Brewer & Hunter, 1989) and particularly in
an area in which there is a need for strong conceptual and theoretical foundations, the
use of both these complementary methods is recommended. Taking the best of
qualitative and quantitative approaches has resulted in the development of a reliable
and valid MTI, one that is based on a conceptual and theoretical foundation.
Furthermore, the MTI provides a reliable and valid measure of that model. Taken
together, these data suggest the MTI is strong on both conceptual, between-network,
and within-network grounds, and the MTI will have direct relevance and benefit in
both applied and research contexts.
To date, this instrument proved that it can be widely appropriate to be used
to measure mental toughness in research. Thus, we attempt to use it as one of the
instruments in this study along with other tools to access mental toughness. Overall,
 23

research and theory on measuring mental toughness suggests that there is still no fully
sound measure of the concept and that further work is required in this regard. It is
highly recommended, therefore, that further research be done to rectify the absence of
a universally accepted, reliable and valid measure of the multifaceted concept of
mental toughness.
To this point, I draw an assumption that mental toughness is recognized as a
key ingredient in achieving success, and it is really needed for athletes to overcome
their adversity and coping with pressure to win their opponents, and is multi-
dimensional. But, still its definition and psychometric instrument need more
researches to clear the gap between the use of this term and the support of literature
surrounding, and raised the need to develop or validate a standard instrument that can
be used to assess mental toughness in the future. Also, more researches need to find
out if mental toughness can be developed through time, age, together with other
criteria, and how it can be developed with the relationship with athletes’ performance
and competitive environment in the specific sport- context. Lastly, the Mental
Toughness Inventory (MTI) appeared to be a sound instrument to measure mental
toughness with strong psychometrics.

Research on mental toughness

Currently there is much concern and debate over whether these mental skills
or psychological characteristics of mental toughness are teachable/ trainable. There is
no conclusive empirical research that shows whether these attributes are inherited.
The lack of clarity and consistency regarding mental toughness is due, in part, to a
significant gap in the literature.
A study titled Mental Toughness and Performance Success and Failure was
conducted to determine an athlete’s level of mental toughness. This study examined
the interactive effects of mental toughness and success and failure instructions upon
subsequent performance, a Motivational Rating Scale was administered to 238
undergraduate physical education participants and the underlying rationale was that if
 24

this supposed personality trait did contribute towards performance excellence, then
individuals at two extremes should respond differently under failure conditions
(Dennis, 1978).
Fourie and Potgieter (2001), conducted a qualitative study of mental
toughness; analyzed responses from 131 expert coaches and 160 athletes from 31
team and individual sports. This resulted in the identification of 12 components
of mental toughness including motivation level, coping skills, confidence
maintenance, cognitive skill, discipline and goal-directedness, competitiveness,
possession of prerequisite physical and mental requirements, team unity, preparation
skills, psychological hardiness, religious convictions and ethics. Coaches regarded
concentration as the most important characteristic, while the athletes regarded
perseverance as most important. The coaches rated the effectiveness of coaches
and sport psychologists in strengthening the characteristics
of mental toughness higher than athletes did.
In his research, Nicholls et al. (2008, 2009) tested mental toughness among
athletes of different: (a) achievement level, (b) gender, (c) age, (d) sporting
experience, and (e) sport type (team vs. individual and contact vs. non-contact sports).
Participants were 677 athletes including sports performers competing at international
(n = 60), national (n = 99), county (n = 198), club/university (n = 289), and beginner
(n = 31) levels. Results revealed a significant relationship between mental toughness
and gender, age, and sporting experience. However, achievement level and the type of
sport an athlete participated were not significantly associated with mental toughness.
According to a study by Nicholls, Polman, Levy and Backhouse (2009)
there are no differences in mental toughness as delineated by performance levels.
Based on their results, Nicholls et al. (2009) concluded that there were no significant
differences in mental toughness between the 677 athletes performing at the
international, national, county, club/ university or beginner levels. These results
contradict those by Golby and Sheard (2004), who found differences in mental
toughness scores between three different levels of rugby players. The rugby athletes
 25

participating at the international level scored higher on levels of mental toughness as

compared to the sub-elite athletes.
Many popular literature sources such as Loehr (1986) Kuehl, Kuehl, and
Tefertiller, (2005) attempted to define and develop mental toughness programs. These
sources provide inconsistent descriptions of mental toughness, not essential
components. The empirical research on the construct of mental toughness is sparse.
In fact, Jones et al. (2002) is the first empirical source that attempted to
identify the components or attributes of mental toughness or a construct surrounding
mental toughness. Prior to 2002, the research done on mental toughness was
characterized by a lack of conceptual clarity and little consensus surrounding the
definition of mental toughness. In 2002, Jones et al. (2002) recognized the need for
clarification of mental toughness and attempted to define and identify the attributes of
mental toughness as perceived by ten elite sport performers. From the applied
perspective it is required to extend beyond broader terminology of mental toughness
and focus on the fundamental areas of mental toughness: Self-confidence, Control of
negative energies, Attention control, Imagery program, Motivation, Positive
energy control, and Attitude control (Loehr, 1986). The focus on single sport research
was popularized with Thelwell, Weston and Greenlees (2005), in their work:
Defining and Understanding Mental Toughness within Soccer. These authors noted
that their research within soccer was in response to Jones et al.’s. (2002) request for
single sport research efforts within the domain of mental toughness. These researchers
therefore embarked on two studies: the first being an investigation into mental
toughness examining the characteristics of mentally tough soccer players, and the
second being a confirmation of the definition and the importance of attributes for
mentally tough soccer players (Thelwell et al., 2005). The participants were exposed
to semi-structured interviews encompassing five specific areas involving:
demographic details, mental toughness definitions within the context of professional
soccer, comparisons between participant definitions and definitions forwarded by
Jones et al. (2002), areas of modification on individually-prescribed definitions,
 26

participant perceptions regarding the attribute make up of mentally tough soccer

players, and finally areas of general commentary (Thelwell et al., 2005).
Following this, the researchers, initially independently and then later
collectively, agreed upon a definition for mental toughness stemming from the
information collated from the interviewees’ perceptions prior to their exposure to the
definition offered by Jones et al. (2002). Additional significance of this study was that
it presented one of the first justifications behind the development and implementation
of mental toughness programs with Thelwell et al. (2005) who expressed that there
was a strong and important need for platforms and frameworks to be put in place for
developing mental toughness (Thelwell et al., 2005).
In the meanwhile, Gordon and Sridhar (2005) conducted a study aiming at
identifying and developing mental toughness in elite cricketers. The aim of this study
was to develop an understanding of mental toughness within the context of Indian
cricket coupled with an attempt to determine specific mental toughness attributes
(Gordon & Sridhar, 2005). Content analysis was conducted on the data collected and
revealed “seven higher order categories or responses that collectively represented the
key attributes of mentally tough Indian cricketers as described by expert
commentators (Gordon & Sridhar, 2005, p. 2). In conclusion, they facilitated a study
to present culturally specific insights regarding development and identification of
mental toughness and the seven key attributes identified by the experts contributed to
the development of a program designed for the elite genre of players (Gordon &
Sridhar, 2005). They did, however, state that “further research is required to refine a
cricket mental toughness inventory that can be used both to identify and develop
mental toughness among genders”.
Mental toughness is a descriptive term that describes the use of a series of
cognitive, behavioral and emotional processes in response to some pressure or
adversity. Mental toughness is about a continuation to believe in oneself, effective
coping, unshakeable focus, and in pursuit of a goal with conviction, despite adversity.
Chiefly, mental toughness is best understood in context. This gives rise to questions
for further research. Do the strategies used for mental toughness change depending on
 27

the context? Do the various mental toughness characteristics change depending on

various stages of interaction with a stressor?
It might be predicted that increased mental toughness would correlate
positively with increased success. The results of such study would prove beneficial to
coaches and athletes, by illuminating the mental toughness characteristics most
related to enhancing athletic success. Examining the degree of interaction between
mental toughness characteristics and factors within the stressor or environment will
help to further understand how mental toughness plays out in real time.
Mentally tough athletes require a sound and solid belief in their capacity to
achieve in their sport. Accordingly, when mentally tough athletes are under pressure
in their sport, they continue to believe in themselves. Despite performance pressure,
mentally tough athletes believe in their potential to achieve, in their ability to do the
task, and in their overall mental strength. On the other hand, athletes lower in mental
toughness doubt themselves. When the going gets tough, these athletes question
themselves and their abilities, sometimes looking for excuses or ways to avoid the
situation. Self-belief factors are routinely reported here in mental toughness research,
and also in related resilience research that seeks to explore how individuals bounce
back from adversity.
We help our athletes develop mental fitness. At the top level it is not your
physical or technical expertise which separates you from the competition but your
mental toughness. To be outstanding you have to hold your nerve, perform under the
most intense pressure, and consistently turn it on even when you don't feel at your
best. Mental toughness is what makes Michael Jordan and Pete Sampras so special.
These athletes know their real battle is not so much on the court, but inside their
heads. We know from countless studies that mental skills are acquirable and you can,
with practice, learn to perform mentally. You can improve your confidence,
concentration, motivation and anxiety levels if you choose to. The mind and the body
are inextricably linked - how you feel physically affects how you feel emotionally.
This means that we can improve our mental performance using physical interventions
and vice versa.
 28

The findings also supported Gucciardi et al. (2009b) process model of

mental toughness. A winning mentality and desire was identified as a key attribute of
mentally tough soccer players in addition to other previously reported qualities such
as self-belief, physical toughness, work ethic/ motivation, and resilience. Key
cognitions reported by mentally tough soccer players enabled them to remain focused
and competitive during training and matches and highlighted the adoption of several
forms of self-talk in dealing with challenging situations. Minor revisions to Gucciardi
and colleagues' definition of mental toughness are proposed.
Theories of Bandura (1977) stipulates that self-efficacy is directly related to
athletic performance. Increases in self-efficacy are mirrored by improvements in
performance, subsequently decreases in performance limit both performance and
training. Prior experiences affect efficacy expectations, the probability performing to
a high standard is much greater if you believe in your abilities; therefore, efficacy has
tremendous explanatory power when comparing fluctuations in performance (Silva &
Stevens, 2002).
Many athletes report that heightening levels of arousal facilitates their
performance (Gould, Finch, & Jackson, 1993). It is reported to increase anaerobic
power (Jones et al., 2002). The PST program will focus on optimizing performance by
improving self-efficacy and emotional control. To improve these psychological skills,
the athlete will complete sessions using goal setting, imagery and relaxation. The
program will follow an educational approach as advised by Gill (2000), and Horn
(2002). The program consists of three main phases: Educational Phase – Athletes
develop the understanding and importance of PST and how it can affect performance.
Acquisition Phase - Athletes learn how to use PST methods and how best to
implement them. Practice Phase – Athletes devote time and effort to PST and
complete training in both competition and practice (Horn, 2002). Fournier, Calmels,
Durand-Bush, and Salmela (2005) reported that four out of nine gymnasts improved
on the vault by 10% and seven out of nine on the asymmetrical bars improved by
10%.
 29

According to Connaughton et al. (2007, p. 193) research conducted on

Mental Toughness can be categorized into four dimensions: mental toughness as a
personality trait, mental toughness as an important contributor toward success, mental
toughness as a defense mechanism against adversity, and finally mental skill
development designed to enhance performance by increasing mental toughness. The
researchers of this study regard mental toughness as a construct capable of being
taught, learnt and further developed and maintained.

Psychological skills training in sport

Mental Skills Training and Psychological Skills Training are psychological
interventions designed to help athletes improve, develop and maintain levels of
particular mental skills needed in sport. Recent times, sport has been going further
from the physical aspect to the mental or psychological aspect of competing and there
is growing realization that peak performance in sport can only be achieved through
taking help from those psychological techniques, which enhance players'
psychological strength. It plays a vital role in producing positive states of mind which
in turn help the athlete in delivering optimal level of performance (Weinberg &
Gould, 2010).
The crucial mental skill of self-efficacy, or self-confidence, has been shown
to be enhanced through mental training (Lai, 2001). Mental training can involve
several different techniques and strategies, including imagery, self-talk, goal setting,
relaxation, focus training, and energy management (Frey, Laguna, & Ravizza, 2003;
Lai, 2001; Vealey, 2005).
Within the realm of sport psychology and sporting professionals it is
believed that specific psychological skills and mental skills can in fact be taught and
further developed, ultimately meaning that a construct, previously believed to be
possessed by elites only, is now obtainable by all levels of athletes at all levels of
sport participation. It is not a lack in knowledge regarding the psychological skills
involved or required in superior sports performance that is the problem, but more on
 30

the lack of knowledge surrounding the methods available to enhance such skills and
the success rate of psychological performance interventions. Teaching and developing
mental toughness has many benefits. By increasing knowledge of the methods
available to develop one’s mental toughness, athletes can begin laying groundwork
for enhancing performance and increasing the chances of success.
The main objective behind mental skills training is to help athletes, of any
level within any sporting discipline, develop their mental skills in order to assist them
achieve success in performance and personal well-being. Mental training involves the
process of training specific mental skills required to strengthen and condition the
mind in pursuit of an athlete’s performance potential (Vealey, 2007). By learning to
train mentally, athletes will essentially be gaining a “degree of control in coordinating
effective movement through various psychological states of performance”, and having
the ability to control mental and emotional states has various benefits. In addition to
assisting task performance and creating psychological foundations for improving
confidence and well-being (Behncke, 2004), developing one’s mental strength will
allow athletes to develop momentum for performing successfully more consistently.
Through mental training, athletes will become aware of the power of their minds and
as they learn to control and create their own sporting experience they will soon
improve their mental toughness and be better equipped to deal appropriately with the
emotions associated with winning and losing within sport.
Mental toughness is a term that's often used in sports, but it's such an
elusive concept. Research on the subject is still in its infancy, and only recently have
some operational definitions been advanced. Until you have a definition, how can
you have accurate measurement tools to assess someone's mental toughness? That's
what coaches and athletes want. That's the tangible aspect to it. Sheard (2008), in his
book The Achievement Mindset: Understanding Mental Toughness, presents some
critical questions that modern-day athletes should consider: Why is it that some
athletes are able to succeed in the face of adversity while others cannot? Why can
some athletes resist and disregard negative effect in competition while others let it
influence and weaken their competitive performance? Many suggest that the answers
 31

to these questions lie in the successful development, implementation and continuous

maintenance of the concept of mental toughness.
A common question among sport psychologists today and even more among
mental toughness theorists, is whether champions and elite performers have inherited
the dominant psychological characteristics critical for success or whether this mental
toughness can be acquired through training and experience. “Recent research has
attempted to explore the concept of mental toughness in sport more thoroughly and it
appears that, while some people are naturally more tough-minded than others, people
can be toughened up with the correct approach to training” (Crust, 2009). Alderman
(1974) suggested that athletes are, in addition to being taught to be physically tough,
and being taught to be mentally tough as well.
Whenever athletes face with situations that require an enhanced level of
performance, the immediate reaction is generally to make an adjustment to all levels
and phases of their physical training routine long before the mental aspect of
performance is even considered. Every athletic contest is a contest of control, control
of the delicate mind and body connection, yet athletes consistently and persistently
continue to train harder and harder physically at the expense of mental training
(Loehr, 1982). Mental toughness is an important characteristic contributing to athletic
excellence (Jones et al., 2007), yet little research has examined how psychological
skills contribute to its development, providing support for use as a potential strategy
for developing or enhancing mental toughness in athletes. Aimed to clear the gap and
add the knowledge to the field of mental toughness as it’s still on developing a way to
explore. There is an increasing demand for strategies aiming at the development of
mental toughness and the clear relationship with performance development, so it's
essential to clarify precisely which techniques should be included in psychological
skills training programs aimed at developing or enhancing this construct. (Crust &
Clough, 2005).
In his paper titled Physiological models to understand exercise fatigue and
the adaptations that predict or enhance athletic performance, Noakes presented what is
known as the psychological/motivational model. This model emphasizes that “the
 32

ability to sustain exercise performance results from a conscious effort” and that
“exercise performance is regulated at a subconscious level”. Both terms ‘conscious’
and ‘subconscious’ refer to states of the mind, and he suggested that sustaining and
regulating exercise performance stems from inside the mind. One must question that
if the mind has such a powerful influence over the reaction, movements, maintenance
and responses of our physical body, why then are athletes not training the mental side
of performance more regularly and intensely? According to Noakes’ findings, athletes
who are able to engage in the mental side of training and performing have a greater
advantage than those who are unable to (Noakes, 2006).
The biology of the human body is designed to regulate its very existence and
this regulation stems directly from the central control system, the brain and the mind.
Regardless of the physical attributes that athletes may possess, the ‘tougher’ athlete
will most often prevail and the determining factor between success and failure is
“often more easily, and perhaps more appropriately, attributable to psychological
factors” (Golby & Sheard, 2003, p. 455). Gucciardi et al. (2008, p. 262) stressed that
“Mental toughness sets apart good and great athletes when physical, technical and
tactical skills are equal”. It is important to note, however, that developing and
improving one’s mental side of performance by no means negates or trivializes the
important role of developing and maintaining physical or technical abilities (Bull,
Shambrook, James, & Brooks, 2005). The point being stressed here is that an athlete
who has physical talent, skill and ability can become an even greater athlete and
increase their chances of a more successful performance and sporting career if they
begin to train mentally. An athlete who does not share equal physical ability as other
athletes and who is perhaps considered slightly weaker in this regard may even
become a better athlete if they learn to engage in mental toughness development,
improvement and maintenance.
The psychological factors involved in athletic performance have long been
of interest to athletes, coaches, sport psychologists and sports scientists. Empirical
studies have largely focused on individual psychological factors and their influence
on performance which includes confidence, motivation, attention, visualization, and
 33

psychosomatic skills (Gucciardi et al., 2009c). Similarly, some studies indicated that
the use of mental skills such as goal setting, imagery, relaxation, and self-talk are
important areas in the field of sport psychology (Vealey, 2007; Williams & Krane,
2001). They also asserted that goal setting as attaining a specific standard of
proficiency on a task, usually within a specified time limit can increase performance
during competition. In addition, self-talk has been defined as occurring verbalizations
or statements about something as well as increase performance and skills in sport
(Howland, 2006; Vealey, 2007). As a consequence, mental training can improve
performance of athletes in order to achieve championship in competition.
Goal-setting
Goal-setting has received some attention and its use has been supported by
personal trainers and popular fitness magazines (Williams, 2001). Locke, Shaw, Saari,
and Gary (1981) indicated goals setting affect performance by directing attention,
mobilizing effort, increasing persistence, and motivating strategy development. This
fact was supported by Burton and Raedeke (2008). Goals are like a magnet that
attracts athletes to higher grounds and new horizons. They give their eyes a focus,
their mind an aim, and their strength a purpose. Moreover, they also asserted that both
motivational and emotional mechanisms were important mediators in improving the
efficacy of goal-setting in endurance sports (Bueno, Weinberg, Fernandez-Castro, &
Capdevila, 2008).
Rationale for goal-setting
According to Bandura (1977) 'performance accomplishment' is the most
effective method for improving self-efficacy. The most commonly used tool utilized
by sports psychologists is goal-setting. Setting goals provide this focus and direct
attention by agreeing a timed end point to their action (Locke et al., 1981).
Researchers and practitioners in both sports and organizational literature have argued
that a combination of both short-term and long-term goals is most effective for
improving performance and changing behavior, short-term goals should be enforced
to directly reach the long-term goal of the client/ performer (Weinberg, Butt, Knight,
& Perritt, 2001). Miller and McAuley (1987) tested free throw self-efficacy in 18
 34

undergraduate students. The goal-training condition reported higher free throw

efficacy when compared to the no-goal condition. Kingston and Hardy (1997) suggest
that in sports which are highly complex (gymnastics) process goals should provide the
framework for improving technical aspects of difficult skills. The support for the use
of process goals is also evident as it is suggested that process goals are more
beneficial for increasing self-efficacy as they are more controllable and flexible, this
allows the coach/psychologist to mold goals so that the athletes constantly achieves
their goals. This constant achievement will improve self-efficacy via increasing the
performance accomplishments (Horn, 2002). Another research found that goal-setting
improved performance, stated self-confidence and perceived satisfaction within 25
female junior high school gymnasts (Pierce & Burton, 1998).
Self-talk
One of the mental skills that researches have been conducted in the mental
training domain is self-talk (Williams & Krane, 2001; Vealey, 2007; Burton &
Raedeke, 2008). Typically, self-talk has been defined as occurring any time one
thinks about something (Gammage, Hardy, & Hall, 2001). On the other hand, self-talk
is defined as ‘‘(a) verbalizations or statements addressed to the self; (b)
multidimensional in nature; (c) having interpretive elements associated with the
content of statements employed; (d) is somewhat dynamic; and (e) serving at least
two functions, instructional and motivational, for the athlete’’ (Edwards, Tod, &
McGuigan, 2008). Researchers have found that self-talk enhances performance and
skills in sport (e.g., Hardy, 2006; Hardy, Hall, & Alexander, 2001). Influences on
vertical jump male Rugby union players (Edwards et al., 2008), affects female youth
soccer performance (Johnson, Hrycaiko, Johnson, & Halas, 2004). Furthermore,
Vealey (2007) suggested that creative self-talk is also effective for using a strategy,
psyching up emotion and effort, relaxation, attention focusing, maintaining self-
confidence and self-assessment. In this type of mental training, athletes make their
feeling and perception clear, evaluate themselves, and give themselves instructions or
reinforcement.
 35

Research conducted by Tremayne (2004) looked at the Swedish and

Australian school systems in order to understand how the teaching of goal-setting,
stress management and relaxation techniques have been successfully implemented in
these contexts. These methods have been proven to advance one’s “physical fitness,
self-confidence and self-esteem” (Sheard & Golby, 2006, p. 150), all of which are
very important in the development of mental toughness. The combination of various
psychological skills intervention techniques can result in effective performance
outcomes; something that has been demonstrated in intervention skill packages such
as goal-setting (Wanlin, Hyrcaito, Martin, & Mahon, 1997), self-talk, goal-setting,
focusing and visualisation (Fournier et al., 2005).
The increased flow of academic interest in the mental toughness
phenomenon clearly indicates the significance and importance that sport
psychologists, coaches and athletes themselves place on mental toughness (Crust,
2008). The influence that psychological factors have on athletic performance is
becoming increasingly important and prominent today so much, so that coaches,
athletes and sport administrators recognize that success cannot be guaranteed by raw
physical talent alone (Gucciardi et al., 2008).
Although this view is endorsed by various researchers, there is still a
concerning lack of belief in the influence of psychological intervention and the impact
it has on performance. Researchers conducting studies using mental toughness and
psychological intervention frameworks are still trying to capture the faith of a
somewhat stubborn audience. Many researchers have attributed mental toughness as
being a significant influencing factor contributing to successful performance and
performance excellence, as well as mental toughness acting as a performance
enhancer (Loehr, 1982; Fourie & Potgieter, 2001; Gould, Dieffenbach & Moffett,
2002; Gould et al., 2002; Golby & Sheard, 2003; Middleton et al., 2004; Bull,
Shambrook et al., 2005; Connaughton, Wadey, Hanton, & Jones, 2008; Kuan & Roy,
2007; Crust, 2008; Gucciardi et al., 2008; Nicholls et al., 2008; Crust & Kayvon,
2009).
 36

A well-known quote “a healthy mind in a healthy body” alludes to the fact

that there is a positive connection between a healthy body and a healthy mind. The
state of one’s physical condition can affect the state of their mental condition and vice
versa. Exercise performed on a regular basis has significant effects not only on
aspects such as athlete’s cardiovascular systems but also on the athlete’s mood and
sense of well-being. Exercise has been correlated to a decline in depression states as
well as the amelioration of anxiety and furthermore assists in improving aspects such
as self-esteem, socialization, self-belief and confidence, all of which relate to
improvements in the mental and emotional side of functioning (Hays, 1995). Most
athletes understand the importance of training physically, without the physical
training the athlete would simply have no place in their sporting arena. There seems to
be a two way relationship between physical training and mental training. Improving
one’s physical training will assist athletes in developing such psychological/ mental
aspects like self-belief and confidence as they become better at their sport and can
compete at higher levels. This in turn motivates them more and empowers them with
a greater drive to succeed, therefore improving their mental toughness (Frey, Laguna,
& Ravizza 2003; Garza & Feltz, 1989).
Mental training relies heavily on athletes having a sense of self mastery as
this self-mastery in turn serves to motivate continuous efforts in attempting to
increase performance (Behncke, 2004). Loehr (1982) believed that “what happens
with mental skills is similar to what happens with physical skills” (Loehr, 1982, p.
85). According to Hays (1995), “Programs are based on the assumption that aspects of
thoughts and feelings can inhibit optimal performance, and likewise, that certain
mental skills, used effectively, can enhance optimal performance”. According to
Greenspan and Feltz 1989 (as cited in Hays, 1995, p. 35), “considerable research,
especially with competitive athletes, suggests that educational psychological skills
interventions improve competitive performance”. You can improve your confidence,
concentration, motivation and anxiety levels if you choose to. The mind and the body
are inextricably linked - how you feel physically affects how you feel emotionally.
 37

This means that we can improve our mental performance using physical interventions
and vice versa.
The wall-sit test
This is a simple test of lower body muscular strength and endurance.
 Purpose: to measure the strength endurance of the lower body, particularly
the quadriceps muscle group.
 Equipment required: smooth wall and a stopwatch
 Procedure: Stand comfortably with feet approximately shoulder width apart,
with your back against a smooth vertical wall. Slowly slide your back down the wall
to assume a position with both your knees and hips at a 90° angle. The timing starts
when one foot is lifted off the ground and is stopped when the subject cannot maintain
the position and the foot is returned to the ground. After a period of rest, the other leg
is tested.
 Advantages: This test requires minimal equipment and can be conducted
with large groups all at once.

Figure 3 The wall-sit test

 38

In conclusion of this chapter before moving to the next chapter of

methodology on pages after, modern research being conducted on mental toughness is
now shifting away from efforts aiming at developing definitions for the construct and
instead moving toward efforts at understanding its development. This particular
research focuses on the development and implementation of Psychological Skills
Training techniques to evaluate the relationship of mental toughness and performance
in real setting.