Search

Considering the popularity and particularity of basketball, the athletes face a potential "Sport Commitment Crisis" due to immense pressures from academics, training, employment, and college. To date, research in sports has demonstrated the relationship between coach trust and sport commitment; however, the relationship among teammates is yet to be explored. We examined whether teammate trust is related to commitment and if prosocial and antisocial behaviors mediate these relationships. Right before a game, the college basketball players (N = 570) were asked to complete a multi-section questionnaire measuring the aforementioned variables. Structural equation modeling (SEM) revealed that athletes' perceptions of their teammates' trust were positively related to their sport commitment, and these relationships were mediated by teammate prosocial behavior. In contrast, antisocial behavior did not affect their relationship. The findings suggest that teammate trust could facilitate sport commitment in athletes, which could occur via prosocial behavior. Current college athletes face multiple pressures such as academics, sports training, and future employment, which cause their continuous participation in sports training and competitions to be shaken, resulting in a decline in sport commitment. This study starts from the perspective of team atmosphere and peer behavior, and selects college basketball players on a large scale in China, because basketball is popular among Chinese college students and has brought greater social attention. In the process of playing basketball, the interaction between members is high, and the emotional factor with teammates is even more important. Therefore, the choice of research participants is also one of the advantages of this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research acknowledges Sports‐Related Concussion (SRC) is acutely deleterious to academic ability, but no tool has been validated to measure the effect of SRC on academic ability. The sutdy aimed to establish if the Revised Perceived Academic Impact Tool (PAIT2) is reliable and valid for assessing academic impairment following an SRC. Non‐concussed, healthy student‐athletes in higher education were recruited to the control group and completed the PAIT2 at day 0, 2, 4, 8, 14 and 19. The concussed group consisted of higher education student‐athletes participating in rugby union. The concussed group completed the PAIT2 at baseline screening during pre‐season, day 2, 4, 8 and 14 following an SRC and at return‐to‐play. The PAIT2 asks participants to rate their perceived ability on 23 academic tasks on a statement scored on a 0–6 Likert scale. Repeated measurements from the healthy group (n = 25) demonstrated PAIT2 has good internal validity (χ2(25) = 2.128 and p = 0.712) and reliability (0.880 [95% CI: 0.785–0.941]). A change of 4.631 (80% CI) can be used to indicate if academic impairment is present following an SRC. PAIT2 identified 96% of concussed student‐athletes with academic impairment at day 2, 92% at day 4, 85.71% at day 8 and 92% at day 14 and 19. PAIT2 has good reliability and internal validity for detecting those with academic impairment following SRC. The use of this tool may be of assistance to clinicians when managing student‐athletes return to learn. Highlights: No previous studies have used an assessment tool to measure perceived academic ability during the acute phase of a Sports‐Related Concussion (SRC). The Revised Perceived Academic Impairment Tool (PAIT2) may fill this void but has not been validated or its reliability established.The concussed group had significantly worse self‐perceived academic performance at day 2, but not by day 4, indicating perceived academic ability recovers by 4 days following an SRC.The PAIT2 had good validity and reliability and was able to detect 96.00%, 92.00% and 85.71% of concussed student‐athletes with academic impairment at day 2, 4, 8 and 14 days post‐SRC.Other measures, such as academic time loss or the Immediate Post Concussion Test, were not superior for detecting academic impairment, but the use of this with PAIT2 was superior for ruling out academic impairment rather than just the PAIT2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]