Search

The public health policies and sanitary measures taken by governments in various countries to stem the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g. lockdown, social distancing) have major implications for athletes. The radical changes are challenging and risk causing significant career disruption to athletes, with subsequent negative psychological effects. Thus, the ways athletes cope with such adversity is of critical importance. The present study aimed to identify athletes' coping profiles using a person-centred approach, based on their reported use of multiple coping strategies in response to the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak, and to compare levels of anxiety, stress appraisals, interpersonal coping strategies, and availability and appreciation of the major sources of support across profiles. A total of 526 French athletes competing at national to elite levels answered an online questionnaire during the lockdown. Latent profile analysis results yielded four distinct coping profiles (i.e. self-reliant, engaged, avoidant, active and social). The MANOVA showed that athletes belonging to the four profiles differed on anxiety, stress appraisals, social support, and interpersonal coping. In particular, avoidant copers reported high levels of anxiety, threat, and uncontrollability, and appeared less able to regulate responses to the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Using a person-centred approach, the findings could inform the development of more adequate care, support, and intervention for athletes, especially avoidant copers, who were characterized by the least effective coping skills and resources. Accordingly, stress reappraisal and stress mindset interventions could be promising approaches to effectively manage pandemic-related impact during and after the COVID-19 crisis.Highlights The COVID-19 outbreak has major implications for athletes and is causing significant disruption to their careers. Using a person-centred approach, four coping profiles emerge showing athletes' preferred use of several coping strategies in response.The four coping profiles (i.e. self-reliant, engaged, avoidant, active and social) differentiate distinct groups of athletes in relation to anxiety, stress appraisals, social support, and interpersonal coping.Avoidant copers were characterized by the least effective coping skills and social context of coping. Management of the COVID-19 situation may be more problematic for them than other in mitigating its negative psychological effects.Using a person-centred approach, the findings could inform the development of more adequate care, support, and intervention for athletes, especially avoidant copers, who were characterized by the least effective coping skills and resources.

International audience; The aim of this study was to identify young elite athletes’ personality profiles using a person-centered approach, and to investigate whether the profiles significantly differ in stress and sleep. 260 athletes from a variety of sports completed a questionnaire package to assess neuroticismand conscientiousness traits, stress appraisals (i.e. intensity and directional interpretation of stress, challenge and threat appraisals), and various indicators of sleep (i.e. sleep quality, social jet lag, Ford insomnia response to stress test (FIRST)). A latent profile analysis (LPA) approach was used to identify personality profiles based on the scores of neuroticism and conscientiousness. A multivariate analysis of variance was performed to examine if the athletes belonging to different personality profiles differ on stress appraisals and indicators of sleep.Three profiles emerged: Maladaptive profile (high levels of conscientiousness and neuroticism); Highly adaptive profile (moderate level of conscientiousness and low level of neuroticism); Adaptive profile (high level of conscientiousness and moderate level of neuroticism). Results showed that athletes from the adaptive profile reported significantly lower scores of stress intensity and threat appraisal than those from other profiles. Athletes from the maladaptive profile reported significantly higher levels of FIRST than those from other profiles as well as worse sleep quality and lower levels of challenge appraisal than the athletes from the highly adaptive profile. These results suggest that investigating personality profile may be useful in identifying athletes at higher risk of stress sensitivity and worsening sleep that are likely to benefit from preventive actions (e.g. cognitive behavioural therapy interventions).

International audience; The Volodalen® field method permits to classify runners into aerial or terrestrial, based on vertical oscillation, upper-body motion, pelvis and foot position at ground contact, and foot strike pattern. The present study aimed to compare the sprint running force-velocity profiles between aerial and terrestrial runners. Sixty-Four French National-Level young soccer players (28 females, 36 males) performed three trials of unloaded maximal 40 m sprints. External horizontal power-force-velocity relationships were computed using a validated biomechanical model and based on the velocity-time curve. Accordingly, the participants were classified into patterns in aerial and terrestrial runners. Terrestrial runners showed a higher maximal horizontal force (F(0)) (6.73 ± 1.03 vs 6.01 ± 0.94 N·kg(-1)), maximal horizontal power (P(max)) (14.04 ± 3.24 vs 12.51 ± 3.31W·kg(-1)), maximal acceleration (Acc) (6.83 ± 0.85 vs 6.26 ± 0.89 m·s(-2)), and maximal rate of horizontal force (RF(max)) (57.41 ± 4.64 vs 52.81 ± 5.69%) compared to aerial runners. In contrast, terrestrial runners displayed a more negative rate of decrease of RF (D(RF)) (-11.65 ± 1.71 vs -10.23 ± 1.66%) and slope of the Force-Velocity relationship (F-V slope) (-0.83 ± 0.11 vs -0.77 ± 0.10 N·s·m(-1)·kg(-1)) than aerial runners. The results indicate that terrestrial runners displayed more efficient force production in the forward direction and displayed more "force-oriented" F-V profiles. Nevertheless, aerial runners were more effective in maintaining a net horizontal force production with increasing speed. Our results suggest that terrestrial runners could be more adapted to the specific short distance and high acceleration sprints running.