DiscussionThe aim of the current in

DiscussionThe aim of the current investigation was to develop a questionnaire assessingathletes’ ST. In brief it should be noted that this study is one of the first of its kindto demonstrate the latent structure of athletes’ ST. The results can be summarizedas follows. First, the responses obtained from the athletes and the classificationinto categories using a qualitative data approach (Boyatzis, 1998) suggested fourpositive, three negative and one neutral category. The positive categories werepsych up, confidence, instruction, and anxiety control. The negative categorieswere worry, disengagement and somatic fatigue and the neutral category wasirrelevant thoughts. Further, the use of a structured content analytic method basedon Dunn et al.’s (1999) suggestions helped in discarding items and identifyingthose to be considered for the exploratory factor analysis, which yielded an acceptable8-factor structure. Finally, the psychometric integrity of the instrument wasalso supported through evidence of construct and concurrent validity. Moreover,reliability analyses provided evidence for the internal consistency of the scale.Altogether, these findings seem to suggest that the ASTQS is a reliable and validself-report instrument for assessing athletes’ trait ST.Thoughts were categorized as positive or negative based on their wording andnot on the results or consequences that can generate. The type of thoughts thatwere identified has been previously encountered in the sport psychology literaturein various studies pertaining to the use and functions of ST. Analytically, in relationto the content analysis four positive ST categories were identified. The firstcategory was labeled psych up and included statements referring to energising(e.g., let’s go, go strong) and maximizing effort (e.g., do your best, give 100%),but also more sport-specific cues such as “hit strong,” “play strong,” and “powerlegs” which were reworded to improve generalisability. The content of the statementsin this category were similar to the statements that were described from Weinberg, Gould, and Jackson (1980) who evaluated the positive effects of‘psych-up’ techniques in an experimental study to enhance participants’ motivationand energy. The second category included statements referring to ones’ beliefsabout adequacy of abilities (e.g., I believe in me, I’m strong) and state of readiness(e.g., I’m well prepared, I can make it) and was labeled confidence. In the literaturethere is evidence that athletes use ST to build confidence and instill belief intheir abilities for encountering demanding situations (Hardy et al., 2001). Thethird category was instruction. Regarding the content of the statements, somewere general such as “focus” and “concentrate on your game” whereas most weresport-specific instructions such as “concentrate on your backhand”, “bend yourknees”, or “high elbow”. These latter statements were edited to become moregeneral such as “concentrate” or “focus on your technique.” Nideffer (1993) suggestedthat ST could help directing and redirecting attention to task relevant cues,and Van Raalte, Brewer, Rivera, and Petipas (1994) reported that athletes’ STfrequently involves such cues. Finally, the fourth category was characterized bystatements that refer to anxiety control. In this category statements were includedinstructing athletes achieving desired cognitive and emotional states, helpingthem not becoming overaroused (e.g., relax, calm down) and overcoming anxietysymptoms (Hanton & Jones, 1999).

結果 (繁體中文) 1:

Discussion
The aim of the current investigation was to develop a questionnaire assessing
athletes’ ST. In brief it should be noted that this study is one of the first of its kind
to demonstrate the latent structure of athletes’ ST. The results can be summarized
as follows. First, the responses obtained from the athletes and the classification
into categories using a qualitative data approach (Boyatzis, 1998) suggested four
positive, three negative and one neutral category. The positive categories were
psych up, confidence, instruction, and anxiety control. The negative categories
were worry, disengagement and somatic fatigue and the neutral category was
irrelevant thoughts. Further, the use of a structured content analytic method based
on Dunn et al.’s (1999) suggestions helped in discarding items and identifying
those to be considered for the exploratory factor analysis, which yielded an acceptable
8-factor structure. Finally, the psychometric integrity of the instrument was
also supported through evidence of construct and concurrent validity. Moreover,
reliability analyses provided evidence for the internal consistency of the scale.
Altogether, these findings seem to suggest that the ASTQS is a reliable and valid
self-report instrument for assessing athletes’ trait ST.
Thoughts were categorized as positive or negative based on their wording and
not on the results or consequences that can generate. The type of thoughts that
were identified has been previously encountered in the sport psychology literature
in various studies pertaining to the use and functions of ST. Analytically, in relation
to the content analysis four positive ST categories were identified. The first
category was labeled psych up and included statements referring to energising
(e.g., let’s go, go strong) and maximizing effort (e.g., do your best, give 100%),
but also more sport-specific cues such as “hit strong,” “play strong,” and “power
legs” which were reworded to improve generalisability. The content of the statements
in this category were similar to the statements that were described from Weinberg, Gould, and Jackson (1980) who evaluated the positive effects of
‘psych-up’ techniques in an experimental study to enhance participants’ motivation
and energy. The second category included statements referring to ones’ beliefs
about adequacy of abilities (e.g., I believe in me, I’m strong) and state of readiness
(e.g., I’m well prepared, I can make it) and was labeled confidence. In the literature
there is evidence that athletes use ST to build confidence and instill belief in
their abilities for encountering demanding situations (Hardy et al., 2001). The
third category was instruction. Regarding the content of the statements, some
were general such as “focus” and “concentrate on your game” whereas most were
sport-specific instructions such as “concentrate on your backhand”, “bend your
knees”, or “high elbow”. These latter statements were edited to become more
general such as “concentrate” or “focus on your technique.” Nideffer (1993) suggested
that ST could help directing and redirecting attention to task relevant cues,
and Van Raalte, Brewer, Rivera, and Petipas (1994) reported that athletes’ ST
frequently involves such cues. Finally, the fourth category was characterized by
statements that refer to anxiety control. In this category statements were included
instructing athletes achieving desired cognitive and emotional states, helping
他們不會變得overaroused（如放鬆，平靜下來）和克服焦慮
症狀（Hanton和瓊斯，1999年）。

結果 (繁體中文) 2:

討論
目前調查的目的是制定一份調查表，評估
運動員的ST。簡而言之，應該注意到，這項研究是同類研究中的首批研究之一。
論證運動員ST的潛在結構。結果可以總結
如下。首先，從運動員那裡獲得的答覆和分類
使用定性資料方法分為類別（Boyatzis，1998年）建議四
正、三負和一中性類別。積極的類別是
心理，信心，指示和焦慮控制。負類別
擔心，脫離和軀體疲勞和中性類別
不相干的想法。此外，使用基於結構化內容分析方法
Dunn等人（1999年）的建議有助於丟棄物品和識別
那些要考慮的探索性因素分析，這產生了一個可接受的
8 因數結構。最後，儀器的心理測量完整性是
也通過構造和併發有效性的證據得到支援。此外
可靠性分析為秤的內部一致性提供了證據。
總之，這些發現似乎表明，ASTQS是一個可靠和有效的
用於評估運動員特性的自報告工具 ST。
根據思想的措辭，將想法歸類為正面或負面，
而不是可能產生的結果或後果。思想的類型，
被確定為以前在運動心理學文獻中遇到過
在有關ST的使用和功能的各種研究中。
對內容分析確定了四個積極的ST類別。第一個
類別被標記為心理，並包括聲明，指激勵
（例如，讓我們去，去堅強）和最大的努力（例如，盡你最大的努力，給100%，
但也更多的運動特定線索，如"打強"，"玩強"和"力量"
腿"，這是改寫，以提高通用性。發言內容
在這個類別中，類似于從Weinberg，古爾德和傑克遜（1980年）描述的聲明誰評估了積極的影響
實驗研究中的"心理增強"技術，以提高參與者的積極性
和能量。第二類包括提及一個信仰的聲明
關於能力的充分性（例如，我相信我，我很強大）和準備狀態
（例如，我準備充分，我能夠做），並被貼上自信的標籤。在文獻中
有證據表明，運動員使用ST建立信心和灌輸信念
他們應對苛刻情況的能力（Hardy等人，2001年）。的
第三類是教學。關於發言的內容，一些
一般如"焦點"和"專注于你的遊戲"，而大多數
運動特定的指示，如"專注于你的反手"，"彎曲你的
膝蓋"，或"高肘"。後一種陳述經過編輯，變得更加
一般，如"集中注意力"或"專注于你的技術"。尼德弗（1993年）建議
ST 可以説明引導和轉移對任務相關線索的關注，
范·拉爾特、布魯爾、裡維拉和佩蒂帕斯（1994年）報告說，運動員的ST
經常涉及這樣的線索。最後，第四類的特點是
指焦慮控制的陳述。在此類別中，語句包含在
指導運動員達到所需的認知和情緒狀態，説明
他們不要過度興奮（例如，放鬆，冷靜下來）和克服焦慮
症狀（漢頓和鐘斯，1999年）。

結果 (繁體中文) 3:

討論
本次調查的目的是編制一份問卷評估
簡言之，這項研究是第一次
揭示運動員ST的潜在結構，其結果可歸納為
如下所示。首先，運動員的反應和分類
使用定性數據方法分類（Boyatzis，1998）建議
正的，三個負的和一個中性的類別。積極的分類是
振奮精神，自信，指導和焦慮控制。消極範疇
分別是擔心、脫離和軀體疲勞，中性分類是
不相關的想法。此外，使用結構化內容分析方法
Dunn等人（1999）的建議有助於丟棄物品和識別
在探索性因素分析中考慮的因素，得出了可接受的
8因素結構。最後，儀器的心理測量完整性是
同時也通過結構和併發有效性的證據來支持。而且，
可靠性分析為量表的內在一致性提供了證據。
總之，這些發現似乎表明ASTQS是可靠和有效的
運動員特質自評量表。
根據他們的措辭和
而不是對可能產生的結果或後果。那種
在以前的運動心理學文獻中
在各種與ST.的使用和功能有關的研究中
對內容進行分析，確定了4個陽性ST類。第一次
類別被標記為“精神向上”，並包含了關於能量的陳述
（例如，讓我們走，走强）和最大化的努力（例如，盡力，付出100%），
但也有更多特定於運動的提示，如“擊球有力”、“擊球有力”和“力量”
“腿”被改寫以提高通用性。陳述的內容
在這一類中，類似於溫伯格、古爾德和傑克遜（1980）的陳述，他們評估了
在一項實驗研究中提高參與者動機的“心理准備”科技
還有能量。第二類包括提及自己信仰的陳述
關於能力的充分性（例如，我相信我，我很强大）和準備狀態
（例如，我準備充分，我能做到）並被貼上了信心的標籤。在文學作品中
有證據表明，運動員使用ST來建立信心，並灌輸他們的信念
他們面對苛刻環境的能力（Hardy等人，2001）。這個
第三類是教學。關於聲明的內容，有些
是一般的，如“專注”和“專注於你的遊戲”，而大多數是
運動指導，如“專注於反手”，“彎曲你的
“膝蓋”或“高肘”。這些後一種說法被編輯成
一般來說，如“集中精力”或“專注於你的科技”，Nideffer（1993）建議
ST有助於將注意力轉移到與任務相關的線索上，
Van Raalte，Brewer，Rivera和Petipas（1994）報告說
經常有這樣的暗示。最後，第四類的特點是
指焦慮控制的陳述。在這一類中包括
指導運動員達到預期的認知和情緒狀態，幫助
他們不會過度興奮（如放鬆、冷靜）和克服焦慮
症狀（Hanton&Jones，1999）。