A mixed-methods investigation of Olympic and Paralympic sport psychology consultant’s experiences of on-site service provision

Citation

MacIntyre T, Holmes M, Lavallee D, Ringland A & Lowther J (2012) A mixed-methods investigation of Olympic and Paralympic sport psychology consultant’s experiences of on-site service provision. 27th AASP Annual Conference 2012, Atlanta, GA, USA, 03.10.2012-06.10.2012.

Abstract
Providing sports psychology services to competitors and their support personnel onsite at the quadrennial events presents various challenges and concerns, given the unique, nontraditional nature of the competition. One particularly illustrative line of enquiry has been the dissemination of almost a dozen accounts of reflective practice by practitioners over the past three decades (e.g., Orlick, 1989). This evidence, augmented by narrative reviews on the role of sport psychology service provision at both Olympic (Hodge, 2010; McCann, 2008) and Paralympic events (Katz, 2009) has provided insights into the challenges for practitioners in terms of ethical dilemmas, service delivery and role definition. However, this discourse has largely been centered on idiosyncratic and personal experiences of service providers, with few systematic investigations (e.g., Sullivan & Nashman, 1998). The need for a more systematic investigation is apparent. The purpose of this study was to explore consultants’ retrospective perceptions and prospective advice for optimizing consultation at an Olympic or Paralympic Games by capturing the nous and experiences of practitioners who have consulted on-site. The study employed a mixed-methods design by combining an online-survey approach (n = 18) with a semi-structured interview protocol (n = 9). Interview transcripts were coded based on both deductive and inductive procedures of Patton (2002). Higher order (e.g., uniqueness of the games) and second order themes (e.g., self-regulation) that emerged confirmed the importance of contextual intelligence (Brown et al., 2005), the necessity for role clarity (Aoyagi & Portegna, 2010), and specific preparation for the idiosyncratic nature of the event (Haberl & Peterson, 2006). The resulting themes were integrated into a model of best practice that included recommendations relating to personal and professional preparation, providing on-site consultancy services, post‐event support and the ongoing roles of a consultant throughout not only the Games but also the preceding quadrennium.