Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35171944›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2022

Sport psychology and performance meta-analyses: A systematic review of the literature.

Marc Lochbaum, Elisabeth Stoner, Tristen Hefner, Sydney Cooper, Andrew M Lane, Peter C Terry

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Revisiting the Self-Confidence and Sport Performance Relationship: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Three Reasons for Playing the Tennis Forehand in Square Stance.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025
    Article
  20. Critical Evaluation of Curriculum Reporting on Orthopedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Websites.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Marc LochbaumDepartment of Kinesiology and Sport Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7640-7075
Elisabeth StonerDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States of America.
Tristen HefnerDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States of America.
Sydney CooperDepartment of Kinesiology and Sport Management, Honors College, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States of America.
Andrew M LaneFaculty of Education, Health and Well-Being, University of Wolverhampton, Walsall, West Midlands, United Kingdom.
Peter C TerryDivision of Research & Innovation, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sport psychology as an academic pursuit is nearly two centuries old. An enduring goal since inception has been to understand how psychological techniques can improve athletic performance. Although much evidence exists in the form of meta-analytic reviews related to sport psychology and performance, a systematic review of these meta-analyses is absent from the literature. We aimed to synthesize the extant literature to gain insights into the overall impact of sport psychology on athletic performance. Guided by the PRISMA statement for systematic reviews, we reviewed relevant articles identified via the EBSCOhost interface. Thirty meta-analyses published between 1983 and 2021 met the inclusion criteria, covering 16 distinct sport psychology constructs. Overall, sport psychology interventions/variables hypothesized to enhance performance (e.g., cohesion, confidence, mindfulness) were shown to have a moderate beneficial effect (d = 0.51), whereas variables hypothesized to be detrimental to performance (e.g., cognitive anxiety, depression, ego climate) had a small negative effect (d = -0.21). The quality rating of meta-analyses did not significantly moderate the magnitude of observed effects, nor did the research design (i.e., intervention vs. correlation) of the primary studies included in the meta-analyses. Our review strengthens the evidence base for sport psychology techniques and may be of great practical value to practitioners. We provide recommendations for future research in the area.

Indexed as

AnxietyAthletic PerformanceMindfulnessPsychology, SportsHumansMeta-Analysis as Topic

Identifiers

PMID35171944
PMCPMC8849618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.