Trial reportBMC psychology2026
Effect of feedback-enhanced reflective journaling on self-regulation and perceived performance among Taekwondo athletes.
Trial report in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReflective journaling has been used as a strategy to help athletes examine their training experiences and support reflective learning. However, whether reflective journaling alone can produce meaningful changes in sport-related psychological outcomes remains unclear. Thus, this study explored whether feedback-enhanced reflective journaling (i.e., reflective journaling with structured feedback) would lead to greater improvements in self-regulation and perceived performance, conceptualized as athletes’ subjective self-evaluative beliefs, than reflective journaling alone.
methodsA total of 52 Taekwondo (Poomsae) athletes participated in the study and were randomly assigned to an experimental (n = 26) or control group (n = 26). For 16 weeks, both groups completed reflective journaling according to the same guidelines. The experimental group received structured feedback on their journal entries, whereas the control group did not. The journaling procedures, based on Gibbs’ six-stage model, focused on training reflection and personal insights. Pre- and post-tests assessed self-regulation and perceived performance. Statistical analyses—including independent-samples t-tests and two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA)—were conducted using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 23.0 (α = .05).
resultsThe experimental group showed significantly higher self-regulation (M = 4.214) and perceived performance scores (M = 3.900) compared with the control group (M = 3.764 and M = 2.800, respectively), with strong statistical significance (p < .01 and p < .001, respectively). The two-way ANOVA confirmed significant group × time interaction effects for both self-regulation (F = 12.013, p < .01) and perceived performance (F = 45.125, p < .001), suggesting that the addition of structured feedback to reflective journaling was associated with greater improvements in these outcomes.
conclusionsFeedback-enhanced reflective journaling was associated with greater improvements in self-regulation and perceived performance than reflective journaling alone among Taekwondo athletes. These findings highlight the potential value of adding structured feedback to reflective journaling in training programs to support athletes’ psychological development and more positive performance-related self-evaluations. The study offers practical implications for the development of sport-based psychological interventions targeting self-regulation and perceived performance.
trial registrationCRIS, KCT0011673, Retrospectively Registered March 3, 2026 [https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do?seq=32687&search_page=L&search_lang=&class_yn=].
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.