Critical analysis and synthesis

The literature on elite sports people, reviewed in terms of self-confidence, negativity, attention, motivation, visualization, positivity, and competitive attitude, is rich, albeit diverse. Strengths of these concepts are based on the blending of psychological constructs and performance outcomes and the use of a wide variety of methods, from quantitative survey studies to an intervention study. Nevertheless, there are some limitations, such as cross-sectional predominance, small sample size, and differences in measurements, which limit the operational capacities and generalizability of the findings. In addition, despite common emphasis on the role of psychological skills training and emotion regulation techniques, the lack of standardization in the definitions of constructs and implementation protocols poses difficulties in synthesizing results. Overall, the specialized literature underscores the complexity of cognitive and affective factors in elite sport, but emphasizes the need for more methodologically robust, longitudinal, and experimental design studies to clarify these relationships and to refine intervention efforts. The published literature on psychological factors in elite athletes offers a rich variety of perspectives but remains characterized by methodological and conceptual challenges of key significance, namely concerning the ranking that athletes who make up the samples have.

Methodological Approaches: The acquired knowledge, so far accumulated, benefits from a variety of research designs, including cross-sectional surveys, experimental interventions, and qualitative analyses, which together offer multifaceted insights into the psychological landscape of elite athletes. For instance, robust correlational data from studies on psychological skills and anxiety/negativity have successfully linked the frequency of mental skills usage with levels of anxiety/negativity and self-confidence (^{Netto et al., 2024}; ^{Neil et al., 2006}). Furthermore, intervention studies provide practical demonstrations of how psychological training programs can enhance motivation, emotional well-being, and grit (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}).

The field is constrained by several limitations. A major weakness is the heavy reliance on cross-sectional designs, which curtails the ability to make causal inferences or understand the temporal dynamics of psychological constructs. A reasonable number of studies, particularly those involving interventions or qualitative analysis, are hampered by small sample sizes that limit their statistical power and the generalizability of their findings (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}; ^{Sofyan et al., 2024}). The accuracy of self-report measures, which are commonly used, can be compromised by social desirability and other response biases (Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006). Compounding these issues is the heterogeneity of measurement instruments, which complicates efforts to compare and synthesize results across different studies (^{Mullai et al., 2020}).

Integration of Psychological Constructs. Research has effectively illuminated the interconnected nature of constructs such as self-confidence, anxiety/negativity, attentional control, motivation, and imagery in shaping elite athletic performance (^{Lopes, 2024}; ^{Matos et al., 2011}; ^{Wang et al., 2022}). The role of adaptive emotion regulation strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal, in enhancing performance and psychological resilience is well-supported by both theoretical models and empirical findings (^{Robazza et al., 2023}; Wang et al., 2022). The conceptualization of mental toughness as a multidimensional construct, encompassing resilience, motivation, and imagery, has further enriched the understanding of athletic psychology (^{Dorling & Bahr, 2024}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}).

Despite this conceptual integration, the field struggles with inconsistent operational definitions for key constructs, such as anxiety (^{Vasconcelos-Raposo et al., 2024}) positivity, competitive attitude, and motivation, leading to contradictory findings that are difficult to synthesize (^{Montero-Carretero et al., 2013}; ^{Birrer & Morgan, 2010}). Some of the studies analyzed present a narrow focus on specific sports or age groups, which limits the broad applicability of their conclusions to the wider population of elite athletes (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). While the complex interplay among cognitive and emotional factors is often acknowledged, it is frequently not modeled or tested with sufficient empirical rigor (^{Matos et al., 2011}; ^{Wang et al., 2022}).

Psychological Skills Training and Interventions: There is substantial empirical evidence to support the effectiveness of Psychological Skills Training (PST) programs. These programs, which often incorporate goal setting, relaxation, imagery, and self-talk, have been shown to reduce competitive anxiety/negativity and boost self-confidence (^{Netto et al., 2024}; ^{Jain et al., 2015}; ^{Mullai et al., 2020}). Longitudinal and case study designs have also demonstrated that tailored cognitive-behavioral interventions can lead to improvements in concentration and confidence (^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). Additionally, mindfulness and acceptance-based approaches are gaining recognition as valuable complements to traditional PST (^{Gardner & Moore, 2015}; ^{Birrer & Morgan, 2010}).

Intervention research faces multiple challenges. Studies are weakened by small sample sizes and the absence of control groups, which reduces the validity of their causal claims (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Magnúsdóttir, 2017}). The wide variety in the components and durations of these interventions makes it difficult to pinpoint the most effective elements and establish optimal protocols (^{Mullai et al., 2020}). There is also a notable lack of long-term follow-up data to determine the durability of the effects of psychological training (Gill & Singh, 2024). Furthermore, the adaptation of these interventions for different cultural contexts and specific sports remains an underexplored area (Gill & Singh, 2024; ^{Jain et al., 2015}).

Role of Experience and Developmental Factors: Research indicates a correlation between greater sports experience and higher self-confidence, reduced negativity, and better anxiety/negativity management, suggesting a developmental progression of psychological skills (^{Vasconcelos-Raposo et al., 2024}; ^{Lourido et al., 2019}). Studies focusing on young elite athletes have identified developmental differences in areas like imagery use and anxiety/negativity regulation, highlighting the necessity for age-appropriate psychological training (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}).

Our understanding of how psychological skills evolve with experience is limited by the prevalence of cross-sectional designs (^{Lourido et al., 2019}). Some developmental research focuses on niche sports with unique demands, which limits the generalizability of the findings (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). Moreover, the influence of maturation and external factors, such as the coaching climate, on psychological development is not sufficiently addressed (^{Gonzalez et al., 2024}.).

Emotion Regulation and Mental Toughness: The literature provides robust support for the critical role of emotion regulation strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal and preparatory routines, in optimizing performance under pressure (^{Robazza et al., 2023}; ^{Orbach & Blumenstein, 2022}; ^{Fawver et al., 2019}). Mental toughness is recognized as a key multifaceted construct for resilience and competitive success, with evidence linking it to motivation, imagery, and self-confidence (^{Dorling & Bahr, 2024}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}.).

Despite these theoretical advances, empirical research is often hampered by a lack of standardized measures for mental toughness and emotion regulation, which hinders the comparability of studies (^{Dorling & Bahr, 2024}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}). The potential cognitive costs of certain emotion regulation strategies, like cognitive reappraisal, are not fully understood, with some evidence suggesting possible performance trade-offs (^{Wang et al., 2022}). Research on integrating emotion regulation into broader psychological skills training programs also remains limited (^{Gardner & Moore, 2015}).

Attention and Concentration Control: Studies have shown that attentional control is positively associated with self-confidence and negatively related to somatic anxiety/negativity, underscoring its importance in sustaining competitive performance (^{Lourido et al., 2019}; ^{Gonzalez et al., 2024}.; ^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). Interventions designed to enhance concentration have shown promise in improving athletes’ focus during competition (Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016).

However, findings regarding the impact of experience on attentional control are inconsistent, with studies reporting no significant differences despite theoretical expectations. The measurement of attentional control frequently relies on self-report questionnaires rather than objective cognitive assessments, which can limit its validity. The dynamic interplay between attentional control, anxiety/negativity, and motivation requires more rigorous experimental investigation (^{Lourido et al., 2019}).

Positivity and Competitive Attitude: Positive psychological constructs, including optimism, grit, and a constructive competitive attitude, are acknowledged as important facilitators of stress management and performance enhancement (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Matos et al., 2011}). Interventions designed to foster positivity have been shown to contribute to improved emotional well-being and motivation (Gill & Singh, 2024). On the other hand, the empirical evidence for positivity and competitive attitude is less extensive and is often embedded within broader psychological constructs, which leads to conceptual ambiguity (Matos et al., 2011). The specific mechanisms through which positivity affects performance outcomes are not clearly defined, and few studies have isolated these variables for targeted analysis (Matos et al., 2011; ^{Hernández et al., 2024}).

Advantages and disadvantages

An analysis of the literature on psychological factors in elite athletes reveals a field with considerable strengths in its breadth and application yet also marked by significant methodological and conceptual weaknesses that temper the certainty of its conclusions. In terms of methodological approaches, the research landscape is characterized by a commendable diversity of designs. This variety enables a multifaceted understanding of the psychological factors influencing elite athletes. For instance, studies examining the use of psychological skills provide strong correlational data that connect the frequency of mental skill application to levels of anxiety/negativity and self-confidence (^{Netto et al., 2024}; ^{Neil et al., 2006}). Intervention studies offer practical evidence for the effectiveness of psychological training programs in enhancing motivation, emotional well-being, and grit (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}).

The field’s research progress is hampered by a heavy reliance on cross-sectional designs, which inherently limit the ability to draw causal conclusions or understand the development of psychological constructs over time (^{Lourido et al., 2019}). A further limitation is the prevalence of small sample sizes, particularly in intervention and qualitative research, which restricts statistical power and the generalizability of findings (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}; ^{Sofyan et al., 2024}). Yet, another aspect to consider is the dependence on self-report measures, which introduces potential biases, such as social desirability (Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006), while the wide array of measurement instruments used makes it difficult to compare results across studies (^{Mullai et al., 2020}).

Regarding the integration of psychological constructs, the research effectively demonstrates the interconnectedness of self-confidence, anxiety/negativity, attentional control, motivation, and imagery in shaping elite athletic performance (^{Lopes, 2024}; ^{Matos et al., 2011}; ^{Wang et al., 2022}). Theoretical models and empirical data also support the critical role of adaptive emotion regulation strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal, in enhancing performance and psychological resilience (^{Robazza et al., 2023}; Wang et al., 2022). The understanding of athlete psychology is further enriched by the inclusion of mental toughness as a multidimensional construct that encompasses resilience, motivation, and imagery (^{Dorling & Bahr, 2024}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}).

Despite this conceptual progress, a significant weakness lies in the wide variation of operational definitions for constructs such as positivity, competitive attitude, and motivation, which results in inconsistent findings that are difficult to synthesize (^{Birrer & Morgan, 2010}; ^{Montero-Carretero et al., 2013}). The applicability of conclusions is often limited by a narrow focus on specific sports or age groups (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). Moreover, while the complex interactions between cognitive and emotional factors are often acknowledged, they are seldom adequately modeled or empirically tested (^{Matos et al., 2011}; ^{Wang et al., 2022}).

The literature on psychological skills training (PST) and interventions provides strong empirical support for programs that incorporate techniques such as goal setting, relaxation, imagery, and self-talk to reduce competitive anxiety/negativity and build self-confidence (^{Jain et al., 2015}; ^{Mullai et al., 2020}; ^{Netto et al., 2024}). Improvements in concentration and confidence have been demonstrated through tailored cognitive-behavioral interventions in longitudinal and case studies (^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). Emerging strategies such as mindfulness and acceptance-based approaches are also being recognized as valuable complements to traditional PST (^{Birrer & Morgan, 2010}; ^{Gardner & Moore, 2015}). Many intervention studies are compromised by limited sample sizes and the absence of control groups, which weakens the strength of their causal claims (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}). The diversity in intervention components and durations also complicates efforts to identify the most effective elements and establish optimal protocols (Mullai et al., 2020). A notable gap is the scarcity of long-term follow-up data to evaluate the durability of training effects, and the need for cultural and sport-specific adaptations of these interventions remains largely underexplored (Gill & Singh, 2024; Jain et al., 2015).

When examining the role of experience and developmental factors, research suggests that greater sports experience is correlated with higher self-confidence, lower negativity, and better anxiety/negativity management, indicating a developmental progression in psychological skills (^{Lourido et al., 2019}; ^{Vasconcelos-Raposo et al., 2024}). Studies on young elite athletes have highlighted developmental differences in imagery use and anxiety/negativity regulation, underscoring the need for age-appropriate psychological training (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). The predominance of cross-sectional designs limits a deeper understanding of how these psychological constructs evolve over time with experience. The generalizability of findings is also restricted when developmental studies focus on niche sports with unique demands (Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006). The influence of biological maturation and external factors, such as the coaching climate, on psychological development is an area that requires more thorough investigation (^{Gonzalez et al., 2024}).

In the domains of emotion regulation and mental toughness, the literature strongly supports the importance of strategies such as cognitive reappraisal and preparatory routines for optimizing performance under pressure (^{Fawver et al., 2019}; ^{Orbach & Blumenstein, 2022}; ^{Robazza et al., 2023}). Mental toughness is conceptualized as a critical, multifaceted construct for resilience and success, with clear links to motivation, imagery, and self-confidence (^{Dorling & Bahr, 2024}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}). Despite these theoretical advances, a significant weakness is the lack of standardized measures for mental toughness and emotion regulation in empirical studies, which hinders comparability (Dorling & Bahr, 2024; Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017). The potential cognitive costs of some emotion regulation strategies are not fully understood, with some research suggesting possible performance trade-offs (^{Wang et al., 2022}). Research on how to integrate emotion regulation within broader psychological skills training programs remains limited (^{Gardner & Moore, 2015}).

Regarding attention and concentration control, studies show that attentional control is positively linked to self-confidence and negatively to somatic anxiety/negativity, highlighting its crucial role in sustaining performance (^{Gonzalez et al., 2024}; ^{Lourido et al., 2019}; ^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). Interventions designed to enhance concentration have shown promise in improving athletes’ focus during competition (Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016). On the other hand, findings on how experience impacts attentional control are mixed, with some studies failing to find significant differences in where theory would expect them. The validity of findings is also limited by the frequent reliance on self-report measures rather than objective cognitive assessments of attentional control. The dynamic interplay between attention, anxiety/negativity, and motivation is an area that warrants further experimental investigation (Lourido et al., 2019).

Finally, regarding positivity and competitive attitude, positive psychological constructs such as optimism, grit, and a constructive attitude are recognized as key facilitators for managing stress and enhancing performance (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Matos et al., 2011}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}). Interventions that foster positivity have been shown to improve emotional well-being and motivation (Gill & Singh, 2024). The empirical evidence in this area is less extensive and is often embedded within broader constructs, which creates conceptual ambiguity (Matos et al., 2011). The mechanisms through which positivity influences performance are not clearly delineated, and there is a scarcity of studies that isolate these variables for targeted analysis (^{Hernández et al., 2024}; Matos et al., 2011).

Thematic review of literature

The psychological correlates among elite athletes are a dynamic and a rapidly evolving domain, marked by substantial strides in understanding key issues and consistent methodological and conceptual challenges. A closer inspection of previously published literature clearly identifies potential psychological mediators and intervention targets, revealing that much of this insight is built on a weak foundation; thus, there is a need to develop efforts to strengthen it for firmer conclusions.

Methodologically, the field draws from a wide array of tools that complement one another, including cross-sectional surveys, experimental interventions, and qualitative analyses, providing multiple views into the inner life of the athlete. Strong correlational analyses have already drawn solid proposed associations between the degree of usage of psychological skills and outcomes such as anxiety/negativity and self-confidence (^{Netto et al., 2024}; ^{Neil et al., 2006}) whereas interventions are demonstrating the real practical use of psychological training in enhancing motivation, well-being, and grit (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). Yet, there are serious weaknesses that counterbalance these advantages. The overwhelming number of cross-sectional studies significantly limits the ability to infer causality, thereby restricting knowledge about how psychological characteristics evolve (^{Lourido et al., 2019}). In addition, sample sizes in many studies, especially those related to interventions and qualitative research, are small, with implications for statistical power and generalizability (^{Sofyan et al., 2024}; ^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). It is also further complicated by the use of self-report measures, which can be affected by response biases, and the absence of standardized measurement tools that impede the replication of results across studies (^{Mullai et al., 2020}; Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006).

Research has successfully drawn attention to the interdependent nature of the core constructs, from confidence, anxiety/positivity, attentional control, and motivation, in influencing the performance (^{Lopes, 2024}; ^{Matos et al., 2011}; ^{Wang et al., 2022}). Literature has given solid evidence in the role of adaptive emotion regulation strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal (^{Robazza et al., 2023}), and has been supplemented by the amalgamation of multidimensional constructs (i.e., mental toughness, resilience, motivation, imagery) (^{Dorling & Bahr, 2024}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}). However, this conceptual combination is rarely reflected by linguistic clarity. Definitions of key concepts, such as “positivity” and “motivation,” have been operationalized to the extent that they cannot be clearly defined, leading to contradictory and difficult-to-evaluate findings (^{Birrer & Morgan, 2010}; ^{Montero-Carretero et al., 2013}). Furthermore, although we usually recognize the complex intertwining between cognitive and affective processes, it is seldom constructed or tested with careful empirical rigor; thus, much of the process linking these remains unelucidated (Matos et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2022).

These factors have direct relevance to the research on psychological skills training (PST) and interventions. There is strong evidence to suggest that PST programs incorporating goal setting, imagery, and self-talk can help reduce anxiety and negativity, as well as improve self-confidence (^{Jain et al., 2015}; ^{Netto et al., 2024}). Studies on case and longitudinal designs have also shown increases in attention span after interventions that are adapted to the children (^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). But the methodological flaws of the larger field are especially pronounced here. A good number of intervention studies are limited by a small sample size and the absence of a control group, making it difficult to convincingly attribute intervention outcomes to the training (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}).

The heterogeneity of intervention protocols also contributes to the challenge of determining the “active ingredients” responsible for success, and there is a notable lack of long-term follow-up data to assess the durability of the effects (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Mullai et al., 2020}). Finally, whilst experience and development are known to be important factors, given that more experienced athletes have also been shown to possess better psychological skills (^{Lourido et al., 2019}; ^{Vasconcelos-Raposo et al., 2024}), there is much to learn about this developmental process. Studies with cross-sectional designs have made it challenging to determine how skills develop as athletes progress in their careers, while research limited to specialized sports has raised concerns about the generalizability of the findings (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}).

The current literature provides a position statement (Cresswell et al., 2008) on the psychological landscape of elite sport, but its future development hinges on utilizing more robust, longitudinal, and consistent research frameworks to build upon this foundation. The literature on elite athletes identifies several interrelated psychological variables that underpin elite performance, including self-confidence, anxiety and negativity, negative thoughts, focus, motivation, imagery/visualization, positivity, and competitive orientation (see also Hanin, 1989).

Self-confidence appears to be a significant protective and enhancing element and is frequently inversely related to anxiety/negativity and negative cognitive patterns. Attentional control and motivation help maintain performance quality and competitive resilience, whereas imagery and visualization types can enhance confidence and control anxiety and negativity. psychological interventions that target these areas are effective in stress management and performance enhancement, indicating that successful regulation of cognitive-emotional processes is possible, and they might integrate in a bottom-up fashion in the field of elite sport psychology.

Agreement and Divergence Across Studies

The enormous body of in-depth scholarly study in the domain of sports psychology tends to coalesce over the fundamental recognition that several key components (including, yet clearly not limited to, facets such as self-confidence, efficient anxiety/negativity control, focus and concentration control, cultivation of intrinsic motivation, along with employment of imagery and visualization techniques) are seen as necessary requisites for achieving peak levels of performance among elite athletes competing at top levels of their respective sport.

Psychological researchers have consistently shown that combining PST with emotion regulation skills training produces significant benefits for athletes in high-stakes competitions. This approach effectively reduces competitive anxiety and negativity while strengthening self-confidence levels. A substantial body of rigorous empirical research supports these positive outcomes (see table 3). It is important to note that wide variations and controversies continue regarding the relative efficacy of different psychological interventions as the impact of psychological factors on athletic performance may differ considerably from one sport to another and in different age levels, and in terms of an even more challenging issue of whether or not emotion regulation strategies (e.g., cognitive reappraisal) can generate consistent benefits to sports performance across multiple contexts and situations have been debated.

Variation observed in empirical studies is often attributed to several factors, including differences in the mixture of different research designs and models, the characteristics of the athletes being studied, the cultural ethos, the competitive environment in sports under investigation, and the methods of measuring, assessing, and analyzing the sport.

A greater knowledge of those particular components would lead researchers and practitioners to describe the interplay between psychological aspects and athletic performance, to design and apply potentially more effective interventions tailored to each single player’s needs.

Ultimately, the study of these nuanced relationships remains a critical research area and area of inter-professional conversation, as the world of sport and the athletes who play within the domain of sport psychology remains in constant flux and evolution.

Theoretical and practical implications

Theoretical Implications

The combination of findings also confirms the multi-dimensional structure of psychological constructs (self-confidence, anxiety/negativity, attentional control, motivation, imagery) in elite athletes, which in turn supports models that are consistent with an interrelationship between cognitive, emotional, and motivational processes in the regulation of performance (Dorling & Bahr, 2004; ^{Hardy et al., 1996}; ^{Neil et al., 2006}). This is consistent with the current theories that understand mental skills as dynamic and context-specific rather than static attributes.

The evidence reviewed in several studies stands that self-confidence exerts a protective effect concerning adverse cognitive patterns and anxiety/negativity (^{Lourido et al., 2019}; ^{Netto et al., 2024}; ^{Vasconcelos-Raposo et al., 2024}), confirming conceptual models that claim self-confidence as the core mediator of the stress-performance relationship. This is consistent with the definition of self-confidence as a buffer that affects the allocation of attention and emotional regulation under pressure.

Imagery and visualization are theoretically supported as an avenue with which to increase self-confidence and combat anxiety/negativity, in the form of motivational general-mastery imagery, which is associated with mental toughening and positive affective states (^{Cumming et al., 2007}; ^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}; ^{Wadey & Hanton, 2008}). These results further imagery theories, highlighting developmental dissimilarities and the subtle roles of imagery in youth compared with adult elite athletes.

The inclusion of emotion regulation strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal, in accounts of sport-specific environments seeks to move theoretical understanding forward by depicting intricate modes of effect for emotion regulation on performance through the conduits of sport-confidence and attention processes (^{Robazza et al., 2023}; ^{Wang et al., 2022}). This contradicts simple accounts of the benefits of emotion regulation and suggests that the context and cognitive resource trade-offs are important.

Mental toughness is shown to be a multi-dimensional concept involving resilience, motivation, and cognitive control, which provides support for theoretical models that this skill can be developed, rather than being an inbuilt personality trait, through targeted psychological skill development (^{Dorling & Bahr, 2024}; ^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}). This highlights the need for individualized interventions that are adapted to the sport-specific requirements and individual athlete characteristics.

Practically, the results help fill a theoretical gap pertaining to the magnitude and predictive association of control dimensions with self-confidence and negative sensations that could hinder high-pressure performance, thereby providing further support toward theoretical underpinnings of the control dimension theory in the competitive sport context (^{Gonzalez et al., 2024}; ^{Lourido et al., 2019}). At the level of practical implications, training programs of psychological skills for high-level athletes would be better to focus on improving self-confidence and attentional control to reduce competitive anxiety/negativity and improve performance, according to research evidence of their predictive and mediator roles (Lourido et al., 2019; ^{Netto et al., 2024}; ^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). Coaches and sport psychologists are encouraged to integrate cognitive-behavioral interventions, goal orientations, and imagery to help develop these constructs.

Developmental medium-specific and individual differences in the use of imagery interventions to prompt positive self-focused attention and minimize capture by negative self-evaluations that may lead to disruptive pre-performance states must be considered when using imagery interventions (^{Hammond et al., 2015}; ^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). Coaches and sport psychologists should focus on mastery and motivational imagery in an attempt to build confidence and decrease levels of anxiety/negativity in their athletes, particularly those who are younger.

Emotion regulation strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal, should be included parsimoniously in training and competition contexts due to their cognitive side effects, and addressing the trade-off between arousal and focus. By training athletes, the ability for adaptive emotion regulation may be increased, and resilience and attentional resources may be improved. The cultivation of mental toughness needs multi-dimensional and individualized intervention incorporating aspects of mental skills training, mindfulness, and coping strategies to enhance coping responses and maintain motivation, even in stressful situations, suggesting that complex factors account for responses to such pressures (^{Pandian et al., 2022}; ^{Quinn & Cavanaugh, 2017}). Sport organizations should commit to investing in sustainable mental skills training programs that will focus on both individual and team dynamics.

The observed impact of motivational climate on self-confidence and anxiety/negativity underlines the coach’s important role in creating enabling environments that facilitate the development of psychological skills (i.e., coping, attentional control) as stated in the study of ^{Gonzalez et al. (2024}). Coaching education initiatives should focus on developing positive environments to promote good athlete mental health and performance.

Considering the intricate system of psychological factors that affect elite performance, interdisciplinary programs incorporating sport psychologists, coaches, and athletes are necessary to develop and implement efficacious mental training guidelines, linking anxiety/negativity, motivation, visualization, and competitive attitude together (^{Lopes, 2024}; ^{Matos et al., 2011}; ^{Mullai et al., 2020}). This comprehensive look at development can better address both performance and athlete welfare.

Limitations of the literature

While advances have been made in the field of psychological research in sport and athletic performance, the need to acknowledge several methodological and conceptual limitations in the research is a concern and has implications for the field (see Table 4). A common and concerning problem that has been highlighted is the continued and excessive reliance on small sample sizes across a diverse range of studies, which restricts the statistical power that can be accessed for some analyses and thus limits the extent to which findings can be generalized (^{Hammond et al., 2015}; ^{Magnúsdóttir 2017}; ^{Patil 2024}; ^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}).

That being said, and as ^{Netto et al. (2024}) correctly point out, many of the studies in this domain use cross-sectional designs and, although this approach is informative, it is not well suited to allowing causal interpretations and does little to advance our insights into the temporal relationships that may exist among psychological constructs as they do among consequences (^{Lopes 2024}; ^{Lourido et al., 2019}). The absence of longitudinal or experimental research designs only accentuates this problem, limiting our ability to effectively evaluate the long-term development and viability of these psychological skills that are needed by elite athletes, as evidenced by the work of Lopes (2024), ^{Laborde et al. (2016}), and ^{Magnúsdóttir (2017}). A key limitation of these studies is its narrow focus on specific sports and athlete samples. This restricted scope limits how well the findings can be applied across different sports disciplines. Additionally, focusing too narrowly increases the risk of missing the unique psychological challenges that arise in different elite sports environments, as noted by ^{Dorling and Bahr (2024}), ^{Bossio et al. (2012}), and ^{Strachan and Munroe-Chandler (2006}).

Second, the issue of reliability and validity concerning the measurement tools that researchers use becomes a significant issue, as some research has yielded disconcertingly low internal consistency of several psychological instruments, which can potentially threaten the construct validity of the findings that they purport to show (^{Magnúsdóttir, 2017}; ^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). Moreover, note that the field is still heavily dependent on self-reported measures, which unfortunately introduce various kinds of biases such as social desirability and subjectivity, and this is reflected in the general robustness and reliability of findings lent from these particular methodologies, as ^{Jain et al. pointed out (2015}), Strachan and Munroe-Chandler (2006), Magnúsdóttir (2017) and ^{Vasconcelos-Raposo et al. (2024}).

According to the above concerns, intervention research in this area is often limited by a lack of suitable comparison groups, which makes the assignment of causation problematic and weakens the internal validity of the findings (^{Gill & Singh, 2024}; ^{Olmedilla & Dominguez-Igual, 2016}). Variability in age and developmental level is an additional area of difficulty for researchers, as it is clear that many studies do not sufficiently control for the marked differences in psychological skill use and anxiety/negativity regulation that exist between younger and older elite performers, raising questions regarding generalizations to be made across age groups (^{Strachan & Munroe-Chandler, 2006}). Much of the research in this field seems to be specific to geographical regions, and outside of any cross-cultural adaptation of psychological constructs and interventions or standardization of measures, significantly constrains the external validity and global relevance of the findings emanating from Applied Sport Psychology (Gill & Singh, 2024; ^{Jain et al., 2015}; ^{Netto et al., 2024}).