Body Dissatisfaction, Self-Efficacy and Trait Self-Control in NCAA Athletes

• Main Author: Josephs, Molly V.
• Language: EN
• Published: Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville 2018
• Subjects: Kinesiology
• Online Access: http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=10790218

<p> Athletes face a significantly higher risk of developing clinical eating disorders compared to nonathletes (Petrie &amp; Greenleaf, 2007; Sundgot-Borgen &amp; Klugland Torstveit, 2004). One risk factor for the development of eating disorders is body dissatisfaction, which is when an individual has a subjective, negative view of their physical body (Stice &amp; Shaw, 2002). Researchers in the field are calling for future research to examine factors that can be modified and strengthened through targeted interventions. Two such factors are self-efficacy and trait self-control. Self-efficacy is the belief is one&rsquo;s ability to organize the necessary steps to achieve desired goals (Bandura, 1997). Trait self-control is the enduring ability to interrupt undesired behavioral tendencies and resist acting upon them (Baumeister, Vohs &amp; Tice, 2007). The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between body dissatisfaction, self-efficacy and trait self-control. One hundred and five NCAA division I and division II athletes completed an online questionnaire containing demographic information and measures for body dissatisfaction, self-efficacy and trait self-control. Pearson correlations found a significant positive relationship between trait self-control and self-efficacy. Significant negative relationships were found between body dissatisfaction and trait self-control and body dissatisfaction and self-efficacy. Additionally, two separate one-way ANOVAs were run assessing the effect of sex and division on body dissatisfaction, self-efficacy and trait self-control. Female athletes were found to have higher amounts of body dissatisfaction than male athletes and athletes in division II schools also had more body dissatisfaction than those in division I schools. Future research should examine differences in the sporting environment as well as instrumentation that better satisfies the needs of male and female athletes.</p><p>