Advertisement

Cognitive Therapy and Research

, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 265–272 | Cite as

Self-efficacy beliefs and tennis performance

  • Julian Barling
  • Mike Abel
Article

Abstract

Theoretical and methodological aspects of self-efficacy theory are assessed in this study, and the tennis performance of 40 active players (M age = 26.6 years) serves as the criterion variable. On a theoretical level, only self-efficacy beliefs, and not response-outcome expectations or the valence thereof, were consistently and significantly related to 12 dimensions of tennis performance. This phenomenon pertained to the relationship of the self-rating of performance as well as to the average of two judges' external ratings of performance and efficacy beliefs, even though the 12 behavioral criteria used were different from the items on the self-efficacy scale. Although Pearson correlations rather than microanalyses were computed to assess the relationship between self-efficacy and performance, the correlations were all positive and significant. Theoretical and empirical implications are suggested.

Keywords

Cognitive Psychology Pearson Correlation Criterion Variable Active Player Methodological Aspect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference Notes

  1. Patz, M., & Barling, J.Self-efficacy versus valence expectancy theories of scholastic performance. Unpublished manuscript, University of the Witwatersrand, 1981.Google Scholar
  2. Barling, J., & Bresgi, B.Self-efficacy beliefs and scholastic performance: Cause or reflection of behavioral change? Unpublished manuscript, University of the Witwatersrand, 1980.Google Scholar

References

  1. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy, 1978,1(4), 137–269.Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change.Psychological Review 1977,84 191–215.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. Gauging the relationship between self-efficacy judgment and action.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1980,4 263–268.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A., & Adams, N. E. Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavior change.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1977,1 287–308.Google Scholar
  5. Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., & Bayer, J. A cognitive mechanism mediating behavioral change.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1977,35 125–139.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., Hardy, A. B., & Howells, G. N. Tests of the generality of self-efficacy theory.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1980,4 39–66.Google Scholar
  7. Barling, J., & Beattie, R. Self-efficacy beliefs and insurance sales performance.Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 1983, in press.Google Scholar
  8. Gravel, R., Lemieux, G., & Ledouceur, R. Effectiveness of a cognitive behavioral treatment package for cross-country ski racers.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1980,4 83–90.Google Scholar
  9. Horowitz, L. M., Inouye, D., & Siegelman, E. T. On averaging judges' ratings to increase their correlation with an external criterion.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1979,47 453–458.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kazdin, A. E. Conceptual and assessment issues raised by self-efficacy theory.Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy 1978,1(4), 177–186.Google Scholar
  11. Kazdin, A. E. Imagery elaboration and self-efficacy in the covert modeling treatment of assertive behavior.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1979,47 725–753.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kazdin, A. E. Covert and overt rehearsal and elaboration during treatment in the development of assertive behavior.Behaviour Research and Therapy 1980,18 191–201.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kazdin, A. E., & Rogers, T. On paradigms and recycled ideologies: Analogue research revisited.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1978,2 105–117.Google Scholar
  14. Kendall, P. C., & Korgeski, G. P. Assessment and cognitive behavioral interventions.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1979,3 1–21.Google Scholar
  15. Keyser, V., & Barling, J. Assessing the determinants of children's academic self-efficacy beliefs.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1981,5 29–39.Google Scholar
  16. Kirsch, I. “Microanalytic” analyses of efficacy expectations as predictors of performance.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1980,4 259–262.Google Scholar
  17. Mahoney, M. J. Cognitive skills and athletic performance. In P. C. Kendall & S. C. Hollon (Eds.),Cognitive behavioral interventions: Theory, research and procedures. New York: Academic Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  18. National Tennis Rating Program. Find out how you rate on the tennis scale.Magazine of Racquet Sports, 1 May 1979.Google Scholar
  19. Woolfolk, R. L., & Lazarus, A. A. Between laboratory and clinic: Paving the two-way street.Cognitive Therapy and Research 1979,3 239–244.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julian Barling
    • 1
  • Mike Abel
    • 1
  1. 1.School of PsychologyUniversity of the WitwatersrandJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations