Post on 30-Jun-2022
http://www.diva-portal.org
Postprint
This is the accepted version of a paper published in International Sport Coaching Journal.This paper has been peer-reviewed but does not include the final publisher proof-correctionsor journal pagination.
Citation for the original published paper (version of record):
Pawsey, F., Wong, J H., Kenttä, G., Näswall, K. (2021)Daily Mindfulness Is Associated With Recovery Processes Among Coaches: A 4-WeekDiary StudyInternational Sport Coaching Journal, 8: 371-381https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2020-0045
Access to the published version may require subscription.
N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published paper.
Accepted author manuscript version reprinted, by permission, from International SportCoaching Journal, 2021 © Human Kinetics, Inc.
Permanent link to this version:http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:gih:diva-6740
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Daily mindfulness is associated with recovery processes among coaches – a 4 week diary
study
Authors:
Fleur Pawsey, School of Psychology, Speech and Hearing, University of Canterbury, Private
Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand (corresponding author)
Jennifer Hoi Ki Wong, School of Psychology, Speech and Hearing, University of
Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand
Göran Kenttä, The Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden
Katharina Näswall, School of Psychology, Speech and Hearing, University of
Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand
1
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
2
Daily mindfulness is associated with recovery processes among coaches – a 4 3
week diary study 4
Sport coaching is a profession which is often demanding, and one in which 5
psychological burnout is problematic. Recovery from work demands is known to important in 6
preventing burnout, but research to date has paid little attention to short term recovery for 7
coaches. The present study therefore focuses on day to day recovery. Specifically, we 8
investigated the role of mindfulness in recovery, given previously established empirical 9
relationships between mindfulness and recovery processes. We used an intensive diary study 10
design to gather daily data from a sample of 46 sport coaches, over a period of 28 consecutive 11
days. Multilevel modelling allowed data analysis at the intra-individual level, providing 12
insights into daily recovery processes for individual coaches. Results showed that increases in 13
daily mindfulness, relative to coaches’ individual mean levels, were predictive of higher 14
levels of recovery related variables (energy, mood) through mechanisms of reduced 15
rumination and improved sleep. The present study highlights mindfulness as a potential path 16
to daily recovery, and prevention of burnout, amongst coaches. The study lays groundwork 17
for the investigation of mindfulness training as a recovery promoting intervention for 18
coaches, potentially through easily accessible means such as app-based training delivery and 19
the incorporation of informal mindfulness practice into daily activities. 20
Keywords: Stress, burnout, rumination, energy, mood 21
Introduction 22
Coaching in competitive sports is a profession which has the potential to be rewarding 23
and stimulating, but also one which is known for its pressures. Coaches typically face a number 24
of varied demands, associated not only with the technical nature of sport performance but also 25
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
to management, administration, and organizational stressors (Norris et al., 2017). Additionally, 26
many coaches work on a part time basis, and must fit the multiple tasks and responsibilities of 27
their coaching work around their primary or other employment (Potts et al., 2019). On top of 28
these demands, many coaches feel pressure to produce results, and often, in high competition. 29
It has been argued that this pressure becomes most obvious and demanding at the highest 30
competitive level (Giges et al., 2004). However, even at levels where competition is less 31
important, such as child and youth sports, coaches must deal with performance expectations, 32
either from external sources or internal sources such as high personal standards (Durand-Bush 33
et al., 2012). 34
Given these many and varied challenges, it is perhaps unsurprising that stress is a 35
common experience amongst coaches (Fletcher & Scott, 2010; Norris, et al., 2017). Drawing 36
on transactional theory (Folkman & Lazarus, 1984), stress can be explained as the result of an 37
appraisal process; a weighing up of perceived demands or threats against available coping 38
resources. Where demands exceed resources, feelings of stress are the likely outcome. It is 39
important to note that stress is not necessarily harmful, especially when stressful episodes are 40
short lived, and in the coaching context some coaches have even reported a certain amount of 41
stress as being invigorating, boosting energy and motivation (Olusoga et al., 2010; Olusoga et 42
al., 2019). Stress, however, is problematic if it is ongoing and chronic without adequate 43
recovery; in this form stress has been found to act as a precursor to a state of burnout (Fletcher 44
& Scott, 2010). 45
Burnout has been identified as a serious issue for coaches, from high performance right 46
through to volunteer and community levels (Engelberg-Moston et al., 2009; Olusoga et al., 47
2019), and therefore presents a cause for concern for the coaching profession (McNeill et al., 48
2017; O'Connor & Bennie, 2006; Olusoga et al., 2019). Symptoms of coach burnout include 49
depressed mood and low energy levels, sleep disturbances, and ruminative thought patterns 50
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
(Bentzen et al., 2014), as well as feelings of cynicism toward and disengagement from athletes 51
(Lundkvist et al., 2012; Madigan et al., 2019), and a desire to withdraw from coaching 52
(Hassmén et al., 2019). Clearly, burnout has a negative impact on affected coaches, but it also 53
affects the athletes and sports participants they work with. Given the negative impact of burnout 54
on coaches and those around them, understanding how to prevent coach burnout is of 55
importance. 56
Kallus & Kellmann (2000) conceptualise coach burnout as an end state resulting from 57
an imbalance between stress and recovery over a period of time. Recovery refers to the process 58
that takes place when work demands or stressors cease, and workers have the opportunity to 59
rebuild and restore those resources expended during the working day (Sonnentag, 2001). If 60
stress and recovery are determinants of burnout, it follows that one strategy to reduce the 61
likelihood of coach burnout, in a profession that is inherently demanding and stressful, is to 62
focus on day-to-day recovery (Bentzen et al., 2017; Bentzen et al., 2016; Kellmann et al., 2016). 63
Consistent with this reasoning, a growing body of research in the general (i.e. non coach 64
specific) work stress literature emphasises the importance of recovery, in terms of maintaining 65
worker wellbeing in the face of high work demands and associated stress (e.g. Rook & Zijlstra, 66
2006; Sonnentag, 2001; Sonnentag et al., 2008; Zijlstra, & Sonnentag, 2006). 67
A range of different activities are thought to contribute to recovery, so long as they do 68
not draw on the same resources that are called on at work (Sonnentag et al., 2008). However, 69
in professions such as coaching, where mental effort is involved, recovery can be difficult to 70
achieve. Work-related activity easily extends beyond work hours per se (Querstret et al., 2017), 71
because simply thinking about work challenges or problems can draw on the same mental 72
resources used during the working day thus limiting opportunities for good recovery 73
(Sonnentag, 2001, Rook & Zijlstra, 2006). This challenge is highly relevant to coaching in 74
sports, which is often described as a profession without boundaries that is difficult to mentally 75
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
disengage from (McNeill et al., 2017). Furthermore, coaches report that they find it hard to 76
stop thinking about work after hours, in addition to a tendency to engage in ruminative thought 77
patterns (e.g. Lundkvist et al., 2012; Tashman et al., 2010; Donahue et al., 2012). Ruminative 78
thoughts, which are intrusive, repetitive, and usually negative, are particularly detrimental to 79
recovery because they can form psychological representations of either past or future stressors 80
at work, prolonging the experience of work demands and the associated stress response 81
(Brosschot et al., 2010). Ruminative thought may be a precursor to, as well as a sign of, coach 82
burnout. In the present research, we therefore examine rumination on day to day basis and how 83
it is associated to the recovery processes, in order to understand more about how coach burnout 84
can be prevented. More specifically, we examine the role of mindfulness, a psychological state 85
that may act as an antidote to rumination and help facilitate better recovery. 86
Mindfulness and Recovery 87
Mindfulness is a state of consciousness involving a ‘receptive attention to and awareness of 88
present events and experience’ (Brown et al., 2007; p122), which has been related to a range 89
of positive outcomes including positive emotional states, and declines in mood disturbance and 90
stress (Brown & Ryan, 2003 Chiesa & Serrett; 2009; Sharma & Rush, 2014). Everyone has the 91
capacity to experience mindfulness (Tuckey et al., 2018), but some people tend to do so more 92
frequently and consistently than others. Mindfulness, therefore, varies between people, but can 93
also fluctuate within individuals. For example, someone who has a naturally high level of 94
mindfulness will still have moments or days when they are less aware of the present moment, 95
and when they end up completing tasks on autopilot (Siegel, 2009). Mindfulness can therefore 96
be considered trait-like (i.e., dispositional mindfulness) but also as a state of consciousness 97
which can vary somewhat from day-to-day within individuals (i.e., state mindfulness). 98
Over the last two decades mindfulness based interventions have been increasingly used 99
in sports settings, and have been found effective in enhancing performance as well as overall 100
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
wellbeing of athletes (Gardner & Moore, 2017). More recently, coach specific interventions 101
have been developed and tested. Longshore and Sachs (2015) found that coaches who 102
participated in mindfulness training reported less anxiety and greater emotional stability 103
following the intervention, while participants in an applied mindfulness intervention 104
(Lundqvist et al., 2018) experienced greater psychological flexibility and lower perceived 105
stress after completing mindfulness training. Importantly, those coaches also reported 106
improved sleep quality and reduced rumination. 107
We build on the findings of Lundqvist et al., (2018) in the present research, further 108
investigating the relationship between mindfulness and rumination amongst coaches, to 109
understand more about determinants of coach recovery. Previous research has demonstrated 110
that individuals who are higher in mindfulness are less likely to engage in ruminative patterns 111
of thinking (Josefsson et al., 2017; Jury & Jose, 2019; Querstret et al., 2017). There are several 112
possible explanations for this relationship. Firstly, mindfulness implies acceptance of events 113
and experiences, whereas rumination has been described as a maladaptive cognitive strategy 114
employed by individuals to avoid, rather than face up to, unwanted emotional states (Liverant 115
et al., 2011). Rumination, therefore, indicates a lack of acceptance (Ciesla et al., 2012; Liverant 116
et al., 2011), a mental or emotional state which seems incompatible with a state of mindfulness. 117
Additionally, as a cognitive response to events or experiences, rumination is automatic 118
rather than intentional. Mindfulness, on the other hand, is associated with decreased 119
automaticity of thoughts and emotions. Mindfulness is described as involving a shift in 120
perspective, referred to as decentering (Brown et al., 2007; Piet & Hougaard, 2011) or re-121
perceiving (Shapiro et al., 2006), in which thoughts and emotions are acknowledged simply as 122
temporary mental events rather than reflections of reality (Bishop et al., 2004; Wolkin, 2015). 123
Decentering therefore involves a separation of self from emotion, and this appears to reduce 124
automatic response patterns such as rumination. 125
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
In addition, mindfulness may also be associated with recovery because it appears to 126
promote sleep quality (Howell et al., 2010; Hülsheger et al., 2015). Sleep is fundamental to 127
recovery (Berset et al., 2011; Zijlstra & Sonnentag, 2006), bringing total disengagement from 128
work related activity, thought and effort (Hulsheger et al., 2015). On the other hand, lack of 129
sleep, or impaired sleep quality, can result in accumulated fatigue, and there are well 130
established links between impaired sleep and burnout in non-clinical populations (Grossi et al., 131
2015). When people are more mindful they may experience better quality sleep, and therefore 132
have greater opportunity for recovery. 133
The present research 134
The arguments presented so far suggest that individuals who are higher in dispositional 135
mindfulness are less likely to engage in ruminative thought, and more likely to experience 136
better quality sleep, in contrast to their counterparts who might be lower in mindfulness. Less 137
rumination, and better sleep quality, are thought to predict recovery from work demands. In 138
the present research we examined these relationships on a day to day basis, for individual 139
coaches. We proposed a an investigative model where daily mindfulness is indirectly related 140
to recovery indicators (mood and energy) through two potential explanatory variables; namely, 141
evening rumination and evening sleep quality. Mood and energy were chosen as outcomes 142
because they strongly associated to recovery: sufficient recovery is experienced by way of 143
feeling mentally and physically refreshed with an associated improvement in mood (Binnewies 144
et al., 2009; Sonnentag & Kruel, 2006). We expected that where participants were more 145
mindful than usual, they would report lower rumination and better sleep that evening, and 146
higher mood and energy levels the following day. 147
Research hypotheses follow: 148
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Hypothesis 1: At the within person level, daytime mindfulness is: a) negatively related to 149
evening work-related rumination, and b) positively related to evening sleep quality. 150
Hypothesis 2: At the within person level, daytime mindfulness is positively related to mood 151
and energy ratings the following day, via the mechanisms of a) reduced evening rumination, 152
and b) improved sleep quality. 153
The purpose of the current research was to test the two hypotheses, and we did this by 154
using a diary design, with participants providing repeated daily measures of the same variables 155
over a period of 28 consecutive days. Each day, the data collection gathered information on 156
recovery related outcomes that day, as well as on recovery processes, which unfolded the 157
previous evening. This repeated measure design gave the ability to examine varying states 158
within individual participants (Gunthert & Wenze, 2012; Hamaker, 2012), and therefore to 159
understand more about individual participant’s recovery processes. 160
Methods 161
Participants 162
Participants were recruited through convenience sampling, via two different methods. 163
Some study participants were recruited through their participation in a previous coaching study 164
carried out by the lead author (while responses in that cross-sectional survey were anonymous, 165
some respondents provide an email address so that they might be contacted regarding future 166
research). Others responded to emails sent to their sporting organisations or governing bodies, 167
providing information on the present study and calling for participants. Eligibility was limited 168
to people over 18 years of age, actively working as a sport coach (either on a full time or part 169
time basis) and based in New Zealand. As an incentive, participants were offered the 170
opportunity to go in a draw for a $250 shopping voucher, provided they remained in the study 171
for the 28-day duration. 172
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
A total of 50 sport coaches began the study. Four were excluded from the analyses 173
because they had completed less than 50% of the daily surveys, leaving a remaining sample of 174
n = 46 (30 males, 65%). This sample size was deemed appropriate for the planned multilevel 175
analysis, where a sample of size of 30 or more is sufficiently large to not bias results (Ohly et 176
al., 2010). Participants ranged in age; the youngest participant identified as being in the 18-20 177
age bracket, while 15 participants (32%) were aged 50 years and over. Ten participants (21%) 178
were aged between 21 and 30 years, 7 (15%) were aged between 31 and 40 years, and 13 (28%) 179
were aged between 41 and 50 years. The majority of participants (29) had more than 10 years 180
coaching experience; only 7 participants had less than 5 years coaching experience. The other 181
10 coaches had between 5 and 10 years of experience. Approximately one third of participants 182
(n = 16, 36%) were full-time coaches, and the remainder coached part-time as well as being 183
employed elsewhere. Hours per week spent coaching ranged from 7 hours per week for a part-184
time coach who worked in other full-time employment, to 60 hours per week for a professional 185
rugby coach. Coaches came from a wide range of sports, including mainstream codes such as 186
rugby, netball, athletics and rowing, as well as lesser known sports such including archery, 187
equestrian, and multisport. The diversity in terms of age, experience, and sports means that it 188
is likely that participants had a range of pathways into their coaching positions; some may have 189
had formal training while others are likely to have learned ‘on the job.’ 190
Daily survey procedures 191
Data collection took place over a four-month period, and coaches were given the option 192
of participating in one of four separate rounds. Each round began on the first Tuesday of the 193
month and continued for 28 consecutive days. Coaches were asked to self-select the month in 194
which they would complete surveys, based on availability and their sporting season (coaches 195
were asked to only participate if they were in their competitive season, and therefore to choose 196
a month where this was the case). Data collection ran from August to November 2017, a time 197
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
period which captured the competitive season for winter and summer sports in New Zealand. 198
Prior to the beginning of data collection, the survey was piloted for seven days amongst a post-199
graduate research lab group and a small group of volunteers from a range of backgrounds and 200
occupations. Additionally, human ethics approval was obtained from the University of 201
Canterbury. 202
In the study itself, daily surveys were emailed to participants each evening for 28 203
consecutive days. Basic demographic information was captured in the initial survey. The 204
remaining 27 surveys contained the same questions each day, although the order of questions 205
was randomized to minimise habitual responding. Daily surveys were brief and took around 206
two minutes to complete. The text introducing and concluding the survey was consistent across 207
participants but different every day, both to keep participants interested and engaged and to 208
show interest and commitment on the part of the researchers. Participants were also given the 209
option to request weekly summaries of their survey scores, to further boost engagement. All 210
surveys and accompanying emails were friendly, informal and encouraging in tone, offering 211
opportunities for participants to provide feedback or to contact the researchers with any 212
questions or concerns. Every survey ended with an expression of thanks and appreciation to 213
the participants for their time and effort. 214
Participants were asked to provide an email address for an account they could access 215
either from home, or on their mobile device, and surveys were emailed via the Qualtrics survey 216
platform (Qualtrics, Provo, Utah, USA) at 7pm each evening. Participants were asked and 217
encouraged to complete each survey on the night it was sent. After 15 hours the survey was 218
made inaccessible, thus preventing late responses. Participants were strongly encouraged to 219
complete all 28 surveys but given the feasibility of an intensive daily diary study, missing a 220
survey on occasion would not impact their inclusion in the study. Of the 1288 possible surveys 221
over the course of the study, 1131 were completed with a mean of 24.64 (SD 3.34) of diary 222
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
entries per participant and a range of 17 – 28 entries. 41 participants completed 20 or more 223
surveys, with 8 participants completing all 28 entries. The highest number of missing surveys 224
for a single participant was 11. Friday and Saturday were the days on which surveys were least 225
likely to be completed. Missing data analysis showed that, at a within-person level, lagged 226
study variables were not significantly associated with the missed days of entry the next day. 227
Measures 228
Mindfulness 229
Daily mindfulness was measured using the state version of the Mindful Attention and 230
Awareness Scale (MAAS). This version of the MAAS has been used in similar diary research 231
(Hülsheger et al., 2014) and is a five-item scale which is designed to measure mindfulness as 232
a naturally occurring state, even in those without any prior mindfulness meditation training or 233
experience. Participants were asked to think back on the day they had just had and indicate the 234
extent to which they agreed with the scale items, an example of which is “I rushed through 235
activities without being really attentive to them.” Responses were given on a seven-point 236
Likert-type scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. Scores were reverse 237
coded prior to analyses, so that a high score would indicate higher levels of mindfulness. 238
Rumination 239
A five-item scale was adapted from the ‘affective rumination’ component of the Work-Related 240
Rumination Questionnaire (Querstret & Cropley, 2012). Items were slightly adjusted to refer 241
specifically to coaching work. The five adjusted items included in the scale were as follows: 242
“1. I became tense when I thought about coaching related issues during my free time; 2. I got 243
annoyed by thinking about coaching related issues when not at work; 3. I became irritated by 244
coaching issues when not at work; 4. I felt fatigued by thinking about coaching-related issues 245
during my free time; 5. I was troubled by coaching-related issues when not at work”. 246
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Participants were asked to think back on the previous evening when responding, and responses 247
were provided on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly 248
agree. 249
Sleep quality 250
Participants were asked to ‘please rate, out of ten, the overall quality of your sleep last night’, 251
using a visual analogue scale with anchor points at each end (0 = extremely poor and 10 = 252
extremely good). This single-item measure has been used in previous diary studies and 253
correlates highly with total scores on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (Pow et al., 2017), 254
while the visual analogue format was used by Arnetz et al. (2008) in their Brief Fatigue 255
Syndrome Scale. 256
Energy 257
Energy was measured using a single-item measure; participants were asked ‘please rate your 258
energy levels today,’ again using a visual analogue scale with anchor points at each of 0 = 259
extremely poor and 10 = extremely good (Fisher et al., 2016). This question was taken from 260
the Brief Fatigue Syndrome Scale (Arnetz et al., 2008), a validated scale containing three 261
single-item measures to measure three aspects of fatigue. The wording was adjusted slightly to 262
reflect the daily nature of the present study and different anchor points were used to ensure 263
consistency with the other single-item measures. 264
Mood 265
A single item measure was used for mood: participants were asked participants to ‘please rate 266
your overall mood today,’ using a visual analogue scale with anchor points at each end of 0 = 267
extremely poor and 10 = extremely good. Mood has been measured in previous recovery-268
related diary research using a similar single item (Fuller et al., 2003). 269
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Reliability analysis 270
Reliability for the multi-item scales, in terms of measuring within person change, was 271
assessed following recommendations from Bolger and Laurenceau (2013). Coefficient omegas 272
for each scale were calculated based on the estimated factor loadings and variances from the 273
within person component of a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (Bolger & Laurenceau, 274
2013). The resulting coefficient omegas of .85 for the mindfulness scale and .87 for rumination 275
indicated good reliability. 276
Statistical analyses 277
As the daily measures were nested within participants, multilevel modelling was 278
appropriate. All analyses were carried out using MPlus Version 8 (Muthén & Muthén, 2019). 279
The analyses utilised a lower level or 1-1-1 mediation model (Kenny et al., 2003) 280
reflecting the fact that all the study variables were measured at the lower (day) level. Following 281
recommendations from Preacher and colleagues (Preacher et al., 2011; Preacher et al., 2010) 282
an unconflated approach was taken, meaning that that the variance of the day-level variables 283
was separated into within- and between-level components. This approach allows for the 284
possibility that relationships between study variables will differ at the within- and between-285
levels. Additionally, each day-level predictor variable was centered on the person mean. 286
Centering in this way makes it possible to investigate how individuals’ daily deviations from 287
their own mean on a predictor variable relate to the outcome variable (Hülsheger et al., 2018), 288
and enables the study of intra-individual processes. 289
Although measures were collected at the same time each day, they related to different 290
points in time. On any given day, the survey measured mindfulness on that day, energy and 291
mood on that same day, and rumination and sleep the previous evening. The area of focus, and 292
research interest, was the temporal relationship between mindfulness on any day, rumination 293
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
and sleep that same evening, and energy and mood the following day. Therefore, prior to 294
analysis the mindfulness variable was lagged by one day in the dataset to allow this temporal 295
relationship to be assessed (Bolger & Laurenceau, 2013). For example, data collected on a 296
Tuesday evening related to mindfulness, energy, and mood on Tuesday, and rumination and 297
sleep on Monday evening. Lagging the mindfulness variable by one day meant that the Monday 298
mindfulness score could be used to predict Monday evening rumination and sleep, and Tuesday 299
daytime energy and mood. 300
Before testing the study hypotheses, several different elements of the data were 301
inspected. First, the intra-class correlation (ICC) was checked. This indicates the proportion of 302
variation that exists between people, compared with the total variation in the model (Finch & 303
Bolin, 2017). ICCs ranged from 0.32 to 0.48, indicating that a large amount of variation in the 304
model was at the within person level, and therefore that multilevel modelling was an 305
appropriate approach. Next, the data was visually inspected via the creation of individual panel 306
plots for each participant. This allowed for observation of variables across time, to check for 307
any evidence of systematic change. While none was apparent, recommendations from Bolger 308
and Laurenceau (2013) were nonetheless followed and time was included in the final model as 309
a predictor of the mediator and outcome variables. 310
Results 311
Tables 1 shows means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations for all study variables. Tables 312
2 and 3 display results of the multilevel mediation analysis, for the outcome variables energy 313
and mood respectively. It should be noted at this point that mediation analysis was used not to 314
explain any direct relationship between the predictor and outcome variables, but rather to 315
investigate the hypothesized indirect relationships between those variables, via the 316
hypothesized explanatory mechanisms (Agler & De Boeck, 2017). 317
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Table 1: Descriptive statistics and correlations for study variables at within and between person level
Variable (within person) M SD 1 2 3 4 1 Mindfulness 5.19 1.34 - 2 Rumination 2.53 1.40 -.14* - 3 Sleep 6.66 2.25 .10* -.13* - 4 Mood 7.57 1.60 .08 -.23* .34* - 5 Energy 6.91 1.98 .06 -.15* .40* .53* Variable (between person) M SD 1 2 3 4 1 Mindfulness 5.19 1.28 - 2 Rumination 2.53 0.94 -.82* - 3 Sleep 6.70 1.28 .43* -.28 - 4 Mood 7.62 1.16 .73* -.69* .56* - 5 Energy 6.97 1.31 .62* -.55* .75* .73*
*significant at 0.05 level
At the within-subject level mindfulness was negatively related to rumination, meaning 318
that on days where individuals reported higher mindfulness during the day, they were less likely 319
to experience coaching-related ruminative thoughts that evening. Similarly, mindfulness 320
during the day was positively related to sleep quality that evening. Thus, Hypotheses 1a and 321
1b were supported. Regarding Hypothesis 2a, results showed a significant indirect relationship 322
between mindfulness and energy, via both rumination and sleep, supporting our predictions 323
(Figure 1). Similarly, Hypothesis 2b was supported, with mindfulness and mood indirectly 324
related, via both rumination and sleep. (Refer to Figure 1 for a conceptual model, including 325
results). 326
In terms of the relative effect of different variables in the model, standardized 327
regression coefficients showed that at the individual level mindfulness had a stronger effect on 328
rumination (-0.14, p = 0.000) than on sleep (0.09, p = 0.000). The effect of sleep on mood 329
(0.29, p = 0.00) was stronger than the effect of rumination on mood (-0.18, p = 0.00). Similarly, 330
the effect of sleep on energy (0.38, p=0.000) was stronger than the effect of rumination on 331
energy (-0.10, p = 0.003). Contrast tests, however, showed that neither rumination nor sleep 332
was more important than the other, in terms of their explanatory roles in the model. 333
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Table 2: Results of mediation analysis for outcome variable Energy
Mediation Pathway Estimate SE P value LLCI ULCI Within Level Mindfulness Rumination -0.16* 0.06 0.006 -0.25 -0.06 Mindfulness Sleep 0.17* 0.07 0.011 0.06 0.27 Rumination Energy -0.15* 0.04 0.001 -0.22 -0.08 Sleep Energy 0.30* 0.07 0.000 0.19 0.41 Mindfulness Energy -0.02 0.04 0.698 -0.08 0.05 Indirect Effects
MindfulnessRuminationEnergy 0.02* 0.01 0.030 0.00 0.04 Mindfulness Sleep Energy 0.05* 0.02 0.044 0.01 0.09 Residual variance outcome 1.82* 0.39 0.000 1.17 2.46 Residual variance rumination 1.15* 0.13 0.000 0.94 1.36 Residual variance sleep 3.38* 0.39 0.000 2.33 4.43
Between Level Mindfulness Rumination -0.76* 0.11 0.000 -0.94 -0.59 Mindfulness Sleep 0.49* 0.19 0.009 0.18 0.79 Rumination Energy -0.35 0.19 0.075 -0.67 -0.03 Sleep Energy 0.61* 0.14 0.000 0.38 0.85 Mindfulness Energy 0.2 0.17 0.056 -0.08 0.49 Indirect Effects
MindfulnessRuminationEnergy 0.26 0.15 0.070 0.02 0.50 Mindfulness Sleep Energy 0.30* 0.14 0.030 0.07 0.53 Residual variance outcome 0.58* 0.2 0.003 0.26 0.90 Residual variance rumination 0.35* 0.06 0.000 0.24 0.45 Residual variance sleep 1.41* 0.24 0.000 1.02 1.81 *Significant at 0.05 level
334
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Table 3: Results of mediation analysis for outcome variable Mood
Mediation Pathway Estimate SE P Value LLCI ULCI Within Level Mindfulness Rumination -0.16* 0.06 0.006 -0.25 -0.06 Mindfulness Sleep 0.17* 0.07 0.011 0.06 0.27 Rumination Mood -0.20* 0.04 0.000 -0.27 -0.14 Sleep Mood 0.20* 0.04 0.000 0.12 0.27 Mindfulness Mood 0.02 0.05 0.747 -0.06 0.09 Indirect Effects
MindfulnessRuminationMood 0.03* 0.01 0.013 0.01 0.05 Mindfulness Sleep Mood 0.03* 0.02 0.030 0.01 0.06 Residual variance outcome 1.32* 0.14 0.000 1.09 1.56 Residual variance rumination 1.15* 0.13 0.000 0.94 1.34 Residual variance sleep 0.28* 0.11 0.000 2.33 4.43
Between Level Mindfulness Rumination -0.76* 0.11 0.000 -0.94 -0.59 Mindfulness Sleep 0.49* 0.19 0.000 0.18 0.79 Rumination Mood -0.43* 0.21 0.035 -0.77 -0.09 Sleep Mood 0.28* 0.11 0.009 0.11 0.46 Mindfulness Mood 0.35 0.18 0.058 0.05 0.65 Indirect Effects
MindfulnessRuminationMood 0.33 0.17 0.055 0.05 0.61 Mindfulness Sleep Mood 0.14 0.08 0.096 0.00 0.05 Residual variance outcome 0.44* 0.11 0.000 0.26 0.61 Residual variance rumination 0.35* 0.06 0.000 0.24 0.45 Residual variance sleep 1.41* 0.24 0.000 1.02 1.81 *Significant at 0.05 level
335
Relationships at the between-person level were not hypothesized, because the focus of 336
the study was the within-person process of recovery. Tests for those relationships were, 337
however, included in the analysis. Results, displayed in Tables 2-3, show a similar pattern to 338
results at the within-subject level. Mindfulness was related to rumination and sleep, 339
indicating that those coaches who across the course of the study reported higher mindfulness 340
levels also reported less rumination and better-quality sleep. Consistent with the within-341
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
person analyses, there were significant indirect effects between mindfulness and both 342
outcome variables through rumination and sleep. 343
344
Figure 1: Results model showing relationships between study variables 345
Discussion 346
The 28-day diary study provided a rich body of data and with it the ability to investigate 347
within-person fluctuations in mindfulness, consequent changes in evening recovery processes, 348
and recovery-related outcomes the day after, for participating coaches. Examining daily 349
processes over an extended time period, at the individual level, is relatively unique in the 350
literature and therefore the present research contributes to a more in depth understanding of 351
daily recovery processes. Results provided support for both of the study hypotheses. Firstly, 352
and consistent with existing research (e.g., Josefsson et al., 2017; Querstret et al., 2017), a 353
negative relationship was found between mindfulness and subsequent rumination. Secondly, 354
results supported the hypothesis that there would be a positive relationship between daily 355
mindfulness and sleep that same evening, providing further evidence that a mindful attitude 356
promotes sleep quality (Howell et al., 2010). Finally, support was found for the hypothesized 357
model. Results showed an indirect relationship between coach mindfulness on a given day and 358
mood and energy the following day, through rumination and sleep quality on the given evening. 359
Specifically, on days where coaches reported higher mindfulness (relative to their own mean), 360
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
they also reported less coaching-related rumination and better sleep quality that evening, and 361
higher mood and energy ratings the following day. Altogether, this represents a recovery 362
process facilitated by state mindfulness. The use of within person lagged analysis in the present 363
study gives an indication of the temporal order of the variables. Intuitively it seems possible 364
that mindfulness, and consequent effects on rumination and sleep, might be outcomes rather 365
than predictors of positive mood. Previous research has suggested that when people are 366
experiencing better psychological wellbeing, they may be more likely to be mindful (Bishop, 367
2002), or that mindfulness levels and mood have a mutual influence on one another (Baer et 368
al., 2012). Past study designs, however, have not adequately allowed for examination of the 369
causal order of variables (Snippe et al., 2015). In the present study there was no significant 370
correlation between mindfulness and mood, but rather an indirect relationship via the 371
explanatory mechanisms of rumination and sleep, suggesting that increased mindfulness is 372
indeed a precursor to better mood. This is consistent with the findings of Snippe et al., (2015) 373
who examined within-person changes in mindfulness and mood following a Mindfulness 374
Based Stress Reduction intervention. Their findings indicated that changes in mindfulness 375
predicted changes in positive affect the following day, but changes in affect did not predict 376
next-day mindfulness. Mindfulness, they argued, was not simply a ‘side-effect’ of a good mood 377
(Snippe et al., 2015). While not yet conclusive, evidence, including that in the present study, 378
does suggest that mindfulness promotes positive affect rather than the other way around. 379
Sleep is an important part of any overnight recovery process, because of the opportunity 380
it provides for total disengagement from work related demands, as well as the replenishment 381
of resources. The present study expected, and found, mindfulness to be positively related to 382
sleep quality. This hypothesis was based on prior research suggesting that mindfulness 383
promotes better awareness and regulation of sleep behaviour (Howell et al., 2008; Hülsheger 384
et al., 2015). It is possible, however, that improved sleep is a result of decreased rumination 385
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
(Berset et al., 2011; Demsky et al., 2018), and that the two recovery processes proposed in the 386
present study (lower rumination, higher sleep quality) are interdependent. Future research, with 387
survey questions more targeted on different aspects of sleep quality, as well as a design that 388
would better support serial mediation and causal inferences (e.g. collection of data about post-389
work rumination with a brief survey in the evening, and collecting data on sleep quality the 390
following morning), could investigate this potential relationship more fully. 391
The present study contributes to the coach burnout literature by identifying the state of 392
mindfulness as a factor which might facilitate recovery and help coaches restore personal 393
resources so that they may continue to meet the demands of their work. Work-related thought 394
outside of work time can act as a continuation of work demands, therefore impeding recovery. 395
Negative rumination is considered particularly detrimental, because dwelling on work 396
problems and stressors may prolong the physiological stress response, and prevent restoration 397
of resources (e.g., energy, and positive affect). Contemplation of work challenges which is 398
positive in tone, however, appears to be less detrimental to recovery (Querstret & Cropley, 399
2012). The experience of positive events is known to build personal resources (Fredrickson, 400
2001) so it is possible that reflections on good things that have taken place at work add to rather 401
than deplete work-related resources. Taken together, these findings signal a need to identify 402
factors which affect the content and valence of work-related thought and may therefore 403
facilitate recovery. Results from the present study, particularly the negative relationship 404
between mindfulness and rumination, suggest that mindfulness is one such factor. 405
Many coaches are motivated to work because of a genuine interest in their chosen sport, 406
and in the development of sportspeople. They find a sense of purpose, meaning, and identity 407
in their work (McNeill et al., 2017). This motivation, amongst workers in an occupation known 408
for unusual work hours and high integration between work and non-work lives, means that 409
work-related thought often extends beyond work hours. Persistent and negative thoughts about 410
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
work issues are known to impede recovery from work demands. However, results of the present 411
study indicate that negative ruminative thought is less likely to occur when one is in a mindful 412
state. Given that the consistency and frequency with which individuals experience state 413
mindfulness (Creswell, 2017) can be increased through education and training, the study 414
highlights a potential direction for recovery promoting interventions for coaches. Given the 415
prevalence of burnout in coaching (e.g. Engelberg-Moston et al., 2009; Olusoga et al., 2019), 416
and the role of recovery in preventing burnout, results of the present study make a significant 417
contribution to the coach burnout literature. 418
Methodological considerations 419
A strength of the present study is the longitudinal design and daily data collection, as 420
there is limited research on actual day to day recovery processes amongst coaches. In addition, 421
little is known how mindfulness varies across workdays and how this might affect wellbeing 422
related outcomes. Almost all investigations of mindfulness in the work context look at trait 423
mindfulness, or the impact of mindfulness interventions (Tuckey et al., 2018). Results of the 424
present study, which show that varying levels of mindfulness predict variation in rumination 425
and sleep and are indirectly related to recovery, add to the literature on how, rather than 426
whether, mindfulness is related to a recovery process that facilitates coach wellbeing. 427
Mindfulness appears to help coaches regulate the content of work-related thought outside of 428
work time, reducing work-related rumination and thus allowing for more effective recovery 429
from the mental demands of work. Through this process, mindfulness may help to protect 430
against the risk of under-recovery and eventual burnout amongst coaches, ultimately enhancing 431
sustainability. 432
While the longitudinal design is one of the strongest features of the study, it also 433
presented challenges. Data collection took place over a relatively long timeframe, in order to 434
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
gain meaningful information on the overnight recovery process within individuals. 435
Administering daily surveys over 28 consecutive days, however, carried the risk of participant 436
boredom and disengagement. The survey was therefore deliberately brief, capturing only the 437
variables which were considered fundamental to the study. Future research into the relationship 438
between daily mindfulness and overnight recovery from work could include other variables 439
which potentially influence recovery. For example, daily measures of objective work demands 440
might influence the amount of recovery required each evening. Daily measures of perceived 441
work-related stress could provide some indication of the extent to which mindfulness predict 442
more benign stress appraisals and more adaptive coping strategies, reducing the likelihood of 443
ruminative thought. 444
In an effort to keep the daily surveys brief, single-item measures rather than multi-item 445
scales were used to measure some of the study variables. Multi-item scales are usually 446
considered more appropriate in survey research, as they allow for assessment of psychometric 447
properties, but single items are suitable in some circumstances (Van Hooff et al., 2007). In 448
daily diary studies where constructs are measured frequently and repeatedly, use of single-item 449
measures can help minimise the risk of participant boredom, disengagement, and dropout 450
(Fuchs & Diamantopoulos, 2009). Additionally, when a construct is familiar and unambiguous 451
to a participant, the use of a single item may be appropriate and even have higher face validity 452
than repetitive multiple items (Van Hooff et al., 2007). This was considered to be the case with 453
the constructs of mood, energy, and sleep, which were likely to be clear and familiar to 454
participants. Further, because the data of interest was within person fluctuations in mood and 455
energy, rather than absolute values, it was more important to measure according to each 456
individual’s understanding of the construct, rather than considering every possible aspect 457
(Gilbert & Kelloway, 2014). In the case of mindfulness and rumination, brief scales were 458
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
considered more appropriate than single items, as the constructs are very abstract in nature and 459
may not have been familiar to or easily conceptualised by participants. 460
Study variables were all measured using self-report, which does bring the risk of 461
common method variance. However, as part of the analysis the independent and mediator 462
variables were centered on the person mean, effectively eliminating any between-person 463
variance attributable to the response tendencies of individual participants (Niks et al., 2017). 464
In addition, the lagging of the data meant that there was a time delay between completion of 465
the mindfulness and rumination scales for each day. From a practical perspective, self-report 466
is the only way to measure constructs which are attitudinal or perceptual, such as rumination, 467
energy, and mood (Fisher et al., 2016; Schmitt, 1994). However, future research on the daily 468
within-person recovery process could explore the use of objective and physiological measures. 469
Steps have been taken toward development of an objective measure of mindfulness (e.g., Wong 470
et al., 2018), and sleep quality and quantity can feasibly be measured using heart rate 471
monitoring technology, as can physiological recovery from work demands. These measures 472
would require considerably more time, effort and commitment from participants, and were not 473
feasible for 28-day daily diary design of the present study where data was easily accessible via 474
self-report measures. 475
Practical implications 476
Mindfulness training is gradually receiving attention in sport coaching literature; a limited 477
number of studies have demonstrated the promise of formal mindfulness based interventions 478
in assisting coaches to maintain wellbeing (e.g. Longshore & Sachs, 2015; Lundqvist et al., 479
2018). However, in considering the impact of day to day fluctuations in mindfulness, the 480
present study makes a novel contribution with important practical implications. In addition, it 481
responds to the recent call by Cropley et al. (2020) for more research into self-care strategies 482
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
that may be taken by coaches. Specifically, results from the present study suggest that even 483
small shifts in mindfulness, relative to one’s daily norm, can have an effect on both rumination 484
and sleep, and therefore may impact the degree to people can recovery from work demands. 485
These findings suggest it could be worthwhile for coaches to take even very small steps that 486
help them to be more mindful, more often. As Creswell (2017) suggests, mindfulness training 487
could viewed in a similar vein to physical training that strives to improve aerobic or muscular 488
capacity; while it might be true that there are optimum training levels in terms of volume and 489
intensity, where this levels are not realistic consistently doing some training is certainly better 490
than none. This should be encouraging for coaches, many of whom may consider the time and 491
commitment requirements of formal mindfulness training programmes a major deterrent. 492
Today, there are practical and accessible ways in which coaches might bring more mindfulness 493
into their daily lives. 494
One option which could feasibly be explored by coaches, and the coaching profession, is digital 495
mindfulness training. Over the last decade mindfulness apps have provided mindfulness 496
instruction to millions of people in different settings (Mrazek et al, 2019). This form of delivery 497
makes mindfulness instruction highly accessible, and even very brief interventions (for 498
example, 10 sessions of 10 minutes each, taking at time and setting of participants’ choice) 499
have been found to have a positive impact on aspects of participants’ wellbeing (Campillo et 500
al., 2018). Critics point out that the plethora of available apps do vary in their content, quality 501
and effectiveness, and the extent to which they teach mindfulness or simply offer guided 502
meditation (Mani et al., 2015). Indeed, to continue with the physical training analogy, any 503
coach will agree that a program well designed, evidence based and specific to the population 504
is preferable. The same is true for mindfulness training (Baltzell et al., 2014). So perhaps while 505
a readily available ‘off the shelf’ app may be a good start, there is potential and need for the 506
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
development for online, app based mindfulness resources specifically targeted toward sport 507
coaches. 508
Additionally, mindfulness can be built and maintained through informal as well as formal 509
practice (Hindman et al., 2015). Informal practice simply means incorporating mindfulness 510
into everyday tasks and existing routines, such as eating mindfully, completing household 511
chores mindfully, or simply engaging in mindful moments. Using such activities as an 512
opportunity to be mindful can increase state mindfulness (Hanley et al., 2015), and as shown 513
in the present study even small increases in state mindfulness may have an impact on wellbeing. 514
Coaches, therefore, could benefit from being taught and encouraged to cultivate moments of 515
mindfulness in their day to day activities; a practice that could be in addition to or instead of 516
formal mindfulness practice. It is suggested that coach education programs could include and 517
promote both formal and informal mindfulness practises, with an emphasis that it will enhance 518
well-being and sustainability in the coaching profession. 519
Conclusions 520
Many sport coaches are faced with high demands, making regular and sufficient 521
recovery important for sustained wellbeing and performance. In showing that variations in 522
daily mindfulness are predictive of changes in rumination levels and sleep quality, which in 523
turn predict changes in recovery related outcomes, the present study highlights a potential 524
path to daily recovery. Groundwork is laid for the investigation of mindfulness training as a 525
recovery promoting intervention, potentially through easily accessible means such as app 526
based training delivery and the incorporation of informal mindfulness practice into day to day 527
activities. 528
Reference list 529
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Agler, R., & De Boeck, P. (2017). On the interpretation and use of mediation: multiple 530
perspectives on mediation analysis. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 1984. 531
Arnetz, B. B., Frenzel, L., Åkerstedt, T., & Lisspers, J. (2008). The Brief Fatigue Syndrome 532
Scale: validation and utilization in fatigue recovery studies. In Fatigue science for 533
human health (pp. 55-66): Springer. 534
Baer, R. A., Carmody, J., & Hunsinger, M. (2012). Weekly change in mindfulness and 535
perceived stress in a mindfulness‐based stress reduction program. Journal of Clinical 536
Psychology, 68(7), 755-765. 537
Baltzell, A., McCarthy, J., & Greenbaum, T. (2014). Mindfulness strategies: Consulting with 538
coaches and athletes: Background and presentation of the 2013 AASP annual 539
convention workshop. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 5(3), 147-155. 540
Bentzen, M., Lemyre, P. N., & Kenttä, G. (2014). The process of burnout among professional 541
sport coaches through the lens of self-determination theory: A qualitative approach. 542
Sports Coaching Review, 3(2), 101-116. 543
Bentzen, M., Lemyre, N., & Kenttä, G. (2017). A Comparison of High-Performance Football 544
Coaches Experiencing High-Versus Low-Burnout Symptoms Across a Season of Play: 545
Quality of Motivation and Recovery Matters. International Sport Coaching Journal, 546
4(2), 133-146. 547
Bentzen, M., Lemyre, P.-N., & Kenttä, G. (2016). Development of exhaustion for high-548
performance coaches in association with workload and motivation: A person-centered 549
approach. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 10-19. 550
Berset, M., Elfering, A., Lüthy, S., Lüthi, S., & Semmer, N. K. (2011). Work stressors and 551
impaired sleep: Rumination as a mediator. Stress and Health, 27(2). 552
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Binnewies, C., Sonnentag, S., & Mojza, E. J. (2009). Daily performance at work: Feeling 553
recovered in the morning as a predictor of day‐level job performance. Journal of 554
Organizational Behavior, 30(1), 67-93. 555
Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., . . . Velting, D. 556
(2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science 557
and Practice, 11(3), 230-241. 558
Bishop, S. R. (2002). What do we really know about mindfulness-based stress reduction?. 559
Psychosomatic medicine, 64(1), 71-83. 560
Bolger, N., & Laurenceau, J. (2013). Intensive longitudinal methods. New York, NY: Guilford. 561
Brosschot, J. F., Verkuil, B., & Thayer, J. F. (2010). Conscious and unconscious perseverative 562
cognition: is a large part of prolonged physiological activity due to unconscious stress? 563
Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 69(4), 407-416. 564
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role 565
in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 84(4), 822. 566
Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations 567
and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18(4), 211-237. 568
Campillo, E., Ricarte, J. J., Ros, L., Nieto, M., & Latorre, J. M. (2018). Effects of the visual 569
and auditory components of a brief mindfulness intervention on mood state and on 570
visual and auditory attention and memory task performance. Current 571
Psychology, 37(1), 357-365. 572
Chiesa A and Serretti A. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for stress management in 573
healthy people: a review and meta-analysis. J Altern Complement Med 2009; 15:593–574
600. 575
Ciesla, J. A., Reilly, L. C., Dickson, K. S., Emanuel, A. S., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). 576
Dispositional mindfulness moderates the effects of stress among adolescents: 577
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Rumination as a mediator. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 41(6), 578
760-770. 579
Creswell, J. D. (2017). Mindfulness interventions. Annual review of psychology, 68, 491-516. 580
Cropley, B., Thelwell, R., Mallett, C. J., & Dieffenbach, K. (2020). A commentary and 581
reflection on sport psychology in the discipline of sports coaching. Journal of Applied 582
Sport Psychology, 32(1), 121-128. 583
Demsky, C. A., Fritz, C., Hammer, L. B., & Black, A. E. (2018). Workplace incivility and 584
employee sleep: The role of rumination and recovery experiences. Journal of 585
Occupational Health Psychology. 586
Donahue, E. G., Forest, J., Vallerand, R. J., Lemyre, P. N., Crevier‐Braud, L., & Bergeron, É. 587
(2012). Passion for work and emotional exhaustion: The mediating role of rumination 588
and recovery. Applied Psychology: Health and Well‐Being, 4(3), 341-368. 589
Durand-Bush, N., Collins, J., & McNeill, K. (2012). Women Coaches' Experiences of Stress 590
and Self-Regulation: A Multiple Case Study. International Journal of Coaching 591
Science, 6(2). 592
Engelberg-Moston, T., Stipis, C., Kippin, B., Spillman, S., & Burbidge, K. (2009). 593
Organisational and occupational commitment as predictors of volunteer coaches' 594
burnout. Australian Journal on Volunteering, 14, 11. 595
Finch, W. H., & Bolin, J. E. (2017). Multilevel modeling using Mplus: Chapman and Hall/CRC. 596
Fisher, G. G., Matthews, R. A., & Gibbons, A. M. (2016). Developing and investigating the 597
use of single-item measures in organizational research. Journal of Occupational Health 598
Psychology, 21(1), 3. 599
Fletcher, D., & Scott, M. (2010). Psychological stress in sports coaches: A review of concepts, 600
research, and practice. Journal of Sports Sciences, 28(2), 127-137. 601
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping (pp. 150-153). New York: 602
Springer Publishing Company. 603
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-604
and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218. 605
Fuchs, C., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2009). Using single-item measures for construct 606
measurement in management research: Conceptual issues and application guidelines. 607
Die Betriebswirtschaft, 69(2), 195. 608
Fuller, J. A., Stanton, J. M., Fisher, G. G., Spitzmüller, C., Russell, S. S., & Smith, P. C. (2003). 609
A lengthy look at the daily grind: time series analysis of events, mood, stress, and 610
satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(6), 1019. 611
Gardner, F. L., & Moore, Z. E. (2017). Mindfulness-based and acceptance-based interventions 612
in sport and performance contexts. Current Opinion in Psychology, 16, 180-184. 613
Giges, B., Petitpas, A. J., & Vernacchia, R. A. (2004). Helping coaches meet their own needs: 614
Challenges for the sport psychology consultant. The Sport Psychologist, 18(4), 430-615
444. 616
Gilbert, S., & Kevin Kelloway, E. (2014). Using single items to measure job stressors. 617
International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 7(3), 186-199. 618
Grossi, G., Perski, A., Osika, W., & Savic, I. (2015). Stress‐related exhaustion disorder–clinical 619
manifestation of burnout? A review of assessment methods, sleep impairments, 620
cognitive disturbances, and neuro‐biological and physiological changes in clinical 621
burnout. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(6), 626-636. 622
Gunthert, K. C., & Wenze, S. J. (2012). Daily diary methods. 623
Hamaker, E. L. (2012). Why researchers should think “within-person”: A paradigmatic 624
rationale. Handbook of Research Methods for Studying Daily Life, 43-61. 625
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Hanley, A. W., Warner, A. R., Dehili, V. M., Canto, A. I., & Garland, E. L. (2015). Washing 626
dishes to wash the dishes: brief instruction in an informal mindfulness 627
practice. Mindfulness, 6(5), 1095-1103. 628
Hassmén, P., Kenttä, G., Hjälm, S., Lundkvist, E., & Gustafsson, H. (2019). Burnout symptoms 629
and recovery processes in eight elite soccer coaches over 10 years. International 630
Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 14(4), 431-443. 631
Hindman, R. K., Glass, C. R., Arnkoff, D. B., & Maron, D. D. (2015). A comparison of formal 632
and informal mindfulness programs for stress reduction in university students. 633
Mindfulness, 6(4), 873-884. 634
Howell, A. J., Digdon, N. L., & Buro, K. (2010). Mindfulness predicts sleep-related self-635
regulation and well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(4), 419-424. 636
Howell, A. J., Digdon, N. L., Buro, K., & Sheptycki, A. R. (2008). Relations among 637
mindfulness, well-being, and sleep. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(8), 773-638
777. 639
Hülsheger, U. R., Feinholdt, A., & Nübold, A. (2015). A low‐dose mindfulness intervention 640
and recovery from work: Effects on psychological detachment, sleep quality, and sleep 641
duration. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(3), 464-489. 642
Hülsheger, U. R., Lang, J. W., Depenbrock, F., Fehrmann, C., Zijlstra, F. R., & Alberts, H. J. 643
(2014). The power of presence: the role of mindfulness at work for daily levels and 644
change trajectories of psychological detachment and sleep quality. Journal of Applied 645
Psychology, 99(6), 1113. 646
Hülsheger, U. R., Walkowiak, A., & Thommes, M. S. (2018). How can mindfulness be 647
promoted? Workload and recovery experiences as antecedents of daily fluctuations in 648
mindfulness. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 649
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Josefsson, T., Ivarsson, A., Lindwall, M., Gustafsson, H., Stenling, A., Böröy, J., . . . Falkevik, 650
E. (2017). Mindfulness Mechanisms in Sports: Mediating Effects of Rumination and 651
Emotion Regulation on Sport-Specific Coping. Mindfulness, 8(5), 1354-1363. 652
Jury, T. K., & Jose, P. E. (2019). Does Rumination Function as a Longitudinal Mediator 653
Between Mindfulness and Depression? Mindfulness, 10(6), 1091-1104. 654
Kallus, K. W., & Kellmann, M. (2000). Burnout in athletes and coaches. Emotions in Sport, 655
209-230. 656
Kellmann, M., Altfeld, S., & Mallett, C. J. (2016). Recovery–stress imbalance in Australian 657
Football League coaches: A pilot longitudinal study. International Journal of Sport and 658
Exercise Psychology, 14(3), 240-249. 659
Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger, N. (2003). Lower level mediation in multilevel 660
models. Psychological Methods, 8(2), 115. 661
Liverant, G. I., Kamholz, B. W., Sloan, D. M., & Brown, T. A. (2011). Rumination in clinical 662
depression: A type of emotional suppression? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 35(3), 663
253-265. 664
Longshore, K., & Sachs, M. (2015). Mindfulness training for coaches: A mixed-method 665
exploratory study. Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 9(2), 116-137. 666
Lundkvist, E., Gustafsson, H., Hjälm, S., & Hassmén, P. (2012). An interpretative 667
phenomenological analysis of burnout and recovery in elite soccer coaches. Qualitative 668
Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 4(3), 400-419. 669
Lundqvist, C., Ståhl, L., Kenttä, G., & Thulin, U. (2018). Evaluation of a mindfulness 670
intervention for Paralympic leaders prior to the Paralympic Games. International 671
Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 13(1), 62-71. 672
Madigan, D. J., Gustafsson, H., Smith, A., Raedeke, T., & Hill, A. P. (2019). The BASES 673
expert statement on burnout in sport. The Sport and Exercise Scientist, 61, 6-7. 674
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Mani, M., Kavanagh, D. J., Hides, L., & Stoyanov, S. R. (2015). Review and evaluation of 675
mindfulness-based iPhone apps. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 3(3), e82. 676
Mrazek, A. J., Mrazek, M. D., Cherolini, C. M., Cloughesy, J. N., Cynman, D. J., Gougis, L. 677
J., ... & Schooler, J. W. (2019). The future of mindfulness training is digital, and the 678
future is now. Current Opinion in Psychology, 28, 81-86. 679
McNeill, K., Durand-Bush, N., & Lemyre, P.-N. (2017). Understanding coach burnout and 680
underlying emotions: a narrative approach. Sports Coaching Review, 6(2), 179-196. 681
Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2019). Mplus. The comprehensive modelling program for applied 682
researchers: user’s guide, 5. 683
Niks, I. M., De Jonge, J., Gevers, J. M., & Houtman, I. L. (2017). Divergent effects of 684
detachment from work: a day-level study on employee creativity. European Journal of 685
Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(2), 183-194. 686
Norris, L. A., Didymus, F. F., & Kaiseler, M. (2017). Stressors, coping, and well-being among 687
sports coaches: A systematic review. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 33, 93-112. 688
O'Connor, D., & Bennie, A. (2006). The retention of youth sport coaches [Paper in: Youth 689
Sport in Australia and New Zealand. Light, Richard and Pope, Clive (eds).]. Change 690
(Sydney, NSW), 9(1), 27. 691
Ohly, S., Sonnentag, S., Niessen, C., & Zapf, D. (2010). Diary studies in organizational 692
research. Journal of Personnel Psychology 9: 79 - 93. 693
Olusoga, P., Butt, J., Maynard, I., & Hays, K. (2010). Stress and coping: A study of world class 694
coaches. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 22(3), 274-293. 695
Olusoga, P., Bentzen, M., & Kentta, G. (2019). Coach burnout: A scoping review. International 696
Sport Coaching Journal, 6(1), 42-62. 697
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Piet, J., & Hougaard, E. (2011). The effect of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for 698
prevention of relapse in recurrent major depressive disorder: a systematic review and 699
meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(6), 1032-1040. 700
Potts, A. J., Didymus, F. F., & Kaiseler, M. (2019). Exploring stressors and coping among 701
volunteer, part-time and full-time sports coaches. Qualitative Research in Sport, 702
Exercise and Health, 11(1), 46-68. 703
Pow, J., King, D. B., Stephenson, E., & DeLongis, A. (2017). Does social support buffer the 704
effects of occupational stress on sleep quality among paramedics? A daily diary study. 705
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(1), 71. 706
Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., & Zyphur, M. J. (2011). Alternative methods for assessing mediation 707
in multilevel data: The advantages of multilevel SEM. Structural Equation Modeling, 708
18(2), 161-182. 709
Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for 710
assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological methods, 15(3), 209. 711
Querstret, D., & Cropley, M. (2012). Exploring the relationship between work-related 712
rumination, sleep quality, and work-related fatigue. Journal of Occupational Health 713
Psychology, 17(3), 341. 714
Querstret, D., Cropley, M., & Fife-Schaw, C. (2017). Internet-based instructor-led mindfulness 715
for work-related rumination, fatigue, and sleep: Assessing facets of mindfulness as 716
mechanisms of change. A randomized waitlist control trial. Journal of Occupational 717
Health Psychology, 22(2), 153. 718
Rook, J. W., & Zijlstra, F. R. (2006). The contribution of various types of activities to recovery. 719
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(2), 218-240. 720
Schmitt, N. (1994). Method bias: The importance of theory and measurement. Journal of 721
Organizational Behavior, 15(5), 393-398. 722
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. 723
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(3), 373-386. 724
Sharma, M & Rush, SE (2014). Mindfulness-based stress reduction as a stress management 725
intervention for healthy individuals: a systematic review. J Evid Based Complementary 726
Altern Med; 19: 271–286. 727
Siegel, R. D. (2009). The mindfulness solution: Everyday practices for everyday problems: 728
Guilford Press. 729
Snippe, E., Nyklíček, I., Schroevers, M. J., & Bos, E. H. (2015). The temporal order of change 730
in daily mindfulness and affect during mindfulness-based stress reduction. Journal of 731
Counseling Psychology, 62(2), 106. 732
Sonnentag, S. (2001). Work, recovery activities, and individual well-being: A diary study. 733
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(3), 196. 734
Sonnentag, S., Binnewies, C., & Mojza, E. J. (2008). " Did you have a nice evening?" A day-735
level study on recovery experiences, sleep, and affect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 736
93(3), 674. 737
Sonnentag, S., & Kruel, U. (2006). Psychological detachment from work during off-job time: 738
The role of job stressors, job involvement, and recovery-related self-efficacy. European 739
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(2), 197-217. 740
Tashman, L. S., Tenenbaum, G., & Eklund, R. (2010). The effect of perceived stress on the 741
relationship between perfectionism and burnout in coaches. Anxiety, Stress, & 742
Coping, 23(2), 195-212. 743
Tuckey, M. R., Sonnentag, S., & Bryan, J. (2018). Are state mindfulness and state work 744
engagement related during the workday? Work & Stress, 1-16. 745
Daily mindfulness is associated with coaches’ recovery processes
Van Hooff, M. L., Geurts, S. A., Kompier, M. A., & Taris, T. W. (2007). "How fatigued do 746
you currently feel?" Convergent and discriminant validity of a single-item fatigue 747
measure. Journal of Occupational Health, 49(3), 224-234. 748
Wolkin, J. R. (2015). Cultivating multiple aspects of attention through mindfulness meditation 749
accounts for psychological well-being through decreased rumination. Psychology 750
Research and Behavior Management, 8, 171. 751
Wong, K. F., Massar, S. A., Chee, M. W., & Lim, J. (2018). Towards an Objective Measure of 752
Mindfulness: Replicating and Extending the Features of the Breath-Counting Task. 753
Mindfulness, 1-9. 754
Zijlstra, F. R., & Sonnentag, S. (2006). After work is done: Psychological perspectives on 755
recovery from work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(2), 756
129-138. 757