Analysis of sport psychology consultancy at three Olympic Games: Facts and figures

Objectives Despite many reports on best practises regarding onsite psychological services, little research has attempted to systematically explore the frequency, issues, nature and client groups of onsite sport psychology consultancy at the Olympic Games. The present paper will fill this gap through a systematic analysis of the sport psychology consultancy of the Swiss team for the Olympic Games of 2006 in Turin, 2008 in Beijing and 2010 in Vancouver. Design Descriptive research design. Methods The day reports of the official sport psychologist were analysed. Intervention issues were labelled using categories derived from previous research and divided into the following four intervention-issue dimensions: “general performance”, “specific Olympic performance”, “organisational” and “personal” issues. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi square statistics and odds ratios. Results Across the Olympic Games, between 11% and 25% of the Swiss delegation used the sport psychology services. On average, the sport psychologist provided between 2.1 and 4.6 interventions per day. Around 50% of the interventions were informal interventions. Around 30% of the clients were coaches. The most commonly addressed issues were performance related. An association was observed between previous collaboration, intervention likelihood and intervention theme. Conclusions Sport psychologists working at the Olympic Games are fully engaged with daily interventions and should have developed ideally long-term relationships with clients to truly help athletes with general performance issues. Critical incidents, working with coaches, brief contact interventions and team conflicts are specific features of the onsite consultancy. Practitioners should be trained to deal with these sorts of challenges.

Simulation Games - A Creative Tool for Capacity Building: Experience from the Learning for Sustainability Approach

Games that simulate complex realities to be dealt with in teams are an effective tool for fostering interactive learning processes. they link different levels of decision-making in the household, community and societal contexts. Negotiation and harmonisation of different perceptions and interests, be it within or between different households, form the basis of a common strategy for sustainable development.

Combining qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze serious games outcomes: A pilot study for a new cognitive screening tool

Computer games for a serious purpose - so called serious games can provide additional information for the screening and diagnosis of cognitive impairment. Moreover, they have the advantage of being an ecological tool by involving daily living tasks. However, there is a need for better comprehensive designs regarding the acceptance of this technology, as the target population is older adults that are not used to interact with novel technologies. Moreover given the complexity of the diagnosis and the need for precise assessment, an evaluation of the best approach to analyze the performance data is required. The present study examines the usability of a new screening tool and proposes several new outlines for data analysis.

Power Games in Strategy Formation Processes – A Performative Interpretation

The article approaches an understanding of power within strategy formation processes established by verbal and bodily communication. On this note, we examined concepts of power constituted by hierarchy and developed a conceptual framework for a performative interpretation of power. In line with Austin’s (1962) and Butler’s (1990, 1993, 1997) concept of performativity as well as strategy-as-practice research (Balogun et al., 2007; Jarzabkowski & Spee, 2009) we ask: How is persuasion achieved by strategic actors during strategy formation processes? To explore verbal and bodily communication empirically we developed an experimental setting in a small high-tech company located in Germany in December, 2012. The Results indicate that (1) during critical incidents – when perspectives clash – actors use arguments to gain persuasion. (2) The data illustrates that independently of their hierarchical position within the company, strategic actors show an equal distribution of argumentative techniques.