SOCIAL, EMOTIONAL, COGNITIVE, AND PHYSIOLOGICAL CORRELATES OF ELECTRONIC SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

There has been very little research that has studied the capacities that can be fostered to mitigate the risk for involvement in electronic bullying or victimization and almost no research examining positive electronic behavior. The primary goal of this dissertation was to use the General Aggression Model and Anxious Apprehension Model of Trauma to explore the underlying cognitive, emotional, and self-regulation processes that are related to electronic bullying, victimization, and prosocial behavior. In Study 1, we explored several potential interpretations of the General Aggression Model that would accurately describe the relationship that electronic self-conscious appraisal, cognitive reappraisal, and activational control may have with electronic bullying and victimization. In Study 2, we used the Anxious Apprehension Model of Trauma to explore rejection cognitions as the mediator of the relationships among emotionality (emotionality, shame, state emotion responses, and physiological arousal) and electronic bullying and victimization using structural equation modelling. In addition, we explored the role of rejection cognitions in mediating the relationship of moral disengagement with electronic bullying. In Study 3, we examined predictors of electronic prosocial behavior, such as bullying, victimization, time online, electronic proficiency, electronic self-conscious appraisals, emotionality, and self-regulation. All three studies supported the General Aggression Model as a framework to guide the study of electronic behavior, and suggest the importance of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral means of regulation in shaping electronic behavior. In addition, each study has implications for the development of high quality electronic bullying prevention and intervention research.

Cognitive Characteristics of Expert, Middle of the Pack, and Back of the Pack Ultra-Endurance Triathletes

Objectives The purpose of this study was to examine cognitive differences between expert and non-expert UE triathletes. Design Twenty-one UE triathletes were stratified according to finishing times into three groups; experts (<9.5 h), middle of the pack (∼12.5 h), and back of the pack triathletes (>14.0 h). Methods Cognition was examined using a think-aloud protocol with the aid of a video montage of segments from an UE triathlon representing periods of high decision-making or cognition. Inductive qualitative analyses supported the classification of athlete cognitions as passive, active, or proactive. Results Expert triathletes reported a greater emphasis on thoughts related to their performance, while middle of the pack and back of the pack triathletes reported a greater number of passive thoughts. Furthermore, experts were more proactive in their approach to performance situations than mid- and back-pack triathletes. Conclusions Expert UE triathletes are cognitively different from non-experts, although future research is needed to determine the role these differences play in promoting expert performance.

Team Building Interventions in Sport: A Meta-Analysis

A meta-analysis of team building interventions in sport was completed. Seventeen studies containing 180 effect sizes were retrieved. The overall effect (Hedges g) was .427. Analyses of possible moderator variables showed the largest effect sizes were in interventions where: (a) non-experimental designs were used (g=.474); (b) the data were unpublished (g=.539); (c) goal setting only was used (g=.714); (d) the coach/manager directed the delivery (g=.446); and (e) the teams were at the university level (g=.482). Finally, team building had the greatest influence on cognitions (g=.799