| Literature DB >> 35734466 |
Abstract
College students are the future of the motherland, the hope of the nation, and the reserve force to realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. The period of college students is an important period for the formation of ideals, beliefs, and world views. However, due to the contradictions between physiological maturity and psychological maturity and the contradictions between independent consciousness and cognitive ability in the growth process of college students, it is easy to cause internal psychological problems of inconsistency and disharmony. Correct sports lifestyle is conducive to promoting individual self-harmony. In the daily life and learning process of college students, the role of self-harmony is often ignored and not paid enough attention to. This indicates that it is necessary to further study the effect of physical activity on adolescents' self-harmony. Mental toughness is one of the important factors affecting self-harmony. Therefore, the variable of mental toughness is introduced to analyze the correlation between physical activity and self-harmony. This study investigate the relationship between physical activity, mental toughness, and self-harmony in college students. Also this study can promote the re-recognition of college students of sports activities, explore the relationship between physical activity and self-harmony. Its purpose is to directly or indirectly promotes the college students' mental health, and further enriches health psychology, exercise psychology, and development psychology-related theory and method. By analyzing the correlation among sports activities, mental toughness, and self-harmony, this study provides a theoretical reference for improving and enhancing the self-harmony degree of college students and providing beneficial suggestions for relevant management departments when making plans.Entities:
Keywords: college students; mental toughness; moderating and mediating effects; self-harmony assessment; sports activities
Year: 2022 PMID: 35734466 PMCID: PMC9207601 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.919247
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Basic information of the research subject.
| Statistical variables of the sample | Number of the sample | Proportion (%) | |
| Grade | Freshman | 39 | 31.45 |
| Sophomore | 41 | 33.06 | |
| Junior year | 21 | 16.94 | |
| Senior year | 23 | 18.55 | |
| Gender | Male | 58 | 46.77 |
| Female | 66 | 53.23 | |
| Origin of student | City | 36 | 29.03 |
| Villages and towns | 56 | 45.16 | |
| Rural | 32 | 25.81 | |
Demographic results.
| First-level indicator | Second-level indicator | Average | Standard deviation |
| Sports activities participation | Sports activity intensity | 12.32 | 5.45 |
| Sports activity time | 23.15 | 1.76 | |
| Sports activity frequency | 23.29 | 1.85 | |
| Self-harmony | Disharmony between self and experience | 23.75 | 1.59 |
| Self-flexibility | 22.82 | 13.26 | |
| Self-rigidity | 53.21 | 8.05 | |
| Mental toughness | Objective focus | 95.15 | 9.68 |
| Emotion control | 46.25 | 13.26 | |
| Positive cognition | 28.18 | 9.66 | |
| Family support | 19.73 | 7.28 | |
| Interpersonal assistance | 52.01 | 13.18 |
Difference between sports activity participation and mental toughness and self-harmony.
| Factor | Sports activity intensity | Sports activity time | Sports activity frequency |
|
| Objective focus | 17.25 ± 3.51 | 18.81 ± 3.50 | 18.77 ± 3.52 | 2.180 |
| Emotion control | 18.55 ± 4.50 | 20.24 ± 4.55 | 20.19 ± 5.04 | 2.446 |
| Positive cognition | 14.79 ± 2.72 | 16.08 ± 2.68 | 16.28 ± 3.01 | 1.135 |
| Family support | 20.70 ± 4.96 | 21.33 ± 2.96 | 22.17 ± 4.46 | 1.128 |
| Interpersonal assistance | 19.24 ± 5.18 | 20.20 ± 5.49 | 20.24 ± 5.28 | 0.769 |
| Disharmony between self and experience | 45.65 ± 8.36 | 44.53 ± 9.35 | 44.58 ± 9.70 | 1.308 |
| Self-flexibility | 44.28 ± 5.48 | 45.73 ± 5.64 | 45.52 ± 6.23 | 1.147 |
| Self-rigidity | 18.59 ± 4.17 | 18.09 ± 3.89 | 18.27 ± 4.39 | 0.947 |
Correlation matrix between sports activity participation and mental toughness and self-harmony.
| Factor | Objective focus | Emotion control | Positive cognition | Family support | Interpersonal assistance |
| Sports activity intensity | 0.136 | 0.128 | 0.068 | 0.028 | 0.026 |
| Sports activity time | 0.223 | 0.165 | 0.071 | 0.036 | 0.082 |
| Sports activity frequency | 0.169 | 0.132 | 0.114 | 0.068 | 0.046 |
Correlation matrix between college students’ sports activity participation and self-harmony.
| Factor | Disharmony between self and experience | Self-flexibility | Self-rigidity |
| Sports activity intensity | −0.028 | 0.065 | −0.029 |
| Sports activity time | −0.112 | 0.121 | 0.023 |
| Sports activity frequency | −0.071 | 0.120 | 0.015 |
Correlation matrix between college students’ mental toughness and self-harmony.
| Factor | Objective focus | Emotion control | Positive cognition | Family support | Interpersonal assistance |
| Disharmony between self and experience | −0.234 | −0.536 | −0.078 | −0.271 | −0.465 |
| Self-flexibility | 0.432 | 0.208 | 0.369 | 0.215 | 0.246 |
| Self-rigidity | −0.118 | −0.204 | −0.123 | −0.175 | −0.317 |
Regression analysis of sports activity participation on mental toughness.
| Factor | Standard regression coefficient |
|
|
| Adjusted |
|
| Sports activity time | 0.135 | 3.854 | ||||
| Sports activity frequency | 0.104 | 2.713 | 0.206 | 0.043 | 0.047 | 22.563 |
Regression analysis of sports activity participation on self-harmony.
| Factor | Standard regression coefficient |
|
|
| Adjusted |
|
| Sports activity intensity | −0.105 | −3.414 | 0.113 | 0.017 | 0.013 | 12.063 |
Regression analysis of mental toughness to self-harmony.
| Factor | Standard regression coefficient |
|
|
| Adjusted |
|
| Objective focus | 0.062 | 2.312 | ||||
| Positive cognition | 0.069 | 2.563 | ||||
| Family support | −0.812 | −18.926 | 0.563 | 0.456 | 0.423 | 203.328 |
Fitting index of each model index.
| Model indexes | Model fitting index before modification | Model fitting index after modification | Critical value |
| CMIN | 341.208 | 63.158 | |
| CMIN/DF | 8.506 | 2.084 | |
| IFI | 0.845 | 0.936 | >0.90 |
| CFI | 0.847 | 0.925 | >0.90 |
| NFI | 0.836 | 0.928 | >0.90 |
| GFI | 0.925 | 0.974 | >0.90 |
| RFI | 0.752 | 0.936 | >0.90 |
| AGFI | 0.896 | 0.964 | >0.90 |
| PNFI | 0.602 | 0.534 | >0.50 |
| PGFI | 0.557 | 0.436 | >0.50 |
| RMSEA | 0.086 | 0.037 | <0.05 |
FIGURE 1Path analysis of intermediate variables.
Mediating effect analysis results.
| Coefficient name | Normalized path coefficients | Standard error | Significant or not |
| a | 0.265 | 0.048 | Yes |
| b | −0.816 | 0.049 | Yes |
| C | −0.153 | 0.067 | Yes |
| c’ | 0.054 | 0.039 | No |
FIGURE 2Mediation equation model.
Path analysis results.
| Path name | Normalized path coefficient | Ratio of total effect (%) | Upper limit | Lower limit | Significant or not |
| Direct effect | 0.049 | 36.52 | 0.129 | −0.025 | No |
| Indirect effect | −0.209 | 63.15 | −0.130 | −0.286 | Yes |
| Total effect | −0.152 | − | −0.059 | −0.234 | Yes |