English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This position paper examines decision-making in sport psychology practitioners from a dual processing perspective. Based on the work of Kahneman and Tversky, we draw upon cognitive and social psychology research to explore key decision-making vulnerabilities in the context of the sport psychology practitioner. We examine the influence of classic heuristics and biases, exploring issues such as: an exclusive focus on the inside view; tunnel vision; focusing on disposition as opposed to situation; the sport environment as a complex adaptive system; formulas for success; phase transitions; and conflating skill and luck. When considering how to combat such decision-making vulnerabilities, we explore a ‘counterintuitive’ approach developed by Mauboussin to mitigating these, and explain how sport psychology practitioners can apply such strategies. We suggest counterweight strategies, including: raising awareness of how biases and heuristics may be affecting our decision-making; diversifying our perspectives; proactively seeking critical feedback from diverse sources; creating useful checklists; and performing ‘pre-mortems’. Likewise, we explore strategies for future research on decision-making in sport psychology practitioners. Lay summary:  This position paper draws on research from social, cognitive and sport psychology to explore key decision-making vulnerabilities in the context of the sport psychology practitioner. We provide evidence-based suggestions to mitigate these vulnerabilities, and strategies for how practitioners can apply these ideas in their practice.Implications for PracticeA dual-processing approach has considerable potential for highlighting, and mitigating against, key decision-making vulnerabilities in sport psychology practitionersThe systematic use of evidence-based strategies could greatly enhance decision-making quality in practitioners. A dual-processing approach has considerable potential for highlighting, and mitigating against, key decision-making vulnerabilities in sport psychology practitioners The systematic use of evidence-based strategies could greatly enhance decision-making quality in practitioners.

Managing vulnerabilities in practitioner decision-making within sport psychology services: Responding to the evidence base