Evaluation of a resilience training program for college student-athletes: A pilot study

Abstract

Objective: To determine if a resilience training program improved knowledge of and intention to use adaptive coping strategies among college student-athletes; and explore college student-athletes’ experiences and satisfaction with program components. Participants: Division I college student-athletes. Methods: Pretest-posttest design with surveys completed at baseline and immediately post-program. Results: A total of 79 participants were included (n = 43 [54.4%] females; n = 36 [45.6%] males; M_age = 20.94, [SD = 1.05]). Overall intention to use adaptive coping strategies significantly increased from baseline (M = 29.05, SD = 4.50) to post-program (M = 32.38, SD = 5.62) (p = 0.0004), as did intentions to use the coping strategies seeking social support (p = 0.0037) and self-controlling (p = 0.0007). We found no statistically significant differences in knowledge scores from baseline to post-program. Conclusions: Resilience training may increase college student-athletes’ likelihood of using adaptive coping strategies to manage academic and sport-related stressors.

Keywords:

• College student-athletes
• coping
• intervention
• resilience

Mental health problems are a growing concern among college students in the United States,^1,2 with rates of depression, anxiety, self-injury, suicidal thoughts, and suicide attempts increasing dramatically from 2007 to 2018.^1–3 The American College Health Association (ACHA)² survey reported that almost one-quarter of college students in the United States reported feeling overwhelming anxiety (22.3%) or very sad (24.7%) in the previous 12 months; approximately one-in-five (18.8%) reported feeling so depressed that it was difficult to function; and 1.7% reported having attempted suicide in the last 12 months.^2,4 Mental health problems are associated with a variety of negative outcomes, including future mood and anxiety pathology and increased risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviors.¹

College student-athletes are not immune to these mental health trends, and they face special challenges due to their unique circumstances.⁵ In addition to the academic and social pressures experienced by all college students, college student-athletes face many sport-related stressors such as loaded schedules, physical stress and fatigue, and performance pressure from their coaches, teammates, and family.^6–9 These stressors can affect the mental and emotional health of college student-athletes, which in turn may lead to the development of depression or other negative consequences such as substance misuse, aggressive behavior, or excessive anxiety, frustration, irritation, or fatigue.^8,9 Prior studies suggest that the prevalence of depression among college student-athletes ranges from 15.6% to 33.2%,^8,10–13 with the prevalence of depressive symptoms being significantly higher in females as compared to males.¹⁰ Research suggests that Division I college student-athletes have higher levels of stress and other behavioral health issues, including substance use disorders^14,15 and subclinical eating disorders,^16,17 than their non-athlete counterparts.^6,18–20 A recent study that surveyed 127 head athletic trainers in NCAA Division I institutions indicated that depression, anxiety, disordered eating, and family issues were common presenting clinical issues in student-athletes.²¹ Furthermore, many college student-athletes do not seek help for mental health problems due to lack of awareness about where to obtain mental health services or service referrals, or the stigma attached to mental health problems and mental health care seeking.^{5,10,11,13,22} This underscores the critical need for more proactive strategies to prevent and manage depression and stress among college student-athletes, including increased access to mental health services.²⁰

Numerous psychological skills training strategies in the field of sport psychology have been used to help athletes overcome obstacles and mental health challenges.²³ The most commonly used strategies include Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT),^24,25 mindfulness,^26–28 and positive psychology.²⁹ Prior studies show that these evidence-based strategies that focus on cognitive restructuring, non-judgmental present-moment awareness, and happiness and strength, respectively, can help improve mental health and well-being in competitive athletes.^24–29

With growing recognition of mental health problems among college student-athletes, in 2013, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) established the Mental Health Task Force, which was designed to identify emerging issues and develop strategies to help NCAA member institutions implement mental health best practices among college student-athletes.^8,30–32 NCAA Division I institutions have also adopted screening practices to assess for mental health issues in student-athletes and incorporate mental health clinicians to treat student-athletes.²¹ Additionally, an international consensus statement in 2019 deemed resilience training that is sensitive to sport culture as essential for mental health in sport settings.³³ In response, many NCAA member institutions have begun to develop and implement educational programs^5,18,34 that aim to promote awareness and understanding of mental health problems and encourage the use of mental health services among college student-athletes.

This pilot study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of the Scarlet and Grit program, a resilience training program for college student-athletes. Specifically, we aimed to (1) determine if the program improved knowledge of and intention to use adaptive coping strategies among college student-athletes and (2) explore college student-athletes’ experiences with the program and their satisfaction with program components. We hypothesized that participants would demonstrate significant improvements in knowledge of and intention to use adaptive coping strategies from baseline to immediately following the program.

Methods

Sample and procedure

This pilot study used a pretest-posttest design to evaluate the program at a Division I university in the capital city of a large U.S. Midwestern state. Male and female college student-athletes aged ≥ 18 years who participated in a Division I NCAA sponsored sport and participated in the Scarlet and Grit program during the Spring semester of 2019 (February–April) were eligible and invited to participate in this study. The university’s Athletic Department mandated that all Division I NCAA student-athletes attended the Scarlet and Grit program once per year. It is important to note that all freshmen completed the program at the beginning of the fall semester as part of their orientation and therefore no freshmen were included in our sample. For this evaluation pilot study, the sport psychologists provided eligible college student-athletes with a study information sheet that included the study aims and procedures before delivering the Scarlet and Grit program. Interested athletes provided written consent prior to receiving the program. Consenting college student-athletes completed a survey at baseline and immediately post-program to examine the immediate effects of the program and explore their views toward the program. The surveys were confidential and anonymous. A total of 79 college student-athletes completed the baseline survey (response rate = 65.8%). Of these, 65 completed the survey immediately post-program (response rate = 54.2%). This study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval prior to data collection.

The program

To address the rise in mental health problems, the university’s sport psychologists, in collaboration with academic counselors, developed the Scarlet and Grit resilience training program for each class year of student athletes, underpinned by common theoretical approaches in clinical sport psychology: CBT,³⁵ mindfulness,²⁸ and positive psychology.^36–39 The program, which was pilot tested before implementation, utilized key sport psychology principles and strategies (e.g., mindset, grit, radical acceptance, self-compassion) to equip student-athletes with the skills and abilities to cope with stressors. For example, student-athletes were taught about mindfulness and how to use mindful breathing techniques when faced with stress. Student-athletes were also taught the importance of self-compassion and provided with the opportunity to practice this technique. This program aimed to improve resilience, defined as an individual’s ability to thrive despite adversity, stress, or trauma,⁴ among college student-athletes. This program also aimed to connect college student-athletes with their peers, such as athletes from other sports teams, to enhance social support,⁴⁰ normalize reactions, develop skills for effective coping, and plan strategies to tackle future obstacles. Furthermore, this theory-driven program aimed to improve college student-athletes’ ability to recognize both academic and athletic demands and increase their use of adaptive coping strategies to deal with these demands, in order to reduce stress and enhance resilience.

The Scarlet and Grit resilience training program, delivered by two sport psychologists (J.C. and J.H.) in order to reduce stigma and increase help-seeking behavior, consisted of a total of four group sessions (around 20 college student-athletes from different sport teams per session) throughout student-athletes’ collegiate careers, with one group session per year. Topics covered in the program included: (1) Stress Models, (2) Skill Building, and (3) Application of Learned Skills. The program was delivered by class year and across sports. Supplementary Appendix 1 presents more detailed content of the Scarlet and Grit program by class year.

Measures

Intention to use adaptive coping strategies

Intention to use adaptive coping strategies was assessed at baseline and immediately post-program using The Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ), one of the most widely used self-assessment inventories of coping strategies and processes.⁴¹ WCQ is designed to identify the thoughts and actions that individuals use to cope with stress in response to stressful encounters.⁴¹ For the purpose of this study, we adapted the WCQ to reflect the specific coping strategies taught in the program: (1) Self-controlling (6 items) and (2) Seeking Social Support (6 items). The instrument thus comprised of 12 items. For each item, participants indicated to what extent they intended to use particular ways of coping in a stressful encounter in the next month on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = never to 4 = very likely). An overall intention to use adaptive coping strategies score was calculated by summing the responses to the 12 intention items (possible range = 0–60); a higher score was indicative of a greater intention to use adaptive coping strategies.

Knowledge of adaptive coping strategies

Knowledge of adaptive coping strategies was measured at baseline and immediately post-program by 10 true-false questions concerning coping skills, mindfulness, CBT, and positive psychology. These questions were developed by our research team based on facts and common myths about the theories. Correct responses were summed to create a total knowledge score for each college student-athlete, with higher scores indicative of greater knowledge of adaptive coping strategies (possible range = 0–10).

Scarlet & grit program implementation measures

To gather feedback on program implementation, college student-athletes completed a survey at the end of the program (see Supplementary Appendix 2). Participants were asked to rate the appropriateness (i.e., ‘The program is relevant to me’, ‘The program content met my needs’) and acceptability of the program (i.e., ‘The program is interesting’, ‘I would recommend this program to others’) using nine questions on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” They were also asked to rate how useful/helpful nine specific program components (e.g., belly breathing, radical acceptance meditation, mindfulness/meditation) would be in dealing with future stressful encounters on a 5-point Likert Scale (0 = not at all to 4 = extremely). Participants were then asked to list the three most important things they learned from the program, and to provide suggestions for future improvements to the program. Finally, participants were asked to provide an overall rating of the program on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = poor to 4 = excellent).

Resilience

Resilience was measured at baseline only using The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC).⁴² The CD-RISC consists of 25 items, with each item rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not true at all to 4 = true nearly all the time). An overall resilience score was calculated as the sum of responses for each item (possible range = 0–100), with higher scores indicating greater resilience. The CD-RISC has been validated in populations of competitive adult athletes.^43,44 Internal reliability for the CD-RISC was deemed sufficient to excellent (α: 0.65–0.91).^43,44

Well-being

Well-being was measured at baseline only using the ‘Well-being’ subscale of the Behavioral Health Measure-20 (BHM-20), which consists of three items that assess distress, life satisfaction, and level of energy and motivation within the last two weeks (i.e., ‘How satisfied have you been with your life?; How energetic and motivated have you been feeling?; How distressed have you been?’).⁴⁵ An overall well-being score was computed by summing responses to the three 6-point Likert scale questions (possible range = 0–18), with higher scores reflecting greater well-being.⁴⁵ The Well-being subscale of the BHM-20 has been validated in populations of adults aged 18 years and older.⁴⁵ This subscale was proven to be a generally reliable and valid instrument (α: 0.65–0.74).⁴⁵

Demographic characteristics

Demographic information collected included: sex, age, race, college class standing, and sport.

Statistical analyses

All analyses were conducted using SPSS Version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). For each key variable, descriptive statistics were calculated. Frequencies were also computed for all demographic variables. Responses to open-ended questions were collated and analyzed using constant comparative analysis to identify specific themes associated with participants’ experience and satisfaction with program components.⁴⁶ The responses were first reviewed by the first author (L.S.), a trained qualitative researcher, who identified common themes and the first iteration of the codebook. Next, the responses were independently coded by two other authors (A.H. and J.Y.). The authors (L.S., A.H., and J.Y.) then reviewed the data to refine common themes. The review/revision process continued until consensus was reached. Paired t-tests were conducted to determine changes in knowledge about and intention to use adaptive coping strategies before and after the program. Further, a multivariable generalized linear regression with repeated measures was conducted to assess the effects of the program on knowledge about and intention to use adaptive coping strategies, adjusting for time of the assessment, and participants’ sex, age, and race. Of the 65 participants who completed both the pre- and post-tests, 63 (96.9%) were included in the paired t-tests and multivariable generalized linear regression, with two participants excluded from analyses due to having more than half of missing responses on the intention to use adaptive coping strategies measure. The statistical significance level was set a priori at p < 0.05 for all analyses.

Results

A total of 79 college student-athletes participated in the study and completed the baseline survey, and of these, 65 (81.3%) completed the post-program survey. Of the 65 student-athletes who completed the post-program survey, 58 (89.2%) completed the program evaluation. The average age was 20.94 years (ranging from 19 to 23). Most participants were female (n = 43, 54.4%), white (n = 64, 81.0%), and juniors (n = 33, 41.8%). The majority of participants were on the rowing (n = 10, 12.7%) or field hockey (n = 10, 12.7%) team followed by the soccer (n = 8, 10.1%) and cross country and track and field (n = 8, 10.1%) teams (Table 1). College student-athletes reported a moderate level of well-being (M = 7.26, SD = 1.36) and moderate level of resilience (M = 72.49, SD = 9.36) at baseline.

Table 1. Participant characteristics at baseline.

	All (n = 79)
Sex, % (n)
Male	45.6 (36)
Female	54.4 (43)
Age, mean (SD), years	20.94 (1.05)
Class year, % (n)
Freshman	0 (0)
Sophomore	22.8 (18)
Junior	41.8 (33)
Senior	26.6 (21)
Fifth Year	8.9 (7)
Race, % (n)
White	81.0 (64)
Nonwhite	19.0 (15)
Sport, % (n)
Rowing	12.7 (10)
Field hockey	12.7 (10)
Women’s Soccer	10.1(8)
Cross country and track and field	10.1 (8)
Baseball	78.9 (7)
Ice Hockey	6.3 (5)
Volleyball	6.3 (5)
Golf	6.3 (5)
Other	26.6(21)
Well-being score, mean (SD)	7.26 (1.36)
Resilience score, mean (SD)	72.49 (9.36)

Changes in knowledge about and intention to use adaptive coping strategies from baseline to post-program

We examined the immediate effects of the program on college student-athletes’ knowledge about and intention to use adaptive coping strategies. We found no statistically significant difference in college student-athletes’ knowledge scores (p = 0.8972) between baseline and post-program. However, overall intention to use adaptive coping strategies significantly increased from baseline (M = 29.05, SD = 4.50) to immediately following the program (M = 32.38, SD = 5.62) (p = 0.0004) (Table 2). We also observed a significant increase from baseline to post-program in participants’ intention to use the coping strategies seeking social support (p = 0.0037) and self-controlling (p = 0.0007). The results from the subgroup analysis suggest similar patterns in knowledge scores and intention to use adaptive coping strategies in both male and female athletes, with no changes in knowledge scores but increased intentions to use the coping strategies of seeking social support and self-controlling in both male and female athletes from baseline to post-program. Further adjusted analysis confirmed the observed increase in total coping score (β = 3.442, p = 0.0003), as well as the increase in intentions to use the coping strategies of seeking social support (β = 1.851, p = 0.0033) and self-controlling (β = 1.591, p = 0.0006) from baseline to post-program after adjusting for sex, age, and race of participants (Table 3). Additional findings from the adjusted analysis suggest that although no significant changes in knowledge scores were observed from baseline to post-program, males had significantly lower knowledge score than females (β = −0.741, p = 0.0186).

Table 2. Pre- and post-test scores by outcome variable, mean (SD) (n = 63).

Outcome variable	Pretest mean (SD)	Post-test mean (SD)	p-value^a
Overall
Total knowledge score	12.69 (1.73)	12.73 (1.72)	0.8927
Total coping score	29.05 (4.50)	32.38 (5.62)	0.0004
Seeking social support	15.55 (3.11)	17.33 (3.62)	0.0037
Self-controlling	13.51 (2.30)	15.04 (2.65)	0.0007
Male
Total knowledge score	12.29 (1.59)	12.38 (1.69)	0.8287
Total coping score	29.29 (3.50)	32.39 (3.73)	0.0015
Seeking social support	15.43 (2.59)	17.19 (3.00)	0.0183
Self-controlling	13.85 (2.02)	15.20 (1.77)	0.0080
Female
Total knowledge score	13.06 (1.80)	13.05 (1.71)	0.9920
Total coping score	28.85 (5.30)	32.32 (6.97)	0.0243
Seeking social support	15.65 (3.55)	17.45 (4.15)	0.0627
Self-controlling	13.19 (2.52)	14.91 (3.27)	0.0201

^a p-values were based on paired t-test.

Table 3. Multi-variable analysis on changes in outcome scores before and after the program.

	Total knowledge		Total coping score		Seeking social support		Self-controlling
	β (SE)^a	p-value	β (SE)^a	p-value	β (SE)^a	p-value	β (SE)^a	p-value
Post- vs. pretest	0.067 (0.309)	0.8295	3.442 (0.929)	0.0003	1.851 (0.617)	0.0033	1.591 (0.451)	0.0006
Male vs. female	−0.741 (0.311)	0.0186	0.244 (0.933)	0.7944	−0.252 (0.619)	0.6852	0.495 (0.453)	0.2761
White vs. Nonwhite	−0.023 (0.443)	0.9595	0.677 (1.330)	0.6119	0.238 (0.882)	0.7876	0.438 (0.645)	0.4983
Age	−0.000 (0.001)	0.8470	−0.002 (0.004)	0.6709	−0.001 (0.003)	0.7105	−0.001 (0.002)	0.7127

^a Beta estimates were based on generalized linear regressions with repeated measures, adjusting for sex, age and race.

Feedback on the implementation of the scarlet and grit program

Feedback on the program was generally positive, suggesting that the program was appropriate for and accepted by college student-athletes. Of the 58 participants who completed the post-program evaluation, 52 (89.7%) rated the program as good or excellent. The majority of participants agreed that the program was relevant (n = 53, 91.4%) and/or interesting (n = 52, 89.7%). Most (n = 51, 87.9%) participants indicated that they planned to use the information/skills they learned from the program, with a large proportion (n = 49, 84.5%) agreeing that they have the confidence to use the knowledge and skills gained from the program (data not tabled). Over three-quarters of participants reported that the length of the program was adequate (n = 49, 84.5%) and that the program met their needs (n = 45, 77.6%). Approximately two-thirds (n = 38, 65.5%) of participants reported that the program motivated them to take action. Encouragingly, 50 (86.2%) participants reported that they would recommend the program to other college student-athletes (data not tabled).

Participants were asked to report the helpfulness of program components. The components rated as “very” or “extremely helpful” by the largest percentage of participants were mindfulness (n = 38, 65.5%), CBT (n = 36, 62.1%), and talking to others (n = 35, 60.3%) (Table 4). Participants were also asked to provide written feedback on the three most important things they learned from the program. The three most commonly reported topics were: (1) coping mechanisms (n = 29), (2) mindfulness and meditation (n = 20), and (3) positive psychology (n = 15) (Table 5). Such topics align with the topics that respondents indicated that they found “very” or “extremely” helpful, outlined above. Other popular topics that were identified include gratitude (n = 12), it’s okay to be stressed (n = 11), and the Recognition, Acceptance, Interest, and Non-Identification (RAIN) technique (i.e., mindfulness) (n = 11). Finally, suggestions for future improvements to the program were sought. While most of the participants provided no suggestions, a few participants indicated that they would have preferred the program to be delivered in a larger group setting or with their sports team. Other participants reported that take home materials (e.g., a handout, flyer) would have been helpful.

Table 4. Usefulness of program activities.

Program activity	Activity very or extremely helpful, n (%)
1. Mindfulness (mindful breath, STOP, meditation, R.A.I.N., other) (n = 43)	38 (88.4)
2. Cognitive Behavior Therapy (expectations, belly breath, power phrase, cue word, assertive communication, problem = challenge, worst case scenario, other) (n = 43)	36 (83.7)
3. Talking to others (n = 41)	35 (85.4)
4. Positive psychology (goal map/hope, gratitude, what went well, best possible selves, other) (n = 42)	34 (81.0)
5. Demands/pressures discussion (n = 44)	32 (72.7)
6. Icebreaker activity (introductions, rock/paper/scissors, favorite memory, easy energy enhancer, other) (n = 39)	16 (41.0)

Table 5. Most important things learned from the program.

Theme/Topic	Quotes
Coping mechanisms (n = 29)	“How to cope with stressors” “How to proactively cope” “Ways to manage stress”
Mindfulness and meditation (n = 20)	“Simple mindfulness meditation” “Mindfulness during stress” “Be mindful”
Positive Psychology (n = 15)	“How to think more positively” “Rephrase things to be more positive” “Be positive and realistic”
Gratitude (n = 12)	“Best ways to express gratitude” “Steps to gratitude” “To be grateful and remind myself of it”
It’s okay to be stressed (n = 11)	“It’s okay to be stressed/sad” “Stress is normal + okay to be felt” “Stress isn’t always bad and it’s necessary”
The Recognition, Acceptance, Interest, and Non-identification (RAIN) technique (n = 11)	“RAIN” “RAIN + other mechanisms to help with anxiety”
Belly breathing (n = 9)	“Belly breathing” “Belly breathes”
Resources (n = 7)	“Available resources” “Connections/resources”
Worst case scenario outlook (n = 7)	“Remember things could be worse” “Think worst case scenario”
Communication skills (n = 5)	“Communication with others” “How to communicate effectively” “Assertive communication”
Other (n = 23)	“You can talk to people to help” “Factors that contribute to stress” “Self-talk”

Discussion

This pilot study examined the effectiveness and implementation of a resilience training program for Division I college student-athletes. The findings suggest that the program had a significant positive effect on athletes’ intention to use adaptive coping strategies immediately following the program. The program, however, did not have a significant effect on athletes’ knowledge of adaptive coping strategies. Results also suggest that the program was well-received by athletes, with many student-athletes highlighting the appropriateness, acceptability, usefulness, and helpfulness of the learned information and skills. These results provide support for resilience training among college student-athletes. Such training has the potential to equip college student-athletes with the skills needed to respond adaptively to stressful experiences, which, in turn, may have a positive impact on college student-athletes’ well-being and mental health.⁴⁷

Our pilot findings suggest that the program had a significant positive effect on athletes’ overall intention to use adaptive coping strategies, and the subscales of seeking social support and self-controlling. The observed effects remained after adjusting for potential covariates and were observed in both males and females. These findings are encouraging as adaptive coping strategies contribute to resilience in the face of stressful events both on and off the playing field.^48,49 Evidence shows that adaptive coping strategies correlate with psychological well-being^48,50–53 and reduce the risk for mental health problems (e.g., anxiety and depression) and negative life outcomes.^49,50,53,54 Moreover, our findings are encouraging as an individual’s intention to engage in a behavior, is the single most important predictor of actual behavior.⁵⁵ Thus, improvements in student-athletes’ intentions to use adaptive coping strategies following resilience training may help increase their use of adaptive coping strategies in the face of stress.³¹ Further research should examine the impact of interventions on both intentions and actual use of adaptive coping strategies.

Knowledge of adaptive coping strategies is important and may affect how a stressful event is perceived and managed. Greater knowledge of adaptive coping strategies may lead to increased use of adaptive coping strategies during stressful encounters, whereas a lack of knowledge about adaptive coping strategies could act as a barrier to the utilization of adaptive coping strategies during stressful events.^22,34 Our results did not show a significant program effect on athletes’ knowledge of adaptive coping strategies. Perhaps, this is due to the use of a one-off program. Prior studies indicate that one-off programs rarely increase knowledge or result in behavior change.⁵⁶ The lack of significant findings may also be due in part to the small sample size, use of a one-off intervention program, a high baseline knowledge score in our participants, or lack of sensitivity of our measurement tool. Another possible factor is that student-athletes at this Division I university are provided a large number of mental health-care resources (e.g., sport psychologists and athletic counselors), and were required to complete the Scarlet and Grit resilience training program, both of which could have contributed to participants’ overall awareness of adaptive coping strategies. However, it is important to acknowledge that despite sufficient knowledge of adaptive coping strategies at baseline among college student-athletes, this knowledge may not directly translate to the use of adaptive coping strategies during times of stress. Future resilience training programs should educate student-athletes about various adaptive coping strategies, including how to choose and effectively execute such strategies in the face of stress.⁴⁹ Providing college student-athletes with a repertoire of coping strategies will enable them to deal with both academic and athletic stressors, which may in turn improve mental health outcomes.

Results also revealed that females had greater knowledge of adaptive coping strategies as compared to their male counterparts. Such finding has not been previously reported. Possibly, this finding can be explained by greater mental health literacy and mental healthcare seeking among females than their male counterparts.^5,53 However, it is also important to acknowledge sex differences in the types of coping strategies used to deal with stressors.^53,57,58 Studies show that maladaptive coping strategies such as emotion-focused and avoidance coping are typically more common in females than males, whereas males are more likely than females to use adaptive coping strategies such as task-oriented coping.^49,58,59 This may partially explain our findings as the Scarlet and Grit program includes various emotion-focused coping techniques such as mindfulness/meditation, reframing, and positive thinking. Further research is therefore needed to examine how sex differences may influence knowledge and use of adaptive coping strategies in stressful encounters. Future programs that include positive and healthy male-focused coping strategies such as problem-solving techniques to manage stress may also be warranted.

Our examination of written feedback suggests that the program was well-received by college student-athletes. Most participants indicated that the program was relevant, helpful, and met their needs. College student-athletes indicated that the most important things they learned from the program were coping mechanisms, mindfulness/meditation, and positive psychology, with the overwhelming majority of participants indicating that they intended to use these learned information/skills in the future. These findings underscore the positive response to and need for resilience training programs that target college student-athletes. These findings also provide important insight into college student-athletes’ needs and preferences for resilience training programs as well as for determining how to best implement such programs. Our findings can inform the development and implementation of future resilience training programs for college student-athletes, including training on how to anticipate and manage stressors both on and off the playing field. Such programs may be needed now more than ever due to the unprecedented coronavirus pandemic. For example, resilience training may help college student-athletes manage coronavirus-related stressors resulting from school closures, canceled sport seasons, missed milestones like graduation, or the fear of returning to sport during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the nature of the pandemic, a COVID-19 focused resilience program would need to be facilitated virtually. Future studies that examine the effectiveness of virtual resilience training programs among college student-athletes using more rigorous evaluation designs are required.

Limitations

This study has several limitations that warrant attention. First, this study was conducted among a small, convenience sample of Division I college student-athletes from one university; thus, the results of this study may not be generalizable to other populations of college student-athletes. Second, we used self-reported measures to assess knowledge of and intention to use adaptive coping strategies. Participants’ responses are therefore subject to social desirability and should be interpreted with caution. Another limitation regarding the measures is that we did not have a control group. Third, we adapted items from preexisting instruments, which may have affected their construct validity. Fourth, the program was only delivered via a single session each year. Refresher sessions may be needed throughout the academic year to increase student-athletes’ knowledge of and intention to use effective coping strategies. Finally, we collected post-program measures immediately after the intervention. Due to this we were unable to examine the effects of the intervention on other outcomes of interest (i.e., resilience, well-being), and whether the effects of the program were sustained overtime. Future studies should evaluate the effectiveness of resilience training programs over the course of six months to one year following program implementation using mixed methods. Despite these aforementioned limitations, this pilot study highlights the need for resilience training programs among college student-athletes and contributes to the advancement of knowledge regarding the potential effectiveness of such programs, although further research is warranted to validate our findings.

Conclusion

College student-athletes face numerous stressors, including both academic and sport-related stressors, that can negatively impact their mental and emotional health. Resilience training programs can equip student-athletes with the necessary skills to effectively manage these stressors, which, in turn, may reduce their stress levels and enhance well-being and mental health.⁶⁰ Overall, findings from this pilot study indicate that the Scarlet and Grit program had a positive effect on college student-athletes, and was well-received. The program shows particular promise in improving college student-athletes’ intention to use adaptive coping strategies when faced with a stressful event. The findings of this study have important implications for the development of resilience training programs for college student-athletes and underscore the need for such programs in college athletics. However, studies that include a control group and larger samples of college student-athletes with longer follow-up are needed to determine the effectiveness of resilience training programs.

Conflict of interest disclosure

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the student-athletes who were involved in this research study. We would also like to sincerely thank Mr. Prince Moody for his contributions and commitment to the Scarlet and Grit program.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.