The effect of Rugby World Cup 2019 on residents’ psychological well-being: a mediating role of psychological capital

Figures & data

Figure 1. Result of the hypothesized mediation model.

Figure 2. The map of Japan that shows the locations of host cities.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and inter-item correlation.

		Mean	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1	Economic Impact (T1)	4.83	1.08	.62^a	.44	.40	.36	.12	.10	.09	.08	.12
2	Cultural Interest (T1)	4.41	1.39	.62**	.75^a	.58	.45	.14	.12	.13	.10	.14
3	Community Pride (T1)	4.64	1.40	.63**	.76**	.79^a	.46	.13	.08	.10	.09	.15
4	Environmental Impact (T1)	3.87	1.33	.60**	.67**	.68**	.87^a	.10	.09	.12	.09	.17
5	Optimism (T1)	4.36	1.37	.35**	.38**	.36**	.31**	.81^a	.72	.62	.58	.37
6	Hope (T1)	4.52	1.22	.31**	.35**	.29**	.30**	.85**	.75^a	.67	.71	.38
7	Resilience (T1)	4.42	1.27	.30**	.36**	.32**	.35**	.79**	.82**	.81^a	.69	.35
8	Self-efficacy (T1)	4.16	1.26	.29**	.32**	.30**	.30**	.76**	.84**	.83**	.76^a	.34
9	Psychological Well-being (T2)	4.13	1.05	.35**	.38**	.39**	.41**	.61**	.62**	.59**	.58**	.59^a

Note: a = AVE. The figures below the AVE line represent correlations between the constructs. The figures above the AVE line represent squared correlations (SC) between the constructs.

*p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics and correlation among second-order factors.

		Mean	SD	1	2	3
1	Event Impact (T1)	4.44	1.14	.95^a
2	Psychological Capital (T1)	4.36	1.15	.41**	.97^a
3	Psychological Well-being (T2)	4.13	1.05	.44**	.65**	.90^a

Note. a = Alpha; *p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 3. Factor Loadings, Construct Reliability, and AVE (n = 206).

Constructs	Items	λ	CR	AVE
Economic Impact (T1)	Led to the regeneration and redevelopment of the host cities	.72	.87	.62
	Increased business opportunities and investments	.84
	Provided local residents with more employment opportunities	.86
	Improved the provision of public services and infrastructures	.73
Cultural Interest and New Opportunity (T1)	Increased interests in foreign cultures.	.80	.92	.75
	Provided residents with unusual experiences.	.83
	Enhanced residents’ hospitality toward the visitors.	.90
	Increased opportunities for residents to learn other cultures.	.92
Community Pride (T1)	Made me proud that the city is hosting an event like this.	.84	.92	.79
	Fostered pride among residents in this city.	.94
	Made me proud to tell others about my city that is hosting the event.	.89
Environmental Impact (T1)	Raised environmental awareness.	.92	.95	.87
	Improved environmental conservation behaviours.	.96
	Encouraged recycling policies and pollution controls.	.92
Optimism (T1)	I always look on the bright side of things regarding my future.	.87	.93	.81
	I’m optimistic about what will happen to me in the future.	.91
	Overall, I expect more good things to happen to me than bad.	.92
Hope (T1)	I can think of many ways to get out of a jam.	.90	.90	.75
	Right now I see myself as being pretty successful.	.91
	I can think of many ways to reach my goals.	.78
Resilience (T1)	I tend to bounce back quickly after hard times.	.94	.93	.81
	It does not take me long to recover from a stressful event.	.95
	I usually come through difficult times with little trouble.	.81
Self-Efficacy (T1)	I feel confident about my ability.	.92	.91	.76
	I am able to achieve my goals.	.88
	I am capable of handling things in my life.	.82
Psychological Well-Being (T2)	You liked most parts of your personality.	.85	.90	.59
	Good at managing the responsibilities of your daily life.	.75
	You had warm and trusting relationships with others.	.79
	You had experiences that challenged you to grow and become a better person.	.70
	You felt confident to think or express your own ideas and opinions.	.72
	Your life has a sense of direction or meaning to it.	.80

Note: All factor loadings are significant at the p < .001 level. CR = Composite reliability. Measurement model fit: χ²/df = 1.94; CFI = .93; TLI = .92; RMSEA = .07; and SRMR = .05.

Table 4. Standardized estimates, SE, and 95% CIs for the hypotheses testing.

	Total and Direct Effect of Event Impact on psychological well-being
	β	S.E.	95% CI
Total effect	.44	.08	[.29, .58]
Direct effect	.17	.08	[.02, 33]
	Indirect Effect of Event Impact on psychological well-being via Psychological Capital
	β	S.E.	95% CI
Indirect effect	.27	.07	[.17, .41]