COMFORT ZONES AND OPTIMAL CHALLENGE POINTS: PERSPECTIVES FROM CANADIAN UNIVERSITY WOMEN’S BASKETBALL COACHES

Authors

  • Jeff Irvine Nipissing University North Bay, Ontario, Canada
  • Kyra Kristensen-Irvine Nipissing University North Bay, Ontario, Canada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejpe.v11i2.5404

Keywords:

comfort zone, optimal challenge point, coaching, basketball, player psychology

Abstract

Abundant research has found that athletes’ mental states impact performance and learning. This paper examines two aspects of players’ mental health: comfort zone and optimal challenge point. While comfort zones have been examined previously and are relatively common in both academic and popular culture, the optimal challenge point (OCP) framework has been less well researched, particularly in relation to team sports. This study examined awareness and use of comfort zones and OCP specifically among Canadian university women’s basketball coaches. This sector was chosen as it represents university coaches in Canada while still comprising a relatively small potential sample. Results of the study show that although the respondent coaches generally are well aware of and use the concept of comfort zones in their coaching, OCP remains less well known despite coaches’ use of many of its principles in their respective practices.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

Author Biographies

  • Jeff Irvine, Nipissing University North Bay, Ontario, Canada

    Dr. Jeff Irvine, PhD, is a Faculty Advisor in the Faculty of Education, Nipissing University. The author of more than 70 peer-reviewed papers, his research interests include student motivation, reflective practice, deep learning, higher-order thinking skills, teacher education, and distributed leadership.

    Email: jeffi@nipissingu.ca or dr.jeffrey.irvine@bell.net

  • Kyra Kristensen-Irvine, Nipissing University North Bay, Ontario, Canada

    Kyra Kristensen-Irvine, M. Ed., is a Faculty Advisor in the Faculty of Education, Nipissing University. A certified Level II Instructor for basketball in the National Coaching Certification Program, she is a retired award-winning principal with extensive coaching experience at all levels, university, college, secondary school and elementary school.

    Email: kyrak@nipissingu.ca

References

Afsanepurak, S., Karimiyani, N., Moradi, J., & Safaei, M. (2012). The effect of blocked, random, and systematically increasing practice on learning of different types of basketball passes. European Journal of Experimental Biology, 2(6), 2397–2402.

Aschendorf, P., Zinner, C., Delextrat, A., Engelmeyer, E., & Mester, J. (2019). Effects of basketball-specific high-intensity interval training on aerobic performance and physical capacities in youth female basketball players, The Physician and Sports Medicine, 47(1), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.2018.1520054

Balali, M., VaezMousavi, M., Ghasemi, A., & Parvinpour, S. (2019). Effects of challenging games on manipulative motor skills of 4–6 years old children: An application of challenge point framework. Early Child Development and Care, 189(5), 697–708. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1339276

Bardwick, J. (1991). Danger in the comfort zone: From boardroom to mailroom—How to break the entitlement habit that’s killing American business. American Management Association.

R., & Joncheray, H. (2018). The life of high-level athletes: The challenge of high performance against the time constraint. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 53(2), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690216647196

Cassell, C. (2018). “Pushed beyond my comfort zone”: MBA student experiences of conducting qualitative research. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 17(2), 119–136. https://doi.org/19.5465/amle.2015.0016

Fischer, M. (2012). Challenging the challenge point framework. Medical Education, 46(5) 442–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04264.x

Guadagnoli, M., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Challenge point: A framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36(2), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.3200/jmbr.36.2.212-224

Guadagnoli, M., Morin, M-P., & Dubrowski, A. (2012). The application of the challenge point framework in medical education. Medical Education, 46(5), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04210.x

Hitchcock, E., & McAllister Byun, T. (2015). Enhancing generalisation in biofeedback intervention using the challenge point framework: A case study. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 29(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2014.956232

Kendall, M., & Gibbons, J. (1990). Rank correlation methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed). SAGE.

McCarthy, C. (2015). Increase graduation success rates by encouraging student-athletes to reach beyond their comfort zones. College Athletics and the Law, 11(12), 6. https://doi.org/10.1002/catl.30051

McSweeney, M., & van Luijk, N. (2019). Leaving the comfort zone: Utilizing institutional ethnography in sport for development and peace research. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 559–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1578254

Onla-or, S., & Winstein, C. (2008). Determining the optimal challenge point for motor skill learning in adults with moderately severe Parkinson’s disease. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 22(4), 385–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968307313508

Pesce, C., Crova, C., Marchetti, R., Struzzolino, I., Masci, I., Vannozzi, G., & Forte, R. (2013). Searching for cognitively optimal challenge points in physical activity for children with typical and atypical motor development. Mental Health and Physical Activity, 6(3), 172–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhpa.2013.07.001

Seabrook, R., Brown, G., & Solity, J. (2004). Distributed and massed practice: From laboratory to classroom. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(1), 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1066

Starks, B., Harrison, L., & Denhardt, K. (2011). Outside the comfort zone of the classroom. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22(2), 203–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2010.517773

Stulberg, B., & Magness, S. (2017). Peak performance: Elevate your game, avoid burnout, and thrive with the new science of success. Rodale Books.

Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935–947. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ854351

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. SAGE.

Teigen, K. (1994). Yerkes-Dodson: A law for all seasons. Theory and Psychology, 4(4), 525–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354394044004

Turman, P. (2007). The influence of athlete sex, context, and performance on high school basketball coaches’ use of regret messages during competition. Communication Education, 56(3), 333–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520701199999

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wadden, K., Hodges, N., De Asis, K., Neva, J., & Boyd, L. (2019). Individualized challenge point practice as a method to aid motor sequence learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 51(5), 467–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2018.1518310

White, A. (2008). From comfort zone to performance management: Understanding development

Yerkes, R., & Dodson, J. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology & Psychology, 18(5), 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.920180503

Zeuch, K. (2014). You want me to teach what? The choral educator’s guide to teaching outside the “comfort zone.” Choral Journal, 54(9), 77–79.

Downloads

Published

2024-06-04

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 2 (2024)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).