Search

Sport psychology embraced the study of athletic identity in the 1990s. The Athletic Identity Measurement Scale (AIMS) is at the forefront of athletic identity measurement. This quantitative review examined two hypotheses: individual who are most engaged in sports identify most as athletes and thus score higher on the AIMS, and athletic identity relates to positive (e.g., intrinsic motivation) and negative (negative emotions) factors. In addition to our two hypotheses, we explored whether the AIMS subscales influenced our two hypotheses. After completing a systematic search of SPORTDiscus, APA PsycINFO, ERIC, and Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection APA within the EBSCOhost platform along with some hand searching, 101 articles published between 1993 and our end date of August 2021 met the inclusion criteria. The included studies investigated 20,498 athletes competing in a variety of sports from the following continents: Australia, Asia, Europe, and North America. We based all analyses on random- and mixed-effects statistics. Higher-achieving athletes, as expected, self-reported a higher degree of athletic identity. The differences between athlete groups were significant (p < 0.001) and meaningful (g values ranged from 1.55 to 1.93). The AIMS total score correlations with positive and negative factors (correlates) were small in magnitude (r = 0.22 and 0.17). However, the relationships differed across correlate subcategories (e.g., intrinsic motivation/commitment, r = 0.51, and body issues, r = 0.14). Minimal AIMS subscale reporting occurred across the 101 studies; thus, we could not assess their importance with certainty. In conclusion, a higher degree of athletic identity related to valued sport correlates such as intrinsic motivation/commitment and the mastery goal orientation. These correlations were small in relation to negative or less desirable factors in sport such as body disorder issues and negative emotions. We recommend future research of greater complexity and the reporting of athletes’ competitive backgrounds to understand athletic identity. In addition, researchers should report AIMS subscale data.

MMA is a global sport with a growing body of psychological literature. Our main objective was to replicate and extend a past review concerning the sport psychology literature with MMA participants. We conducted our electronic search in EBSCO with the following databases: SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, ERIC, and Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection. Our eligibility criteria were research articles (a) found in academic journals, (b) with MMA participants, and (c) at least one topic found in sport psychology literature. After conducting a PRISMA-guided search, 16 studies met our inclusion criteria. The studies spanned from 2011 to 2021, with 795 MMA participants from the USA (n = 7), Brazil (n = 4), and one study each from Czechia, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. From studies reporting mean ages, MMA participants were in their mid-20s (M = 26.55 ± 2.38 years of age). The results section includes risk of bias ratings across five areas (i.e., subject selection, sample’s MMA background, participant anonymity, data collection procedures, and questionnaire or qualitative theme reporting). More risk of bias concerns resulted with the quantitative than qualitative articles. To best represent the studies, we presented separate results tables with many specifics for both the quantitative (i.e., topic, main analysis, time frame, summary of results, and meaningfulness) and qualitative studies (topic, main analysis, time frame, and main themes). The included studies covered a variety of historic and meta-analyzed topics such as confidence, mood, motivations, and social facilitation. Based on our review, we discussed the literature strengths and limitations, and suggested future research directions. Last, we provided practical points for both MMA participants and their trainers.