<p>Between 65 – 91 % of elite soccer players have at least one injury / year (Hägglund, 2007). Several researches have established models that specify psychological factors that could predict sport injuries. Two examples are Rogers and Landers (2005) stress – coping model and Williams and Andersen´s (1998) stress – injury model. The main purpose of the study was to single out significant psychological factors that could lead to an increased injury risk among soccer players. The participants were 152 male and female soccer players (m = 17, 6) studying at soccer high schools in southwest Sweden. Five questionnaires were used STAI, SAS, LESCA, ACSI – 28 and SSP. Continuously injury record was collected by athletic trainers at the school, during a period of six months. The result suggested that there are four significant predictors that in all could explain 23 % of the injuries. The main factors are life event stress, somatic trait anxiety, mistrust and negative coping. These findings are in unison with for example Williams and Andersen´s (1998) stress – injury model and should be considered by coaches when it comes to preventing sport injuries among their athletes.</p>

Between 65 – 91 % of elite soccer players have at least one injury / year (Hägglund, 2007). Several researches have established models that specify psychological factors that could predict sport injuries. Two examples are Rogers and Landers (2005) stress – coping model and Williams and Andersen´s (1998) stress – injury model. The main purpose of the study was to single out significant psychological factors that could lead to an increased injury risk among soccer players. The participants were 152 male and female soccer players (m = 17, 6) studying at soccer high schools in southwest Sweden. Five questionnaires were used STAI, SAS, LESCA, ACSI – 28 and SSP. Continuously injury record was collected by athletic trainers at the school, during a period of six months. The result suggested that there are four significant predictors that in all could explain 23 % of the injuries. The main factors are life event stress, somatic trait anxiety, mistrust and negative coping. These findings are in unison with for example Williams and Andersen´s (1998) stress – injury model and should be considered by coaches when it comes to preventing sport injuries among their athletes.

No description available.

The current study sought to prospectively explore the potential main effects and interactive relations among drive for thinness, life event stress, and harm avoidance in the prediction of disordered eating in an ethnically diverse sample of women (N = 58). During the initial and follow-up assessments, standardized questionnaires were utilized to assess drive for thinness, life event stress, and a harm avoidant temperament. Additionally, semi-structured diagnostic interviews were administered to assess disordered eating. Results revealed a significant interaction between drive for thinness and life event stress in the prediction of eating pathology. Neither the two-way life event stress x harm avoidance interaction nor the three-way drive for thinness x life event stress x harm avoidance interaction were significant predictors of eating pathology. These findings suggest that the previously suggested relation between drive for thinness and pathological eating is dependent upon the degree of life event stress experienced.

The current study sought to prospectively explore the potential main effects and interactive relations among drive for thinness, life event stress, and harm avoidance in the prediction of disordered eating in an ethnically diverse sample of women (N = 58). During the initial and follow-up assessments, standardized questionnaires were utilized to assess drive for thinness, life event stress, and a harm avoidant temperament. Additionally, semi-structured diagnostic interviews were administered to assess disordered eating. Results revealed a significant interaction between drive for thinness and life event stress in the prediction of eating pathology. Neither the two-way life event stress x harm avoidance interaction nor the three-way drive for thinness x life event stress x harm avoidance interaction were significant predictors of eating pathology. These findings suggest that the previously suggested relation between drive for thinness and pathological eating is dependent upon the degree of life event stress experienced.