ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Officiating stress and coping strategies among male student basketball referees in China: a procedural grounded theory study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to explore the sources, interactions, outcomes, and coping strategies associated with officiating stress among male student basketball referees in China. Methods: Using a procedural grounded theory approach, 28 male student basketball referees participated in semi-structured, in-depth interviews. Purposive sampling was initially employed to ensure sample diversity, followed by theoretical sampling based on constant comparison. Data were analyzed using open, axial, and selective coding with the assistance of NVivo 12.0. Results: A total of 979 coding references were identified, generating 53 initial categories, 15 subcategories, and five main categories: personal factors, relational pressure, decision-making pressure, match pressure, and event-related pressure. These dimensions formed an interactive, multifactor model of officiating stress. Theoretical saturation was reached after the 26th interview, and two additional interviews confirmed that no new categories or relationships emerged. Moderate pressure could facilitate learning and professional growth, whereas excessive pressure could contribute to stress responses, officiating errors, and a self-reinforcing cycle of escalating pressure. Discussion: Coping strategies included self-regulation, social support, skill development, and stress-response adjustment, although organizational support remained insufficient. The findings provide practical implications for developing psychological support systems, structured training pathways, post-match review mechanisms, and referee development programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.