Senior Executives’ Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Psychological Well-being: Is It Different at the Top?

Senior executives’ decisions can have a substantial impact on their own lives, their families, their organizations’ workers and employees, and society. This quantitative study (1) investigated the relationship between basic psychological need satisfaction (BPNS) at work and psychological well-being (PWB) in 142 senior executives as antecedent of their decision making and (2) compared the results to two other managerial level samples of 260 managers and 445 employees. The results have implications for theory and practice. Our findings contribute the new theoretical perspectives of differences in the relationship between BPNS at work and PWB by managerial level and senior executives’ gender (“complementarity effect”). In turn, our research provides evidence for practical organizational applications such as the design and implementation of effective human resource development programs based on BPNS. Our findings further underscore the importance of senior executive psychology as a field of academic inquiry and provide directions for future research focused on further improving senior executives’ optimal functioning

Relatedness Need Satisfaction in Senior Executives

This research investigated relatedness need satisfaction in senior executives in three studies (two qualitative/ one quantitative). In study 1, we identified a matrix of coping strategies (MoCS) as conceptualization of senior executives’ behavioral responses to perceived social rejection or exclusion. Study 2 found that senior executives’ level of relatedness need satisfaction as a potential indicator of self-regulation failure was not significantly different from the rest of us. However, every sixth senior executive participant and every fourth senior executive participant from large organizations had a very low relatedness need satisfaction score with very large effect size. The final study 3, identified a relatedness loop model (RLM) as a theoretical framework for relatedness need satisfaction processes. In summary, our work offers an empirical foundation for future research as well as for practical tools and applications in the field of senior executive psychology

Mental toughness and self-efficacy of elite ultra-marathon runners

Minimal research has examined psychological processes underpinning ultra-marathon runners' performance. This study examined the relationships between mental toughness and self-efficacy with performance in an elite sample of ultra-marathon runners competing in the 2019 Hawaiian Ultra Running Team's Trail 100-mile endurance run (HURT100). The Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ) and the Endurance Sport Self-Efficacy Scale (ESSES) were completed by 56 elite ultra-marathon runners in the HURT100 (38 males, 18 females; Mage = 38.86 years, SDage = 9.23). Findings revealed mental toughness and self-efficacy are highly related constructs (r(54) = 0.72, p < 0.001). Mental toughness and self-efficacy did not significantly relate to ultra-marathon performance (mental toughness and self-efficacy with Ultra-Trail World Tour (UTWT) rank F(2, 53) = 0.738, p = 0.483; mental toughness and self-efficacy with likelihood would finish the HURT100 χ2 = 0.56, p = 0.756; mental toughness and self-efficacy with HURT100 placing and time F(2, 53) = 1.738, p = 0.186 and F(2, 30) = 2.046, p = 0.147, respectively). However, participants had significantly and meaningfully higher mental toughness (M = 45.42, SD = 4.26, medium and large effect sizes) than athletes from other sports previously published. Our interpretation is that these results taken in conjunction, suggest a threshold of mental toughness that performers require to be of the standard needed to be able to prepare for and compete in elite ultra-marathon events such as the HURT100; once this mental toughness threshold is met, other factors are likely to be more influential in determining elite level ultra-marathon performance

Perceived Exercise Benefits and Barriers of Non-Exercising Female University Students in the United Kingdom

Many individuals do not engage in sufficient physical activity due to low perceived benefits and high perceived barriers to exercise. Given the increasing incidence of obesity and obesity related health disorders, this topic requires further exploration. We used the Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale to assess perceived benefit and barrier intensities to exercise in 200 non-exercising female university students (mean age 19.3 years, SD = 1.06) in the UK. Although our participants were selected because they self reported themselves to be non-exercising, however they reported significantly higher perceived benefits from exercise than perceived barriers to exercise [t(199) = 6.18, p < 0.001], and their perceived benefit/barrier ratio was 1.33. The greatest perceived benefit from exercise was physical performance followed by the benefits of psychological outlook, preventive health, life enhancement, and then social interaction. Physical performance was rated significantly higher than all other benefits. Psychological outlook and preventive health were not rated significantly different, although both were significantly higher than life enhancement and social interaction. Life enhancement was also rated significantly higher than social interaction. The greatest perceived barrier to exercise was physical exertion, which was rated significantly higher than time expenditure, exercise milieu, and family discouragement barriers. Implications from this investigation for the design of physical activity programmes include the importance, for females, of a perception of high benefit/barrier ratio that could be conducive to participation in exercise. Applied interventions need to assist female students to ‘disengage’ from or overcome any perceived ‘unpleasantness’ of physical exertion during physical activity (decrease their perceived barriers), and to further highlight the multiple health and other benefits of regular exercising (increase their perceived benefits)