Mindfulness, Psychological Resilience, and Cognitive Reappraisal on Athletic Performance: A Predictive Model Based on Psychological Mechanisms

Mindfulness, Psychological Resilience, and Cognitive Reappraisal on Athletic Performance: A Predictive Model Based on Psychological Mechanisms | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Mindfulness, Psychological Resilience, and Cognitive Reappraisal on Athletic Performance: A Predictive Model Based on Psychological Mechanisms Cheng Xing, Zainal Abidin N.E., Aman M.S. This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8035772/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 14 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Mindfulness is increasingly recognized as a psychological resource in sport, yet the mechanisms by which it enhances athletic performance remain underexplored. This research seeks to construct a predictive framework to examine how mindfulness affects athletic performance, specifically through the intermediary functions of cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. A total of 482 competitive university athletes from Sichuan Province, China, participated in a cross-sectional survey. Following preliminary analyses—including descriptive statistics, reliability assessment, and validity checks—the study employed structural equation modeling (SEM) to explore the hypothesized relationships. The findings demonstrated that mindfulness not only directly influenced athletic performance but also exerted indirect effects mediated by cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. Evidence also confirmed a sequential mediation route in which mindfulness enhances performance via cognitive reappraisal followed by psychological resilience, suggesting the presence of a multi-stage self-regulation process. The model provides theoretical grounding for staged mental training interventions in sport and supports the structured development of psychological skills to optimize athletic outcomes. Mindfulness Cognitive Reappraisal Psychological Resilience Athletic Performance Structural Equation Modeling Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 1. Introduction Achieving optimal athletic performance requires more than physical conditioning and technical proficiency. In recent years, growing empirical attention has shifted toward understanding how psychological mechanisms influence athletes' capacity to perform under pressure, adapt to adversity, and maintain consistency in high-stakes environments (Reardon et al., 2019 ). This shift reflects not only the increasing recognition of mental health in elite sport, but also the evolving need for evidence-based psychological frameworks that address the complexity of performance optimization beyond conventional physical training paradigms (Henriksen et al., 2020 ). Among various psychological constructs, mindfulness has emerged as a key contributor to athletes’ mental adaptability and performance consistency. Mindfulness, characterized by an awareness of the present moment combined with an accepting and non-evaluative mindset, has been associated with improvements in emotional regulation, focused attention, and the ability to manage stress in demanding performance settings. (Kee et al., 2012 ; Wang et al., 2016 ). It is increasingly applied in sport psychology to buffer against performance anxiety and to foster psychological flexibility during competition (Bellinger et al., 2015 ). In parallel, psychological resilience—the capacity to recover and maintain functioning after adversity—has gained prominence as a core protective factor for athletes navigating intensive training and competitive stressors (Hussain et al., 2023 ; Sarkar & Fletcher, 2014 ). Resilience enables athletes to adaptively interpret setbacks, sustain effort, and maintain motivation under fluctuating performance conditions (Galli & Gonzalez, 2015 ). However, despite the recognized benefits of both mindfulness and resilience, their interdependence in shaping athletic outcomes remains conceptually underdeveloped and underexplored in empirical research. Cognitive reappraisal has also gained growing attention as a key adaptive strategy for regulating emotions, involving the reinterpretation of emotionally charged situations to alter their psychological impact (Wolgast et al., 2011 ). Reappraisal has demonstrated efficacy in reducing sport-related anxiety and preserving performance under pressure (Costanzo et al., 2016 ; van Rens et al., 2021 ). Notably, mindfulness may act as a meta-cognitive precursor to reappraisal, facilitating athletes’ ability to flexibly reinterpret stress-inducing scenarios through enhanced emotional awareness and cognitive decentering (Fresco et al., 2007 ). Although each of these constructs—mindfulness, resilience, and reappraisal—has individually been associated with improved performance outcomes, the integrative mechanism through which mindfulness exerts its influence via resilience and reappraisal has not been sufficiently theorized or empirically validated. Prior studies have largely examined these factors in isolation, leaving a critical gap in understanding how they interact to support psychological functioning and performance optimization in athletic contexts. To bridge this research gap, the current study introduces a predictive model in which cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience are conceptualized as mediating variables linking mindfulness to athletic performance. Drawing upon third-wave cognitive-behavioral theories and mindfulness-acceptance-commitment frameworks, this research aims to clarify the underlying regulatory mechanisms that translate mindfulness into tangible performance benefits (Hayes, 2004 ). Specifically, the study investigates: How does the mindfulness enhance cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, athletic performance? In what ways do cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience function as mediators in the relationship between mindfulness and athletic performance? Through the development and empirical validation of this model, the study enhances the nuanced understanding of psychological regulation in athletic contexts and provides practical guidance for designing interventions aimed at strengthening athletes’ mental preparedness, emotional flexibility, and performance under pressure. 2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses 2.1 Mindfulness as a Psychological Resource in Athletic Performance Mindfulness is understood as the intentional and self-directed ability to focus on the present moment while maintaining an open, accepting, and non-judgmental perspective (Kabat-Zinn, 2023 ; Nilsson & Kazemi, 2016 ). Within the field of sports, mindfulness has gained growing recognition as an effective means of improving athletes’ focus, emotional management, and capacity to cope with stress. (Birrer et al., 2012 ; Teper et al., 2013 ). The Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) framework advocates for incorporating mindfulness into athletic contexts, emphasizing experiential acceptance and metacognitive insight as pathways to fostering greater psychological adaptability (Gardner & Moore, 2004 ; Ptáček et al., 2024). From a theoretical perspective, Self-Determination Theory (SDT) suggests that mindfulness enhances individuals’ sense of autonomy and competence, enabling athletes to manage their emotions and actions more efficiently, which in turn contributes to better performance (Garland, A., R., et al., 2015). In a similar vein, the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory proposes that mindfulness promotes constructive cognitive reappraisal—a central emotional regulation mechanism enabling athletes to view stress-inducing situations as challenges instead of perceived threats (Shannon et al. 2025 ). From the lens of Attentional Control Theory, mindfulness enhances the efficiency of attentional allocation, reducing the cognitive load of task-irrelevant thoughts such as rumination or anxiety, thereby optimizing performance during high-pressure situations (Jha et al., 2010 ). Empirical studies on mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have demonstrated their effectiveness in improving athletes’ concentration, alleviating performance-related anxiety, and strengthening psychological resilience across diverse sporting environments (Zhong et al., 2025 ). These studies demonstrate that mindfulness training not only improves mental regulation strategies like reappraisal but also equips athletes with the emotional stability to recover from setbacks, thus maintaining consistent performance. Hence, this study posits: H1: Mindfulness has a positive impact on athletic performance. H2. Mindfulness positively affects cognitive reappraisal. H3. Mindfulness positively affects psychological resilience. Athletes’ use of cognitive reappraisal can significantly impact their emotional regulation and, subsequently, their performance (Robazza et al., 2023 ). Cognitive reappraisal represents an emotion regulation strategy that operates prior to the full activation of an emotional response, targeting the interpretation of the triggering event, which allows individuals to change their interpretation of stress-inducing events and mitigate negative emotional responses (Buhle et al., 2014 ). Within the realm of sport psychology, athletes who engage in cognitive reappraisal tend to exhibit greater emotional stability and remain composed during high-pressure situations,adjust their thinking during setbacks, and remain focused on performance tasks (Doorley & Kashdan, 2021 ). For instance, Josefsson et al. ( 2019 ) showed that athletes who practiced mindfulness-based strategies—of which reappraisal is a core mechanism—demonstrated superior attentional control and competitive performance. Further, Noetel et al. ( 2019 ) identified cognitive reappraisal as a critical mediating factor between mindfulness and athletic performance, indicating that reframing stressful experiences contributes to enhanced outcomes in competitive settings. Psychological resilience denotes an individual’s capacity to bounce back from difficulties, manage emotional responses effectively, and respond constructively to demanding circumstances. (Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012 ). In athletic settings, individuals with higher resilience are generally more capable of handling both the physical strain and mental pressures associated with rigorous training and competitive performance. Fletcher and Sarkar ( 2012 ) indicated that mentally tough athletes, characterized by higher resilience, showed better coping capacity and emotional stability in the face of athletic stress. According to Appleton et al. ( 2009 ), athletes exhibiting greater psychological resilience are more likely to achieve higher levels of performance and maintain consistency when facing competitive pressure. Lai et al. ( 2020 ) further observed a positive correlation between psychological resilience and athletes’ self-efficacy, as well as their overall success in sports performance. Together, these findings suggest that resilience is an essential psychological trait contributing to optimal athletic functioning. Meanwhile, research has consistently demonstrated that cognitive reappraisal plays a crucial role in fostering psychological resilience. Tugade and Fredrickson ( 2004 ) found that individuals who frequently apply cognitive reappraisal tend to experience more positive emotions, gradually accumulate psychological resources, and develop effective coping mechanisms over time. Keng et al. ( 2011 ) emphasized that mindfulness-based interventions promote reappraisal processes, which subsequently lead to enhanced resilience when dealing with emotional challenges. In the sports context, Campoamor-Olegario et al. ( 2025 ) showed that athletes who scored higher in hope and reappraisal also exhibited better stress-coping capabilities—attributes closely linked with psychological resilience. The evidence indicates that athletes capable of reframing challenging experiences through cognitive reappraisal are more likely to cultivate and sustain resilient mental states. Drawing upon these insights, the following hypothesis is proposed: H4. Cognitive reappraisal positively affects athletic performance. H5. Psychological resilience positively affects athletic performance. H6. Cognitive reappraisal positively affects psychological resilience Mindfulness has a positive effect on athletic performance by enhancing emotional regulation, attentional control, and metacognitive awareness (Love et al., 2019 ). Cognitive reappraisal serves as a central pathway by which mindfulness generates positive outcomes, enabling individuals to reframe stress-inducing experiences in ways that alleviate emotional strain. (Garland et al., 2009 ). Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory reveals the mindfulness promotes decentering and metacognitive insight, which in turn foster reappraisal processes that lead to more adaptive emotional responses. Keng et al. ( 2011 ) emphasized that mindfulness interrupts automatic cognitive reactions such as rumination and facilitates the use of reappraisal to reinterpret competition-related stress in more constructive ways. Noetel et al. ( 2019 ) provided evidence that cognitive reappraisal played a significant mediating role in linking mindfulness-based interventions to athletes’ performance improvements. Similarly, Moore et al. ( 2008 ) found that athletes who adopted reappraisal as a strategy in response to performance anxiety were more likely to maintain focus and achieve competitive goals. These results imply that cognitive reappraisal could function as a vital psychological mechanism through which mindfulness contributes to enhanced athletic performance. In addition to performance, Mindfulness has likewise been linked to psychological resilience, defined as the capacity to cope successfully with stress and rebound from adversity (Oh et al., 2022 ). According to the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory, mindfulness promotes ongoing cycles of constructive cognitive reappraisal, which over time contribute to the development of emotional steadiness and greater psychological resilience (Garland, A., Philippe, et al., 2015). Reappraisal enables individuals to reconstruct adverse experiences as opportunities for learning and growth, which contributes to the development of resilient traits (Riepenhausen et al., 2022 ). In sport contexts, Lelek-Kratiuk and Szczygieł ( 2022 ) showed that athletes who were better at reframing stressors using reappraisal demonstrated stronger resilience and stress-coping abilities. Mindfulness practice, by promoting a non-reactive and accepting stance toward experiences, enhances reappraisal tendencies, which in turn improve athletes’ ability to handle adversity with greater composure and psychological strength (Zhong et al., 2025 ). Both theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence affirm the mediating function of cognitive reappraisal in linking mindfulness to psychological resilience. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is advanced: H7. Cognitive reappraisal mediates the relationship between the mindfulness and athletic performance. H8. Cognitive reappraisal mediates the relationship between the mindfulness and psychological resilience. Research has shown that mindfulness contributes to multiple beneficial psychological outcomes in athletes, such as improved concentration, better emotional management, and more effective coping strategies (Jones et al., 2020 ; Josefsson et al., 2017 ). Among these, psychological resilience has emerged as a crucial mediator that connects mindfulness to performance outcomes. The Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) model posits that mindfulness enhances psychological flexibility and fosters acceptance—two critical components for building resilience in demanding competitive settings (Josefsson et al., 2019 ). Fletcher and Sarkar ( 2012 ) observed that athletes with higher resilience tend to rebound from challenges more rapidly, preserve self-confidence, and consistently perform at a high level. Tugade and Fredrickson ( 2007 ) further theorized that mindfulness indirectly enhances well-being through positive emotion regulation processes that build resilience over time. Zhang et al. ( 2025 ) reported that athletes with greater psychological resilience—often enhanced through mindfulness practice—performed better under stress. Josefsson et al. ( 2017 ) further identified resilience as a key process by which mindfulness enhances athletes’ emotional regulation and concentration. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider psychological resilience as a mediating factor in the link between mindfulness and athletic performance. Cognitive reappraisal enables athletes to positively reinterpret stress-inducing events, while resilience allows them to recover and perform consistently in challenging situations. Theoretically, the use of reappraisal may enhance resilience by fostering constructive perspectives on adversity, which subsequently support better performance (Garland, Hanley, et al., 2015 ). Keng et al. ( 2011 ) demonstrated that athletes who frequently engaged in reappraisal were more likely to develop resilient traits, leading to improved coping and psychological outcomes. Furthermore, Fletcher and Sarkar ( 2012 ) emphasized that resilient athletes often regulate their emotions through reappraisal processes, which buffer the impact of stress. Therefore, cognitive reappraisal may influence athletic performance indirectly through its effect on resilience. Based on this reasoning. Extending from these findings, it is plausible to suggest that cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience function in a sequential mediating pathway that connects mindfulness with athletic performance outcomes. That is, mindfulness facilitates reappraisal of stressful events, which contributes to the development of resilience, and ultimately enhances athletic outcomes. This conceptual pathway aligns with the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory, which asserts that mindfulness initiates ongoing cycles of cognitive reappraisal and positive emotional experiences, ultimately fostering psychological capacities like resilience (Garland, A., Philippe, et al., 2015). This cumulative process suggests a pathway from mindfulness to reappraisal to resilience to performance. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis: H9. Psychological resilience serves as a mediator in the relationship between mindfulness and athletic performance. H10. Psychological resilience functions as a mediating variable in the association between cognitive reappraisal and athletic performance. H11. The relationship between mindfulness and athletic performance is sequentially mediated by cognitive reappraisal followed by psychological resilience. To synthesize these hypotheses, a conceptual model is proposed (see Fig. 1 ) 3. Materials and Methods 3.1 Data collection Mixing the convenience sampling and purposive sampling strategy was used to recruit athletes from 19 universities across Sichuan Province, China. Eligible participants were student-athletes with confirmed experience in provincial or national competitions. Participants were drawn from both team-based sports (such as football, basketball, and volleyball) and individual disciplines (including track and field, swimming, gymnastics, martial arts, tennis, and table tennis). Out of 535 questionnaires administered via both online platforms and printed formats, 482 were deemed valid after removing 53 incomplete or invalid responses, resulting in a final response rate of 90.1%. Prior to initiating data collection, coaches and institutional coordinators were briefed on the purpose of the study and collaborated in selecting eligible athlete participants. Participants were provided with a written summary outlining the study’s purpose, gave informed consent, and were clearly informed of their right to withdraw at any stage. Data collection was conducted anonymously, with all information treated in strict confidence. 3.2 Instrument The questionnaire consisted of four validated scales corresponding to the core constructs: mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and perceived athletic performance. To measure mindfulness, the study employed the State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity (SMS-PA-2) (Ullrich-French et al., 2022), comprising 19 items distributed across four distinct subscales: These subdimensions include awareness of mental processes, bodily sensations, acceptance of thoughts, and acceptance of physical experiences. Participants responded using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (“not at all”) to 4 (“very much”). This instrument has shown strong internal consistency and has been validated for use in physical activity contexts (Baceviciene et al., 2023 ). The 25-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) was utilized to assess psychological resilience, encompassing five dimensions: personal competence, instinctual trust, adaptability to change, sense of control, and spiritual orientation(Connor & Davidson, 2003 ). The Chinese version has shown good psychometric performance in athlete populations (Yu & Zhang, 2007 ). Cognitive reappraisal was measured through a six-item subscale from the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ), which was localized and psychometrically validated in the Chinese context by Wang et al. ( 2007 ). Participants rated their responses on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 7 (“strongly agree”). The scale has exhibited strong reliability, with a test–retest coefficient of 0.82 and a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.85. To evaluate athletic performance, the study employed the Perceived Performance in Sport Questionnaire (PPSQ), originally created by Charbonneau (2001) and later adapted by Lourenço et al. ( 2018 ). This instrument comprises five items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”), where higher scores reflect greater perceived performance. The scale has demonstrated high internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha values consistently between 0.88 and 0.91. 3.3 Pilot Testing Before administering the survey on a larger scale, a preliminary test involving 30 athletes was carried out to assess the translated questionnaires in terms of clarity, contextual relevance, and cultural suitability. Feedback was solicited on potential ambiguities and revised accordingly. The reliability assessment showed that each subscale attained a Cronbach’s alpha exceeding 0.80, indicating strong internal consistency and justifying the instruments’ applicability in the main research phase. 3.4 Data Processing and Analysis Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 26.0 alongside AMOS version 24.0 for structural modeling procedures. Preliminary analyses involved computing descriptive statistics and examining the dataset for normal distribution, missing data, and potential outliers. To evaluate the measurement model, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted, examining factor loadings, composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE), and various model fit indices. Following this, structural equation modeling (SEM) was applied to test the proposed direct effects, mediation paths, and sequential mediation processes. Model fit was evaluated using a range of indices, including χ²/df, RMSEA, GFI, AGFI, CFI, and TLI. To examine both mediating and sequential mediation effects involving cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience, a bootstrap procedure with 5,000 resamples and bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals was employed. 4. Results 4.1 Descriptive analysis A total of 482 individuals participated in the study, shown in Table 1 , with a gender distribution slightly skewed toward males (56%) compared to females (44%). In terms of academic standing, the majority of respondents were in their third year (40%), followed by seniors (21.8%), sophomores (19.9%), freshmen (10%), and a smaller group of postgraduates (8.3%). Regarding sport type, 55.2% were engaged in team sports, while 44.8% participated in individual sports. The most commonly reported specific disciplines were basketball (12.7%) and football (12%), closely followed by volleyball (10.8%) and martial arts (10.2%). Disciplines like track and field, swimming, and gymnastics were moderately represented, while tennis and table tennis each comprised a smaller share. Notably, 16.8% of participants reported being involved in sports not listed under the main categories. Regarding competitive background, most participants had considerable experience, with 38.2% indicating 4 to 6 years and 34.6% reporting over 7 years of involvement. Only a small fraction (4.4%) had been involved for less than a year. The competition level also reflected this experience, with 62.7% having competed at the provincial level, and 24.9% reaching national-level events. A small elite group (4.6%) had international-level experience. Finally, training frequency was relatively high across the board, with over half (51%) training five or more times a week, and another 35.1% training three to four times weekly. Only 13.9% trained less frequently, at one to two sessions per week. Overall, the data suggest a well-experienced and competitively active sample, balanced in gender and with diverse sports representation. Table 1 Sample’s information Variable Category number % Gender Male 270 56.00% Female 212 44.00% Academic Year First year (Freshman) 48 10.00% Second year (Sophomore) 96 19.90% Third year (Junior) 193 40.00% Fourth year or above (Senior) 105 21.80% Postgraduate 40 8.30% Type of Sport Team sport 266 55.20% Individual sport 216 44.80% Specific Sport Discipline Football (Soccer) 58 12.00% Basketball 61 12.70% Volleyball 52 10.80% Track and Field 46 9.50% Swimming 42 8.70% Gymnastics 28 5.80% Martial Arts 49 10.20% Tennis 35 7.30% Table Tennis 30 6.20% Other 81 16.80% Years of Competitive Experience Less than 1 year 21 4.40% 1–3 years 110 22.80% 4–6 years 184 38.20% More than 7 years 167 34.60% Highest Competition Level School-level only 38 7.90% Provincial-level 302 62.70% National-level 120 24.90% International-level 22 4.60% Weekly Training Frequency 1–2 sessions per week 67 13.90% 3–4 sessions per week 169 35.10% 5 or more sessions per week 246 51.00% 4.2 Data availability analysis Table 2 reports the internal consistency of the measurement tools employed in the study, assessed through Cronbach’s alpha values for each underlying construct. As shown, all four scales—mindfulness, psychological resilience, cognitive reappraisal, and athletic performance—all demonstrated strong internal reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients significantly exceeding the standard threshold of 0.70 (McCormick & Salcedo, 2017 ). In particular, the 19-item mindfulness scale yielded a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.957, reflecting outstanding internal consistency across its various subcomponents. Likewise, the 25-item psychological resilience scale produced a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.967, indicating a high degree of consistency in capturing the targeted construct with minimal measurement error. The cognitive reappraisal scale, although shorter (6 items), maintained a strong internal consistency (α = 0.881), a result that aligns with findings from earlier studies utilizing the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire. The athletic performance scale also demonstrated good reliability (α = 0.862), despite consisting of only five items, suggesting that the instrument is sufficiently robust to capture self-perceived performance outcomes. These reliability findings validate the internal coherence of the measurement instruments and support their suitability for further analyses using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. These results offer a robust empirical basis for establishing the validity of the measurement model and affirm the consistency of the observed associations among the variables. Table 2 Reliability Statistics Study variables Number of items Cronbach's α Mindfulness 19 0.957 Psychological Resilience 25 0.967 Cognitive Reappraisal 6 0.881 Athletic Performance 5 0.862 Table 3 presents the outcomes of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test for sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, both of which were employed to assess whether the dataset was appropriate for conducting factor analysis. The resulting KMO value of 0.978 surpassed the conventional benchmark of 0.90, signifying a high level of sampling adequacy for factor analysis (McCormick & Salcedo, 2017 ). This suggests that the patterns of correlations among the observed variables are compact enough to yield distinct and reliable factors in subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Moreover, Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity yielded a highly significant outcome (Approx. χ² = 17,427.067, df = 1485, p < .001), effectively rejecting the null hypothesis and confirming that the correlation matrix is not an identity matrix. This result suggests the presence of meaningful intercorrelations among variables, thereby reinforcing the suitability of applying factor analysis to the measurement model. Taken together, the two indicators validate the statistical adequacy of the dataset for latent variable analysis and confirm that the observed variables exhibit sufficient interrelationships to warrant the application of confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling in this research. Table 3 KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .978 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 17427.067 df 1485 Sig. .000 4.3 Measurement model and fit metrics Figure 2 depicts the measurement model adopted in this study, which was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the reliability and validity of the four latent constructs: mindfulness, psychological resilience, cognitive reappraisal, and athletic performance. Each underlying construct is represented by several observed indicators used for measurement, with corresponding standardized factor loadings reported for each path. All standardized factor loadings were above the suggested cutoff of 0.70, demonstrating that the measured items effectively reflect their corresponding latent variables (Collier, 2020 ). Specifically, loadings for mindfulness items (MI1–MI19) range from 0.706 to 0.774, and those for psychological resilience (PR1–PR25) range from 0.694 to 0.775. For cognitive reappraisal (CR1–CR6), loadings range from 0.724 to 0.781, and for athletic performance (AP1–AP5), loadings range from 0.724 to 0.769. These findings offer robust support for the convergent validity of all latent constructs. The model also reveals statistically significant correlations among the constructs, with coefficients ranging from 0.514 to 0.598, indicating moderate to strong interrelationships. Notably, the strongest correlation emerged between mindfulness and psychological resilience (r = 0.598), aligning with theoretical predictions regarding their close connection in athletes' psychological adjustment processes. Moreover, the measurement errors (e1–e55) associated with each observed indicator are shown, indicating the portion of variance not explained by the latent construct. The inclusion of correlated errors and path coefficients confirms that the model was properly specified for CFA purposes. Taken as a whole, the configuration and statistical values presented in Fig. 2 demonstrate that the measurement model attains acceptable standards of construct reliability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity, thereby laying a solid groundwork for further structural equation modeling Table 4 outlines the model fit indices employed to assess the suitability of the measurement model developed through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The findings show that the model achieves a strong overall fit with the data, meeting widely recognized benchmark standards in structural equation modeling (Collier, 2020 ). The chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio (χ²/df) was 1.224, which falls well below the threshold of 3.0, suggesting minimal divergence between the observed and predicted covariance matrices and indicating that the model avoids overfitting. In addition, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was calculated at 0.022, well below the 0.08 threshold, indicating a tight and efficient alignment of the model with the population data. Additional evidence of model adequacy is provided by the goodness-of-fit index (GFI = 0.889) and the adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI = 0.880), both surpassing the recommended cutoff of 0.85, suggesting that the model effectively captures a substantial portion of the variance–covariance structure. Likewise, the normed fit index (NFI = 0.904), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI = 0.980), and comparative fit index (CFI = 0.981) all exceed the conventional threshold of 0.90, providing additional confirmation of the proposed measurement model’s strong comparative fit over the null model. Taken together, these findings offer compelling empirical evidence for the model’s construct validity, demonstrating that the observed indicators effectively capture the intended latent variables and justifying the model’s application in further structural analyses (Collier, 2020 ). Table 4 Measure model fit index Fit index χ2/df RMSEA GFI AGFI NFI TLI CFI Reference standards < 3 0.85 > 0.85 > 0.85 > 0.85 > 0.85 Result 1.224 0.022 0.889 0.880 0.904 0.980 0.981 4.4 Convergent validity Table 5 displays the outcomes of the convergent validity assessment for the latent constructs. Convergent validity reflects the degree to which multiple indicators are interrelated and reliably capture the same conceptual dimension (Collier, 2020 ). This assessment relies on three primary indicators: standardized factor loadings, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE). All standardized loadings surpassed the acceptable benchmark of 0.70, with values ranging from 0.694 to 0.781, confirming that each measurement item is strongly and significantly associated with its respective latent construct. This suggests that each measurement item contributes meaningfully to its respective construct. The composite reliability (CR) values for all constructs are substantially above the recommended minimum of 0.70, with Mindfulness = 0.957, Psychological Resilience = 0.965, Cognitive Reappraisal = 0.882, and Athletic Performance = 0.862. These results indicate strong internal coherence among the observed items within each latent variable, confirming their reliability. In addition, the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct surpassed the 0.50 benchmark, indicating that over half of the variance in the observed indicators is explained by their associated latent variable. Specifically, Mindfulness yielded an AVE of 0.542, Psychological Resilience an AVE of 0.522, Cognitive Reappraisal an AVE of 0.554, and Athletic Performance an AVE of 0.557. The findings offer clear evidence that the measurement items align closely with their respective constructs, satisfying the criteria for convergent validity. Overall, the results summarized in Table 5 confirm that all latent variables in the model demonstrate sufficient convergent validity, supporting their applicability in the following structural path analyses. Table 5 Convergent Validity Latent variables Observation indicators Factor loading CR AVE Mindfulness MI1 0.718 0.957 0.542 MI2 0.740 MI3 0.706 MI4 0.759 MI5 0.720 MI6 0.748 MI7 0.747 MI8 0.741 MI9 0.739 MI10 0.737 MI11 0.730 MI12 0.737 MI13 0.774 MI14 0.719 MI15 0.733 MI16 0.716 MI17 0.745 MI18 0.724 MI19 0.748 Psychological Resilience PR1 0.705 0.965 0.522 PR2 0.755 PR3 0.744 PR4 0.744 PR5 0.726 PR6 0.740 PR7 0.741 PR8 0.713 PR9 0.705 PR10 0.725 PR11 0.770 PR12 0.734 PR13 0.720 PR14 0.761 PR15 0.721 PR16 0.730 PR17 0.694 PR18 0.724 PR19 0.751 PR20 0.740 PR21 0.760 PR22 0.767 PR23 0.750 PR24 0.729 PR25 0.758 Cognitive Reappraisal CR1 0.724 0.882 0.554 CR2 0.711 CR3 0.747 CR4 0.781 CR5 0.736 CR6 0.765 Athletic Performance AP1 0.744 0.862 0.557 AP2 0.752 AP3 0.740 AP4 0.724 AP5 0.769 4.5 Discriminant validity Table 6 presents the outcomes of the discriminant validity assessment for the four latent constructs. This form of validity determines whether each construct is empirically separate from the others and is typically assessed using the Fornell–Larcker criterion (Collier, 2020 ). Under the Fornell–Larcker criterion, discriminant validity is confirmed when the square root of a construct’s AVE (positioned on the diagonal) exceeds its correlations with all other constructs (represented by the off-diagonal values in the same row and column). This criterion verifies that each latent construct explains more variance in its own observed indicators than it shares with any other construct within the model. In Table 6 , all diagonal elements exceed their corresponding off-diagonal values. For Mindfulness, The square root of the AVE for this construct is 0.736, exceeding its correlation with Psychological Resilience, which stands at 0.598, Cognitive Reappraisal (0.561), and Athletic Performance (0.578). Psychological Resilience shows a square root AVE value of 0.722, which surpasses its correlations with both Cognitive Reappraisal (0.611) and Athletic Performance (0.609). For Cognitive Reappraisal, the square root of AVE is 0.744, exceeding its correlation with Athletic Performance (0.656). Finally, the square root of the AVE for Athletic Performance is 0.746, exceeding its correlations with all other latent constructs in the model. These results confirm that each construct in the model is statistically distinct from the others, thereby establishing adequate discriminant validity. This further validates the construct measurement model and justifies the examination of structural paths among the latent variables in the subsequent analysis. Table 6 Discriminant validity test Latent variables Mindfulness Psychological Resilience Cognitive Reappraisal Athletic Performance Mindfulness 0.736 Psychological Resilience 0.598 0.722 Cognitive Reappraisal 0.561 0.611 0.744 Athletic Performance 0.578 0.609 0.656 0.746 Note: The diagonal is the square root of the corresponding variable’s AVE. 4.6 Structural model fit metrics for the structural model Figure 3 depicts the standardized structural equation model used to evaluate the hypothesized relationships, testing the hypothesized relationships among mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance. The model was designed to explore both direct and mediated effects of mindfulness on athletic performance, with an emphasis on cognitive and emotional regulation pathways. As illustrated in Fig. 3 , mindfulness has a direct impact on athletic performance (β = 0.150), while also exerting indirect effects via cognitive reappraisal (β = 0.386) and psychological resilience (β = 0.260). A sequential pathway is also confirmed, as mindfulness enhances cognitive reappraisal (β = 0.415), which in turn increases psychological resilience (β = 0.401), ultimately improving performance. The model accounts for 52.6% of the variance in athletic performance and 46.8% in psychological resilience, indicating strong explanatory power. All observed variables exhibit standardized loadings above 0.70, providing strong evidence for the construct validity of the model. Overall, Fig. 3 validates the proposed multi-stage mediation mechanism and highlights cognitive reappraisal as the most influential mediator in translating mindfulness into enhanced athletic outcomes. Table 7 indicates that the structural model exhibits an excellent overall fit to the data. With a chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio of 1.224, the model falls well within the acceptable range, suggesting a streamlined and efficient structural configuration.The RMSEA value of 0.022 is considerably lower than the standard cutoff of 0.08, indicating a strong correspondence between the model and the underlying population covariance structure. In terms of absolute and incremental fit, GFI = 0.889 and AGFI = 0.880, exceed the benchmark value of 0.85, indicating that the model explains a substantial proportion of the observed variance. Additionally, the NFI (0.904), TLI (0.980), and CFI (0.981) all exceed the commonly accepted benchmark of 0.90, offering further evidence of the model’s robustness and its strong explanatory power. Collectively, these results confirm that the proposed structural relationships among mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance are statistically reliable and theoretically well-grounded. Table 7 Model fit index Fit index χ2/df RMSEA GFI AGFI NFI TLI CFI Reference standards < 3 0.85 > 0.85 > 0.85 > 0.85 > 0.85 Result 1.224 0.022 0.889 0.880 0.904 0.980 0.981 4.7 Path analysis for direct effects Path analysis was carried out to examine the direct effects among mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance, thereby testing the hypothesized structural links. This analysis establishes the foundational structure of the model and serves as a prerequisite for interpreting mediating mechanisms. The theoretical rationale for these relationships is grounded in prior empirical studies, where mindfulness has been associated with enhanced attentional control, emotional regulation, and sport-specific outcomes through both direct and indirect mechanisms (Collier, 2020 ). As shown in Table 8 , all six hypothesized direct paths (H1–H6) reached statistical significance at the p < 0.001 level, offering strong empirical backing for the proposed structural framework. Specifically, mindfulness demonstrated a moderate yet significant direct effect on athletic performance (β = 0.216, p < 0.001), confirming H1. This indicates that higher levels of present-moment awareness are associated with improved self-perceived athletic outcomes, independent of mediation. Mindfulness was also found to have significant positive impacts on cognitive reappraisal (β = 0.561, p < 0.001) and psychological resilience (β = 0.373, p < 0.001), thereby supporting hypotheses H2 and H3. These results underscore mindfulness as a foundational regulatory factor that shapes both cognitive and emotional adjustment mechanisms. In addition, cognitive reappraisal (β = 0.386, p < 0.001) and psychological resilience (β = 0.244, p < 0.001) were both significant predictors of athletic performance, confirming H4 and H5. These findings imply that athletes who excel at reframing stressful situations or bouncing back from setbacks are more likely to achieve superior performance in competitive environments. Lastly, the relationship between cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience was significant (β = 0.401, p < 0.001), thereby supporting hypothesis H6. This result substantiates the sequential cognitive-to-emotional regulatory pathway proposed in the model, wherein reappraisal serves as a precursor to resilience under stress-inducing sport contexts. Collectively, these direct effects offer substantial empirical validation for the proposed framework, demonstrating that mindfulness impacts athletic performance both directly and through intermediary psychological processes. Table 8 Direct path effects Hypothesis Path Unstandardized estimates β S.E. C.R. P Results H1 MI→AP 0.225 0.216 0.055 4.101 *** Supported H2 MI→CR 0.609 0.561 0.060 10.233 *** Supported H3 MI→PR 0.375 0.373 0.051 7.330 *** Supported H4 CR→AP 0.370 0.386 0.057 6.473 *** Supported H5 PR→AP 0.253 0.244 0.058 4.387 *** Supported H6 CR→PR 0.372 0.401 0.049 7.538 *** Supported Note: MI: Mindfulness; PR: Psychological Resilience; CR: Cognitive Reappraisal; AP: Athletic Performance. ***: P < 0.001. 4.8 Path analysis for indirect effects Table 9 presents the findings from the bootstrapped mediation analysis, which explored how mindfulness indirectly influences athletic performance via cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. Five indirect pathways (H7–H11) were evaluated through 5,000 bootstrap resamples, employing bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals to assess the significance of the mediation effects. The mediation pathway from mindfulness to athletic performance through cognitive reappraisal (H7) was statistically significant, with an effect size of 0.226 and a 95% confidence interval of [0.122, 0.329]. This finding confirms that athletes with greater mindfulness are more capable of adaptively reframing stress, thereby enhancing performance. The pathway from mindfulness to resilience through reappraisal (H8) was also significant (0.227, 95% CI [0.131, 0.319]), indicating that reappraisal facilitates emotional adaptability. Mindfulness also influenced performance indirectly via psychological resilience alone (H9: 0.095, 95% CI [0.019, 0.174]), while reappraisal affected performance through resilience (H10: 0.094, 95% CI [0.026, 0.176]). The sequential mediation pathway (H11: MI → CR → PR → AP) was supported with an effect of 0.057 (95% CI [0.013, 0.105]), demonstrating a layered regulatory mechanism. Taken together, the findings affirm that both cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience function as meaningful mediators, with cognitive reappraisal demonstrating the most substantial impact. Table 9 Mediation effect bootstrap test Hypothesis Mediation path Effect size SE Bias-Corrected 95%CI Results Lower Upper H7 MI→CR→AP 0.226 0.055 0.122 0.329 Supported H8 MI→CR→PR 0.227 0.048 0.131 0.319 Supported H9 MI→PR→AP 0.095 0.039 0.019 0.174 Supported H10 CR→PR→AP 0.094 0.037 0.026 0.176 Supported H11 MI→CR→PR→AP 0.057 0.024 0.013 0.105 Supported Note: MI: Mindfulness; PR: Psychological Resilience; CR: Cognitive Reappraisal; AP: Athletic Performance. 5. Discussion and conclusion 5.1 Interpretation of Key Findings Mindfulness positively enhances cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance The findings reveal that mindfulness has a significant and direct impact on cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance, providing empirical evidence for its central role in psychological processes relevant to athletic settings. Among these relationships, the strongest direct effect was found between mindfulness and cognitive reappraisal (β = 0.561), suggesting that individuals with higher mindfulness are more capable of reinterpreting stressful or challenging situations in a constructive way. This aligns with theoretical perspectives that view mindfulness as a facilitator of adaptive emotion regulation strategies. Additionally, mindfulness positively predicted psychological resilience (β = 0.373), implying that athletes who maintain a mindful presence are better equipped to recover from setbacks and cope with pressure. This finding is particularly relevant in competitive sports environments where resilience is often a differentiator between consistent and inconsistent performance. Mindfulness also directly enhanced athletic performance (β = 0.216), reinforcing the idea that mental clarity and present-focused awareness contribute meaningfully to behavioral outcomes. This relationship supports the increasing inclusion of mindfulness training in athletic programs aimed at optimizing focus, reducing performance anxiety, and enhancing execution under pressure. Furthermore, both cognitive reappraisal (β = 0.386) and psychological resilience (β = 0.244) were found to directly improve performance, confirming their roles as proximal psychological resources that translate into tangible competitive advantages. Lastly, the strong predictive path from cognitive reappraisal to resilience (β = 0.401) highlights how effectively managing emotions may not only help athletes perform but also build the inner strength needed to persist through adversity. Collectively, these direct effects portray a coherent picture: mindfulness is not an isolated trait but a core psychological driver that influences key mental skills and, ultimately, athletic success. Cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience play as significant mediation roles. Beyond the direct pathways, the model also revealed several meaningful indirect effects, highlighting the nuanced mechanisms through which mindfulness impacts athletic performance. Notably, the path from mindfulness to athletic performance via cognitive reappraisal (H7, β = 0.226) emerged as a strong mediating relationship. This suggests that part of the reason mindfulness contributes to better performance lies in its ability to enhance athletes’ capacity for cognitive reframing. In essence, mindfulness helps athletes manage how they interpret stress, which in turn enables them to stay composed and effective during competition. Similarly, cognitive reappraisal was found to mediate the link between mindfulness and psychological resilience (H8, β = 0.227), further reinforcing its centrality in the psychological chain of influence. This implies that the resilient mindset observed in mindful individuals may not stem directly from mindfulness alone, but also from the enhanced cognitive strategies that mindfulness fosters. These findings point to a layered psychological process, where mindfulness supports reappraisal, and reappraisal builds the psychological stamina athletes need. Interestingly, psychological resilience also acted as a standalone mediator between mindfulness and performance (H9, β = 0.095), although the effect size was smaller. This suggests that the ability to recover from adversity may partially account for how mindfulness improves outcomes, albeit less strongly than cognitive mechanisms. Furthermore, the pathway from cognitive reappraisal through resilience to performance (H10, β = 0.094) adds depth to the model by indicating that the effects of cognitive strategies may be sustained and amplified when paired with a resilient disposition. The most complex mediation chain—mindfulness → cognitive reappraisal → psychological resilience → performance (H11, β = 0.057)—while smaller in magnitude, is particularly illuminating. It demonstrates that the full benefits of mindfulness may unfold progressively across multiple psychological layers, starting with reframing, leading to increased internal strength, and finally manifesting in improved performance. Together, these findings paint a picture of mindfulness as an upstream catalyst that activates a cascade of psychological mechanisms, ultimately shaping how athletes think, feel, and perform under pressure. 5.2 Theoretical Contributions This study advances the field of performance-focused sport psychology by empirically validating a multi-layered predictive model that explains how mindfulness facilitates athletic performance through two interrelated psychological mechanisms: cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. While previous studies have largely investigated the direct effects of mindfulness or isolated single mediators, this research offers a novel contribution by integrating both parallel and sequential mediation pathways into a unified structural model (Josefsson et al., 2019 ). In doing so, it provides a more ecologically valid understanding of how attentional, cognitive, and emotional self-regulation processes interact dynamically under competitive pressure. A key theoretical advancement lies in the empirical extension and refinement of the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory within the sport performance domain (Garland, A., Philippe, et al., 2015). This study explicitly models and tests the sequential relationship whereby mindfulness enhances cognitive reappraisal, which in turn fosters psychological resilience, ultimately leading to improved performance outcomes. Previous applications of the theory have often posited a general link between mindfulness and positive outcomes via emotion regulation, yet without specifying the temporal and hierarchical ordering of regulatory processes. By confirming a cognition-to-emotion regulatory cascade, this study fills a theoretical gap and supports the existence of a staged self-regulation mechanism in high-performance athletic settings. Additionally, the findings contribute to Attentional Control Theory by illustrating how mindfulness may reduce task-irrelevant cognitive intrusions—such as rumination or evaluative anxiety—thereby enabling athletes to allocate attention more efficiently to performance-relevant cues (Eysenck et al., 2007 ). This attentional refinement serves as a precursor to cognitive reframing, thereby operationalizing how metacognitive awareness can initiate broader emotional regulatory benefits. From the perspective of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), the study reinforces the role of mindfulness in supporting psychological autonomy and competence, which are expressed through enhanced internal regulation of thoughts and emotions (Brown & Ryan, 2003 ). By demonstrating that mindfulness leads to better emotion-focused coping strategies (e.g., reappraisal) and fosters resilient states conducive to persistence, this model offers a nuanced SDT-based interpretation of motivated self-regulation in sport. The study also contributes conceptually to the Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) model by clarifying the cognitive-affective pathways through which experiential acceptance (a core MAC tenet) translates into psychological performance gains. Specifically, it positions cognitive reappraisal as a key mediator that bridges mindful awareness with adaptive coping, extending MAC from a process framework into a validated structural model. A further theoretical contribution involves the reconceptualization of psychological resilience. Rather than treating resilience as a fixed trait or moderator, as common in earlier works, this study empirically establishes resilience as a state-like, malleable outcome that emerges from higher-order cognitive regulation (Gupta & McCarthy, 2022 ; IJntema et al., 2023 ). This shift aligns with developmental sport psychology and underscores the trainability of resilience through upstream interventions targeting mindful awareness and reframing skills. Finally, the identification of varying effect sizes across mediation paths—particularly the stronger impact of the cognitive reappraisal path (β = 0.226) compared to the resilience path (β = 0.095)—suggests that top-down cognitive mechanisms may exert a more immediate influence on performance than bottom-up affective processes. This insight invites future theoretical refinement by encouraging differentiated modeling of regulatory pathways based on their functional immediacy, plasticity, and role within mental skills interventions. In sum, this study makes three primary theoretical contributions: (1) it formalizes and validates a dual-path and sequential mediation model linking mindfulness to athletic performance, (2) it reframes psychological resilience as a dynamic psychological outcome shaped by cognitive-emotional processes, and (3) it integrates attentional, cognitive, and emotional regulation into a staged framework for understanding performance enhancement in sport. These contributions significantly extend the conceptual boundaries of existing theories and offer a scaffold for future research and intervention design. 5.3 New knowledge and Contribution By offering a predictive model that portrays the psychological pathways linking mindfulness to athletic performance in a Southeast China context (Sichuan province). Unlike prior research that often examined these constructs in isolation or within Western cultural frameworks, this study integrates mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, and psychological resilience into a cohesive structure, revealing both direct and indirect effects with robust statistical support. Importantly, it highlights cognitive reappraisal as a central mediating mechanism, demonstrating how mindfulness not only enhances immediate mental clarity but also cultivates adaptive emotional strategies that fuel both resilience and performance. The inclusion of a serial mediation path—mindfulness influencing performance through both reappraisal and resilience—offers a novel contribution by unpacking the layered psychological sequence through which mindfulness exerts its influence. Furthermore, by situating the research within the high-pressure domain of competitive athletics, this study expands the applicability of mindfulness theory beyond clinical and educational settings, suggesting its value as a performance-enhancing psychological resource. Collectively, the findings not only enrich the theoretical understanding of how mindfulness works, but also inform practical interventions for athletes and coaches seeking to strengthen psychological readiness through structured mental training. 5.3 Practical Implications The findings provide a strong empirical basis for enhancing athlete development strategies through targeted psychological interventions, particularly mindfulness training. Given that mindfulness demonstrated direct positive effects on cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance, and also showed multiple indirect effects via these variables, the model suggests a multi-layered psychological mechanism that stakeholders can leverage to promote performance and mental health. For training institutions and universities, these results underscore the value of embedding mindfulness modules into athletic programs. Items such as “I noticed emotions come and go”, “I accepted my thoughts/emotions without judging them”, and “I let my thoughts/emotions just be without fixating on them” (from the mindfulness scale) point to the importance of helping athletes cultivate non-reactivity and acceptance. These capacities were shown to indirectly boost athletic performance through improved emotion regulation and resilience. Institutions can offer mindfulness-based group workshops that foster this emotional self-awareness, particularly for students in high-performance or scholarship-based athletic tracks. For coaches and sports training teams, the finding that cognitive reappraisal significantly predicted both resilience and performance highlights the need to train athletes in mental reframing techniques. Statements like “When I want to feel happier, I change the way I'm thinking about it” or “I control my feelings by changing how I think about things” suggest that simple cognitive tools can empower athletes to reframe stress as challenge, disappointment as feedback. This reframing not only boosts resilience but also contributes directly to performance outcomes, as reflected in athlete self-assessments like “I feel my performance was good” and “I contributed to the team”. For sports psychologists and counseling centers, the full mediation path offers a blueprint for tiered interventions. These may begin with basic mindfulness training and then progress to emotional regulation and stress inoculation techniques. Athletes with high anxiety or performance dips under pressure may particularly benefit from a program that helps them first become aware of their emotional triggers, then reinterpret them, and ultimately develop psychological hardiness. For student-athletes themselves, the message is clear: inner work matters. Building awareness of thoughts and body sensations (e.g., “I was aware of how my body felt”, “I noticed pleasant and unpleasant thoughts”) and practicing acceptance (e.g., “Even if my body didn’t meet expectations, I was okay with it”) are not abstract ideals but actionable skills with performance payoffs. This empowers students to shift from reactive coping to strategic mental self-regulation, enhancing both well-being and competitive readiness. Collectively, these findings argue for a predictive model that integrates psychological education alongside physical training. Stakeholders at all levels—from policy planners in athletic departments to frontline coaches and mental health professionals—can act on this evidence to build more resilient, mindful, and high-performing athletes. 5.4 Limitations and Directions for Future Research This study constructed and empirically validated a structural model to examine the influence of mindfulness on athletic performance through two key psychological mechanisms: cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. However, there are several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the sampling method was relatively straightforward, and the survey was confined to specific geographic areas, which may limit the representativeness of the sample. With only 482 valid responses, the dataset is somewhat limited in scope. Future research could benefit from expanding the sample size, employing more sophisticated sampling techniques, and integrating experimental and qualitative approaches—such as interviews—to enrich data depth and contextual understanding. From a theoretical standpoint, the study primarily drew upon established psychological frameworks, including the Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment model, Self-Determination Theory (SDT), Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory, and Attentional Control Theory. While these offer a solid foundation, they are predominantly rooted in psychology. Future investigations could take an interdisciplinary approach, incorporating theories from sociology, neuroscience, education, or behavioral economics, and explore a broader range of internal and external variables. This could help move beyond the boundaries of a purely psychological model and offer more comprehensive insights. Lastly, although the data analysis methods met the study’s objectives, they relied on traditional statistical techniques. To enhance the analytical depth and visual interpretability of future findings, researchers may consider adopting machine learning methods and leveraging advanced programming languages such as R or Python. These tools can facilitate more dynamic data visualization and offer greater flexibility in uncovering complex patterns, ultimately contributing to a richer and more accessible presentation of research outcomes. In conclusion, this study offers a theoretically grounded and practically relevant framework that integrates attentional, cognitive, and emotional pathways to explain how mindfulness contributes to athletic performance. Despite certain methodological constraints, it provides a solid foundation for future research and intervention development in applied sport psychology. As the demand for mental optimization in sport continues to grow, this model may serve as a valuable guide for designing psychologically informed training systems that elevate both performance and well-being in competitive athletic contexts. 6. Conclusion This study validated a predictive model to explore how mindfulness influences athletic performance through the mediating roles of cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. The findings provide clear empirical evidence that mindfulness not only has direct effects on performance, but also exerts its influence through key psychological pathways. Cognitive reappraisal emerged as both a direct enhancer of performance and a bridge between mindfulness and resilience, while resilience itself contributed significantly to performance outcomes. These results highlight the importance of cultivating mental awareness, emotional flexibility, and adaptive strength in athletes, offering valuable guidance for the design of psychological training interventions. Theoretically, this study extends the application of mindfulness-related constructs within the domain of sport psychology and provides empirical support for a layered psychological model grounded in frameworks such as Self-Determination Theory and the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory. At the same time, it opens the door for future interdisciplinary expansion beyond traditional psychological models. Practically, the research offers actionable insights for educators, coaches, training teams, and mental health professionals, suggesting that integrating mindfulness-based strategies into athlete development programs may significantly enhance both psychological readiness and competitive performance. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate: Ethical approval was obtained from the Academic Ethics Committee, Institute of Physical Education, Neijiang Normal University (Approval No. IRB-PE-NSNU-2025-001 , approved January 15, 2025 ). All participants provided informed consent and participated voluntarily. Data were collected anonymously and treated confidentially. Consent for publication: Not applicable Availability of data and material: The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to confidentiality requirements, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Competing interests: Not applicable Funding: Not applicable Authors' contributions - CX conceptualized the study, designed the methodology, wrote the original draft, and created visualizations. ZA validated data, and contributed to study design. AM supervised the research, acquired funding, reviewed and edited the manuscript, and approved the final version. All authors read and approved the submitted manuscript. References Appleton, P. R., Hall, H. K., & Hill, A. P. (2009). Relations between multidimensional perfectionism and burnout in junior-elite male athletes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 10 (4), 457-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2008.12.006 Baceviciene, M., Jankauskiene, R., & Balciuniene, V. (2023). Mindfulness, Physical Activity and Sports Participation: Validity Evidence of the Lithuanian Translation of the State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity 2 in Physically Active Young Adults. Behavioral Sciences , 13 (10). Bellinger, D. B., DeCaro, M. S., & Ralston, P. A. S. (2015). Mindfulness, anxiety, and high-stakes mathematics performance in the laboratory and classroom. Consciousness and Cognition , 37 , 123-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2015.09.001 Birrer, D., Röthlin, P., & Morgan, G. (2012). Mindfulness to Enhance Athletic Performance: Theoretical Considerations and Possible Impact Mechanisms. Mindfulness , 3 (3), 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0109-2 Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology , 84 (4), 822-848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 Buhle, J. T., Silvers, J. A., Wager, T. D., Lopez, R., Onyemekwu, C., Kober, H., Weber, J., & Ochsner, K. N. (2014). Cognitive Reappraisal of Emotion: A Meta-Analysis of Human Neuroimaging Studies. Cerebral Cortex , 24 (11), 2981-2990. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht154 Campoamor-Olegario, L., Camitan, D. S., & Guinto, M. L. M. (2025). Beyond the pandemic: physical activity and health behaviors as predictors of well-being among Filipino tertiary students [Original Research]. Frontiers in Psychology , Volume 16 - 2025 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1490437 Collier, J. E. (2020). Applied structural equation modeling using AMOS: Basic to advanced techniques . Routledge. Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. T. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety , 18 (2), 76-82. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113 Costanzo, M. E., W., V. J., M., J. C., Allen, B., W., M. M., Jessica, O., H., R. B. A., & and Hatfield, B. D. (2016). Neural Efficiency in Expert Cognitive-Motor Performers During Affective Challenge. Journal of Motor Behavior , 48 (6), 573-588. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2016.1161591 Doorley, J. D., & Kashdan, T. B. (2021). Positive and Negative Emotion Regulation in College Athletes: A Preliminary Exploration of Daily Savoring, Acceptance, and Cognitive Reappraisal. Cognitive Therapy and Research , 45 (4), 598-613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10202-4 Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion , 7 (2), 336-353. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336 Fletcher, D., & Sarkar, M. (2012). A grounded theory of psychological resilience in Olympic champions. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 13 (5), 669-678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.04.007 Fresco, D. M., Moore, M. T., van Dulmen, M. H. M., Segal, Z. V., Ma, S. H., Teasdale, J. D., & Williams, J. M. G. (2007). Initial Psychometric Properties of the Experiences Questionnaire: Validation of a Self-Report Measure of Decentering. Behavior Therapy , 38 (3), 234-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.08.003 Galli, N., & Gonzalez, S. P. (2015). Psychological resilience in sport: A review of the literature and implications for research and practice. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 13 (3), 243-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2014.946947 Gardner, F. L., & Moore, Z. E. (2004). A mindfulness-acceptance-commitment-based approach to athletic performance enhancement: Theoretical considerations. Behavior Therapy , 35 (4), 707-723. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(04)80016-9 Garland, E., Gaylord, S., & Park, J. (2009). The Role of Mindfulness in Positive Reappraisal. EXPLORE , 5 (1), 37-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2008.10.001 Garland, E. L., A., F. N., Philippe, R. G., & and Fredrickson, B. L. (2015). Mindfulness Broadens Awareness and Builds Eudaimonic Meaning: A Process Model of Mindful Positive Emotion Regulation. Psychological Inquiry , 26 (4), 293-314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2015.1064294 Garland, E. L., A., F. N., R., G. P., & and Fredrickson, B. L. (2015). The Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory: Extensions, Applications, and Challenges at the Attention Appraisal Emotion Interface. Psychological Inquiry , 26 (4), 377-387. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2015.1092493 Garland, E. L., Hanley, A., Farb, N. A., & Froeliger, B. (2015). State Mindfulness During Meditation Predicts Enhanced Cognitive Reappraisal. Mindfulness , 6 (2), 234-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-013-0250-6 Gupta, S., & McCarthy, P. J. (2022). The sporting resilience model: A systematic review of resilience in sport performers [Systematic Review]. Frontiers in Psychology , Volume 13 - 2022 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1003053 Hayes, S. C. (2004). Acceptance and commitment therapy, relational frame theory, and the third wave of behavioral and cognitive therapies. Behavior Therapy , 35 (4), 639-665. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(04)80013-3 Henriksen, K., Robert, S., Karin, M., Sean, M., William D, P., Hvid, L. C., & and Terry, P. (2020). Consensus statement on improving the mental health of high performance athletes. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 18 (5), 553-560. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2019.1570473 Hussain, T., Wang, D., & Li, B. (2023). Psychological resilience in athletes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative insight. Acta Psychologica , 240 , 104050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104050 IJntema, R. C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Burger, Y. D. (2023). Resilience mechanisms at work: The psychological immunity-psychological elasticity (PI-PE) model of psychological resilience. Current Psychology , 42 (6), 4719-4731. Jha, A. P., Stanley, E. A., Kiyonaga, A., Wong, L., & Gelfand, L. (2010). Examining the protective effects of mindfulness training on working memory capacity and affective experience. Emotion , 10 (1), 54. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018438 Jones, B. J., Kaur, S., Miller, M., & Spencer, R. M. C. (2020). Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Benefits Psychological Well-Being, Sleep Quality, and Athletic Performance in Female Collegiate Rowers [Original Research]. Frontiers in Psychology , Volume 11 - 2020 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.572980 Josefsson, T., Ivarsson, A., Gustafsson, H., Stenling, A., Lindwall, M., Tornberg, R., & Böröy, J. (2019). Effects of Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) on Sport-Specific Dispositional Mindfulness, Emotion Regulation, and Self-Rated Athletic Performance in a Multiple-Sport Population: an RCT Study. Mindfulness , 10 (8), 1518-1529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01098-7 Josefsson, T., Ivarsson, A., Lindwall, M., Gustafsson, H., Stenling, A., Böröy, J., Mattsson, E., Carnebratt, J., Sevholt, S., & Falkevik, E. (2017). Mindfulness Mechanisms in Sports: Mediating Effects of Rumination and Emotion Regulation on Sport-Specific Coping. Mindfulness , 8 (5), 1354-1363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0711-4 Kabat-Zinn, J. (2023). Wherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in everyday life . Hachette UK. Kee, Y. H., Chatzisarantis, N. N. L. D., Kong, P. W., Chow, J. Y., & Chen, L. H. (2012). Mindfulness, Movement Control, and Attentional Focus Strategies: Effects of Mindfulness on a Postural Balance Task. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 34 (5), 561-579. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.34.5.561 Keng, S.-L., Smoski, M. J., & Robins, C. J. (2011). Effects of mindfulness on psychological health: A review of empirical studies. Clinical Psychology Review , 31 (6), 1041-1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.04.006 Lai, C.-P., Hsieh, H.-H., Chang, C.-M., & Ni, F.-T. (2020). The Role of Psychological Capital in Athletic Performance and Career Development of Adolescent Baseball Players in Taiwan. Sustainability , 12 (18). Lelek-Kratiuk, M., & Szczygieł, M. (2022). Stress appraisal as a mediator between the sense of coherence and the frequency of stress coping strategies in women and men during COVID-19 lockdown. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology , 63 (4), 365-375. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12813 Lourenço, J., Almagro Torres, B. J., & Saenz-Lopez Buñuel, P. (2018). Validação do Questionario de Percecao do Rendimento no Desporto (QPRD). Love, S., Kannis-Dymand, L., & Lovell, G. P. (2019). Metacognitions and Mindfulness in Athletes: An Investigation on the Determinants of Flow. Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology , 13 (4), 686-703. https://doi.org/10.1123/jcsp.2017-0038 McCormick, K., & Salcedo, J. (2017). SPSS statistics for data analysis and visualization . John Wiley & Sons. Moore, S. A., Zoellner, L. A., & Mollenholt, N. (2008). Are expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal associated with stress-related symptoms? Behaviour Research and Therapy , 46 (9), 993-1000. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2008.05.001 Nilsson, H., & Kazemi, A. (2016). Reconciling and Thematizing Definitions of Mindfulness: The Big Five of Mindfulness. Review of General Psychology , 20 (2), 183-193. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000074 Noetel, M., Joseph, C., Brooke, V. Z., & and Lonsdale, C. (2019). Mindfulness and acceptance approaches to sporting performance enhancement: a systematic review. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 12 (1), 139-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2017.1387803 Oh, V. K. S., Sarwar, A., & Pervez, N. (2022). The study of mindfulness as an intervening factor for enhanced psychological well-being in building the level of resilience. Frontiers in Psychology , Volume 13 - 1056834 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1056834 Ptacek, M., G., L. R., Karl, S., & and Sutterlin, S. (2024). Effectiveness of the mindfulness acceptance commitment approach: a meta-analysis. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 22 (5), 1229-1247. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2023.2180070 Reardon, C. L., Hainline, B., Aron, C. M., Baron, D., Baum, A. L., Bindra, A., Budgett, R., Campriani, N., Castaldelli-Maia, J. M., Currie, A., Derevensky, J. L., Glick, I. D., Gorczynski, P., Gouttebarge, V., Grandner, M. A., Han, D. H., McDuff, D., Mountjoy, M., Polat, A., Purcell, R., Putukian, M., Rice, S., Sills, A., Stull, T., Swartz, L., Zhu, L. J., & Engebretsen, L. (2019). Mental health in elite athletes: International Olympic Committee consensus statement (2019). British Journal of Sports Medicine , 53 (11), 667. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-100715 Riepenhausen, A., Wackerhagen, C., Reppmann, Z. C., Deter, H.-C., Kalisch, R., Veer, I. M., & Walter, H. (2022). Positive Cognitive Reappraisal in Stress Resilience, Mental Health, and Well-Being: A Comprehensive Systematic Review. Emotion Review , 14 (4), 310-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/17540739221114642 Robazza, C., Morano, M., Bortoli, L., & Ruiz, M. C. (2023). Athletes’ basic psychological needs and emotions: the role of cognitive reappraisal [Original Research]. Frontiers in Psychology , Volume 14 - 2023 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1205102 Sarkar, M., & Fletcher, D. (2014). Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and protective factors. Journal of Sports Sciences , 32 (15), 1419-1434. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2014.901551 Shannon, S., Donncha, H., Gerry, L., Tandy, H., Drew, N., & and Breslin, G. (2025)The association between mindfulness and mental health outcomes in athletes: testing the mediating role of autonomy satisfaction as a core psychological need. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2020.1717578 Teper, R., Segal, Z. V., & Inzlicht, M. (2013). Inside the Mindful Mind: How Mindfulness Enhances Emotion Regulation Through Improvements in Executive Control. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 22 (6), 449-454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413495869 Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient Individuals Use Positive Emotions to Bounce Back From Negative Emotional Experiences. Journal of personality and social psychology , 86 (2), 320-333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.320 Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2007). Regulation of Positive Emotions: Emotion Regulation Strategies that Promote Resilience. Journal of Happiness Studies , 8 (3), 311-333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-006-9015-4 Ullrich-French, S., E., C. A., & and Huong, C. (2022). The State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity 2: Expanding the Assessment of Monitoring and Acceptance. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science , 26 (2), 116-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2021.1952207 van Rens, F. E. C. A., Matthew, B., & and Morris-Binelli, K. (2021). Implementing a pressure inurement training program to optimize cognitive appraisal, emotion regulation, and sport self-confidence in a women’s state cricket team. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 33 (4), 402-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2019.1706664 Wang, L., Liu, H., Li, Z., & Du, W. (2007). Reliability and validity of emotion regulation questionnaire Chinese revised version. China Journal of Health Psychology , 15 (6), 503-505. Wang, Y., Xu, W., & Luo, F. (2016). Emotional Resilience Mediates the Relationship Between Mindfulness and Emotion. Psychological Reports , 118 (3), 725-736. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294116649707 Wolgast, M., Lundh, L.-G., & Viborg, G. (2011). Cognitive reappraisal and acceptance: An experimental comparison of two emotion regulation strategies. Behaviour Research and Therapy , 49 (12), 858-866. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2011.09.011 Yu, X., & Zhang, J. (2007). Factor analysis and psychometric evaluation of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) with Chinese people. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal , 35 (1), 19-30. Zhang, J., Jinxiu, S., Yuchuan, Z., Lihong, G., & and Huang, S. (2025). The effect of mindfulness training on the psychological state of high-level athletes: Meta analysis and system evaluation research. Journal of Sports Sciences , 43 (6), 600-622. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2025.2468997 Zhong, Z., Jiang, H., Wang, H., & Liu, Y. (2025). The Association Between Mindfulness and Athletes' Distress Tolerance: The Mediating Roles of Cognitive Reappraisal and Mental Toughness. Behav Sci (Basel) , 15 (3). https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030298 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 13 May, 2026 Reviews received at journal 09 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 05 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 01 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 05 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 25 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 18 Mar, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 04 Feb, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 04 Feb, 2026 Editor invited by journal 19 Jan, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 17 Jan, 2026 First submitted to journal 17 Jan, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8035772","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":586741051,"identity":"a35e1232-579b-4d4b-9e84-06352008be2e","order_by":0,"name":"Cheng Xing","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Neijiang Normal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Cheng","middleName":"","lastName":"Xing","suffix":""},{"id":586741052,"identity":"752d98b8-09bb-4555-99bf-1c022353a33e","order_by":1,"name":"Zainal Abidin N.E.","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universiti Malaya","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zainal","middleName":"Abidin","lastName":"N.E.","suffix":""},{"id":586741053,"identity":"062ad7ee-51d4-413f-8b24-146bb6a57650","order_by":2,"name":"Aman M.S.","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universiti Malaya","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Aman","middleName":"","lastName":"M.S.","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-11-05 08:08:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8035772/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8035772/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":102179025,"identity":"fb309deb-d8d3-494c-88ba-b105a208c44c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-09 06:57:22","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":48754,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTheoretical Model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8035772/v1/f5e9ea468f0f0b33907fe685.png"},{"id":102179028,"identity":"efb323aa-9712-483c-82dd-6b8db21242be","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-09 06:57:22","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":312588,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurement model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8035772/v1/84488faaae296d81c9f5825d.png"},{"id":102179027,"identity":"ca638136-f5cd-4a63-b3fc-45053eb9f5df","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-09 06:57:22","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":343758,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStructural model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8035772/v1/046476c5d8969dec47c83ea4.png"},{"id":102296704,"identity":"2a069a98-9bc9-4fe2-85bb-dffa5286a3fd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-10 10:20:56","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1985363,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8035772/v1/25fe99c1-30eb-4b32-ac07-d4f507c314da.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Mindfulness, Psychological Resilience, and Cognitive Reappraisal on Athletic Performance: A Predictive Model Based on Psychological Mechanisms","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAchieving optimal athletic performance requires more than physical conditioning and technical proficiency. In recent years, growing empirical attention has shifted toward understanding how psychological mechanisms influence athletes' capacity to perform under pressure, adapt to adversity, and maintain consistency in high-stakes environments (Reardon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). This shift reflects not only the increasing recognition of mental health in elite sport, but also the evolving need for evidence-based psychological frameworks that address the complexity of performance optimization beyond conventional physical training paradigms (Henriksen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong various psychological constructs, mindfulness has emerged as a key contributor to athletes\u0026rsquo; mental adaptability and performance consistency. Mindfulness, characterized by an awareness of the present moment combined with an accepting and non-evaluative mindset, has been associated with improvements in emotional regulation, focused attention, and the ability to manage stress in demanding performance settings. (Kee et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Wang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). It is increasingly applied in sport psychology to buffer against performance anxiety and to foster psychological flexibility during competition (Bellinger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn parallel, psychological resilience\u0026mdash;the capacity to recover and maintain functioning after adversity\u0026mdash;has gained prominence as a core protective factor for athletes navigating intensive training and competitive stressors (Hussain et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Sarkar \u0026amp; Fletcher, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Resilience enables athletes to adaptively interpret setbacks, sustain effort, and maintain motivation under fluctuating performance conditions (Galli \u0026amp; Gonzalez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). However, despite the recognized benefits of both mindfulness and resilience, their interdependence in shaping athletic outcomes remains conceptually underdeveloped and underexplored in empirical research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive reappraisal has also gained growing attention as a key adaptive strategy for regulating emotions, involving the reinterpretation of emotionally charged situations to alter their psychological impact (Wolgast et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Reappraisal has demonstrated efficacy in reducing sport-related anxiety and preserving performance under pressure (Costanzo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; van Rens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Notably, mindfulness may act as a meta-cognitive precursor to reappraisal, facilitating athletes\u0026rsquo; ability to flexibly reinterpret stress-inducing scenarios through enhanced emotional awareness and cognitive decentering (Fresco et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough each of these constructs\u0026mdash;mindfulness, resilience, and reappraisal\u0026mdash;has individually been associated with improved performance outcomes, the integrative mechanism through which mindfulness exerts its influence via resilience and reappraisal has not been sufficiently theorized or empirically validated. Prior studies have largely examined these factors in isolation, leaving a critical gap in understanding how they interact to support psychological functioning and performance optimization in athletic contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo bridge this research gap, the current study introduces a predictive model in which cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience are conceptualized as mediating variables linking mindfulness to athletic performance. Drawing upon third-wave cognitive-behavioral theories and mindfulness-acceptance-commitment frameworks, this research aims to clarify the underlying regulatory mechanisms that translate mindfulness into tangible performance benefits (Hayes, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Specifically, the study investigates:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eHow does the mindfulness enhance cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, athletic performance?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn what ways do cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience function as mediators in the relationship between mindfulness and athletic performance?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThrough the development and empirical validation of this model, the study enhances the nuanced understanding of psychological regulation in athletic contexts and provides practical guidance for designing interventions aimed at strengthening athletes\u0026rsquo; mental preparedness, emotional flexibility, and performance under pressure.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Mindfulness as a Psychological Resource in Athletic Performance\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness is understood as the intentional and self-directed ability to focus on the present moment while maintaining an open, accepting, and non-judgmental perspective (Kabat-Zinn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Nilsson \u0026amp; Kazemi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Within the field of sports, mindfulness has gained growing recognition as an effective means of improving athletes\u0026rsquo; focus, emotional management, and capacity to cope with stress. (Birrer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Teper et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) framework advocates for incorporating mindfulness into athletic contexts, emphasizing experiential acceptance and metacognitive insight as pathways to fostering greater psychological adaptability (Gardner \u0026amp; Moore, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Pt\u0026aacute;ček et al., 2024). From a theoretical perspective, Self-Determination Theory (SDT) suggests that mindfulness enhances individuals\u0026rsquo; sense of autonomy and competence, enabling athletes to manage their emotions and actions more efficiently, which in turn contributes to better performance (Garland, A., R., et al., 2015). In a similar vein, the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory proposes that mindfulness promotes constructive cognitive reappraisal\u0026mdash;a central emotional regulation mechanism enabling athletes to view stress-inducing situations as challenges instead of perceived threats (Shannon et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom the lens of Attentional Control Theory, mindfulness enhances the efficiency of attentional allocation, reducing the cognitive load of task-irrelevant thoughts such as rumination or anxiety, thereby optimizing performance during high-pressure situations (Jha et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Empirical studies on mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have demonstrated their effectiveness in improving athletes\u0026rsquo; concentration, alleviating performance-related anxiety, and strengthening psychological resilience across diverse sporting environments (Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). These studies demonstrate that mindfulness training not only improves mental regulation strategies like reappraisal but also equips athletes with the emotional stability to recover from setbacks, thus maintaining consistent performance. Hence, this study posits:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH1: Mindfulness has a positive impact on athletic performance.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH2. Mindfulness positively affects cognitive reappraisal.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH3. Mindfulness positively affects psychological resilience.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAthletes\u0026rsquo; use of cognitive reappraisal can significantly impact their emotional regulation and, subsequently, their performance (Robazza et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Cognitive reappraisal represents an emotion regulation strategy that operates prior to the full activation of an emotional response, targeting the interpretation of the triggering event, which allows individuals to change their interpretation of stress-inducing events and mitigate negative emotional responses (Buhle et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Within the realm of sport psychology, athletes who engage in cognitive reappraisal tend to exhibit greater emotional stability and remain composed during high-pressure situations,adjust their thinking during setbacks, and remain focused on performance tasks (Doorley \u0026amp; Kashdan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, Josefsson et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) showed that athletes who practiced mindfulness-based strategies\u0026mdash;of which reappraisal is a core mechanism\u0026mdash;demonstrated superior attentional control and competitive performance. Further, Noetel et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) identified cognitive reappraisal as a critical mediating factor between mindfulness and athletic performance, indicating that reframing stressful experiences contributes to enhanced outcomes in competitive settings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological resilience denotes an individual\u0026rsquo;s capacity to bounce back from difficulties, manage emotional responses effectively, and respond constructively to demanding circumstances. (Fletcher \u0026amp; Sarkar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). In athletic settings, individuals with higher resilience are generally more capable of handling both the physical strain and mental pressures associated with rigorous training and competitive performance. Fletcher and Sarkar (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) indicated that mentally tough athletes, characterized by higher resilience, showed better coping capacity and emotional stability in the face of athletic stress. According to Appleton et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), athletes exhibiting greater psychological resilience are more likely to achieve higher levels of performance and maintain consistency when facing competitive pressure. Lai et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) further observed a positive correlation between psychological resilience and athletes\u0026rsquo; self-efficacy, as well as their overall success in sports performance. Together, these findings suggest that resilience is an essential psychological trait contributing to optimal athletic functioning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeanwhile, research has consistently demonstrated that cognitive reappraisal plays a crucial role in fostering psychological resilience. Tugade and Fredrickson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) found that individuals who frequently apply cognitive reappraisal tend to experience more positive emotions, gradually accumulate psychological resources, and develop effective coping mechanisms over time. Keng et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) emphasized that mindfulness-based interventions promote reappraisal processes, which subsequently lead to enhanced resilience when dealing with emotional challenges. In the sports context, Campoamor-Olegario et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) showed that athletes who scored higher in hope and reappraisal also exhibited better stress-coping capabilities\u0026mdash;attributes closely linked with psychological resilience. The evidence indicates that athletes capable of reframing challenging experiences through cognitive reappraisal are more likely to cultivate and sustain resilient mental states. Drawing upon these insights, the following hypothesis is proposed:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH4. Cognitive reappraisal positively affects athletic performance.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH5. Psychological resilience positively affects athletic performance.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH6. Cognitive reappraisal positively affects psychological resilience\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness has a positive effect on athletic performance by enhancing emotional regulation, attentional control, and metacognitive awareness (Love et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Cognitive reappraisal serves as a central pathway by which mindfulness generates positive outcomes, enabling individuals to reframe stress-inducing experiences in ways that alleviate emotional strain. (Garland et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory reveals the mindfulness promotes decentering and metacognitive insight, which in turn foster reappraisal processes that lead to more adaptive emotional responses. Keng et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) emphasized that mindfulness interrupts automatic cognitive reactions such as rumination and facilitates the use of reappraisal to reinterpret competition-related stress in more constructive ways. Noetel et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) provided evidence that cognitive reappraisal played a significant mediating role in linking mindfulness-based interventions to athletes\u0026rsquo; performance improvements. Similarly, Moore et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) found that athletes who adopted reappraisal as a strategy in response to performance anxiety were more likely to maintain focus and achieve competitive goals. These results imply that cognitive reappraisal could function as a vital psychological mechanism through which mindfulness contributes to enhanced athletic performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to performance, Mindfulness has likewise been linked to psychological resilience, defined as the capacity to cope successfully with stress and rebound from adversity (Oh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). According to the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory, mindfulness promotes ongoing cycles of constructive cognitive reappraisal, which over time contribute to the development of emotional steadiness and greater psychological resilience (Garland, A., Philippe, et al., 2015). Reappraisal enables individuals to reconstruct adverse experiences as opportunities for learning and growth, which contributes to the development of resilient traits (Riepenhausen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In sport contexts, Lelek-Kratiuk and Szczygieł (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) showed that athletes who were better at reframing stressors using reappraisal demonstrated stronger resilience and stress-coping abilities. Mindfulness practice, by promoting a non-reactive and accepting stance toward experiences, enhances reappraisal tendencies, which in turn improve athletes\u0026rsquo; ability to handle adversity with greater composure and psychological strength (Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Both theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence affirm the mediating function of cognitive reappraisal in linking mindfulness to psychological resilience. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is advanced:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH7. Cognitive reappraisal mediates the relationship between the mindfulness and athletic performance.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH8. Cognitive reappraisal mediates the relationship between the mindfulness and psychological resilience.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch has shown that mindfulness contributes to multiple beneficial psychological outcomes in athletes, such as improved concentration, better emotional management, and more effective coping strategies (Jones et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Josefsson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Among these, psychological resilience has emerged as a crucial mediator that connects mindfulness to performance outcomes. The Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) model posits that mindfulness enhances psychological flexibility and fosters acceptance\u0026mdash;two critical components for building resilience in demanding competitive settings (Josefsson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Fletcher and Sarkar (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) observed that athletes with higher resilience tend to rebound from challenges more rapidly, preserve self-confidence, and consistently perform at a high level. Tugade and Fredrickson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e) further theorized that mindfulness indirectly enhances well-being through positive emotion regulation processes that build resilience over time. Zhang et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) reported that athletes with greater psychological resilience\u0026mdash;often enhanced through mindfulness practice\u0026mdash;performed better under stress. Josefsson et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) further identified resilience as a key process by which mindfulness enhances athletes\u0026rsquo; emotional regulation and concentration. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider psychological resilience as a mediating factor in the link between mindfulness and athletic performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive reappraisal enables athletes to positively reinterpret stress-inducing events, while resilience allows them to recover and perform consistently in challenging situations. Theoretically, the use of reappraisal may enhance resilience by fostering constructive perspectives on adversity, which subsequently support better performance (Garland, Hanley, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Keng et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that athletes who frequently engaged in reappraisal were more likely to develop resilient traits, leading to improved coping and psychological outcomes. Furthermore, Fletcher and Sarkar (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) emphasized that resilient athletes often regulate their emotions through reappraisal processes, which buffer the impact of stress. Therefore, cognitive reappraisal may influence athletic performance indirectly through its effect on resilience. Based on this reasoning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExtending from these findings, it is plausible to suggest that cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience function in a sequential mediating pathway that connects mindfulness with athletic performance outcomes. That is, mindfulness facilitates reappraisal of stressful events, which contributes to the development of resilience, and ultimately enhances athletic outcomes. This conceptual pathway aligns with the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory, which asserts that mindfulness initiates ongoing cycles of cognitive reappraisal and positive emotional experiences, ultimately fostering psychological capacities like resilience (Garland, A., Philippe, et al., 2015). This cumulative process suggests a pathway from mindfulness to reappraisal to resilience to performance. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH9. Psychological resilience serves as a mediator in the relationship between mindfulness and athletic performance.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH10. Psychological resilience functions as a mediating variable in the association between cognitive reappraisal and athletic performance.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH11. The relationship between mindfulness and athletic performance is sequentially mediated by cognitive reappraisal followed by psychological resilience.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo synthesize these hypotheses, a conceptual model is proposed (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Data collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMixing the convenience sampling and purposive sampling strategy was used to recruit athletes from 19 universities across Sichuan Province, China. Eligible participants were student-athletes with confirmed experience in provincial or national competitions. Participants were drawn from both team-based sports (such as football, basketball, and volleyball) and individual disciplines (including track and field, swimming, gymnastics, martial arts, tennis, and table tennis). Out of 535 questionnaires administered via both online platforms and printed formats, 482 were deemed valid after removing 53 incomplete or invalid responses, resulting in a final response rate of 90.1%. Prior to initiating data collection, coaches and institutional coordinators were briefed on the purpose of the study and collaborated in selecting eligible athlete participants. Participants were provided with a written summary outlining the study\u0026rsquo;s purpose, gave informed consent, and were clearly informed of their right to withdraw at any stage. Data collection was conducted anonymously, with all information treated in strict confidence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Instrument\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire consisted of four validated scales corresponding to the core constructs: mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and perceived athletic performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo measure mindfulness, the study employed the State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity (SMS-PA-2) (Ullrich-French et al., 2022), comprising 19 items distributed across four distinct subscales: These subdimensions include awareness of mental processes, bodily sensations, acceptance of thoughts, and acceptance of physical experiences. Participants responded using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (\u0026ldquo;not at all\u0026rdquo;) to 4 (\u0026ldquo;very much\u0026rdquo;). This instrument has shown strong internal consistency and has been validated for use in physical activity contexts (Baceviciene et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The 25-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) was utilized to assess psychological resilience, encompassing five dimensions: personal competence, instinctual trust, adaptability to change, sense of control, and spiritual orientation(Connor \u0026amp; Davidson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). The Chinese version has shown good psychometric performance in athlete populations (Yu \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Cognitive reappraisal was measured through a six-item subscale from the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ), which was localized and psychometrically validated in the Chinese context by Wang et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Participants rated their responses on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (\u0026ldquo;strongly disagree\u0026rdquo;) to 7 (\u0026ldquo;strongly agree\u0026rdquo;). The scale has exhibited strong reliability, with a test\u0026ndash;retest coefficient of 0.82 and a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha of 0.85. To evaluate athletic performance, the study employed the Perceived Performance in Sport Questionnaire (PPSQ), originally created by Charbonneau (2001) and later adapted by Louren\u0026ccedil;o et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). This instrument comprises five items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (\u0026ldquo;strongly disagree\u0026rdquo;) to 5 (\u0026ldquo;strongly agree\u0026rdquo;), where higher scores reflect greater perceived performance. The scale has demonstrated high internal consistency, with Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha values consistently between 0.88 and 0.91.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3 Pilot Testing\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBefore administering the survey on a larger scale, a preliminary test involving 30 athletes was carried out to assess the translated questionnaires in terms of clarity, contextual relevance, and cultural suitability. Feedback was solicited on potential ambiguities and revised accordingly. The reliability assessment showed that each subscale attained a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha exceeding 0.80, indicating strong internal consistency and justifying the instruments\u0026rsquo; applicability in the main research phase.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4 Data Processing and Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData analysis was performed using SPSS version 26.0 alongside AMOS version 24.0 for structural modeling procedures. Preliminary analyses involved computing descriptive statistics and examining the dataset for normal distribution, missing data, and potential outliers. To evaluate the measurement model, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted, examining factor loadings, composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE), and various model fit indices. Following this, structural equation modeling (SEM) was applied to test the proposed direct effects, mediation paths, and sequential mediation processes. Model fit was evaluated using a range of indices, including χ\u0026sup2;/df, RMSEA, GFI, AGFI, CFI, and TLI. To examine both mediating and sequential mediation effects involving cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience, a bootstrap procedure with 5,000 resamples and bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals was employed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Descriptive analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 482 individuals participated in the study, shown in Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, with a gender distribution slightly skewed toward males (56%) compared to females (44%). In terms of academic standing, the majority of respondents were in their third year (40%), followed by seniors (21.8%), sophomores (19.9%), freshmen (10%), and a smaller group of postgraduates (8.3%). Regarding sport type, 55.2% were engaged in team sports, while 44.8% participated in individual sports. The most commonly reported specific disciplines were basketball (12.7%) and football (12%), closely followed by volleyball (10.8%) and martial arts (10.2%). Disciplines like track and field, swimming, and gymnastics were moderately represented, while tennis and table tennis each comprised a smaller share. Notably, 16.8% of participants reported being involved in sports not listed under the main categories. Regarding competitive background, most participants had considerable experience, with 38.2% indicating 4 to 6 years and 34.6% reporting over 7 years of involvement. Only a small fraction (4.4%) had been involved for less than a year. The competition level also reflected this experience, with 62.7% having competed at the provincial level, and 24.9% reaching national-level events. A small elite group (4.6%) had international-level experience. Finally, training frequency was relatively high across the board, with over half (51%) training five or more times a week, and another 35.1% training three to four times weekly. Only 13.9% trained less frequently, at one to two sessions per week. Overall, the data suggest a well-experienced and competitively active sample, balanced in gender and with diverse sports representation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample\u0026rsquo;s information\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enumber\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e270\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e56.00%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e212\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.00%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcademic Year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst year (Freshman)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.00%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond year (Sophomore)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e96\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.90%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird year (Junior)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e193\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.00%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFourth year or above (Senior)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e105\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePostgraduate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.30%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType of Sport\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTeam sport\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e266\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.20%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndividual sport\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e216\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"9\" rowspan=\"10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpecific Sport Discipline\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFootball (Soccer)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.00%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBasketball\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.70%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVolleyball\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrack and Field\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.50%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSwimming\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.70%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGymnastics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMartial Arts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.20%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTennis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.30%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable Tennis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.20%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYears of Competitive Experience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLess than 1 year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.40%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u0026ndash;3 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e110\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u0026ndash;6 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e184\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.20%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore than 7 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e167\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34.60%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHighest Competition Level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSchool-level only\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.90%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProvincial-level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e302\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62.70%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNational-level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e120\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.90%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInternational-level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.60%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWeekly Training Frequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u0026ndash;2 sessions per week\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.90%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u0026ndash;4 sessions per week\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e169\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35.10%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5 or more sessions per week\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e246\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.00%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Data availability analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e reports the internal consistency of the measurement tools employed in the study, assessed through Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha values for each underlying construct. As shown, all four scales\u0026mdash;mindfulness, psychological resilience, cognitive reappraisal, and athletic performance\u0026mdash;all demonstrated strong internal reliability, with Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha coefficients significantly exceeding the standard threshold of 0.70 (McCormick \u0026amp; Salcedo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn particular, the 19-item mindfulness scale yielded a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha of 0.957, reflecting outstanding internal consistency across its various subcomponents. Likewise, the 25-item psychological resilience scale produced a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha of 0.967, indicating a high degree of consistency in capturing the targeted construct with minimal measurement error. The cognitive reappraisal scale, although shorter (6 items), maintained a strong internal consistency (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.881), a result that aligns with findings from earlier studies utilizing the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire. The athletic performance scale also demonstrated good reliability (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.862), despite consisting of only five items, suggesting that the instrument is sufficiently robust to capture self-perceived performance outcomes. These reliability findings validate the internal coherence of the measurement instruments and support their suitability for further analyses using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. These results offer a robust empirical basis for establishing the validity of the measurement model and affirm the consistency of the observed associations among the variables.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReliability Statistics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudy variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of items\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCronbach's α\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.957\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Resilience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.967\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Reappraisal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.881\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAthletic Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.862\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e presents the outcomes of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test for sampling adequacy and Bartlett\u0026rsquo;s Test of Sphericity, both of which were employed to assess whether the dataset was appropriate for conducting factor analysis. The resulting KMO value of 0.978 surpassed the conventional benchmark of 0.90, signifying a high level of sampling adequacy for factor analysis (McCormick \u0026amp; Salcedo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests that the patterns of correlations among the observed variables are compact enough to yield distinct and reliable factors in subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, Bartlett\u0026rsquo;s Test of Sphericity yielded a highly significant outcome (Approx. χ\u0026sup2; = 17,427.067, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1485, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), effectively rejecting the null hypothesis and confirming that the correlation matrix is not an identity matrix. This result suggests the presence of meaningful intercorrelations among variables, thereby reinforcing the suitability of applying factor analysis to the measurement model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTaken together, the two indicators validate the statistical adequacy of the dataset for latent variable analysis and confirm that the observed variables exhibit sufficient interrelationships to warrant the application of confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling in this research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKMO and Bartlett's Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.978\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBartlett's Test of Sphericity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eApprox. Chi-Square\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17427.067\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1485\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Measurement model and fit metrics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e depicts the measurement model adopted in this study, which was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the reliability and validity of the four latent constructs: mindfulness, psychological resilience, cognitive reappraisal, and athletic performance. Each underlying construct is represented by several observed indicators used for measurement, with corresponding standardized factor loadings reported for each path.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll standardized factor loadings were above the suggested cutoff of 0.70, demonstrating that the measured items effectively reflect their corresponding latent variables (Collier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Specifically, loadings for mindfulness items (MI1\u0026ndash;MI19) range from 0.706 to 0.774, and those for psychological resilience (PR1\u0026ndash;PR25) range from 0.694 to 0.775. For cognitive reappraisal (CR1\u0026ndash;CR6), loadings range from 0.724 to 0.781, and for athletic performance (AP1\u0026ndash;AP5), loadings range from 0.724 to 0.769. These findings offer robust support for the convergent validity of all latent constructs. The model also reveals statistically significant correlations among the constructs, with coefficients ranging from 0.514 to 0.598, indicating moderate to strong interrelationships. Notably, the strongest correlation emerged between mindfulness and psychological resilience (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.598), aligning with theoretical predictions regarding their close connection in athletes' psychological adjustment processes. Moreover, the measurement errors (e1\u0026ndash;e55) associated with each observed indicator are shown, indicating the portion of variance not explained by the latent construct. The inclusion of correlated errors and path coefficients confirms that the model was properly specified for CFA purposes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTaken as a whole, the configuration and statistical values presented in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e demonstrate that the measurement model attains acceptable standards of construct reliability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity, thereby laying a solid groundwork for further structural equation modeling\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e outlines the model fit indices employed to assess the suitability of the measurement model developed through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The findings show that the model achieves a strong overall fit with the data, meeting widely recognized benchmark standards in structural equation modeling (Collier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio (χ\u0026sup2;/df) was 1.224, which falls well below the threshold of 3.0, suggesting minimal divergence between the observed and predicted covariance matrices and indicating that the model avoids overfitting. In addition, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was calculated at 0.022, well below the 0.08 threshold, indicating a tight and efficient alignment of the model with the population data. Additional evidence of model adequacy is provided by the goodness-of-fit index (GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.889) and the adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.880), both surpassing the recommended cutoff of 0.85, suggesting that the model effectively captures a substantial portion of the variance\u0026ndash;covariance structure. Likewise, the normed fit index (NFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.904), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.980), and comparative fit index (CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.981) all exceed the conventional threshold of 0.90, providing additional confirmation of the proposed measurement model\u0026rsquo;s strong comparative fit over the null model. Taken together, these findings offer compelling empirical evidence for the model\u0026rsquo;s construct validity, demonstrating that the observed indicators effectively capture the intended latent variables and justifying the model\u0026rsquo;s application in further structural analyses (Collier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeasure model fit index\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFit index\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2/df\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRMSEA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAGFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTLI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReference standards\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResult\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.224\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.022\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.889\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.880\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.904\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.980\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.981\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.4 Convergent validity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e displays the outcomes of the convergent validity assessment for the latent constructs. Convergent validity reflects the degree to which multiple indicators are interrelated and reliably capture the same conceptual dimension (Collier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). This assessment relies on three primary indicators: standardized factor loadings, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE). All standardized loadings surpassed the acceptable benchmark of 0.70, with values ranging from 0.694 to 0.781, confirming that each measurement item is strongly and significantly associated with its respective latent construct. This suggests that each measurement item contributes meaningfully to its respective construct.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe composite reliability (CR) values for all constructs are substantially above the recommended minimum of 0.70, with Mindfulness\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.957, Psychological Resilience\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.965, Cognitive Reappraisal\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.882, and Athletic Performance\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.862. These results indicate strong internal coherence among the observed items within each latent variable, confirming their reliability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct surpassed the 0.50 benchmark, indicating that over half of the variance in the observed indicators is explained by their associated latent variable. Specifically, Mindfulness yielded an AVE of 0.542, Psychological Resilience an AVE of 0.522, Cognitive Reappraisal an AVE of 0.554, and Athletic Performance an AVE of 0.557. The findings offer clear evidence that the measurement items align closely with their respective constructs, satisfying the criteria for convergent validity. Overall, the results summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e confirm that all latent variables in the model demonstrate sufficient convergent validity, supporting their applicability in the following structural path analyses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConvergent Validity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLatent variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservation indicators\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactor loading\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAVE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"18\" rowspan=\"19\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.718\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"18\" rowspan=\"19\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.957\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"18\" rowspan=\"19\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.542\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.740\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.706\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.759\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.720\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.748\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.747\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.741\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.739\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.737\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.730\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.737\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.774\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.719\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.733\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.716\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.745\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.724\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.748\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"24\" rowspan=\"25\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Resilience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.705\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"24\" rowspan=\"25\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.965\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"24\" rowspan=\"25\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.522\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.755\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.744\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.744\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.726\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.740\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.741\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.713\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.705\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.725\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.770\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.734\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.720\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.761\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.721\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.730\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.694\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.724\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.751\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.740\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.760\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.767\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.750\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.729\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.758\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Reappraisal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.724\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.882\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.554\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.711\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.747\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.781\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.736\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.765\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAthletic Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAP1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.744\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.862\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.557\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAP2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.752\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAP3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.740\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAP4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.724\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAP5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.769\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.5 Discriminant validity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e presents the outcomes of the discriminant validity assessment for the four latent constructs. This form of validity determines whether each construct is empirically separate from the others and is typically assessed using the Fornell\u0026ndash;Larcker criterion (Collier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Under the Fornell\u0026ndash;Larcker criterion, discriminant validity is confirmed when the square root of a construct\u0026rsquo;s AVE (positioned on the diagonal) exceeds its correlations with all other constructs (represented by the off-diagonal values in the same row and column). This criterion verifies that each latent construct explains more variance in its own observed indicators than it shares with any other construct within the model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, all diagonal elements exceed their corresponding off-diagonal values. For Mindfulness, The square root of the AVE for this construct is 0.736, exceeding its correlation with Psychological Resilience, which stands at 0.598, Cognitive Reappraisal (0.561), and Athletic Performance (0.578). Psychological Resilience shows a square root AVE value of 0.722, which surpasses its correlations with both Cognitive Reappraisal (0.611) and Athletic Performance (0.609). For Cognitive Reappraisal, the square root of AVE is 0.744, exceeding its correlation with Athletic Performance (0.656). Finally, the square root of the AVE for Athletic Performance is 0.746, exceeding its correlations with all other latent constructs in the model. These results confirm that each construct in the model is statistically distinct from the others, thereby establishing adequate discriminant validity. This further validates the construct measurement model and justifies the examination of structural paths among the latent variables in the subsequent analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscriminant validity test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLatent variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Resilience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Reappraisal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAthletic Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.736\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Resilience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.598\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.722\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Reappraisal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.561\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.611\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.744\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAthletic Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.578\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.609\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.656\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.746\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eNote: The diagonal is the square root of the corresponding variable\u0026rsquo;s AVE.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.6 Structural model fit metrics for the structural model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e depicts the standardized structural equation model used to evaluate the hypothesized relationships, testing the hypothesized relationships among mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance. The model was designed to explore both direct and mediated effects of mindfulness on athletic performance, with an emphasis on cognitive and emotional regulation pathways.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs illustrated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, mindfulness has a direct impact on athletic performance (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.150), while also exerting indirect effects via cognitive reappraisal (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.386) and psychological resilience (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.260). A sequential pathway is also confirmed, as mindfulness enhances cognitive reappraisal (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.415), which in turn increases psychological resilience (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.401), ultimately improving performance. The model accounts for 52.6% of the variance in athletic performance and 46.8% in psychological resilience, indicating strong explanatory power. All observed variables exhibit standardized loadings above 0.70, providing strong evidence for the construct validity of the model. Overall, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e validates the proposed multi-stage mediation mechanism and highlights cognitive reappraisal as the most influential mediator in translating mindfulness into enhanced athletic outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e indicates that the structural model exhibits an excellent overall fit to the data. With a chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio of 1.224, the model falls well within the acceptable range, suggesting a streamlined and efficient structural configuration.The RMSEA value of 0.022 is considerably lower than the standard cutoff of 0.08, indicating a strong correspondence between the model and the underlying population covariance structure. In terms of absolute and incremental fit, GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.889 and AGFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.880, exceed the benchmark value of 0.85, indicating that the model explains a substantial proportion of the observed variance. Additionally, the NFI (0.904), TLI (0.980), and CFI (0.981) all exceed the commonly accepted benchmark of 0.90, offering further evidence of the model\u0026rsquo;s robustness and its strong explanatory power. Collectively, these results confirm that the proposed structural relationships among mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance are statistically reliable and theoretically well-grounded.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel fit index\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFit index\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2/df\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRMSEA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAGFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTLI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReference standards\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResult\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.224\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.022\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.889\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.880\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.904\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.980\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.981\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.7 Path analysis for direct effects\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePath analysis was carried out to examine the direct effects among mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance, thereby testing the hypothesized structural links. This analysis establishes the foundational structure of the model and serves as a prerequisite for interpreting mediating mechanisms. The theoretical rationale for these relationships is grounded in prior empirical studies, where mindfulness has been associated with enhanced attentional control, emotional regulation, and sport-specific outcomes through both direct and indirect mechanisms (Collier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, all six hypothesized direct paths (H1\u0026ndash;H6) reached statistical significance at the p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001 level, offering strong empirical backing for the proposed structural framework. Specifically, mindfulness demonstrated a moderate yet significant direct effect on athletic performance (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.216, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), confirming H1. This indicates that higher levels of present-moment awareness are associated with improved self-perceived athletic outcomes, independent of mediation. Mindfulness was also found to have significant positive impacts on cognitive reappraisal (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.561, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and psychological resilience (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.373, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), thereby supporting hypotheses H2 and H3. These results underscore mindfulness as a foundational regulatory factor that shapes both cognitive and emotional adjustment mechanisms.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, cognitive reappraisal (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.386, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and psychological resilience (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.244, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) were both significant predictors of athletic performance, confirming H4 and H5. These findings imply that athletes who excel at reframing stressful situations or bouncing back from setbacks are more likely to achieve superior performance in competitive environments. Lastly, the relationship between cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience was significant (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.401, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), thereby supporting hypothesis H6. This result substantiates the sequential cognitive-to-emotional regulatory pathway proposed in the model, wherein reappraisal serves as a precursor to resilience under stress-inducing sport contexts. Collectively, these direct effects offer substantial empirical validation for the proposed framework, demonstrating that mindfulness impacts athletic performance both directly and through intermediary psychological processes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab8\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDirect path effects\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHypothesis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePath\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnstandardized estimates\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eβ\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eS.E.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC.R.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI\u0026rarr;AP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.225\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.216\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.055\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.101\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI\u0026rarr;CR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.609\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.561\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.060\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.233\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI\u0026rarr;PR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.375\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.373\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.051\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.330\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR\u0026rarr;AP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.370\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.386\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.057\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.473\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePR\u0026rarr;AP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.253\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.244\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.058\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.387\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR\u0026rarr;PR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.372\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.401\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.049\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.538\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"8\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNote: MI: Mindfulness; PR: Psychological Resilience; CR: Cognitive Reappraisal; AP: Athletic Performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e***: P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.8 Path analysis for indirect effects\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e presents the findings from the bootstrapped mediation analysis, which explored how mindfulness indirectly influences athletic performance via cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. Five indirect pathways (H7\u0026ndash;H11) were evaluated through 5,000 bootstrap resamples, employing bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals to assess the significance of the mediation effects. The mediation pathway from mindfulness to athletic performance through cognitive reappraisal (H7) was statistically significant, with an effect size of 0.226 and a 95% confidence interval of [0.122, 0.329]. This finding confirms that athletes with greater mindfulness are more capable of adaptively reframing stress, thereby enhancing performance. The pathway from mindfulness to resilience through reappraisal (H8) was also significant (0.227, 95% CI [0.131, 0.319]), indicating that reappraisal facilitates emotional adaptability. Mindfulness also influenced performance indirectly via psychological resilience alone (H9: 0.095, 95% CI [0.019, 0.174]), while reappraisal affected performance through resilience (H10: 0.094, 95% CI [0.026, 0.176]). The sequential mediation pathway (H11: MI \u0026rarr; CR \u0026rarr; PR \u0026rarr; AP) was supported with an effect of 0.057 (95% CI [0.013, 0.105]), demonstrating a layered regulatory mechanism. Taken together, the findings affirm that both cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience function as meaningful mediators, with cognitive reappraisal demonstrating the most substantial impact.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab9\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 9\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMediation effect bootstrap test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHypothesis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMediation path\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffect size\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBias-Corrected 95%CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI\u0026rarr;CR\u0026rarr;AP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.226\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.055\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.122\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.329\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI\u0026rarr;CR\u0026rarr;PR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.227\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.048\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.131\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.319\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI\u0026rarr;PR\u0026rarr;AP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.095\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.039\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.019\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.174\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR\u0026rarr;PR\u0026rarr;AP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.094\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.037\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.026\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.176\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eH11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMI\u0026rarr;CR\u0026rarr;PR\u0026rarr;AP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.057\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.105\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003eNote: MI: Mindfulness; PR: Psychological Resilience; CR: Cognitive Reappraisal; AP: Athletic Performance.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Discussion and conclusion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.1 Interpretation of Key Findings\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eMindfulness positively enhances cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings reveal that mindfulness has a significant and direct impact on cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance, providing empirical evidence for its central role in psychological processes relevant to athletic settings. Among these relationships, the strongest direct effect was found between mindfulness and cognitive reappraisal (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.561), suggesting that individuals with higher mindfulness are more capable of reinterpreting stressful or challenging situations in a constructive way. This aligns with theoretical perspectives that view mindfulness as a facilitator of adaptive emotion regulation strategies. Additionally, mindfulness positively predicted psychological resilience (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.373), implying that athletes who maintain a mindful presence are better equipped to recover from setbacks and cope with pressure. This finding is particularly relevant in competitive sports environments where resilience is often a differentiator between consistent and inconsistent performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness also directly enhanced athletic performance (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.216), reinforcing the idea that mental clarity and present-focused awareness contribute meaningfully to behavioral outcomes. This relationship supports the increasing inclusion of mindfulness training in athletic programs aimed at optimizing focus, reducing performance anxiety, and enhancing execution under pressure. Furthermore, both cognitive reappraisal (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.386) and psychological resilience (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.244) were found to directly improve performance, confirming their roles as proximal psychological resources that translate into tangible competitive advantages. Lastly, the strong predictive path from cognitive reappraisal to resilience (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.401) highlights how effectively managing emotions may not only help athletes perform but also build the inner strength needed to persist through adversity. Collectively, these direct effects portray a coherent picture: mindfulness is not an isolated trait but a core psychological driver that influences key mental skills and, ultimately, athletic success.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eCognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience play as significant mediation roles.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeyond the direct pathways, the model also revealed several meaningful indirect effects, highlighting the nuanced mechanisms through which mindfulness impacts athletic performance. Notably, the path from mindfulness to athletic performance via cognitive reappraisal (H7, β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.226) emerged as a strong mediating relationship. This suggests that part of the reason mindfulness contributes to better performance lies in its ability to enhance athletes\u0026rsquo; capacity for cognitive reframing. In essence, mindfulness helps athletes manage how they interpret stress, which in turn enables them to stay composed and effective during competition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, cognitive reappraisal was found to mediate the link between mindfulness and psychological resilience (H8, β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.227), further reinforcing its centrality in the psychological chain of influence. This implies that the resilient mindset observed in mindful individuals may not stem directly from mindfulness alone, but also from the enhanced cognitive strategies that mindfulness fosters. These findings point to a layered psychological process, where mindfulness supports reappraisal, and reappraisal builds the psychological stamina athletes need.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterestingly, psychological resilience also acted as a standalone mediator between mindfulness and performance (H9, β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.095), although the effect size was smaller. This suggests that the ability to recover from adversity may partially account for how mindfulness improves outcomes, albeit less strongly than cognitive mechanisms. Furthermore, the pathway from cognitive reappraisal through resilience to performance (H10, β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.094) adds depth to the model by indicating that the effects of cognitive strategies may be sustained and amplified when paired with a resilient disposition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe most complex mediation chain\u0026mdash;mindfulness \u0026rarr; cognitive reappraisal \u0026rarr; psychological resilience \u0026rarr; performance (H11, β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.057)\u0026mdash;while smaller in magnitude, is particularly illuminating. It demonstrates that the full benefits of mindfulness may unfold progressively across multiple psychological layers, starting with reframing, leading to increased internal strength, and finally manifesting in improved performance. Together, these findings paint a picture of mindfulness as an upstream catalyst that activates a cascade of psychological mechanisms, ultimately shaping how athletes think, feel, and perform under pressure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2 Theoretical Contributions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study advances the field of performance-focused sport psychology by empirically validating a multi-layered predictive model that explains how mindfulness facilitates athletic performance through two interrelated psychological mechanisms: cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. While previous studies have largely investigated the direct effects of mindfulness or isolated single mediators, this research offers a novel contribution by integrating both parallel and sequential mediation pathways into a unified structural model (Josefsson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In doing so, it provides a more ecologically valid understanding of how attentional, cognitive, and emotional self-regulation processes interact dynamically under competitive pressure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA key theoretical advancement lies in the empirical extension and refinement of the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory within the sport performance domain (Garland, A., Philippe, et al., 2015). This study explicitly models and tests the sequential relationship whereby mindfulness enhances cognitive reappraisal, which in turn fosters psychological resilience, ultimately leading to improved performance outcomes. Previous applications of the theory have often posited a general link between mindfulness and positive outcomes via emotion regulation, yet without specifying the temporal and hierarchical ordering of regulatory processes. By confirming a cognition-to-emotion regulatory cascade, this study fills a theoretical gap and supports the existence of a staged self-regulation mechanism in high-performance athletic settings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the findings contribute to Attentional Control Theory by illustrating how mindfulness may reduce task-irrelevant cognitive intrusions\u0026mdash;such as rumination or evaluative anxiety\u0026mdash;thereby enabling athletes to allocate attention more efficiently to performance-relevant cues (Eysenck et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). This attentional refinement serves as a precursor to cognitive reframing, thereby operationalizing how metacognitive awareness can initiate broader emotional regulatory benefits.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom the perspective of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), the study reinforces the role of mindfulness in supporting psychological autonomy and competence, which are expressed through enhanced internal regulation of thoughts and emotions (Brown \u0026amp; Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). By demonstrating that mindfulness leads to better emotion-focused coping strategies (e.g., reappraisal) and fosters resilient states conducive to persistence, this model offers a nuanced SDT-based interpretation of motivated self-regulation in sport. The study also contributes conceptually to the Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) model by clarifying the cognitive-affective pathways through which experiential acceptance (a core MAC tenet) translates into psychological performance gains. Specifically, it positions cognitive reappraisal as a key mediator that bridges mindful awareness with adaptive coping, extending MAC from a process framework into a validated structural model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA further theoretical contribution involves the reconceptualization of psychological resilience. Rather than treating resilience as a fixed trait or moderator, as common in earlier works, this study empirically establishes resilience as a state-like, malleable outcome that emerges from higher-order cognitive regulation (Gupta \u0026amp; McCarthy, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; IJntema et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This shift aligns with developmental sport psychology and underscores the trainability of resilience through upstream interventions targeting mindful awareness and reframing skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, the identification of varying effect sizes across mediation paths\u0026mdash;particularly the stronger impact of the cognitive reappraisal path (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.226) compared to the resilience path (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.095)\u0026mdash;suggests that top-down cognitive mechanisms may exert a more immediate influence on performance than bottom-up affective processes. This insight invites future theoretical refinement by encouraging differentiated modeling of regulatory pathways based on their functional immediacy, plasticity, and role within mental skills interventions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn sum, this study makes three primary theoretical contributions: (1) it formalizes and validates a dual-path and sequential mediation model linking mindfulness to athletic performance, (2) it reframes psychological resilience as a dynamic psychological outcome shaped by cognitive-emotional processes, and (3) it integrates attentional, cognitive, and emotional regulation into a staged framework for understanding performance enhancement in sport. These contributions significantly extend the conceptual boundaries of existing theories and offer a scaffold for future research and intervention design.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3 New knowledge and Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy offering a predictive model that portrays the psychological pathways linking mindfulness to athletic performance in a Southeast China context (Sichuan province). Unlike prior research that often examined these constructs in isolation or within Western cultural frameworks, this study integrates mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, and psychological resilience into a cohesive structure, revealing both direct and indirect effects with robust statistical support. Importantly, it highlights cognitive reappraisal as a central mediating mechanism, demonstrating how mindfulness not only enhances immediate mental clarity but also cultivates adaptive emotional strategies that fuel both resilience and performance. The inclusion of a serial mediation path\u0026mdash;mindfulness influencing performance through both reappraisal and resilience\u0026mdash;offers a novel contribution by unpacking the layered psychological sequence through which mindfulness exerts its influence. Furthermore, by situating the research within the high-pressure domain of competitive athletics, this study expands the applicability of mindfulness theory beyond clinical and educational settings, suggesting its value as a performance-enhancing psychological resource. Collectively, the findings not only enrich the theoretical understanding of how mindfulness works, but also inform practical interventions for athletes and coaches seeking to strengthen psychological readiness through structured mental training.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3 Practical Implications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings provide a strong empirical basis for enhancing athlete development strategies through targeted psychological interventions, particularly mindfulness training. Given that mindfulness demonstrated direct positive effects on cognitive reappraisal, psychological resilience, and athletic performance, and also showed multiple indirect effects via these variables, the model suggests a multi-layered psychological mechanism that stakeholders can leverage to promote performance and mental health.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor training institutions and universities, these results underscore the value of embedding mindfulness modules into athletic programs. Items such as \u0026ldquo;I noticed emotions come and go\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;I accepted my thoughts/emotions without judging them\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;I let my thoughts/emotions just be without fixating on them\u0026rdquo; (from the mindfulness scale) point to the importance of helping athletes cultivate non-reactivity and acceptance. These capacities were shown to indirectly boost athletic performance through improved emotion regulation and resilience. Institutions can offer mindfulness-based group workshops that foster this emotional self-awareness, particularly for students in high-performance or scholarship-based athletic tracks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor coaches and sports training teams, the finding that cognitive reappraisal significantly predicted both resilience and performance highlights the need to train athletes in mental reframing techniques. Statements like \u0026ldquo;When I want to feel happier, I change the way I'm thinking about it\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;I control my feelings by changing how I think about things\u0026rdquo; suggest that simple cognitive tools can empower athletes to reframe stress as challenge, disappointment as feedback. This reframing not only boosts resilience but also contributes directly to performance outcomes, as reflected in athlete self-assessments like \u0026ldquo;I feel my performance was good\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I contributed to the team\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor sports psychologists and counseling centers, the full mediation path offers a blueprint for tiered interventions. These may begin with basic mindfulness training and then progress to emotional regulation and stress inoculation techniques. Athletes with high anxiety or performance dips under pressure may particularly benefit from a program that helps them first become aware of their emotional triggers, then reinterpret them, and ultimately develop psychological hardiness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor student-athletes themselves, the message is clear: inner work matters. Building awareness of thoughts and body sensations (e.g., \u0026ldquo;I was aware of how my body felt\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;I noticed pleasant and unpleasant thoughts\u0026rdquo;) and practicing acceptance (e.g., \u0026ldquo;Even if my body didn\u0026rsquo;t meet expectations, I was okay with it\u0026rdquo;) are not abstract ideals but actionable skills with performance payoffs. This empowers students to shift from reactive coping to strategic mental self-regulation, enhancing both well-being and competitive readiness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCollectively, these findings argue for a predictive model that integrates psychological education alongside physical training. Stakeholders at all levels\u0026mdash;from policy planners in athletic departments to frontline coaches and mental health professionals\u0026mdash;can act on this evidence to build more resilient, mindful, and high-performing athletes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.4 Limitations and Directions for Future Research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study constructed and empirically validated a structural model to examine the influence of mindfulness on athletic performance through two key psychological mechanisms: cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. However, there are several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the sampling method was relatively straightforward, and the survey was confined to specific geographic areas, which may limit the representativeness of the sample. With only 482 valid responses, the dataset is somewhat limited in scope. Future research could benefit from expanding the sample size, employing more sophisticated sampling techniques, and integrating experimental and qualitative approaches\u0026mdash;such as interviews\u0026mdash;to enrich data depth and contextual understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a theoretical standpoint, the study primarily drew upon established psychological frameworks, including the Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment model, Self-Determination Theory (SDT), Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory, and Attentional Control Theory. While these offer a solid foundation, they are predominantly rooted in psychology. Future investigations could take an interdisciplinary approach, incorporating theories from sociology, neuroscience, education, or behavioral economics, and explore a broader range of internal and external variables. This could help move beyond the boundaries of a purely psychological model and offer more comprehensive insights.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLastly, although the data analysis methods met the study\u0026rsquo;s objectives, they relied on traditional statistical techniques. To enhance the analytical depth and visual interpretability of future findings, researchers may consider adopting machine learning methods and leveraging advanced programming languages such as R or Python. These tools can facilitate more dynamic data visualization and offer greater flexibility in uncovering complex patterns, ultimately contributing to a richer and more accessible presentation of research outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, this study offers a theoretically grounded and practically relevant framework that integrates attentional, cognitive, and emotional pathways to explain how mindfulness contributes to athletic performance. Despite certain methodological constraints, it provides a solid foundation for future research and intervention development in applied sport psychology. As the demand for mental optimization in sport continues to grow, this model may serve as a valuable guide for designing psychologically informed training systems that elevate both performance and well-being in competitive athletic contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study validated a predictive model to explore how mindfulness influences athletic performance through the mediating roles of cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings provide clear empirical evidence that mindfulness not only has direct effects on performance, but also exerts its influence through key psychological pathways. Cognitive reappraisal emerged as both a direct enhancer of performance and a bridge between mindfulness and resilience, while resilience itself contributed significantly to performance outcomes. These results highlight the importance of cultivating mental awareness, emotional flexibility, and adaptive strength in athletes, offering valuable guidance for the design of psychological training interventions. Theoretically, this study extends the application of mindfulness-related constructs within the domain of sport psychology and provides empirical support for a layered psychological model grounded in frameworks such as Self-Determination Theory and the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory. At the same time, it opens the door for future interdisciplinary expansion beyond traditional psychological models. Practically, the research offers actionable insights for educators, coaches, training teams, and mental health professionals, suggesting that integrating mindfulness-based strategies into athlete development programs may significantly enhance both psychological readiness and competitive performance.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eEthical approval was obtained from the Academic Ethics Committee, Institute of Physical Education, Neijiang Normal University (Approval No. \u003cstrong\u003eIRB-PE-NSNU-2025-001\u003c/strong\u003e, approved \u003cstrong\u003eJanuary 15, 2025\u003c/strong\u003e). All participants provided informed consent and participated voluntarily. Data were collected anonymously and treated confidentially.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsent for publication: Not applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAvailability of data and material:\u0026nbsp;The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to confidentiality requirements, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCompeting interests: Not applicable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFunding: Not applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAuthors' contributions - CX conceptualized the study, designed the methodology, wrote the original draft, and created visualizations. ZA validated data, and contributed to study design. AM supervised the research, acquired funding, reviewed and edited the manuscript, and approved the final version. All authors read and approved the submitted manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAppleton, P. R., Hall, H. K., \u0026amp; Hill, A. P. (2009). Relations between multidimensional perfectionism and burnout in junior-elite male athletes. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 10\u003c/em\u003e(4), 457-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2008.12.006\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaceviciene, M., Jankauskiene, R., \u0026amp; Balciuniene, V. (2023). Mindfulness, Physical Activity and Sports Participation: Validity Evidence of the Lithuanian Translation of the State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity 2 in Physically Active Young Adults. \u003cem\u003eBehavioral Sciences\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 13\u003c/em\u003e(10).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBellinger, D. B., DeCaro, M. S., \u0026amp; Ralston, P. A. S. (2015). Mindfulness, anxiety, and high-stakes mathematics performance in the laboratory and classroom. \u003cem\u003eConsciousness and Cognition\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 37\u003c/em\u003e, 123-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2015.09.001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBirrer, D., R\u0026ouml;thlin, P., \u0026amp; Morgan, G. (2012). Mindfulness to Enhance Athletic Performance: Theoretical Considerations and Possible Impact Mechanisms. \u003cem\u003eMindfulness\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 3\u003c/em\u003e(3), 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0109-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown, K. W., \u0026amp; Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. \u003cem\u003eJournal of personality and social psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 84\u003c/em\u003e(4), 822-848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBuhle, J. T., Silvers, J. A., Wager, T. D., Lopez, R., Onyemekwu, C., Kober, H., Weber, J., \u0026amp; Ochsner, K. N. (2014). Cognitive Reappraisal of Emotion: A Meta-Analysis of Human Neuroimaging Studies. \u003cem\u003eCerebral Cortex\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 24\u003c/em\u003e(11), 2981-2990. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht154 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCampoamor-Olegario, L., Camitan, D. S., \u0026amp; Guinto, M. L. M. (2025). Beyond the pandemic: physical activity and health behaviors as predictors of well-being among Filipino tertiary students [Original Research]. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e Volume 16 - 2025\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1490437\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCollier, J. E. (2020). \u003cem\u003eApplied structural equation modeling using AMOS: Basic to advanced techniques\u003c/em\u003e. Routledge.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eConnor, K. M., \u0026amp; Davidson, J. R. T. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). \u003cem\u003eDepression and Anxiety\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 18\u003c/em\u003e(2), 76-82. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCostanzo, M. E., W., V. J., M., J. C., Allen, B., W., M. M., Jessica, O., H., R. B. A., \u0026amp; and Hatfield, B. D. (2016). Neural Efficiency in Expert Cognitive-Motor Performers During Affective Challenge. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Motor Behavior\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 48\u003c/em\u003e(6), 573-588. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2016.1161591\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDoorley, J. D., \u0026amp; Kashdan, T. B. (2021). Positive and Negative Emotion Regulation in College Athletes: A Preliminary Exploration of Daily Savoring, Acceptance, and Cognitive Reappraisal. \u003cem\u003eCognitive Therapy and Research\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 45\u003c/em\u003e(4), 598-613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10202-4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., \u0026amp; Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 7\u003c/em\u003e(2), 336-353. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFletcher, D., \u0026amp; Sarkar, M. (2012). A grounded theory of psychological resilience in Olympic champions. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 13\u003c/em\u003e(5), 669-678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.04.007\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFresco, D. M., Moore, M. T., van Dulmen, M. H. M., Segal, Z. V., Ma, S. H., Teasdale, J. D., \u0026amp; Williams, J. M. G. (2007). Initial Psychometric Properties of the Experiences Questionnaire: Validation of a Self-Report Measure of Decentering. \u003cem\u003eBehavior Therapy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 38\u003c/em\u003e(3), 234-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.08.003\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGalli, N., \u0026amp; Gonzalez, S. P. (2015). Psychological resilience in sport: A review of the literature and implications for research and practice. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 13\u003c/em\u003e(3), 243-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2014.946947\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGardner, F. L., \u0026amp; Moore, Z. E. (2004). A mindfulness-acceptance-commitment-based approach to athletic performance enhancement: Theoretical considerations. \u003cem\u003eBehavior Therapy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 35\u003c/em\u003e(4), 707-723. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(04)80016-9\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGarland, E., Gaylord, S., \u0026amp; Park, J. (2009). The Role of Mindfulness in Positive Reappraisal. \u003cem\u003eEXPLORE\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 5\u003c/em\u003e(1), 37-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2008.10.001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGarland, E. L., A., F. N., Philippe, R. G., \u0026amp; and Fredrickson, B. L. (2015). Mindfulness Broadens Awareness and Builds Eudaimonic Meaning: A Process Model of Mindful Positive Emotion Regulation. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Inquiry\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 26\u003c/em\u003e(4), 293-314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2015.1064294\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGarland, E. L., A., F. N., R., G. P., \u0026amp; and Fredrickson, B. L. (2015). The Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory: Extensions, Applications, and Challenges at the Attention Appraisal Emotion Interface. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Inquiry\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 26\u003c/em\u003e(4), 377-387. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2015.1092493\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGarland, E. L., Hanley, A., Farb, N. A., \u0026amp; Froeliger, B. (2015). State Mindfulness During Meditation Predicts Enhanced Cognitive Reappraisal. \u003cem\u003eMindfulness\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 6\u003c/em\u003e(2), 234-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-013-0250-6\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGupta, S., \u0026amp; McCarthy, P. J. (2022). The sporting resilience model: A systematic review of resilience in sport performers [Systematic Review]. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e Volume 13 - 2022\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1003053\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHayes, S. C. (2004). Acceptance and commitment therapy, relational frame theory, and the third wave of behavioral and cognitive therapies. \u003cem\u003eBehavior Therapy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 35\u003c/em\u003e(4), 639-665. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(04)80013-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHenriksen, K., Robert, S., Karin, M., Sean, M., William D, P., Hvid, L. C., \u0026amp; and Terry, P. (2020). Consensus statement on improving the mental health of high performance athletes. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 18\u003c/em\u003e(5), 553-560. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2019.1570473\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHussain, T., Wang, D., \u0026amp; Li, B. (2023). Psychological resilience in athletes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative insight. \u003cem\u003eActa Psychologica\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 240\u003c/em\u003e, 104050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104050 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIJntema, R. C., Schaufeli, W. B., \u0026amp; Burger, Y. D. (2023). Resilience mechanisms at work: The psychological immunity-psychological elasticity (PI-PE) model of psychological resilience. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 42\u003c/em\u003e(6), 4719-4731.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJha, A. P., Stanley, E. A., Kiyonaga, A., Wong, L., \u0026amp; Gelfand, L. (2010). Examining the protective effects of mindfulness training on working memory capacity and affective experience. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 10\u003c/em\u003e(1), 54. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018438\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJones, B. J., Kaur, S., Miller, M., \u0026amp; Spencer, R. M. C. (2020). Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Benefits Psychological Well-Being, Sleep Quality, and Athletic Performance in Female Collegiate Rowers [Original Research]. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e Volume 11 - 2020\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.572980\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJosefsson, T., Ivarsson, A., Gustafsson, H., Stenling, A., Lindwall, M., Tornberg, R., \u0026amp; B\u0026ouml;r\u0026ouml;y, J. (2019). Effects of Mindfulness-Acceptance-Commitment (MAC) on Sport-Specific Dispositional Mindfulness, Emotion Regulation, and Self-Rated Athletic Performance in a Multiple-Sport Population: an RCT Study. \u003cem\u003eMindfulness\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 10\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1518-1529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01098-7\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJosefsson, T., Ivarsson, A., Lindwall, M., Gustafsson, H., Stenling, A., B\u0026ouml;r\u0026ouml;y, J., Mattsson, E., Carnebratt, J., Sevholt, S., \u0026amp; Falkevik, E. (2017). Mindfulness Mechanisms in Sports: Mediating Effects of Rumination and Emotion Regulation on Sport-Specific Coping. \u003cem\u003eMindfulness\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 8\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1354-1363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0711-4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKabat-Zinn, J. (2023). \u003cem\u003eWherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in everyday life\u003c/em\u003e. Hachette UK.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKee, Y. H., Chatzisarantis, N. N. L. D., Kong, P. W., Chow, J. Y., \u0026amp; Chen, L. H. (2012). Mindfulness, Movement Control, and Attentional Focus Strategies: Effects of Mindfulness on a Postural Balance Task. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 34\u003c/em\u003e(5), 561-579. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.34.5.561\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeng, S.-L., Smoski, M. J., \u0026amp; Robins, C. J. (2011). Effects of mindfulness on psychological health: A review of empirical studies. \u003cem\u003eClinical Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 31\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1041-1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.04.006\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLai, C.-P., Hsieh, H.-H., Chang, C.-M., \u0026amp; Ni, F.-T. (2020). The Role of Psychological Capital in Athletic Performance and Career Development of Adolescent Baseball Players in Taiwan. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 12\u003c/em\u003e(18).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLelek-Kratiuk, M., \u0026amp; Szczygieł, M. (2022). Stress appraisal as a mediator between the sense of coherence and the frequency of stress coping strategies in women and men during COVID-19 lockdown. \u003cem\u003eScandinavian Journal of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 63\u003c/em\u003e(4), 365-375. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12813 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLouren\u0026ccedil;o, J., Almagro Torres, B. J., \u0026amp; Saenz-Lopez Bu\u0026ntilde;uel, P. (2018). Valida\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o do Questionario de Percecao do Rendimento no Desporto (QPRD). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLove, S., Kannis-Dymand, L., \u0026amp; Lovell, G. P. (2019). Metacognitions and Mindfulness in Athletes: An Investigation on the Determinants of Flow. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Clinical Sport Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 13\u003c/em\u003e(4), 686-703. https://doi.org/10.1123/jcsp.2017-0038\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcCormick, K., \u0026amp; Salcedo, J. (2017). \u003cem\u003eSPSS statistics for data analysis and visualization\u003c/em\u003e. John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoore, S. A., Zoellner, L. A., \u0026amp; Mollenholt, N. (2008). Are expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal associated with stress-related symptoms? \u003cem\u003eBehaviour Research and Therapy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 46\u003c/em\u003e(9), 993-1000. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2008.05.001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNilsson, H., \u0026amp; Kazemi, A. (2016). Reconciling and Thematizing Definitions of Mindfulness: The Big Five of Mindfulness. \u003cem\u003eReview of General Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 20\u003c/em\u003e(2), 183-193. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000074\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNoetel, M., Joseph, C., Brooke, V. Z., \u0026amp; and Lonsdale, C. (2019). Mindfulness and acceptance approaches to sporting performance enhancement: a systematic review. \u003cem\u003eInternational Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 12\u003c/em\u003e(1), 139-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2017.1387803\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOh, V. K. S., Sarwar, A., \u0026amp; Pervez, N. (2022). The study of mindfulness as an intervening factor for enhanced psychological well-being in building the level of resilience. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e Volume 13 - 1056834\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1056834\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePtacek, M., G., L. R., Karl, S., \u0026amp; and Sutterlin, S. (2024). Effectiveness of the mindfulness acceptance commitment approach: a meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 22\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1229-1247. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2023.2180070\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReardon, C. L., Hainline, B., Aron, C. M., Baron, D., Baum, A. L., Bindra, A., Budgett, R., Campriani, N., Castaldelli-Maia, J. M., Currie, A., Derevensky, J. L., Glick, I. D., Gorczynski, P., Gouttebarge, V., Grandner, M. A., Han, D. H., McDuff, D., Mountjoy, M., Polat, A., Purcell, R., Putukian, M., Rice, S., Sills, A., Stull, T., Swartz, L., Zhu, L. J., \u0026amp; Engebretsen, L. (2019). Mental health in elite athletes: International Olympic Committee consensus statement (2019). \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Sports Medicine\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 53\u003c/em\u003e(11), 667. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-100715\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRiepenhausen, A., Wackerhagen, C., Reppmann, Z. C., Deter, H.-C., Kalisch, R., Veer, I. M., \u0026amp; Walter, H. (2022). Positive Cognitive Reappraisal in Stress Resilience, Mental Health, and Well-Being: A Comprehensive Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eEmotion Review\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 14\u003c/em\u003e(4), 310-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/17540739221114642\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRobazza, C., Morano, M., Bortoli, L., \u0026amp; Ruiz, M. C. (2023). Athletes\u0026rsquo; basic psychological needs and emotions: the role of cognitive reappraisal [Original Research]. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e Volume 14 - 2023\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1205102\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSarkar, M., \u0026amp; Fletcher, D. (2014). Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and protective factors. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Sciences\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 32\u003c/em\u003e(15), 1419-1434. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2014.901551\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShannon, S., Donncha, H., Gerry, L., Tandy, H., Drew, N., \u0026amp; and Breslin, G. (2025)The association between mindfulness and mental health outcomes in athletes: testing the mediating role of autonomy satisfaction as a core psychological need. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2020.1717578\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTeper, R., Segal, Z. V., \u0026amp; Inzlicht, M. (2013). Inside the Mindful Mind: How Mindfulness Enhances Emotion Regulation Through Improvements in Executive Control. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Directions in Psychological Science\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 22\u003c/em\u003e(6), 449-454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413495869\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTugade, M. M., \u0026amp; Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient Individuals Use Positive Emotions to Bounce Back From Negative Emotional Experiences. \u003cem\u003eJournal of personality and social psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 86\u003c/em\u003e(2), 320-333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.320\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTugade, M. M., \u0026amp; Fredrickson, B. L. (2007). Regulation of Positive Emotions: Emotion Regulation Strategies that Promote Resilience. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Happiness Studies\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 8\u003c/em\u003e(3), 311-333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-006-9015-4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUllrich-French, S., E., C. A., \u0026amp; and Huong, C. (2022). The State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity 2: Expanding the Assessment of Monitoring and Acceptance. \u003cem\u003eMeasurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 26\u003c/em\u003e(2), 116-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2021.1952207\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003evan Rens, F. E. C. A., Matthew, B., \u0026amp; and Morris-Binelli, K. (2021). Implementing a pressure inurement training program to optimize cognitive appraisal, emotion regulation, and sport self-confidence in a women\u0026rsquo;s state cricket team. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Sport Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 33\u003c/em\u003e(4), 402-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2019.1706664\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, L., Liu, H., Li, Z., \u0026amp; Du, W. (2007). Reliability and validity of emotion regulation questionnaire Chinese revised version. \u003cem\u003eChina Journal of Health Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 15\u003c/em\u003e(6), 503-505.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, Y., Xu, W., \u0026amp; Luo, F. (2016). Emotional Resilience Mediates the Relationship Between Mindfulness and Emotion. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Reports\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 118\u003c/em\u003e(3), 725-736. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294116649707\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWolgast, M., Lundh, L.-G., \u0026amp; Viborg, G. (2011). Cognitive reappraisal and acceptance: An experimental comparison of two emotion regulation strategies. \u003cem\u003eBehaviour Research and Therapy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 49\u003c/em\u003e(12), 858-866. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2011.09.011\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYu, X., \u0026amp; Zhang, J. (2007). Factor analysis and psychometric evaluation of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) with Chinese people. \u003cem\u003eSocial Behavior and Personality: an international journal\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 35\u003c/em\u003e(1), 19-30.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, J., Jinxiu, S., Yuchuan, Z., Lihong, G., \u0026amp; and Huang, S. (2025). The effect of mindfulness training on the psychological state of high-level athletes: Meta analysis and system evaluation research. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Sciences\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 43\u003c/em\u003e(6), 600-622. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2025.2468997\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhong, Z., Jiang, H., Wang, H., \u0026amp; Liu, Y. (2025). The Association Between Mindfulness and Athletes\u0026apos; Distress Tolerance: The Mediating Roles of Cognitive Reappraisal and Mental Toughness. \u003cem\u003eBehav Sci (Basel)\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 15\u003c/em\u003e(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030298\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Mindfulness, Cognitive Reappraisal, Psychological Resilience, Athletic Performance, Structural Equation Modeling","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8035772/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8035772/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eMindfulness is increasingly recognized as a psychological resource in sport, yet the mechanisms by which it enhances athletic performance remain underexplored. This research seeks to construct a predictive framework to examine how mindfulness affects athletic performance, specifically through the intermediary functions of cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. A total of 482 competitive university athletes from Sichuan Province, China, participated in a cross-sectional survey. Following preliminary analyses\u0026mdash;including descriptive statistics, reliability assessment, and validity checks\u0026mdash;the study employed structural equation modeling (SEM) to explore the hypothesized relationships. The findings demonstrated that mindfulness not only directly influenced athletic performance but also exerted indirect effects mediated by cognitive reappraisal and psychological resilience. Evidence also confirmed a sequential mediation route in which mindfulness enhances performance via cognitive reappraisal followed by psychological resilience, suggesting the presence of a multi-stage self-regulation process. The model provides theoretical grounding for staged mental training interventions in sport and supports the structured development of psychological skills to optimize athletic outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Mindfulness, Psychological Resilience, and Cognitive Reappraisal on Athletic Performance: A Predictive Model Based on Psychological Mechanisms","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-09 06:57:12","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8035772/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-13T05:43:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-09T08:06:20+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"49461168287821342636894261565291852406","date":"2026-05-06T02:14:26+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"31655903675847819141926792007547694731","date":"2026-05-02T09:49:26+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"329982257739563359389852596846879648464","date":"2026-05-01T14:26:20+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"276342031851398501995136763302610667890","date":"2026-04-05T18:22:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"337032635937039800051962366208979356109","date":"2026-04-03T01:53:20+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-25T09:54:13+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"158909985691399021116876895912568691353","date":"2026-03-18T07:54:29+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-02-05T04:27:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-02-05T04:17:38+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2026-01-19T06:24:29+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-01-17T13:03:18+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Psychology","date":"2026-01-17T12:56:30+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"ed363d73-2721-41f9-895e-aaf72e8cb2b5","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 9th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-13T05:43:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-09T08:06:20+00:00","index":84,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"49461168287821342636894261565291852406","date":"2026-05-06T02:14:26+00:00","index":83,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"31655903675847819141926792007547694731","date":"2026-05-02T09:49:26+00:00","index":81,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"329982257739563359389852596846879648464","date":"2026-05-01T14:26:20+00:00","index":80,"fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-19T05:25:35+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-09 06:57:12","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8035772","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8035772","identity":"rs-8035772","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}