Recalibrating the talent transfer process - The properspective view

Proposed outline of the dissertation: Talent transfer „occurs when a high performing athlete’s involvement in a sport (...) comes to an end, and they try to transfer their experiences to a new sport“ (Expert Advantage; in: Rea & Lavallee, 2015). As talent transfer is still a growing field of research, investigations have generated complementary findings. For example, while Rea and Lavallee (Rea & Lavallee, 2015; Rea, 2018) have found team deselection to cause talent transfer, Hayman et al. (cf. Hayman et al., 2020) claim plateaued performances to initiate talent transfer. Complimentary, Blakelock et al. referred to decreasing performance as a hint for deselection (cf. Blakelock et al., 2016). The publication based dissertation is designed to monitor strategic consideration trajectories of the talent transfer athlete more precisely (cf. Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a; Rea, 2018). Investigated findings indicate, that change events can be divided into more complex sub-processes (cf. above; Blakelock et al., 2016; Rea & Lavallee, 2015; Hayman et al., 2020). Complementary, the impact of interventions is aimed to be measured to find other advantageous impact factors to talent transfer, such as learnability (cf. Hayman et al., 2020). The first study will provide a tool to measure the athlete ́s properspective talent transfer affinity (cf. Rea, 2018; Collins et al., 2019). The focus is set on the athlete ́s state in the athletic engagement and the impact on their considerations and decisions to take action in a talent transfer. The second study applies the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire to a sample of athletes in advance of a talent transfer intervention. The implementation step allows to validate the findings of the first study (cf. Almagro et al., 2020) and the adaptability of the questionnaire to different settings during the talent transfer process (cf. Franck et al., 2018). The implementation is expected to allow the containment of a more promising sample for talent transfer interventions (cf. Rea, 2018). The third study contains the application of the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire to a sample of athletes during and after participating in a talent transfer intervention. In this context the questionnaire is expected to serve as a tool to depict individual trajectories during a talent transfer intervention. For example, career assistance research has claimed that interventions raised the knowledge about the transition, resulting in a changed perception of selection criteria (cf. Rea, 2018; Pummell et al., 2019) and an increase of talent transfer affinity (cf. Hayman et al., 2020). Tentative bibliography of most relevant sources: Agnew, D., Marks, A., Henderson, P., & Woods, C. (2018). Deselection from elite Australian football as the catalyst for a return to sub-elite competitions: when elite players feel there is ‘still more to give.’. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 10(1), 117-136 Almagro, B. J., Sáenz-López, P., Fierro-Suero, S., & Conde, C. (2020). Perceived Performance, Intrinsic Motivation and Adherence in Athletes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(24), 9441. Blakelock, D.J., Chen, M.A., & Prescott, T. (2016). Psychological Distress in Elite Adolescent Soccer Players Following Deselection. Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 10, 59-77. Bullock, N., Gulbin, J. P., Martin, D. T., Ross, A., Holland, T., & Marino, F. (2009). Talent identification and deliberate programming in skeleton: ice novice to Winter Olympian in 14 months. Journal of sports sciences, 27(4), 397–404. Collins, D., MacNamara, Á., & Cruickshank, A. (2019). Research and practice in talent identification and development—Some thoughts on the state of play. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 31(3), 340–351. Elsborg, P., Wikman, J. M., Nielsen, G., Tolver, A., & Elbe, A.-M. (2017). Development and initial validation of the Volition in Exercise Questionnaire (VEQ). Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 21(2), 57–68. Franck A., Stambulova N. B. & Ivarsson A. (2018) Swedish athletes’ adjustment patterns in the junior-to-senior transition, International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16(4), 398-414 Gollwitzer, P. M., Heckhausen, H., & Steller, B. (1990). Deliberative and implemental mind-sets: Cognitive tuning toward congruous thoughts and information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1119–1127 Hayman, R., Polman, R., & Borkoles, E. (2020). Inter sport transfer: experiences of high performing Australian adolescent athletes. Journal of Expertise, 3(4), 212-226. Heckhausen, H., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1987). Thought con- tents and cognitive functioning in motivational versus volitional states of mind. Motivation and Emotion, 11(2), 101–120 Morris, R., Tod, D., & Oliver, E.J. (2015). An Analysis of Organizational Structure and Transition Outcomes in the Youth-to-Senior Professional Soccer Transition. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 27, 216 - 234. Pummell, E., & Lavallee, D. (2019). Preparing UK tennis academy players for the junior‐to‐senior transition: Development, implementation, and evaluation of an intervention program. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 40, 156–164. Rea, T. (2018) A Talent Transfer Lifecycle Model in Sport, Doctoral thesis, University of Sterling; URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/28842 Rea, T. & Lavallee, D. (2015) An examination of athletes' experiences of the talent transfer process. Talent Development and Excellence, 7 (1), 41-67. Roberts, A. H., Greenwood, D. A., Stanley, M., Humberstone, C., Iredale, F., & Raynor, A. (2019). Coach knowledge in talent identification: A systematic review and meta-synthesis. Journal of science and medicine in sport, 22(10), 1163–1172. Samuel, R.D., & Tenenbaum, G. (2011a). The Role of Change in Athletes' Careers: A Scheme of Change for Sport Psychology Practice. Sport Psychologist, 25, 233-252. Samuel, R. D., & Tenenbaum, G. (2011b). How do athletes perceive and respond to change-events: An exploratory measurement tool. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(4), 392–406.  Provisional description of the objective(s) of the doctoral dissertation (research plan), the methodology, timing and any previously accomplished research related to the present proposal: The doctoral thesis is designed to monitor strategic considerations and decision process trajectories of the talent transfer athlete (cf. Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a; Rea, 2018). Complementary, an impact of interventions is aimed to be measured to find other advantageous impact factors to talent transfer, such as learnability (cf. Hayman et al., 2020). Furthermore, the sustainability of decisions is aimed to be monitored, as the decision to change does not always lead to action (Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a). As the example mentioned above illustrates, current models offer generic bivariate views on talent transfer catalysts (cf. Rea, 2018). The investigated findings indicate, that change events can be divided into more complex sub-processes (cf. Hayman et al., 2020). For example, athletes might rather focus on decreasing playing time as a cue for deselection during their decision process (cf. Almagro et al., 2020; Hayman et al., 2020). Additionally, the avoidability of the deselection can determine the quality of the transition and coping skills, which has not been investigated so far (cf. Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a; Blakelock et al., 2016). These findings might result from exclusively retroperspective research in talent identification and development and might have revealed weaknesses (e.g. recall biases) (cf. Collins et al., 2019). Therefore, a properspective or respectively mixed view, will be applied to the investigation of talent transfer. As it has proven to be a useful basis in determining differences in sports participation (cf. Elsborg et al., 2017), the Rubicon Model (cf. Heckhausen & Gollwitzer, 1987) is consulted to structure the talent athletic transfer process and the accompanying strategic decision (cf. Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a; Rea, 2018). The Rubicon Model of Action Phases describes consecutive phases of goal striving: During the pre-decisional phase the athlete formulates a goal intention and evaluates the consequences. In the pre-actional phase, the individual plans the steps to reach the goal. This leads to the actional phase, in which the individual engages in determined and persistent pursuit of the goal. Gollwitzer et al. (cf. Gollwitzer et al., 1990) found that a motivational mindset rather contains a higher relevance of desirability and feasibility of goals, while implementation concerns prevailed when individuals were in a volitional mindset. The first study will provide a tool to measure the athlete´s properspective talent transfer affinity (cf. Rea, 2018; Collins et al., 2019). A Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire is developed to portrait talent transfer athletes´ current status in a primary sport and perspective in a potential new sport (cf. Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a; Rea, 2018). The focus is set on athletes´ state in the athletic engagement and the impact on their considerations and decisions to take action in a talent transfer. Besides catalysts (change events causing a talent transfer), considerations and the commitment screening are assumed in advance of talent transfers, comparable to the pre-decisional phase (cf. Gollwitzer et al., 1990; Rea, 2018). On one hand the model of Rea serves as orientation in the conceptualization of the talent transfer process and in this sense of the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire. On the other hand, besides catalysts (cf. above), also the considerations in advance of a talent transfer are held too generic to generate measurable outcomes. For example, a tool measuring the consideration about the „NGB structure of program“ might capture the positive impact of a development plan (cf. Rea, 2018) or education opportunities (cf. Agnew et al., 2018). Finally, the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire should also link and measure the volition (e.g. testing own capabilities in new sports (cf. Rea, 2018)) resulting from the motivational surrounding the athlete is exposed to (cf. Heckhausen & Gollwitzer, 1987). Fundamentally, a literature review will be conducted to summarize the available state of knowledge and to depict the process of an athlete in the course of a talent transfer (cf. Rea, 2018; Hayman et al., 2020). Building on the findings of the individual process and the Rubicon model (cf. Heckhausen & Gollwitzer, 1987), the Talent Transfer Affinity questionnaire will be conceptualized. Other measurement tools will complete the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire, such as the Perceived Performance in Sports Questionnaire, as it gives more detailed insights on the impact of decreasing performance towards talent transfer (cf. Almagro et al., 2020; Hayman et al., 2020). The second study applies the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire to a sample of athletes in advance of a talent transfer intervention. The implementation step allows to validate the findings of the first study regarding the factorial structure (cf. Almagro et al., 2020) and the adaptability of the questionnaire to the talent transfer process (cf. Franck et al., 2018). The implementation of the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire is expected to allow the containment of a more promising sample for talent transfer interventions (cf. Rea, 2018). A comparison of the athletes is aimed to define profiles and differences between talent transfer athletes (cf. Franck et al., 2018). Profiles might differ due to intention to transfer, planned transfer actions (cf. Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a) or experience in their primary sport (cf. Rea, 2018). The determination of significant correlations of a highly motivated sample is claimed to refine the decisive impact factors in the course of a talent transfer (cf. Rea & Lavalle, 2015; Hayman et al., 2020). Complementary, an Exploratory Factor Analysis will be consulted to prove the reliability of the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire (cf. Almagro et al., 2020). In order to maximize the reliability of the study, the intervention is aimed to be conducted in a variety of interventions, varying in sports and intervention styles (cf. Morris et al., 2015). The third study contains the application of the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire to a sample of athletes during and after participating in a talent transfer intervention. In this context the questionnaire is expected to serve as a tool to depict individual trajectories during a talent transfer intervention. For example, career assistance research has claimed that interventions raise the knowledge about the transition, which may for example express in a changed perception about the selection criteria (cf. Rea, 2018; Pummell et al., 2019). Complementary, the study aims to measure the increase of talent transfer affinity and the progress in the learning process in a new sport (cf. Hayman et al., 2020). Furthermore, the longitudinal temporal stability of the decision for a talent transfer is aimed to be proven, as the decision to initiate a change does not always lead to the completion of the strategic decision due to interpersonal or environmental obstacles (cf. Samuel & Tenenbaum, 2011a). In this context, three measurements before, during and after the intervention are implemented. (cf. Franck et al., 2018). As transfer athletes are now engaged in their new sport, items of the questionnaire have to be assimilated (cf. Hayman et al., 2020). For example, the Perceived Performance in Sports Questionnaire has to be adjusted, as the performance has to be derived from training environment, because athletes are not in a competition environment anymore (cf. Almagro et al., 2020). Research question(s) Is talent transfer led by strategic considerations? - What are contents of strategic decision considerations? - Is the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire able to predict talent transfer sustainably? - Is a certain profile of athlete predestined to be chosen for talent transfer interventions? Study I - The Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire - A measurement tool to predict the probability of a talent transfer? 
How can talent transfer affinity be measured properspectively? 
- How can an athletes´ talent transfer process be structured? - Which actions can be observed in the context of a talent transfer process? - Which are decisive factors in primary and new sports that impact the affinity towards talent transfer? - Which decisive factors for talent transfer have been overseen in current research? 
 Study II - Taking the first step - Who are the athletes participating in a talent transfer intervention? 
Is the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire a reliable tool for determining distinctive samples in a talent transfer intervention? - Which catalysts from the literature can be confirmed in the sample? - Is it possible to distinguish athletes by catalysts, actions or other? Study III - Is learning progress leading to talent transfer? - The evaluation of a talent identification intervention
Can learning progress in a targeted sport intervention be perceived as a catalyst for the talent transfer process? - Does learning progress in an intervention also affect athletic perceptions (e.g. selection criteria)?
- Is the Talent Transfer Affinity Questionnaire also suitable to measure talent transfer affinity in the course of a talent transfer intervention? Which adjustments have to be made? - Which are significant change events in a talent transfer intervention?