Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study demonstrates how technostress affects innovation in sports education, highlighting technological self-efficacy and perceived innovation importance as key factors.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of sports education, the integration of technology has become both a source of innovation and a potential stressor for coaches, educators, and athletes. This study draws insights on the social cognitive theory and investigates the relationships between technostress and innovation in sports education through the mediating role of technological self-efficacy and the moderating role of perceived innovation importance. Using a lagged research design, we collected data from a diverse sample of sports educators, coaches, and athletes. Data are examined by employing multivariate analytical techniques to determine the predictive relevance of the hypothesised model. Our findings indicate that technostress deteriorates innovation in sports education. Nevertheless, technological self-efficacy buffers the adverse effects of technostress in diminished innovation outcomes. Moreover, perceived innovation importance acts as an individual's psychological predisposition that underpins the influence of technological self-efficacy on innovation, ultimately weakening the link between technostress and innovation in sports education. The study illuminates the significance of nurturing technological self-efficacy among stakeholders and emphasises the role of perceived innovation importance as a crucial factor in shaping responses to technostress. These insights offer practical implications for educators, coaches, and athletes seeking to harness technology effectively in the pursuit of excellence within the realm of sports education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shu-guang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: