Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Based on the work of Martindale, R. J., Collins, D., and Daubney, J. (2005, Talent development: A guide for practice and research within sport. Quest (Grand Rapids, Mich ), 57(4), 353–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2005.10491862) and Henriksen, K., Stambulova, N., and Roessler, K. K. (2010a, Holistic approach to athletic talent development environments: A successful sailing milieu. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(3), 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.10.005), researchers have increasingly focused on environmental features influencing talent development in sport from an integrated, holistic perspective. These contributions led to a quickly evolving body of literature and a proliferation of findings related to facilitative and debilitative environmental features. With a timely appraisal of this work warranted, this review aims to coalesce salient results from talent development environment research. For this purpose, a holistic perspective is employed on (a) the environmental level, by considering the sport and non-sport domain and by identifying functional and dysfunctional features, as well as on (b) the outcome level, by considering wellbeing and personal development, alongside athletic development, as important athlete-related outcomes. Following a systematic search, 44 articles were identified and findings summarised by conducting a directed content analysis (Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687). Several functional and dysfunctional features were derived from the literature and grouped into the following main categories within a preliminary conceptual framework: Preconditions of the Sport Environment, Organisational Culture, Integration of Efforts, and Holistic Quality Preparation. The framework’s contribution to a more systemic and holistic approach to talent development is discussed and critical future research directions are proposed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hauser et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: