Yangjia Xiong, Minghan Li, Xingyuan Song, Ying Chen
The analysis generated Navigating Constrained Training Participation as the core category. Four causal conditions shaped training avoidance: Status Marginalization Pressure, Inter-Role Conflict, Informal Power Oppression, and Asymmetrical Rule Enforcement. Athletes responded through a flexible, context-dependent repertoire of Covert Energy Conservation, Psychological Defense, Legitimation Maneuvering, and Overt Resistance. These strategies were not a fixed progression; athletes combined, revisited, or abandoned them as perceived risk, bodily capacity, available justifications, and coach relations changed. The process provided short-term protection while potentially contributing to longer-term erosion of skill, belonging, and participation.
INTRODUCTION: Training avoidance in sport is often interpreted through a deficit lens, yet little is known about how athletes regulate participation when leaving a team is institutionally costly. This study examined training avoidance within Chinese college football as a form of constrained participation.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 Chinese college football student-athletes, all admitted through the Sports Special Admission policy. Data were analyzed using Straussian grounded theory procedures, including iterative theoretical sampling, constant comparison, open, axial, and selective coding, and negative-case analysis.
RESULTS: The analysis generated Navigating Constrained Training Participation as the core category. Four causal conditions shaped training avoidance: Status Marginalization Pressure, Inter-Role Conflict, Informal Power Oppression, and Asymmetrical Rule Enforcement. Athletes responded through a flexible, context-dependent repertoire of Covert Energy Conservation, Psychological Defense, Legitimation Maneuvering, and Overt Resistance. These strategies were not a fixed progression; athletes combined, revisited, or abandoned them as perceived risk, bodily capacity, available justifications, and coach relations changed. The process provided short-term protection while potentially contributing to longer-term erosion of skill, belonging, and participation.
DISCUSSION: Training avoidance is better understood not as an individual moral deficit but as a systemically produced and structurally conditioned adaptation. The model clarifies how athletes exercise constrained agency and offers a transferable explanation for sport-education systems in which exit is costly and participation is tied to educational opportunities, grading, resources, or status.