Publishing Disclaimer: In all of its publications and products, Military Review presents professional information. However, the views expressed therein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Army University, the Department of the Army, or any other agency of the U.S. government.

---

 

Cadets’ Perceptions of Hand-to-Hand Combatives Instruction for Officer Development

 

Daniel J. Furlong, EdD
Drew J. Van Dam, EdD*
Matthew C. Larsen

 

Download the PDF

 

Developing officers to meet the Nation’s military needs serves to “produce intellectually astute and innovative leaders who [are] capable of understanding complex issues, be they command-related or not.”¹ Furthermore, commissioned officers from the U.S. service academies such as the U.S. Military Academy at West Point (USMA) are expected to lead enlisted personnel while maintaining a high level of character and competence.

Cadets at USMA, like other military students at the U.S. Air Force Academy and the U.S. Naval Academy, attend academic, military, and physical education (PE) courses. Each pillar is designed to help cadets pursue a career in the military. USMA’s PE360, Combat Applications, lasts nineteen lessons, covering multiple psychomotor skills and techniques as well as providing future officers the purpose that combatives has in leadership. This study was designed to hear the perceptions of cadets using the critical incident technique (CIT) regarding their experiences in Combat Applications as they relate to their future as officers in the Army.

Physical Education at West Point

The mission of USMA is “to build, educate, train, and inspire the Corps of Cadets to be commissioned leaders of character committed to the Army Values and ready for a lifetime of service to the Army and Nation.”² The mission of USMA’s Department of Physical Education (DPE) is “to educate, train, and inspire the Corps by challenging each cadet in activities that promote holistic health and optimal physical performance, commissioning physically fit and mentally tough leaders of character.”³ In this context, two courses offered are considered combatives related: Boxing, which is taken during freshman year, and Combat Applications, offered during junior year. Both courses stimulate cadets affectively (fear management, stress arousal, etc.) and physically (kinesthetic awareness, proprioception, etc.) through close-quarters combat, yet they are not the only means for creating mentally tough leaders. Additional courses such as Swimming, Military Movement, Personal Fitness, and Unit Fitness all help in pursuing the vision of DPE (to cultivate a culture of physical fitness excellence) and focus faculty on the purpose of teaching in the PE program at West Point.⁴

Combat Applications and Officer Development at West Point

Combat Applications includes boxing, Brazilian jiujitsu, and American-style wrestling techniques. Students are instructed on fundamental skills that enhance previous skills learned during plebe-year Boxing. Each lesson builds upon previous lessons to advance each cadet from beginner to experienced participant. The course includes a midterm tournament (cadets fight three times during the tournament) and paired matches based on skill and weight for their two final exam bouts. Cadets must also take two quizzes based on lectures given by the course director. The stressful environment progresses by initially starting with the points of emphasis in pummeling followed by ground-technique instruction. Cadets begin sparring at the end of lessons and start on their knees to avoid injury due to falls and takedowns. The intensity increases until the midterm bouts, after which the stand-up portion of the course begins and takedowns and body strikes are introduced. Once again, a progression is followed to the final exam.

Methods

Through a qualitative research study, researchers sought the perceptions of military students regarding the impact of the mandatory combatives training in Combat Applications on their development as officers. Investigators were interested in understanding the perceptions of those cadets who were close to graduation and how the course positively or negatively impacted their development toward becoming officers in the U.S. Army.

Researchers were approved to target the cadet population enrolled in Combat Applications during the fall of 2022 at USMA. A convenient, purposeful sampling of 494 potential students who had earned a final grade from the course were sent emails recruiting their participation in a two-question qualitative survey. The survey questions included: (1) Can you describe specific incidents in the hand-to-hand combatives course at USMA that you believe have a positive influence on your development as a cadet and as a future officer? (2) Can you describe specific incidents in the hand-to-hand combatives course at USMA that you believe have a negative influence on your development as a cadet and as a future officer? Of the 494 potential participants, seventy-three cadets (about 15 percent) consented to participate in the survey.

These seventy-three participants were directed to an online qualitative questionnaire in Qualtrics. Data was collected and arranged by positive and negative statements for all participant responses. The date and time stamp identified each singular report (both positive and negative) from when the survey was submitted. Utilizing Excel, the research team then coded each positive and negative response by ID number. The research team coded the data by reviewing each statement, seeking the incident reported. If a participant failed to provide a response at all, then they were removed from the study; this happened seven times. Responses that did not include an incident in one of the categories (positive or negative) remained in the study and were annotated.

The research team included Combat Application instructors at the USMA; therefore, the online qualitative survey was necessary to avoid any authority over the participants while responding to the survey. This method for collecting data also allowed for the maximum amount of data collection in a rather short amount of time. Student names and ID numbers were kept anonymous throughout the study due to the online submissions. These two steps were important as researchers were solely interested in the perceptions that these military students had as it related to their career as officers in the U.S. Army.

The critical incident technique served as the guideline for categorizing all responses. Originally designed as a positivist approach and consisting of what Gregory Bott and Dennis Tourish described as “a set of procedures for collecting direct observations of human behavior in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness in solving practical problems and developing broad psychological principles,” some researchers have adjusted the approach to be more interpretive and inductive.⁵ While the CIT does not follow a rigid set of rules, there is a “flexible set of principles that can be modified and adapted to meet the specific situation,” which the current research team followed through an inductive content analysis.⁶

A primary feature of the CIT is that it relies on a participant’s memory of the events they participated in. Relying on a flexible set of principles and participant memories, researchers in this study requested participants answer two open-ended questions regarding the time spent in the required collegiate hand-to-hand combat physical education course. John Flanagan noted that participant memories were “usually satisfactory when the incidents reported are fairly recent.”⁷

Field and observer memories must be discussed when discussing memory and recall. Briefly, field memories are considered those in which participants experience a “high degree of emotion,” while observer memories “are more common in memory for temporally remove events, such as events of one’s childhood.”⁸ Therefore, in a class setting where physical altercation is required, researchers believed that the memories experienced from participating in the course were considered recent and accurate due to the nature that hand-to-hand combat presents and its associated “high degree of emotion,” even though participants had answered the survey questions up to three months after the course had been completed.

Following Flanagan’s steps, researchers ensured that qualifying responses included specific incidents regarding the course as stated by the participants.⁹ Any response not mentioning a specific incident was marked as not eligible. As stated previously, the research team consisted of instructors within the course, so they were easily able to ascertain incidents that were relevant to the course. Participants were asked to focus on actual events as opposed to general impressions as they related to their own potential as an officer, which followed Flanagan’s recommendation to obtain participants perceptions from the course and the effect it has on them as it relates to their desired career.

During the coding phase, researchers noted that some responses included more than one incident and therefore yielded more than one code. At the same time, researchers found that in some cases, no relevant incidents were mentioned, and therefore, the response was coded “n/a” or “not eligible.” Researchers were tasked with reviewing the responses three different times over two months. This step followed the constant comparative method to help with codifying individual codes. Once the research team accomplished their data analysis individually, the team met to discuss similarities and differences amongst their findings. Following the constant comparison method whereby data was coded, the coded data led to categories or clusters of codes, which led to the concepts that were ultimately agreed upon by the research team.¹⁰

Recognizing the biases that the research team had due to their involvement in the course as instructors, researchers attempted to increase the trustworthiness of their findings by incorporating the help of peer combatives instructors external to the study. This step helped ensure that the agreed upon codes and categories matched the study’s intent and that all incidents reported were accurate and related to the course. This process included providing all participant responses (positive and negative), all codes from each researcher, and all categories that codes built to the external group. After peer instructors reviewed the data analysis, the external review team reported their agreement or disagreement with the findings from the examples they were provided. In total, the external review team negated three response codes from the positive responses; these were withdrawn from the study, leaving seventy response codes of which three themes arose that were positive. The research team and the external group agreed that the two negative themes were accurate given participant responses.

Results

A total of seventy-three participants contributed to the study, of which three total positive responses and forty negative responses were deemed unacceptable based upon established criteria set by the investigators. Examples of a positive unacceptable response include “Nothing” and “No comments.” Examples of negative responses deemed unacceptable include “the quiz,” “none,” and “I don’t think there were negative influences in this course.” Additionally, responses from the negative statements were removed because participants provided positive responses when asked to provide negative influences, which occurred seven times and included “I genuinely believe that everything that happened in that course will benefit me in my future career as an officer,” and “None. This class helps build grit and develops mental fortitude to overcome adversity and failure through perseverance.”

Following inductive analysis of the 109 responses (combined total of acceptable responses from both positive and negative cues), researchers identified a total of 184 key elements that held important concepts from the Combat Applications course. Forty-six positive responses contained more than one key, while the negative responses only saw this occur eight times. These additional elements helped to contribute to the 184 overall key elements from both the positive and negative responses. There were twenty-one positive categories and twelve negative categories in total. The list of frequencies and percentages by key element, both positive and negative, are presented in the table. Percentages were established based upon the total number of key elements positively and negatively.

The top three positive and top two negative perceptions are presented below in detail. Included examples were taken from responses that stood out among the rest and helped to provide a deeper understanding of the response as well as the meaning the participant conveyed when demonstrating the usefulness or, lack thereof, that combatives education is believed to hold on their future as an officer in the U.S. Army.

Positive Perceptions

Understanding. Overall, cadets described the benefit that the educational lectures held in the course, which entailed the course director speaking to all enrolled students about his time in the military, the importance of a competitive environment, how competitions can help a leader when attempting to raise the skill level of their soldiers, and why it is important that officers implement combatives in their units upon arriving. One student reported that these lectures were “inspirational” as he wrote, “The first speech before midterms was very inspiring and helped me understand why all cadets need to be fit and prepared to fight, regardless of branch.” Another stated, “I learned a lot from combatives—not just from the actual sparring, but also from the lectures. I feel excited about integrating combatives into PT when I’m a PL.”

To a slightly lesser degree, students described that their understanding came from experiencing something that they had not experienced in their past, and therefore, are now more willing to overcome obstacles. One student contributed,

[Combatives] taught me how to fight effectively and use the grit factor to overcome my opponents. I learned that if I can endure the pain long enough, my opponent will tire out and I could defeat them easily from there.

Another reported,

I think this class was possibly the most important DPE class we took at West Point … I came into the class thinking I was unaggressive and was going to lose every fight and feel defeated by the end. Instead with the help of the great staff I had fun learning the basics of Combatives … this improved my confidence and made me feel like I was actually more ready to be an officer.

Leader opportunity. Participants reported many instances that combatives could help them lead in the future, recognizing that these skills would help them as a second lieutenant or more. One cadet provided,

The chance to go full out in a physical fight provided self-awareness to my personal level of grit. It taught me how to control my efforts and manage my strength to win in my fights. I think this management will be valuable to understand as I teach my soldiers such skills.

Another said, “An explanation of WHY unit combative training is essential, but also HOW to implement it healthily and productively … it showed and explained how it is manageable and possible to do what is taught to us.”

Confidence. Unsurprisingly, many responses included an increase in confidence in engaging in an aggressive sparring session, controlled bout, or a fight for a grade (midterm and final exams are graded fights). Some reported an enhanced ability to act such as this student who wrote, “I think it increased my confidence and made me a more aggressive and decisive person.” Others responded that the confidence gained will help them be a better officer in the future. One participant contributed,

Overall, the combatives class was an excellent experience that better prepared me to be an officer and had a positive impact on my personal and professional development. I feel more confident and capable as a result of the training, and I know that the skills I learned will be invaluable throughout my military career.

Negative Perceptions

Opponents. A majority (32.5 percent) of the negative perceptions related to the opponent that many participants faced. While participants did not necessarily always mention how that will affect their leadership potential, it could be inferred that they will take this negative experience with them and seek to avoid these issues when leading as an officer. One participant reflected on the differences in gender, stating,

When partners wouldn’t put in any effort to provide feedback or provide any resistance to help us learn the skills and to think of the next move. When paired with a male partner for one of the quick practice rounds, he very obviously didn’t try at all and let me move him without resistance … he could have given me the respect as a teammate to provide a reasonable amount of resistance to help us both practice and learn.

Another recognized that size plays a role in “real-life” scenarios, stating,

If the class sizes were larger, we may have been able to more evenly distribute ourselves during the final matches. This said, at the same time it does not matter, as we will not be able to pick the size of the other person in a real-life situation.

Time constraints (lack of time/lack of preparation). It was not surprising for researchers to hear that more than a quarter of the elements reported included a time constraint. DPE operates two nineteen-lesson courses each semester, leaving little time to advance from the novice combatant level. Researchers expected to hear participants state they wished they had more time. As one participant contributed,

The only negative influence would probably be that there was not enough about fighting using weapons such as knives or rifles. I think that would have been better for my development as a future officer if there were more realistic situations.

Discussion

The current findings provided valuable insights into what cadets viewed as important to their future as officers. Understanding appeared as the highest-ranked positive perception. Many cadets suggested that, in terms of fighting, understanding the why behind the how is extremely important for their development as future officers. Cadets stated they enjoyed the lectures, finding them motivating, which seemingly led to increased internalization of the importance of combatives training in the conventional Army. This has been reported in previous sport psychology research where philosophy and moral principles communicated in martial arts and combat sports training provide opportunities to connect values with required behaviors.¹¹

Cadet comments regarding the usefulness of learning about the morality of fighting concurrently with how the human brain learns physical skills were consistent with previous research. Sports that develop skills that were once useful for combat and hunting have also been linked with development of a moral code.¹² Cadets recognized that the lectures on training the required physical skills and those on developing a warrior mindset provided a deeper educational experience. Physical education instructors are catalysts for setting the motivational climate and the level of enthusiasm in the room.¹³ This is especially true when the climate invites fun, some degree of ability, and a willingness to produce effort. Several incidents pointed to the lecture on applying combatives to officership as positive and enjoyable because it linked the warrior ethos with the mindset cadets will need as officers, along with it being a trait they will instill in their future soldiers.

Leader opportunities are also important to the educational framework at the USMA. Leadership, along with character development, is a foundational tenet of the USMA programmatic outcome goals. As a result of combatives training, cadets felt the training better prepared them to be officers as well as having a positive impact from a professional development perspective. Cadets indicated that they learned how to assess risks and respond to high-pressure situations quickly and effectively, skill sets critical for any military officer. Combat sports often contain underlying values that may be well-suited for acquiring life skills based on the values of proficiency, persistence, and control such as leadership.¹⁴ This may be because the grit required in dealing with adversity and coping skills have been found to transfer to other difficult life conditions.

Cadets also noted how the combatives training provided by the USMA PE faculty was effective in instructing a combined class of cadets with mixed abilities. Several cadets expressed being forced out of their comfort zones by receiving feedback from different people as they would exchange partners throughout. This provided cadets with continued repetitions of listening to or providing constructive criticism as they learned from or facilitated the learning of others. Findings indicate that social skills (teamwork, leadership) can be learned through sport.¹⁵ These social skills are necessary for individuals to succeed as future officers in the U.S. Army. This study successfully shows that physical education is the model environment for developing not only social life skills but also positive self-directed skills such that students come to value the training because they find it beneficial for their future.¹⁶

Improved confidence was also reported by cadets. Research has defined confidence as believing that one’s capabilities are effective for success when performing in competitive and social settings.¹⁷ Cadets described feeling more confident and capable because of combatives training and acknowledged the skills learned would be invaluable throughout their military career. With the opportunity to fight other students in the class, cadets appreciated that they could use their newly acquired skills against an opponent, testing their confidence and competence under pressure. Developing the ability to maintain confidence under pressure is vital for one’s mental toughness.¹⁸ Literature suggests that competition during physical education lessons improves the number of confident students.¹⁹

Appreciation for the need to acquire skills required as soldiers and officers in the U.S. Army was also influential in developing confidence in cadets through combatives training. Cadets admitted to enjoying the increased confidence that resulted from them feeling they could now hold their own in a fight. This supports previous research that hands-on combatives training produces confidence that one can defend themselves in the event situations become combative.²⁰ Also, cadets stated that combatives training helped them develop in terms of grit and determination, growing in their warrior ethos. This aligns with the literature that suggests soldiers with a background in combatives training are better prepared to navigate challenges with confidence and the appropriate amount of aggression.²¹ Cadets reported that every future officer should experience the challenge of being evaluated in a one-on-one fight solely on whether they won or lost, and that this experience is instrumental in instilling the warrior ethos and developing confidence.

Research suggests there are other views to consider regarding combatives training outside of building confidence and warrior ethos. For example, not developing or growing in confidence could leave one unmotivated and discouraged as an officer where they no longer have confidence when performing routine tasks or facing expected challenges.²² Therefore, physical educators should incorporate combatives training that promotes the use of one-on-one fighting as a way of assessing not just skill acquisition but also competency. Physical educators help cultivate a positive learning culture, as well as develop adaptive behaviors, among students related to confidence and resilience.²³

The highest-ranking negative perception by cadets regarded opponents. Some cadets stated that they perceived little training value fighting an opponent with a wrestling, judo, or combatives background. When someone with fighting experience fought someone inexperienced, it often resulted in the inexperienced fighter being unable to demonstrate or utilize the skill or skills they learned over just nineteen lessons. Some cadets reported this had a negative influence on their development, leaving them discouraged because this was attributed to unfairly influencing their grade. Research has indicated that fear of losing can lead to adaptations and behaviors due to the perceived public humiliation of losing, the event’s significance, or possible injury.²⁴ This would support one’s discouragement or poor perception of training value, citing external conditions to the cadet as the cause of their failure.

Other criticisms involving opponents included partners who displayed little effort or resistance to provide proper stimulus feedback to facilitate learning and skill acquisition. This study supports the research that suggests developing fighting skills and confidence helps cope with the austere and potentially stressful circumstances cadets may encounter throughout their military career; cadets training in combatives recognize it requires effort, consistency, commitment, and sacrifice from themselves and others.²⁵ Simone Cecchini et al. reported that combat sports training not only improves motor skills along with tactical abilities, but a key component of training is also social development and working to improve each other.²⁶

Some cadets recognized when their opponent was less skilled and felt obligated to lower their speed and intensity when fighting. This also created consternation for some cadets who felt that fighting someone who was clearly less trained and able to engage them did not adequately challenge them. Cadets made the connection that they would not be able to select the other person’s size, weight, or skill in a real-life conflict. Darius Mojtahedi et al. reported that individuals with greater levels of confidence demonstrate lower levels of apprehension and manage negative emotions better.²⁷ It makes sense that those possessing greater size, weight, or skill would be disappointed if they felt they had to restrain the display of their talents. Conversely, less skilled or smaller fighters might not find the same satisfaction because demonstration of skill demands the defeat of others who may be bigger, stronger, or better.²⁸

Another negative perception was the time constraint of the class. USMA’s Combat Applications course consists of nineteen fifty-minute classes that are required for graduation. Many cadets felt that the class should extend longer than nineteen lessons. Reasons for doing so included allowing for more sparring before fights as well as wanting exposure to fighting with weapons. Several students cited that they would support increasing from two fight days to four, engaging in eight or more fights. This supports reports from Cecchini et al. who found that participants displayed significantly greater levels of intrinsic motivation after just four weeks of beginning athletics.²⁹ One of the arguments from cadets for increasing the number of lessons, along with the number of fights, was to offer more exposure to fighting, evaluate their abilities among the class, and identify the better or more skilled fighters. Research suggests that students who are regularly exposed to competitive situations in athletics have more opportunities to assess their abilities in relation to others.³⁰ Also, elements that influence motor skills learning in physical education include time, practice, and student skill level.³¹

Research has provided that both the acquisition and retention of skills and concepts were related to practice at appropriate levels of intensity.³² Motor learning requires the generation of new pathways and patterns. Because of this, some behaviors and abilities are easier to learn than others.³³ Accomplishing daily activities such as tying shoes, texting, swinging a bat to hit a ball, or playing the drums all require a series of precise movements. Similarly, combatives training requires time and practice to produce movements and reactions that require timing, tactile feedback, and body awareness.³⁴ This supported negative views associated with not enough time allowed to free-spar or practice techniques in a less calculated way. Cadets reported that a great amount of time was allowed for them to focus on learning a technique or drill, but they did not have enough time or opportunity to replicate it in a more real-time, fight-like environment.

The findings from this study support the continued use of combatives instruction at the USMA and discuss both the positive and negative influences that students believe could impact their future as officers. Challenging cadets in social, emotional, and physical realms hopefully brings about positive change. Using the results of this study can enable combatives course development to incorporate more time for in-class practice and add to the course lectures, possibly discussing the positive atmosphere opponents can have and the impact that a “poor sport” can have on their peers.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to hear the perceptions of military students regarding the impact a mandatory hand-to-hand combatives PE course had on their development as officers through a qualitative research study. Through this approach and relying on the CIT, volunteer participants reported that their potential as officers was improved due to the lectures incorporated into the course; they facilitated understanding and explained how to implement combatives training into physical training—leader opportunity. Combined with increased confidence reported from daily sparring, cadets overwhelmingly reported positive outcomes from a mandatory PE combatives course as it relates to developing officers.

The U.S. Army must continue to stand ready to defend the country and defeat its enemies. Developing leaders who embrace a combatives culture and who understand that soldiers may need to fight in close-quarters combat is a piece of building a formidable force. Soldiers need officers who understand the importance of hand-to-hand combat and who create a culture that embraces it. Future and current officers who implement hand-to-hand combatives training enhance soldiers’ skill sets, ultimately leading to a more prepared soldier. By failing to recognize this point, officers in the U.S. Army may be setting their soldiers up to fail should the soldier encounter close-quarters combat.

 

---

Notes

1. Arthur T. Coumbe, Army Officer Development: Historical Context (U.S. Army Cadet Command, 2010), 5, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA518337.pdf.
2. The U.S. Military Academy at West Point, accessed 4 April 2025, https://www.westpoint.edu.
3. “Department of Physical Education,” West Point, accessed 4 April 2025, https://www.westpoint.edu/about/academy-leadership/commandant/department-of-physical-education.
4. “Department of Physical Education.”
5. John C. Flanagan, “The Critical Incident Technique,” Psychological Bulletin 51, no. 4 (1954): 327, https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061470; Gregory Bott and Dennis Tourish, “The Critical Incident Technique Reappraised: Using Critical Incidents to Illuminate Organizational Practices and Build Theory,” Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 11, no. 4 (2016): 276–300, https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-01-2016-1351.
6. Jeffrey D. Coelho and Lynn R. Fielitz, “Cadets’ Perceptions of Gymnastics Instruction for Officer Development,” The Qualitative Report 11, no. 3 (2006): 605–25, https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2006.1670.
7. Flanagan, “The Critical Incident Technique,” 339.
8. Georgia Nigro and Ulric Neisser, “Point of View in Personal Memories,” Cognitive Psychology 15, no. 4 (1983): 467–82, https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(83)90016-6.
9. Flanagan, “The Critical Incident Technique,” 344–45.
10. Yvonna S. Lincoln and Egon G. Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry (Sage Publications, 1985).
11. Karolina Kostorz and Krzysztof Sas-Nowosielski, “The Morality of Practicing Martial Arts and Combat Sports,” Ido Movement for Culture: Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology 21, no. 2 (2021): 57–68.
12. Philip Furley, “What Modern Sports Competitions Can Tell Us About Human Nature,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 14, no. 2 (2019): 138–55, https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618794912.
13. Juan Cecchini et al., “The Influence of the Physical Education Teacher on Intrinsic Motivation, Self-Confidence, Anxiety, and Pre- and Post-Competition Mood States,” European Journal of Sport Science 1, no. 4 (2001): 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1080/17461390100071407.
14. Alexander E. Chinkov and Nathan L. Holt, “Implicit Transfer of Life Skills Through Participation in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu,” Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 28, no. 2 (2016): 139–53, https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2015.1086447.
15. Chinkov and Holt, “Implicit Transfer of Life Skills,” 139–40.
16. Cairong Wu and Ryan Dapat, “Self-Efficacy Skills of Student-Athletes Toward Developing Pedagogical Methodologies in Physical Education,” The Education Review 7, no. 7 (2023): 994–99, http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2023.07.027.
17. Darius Mojtahedi et al., “Competition Anxiety in Combat Sports and the Importance of Mental Toughness,” Behavioral Sciences 13, no. 9 (2023): 713, https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13090713.
18. Mojtahedi et al., “Competition Anxiety in Combat Sports and the Importance of Mental Toughness.”
19. Ion Delipovici, “The Game and Competition as a Way of Improvement of Self-Confidence in Adolescence,” The Annals of the “Stefan Cel Mare” University 9, no. 2 (2016): 12–19.
20. Joseph Torres, “Predicting Law Enforcement Confidence in Going ‘Hands-On’: The Impact of Martial Arts Training, Use-of-Force Self-Efficacy, Motivation, and Apprehensiveness,” Police Practice and Research 21, no. 2 (2020): 187–203, https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2018.1500285.
21. Walter Wojdakowski, “Combatives and Conditioning: Winning the Close Fight,” Infantry 96, no. 3 (2007): 1, https://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/magazine/issues/2007/MAY-JUN/pdfs/MAY-JUN2007.pdf.
22. Torres, “Predicting Law Enforcement Confidence,” 195–97.
23. Raúl Trigueros et al., “Emotion, Psychological Well-Being and Their Influence on Resilience: A Study with Semi-Professional Athletes,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 21 (2019): 1–12, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214192.
24. Cecchini et al., “The Influence of the Physical Education Teacher,” 7–9.
25. Simone Ciaccioni et al., “Martial Arts, Combat Sports, and Mental Health in Adults: A Systematic Review,” Psychology of Sport and Exercise 70 (2024): 1–18, https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2023.102556.
26. Ciaccioni et al., “Martial Arts, Combat Sports, and Mental Health,” 15.
27. Mojtahedi et al., “Competition Anxiety,” 713.
28. Ciaccioni et al., “Martial Arts, Combat Sports, and Mental Health,” 7.
29. Cecchini et al., “The Influence of the Physical Education Teacher,” 7.
30. Cecchini et al., “The Influence of the Physical Education Teacher,” 8.
31. Stephen Silverman and Kathleen Mercier, “Teaching for Physical Literacy: Implications to Instructional Design and PETE,” Journal of Sport and Health Science 4, no. 2 (2015): 150–55, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2015.03.003.
32. Vassiliki Derri et al., “Relationship Between Academic Learning Time in Physical Education (ALT-PE) and Skill Concepts Acquisition and Retention,” Physical Educator 65, no. 3 (2008): 134–45, https://js.sagamorepub.com/index.php/pe/article/view/2137.
33. Patrick T. Sadtler et al., “Neural Constraints on Learning,” Nature 512 (2014): 423–26, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13665.
34. Deanna M. Kennedy et al., “The Influence of Accuracy Constraints on Bimanual and Unimanual Sequence Learning,” Neuroscience Letters 751 (2021): 2–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2021.135812.

 

 

 

Back to Top

September-October 2025