Metacognitive Components of Sport Performance Test

Athletes, coaches, and active performers who want to examine how they manage thinking in training and competition can use the Metacognitive Components of Sport Performance Test as a structured self-reflection tool. This sport metacognition assessment maps how a person prepares, learns, detects errors, adapts, and organizes effort toward goals, helping identify aspects of performance thinking worth discussing or practicing.

What This Assessment Explores

Six dimensions cover metacognition in sport:

• Metacognitive Experiences (1-7) measures confidence: Low 1-2.91; Moderate 2.92-5.43; High 5.44-7.
• Sport Performance Analysis and Evaluation (1-7) reflects experience: Low reflection 1-4.29; Moderate reflection 4.3-6.15; High reflection 6.16-7.
• Error Monitoring (1-7) handles errors: Low monitoring 1-2.84; Moderate monitoring 2.85-5.26; High monitoring 5.27-7.
• Pre-Performance Mindset Formation (1-7) reflects readiness: Developing mindset 1-3.87; Situational mindset 3.88-6.07; Consistent optimal mindset 6.08-7.
• Adaptation to Change (1-7) measures adjustment: Low adaptability 1-3.69; Moderate adaptability 3.7-5.69; High adaptability 5.7-7.
• Goal-Oriented Organization of Sport Activity (1-7) concerns goals: Low 1-3.92; Moderate 3.93-6.16; High 6.17-7.

Methodology and Scientific Basis

Each item is a first-person statement answered on a seven-point agreement scale, from strong disagreement to strong agreement. Situations cover preparation, difficult tasks, mistakes, distraction, learning, competition, and post-performance review, so respondents judge recurring experiences rather than demonstrate an objective skill.

Results are reported separately for six dimensions, each scored from 1 to 7 and interpreted through its displayed band. This shows uneven patterns-for example, stronger preparation alongside less developed error analysis-rather than one undifferentiated label.

Methodologically, the questionnaire is conceptually consistent with the instrument developed by Fedunina and Korobeynikova (2022), but this online version is not presented as a direct adaptation of their published measure. Flavell’s (1979) framework explains metacognition as awareness and monitoring of cognitive activity, while Brick, MacIntyre, and Campbell (2015) connect such processes with self-regulation during endurance performance.

Interpretation is descriptive: this athlete self-reflection assessment has no stated population norms, reliability estimates, or clinical cutoffs. Current confidence, memory, context, self-awareness, and response style may influence answers, so use the profile to identify training questions and patterns to examine over time rather than to make a definitive judgment about ability.