Formulating a good research question is a job half done as the paper follows the research question and hence the research question has to be posed in a structured manner.
3) Both the articles one and two attempt to answer the research question related to the generation of anxiety among the participants before a major competition. The first article proposes the question to “examine retrospective perceptions and causal beliefs about temporal experiences of competitive anxiety and related symptoms in the lead up to competition” (Hanton, 2002) whereas the second article attempts to answer the question about “To investigate the symptom responses associated with competitive anxiety through a fine grained measurement approach” (Hanton, 2004).
4) The rationale provided by the authors of the first article has to do with examining the precompetitive anxiety responses is critical to the understanding of the symptoms as effective interventions can be provided if the symptoms are understood. In other words, the rationale for the first article is about finding ways to relieve the stress in sportspersons before a major competition.
5) The rationale for article two is to find out the frequency of manifestation of symptoms so as to provide effective and timely relief as well as lasting relief. The rationale for this flow in a similar manner to article one and the emphasis is on providing treatment before major competitions.
6) A hypothesis is a tentative conclusion that the authors posit as a way of reaching the solution. A hypothesis is usually proposed without empirical and quantitative data and later it is tested against the data for validation.
7) The hypotheses that the authors were testing in Article two relates to, “In addition to examining anxiety perceptions as responses that may change over time, there is scope for researchers to consider a frequency component to the response” (Hanton, 2004). Hence the authors of article two were testing the