Introduction

Athletes experience pressure originated from many aspects, such as high physical, tactical and psychological demands (^{Simim et al., 2010}; ^{Stefanello, 2009)}, occurrence of injuries (^{Carson & Polman, 2010)}, anxiety, sports demands (^{Nicholls et al., 2012)}, and high training loads (^{Moreira et al., 2010)} representing aspects capable to influence directly the athlete’s performance as well as athletic success (^{De Rose Júnior, 2002)}, beside to conditions outside the sports environment, like family and health issues. Mainly, athletes feel incapable to deal with these adverse situations whether these events come from the sporting area or from their personal lives (^{Wagstaff et al., 2017}; ^{Weinberg, 2008)}.

Other factors as the importance attributed to the event or competition, doubt regarding the results, unknown or stronger opponent, event location, lack of confidence, high levels of anxiety and low self-esteem, are stress-generating which may affect athletes’ performance. In addition, higher levels of stress can also cause diseases (^{Brink et al., 2012)} and interfere in the recovery of athletes after intense training (^{Coutts & Reaburn, 2008)} and participation in competitions (^{Noce et al., 2011)}.

In that regard, it is necessary for athletes deal stressful and adverse situations in order to adapt to the demands of the sport (^{Calmeiro et al., 2010)}, which is based on the coping strategies defined by ^{Lazarus and Folkman (1984)} as a set of cognitive and behavioral efforts that individuals use to deal with specific demands which appear in stressful situations.

The capacity to cope with stressful and adverse situations has been described as a differential of successful athletes and plays an important role in the performance and satisfaction (^{Jowett & Spray, 2013}; ^{Lazarus, 2000)}. The implementation of these strategies before a stressful event can be considered as a protection factor through the process of a certain situation faced (e.g. competitive event, injuries and losing a fight).

^{Fletcher and Sarkar (2012)} investigated former Olympic athletes to better understand how resilience develops, and found that successful athletes had protective (resilient) resources during adversities encountered and presented positive personality, motivation, confidence, focus and perceived social support throughout periods of stress. The authors further postulated that protective resources are under the influence of challenges assessments and metacognitions to provide cover against potential negative effects of stress. These processes promote facilitating responses that precede sports performance (^{Galli & Vealey, 2008)}.

^{Fletcher and Sarkar (2013)} indicate that a resilient nature may influence how athletes evaluate certain events and deal with stress in response to the emotions and the selection of coping strategies. In other words, resilient athletes assess the situation before the responses ^{(Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012)}. Besides, more experienced and resilient athletes are better prepared to overcome the challenges and stress of sporting environments, increasing the chances of having a successful career in sport (^{Bicalho, Melo & Noce, 2020)}.

Therefore, resilience can be defined as the role of mental behavior at promoting personal qualities as a protective factor against the negative effects of experienced stressors (^{Fletcher & Sarkar, 2012)}. Or a psychological reintegration process based in the ability of the subjects to learn new skills, enhancing abilities to cope with further stressful events in life (^{Richardson et al. 1990)}. The combination of psychological factors and skills that can be developed - goal setting, optimism, self-talk, among others - to helps individuals to be more flexible when facing stressful or adverse events (^{Wagstaff et al., 2017)}.

In combat sports, stressful or adverse events occur throughout the fight, and the way the athlete deals with these events is essential to decide the results. Thus, athletes are constantly withdrawn from their comfort zone and forced to deal with a variety of unpleasant feelings during competitions / fights. Being resilient implies a quick recovery from such adverse situations, which, during a fight, can be an unexpected blow, loss or injury. The duration of the process of reintegrating from an adversity can range from a few minutes to a few years, depending on the severity of the problem, for a athlete to develop new skills. For example, during a fight the athlete receives an unexpected jab and falls. Get up, concentrate and return to the fight more focused and win. On the other hand, during a volleyball game an athlete misses a serve, becomes unbalanced and is no longer able to play well and is injured. After recovery, the athlete may still not feel confident enough to perform well during games. Therefore, in facing these situations, athletes improve their response to similar events in the future and will re-establish themselves more quickly (^{Richardson et al., 1990)}.

Although several studies have investigated resilience in the sporting environment, the relation of athletes’ sociodemographic factors and psychological aspects - especially combat sports athletes - is yet to be investigated. Several factors about resilience and its relationship with sport are still being investigated. So, knowing the different profiles can lead to a better understanding of which characteristics the most resilient athletes have, namely psychological and sociodemographic characteristics. Therefore, this study aims at analyzing different profiles of MMA athletes considering the psychological aspects of resilience, state of stress and coping strategies, and sociodemographic data.

Methodology

Results

The distribution of the number of fighters per cluster was established as follows: 21 athletes in Cluster I (42%), 18 athletes in Cluster II (36%) and 11 athletes in Cluster III (22%). The resilience level of Cluster I athletes was 34.0 (33.0-36.0) points, which can be considered high. The Cluster II presented a resilience level of 29.5 (29.0-31.0), being considered moderate. Finally, Cluster III obtained the resilience level of 24.0 (22.0-26.0), being considered low.

In the evaluation of the Coping construct (Table 1), it was observed that Cluster I and Cluster II athletes used more strategies like “Coachability” (Md = 3.0) (p = 0.01), “Coping with adversity” (Md = 2.5) (p <0.01) and “Concentration” (Md = 2.5) (p = 0.01). However, Cluster III athletes sought more of the “Freedon from worry” strategy (Md = 2.0) (p <0.01).

When assessing the Clusters according to the state of stress and recovery (Table 2) of the fighters, there were significant differences between the groups. Cluster I and II athletes showed higher scores in comparison with Cluster III for “Success” dimensions (p = 0.01), “Social relaxation” (p = 0.01), “General well-being” (p <0.01), “Fitness/ Being in shape” (p = 0.01), and “Self-efficacy” (p = 0.03), all of which indicated good recovery by athletes.

In assessing clusters according to resilience level and sociodemographic variables (Table 3), there were significant differences between the groups of athletes and the level of resilience (p <0.01). It was verified that all the athletes of Cluster I and Cluster II presented high level of resilience (100.0%). However, most athletes in Cluster III (90.9%) were not resilient to stressors, and the level of resilience was considered low. The variable marital status (p = 0.06) showed an association close to the significance level adopted in this study when compared to the clusters. Cluster I athletes, who were more resilient, mostly had companions. On the other hand, most athletes of Clusters II (resilient) and III (non resilient) had no companions.

The sociodemographic variables, when compared with the clusters, showed a significant difference for the age, namely that Cluster I athletes (p = 0.02) were the oldest (28 years) when compared to the remaining groups (Cluster II - p = 0.02 (23 years), Cluster III - p = 0.03 (25 years). It is important to note that the variable number of dependents (p = 0.05) also presented a significant value, since Cluster I athletes claimed to have dependents, while the fighters of Clusters II and III have no dependents.

Discussion

Three distinct groups were observed to have their aspects related to resilience, coping strategies, state of stress and recovery investigated. The first group revealed that athletes had a high level of resilience (Table 3) by using strategies of coachability, coping with adversity, and concentration (Table 1). In addition, they had low levels of stress and good recovery (Table 2), moreover, they were older, had partners and reported having dependents (Table 4). Cluster II athletes had a moderate level of resilience, were more likely to use the coping strategy (Table 1), had low levels of stress and had good recovery (Table 2). These were younger and had neither partners nor dependents (Table 4). The third group identified with low resilience (Table 3) used freedom from worry strategy (Table 1) and presented higher levels of emotional stress and lack of energy (Table 2), besides having neither companions and dependent (Table 4).

It is observed that resilience is an essential factor for athletes to have good development in the sport. ^{Fletcher and Sarkar (2013)} indicate that a resilient athlete is able to better evaluate stressors, uses metacognition to manage their emotions and selects appropriate stress coping responses (^{Bicalho, Melo & Noce, 2020)}. Therefore, athletes with a higher level of resilience have low levels of stress.

Resilient athletes (Clusters I and II) reported having a good perception of the stress scales associated with success, social relaxation, well-being, feeling in shape, and self-efficacy, in addition to the use of a larger variety of coping strategies. ^{Bryan et al. (2017)} pointed out that resilience is associated with the use of other psychological resources, which are considered as agents capable of minimizing stressors. These resources are social support, self-efficacy, optimism, coping skills, motivation, perspective, self-regulation, endurance, proactivity, adaptability, sense of control, positive mentality, hope, and self-sufficiency.

High resilience indices associated with age and the responsibilities of having dependents and companions seem to influence the coping strategies utilization and recovery status of these athletes. The results found in the study by ^{Berbetz (2015)} performed in MMA fighters were similar to those of Cluster I in this study. These fighters used the memory of family members as a strategy to increase levels of resilience and coping in at least some of the fighting. During the struggle, family memories provided intrinsic motivation which helped to increase the level of concentration and to deal with unfavorable situations, so that, after the fight, the fighter could be well and able to reunite with their loved ones. This fact may also have influenced physical and mental recovery in order to return to their homes after the fights in the expectation of pursuing their daily routines after the fight (Berbetz, 2015).

Therefore, high-resilience athletes can develop strategies to help mobilize resources that will help them cope with the demands of situations in an active way (^{Secades et al., 2016)}. In addition, using positive emotions makes athletes better able to cope with the pressures they are exposed to (^{Belem et al., 2014)}.

Life events which bring new experiences can also be considered as stressors capable to induce ruptures or adversities. New adversities can lead the athlete to present a positive or negative response, depending on their psychological abilities. For ^{Richardson et al. (1990)}, such influences are socioenvironmental and include community, family, church, peers, gangs, living conditions, and the media. The way athletes deal with these challenges make them able to cope with these situations, thus becoming resilient, and seeking to do their best during competitions due to their assumed responsibility.

In contrast, Cluster II athletes demonstrated that the levels of resilience and age have an impact on coping strategies and the recovery status of these athletes, while not having a partner or dependentes has little influence. A possible explanation may be associated with the fact that the majority of athletes participating in the study have practiced the sport for more than five years. Thereby, because they started practing sport while still young, these athletes have become resilient and, despite their young age, due to their experience, they are better able to cope with the stressful demands of the sport. As these athletes do not have companions or dependents, their focus is on training and participating in competitions. Therefore, socioenvironmental influences (^{Richardson et al., 1990)} are lower for this group of athletes considering that the responsibility assumed by them is directed towards their career in the sport.

Athletes are subject to various stressors associated with their performance. These demands can be related to training (preparation, fights, expectations and opponents), the organization to which the modality is conveyed, or events that may occur in your personal life (family responsibilities, changes, illness, death, etc.) (^{Wagstaff et al., 2017)}. However, in our study these demands were not confirmed since athletes had no focus on “non-sports” responsibilities.

However, because they are younger and have practiced sport for a longer period of time, such an experience may have been a preponderant factor for the high level of resilience. According to ^{Richardson et al. (1990)}, exposure to adversity and change allows individuals to initiate a process that can lead to resilient reintegration as well as the addition of new qualities to promote resilience for further adversities. Experiences with the sport practice are a key factor in the resilience process since the perception of positive results occurring in the face of adversity helps to develop resilience. Thus, athletes with personal and sociocultural resources successfully respond to adversity in sport and gain more resources to enable them to do the same in the future (^{Galli & Vealey, 2008)}.

The third Cluster made evident that low levels of resilience combined with the absence of dependents or companions negatively influenced the use of coping strategies and the stress levels of the athletes. Even though they do not have the responsibility of caring for a family, factors from their personal life can influence stress levels, such as depending on the sport financially, competitive level, and availability for training in a negative way (^{Belem et al., 2016)}.

Another important factor to be highlighted is the low level of resilience presented by the athletes of this group. Athletes with a low level of resilience are more susceptible to the negative effects of stress (^{Belem et al., 2017)} and may have more negative thoughts. For these athletes, focus during fights and competitions seems to be natural since they do not observe other important information in the environment. Therefore, athletes increase their concentration for some physical sensations and perceptions, such as anxiety, pain, doubts about oneself as to their performance (^{Stefanello, 2009}; ^{Weinberg, 2008)}.

Seeking to identify different profiles of the fighters from the cluster analysis, we observed three distinct groups regarding the use of coping strategies, stress and recovery status, and sociodemographic variables. The athletes of the first group were older, resilient, which seems to directly influence the use of coping strategies and stress levels. This is because the athletes of this group have sought to listen more to the corrections of their coaches, face the adversities on their way, and concentrate more. In addition, they have positive values regarding their recovery, both focused on sport and on other dimensions of their lives, in addition to having low levels of stress.

Cluster II observed that athletes were resilient, used coping strategies to confront adverse situations, sought concentration, and were dedicated to training. Levels of stress were emphasized as low, while social and personal recovery was high, especially regarding perception of success, well-being, and self-efficacy. In contrast, they were the youngest athletes, had no companions or dependents.

The third group was also influenced by resilience, but in a negative way since athletes demonstrated a low level of resilience. Fighters of this cluster have adopted the lack of concerns strategy more frequently, a situation in which athletes do not worry too much about their performance, even if it is not satisfactory, not caring about what others think of their failures. In addition, stress and lack of energy levels were higher in these athletes. Finally, it is important to observe that they have no dependents and no partners.

Therefore, it is important to understand that the different profiles found among athletes seem to be modified according to some key points, such as resilience level, age, marital status, and number of dependents. Resilient athletes are able to learn from the stressful situations they encounter throughout their careers, improve their psychological skills, or acquire new ones. Age, as well as having a commitment with companions and dependents, seems to be related to the decision making about the career, such as dedication to training and participation in competitions, also influencing the athlete’s commitment to both aspects related to the sport, as well as their personal life.

Thus, the analysis of the different profiles revealed that Cluster I athletes have some factors such as being resilient, having companions, dependents in addition to being older which influence their preparation to seek better results. Consequently, they use more coping strategies (trainability, concentration, and confrontation with adversity) and have a better recovery, which is why they have a better perception of their well-being, physical form, self-efficacy, social recovery, and success.

Being resilient, younger and not having companions or dependents are factors which seem to influence Cluster II athletes regarding the use of coping strategies and their recovery. The athletes in this group use more strategies of trainability, concentration, and confrontation with adversity, have higher levels of perception regarding their self-efficacy, being in shape, social recovery, success, and general well-being.

Finally, Cluster III is constituted of athletes with lower resilience level, who do not have companions or dependents and are also young. These factors seem to directly influence the psychological aspects of the fighters considering their poor coping strategies (lack of concerns), stronger emotional stress, and lack of energy.

The different profiles allow knowledge of various psychological and personal life issues that impact the development, support and success of athletes. In this way, understanding the different clusters allows for a more refined and effective approach in developing training programs and psychological and social support, adjusting to the specific needs of each group and increasing the performance and general well-being of athletes. For example, for athletes in Cluster III, interventions focused on developing resilience can be provided to improve their ability to face adversity and stress. Coping strategies can also be worked on, as Cluster II athletes may need different types of psychological and emotional support compared to Cluster III athletes, who face greater challenges in terms of stress and recovery.

It should be noted that this study had some limitations, including the following aspects: absence of a ranking of the modality to complement the sociodemographic data, which made the comparisons between the results and the psychological aspects investigated in this study unfeasible; the number of participants, since athletes of only one state were evaluated. However, it is important to observe that the federation of this modality has been created only recently and still lacks an exact number of athletes who participate in national and international competitions. Nevertheless, it is equally worth mentioning that the state of Paraná is among the Brazilian states with a large number of outstanding athletes of this national and international MMA scene.

Finally, it is worth mentioning how important new studies should be to investigate the relationship between sociodemographic variables, especially having partners and dependents since our study indicates that such variables can influence the development of resilience, coping with adverse situations in addition to the level of stress in athletes