Mental Toughness of Badminton Athletes at Bina Guna College of Sports and Health: A Descriptive Mixed-Methods Study

Abstract

Objectives: To describe the mental toughness and competition-related psychological readiness of badminton athletes in the Student Activity Unit (UKM) at Bina Guna College of Sports and Health (STOK Bina Guna), Medan, in 2026.

Materials and Methods: A descriptive mixed-methods design was used at STOK Bina Guna from March to April 2026. The study involved the 25 registered badminton UKM athletes and drew additional information from coaches and administrators. Quantitative data were obtained from a 20-item, five-point Likert questionnaire; qualitative data came from semi-structured interviews, direct and reflective field notes, observation, and organizational documents. Questionnaire and documentation scores were summarized as percentages, while qualitative data were reduced, coded, displayed, and verified. Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability procedures supported trustworthiness.

Results: The questionnaire yielded an overall mental-readiness score of 86.3% (good). The interview assessment reported 91.8% (very good), and documentation analysis yielded 90.5% (very good). Supporting indicators included 85.9% attendance across 20 scheduled sessions, 85.7% facility availability, and 100% completeness of the documented training program. Qualitative findings nevertheless identified pre-competition fear, anxiety, low self-confidence, and difficulty maintaining focus, alongside perceived benefits of structured training, practice matches, coach support, teamwork, and competition exposure.

Conclusions: The athletes displayed generally favorable mental-readiness indicators, but competition-specific anxiety and attentional disruption remained important concerns. Structured psychological-skills practice should therefore be integrated into regular badminton training. Because instrument psychometrics, subgroup characteristics, and the derivation of an overall composite score were not reported, the findings should be interpreted descriptively rather than as evidence of intervention effectiveness.