Background
College athletes are often seen as physically resilient (Chrétien et al., 2024), yet mental health concerns have become an increasing focus within collegiate athletics (NCAA, 2022, 2023b). Research conducted by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) indicates elevated levels of anxiety and mental exhaustion among college athletes, with higher prevalence among women, athletes of color, LGBTQ+ athletes, and those experiencing financial hardship (NCAA, 2023a). Awareness of mental health challenges does not consistently translate into intervention or help-seeking, as many athletes report uncertainty about where to access resources (NCAA, 2023a, 2023b). These gaps highlight the need to move beyond literacy toward actionable engagement with services. High-performance demands, scheduling conflicts, and sport-specific cultural norms may impede access, suggesting that interventions must be contextually responsive (Young et al., 2023). Further, NCAA institutions hold an ethical responsibility to support athlete well-being and ensure equitable access to mental health resources (NCAA, 2016, 2022, 2024a).
This paper examines the recruitment process of an IRB approved study and explores methodological and contextual barriers to engaging Division I college athletes in mental health related research, offering recommendations to inform future sport social work research and practice. Although the study employed a rigorous design, no one was enrolled and this was the authors’ most important finding. Thus, this paper reflects on lessons learned from recruitment challenges rather than presenting empirical findings.
Mindfulness-based Interventions in Collegiate Athletics
Mindfulness has gained recognition as an evidence-informed approach to support athlete well-being and performance (Anderson et al., 2021; Bühlmayer et al., 2017). Mindfulness-based Interventions (MBIs) emphasize present-moment awareness, acceptance, and attentional focus, differing from Psychological Skills Training (PST), which aims to control intrusive thinking (Anderson et al., 2021; Hut et al., 2023). Empirical research suggest MBIs are acceptable and potentially effective for college athletes across sports (Economou et al., 2024; Glass et al., 2019; Gross et al., 2018), though barriers such as scheduling conflicts, group participation discomfort, and formal training length limit engagement (Hut et al., 2023; Mistretta et al., 2017). Addressing these barriers requires delivery approaches sensitive to the cultural and structural context of collegiate athletics (National Association of Social Workers, 2021; NCAA, 2024b). Virtual delivery of MBIs may offer a viable and engaging approach for college athletes (Karing, 2023), with potential to increase accessibility and flexibility.
Rationale for Virtual Delivery
Virtual MBIs align with social work principles of accessibility, equity, and attention to systemic constraints (National Association of Social Workers, 2013). Virtual delivery has gained attention due to barriers associated with in-person MBI training, including scheduling constraints and personal preference, as well as challenges related to accessibility and adherence in traditional formats (Shankar et al., 2025). Prior studies suggest that virtual interventions can promote meaningful improvements in mental health outcomes, though engagement rates vary (Sommers-Spijkerman et al., 2021). A 7-week virtual program among college students demonstrated improved mindfulness and life satisfaction, with guided video conferencing supporting greater reductions in depression compared to unguided formats (Karing, 2023). These findings highlight the potential utility of virtual MBIs for populations with demanding schedules, such as college athletes, but gaps remain regarding their application in this context.
Considerations for Research in Collegiate Athletics
The original IRB-approved study was designed to explore athletes’ perceptions of virtual MBIs, usage patterns, engagement, and intervention features. However, no participants were enrolled in the study. This paper focuses on reflective lessons from recruitment challenges to inform future sport social work research and intervention implementation. Performance demands, scheduling, and sport-specific norms may affect engagement (Young et al., 2023), highlighting the need to evaluate practicality alongside acceptability in athletic contexts.
Theoretical Framework: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989, 1993) guided the study design and offers insight into recruitment challenges. TAM posits that individuals’ adoption and use of technology is shaped by perceived usefulness and ease of use, which influence engagement, adherence, and outcomes. Applying TAM to recruitment allows these barriers to be understood not solely as logistical failures, but as indicators of systemic and attitudinal factors relevant to research design and intervention implementation. This framework emphasizes that practical challenges in engaging athletes with virtual based research provides important lessons for sport social work researchers and practitioners.
Methods and Planned Recruitment
The original study was designed as an exploratory concurrent mixed methods study to examine college athletes’ perceptions and engagement with virtually delivered MBIs. The original plan was for the qualitative data to be analyzed using thematic analysis, and quantitative data were intended for descriptive exploration. The mixed methods approach aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of perceived usefulness, ease of use, engagement, and intervention features (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).
Participants and Recruitment
The original study targeted NCAA Division I college athletes ages 18 – 25 across four conferences. Eligibility included prior experience with virtual and in-person mindfulness training. Recruitment aimed for approximately 100 participants through convenience sampling from 23 universities. Multiple strategies were planned, including outreach via athletic departments, advisory committees, flyers, and email invitations with links to eligibility screening. Despite these efforts, the research team received minimal response and subsequently attempted IRB-approved recruitment at a private, research-intensive university in the Southern United States. Challenges persisted, and ultimately, no participants were enrolled.
Planned Procedures
The intended study procedures included initial screening, informed consent, demographic surveys, and a combination of qualitative and quantitative measures to explore perceptions, usage, engagement, and preferred features of virtual MBIs. The total time commitment was estimated to require 25 – 30 minutes. While these procedures were not implemented, the planning process highlighted key considerations from engaging collegiate athletes in research and the logistical, cultural, and institutional barriers that may impede participation.
Ethical Considerations
The original study received institutional review board approval. Procedures were designed to protect participant confidentiality and minimize risk. Participation was intended to be voluntary, with the option to withdraw at any time without penalty. National mental health resources were provided through the informed consent process. Although no direct benefits were anticipated, the knowledge gained was intended to inform future research and practice in collegiate athlete mental health.
Measures
Planned data combined qualitative and quantitative approaches. Open-ended qualitative questions were intended to capture athletes’ perceptions, experiences, and attitudes toward virtual MBIs, while quantitative measures were designed to describe engagement, usage patterns, and perceived intervention features. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) guided the study framework, with perceived usefulness and ease of use serving as conceptual lenses to understand engagement (Davis, 1989, 1993). Although measures were not deployed, the planned design demonstrates how recruitment challenges can reveal insights into systemic, technological, and cultural factors affecting research practicability in collegiate athletics.
Reflection on Recruitment Challenges
As stated previously, despite comprehensive recruitment strategies, no participants were enrolled in the study. Minimal response from athletic departments and limited engagement with college athletes highlighted barriers that extend beyond methodological planning. Challenges included institutional gatekeeping, scheduling conflicts, and sport specific cultural norms. These experiences emphasize the need for contextually tailored recruitments strategies, early engagement with stakeholders, and flexible, multidimensional approaches to reach college athletes effectively. From a sport social work perspective, understanding these barriers is critical to designing research studies that are feasible, accessible, and ethically responsive within collegiate athletics (National Association of Social Workers, 2021; NCAA, 2024a).
Discussion
Recruitment Challenges: Barriers and Future Directions
Recruitment efforts for this study revealed several structural, institutional, and cultural barriers that limited participation among NCAA Division I college athletes. Despite implementing multiple outreach strategies, including contact with athletic departments, conference offices, and college athlete networks, no participants were enrolled. The recruitment challenges highlight important methodological considerations for researchers conducting mental health intervention research within collegiate athletic contexts. Additionally, the authors provide interpretations of these challenges and offer recommendations for future research in collegiate athletic contexts.
One recruitment challenge may be related to the use of convenience sampling, combined with restrictive inclusion criteria. Recruitment efforts focused on NCAA Division I athletic programs and a private Division I, research-intensive university in the Southern United States. While this approach aligned with the study’s aims, it may have limited the potential participant pool. Expanding eligibility criteria to include college athletes from NCAA Division II and Division III institutions, as well as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), may increase recruitment reach in future research.
Institutional gatekeeping within collegiate athletics also appeared to influence recruitment outcomes. Of the 23 universities contacted, the research team received one response from a Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR) who indicated that their specific institution required internal review of research involving college athletes before participation could be considered. Within the private university included in the recruitment strategy, three head coaches responded to outreach efforts. Two coaches granted permission to contact college athletes directly, while one indicated that participation was not feasible at the time but expressed interest in future studies. Ultimately, recruitment emails were distributed to 26 college athletes across two sports teams; however, no responses were received.
Although coaches served as important institutional gatekeepers, competing athletic priorities, concerns regarding time commitments, and the protection of college athletes from outside research may have limited their willingness to promote the study (Israel et al., 2012; NCAA, 2025). Future research should consider embedding researchers within athletic departments and establishing partnerships with coaches and coaching staff before recruitment (Israel et al., 2012). Regarding the coaches who agreed to participate in the study, several possibilities warrant consideration. Coaches who expressed interest may have had greater familiarity with mental health initiatives and perceived greater compatibility between athlete wellness and team culture. Additionally, considering the researchers attended the same institution as the college athletes and coaches, this existing institutional relationship may have increased receptivity among the coaches who agreed to participate. Researchers without established connections to athletic departments may encounter greater barriers to recruitment because of limited familiarity and the highly competitive nature of Division I collegiate athletics. Nonetheless, future studies should directly explore coaches’ perspectives regarding participation decisions.
The timing of the recruitment efforts may have also contributed to these challenges for college athletes. College athletes often balance demanding schedules that include athletic participation, academic coursework, travel, and personal responsibilities (Young et al., 2023), which may reduce availability or willingness to participate in research. Additionally, the study did not offer incentives for participation, which may have further limited engagement. Future research should focus on minimizing time burden. Considerations include utilizing short surveys involving minimal time commitment (Dillman et al., 2014). For researchers who have established relationships with college athletes and coaching staff, integrating research activities into existing team schedules may be convenient for all and may reduce logistical barriers to participation (Israel et al., 2012). Further, Division I college athletes spend an average of 35 hours a week on athletic actives, 31.5 hours a week on academic commitments, and 17.5 hours a week socializing/relaxing (NCAA, 2025). Researchers should consider these time constraints and avoid peak periods of the sports season for college athletes, such as finals week and heavy travel periods. Recruitment may be best during non-peak periods, such as the offseason (NCAA, 2025).
Cultural norms within collegiate athletics may also influence participation in mental health research. Although awareness of college athlete mental health concerns has increased, stigma surrounding psychological support persists in many sport environments (NCAA, 2023b). The study’s focus on MBIs and mental health outcomes may have deterred coaches or athletic staff from distributing recruitment materials. Based on recruitment challenges encountered in the original study, future research should carefully consider the language used in recruitment materials. Framing mindfulness using terms such as stress management, resilience, focus, or mental skills may facilitate initial engagement among college athletes while preserving an emphasis on mental well-being.
Furthermore, future research should prioritize establishing long-term partnerships with athletic departments before recruitment begins (Israel et al., 2012). Researchers who have established relationships with athletic departments may encounter fewer barriers to recruitment. In addition, athletes may be more open to participation in mental health research when recruitment comes from their peers (Valente & Pumpuang, 2007). Ideas include, but are not limited to, increasing athlete ownership by collaborating with Student Athlete Advisory Committees (SAAC) who have mental health initiatives, establishing relationships with former college athletes who can serve as recruiters, and creating partnerships with active college athletes who can serve as ambassadors for mental health research.
Overall, the above highlights the potential role of social workers as institutional bridges within collegiate athletics. Expertise in mental health, ethical practice, and systems-level collaboration positions social workers to address barriers to research engagement while supporting college athlete well-being in sport environments.
Applying TAM to Inform Future Research
From a TAM perspective, recruitment outcomes may reflect how potential participants and institutional gatekeepers perceived both the usefulness of the study and the ease of participation. In TAM, perceived usefulness refers to the degree to which individuals believe participation with technology will be beneficial, while perceived ease of use refers to the extent to which engagement is perceived to be minimally burdensome (Davis, 1989, 1993). Within collegiate sport context, perceived usefulness of the original research study may have been influenced by whether coaches, athletic staff, or college athletes viewed research on virtual MBIs as relevant to athlete well-being or sport performance. Similarly, perceived ease of participation may have been shaped by competing time demands, institutional approval processes, and uncertainty about research participation within athletic settings. From this perspective, recruitment challenges may not solely represent logistical barriers but may instead reflect broader contextual and perceptual factors influencing research on mental health in collegiate athletics (Davis, 1989, 1993).
Future research may benefit from applying TAM principles during the recruitment phase rather than solely using the framework to understand technology adoption after enrollment (Davis, 1989, 1993). Recommendations include explicitly stating in recruitment materials the practical value of participation by emphasizing overall study goals and potential benefits (i.e., promoting emotional well-being among college athletes), while also addressing potential concerns related to time commitment (Davis, 1989, 1993). Researchers may also consider implementing research strategies that reduce perceived burden through a shortened enrollment process, flexible scheduling, and longer enrollment periods. Additionally, fostering relationships with athletic departments, coaching staff, and college athletes may promote credibility and research relevance, thereby enhancing perceived usefulness, perceived ease of participation, and participants’ intentions to engage with the study (Davis, 1989, 1993; Israel et al., 2012). Applying TAM in this manner may provide a useful foundation for developing recruitment strategies that are contextually appropriate for collegiate athletic environments.
Documenting these challenges provides insight into structural barriers within collegiate sport environments and offers practical, research-informed guidance for designing and implementing future research studies of virtual mental health interventions with college athlete populations. These findings underscore the need for applied systems-oriented approaches that leverage social work expertise to address institutional barriers to athlete well-being. Such efforts may be particularly important given that 24% of men’s sports and 46% of women’s sports in Division I athletics reported a desire for coaches and athletic staff to engage college athletes in conversation about mental wellness (NCAA, 2025).
Implications for Sport Social Work Research
Recruitment failure provides valuable methodological insight into conducting mental health research among Division I college athletes. Future research for recruitment strategies include potential partnering among researchers, institutions, college athletes, coaches, and athletic departments to build trust and rapport, thereby increasing credibility and access. Additionally, interprofessional collaboration should be considered in future recruitment efforts. Collaboration between sport social workers, sport psychologists, and other related professionals to advance research efforts with college athletes is imperative. Interprofessional collaboration may foster diverse perspectives necessary to reach and work with college athletes (Eberman et al., 2023; Moore et al., 2022).
Another potential strategy is to utilize community engaged approaches to ensure a collaborative process that allows college athletes to be part of the creation of the research study and questions (Israel et al., 2012). A community engaged approach would center college athletes as a community, alongside the concerns they deem most relevant. Additionally, this approach would allow college athletes to take ownership of the research process, which may increase trust among other college athletes and, in turn, the credibility of the research and study (Israel et al., 2012). Lastly, meaningful incentives (e.g., monetary gifts, resources, and donations) may also improve participation. Researchers conducting similar studies on virtual mental health interventions with college athletes may wish to explore the strategies outlined above before developing future research studies. These strategies may address structural, cultural, and perceptual barriers that are necessary to conduct the rigorous research that is needed to promote college athletes’ well-being.
Conclusion
This paper examined recruitment challenges encountered during an IRB approved study designed to explore perceptions and engagement of virtually delivered MBIs among Division I college athletes. Although no participants were enrolled, the recruitment process provided meaningful insight into institutional, structural, and cultural barriers that may influence research participation within collegiate athletic contexts. When considered through the lens of TAM, these challenges highlight the potential influence of perceived usefulness and ease of participation in research engagement. Future studies may benefit from expanded sampling strategies, interprofessional collaboration with athletic stakeholders, and recruitment strategies that are mindful of the demands of collegiate sport environments. Strengthening interprofessional collaboration and integrating social workers and other mental health professionals within athletic systems may further improve mental health research engagement with college athlete populations.