The purpose of discussing personality in connection with ...



Personality and Sport:

[pic]

|Sub Topic |Studies |

|i) theories of personality; |Trait theory (Eysenck) |

| |Social Learning theory (Bandura) |

|ii) measurement of personality; |Psychometric (Eysenck) |

| |Projective (Rorschach) |

|iii) personality and sport performance. |Characteristics of elite athletes (Morgan et al) |

The purpose of discussing personality in connection with psychology and

sport is an attempt to investigate whether certain people are more likely to

participate or be successful in sport due to their personality characteristics.

Personality has formed a large part of sport psychology research.

The concept of personality is difficult to define, as many definitions are seen

as too broad or too narrow. One straightforward definition that offers a

simple explanation was put forward by Hollander (1971). He described

personality as ‘the sum total of an individual’s characteristics that make him

unique’. The important point is that an individual’s personality is unique.

i) Theories of Personality

Trait theory of personality

The main belief of this theory is that individuals possess certain personality traits that are relatively stable and enduring over time. Thus, if traits can be identified, behaviour can, to a point, be predicted. A predisposition toward a certain trait does not mean that individuals will always act in that way but that there will be a strong likelihood. For example, a person who has a high level of trait competitiveness would be expected to be competitive in a range of different situations.

Hans Eysenck’s trait approach can be used to investigate whether certain personality traits are linked to sporting success and if certain sports would be more appropriate for some individuals than others.

According to Eysenck personality traits originate in biology. Eysenck stated that people characterised by extroversion, have a greater need for external stimulation to maintain an optimal level of arousal in the cortex of their brains. To maintain homeostasis, these extroverted individuals are compelled to seek arousal from exciting or stimulating activities, including sports.

Other people, Eysenck claimed, are able to maintain an optimum level of arousal without much external stimulation, and these individuals are characterised by introversion. The basic differences between extroverts and introverts are genetic, not learned. In contrast to extroverts, introverts naturally have a higher level of cortical arousal. Because of a lower sensory threshold, they experience stronger reactions to sensory stimulation.

Given these genetic differences, one would expect extroverts to seek excitement from a variety of stimulating activities, including team sports. In addition, it can be hypothesised that team sports are associated with a number of other stimulating behaviours, including smoking, drinking alcohol, drug abuse, changing sexual partners and engaging in criminal activity.

Evaluation

+ Eysenck's trait theory has been very popular. One of the main reasons for its popularity has been its ease of application. Eysenck's personality traits are assessed by a relatively simple questionnaire, the EPI, which is easy to use and the quantitative data easy to analyse.

- However it is important to remember that the findings from studies using Eysenck's personality inventory are correlational and not causal. It is not possible to make causal statements from correlational studies. For example, it is possible that participating in extreme sports is causing the person to be an extrovert or more likely that a third variable is causing the person to participate in these sports and affecting there personality, such as the way a person is socialised, their role models and so on.

- The EPI has been criticised because of its forced choice ('yes/no') form. Many psychologists have argued that a few simple 'yes/no' questions cannot be expected to do justice to the complexities of human personalities. The lie scale has also been criticised for its lack of subtlety.

- Eysenck believed that the basis of personality was biological - that is, we inherit our personality. Most psychologists would disagree with this and argue that the development of personality is an interaction of inherited factors and learning.

Think of two more evaluation points

+

-

Social Learning Theory

According to social learning theory, behaviour is not a result of unconscious motives; rather it is learned through the environment. Thus personality traits are less important as the environment is much more influential. Social learning theorists suggest that personality is not a stable core but it is built up out of our experiences in the social world.

It has been suggested that individuals tend to see patterns and consistency in the behaviour of others where none exist because we try to impose some stability and predictability on our experiences. Therefore, from a social learning perspective our personality is the behaviour we demonstrate resulting from our experiences or the roles that we play rather than due to a biological predisposition.

Social Learning Theory suggests that sport behaviours are largely learned from observing and imitating other role models. Research has demonstrated that peers and role models in the media can have an affect on sporting behaviour.

Bandura (1977) suggested that a four-step process is required for

observational (social) learning to occur:

• Attention: needs to be paid to the behaviour that is to be imitated.

• Memory: to store the observed behaviour, as without a clear memory of

the behaviour repetition is unlikely.

• Motor reproduction: putting into practice what has been observed.

• Motivation: to attend to, remember and reproduce the behaviour.

Social learning theorists would suggest that personality develops as a result of experiences that we have had and can be shaped by rewards, such as praise or money. The rewards can be direct, received by the individual or vicarious (indirect), feeling rewarded by seeing someone else, a role model, being rewarded. This approach suggests that personality can vary depending upon external factors. This theory may help to explain certain types of behaviour in sport for example, aggression or anxiety, as this may have been observed and reproduced.

Evaluation

+ The behaviourist approach (and psychological approaches in general) is useful because it recognises that personality is affected by the environment. For example it has implications for sports in schools and the media.

+ The behaviourist approach is also useful as it is able to explain why people start playing sports and also offers an explanation for why people continue to play sports.

+ The behaviourist approach not only provides an explanation for why people engage in sports, but also suggests how techniques can be modelled to improve performance. Sporty role models for teenagers can encourage exercise and healthy lifestyles.

- However there are a number of problems with the behaviourist approach. The major limitation with behaviourist explanations is that they are reductionist. For example by only focusing on observable behaviour they often neglect other important factors such as people’s cognitive processes (e.g. attitudes). In doing so they often provide a very passive view of human beings.

- The behaviourist approach also ignores physiological explanations. For example twin studies have demonstrated that genetics may be an important factor in body types, and thus sporting abilities.

- According to Bandura one of the steps required for social learning is ‘attention’. This suggests that all social learning is conscious which may be too simplistic a view.

ii) Measurement of Personality

As there are a number of explanations for personality, there are also a

number of different ways to measure it.

There are two main ways to measure personality:

• projective tests

• objective tests.

Objective tests used to measure personality have been more widely used in

sport psychology. They include structured questions, often multiple choice, yes/no or true/false, which are easy to administer and to score. One test that has been used in sport psychology research is Eysenck’s EPI. This is a self-report questionnaire that requires yes/no answers and contains a lie scale. It measures personality on the two main dimensions of personality that he proposed.

Hans Eysenck’s trait approach can be used to investigate whether certain personality traits are linked to sporting success and if certain sports would be more appropriate for some individuals than others.

According to Eysenck personality traits originate in biology. Eysenck stated that people characterised by extroversion, have a greater need for external stimulation to maintain an optimal level of arousal in the cortex of their brains. To maintain homeostasis, these extroverted individuals are compelled to seek arousal from exciting or stimulating activities, including sports.

Other people, Eysenck claimed, are able to maintain an optimum level of arousal without much external stimulation, and these individuals are characterised by introversion. The basic differences between extroverts and introverts are genetic, not learned. In contrast to extroverts, introverts naturally have a higher level of cortical arousal. Because of a lower sensory threshold, they experience stronger reactions to sensory stimulation.

Given these genetic differences, one would expect extroverts to seek excitement from a variety of stimulating activities, including team sports. In addition, it can be hypothesised that team sports are associated with a number of other stimulating behaviours, including smoking, drinking alcohol, drug abuse, changing sexual partners and engaging in criminal activity.

Evaluation

+ Eysenck’s EPI is quick to administer and produces quantitative data which is easy to analyse. People can easily be identified as extroverts or introverts which is useful in predicting who will partake and be successful at team or individual sports.

- However it is important to remember that the findings from studies using Eysenck's personality inventory are correlational and not causal. It is not possible to make causal statements from correlational studies. For example, it is possible that participating in extreme sports is causing the person to be an extrovert or more likely that a third variable is causing the person to participate in these sports and affecting there personality, such as the way a person is socialised, their role models and so on.

- The EPI has been criticised because of its forced choice ('yes/no') form. Many psychologists have argued that a few simple 'yes/no' questions cannot be expected to do justice to the complexities of human personalities. The lie scale has also been criticised for its lack of subtlety.

Projective tests

Projective tests are used to try to predict some underlying motive for behaviour and link most closely to the psychodynamic theories of personality.

The idea is that by using an unstructured test for which there are no right and wrong answers, the individual taking the test is likely to be honest in his or her answers. The tests claim to reveal things about the individual’s unconscious mind. According to psychoanalysts, such as Freud, unconscious processes drive our behaviour and therefore by analysing the unconscious mind we can assess personality. The best known of these types of tests are the Rorschach Inkblot Test and the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT).

The inkblot test was first used in 1921 and remains one of the most popular projective tests. Individuals are presented with ten cards, one at a time, with symmetrical inkblots on them and have to say what they see, which the tester notes down. The aim is to identify themes or underlying motives in the individual’s personality.

The TAT consists of sheets of pictures around which the individual has to make up a story to explain what is happening.

It is questionable how useful these tests are for sports psychology. J9 can’t really think of any uses at all. Maybe you can?

Evaluation

- The inkblot test has not been extensively used in sports psychology as its validity and test/retest reliability has been questioned. Similarly the TAT has

not been widely used in sports psychology. The reliability and validity of both tests are dependent upon the skill of the person administering it.

- It is questionable whether the structured objective tests for personality are a valid method of measuring human personality. Is it possible to reduce personality to a series of yes/no answers, as in the EPI?

Think of your own positive evaluation points and write them below.

+

+

iii) Personality and sport performance

Personality research in sport has considered whether particular personality traits are related to the sports which people take u, the positions they take on a team and their success in sport. In this final section we will look at the question: can the elite performer be distinguished from the non-elite on the basis of personality?

POMS iceberg profile for elite Vs non-elite athletes

[pic]

- We cannot we judge whether elite athletes develop their personality characteristics as they progress in sport, or whether they have them to begin with and it is these characteristics which contribute to their success. In other words, the cause and effect cannot be established, the relationship is only correlational.

- Research that has been conducted in an attempt to link personality type

and sport is quite limited and thus the findings are not fully generalisable.

Further research is needed sampling a full range of sports and levels of

sporting performance.

Practice exam questions.

1 (a) Describe a theory of personality and sport. [6]

(b) Compare and contrast theories of personality and sport. [10]

2 (a) Describe one way in which personality is measured . [6]

(b) Assess the reliability and validity of personality measures in sport. [10]

3 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about personality and sport performance. [6]

(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about personality and sport performance. [10]

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have learned about personality and sport. [10]

(b) Evaluate what psychologists have learned about personality and sport. [16]

(c) A young athlete was excels at both golf and rugby. Using your knowledge of sports psychology, suggest how you would advise him or her about choosing one of these as his/her sporting career. [8]

-----------------------

Choose a sport.

Give examples from this sport of the four steps required for observational learning.

1. Attention

2. Memory

3. Motor reproduction

4. Motivation

Extrovert or introvert?

1. Who would make a better marathon runner?

2. Who would enjoy performing in front of a crowd?

3. Name three extreme sports.

4. Who would enjoy these sports most and why?

There are no ‘right’ answers for projective testing. The individual’s responses are interpreted by the tester. Why might this be a problem?

Briefly describe objective testing in your own words.

How is this different from projective testing?

Which way of testing personality do you think is best?

Explain why.

Morgan, et al (1987): Psychological Characterization of the Elite Female Distance Runner

Aim: The aim was to identify psychological differences between elite and nonelite runners.

Participants: The sample comprised 27 volunteers including 15 elite and 12 non-elite distance runners. The participants ranged from 1500m to marathon runners. The non-elite runners formed the control group.

Procedure: Participants signed an informed consent document, were informed that the results would be treated confidentially and that they would remain anonymous and were told that they were free to discontinue involvement at any point.

Participants completed a series of psychological questionnaires and a 24-hour history during the first evening.

The questionnaires included:

• Eysenck’s Personality Questionnaire, • Profile of Mood States, • State-trait Anxiety Inventory

• Body Awareness Scale

The 24-hour history involved a questionnaire focusing on the individual’s general state of well-being as well as exercise and sleep patterns over the previous 24 hours. It was used as a means of identifying runners who were experiencing problems of any kind, which might influence the psychological test results. This therefore accounted for any confounding variables.

Results:

Questionnaires

• Initial analysis of the results of the questionnaires showed that there were no significant differences between the elite and non-elite groups. Morgan et al then made the decision to combine the data from the two groups and compare the combined results with population averages (non-athletes).

• Results from the POMS showed that the combined group possessed the “ iceberg profile” typical of elite athletes scoring lower than the population average on negative moods (such as tension, depression, anger) and significantly higher on vigour.

• Analysis of the EPQ showed that the group were slightly more extroverted and stable than the general population.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download