Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 1114–1120
WCES-2010
Nonverbal intelligence of soccer players according to their level of
play
Erkut Kontera *
a
Dokuz Eylül University, Physical Education and Sports Department, øzmir, Turkey
Received October 9, 2009; revised December 18, 2009; accepted January 6, 2010
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the nonverbal intelligence of soccer players according to their level of play. For this
purpose, data were collected from 312 male soccer players (aged 14.71 ± 1.38 years). using adapted version of the TONI-2.
Collected data was analyzed by ANOVA and LSD Test for comparisons of significant differences. Analysis revealed the
significant differences between A, B and C Level of Soccer players (p<.02). It seems that TONI-2 points go up with the increase
of age and level of play. However, future researchers could control the level of play for each age group to have more conclusive
results in soccer.
© 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Keywords: Nonverbal intelligence; soccer; soccer player; level of play.
1. Introduction
Intelligence was included among the myriad of personality traits measured, although few conclusions about
athletes' intelligence levels were drawn from this line of research (Fisher, 1984). In the 1980s, researchers began to
draw more attention to different paradigms and methods, which could probably better account for intelligent
behavior related to skilled motor performance. (Tenenbaum and Bar-Eli, 1995). For example, Gardner (1983) viewed
intelligence as composed of seven multiple abilities and labeled them as linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial,
musical, kinesthetic, interpersonal and intrapersonal. Following these efforts, different concepts of intelligence were
also put forward. For example; Nonverbal Intelligence (Brown, Sherbenou and Johnsen, 1990), “Emotional
Intelligence”(Gdeman, 1995) and Naturalistic Intelligence”(Gardner, 1999). In essence, intelligence is a complex
cognitive construct, particularly when applied to a specific field such as athletic performance. In the early 1990s,
research in this area was in its relative infancy (Tenenbaum and Bar-Eli, 1995) therefore, the exact nature of the
relationships between intellectual capabilities, nonverbal intelligence, motor behavior and performance were still
quite unclear.
* Erkut Konter. Tel.: 0 533 4660120
E-mail address: [email protected]
1877-0428 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.157
Erkut Konter / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 1114–1120
1115
Behavior can only be as intelligent as the way in which world events are represented in the brain. This is
referred to as encoding and it is closely related to perception and attention (Fisher, 1984). Therefore, it seems that
nonverbal intelligence in particular is related to attention and perceptual style. Some characteristics of this style are
the way a person (a) transforms and codes environmental stimuli, (b) attends to some stimuli while neglecting
other, (c) uses stimuli to form the internal representation of the external world, (d) symbolizes events in space and
time, and (e) organizes, initiates, and controls movements (Marteniuk, 1976). Tenenbaum and Bar-Eli (1995) also
discussed intelligence with reference to intellectual capabilities required for successful athletic activity, such as
information processing, knowledge, experience, decision making, reaction time, timing, memory and recall, vision,
sensorimotor processing, attention, anticipation, cognitive styles, and time and space perception. These all seem to
be related to nonverbal intelligence in sport.
Intelligence is an interactional construct based on individuals' capacities to handle specific environmental
demands. Few people are necessarily intelligent in all situations. If this assertion seems reasonable, then it points us
clearly in the direction of a task demands approach if we are to understand sport intelligence (Fisher, 1984). For
example, what is it that players have to do to be successful in soccer? What specific kinds of intelligence do they need
in offense and defense situations, central and peripheral positions? How can soccer players be assisted with their
intelligence development (particularly nonverbal intelligence)?
Soccer players must have enough knowledge about the task to know from where the important cues are
derived, understand the basic nature of their task, select relevant cues and filter out disturbances and eventually
make their movement decisions. Awareness of the complexities of the demands placed upon soccer players and
the role of cognitive mediators on soccer performance could also be related to soccer players' cognitive styles. Certain
cognitive styles may reflect strategy differences, which are manifestations of athletes' intelligence (e.g., Fisher,
1984). More research is needed regarding how intelligence in general and nonverbal intelligence in particular is
involved in sport and more specifically in soccer, when and why they operate in sports settings.
Limited number of studies in sport related intelligence concentrated on: academic performance of varsity
athletes and their intelligence (Reeder, 1942), group intelligence, group placement, physical efficiency and
performance (Milne, Cluver, Suzman, Wilkens-Steyn and Jokl, 1943; Start, 1961), mental functions, athletic ability,
personality problems, affectivity and intelligence (Froeclich, 1944), ability to learn sport-type gross bodily motor
ability and the effect of intelligence on motor learning and performance of motor skills (Brace, 1948), power and
mental ability of nonathletes’ and athletes’ participation in different sports (Burley, 1955), mental ability and skill in
badminton and tennis (Thorpe, 1967), conceptual symbol identification, physical ability, intelligence in hockey and
gymnastics (Miloslov, 1974), physical exercises, performance, successful orientation, expectations of achievement
(Rocusfalvy, 1976), personality factors, high-achievers and low-achievers in tennis and badminton (Bushan and
Agarval, 1978), superior intellectual functioning, peak performance and intellectual excellence (Privatte, 1982),
intellectual abilities, technical competence, experience and effective team performance in basketball (Fiedler,
McGuire and Richardson, 1989), heredity, well-being, physical attributes, personality characteristics, information
processing capabilities, and intelligence (Singer and Janelle, 1999), psychological characteristics of Olympic
champions, coping with and controlling anxiety; confidence; mental toughness/resiliency; sport intelligence (Gould,
Dieffenbach and Moffeth, 2002), influence of intelligence in the terminal phases of information processing and
motor programming (Alves and Martins, 2003).
Researches are also very limited related to intelligence in soccer. Limited research indicated that soccer-expert
children recalled more items on the soccer list but not on the nonsoccer list than soccer-novice children. However,
soccer expertise did not modify a significant effect of IQ level, with high-IQ children recalling more than low-IQ
children for all contrasts. Interest in soccer was found to be related to expertise but did not contribute to differences
in memory performance (Scnider and Bjorklun, 1992). Bjurwill (1993) discussed problems of vision and
intelligence related to one-touch play in soccer. He put forward that practicing one-touch play needs players who are
creative in reading the game and in reacting quickly.
Intelligence tests are widely used in schools, in industry, in other sectors of our communities. Unfortunately,
few suitable tests have been developed for use with populations who require language free, motor reduced or culture
reduced testing formats. More research is needed regarding how different types of intelligence (particularly
nonverbal intelligence) are involved in sports and more specifically in soccer. Test of Nonverbal Intelligence-2
(TONI-2) was built as a language free and culture reduced test, which might fill this void (Brown, Sherbenou and
Johnsen, 1990) and could be used in sport settings and various cultures. In general, a number of studies have used
1116
Erkut Konter / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 1114–1120
and supported Brown, Sherbenou and Johnsen’s (1990) TONI-2. For example, undergraduate students and
concurrent validity (Martin, Garland and Judy, 1990; Coleman, Scribner, Johnsen and Evans, 1993), cultural
differences and cultural bias (Kaplan, 1998; Miles, Graham and Watson, 1990). In addition, Gifted-Secondary,
Gifted-Elementary, Spanish Speaking/Mexico and Chile, Bilingual/Faculty English Proficient, Limited English
Proficient, Non English Proficient) were used in the development process of the TONI-2 (Brown, Sherbenou and
Johnsen, 1990).
This research might be an important contribution to using TONI-2 in soccer, since soccer, most of the time,
involves nonverbal interaction, communication and problem solving skills of players in connection with time and
space. An important part of interpersonal communication involves nonverbal communication, or nonverbal cues.
Research indicated that this type of communication is also critical to imparting and receiving information (Weinberg
and Gould, 2003).
People are often unaware of the many nonverbal cues they use in communicating. In fact, estimations from
various researchers indicate that approximately 50 % to 70 % of the information conveyed in a communication is
nonverbal (Burke, 2005; Weinberg and Gould, 2003; Yukelson, 1998). Nonverbal messages are less likely to be
under conscious control, and therefore they are harder to hide than verbal messages. They can give away our
unconscious feelings and attitudes. People tend to believe in nonverbal messages. Although nonverbal messages can
be powerful, they are often difficult to interpret accurately. Thus, we have to try to correctly judge the context
(Weinberg and Gould, 2003). Nonverbal communication related to nonverbal intelligence, time, space and figures
include physical appearance, posture, gestures, body position, touching, facial expression and voice characteristics.
Like in all the various fields of our everyday life, nonverbal communication also plays a role of critical
importance in the world of soccer. As far as nonverbal codes are concerned, particular attention should be focused
on iconic codes, characterizing the language of fixed or moving images and pictorial representations. Body contact
is another nonverbal element whereby players can communicate massages to their opponents. Nonverbal
communication also helps to suggest the player’s personal disposition and approach to soccer (Cabrini, 1999). The
basis of all the TONI-2 items is problem solving and the content is abstract/figural (Brown, Sherbenou and Johnsen,
1990), which might be useful in soccer where performance is influenced by ongoing struggle of abstract/figural
problem solving.
It has long been accepted that the skill of the team game player lies not only in the possession of technical
ability but also the ability to make quick and accurate decisions. Good decision-making is thought to be at least as
important as good technique. These decisions must be made while the player is engaged in physical activity, often
stressful physical activity (Morris and Graydon, 1997). Soccer matches are won by exploiting space. On many
occasions this means first creating the space to exploit. Space can be created either by individual player or combined
play between two or more players (Hughes, 1990). The first step in understanding the game of soccer is to
understand what space is and its importance. Good soccer teams use spaces to keep the ball, to advance it, and
ultimately, to score (Mark and Catlin, 1990).
In soccer, two of the most important elements of a successful offense require either skill or tactical
sophistication-staying spread out and having a good vision. There is nothing as simple, yet more important to the
success of a soccer team, than good vision. By vision we mean the personal habit of constantly scrutinizing the
soccer field to get the big picture. Soccer players should look over the entire field approximately every five seconds.
They should note the best place for the ball (usually an area of space) and the location of nearby passing
opportunities. On defense, players should check the space behind them and plan what to do when they get the ball.
Players with vision are distinguished by their apparent ability to perceive events before they happen, and by their
ability to influence the play by appropriately redistributing the ball. Players with vision are a prerequisite for
implementing a system of total football (Mark and Catlin, 1990). Therefore, nonverbal problem solving skills seem
important to create and exploit the space, and vision in soccer.
Figures in TONI-2 items contain one or more of the following characteristics: shape, position, direction,
rotation, contiguity, shading, size, length, movement, and figured pattern. For the most part, the more difficult items
contain several of these characteristics while easier items contain only one or two (Brown, Sherbenou and Johnsen,
1990). All of these characteristics could be very important in soccer. For example, shape of a player and a team
using physical, technical, tactical and psychological elements of the game against their opponents might be very
important to be successful. Similarly, positions, directions, rotations, contiguity, shading, size, length, movement
and figured patterns seem as vital elements of a successful play in soccer. Soccer involves changing the directions,
Erkut Konter / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 1114–1120
1117
positions and rotations all the time between defense and offense with the ball and without the ball, and quality (e.g.,
taking a good shot at goal or heading) and quantity (e.g., a number of correct passes and ball stealing) of movements
and patterns of figures determine the successful results.
One or more of the following rules are used in each TONI-2 item: simple matching, analogies (matching and
addition, subtraction, alternation, progression), classifications, interactions, and progressions (Brown, Sherbenou
and Johnsen, 1990). These problem solving rules and patterns given above might be applicable in sports in general,
and soccer in particular. For example, combining one player’s own skill with the other team players, using
appropriate individual, group and team tactics, and creating the space as an individual, as a group or as a team, to the
contrary narrowing the space for the opponents. A soccer player successfully comes out of a crowded and tight
marked area uses a kind of nonverbal problem solving skills, which are defined in TONI-2.
International and cross cultural management of players, coaches, teams, administrators and other related
supporting staff (for instance; sport psychologist, athletic trainer etc.) become of great importance in order to obtain
desired results, success, performance and satisfaction. It also seems very important and privilege to have and to
educate intelligent players for most soccer clubs. TONI-2 would be of value to sport educators, sport management
and especially to sport psychology studies. Research into nonverbal intelligence of soccer players based on their
level of play could help; a) obtain information about the needs of players in different age groups and levels, b) give
information to coaches to adapt their leadership patterns according to the needs of their players, and c) aid to
improve performance, success and satisfaction levels of players. In addition, using the TONI-2 could be of value to
sports psychology nonverbal intelligence research in soccer, because it can provide information about the chemistry
of a team, the perceptions of the each player, and their behavior related to nonverbal intelligence. Therefore the
objective of this research was to analyze the nonverbal intelligence of soccer players according to their level of play
(A-Youth, B-Youth, and C-Youth Soccer Players).
2. Method
2.1. Participants
For this purpose, data were collected from 312 male soccer players (A-Youth players = 45, 17 years olds; B-Youth
players = 112, 15 and 16 years olds; C-Youth players = 155, 13-14 years olds) using adapted version of the TONI-2
(Konter and Yurdabakan, 2010) and an information form. The male soccer players had a mean age of 14.71 ± 1.38
years.
2.2. Instrumentation
Original TONI-2 was described by its authors as a language-free measure of cognitive ability and can be given to
persons who range in age from 5 to 85 years. TONI-2 contains 55 items arranged in order of difficulty. This is an
untimed test which requires 15 minutes to complete. To determine the test, one simply pantomimes the instructions;
no reading, writing, listening and speaking is involved on the part of the administrator or subject. The subject simply
points to the appropriate response. Original TONI-2 has multiple choice items (Brown, Sherbenou and Johnsen,
1990).Demographic characteristics of the original TONI-2 include different age, gender, race, ethnicity, geographic
region of residence, domicile, educational attainment of parents and adult subjects, and special population groups
(Brown, Sherbenou and Johnsen, 1990). Internal consistency reliability of the original TONI-2 differs between .81
and .98 according to different age groups. In addition, test-retest with alternate form reliability coefficients ranges
between .80 and .95. Moreover, reliability of the original TONI-2 with special populations changes between .67 and
.92. Test validity of the original TONI-2 consists of correlations with achievement (.81), aptitude and general
intelligence (.80) (Brown, Sherbenou and Johnsen, 1990). TONI-2 has recently been adapted to soccer players in
Turkey (Konter and Yurdabakan, 2010) and revealed internal consistency reliability .72 and test-retest reliability .83
for 13-17 years old soccer players.
1118
Erkut Konter / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 1114–1120
Head coaches for soccer clubs were contacted and the nature of the research project was explained. The coaches
were informed that the research involved soccer players’ nonverbal perceptions related to soccer. After the coaches
and soccer players consented to participate in the research, a meeting time and place for testing sessions was
determined. TONI-2 forms with brief instructions were then administered to players.
2.4. Data Analysis
Collected data were analyzed by One Way ANOVA and LSD Test for comparisons of significant differences.
3. Results
ANOVA Analysis revealed the significant differences (Table 1) in nonverbal intelligence of soccer players
according to their level of play (p<.017). Table 1 also presents the below moderate effect size (ƾ = .16) related to
level of play and nonverbal intelligence of soccer players (Cohen, 1987). Further analysis of TONI-2 and level of
play for multiple comparisons were presented in Table 2.
Table 1. ANOVA Results of TONI-2 According to the Play Level of 13-17 Years Olds in Soccer.
Level
C-Youth
13-14yrs.
B-Youth
15-16yrs.
A-Youth 17
yrs
Total
N
Mean
SD
155
11.25
4.54
112
12.75
5.16
45
12.98
5.16
312
12.04
4.91
Source of
variance
Between
groups
Within
groups
Some of
Square
Df
Mean
Square
F
p
ƽ
193.95
2
96.97
4.11
.017
.16
7296.66
309
23.61
Total
7490.61
311
LSD comparisons indicated that: a) A-Youth players have higher TONI-2 points than C-Youth players (p<.04).
b) B-Youth players have higher TONI-2 points than C-Youth players (p<.01). c) There is no significant difference
between A-Youth and B-Youth soccer players. But, A-Youth soccer players have higher TONI-2 means
( X =12.97) than B-Youth soccer players ( X =12.75).
Table 2. Multiple Comparisons of Mean Differences According to the Level of Play of 13-17 Years Olds in Soccer Related to TONI-2.
(I) Level of Play
C-Youth
(J) Level of Play
B-Youth
A-Youth
B-Youth
A-Youth
Mean Difference
(I-J)
-1.51
SE
.60
P
.013
-1.73
.82
.036
C-Youth
-1.51
.60
.013
A-Youth
-2.23
.86
.791
C-Youth
1.73
.82
.036
B-Youth
.23
.86
.791
4. Discussion
Analysis, in general, indicated that TONI-2 points increase with the level of play from C-Youth to A-Youth in
soccer. There are significant differences between A-Youth and C-Youth, B-Youth and C-Youth soccer players.
However, There is no a meaningful difference between A-Youth and B-Youth soccer players, although the mean
value of A-Youth soccer players are higher than the B-Youth soccer players
Erkut Konter / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 1114–1120
1119
The characteristics and needs of A (17 years olds), B (15-16 years olds) and C (13-14 years olds) levels Youth
soccer players could be quite different from oneother. For example: C-Youth soccer players have; a) increased
capacity to read the game, b) greater assertiveness, c) higher tendency to compare own performance with that of
others, d) primarily occupied with skills, improved defensive play apparent, e) the responsibilities assigned to a
particular position. Characteristics of B-Youth soccer players typically include; a) height, arm and leg length
increase very quickly at this age and losses of physical control can occur, b) emotions are volatile, c) attitudes of
indifference are common, d) stubborn attitudes happen often, e) these youths can be quick to become angry or take
offence, f) their abilities and creativity increase at this time, g) winning becomes a more important goal than merely
playing, h) individualistic play is emphasized over team play, i) showing-off attitudes are evident, j) coping with
stress and pressure etc. becomes a more significant factor in their lives. Characteristics of A-Youth soccer players
specifically involve; a) physical broadening of the frame and a more businesslike approach to what is happening
around them, b) whether to take up the game seriously or simply to continue playing it for fun, c) beter able to deal
with problems encountered when playing in a limited amount of space and time, d) greater restraint then B-Youth
plyers, e) pay attention to the way their team-mates play, f) beter degree of acquired self-discipline (Lingen, 1997).
It seems that nonverbal intelligence increases with the level of C-Youth, B-Youth and A-Youth in soccer (see
Table 1 and Table 2), as it is expected that A-level Youth players have the highest scores than all the other measured
groups. This might be effect of age increasing 13 to 17 years. However, results are attentively interpreted, since
they indicated the little below moderate level of effect size (ƾ = .16) related to level of play and nonverbal
intelligence (Cohen, 1987). It is also kept in mind that there is not much research using “Nonverbal Intelligence
Scales” in sports and specifically in soccer to be able to comment on the supporting and not supporting results.
Future researchers could also control the level of play for each age group and pay more attention to the B-Youth
level soccer players. There is obviously a need for more research in order to make more definite conclusions
regarding the relationships between the play level of soccer players and their nonverbal intelligence. Researchers in
the future should not only take into consideration the category of competition and level of play in which the players
are involved, but also take into account variables such as their gender, age, education, personality, motivation, the
attainability of their goals, their objectives and successes, and other relevant factors.
References
Alves, J. Martins, F. (2003). Information processing and intelligence: Inner-stimulus interval and uncertainty in the response. International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 34, 329-339.
Bjurwill, C. (1993). Read and react: The football formula. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 76, 3, 1383-1386.
Brace, D. K. (1948). Motor learning of feable-minded girls. Research Quarterly of the American Association for Health, Physical Education and
Recreation, 19, 269-275.
Brown, L. Shebenou, R. J. Johnsen, S. K. (1990). Test of Nonverbal Intelligence: A Language-free measure of cognitive ability, examiner’s
manuel Second Edition. Austin, Texas: Pro-ed.
Burke, K. L. (2005). But coach doesn’t understand: Dealing with team communication quagmires. In. Mark. B. Andersen (Ed.). Sport Psychology
in Practice. IIIinois: Human Kinetics, pp. 45-59.
Burley, L. R. (1955). Relation of jump and reach measures of power to intelligence scores and athletic performance. Research Quarterly of the
American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 26, 28-35.
Bushan, S. Agarval, V. (1978). Personality characteristics of high and low achieving Indian sports persons. International Journal of Sport
Psychology, 9(3), 191-198.
Cabrini, M. (1999). The Psychology of Soccer. Spring City, PA: Reedswain.
Cohen, J. (1987). Statistical Power Analysis for Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Coleman, M. Scribner, A. P. Johnsen, S. Evans, M. K. (1993). A comparison between the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Revised and the Test
of Nonverbal Intelligence-2 with Mexican American secondary students.
Fiedler, F. E. McGuire, M. Richardson, M. (1989). The role of intelligence and experience in successful group performance. Journal of Applied
Sport Psychology, 1(2), 132-149.
Fisher, A. C. (1984). Sport intelligence. In. W.F. Straub and J. M. Williams (Eds.). Cognitive Sport Psychology. New York: Sport Science
Association, pp. 42-50.
Froeclich, G. J. (1944). Mental development during the preadolescent and adolescent periods. Review of Education Research, 14, 401-412.
1120
Erkut Konter / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 1114–1120
Gardner, Howard. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory, Multiple Intelligence. New York. Basic Books.
Gould, D. Dieffenbach, K. Moffeth, A. (2002). Psychological characteristics and their developments in Olympic champions. Journal of Applied
Sport Psychology, 14(3), 172-204.
Kaplan, F. E. (1998). The WISC-III, TONI-2, and WRAT3: Are they significantly culturally biased? Unpublished Dissertation, United States
International University, US.
Konter, E. Yurdabakan, ø. (2010). Validity and Reliability of the Test of Nonverbal Intelligence-2 for Soccer Players in Turkey, International
Journal of Sport Science and Engineering, In publication process.
Lingen, B. (1997). Coaching soccer: The official coaching book of the Dutch Soccer Association. Spring City, PA: Reedswain.
Mark, G. Catlin, M. D. (1990). The Art of Soccer. St. Paul, MN: Soccer Books.
Marteniuk, R. G. (1976). Cognitive information processes in motor short-term memory and movement production. In G. E.
Stelmach (Ed.), Motor control: Issues and trends, New York: Academic Press, pp. 175-199.
Martin, J. D. Garland, E. B. Judy, R. B. (1990). Measures of concurrent validity and alternate-form reliability of the Test of Nonverbal
Intelligence. Psychological Reports, 66, 503-508.
Medoff, M. H. (1987), “A reply to Yetman: Toward on understanding of the economic hypothesis”, Sociology of Sport Journal, 4, 278-279.
Miles, A. K. Graham, M. W. Watson (1990). Concurrent validity of the Test of Nonverbal Intelligence with referred suburban and Canadian
native children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46(5), 632-642.
Milne, F. T. Cluver, E. H. Suzman, H. Wilkens-Steyn, A. Jokl, E. (1943). Does a physiological correlation exist between basic intelligence and
physical efficiency of school children? Journal of Genetic Psychology, 63, 131-140.
Miloslov, K. (1974). Conceptual symbol identification related to some types of performance. Ceskolovenska Psychologie, 18(2), 115-126.
Morris, T. Graydon, I. (1997). Effect of exercise on the decision making of soccer players. In. T. Reilly, J. Bangsbo, M. Hughes (Eds.). Science
and Football III. London: E & FN SPON.pp. 278-284.
Privatte, G. (1982). Experiential correlates of peak performance. Psychological Reports, 5(1), 323-330.
Reeder, C. W. (1942). Academic performance. Journal of Higher Education, 13, 204-208.
Rocusfalvy, P. (1976). Certain experimental results in sports psychology. Studia Psychologica, 18(2), 137-145.
Schneider, W. Bjorklund, D.F. (1992). Expertise, aptitude, and strategic remembering. Child Development, 63(2), 461-473.
Singer, R. N. Janelle, C. M. (1999). Determining sport expertise: from games to supremes. International Journal of Sport Psychology Special
Issue: The development of expertise in sport: Nature and nurture, 30(2), 117-153.
Tenenbaum, T. Bar-Eli, M. (1995). Personality and intellectual capabilities in sport psychology. In..Saklofske, D. H., Zeidner, M. (Eds.).
International Handbook of Personality and Intelligence. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 687-710.
Thorpe, J. (1967). Intelligence and skill in relation to success in singles competition in badminton and tennis. Research Quarterly, 38(1), 119-125.
Weinberg, R. Gould, D. (2003). Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 3rd. Edition. IIIinois: Human Kinetics, p. 222-223.
Yukelson, D. (1998). Communicating effectively. 3RD. Edition. In. J. Williams (Ed.). Sport Psychology: Personal growth to peak performance.
CA: Mountain View, Myfield, pp. 142-157.