Bond University
ePublications@bond
Humanities & Social Sciences papers
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
1-1-1995
High school students' sports personalities:
Variations across participation level, gender, type of
sport, and success
Peter A. Newcombe
University of Queensland
Gregory J. Boyle
Bond University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://epublications.bond.edu.au/hss_pubs
Part of the Health Psychology Commons
Recommended Citation
Peter A. Newcombe and Gregory J. Boyle. (1995) "High school students' sports personalities:
Variations across participation level, gender, type of sport, and success" International Journal of Sport
Psychology, 26, 277-294: ISSN 0047-0767.
http://epublications.bond.edu.au/hss_pubs/802
This Journal Article is brought to you by the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at ePublications@bond. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Humanities & Social Sciences papers by an authorized administrator of ePublications@bond. For more information, please contact Bond University's
Repository Coordinator.
1
High School Students' Sports Personalities: Variations across
Participation Level, Gender, Type of Sport, and Success
Peter A. Newcombe
University of Queensland
and
Gregory J. Boyle
University of Queensland and Bond University
2
Abstract
Personality has become an increasingly important area in sport psychology as attempts
are made to understand, explain, and predict levels of sporting involvement and
success. To further understand these relationships, 312 Grade 11 and 12 students
completed a battery of personality and mood-state inventories consisting of the STAI,
EPQ and POMS, and were then categorized by (i) participation in sport, (ii) type of
sport played, and (iii) level of success experienced. A MANOVA indicated that sports
participants exhibited significantly different personality profiles from non-participantsunivariate tests showed that the participants were more extraverted and vigorous, and
less anxious, neurotic, depressed and confused. Gender differences noted for sports
participants continued across type of sport and success level. Elite athletes were found
to have a mood profile significantly different from non-elite athletes, and almost
congruent with Morgan's (1980) "iceberg" profile. Results support the view that sports
participation is associated with positive mental health.
KEY WORDS: Personality, Success, Type of sport, Participation level, Gender
3
The study of personality traits and mood states has been extremely popular
in sport psychology as researchers have attempted to isolate those psychological
profiles that distinguish athletes from non-athletes, athletes in various types of
sports, and the successful from the less successful competitors. The question of
whether sport and personality is related has, however, been controversial. Eysenck,
Nias, and Cox (1982) suggested that the wealth of inconclusive and contradictory
evidence regarding the sporting personality was due to conceptual and definitional
problems.
Conceptually, the arguments rest within the sceptical-credulous continuum
of belief in sport personality traits. Ogilvie (1968), in supporting the credulous
approach argued that participation and success in sports was related to the athlete's
personality character. Conversely, Martens (1975) and Rushall (1975) rejected this
argument because of scepticism surrounding the prediction of athletic participation
from psychological data. Morgan (1978), in noting only modest significant
correlations (r = .5) between personality and performance, has criticized these
extreme perspectives. He concluded that initially selecting and subsequently
realizing successful and satisfying experiences in sport is dependent, only in part,
on selected psychological states and traits (Morgan, 1978). That persons choose to
participate in sports and that some athletes who seem to have talent and physical
capabilities do not always achieve success, suggests that a certain psychological
profile may be an influencing factor.
Across types of sports and cross-culturally, there exists much evidence to
suggest that athletes possess unique and definable personality attributes different
4
from non-athletes. Cooper (1969), as well as Warburton and Kane (1966) painted a
picture of the sport participant as more extraverted, less anxious and neurotic that
those who do not play sport. University athletes are less anxious and depressed, and
more extraverted and stable than non-athletes (Williams 1985). Track and Held has
been a source of extensive research into sports personology. Marathon runners were
found to differ from college norms with less tension, depression, and confusion
(Wilson, Morley & Bird, 1980), as well as being more vigorous (Gondola & Tuckman, 1982; Morgan & Pollock, 1977). Fewer negative affective states (such as
tension, depression, confusion) have been related to participation in ultra-marathons
(Tharion, Strowman, & Rauch, 1988) and track and field (Thomas, Zabas, Bahrke,
Araujo, & Etheridge, 1983). Using a longitudinal research design, Johnson and
Morgan (1981) showed that college athletes from 12 different sports scored at a
significantly lower level than non- athletes on measures of depression, social
introversion, cultural-aesthetic interests, and unusual feelings and behaviors. In one
of the few experimentally manipulated studies, Chan and Grossman (1988) showed
that control subjects 'prevented' from running displayed significantly greater
symptoms of psychological distress (depression, confusion, anger) than those
allowed to 'continue' running.
Research with particular sports has also shown distinct personality
structures for participants. Tennis players-were found by Daino (1985) to be more
extraverted and less neurotic while competitors in body-building (Fuchs
& Zaichkovsky, 1983), diving (De Mers, 1983), football (Le Unes & Nation, 1982),
karate (McGowan & Jordon, 1988), rodeo (Meyers, Sterling, & Le Unes, 1988) and
rowing (Morgan & Johnson, 1978) were less depressed and confused, and more
vigorous when compared with college norms.
5
Cross-cultural findings appear to be similar with Kirkcaldy (1982)
reporting that 399 German sportspersons were extraverted and stable, and
Tenenbaum and Milgram (1978) showing that Israeli physical education students
who competed in sports were less anxious than non-competitors.
However, contradictory results have interfered with the adoption of'
a definitive athletic personality profile. Eysenck et al. (1982) have argued strongly
that the negative findings are an artifact of methodological inconsistencies (sample
size, testing instruments, statistical analyses). Aamodt, Alexander and Kinbrough
(1982) in comparing 51 non-athletes to 29 basketballers, 36 footballers, and 23
track and field athletes found no difference in personality profiles. Aerobic
exercisers (Williams & Getty, 1986), sailors (Franke, 1985), swimmers (Riddick.
1984), and wrestlers (Morgan, 1968) have all shown similar mood profiles
(affective states) to non-competitors.
The primary purpose of this present research was to extend the findings of
earlier descriptive studies to further clarify the personality profile of the athlete. It
was hypothesized that athletes would differ from non- athletes on a range of
personality traits and mood states. A mental health model, first proposed by
Morgan in 1980 and modified later (Morgan, 1985), offers a testable model for
evaluating the profiles of divergent groups of sportspersons•. This model,
formulated from elite athletes' responses in a wide variety of sports, suggests that
positive mental health is characterized by low scores on negative affective states
(tension, depression, anger, fatigue, confusion) and a high score on the positive
mood, vigor. It was further proposed that sportspersons would be characterized by
positive mental health.
6
When results are averaged over heterogenous groups, important conceptual
and meaningful information may be lost. It is therefore necessary to define distinct
dimensions within the sporting group to more fully understand the personalities of
those who do participate in sport. This research, then, further examined the
differences in personality across gender, type of sport, and sporting success level to
more clearly describe the personality profiles for sportsmen and sportswomen (e.g.,
Ogilvie, 1968). Colley, Roberts and Chipps (1985) and Kirkcaldy (1982) found
female athletes to be more neurotic and tough-minded than their male counterparts.
Gender differences have been reported for normative population samples on a
number of personality dispositions. Typically, females more readily assent to
negative affective states (Boyle, 1985), scoring at a significantly higher level on
state and trait anxiety (Spielberger, Gorsuch, & Lushene, 1971), neuroticism
(Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975), tension, depression, and confusion (McNair, Lorr, &
Droppleman, 1971), and at a lower level on psychotic/tough-minded traits (Eysenck
& Eysenck, 1975). In line with this normative data, it was hypothesized that sex
differences would continue to exist in the personality profiles of athletes.
The study of athletes from various sports, combined in heterogeneous
groups, does not permit the discovery of personality characteristics which may be
different for the various sports. The need for a theoretical framework from which
the multitude of sports types can be described and ordered has been stressed by
Harris (197.3). Dichtomising sports into individual and team sports has been one of
the most frequently used classification systems (Schurr, Ashley, & Joy, 1977).
Stereotyping of individual athletes as more introverted than team participants is
intuitively appealing because of the social nature of each type of sport. However,
research results in this area are inconsistent. The introverted individual sports per-
7
son findings of Cratty (1986), Frazier (1987), Morgan and Costill (1972), and
Schurr et al. (1977) have not been supported by Hendry (1968), Kirkcaldy (1982),
nor Morgan and associates (Morgan, O'Connor, Elickson, & Bradley, 1985;
Morgan & Pollack, 1977). Indeed, Heusner (1952) found track and field athletes
(individual sports) to be the more extraverted and stable. Negative affective states
(anxiety, tension and neuroticism) were found by Geron, Furst and Rotstein (1986)
in a study of 27.3 athletes in nine -sports to differentiate individual and team
participants -- a result not confirmed by Colley et al. (1985). Dowd and Innes
(1981), in an Australian study, concluded that personality factors did not play a
large role in discriminating between squash (individual) and volleyball (team)
players.
A further dichotomy classifies sports as direct or parallel. Direct sports
(e.g.,- football) allow participants to show personal aggression towards an
opponent. Participants in these sports have been found to be extraverted (Cratty,
1986) and dominant (Schurr et al., 1977). Iso, Ahola and Hatfield (1986) concluded
that persons involved in non-contact sports (parallel) were more introverted than
contact sportspersons. Seemingly, the personalities of athletes vary according to the
type of sport -- albeit in a somewhat inconsistent pattern. It was therefore
hypothesized that participants in the different sports types (individual; team; direct,
parallel) would exhibit significantly different personality profiles.
An important consideration in analyzing the personality characteristics of
athletes is the ability or success level achieved in a chosen sport. Eysenck et al.
(1982) suggested that special personality features mediate levels of achievement
and hence distinguish the outstanding from the average performer. Morgan and his
colleagues (Morgan, 1968, 1974; Morgan & Costill, 1972; Morgan & Johnson,
8
1977, 1978; Morgan & Pollock, 1977) have studied national distance runners,
marathoners, oarsmen, and wrestlers and found that successful athletes possess
more desirable psychological mood states than do unsuccessful athletes-success in
sport was inversely correlated with psychopathology. From these studies, a
psychological "iceberg profile" (Morgan, 1980; 1985) was proposed to be directly
proportional to success in sport. This profile shows an absence of negative affective
states with scores below the 50th percentile on tension, depression, anger, fatigue,
and confusion, and a score greater than the 50th percentile "on the positive affective
state, vigor.
National level performers in cycling (Hagberg, Mullin, Bahrke, & Limburg,
1979), soccer (Robinson & Howe, 1987) and weightlifting (Mahoney, 1989), and
further studies with wrestlers (Silva, Schultz, Haslam, & Murray, 1981) and male
distance runners (Morgan et al., 1988) have shown the iceberg profile to be a
consistent predictor of success in these sports. Elite athletes also appear to be less
anxious (Ogilvie, 1968; Smith, 1983; Williams, 1985), less neurotic (Warburton &
Kane, 1968) and more extraverted (Dowd & Innes, 1981; Hendry, 1975) than their
non-successful competitors.
Nonetheless, the iceberg profile has not been replicated for all elite
athletes. Miller and Miller (1985) in a study of 20 international female net- bailers
found that this profile did not differentiate between those women who made the
Australian team and those who did not. Top-level West German sailors were found
to have similar profiles to the general population (Franke, 1985). Successful
performers in karate (Kroll & Carlson, 1967), basketball (Craighead, Privette,
Vallianos; & Byrkit, 1986) and college football (Daiss, Le Unes, & Nation, 1986),
and outstanding high school athletes (Foster, 1977) have also failed to display this
9
iceberg profile. Unfortunately, these studies can be critiqued on at least two
methodological criteria. In the first instance, they did not employ safeguards against
response distortion (non-elite athletes may have responded to a perceived ideal profile showing less psychopathology). Furthermore, personally profiles for elite
athletes have been shown to flatten or even inverted mood during periods of heavy
training and/or overtraining (Morgan, Brown, Raglin, O'Connor, & Elickson,
1987). Hence, the elite athlete may not have shown the classic iceberg profile due
to time of assessment. The final hypothesis, then, attended to the psychological
profile of outstanding athletes. It was pro- posed that sports performers at the elite
level would demonstrate greater positive mental health (the iceberg profile) than
would non-elite athletes.
Method
Three hundred and twelve students (mean age = 16.98 years, S.D. = 1.02
years) attending a large secondary school in Brisbane, Australia were the subjects
for this research. This school is located in a well-established middle-class suburb
and draws students from a vast geographical area involving a wide range of
socioeconomic levels. The 184 males (mean age=16.95 years, S.D = 0.87 years)
and 128 females (mean age 17.03 years, S.D = l.20 years) were all students
competing either Grade 11 or 12.
An athlete was defined as a student who played sport competitively either at
school or club level. The sports played by the students were categorized using the
Schurr et al. (1977) model-individual or team, direct or parallel. Athletes were then
classified by type of sport played in the following manner-(a) subjects who
participated in one sport only were ,classified by that type; (b) subjects who
10
participated in more than one sport were classified by (i) the sport in which they
received the highest representative honor (viz., national, state, city, dub) or (ii) the
sport which they had most recently or were currently playing, if representative
honors were similar. Level of achievement was coded using the elite/non- elite
dichotomy-an elite athlete being described as a person who had played sport at
either state or national level. Table 1 shows the breakdown of subject numbers by
gender through level of sport participation, type of sport played, and level of
success.
Instruments
A demographic questionnaire and three self-report pencil-and-paper tests
were used to gather the sporting and personality information for this study.
Demographic information included age, gender, nationality, and father's
occupation, together with questions relating to sports participation, names of sports
played, and level to which these sports were played.
The personality and mood-state instruments used included the State-Trait
Anxiety Inventory (STAI: Spielberger et al., 1971), the Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire (EPQ: Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975), and the Profile of Mood States
(POMS: McNair et al., 1971). These instruments were selected because of their
reliability and validity in the Australian context (cf. Boyle, 1987, 1988), ease of
administration to large groups, and -- despite their lack of sporting specificity -frequent use in the sports personology area.
The 40 statements of the STAI are designed to evaluate two separate
anxiety concepts- state anxiety (intensity of one's present feelings) and trait anxiety
(frequency of feelings), on a four-point Likert-type self-rating scale. The EPQ
11
requires subjects to answer yes or no to 90 questions about general feelings and
behaviors. It provides measures of extraversion- introversion, neuroticism-stability,
psychoticism, and conformity (a safeguard against lying or faking good responses).
The POMS, a 65-adjective self-rating scale, measures six transitory affective states
which may be constructed as a mood profile. The list of adjectives (e.g., tense,
alert, restless) describes feelings rates on a 5-point Likert-type intensity scale from
“not at all” (0) to “extremely” (4). The mood states measured are tension,
depression, anger, vigor, fatigue, and confusion. A single global measure-total
mood disturbance (TMD) also was obtained (weighting vigor negatively). Use of
the POMS has been criticized for its application in the sporting situation as being a
transparent instrument. Miller and Edgington (1984) found that subjects in a
hypothetical sporting situation responded to a perceived ideal profile -- they gave
“faked good” responses. To control for this possible difficulty, the EPQ lie scale
was used to estimate response distortion. Since data collection was anonymous, and
as this variable did not significantly correlate with other personality variables, and
as the mean lie scores were' not elevated, it was predicted that the analyses would
not be influenced significantly by' response distortion.
Table 1
Subject number breakdown, by sex, through total group, participation
level, type of sport played, and level of success
Group
Males
Total Group
Sports Participants
Non-Participants
Individual Sports
Team Sports
Direct Sports
Females
Totals
184
132
52
34
98
48
128
80
48
18
62
10
Parallel Sports
84
70
154
Non-elite Athletes
Elite Athletes
103
29
69
11
172
40
312
212
100
52
160
58
12
Although, Johnson and Morgan (1981) employed a multivariate analysis in
reporting more signs of maladjustment for unsuccessful athletes, Cox (1985) and
Eysenck et al. 1982) have been critical of much of the sport personology research
for its failure to adopt such an approach. A multivariate approach, which considers
most of the personality variables simultaneously (cf. Boyle, 1991), was used in the
present study to increase the sensitivity of the analysis and to decide if the entire
psychological profile was different.
Procedure
Students completed the demographic and personality inventories during a
regularly scheduled 40-minute class. Instructions were read aloud to the group
emphasizing the time sets and response scales for each inventory. It was also
pointed out that responses were neither right nor wrong and that, with the
anonymity of results, only honest and candid responses were expected.
Table 2
Multivariate results /or sex differences in personality profiles of sports
participants, of different types of sports, and of athletes at each level of
success.
Sex difference in
· Wilks' Lamda
F
df
p
Sports Participants
.73
6.07
12,199
.000
Individual Sports
.47
3.61
12,39
.001
Team Sports
.74
4.23
12,147
.000
Direct Sports
.56
2.89
12,45
.005
Parallel Sports
.73
4.33
12,141
.000
Non-elite Athletes
.74
4.66
12,159
.000
Elite Athletes
.42
3.06
12,27
.008
13
Results
The mean raw scores for the 12 personality states and traits of athletes and
non-athletes appear in Figure 1. Athletes obtained lower scores on all variables
except the positive trait (extraversion) and the only positive affective state (vigor).
As all outcome variables purport to measure an aspect of personality, a MANOVA
was performed on the effect of sports participation on the entire personality profile.
Athletes were found to have a significantly different personality profile from nonathletes (Wilks’ λ) = .85, F(l2,299)=4.43, p<.001). Univariate analyses (ANOVA')
assessed the relative importance of the underlying personality constructs.
Significant differences were observed for state anxiety (F(l,310) = 9.23, p<
.01), trait anxiety (F(l,310) = 12.78, p < .001), extraversion (F(l,310) = 31.10, p <
.001), neuroticism (F(l,310) = 3.82, p< .05), lie scale (F(l,310) = 12.87; p < .001),
depression (F(l,310) = 5.63, p< .05), vigor (F(l,310) = 7.45, p< .01) and confusion
(F(1,310) = 5.99, p< .05). The elevated lie scores for non-athletes may be
interpreted as an attempt to dissimulate. In line with the suggestions of Eysenck and
Eysenck (1975), the low correlation between the lie scale and neuroticism (r = .12)
provided little indication of motivation to dissimulate and hence afforded. no
.empirical basis for correcting for a response distortion in this sample. Overall then,
from a mental health viewpoint, all differences favored the athlete.
14
Athletes
Non-Athletes
* represents
a significant difference
for that variable.
*
*
•
•
•
*
•
Personality Tralts and States
Fig.1. Mean raw scores for the personality variables as a function of athletic participation.
Note. AS = State Anxiety; AT = Trait Anxiety; E = Extraversion; N = Neuroticisn; P =
Psychoticism; L = Lie Scale; T = Tension; D = Depression; A = Anger; V = Vigor; F = Fatigue;
C = Confusion.
Figure 2 presents the mean TMD scores for the total group, males only, and
females only, by level of sports participation. TMD scores are presumed to be
highly reliable as a single global measure of mood state (McNair et al., 19.71) with
higher scores reflecting negative mental health. ANOVA's revealed significant
differences between athletes and non-athletes for the total group (F(l,308) = 4.30,
p< .05) and for males (F(l,182) = 4.85, p < .05) - in both cases, the athlete
experienced more positive mental health. Surprisingly, female athletes did not have
significantly different TMD scores from non-athletes.
15
• represents a significant difference in TMD scores.
150.40
.
Total
Fig. 2. Mean Total Mood Disturbance (TMD) scores for the total group, males only, and
females only by sports participation level.
The data was then analyzed by gender, type of sport, and level of success.
Figure 3 shows the mean raw scores for the personality variables of male and
female athletes. A MANOVA revealed a significant effect for sex (Wilks' λ = .73,
F(l2,199) = 6.07, p<.001) -- the personality profiles of the male and female athletes
were statistically distinct. To describe the relative contributions of each of the traits
and states to this sex effect, multiple ANOVA's were conducted (cf. Huberty &
Morris, 1989). Male athletes were significantly less anxious (F(l,210) = 5.90, p<
.05), less extraverted (F(1,210) =6.87, p<.01), less neurotic (F(1,210)= 16.99,
p<.001), and more psychotic/tough-minded (F(1,210) = 27.82, p<.001) than female
athletes. Table 2 shows that the sex differences in the personalities of athletes
continued through individual (p<.001), direct (p<.0l) and parallel (p<.001) sports as
16
well as at the non-elite (p< .001) and elite (p< .01) levels of competition. These
results supported the hypothesis that the personalities of male and female
sportspersons would differ.
/Male Athletes
1IJ] Female Athletes
l
• represents a significant difference for
that variable.
N
* *
Personality Traits and States
Fig. 3. Mean raw scores for the personality variables as a function of the athlete's gender.
Note. AS = State Anxiety; AT = Trait Anxiety; E = Extraversion; N = Neuroticism; P =
Psychoticism; L = Lie Scale; T = Tension; D = Depression; A = Anger; V = Vigor; F =
Fatigue; C = Confusion.
No significant differences were noted for the effect of type of sport on the
personality profiles of athletes. Individual and team participants were found to
exhibit homogeneous profiles (Wilks’ λ) = .96, F(12,199) = .70, p < .05), as were
the direct and parallel competitors (Wilks’ λ) = .92, F(12,199) = 1.46, p > .05). As
multiple ANOVA's do not necessarily require a significant multivariate effect to
permit analysis (Huberty & Morris, 1989), separate ANOVAs were carried out for
the effect of sports type on each of the personality traits and states. The stereotype
17
of the introverted individual and extraverted team participant was not confirmed.
The only significant discriminator between types of sports was for vigor in the
direct/parallel contrast (F(1,210) = 4.46, p< .05).
An ANOVA performed on the TMD scores for elite and non-elite athletes
showed a significant advantage in mental health for the outstanding performers
(F(1,210) = 6.96, p< .01). Figure 4 presents mean raw scores for the six affective
states converted to percentile rankings based on the college norms of McNair et al.
(1971). Although only depression reached significance (F(1,210) = 8.37, p< .01),
all differences are in the anticipated direction. The elite group's response patterns
are slightly more congruent with Morgan's (1980) iceberg profile for stressful
athletes, notwithstanding the elevated anger scores.
Fig. 4. Mood profiles for the elite and non-elite athletes. Note. T = Tension; D =
Depression; A = Anger; V = Vigor; F = Fatigue; C = Confusion.
18
Discussion
The present investigation sought to identify psychological profiles related to
participation in sport, choice of different types of sport, and exceptional sports
performance. Both trait and state measures were used to maximise information and
to gain more insight into the total personality picture -- the most efficacious
approach (Morgan, 1979). The underlying personality constructs were then
examined to further isolate the relation- ships between personality and sport.
The premise that athletes can be differentiated from non-athletes in personality structure has gained support from this study. In line with past research (e.g.,
Cooper, 1969; Morgan, 1974), individuals who engaged in competitive sporting
activities were found to be less anxious, neurotic, depressed, and confused, and
more extraverted and vigorous. The notion that athletes possess greater positive
mental health (Morgan, 1980) was sup- ported with lower scores on all negative
traits and states and a significantly lower total mood disturbance profile. Athletes
were found to have fewer symptoms of psychopathology and a greater feeling of
vigor (high energy). However, sports participants comprise such a diverse group of
individuals with respect to sex, sports specificity, and success level that omnibus
comparisons with non-athletes are problematic. Differences within the sporting
population were evaluated to further delineate the personality profiles of athletes.
Our results confirmed that gender differences did exist in the personality
profiles of athletes. Males and females exhibited distinctly different personalities at
the participation level, for each type of sport, and at each level of success. The
general findings that male athletes are less anxious, extraverted and neurotic, and
more psychotic/tough-minded support the conclusion of Colley et al. (1985) and
Kirkcaldy (1982). However, this picture also reflects the well-documented gender
19
differences in the normal population (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975; Spielberger et al.,
1971).
While it was hypothesized (and perhaps was intuitively appealing) that
athletes in individual vs. team and direct vs. parallel sports should possess different
personality profiles, this was not borne out by our results. The findings support
those of Cratty (1986) and Kirkcaldy (1982) and agree that a set of unique
distinguishing characteristics for each type of sport seems untenable. The only
personality variable found to discriminate any type of sport was greater vigor for
the direct athlete - a result that would meet scant approval from parallel sports
persons such as volleyballers and tennis players where a high energy level would
seem to be a necessary prerequisite. The very nature bf team sports requires
participants to be extraverted (sociable, talkative, not interested in doing things
alone), but extraversion did not differentiate those persons from individual athletes.
Perhaps, as Eysenck et al. (1982) suggested, it may not be sufficient to compare one
sport type with another - quite specific detail within a given sport (e.g., position)
may be needed to discern personality differences.
Elite athletes were found to have significantly greater positive mental health
than non-elite athletes. Positive mental health is characterized by scores below the
population mean for tension, depression, anger, fatigue, and confusion (negative
affective states) and above the population mean for vigor (positive affective state) the iceberg profile (see Figure 4). This profile seems beneficial from a mental
health viewpoint (Hagberg et al., 1979); advantageous to the elite athlete as
compared with the general population. Presumably, those who have excelled in a
particular port would have a higher than average ability to• come to terms with
negative affective states, which appear to have a detrimental effect on performance
20
(Klavora, 1977). Results also revealed that the mood profile of the national and
state representatives in this sample closely resembled those of outstanding athletes
in previous studies of distance running (Morgan & Pollock, 1977), rowing (Morgan
& Johnson, 1978), soccer (Robinson a Howe, 1987) and weightlifting (Mahoney,
1989). The iceberg profile was slightly distorted by elevated anger scores (similar:
to those found by Morgan (1980) with wrestlers). Anger scores were consistent
through level of success and across the total sample and may be characteristic of
adolescents.
Several theoretical and methodological factors need clarification.
Personality research in sport has often been criticized for adopting a trait approach
(e.g., Martens, 1975). This approach considers the general source of behavioral
variance to reside within the individual and to be consistent across situations. The
mental health model of Morgan (1981, 1985), confirmed in this research, neither
represents a trait approach, nor its conceptual alternative, a situational paradigm.
The model seeks to explain relationships between individuals and their sporting
participation and/or success. As such, it accounts for a significant percentage of the
variance in participation and/or success level. Indeed, the .model can be extended
by the adoption of an interactional paradigm, wherein behavioral effects of
personality differences and environmental influences are studied concurrently
(Martens, 1975).
Normative POMS data for samples of senior high school students has not
yet been published, while both the STAI and EPQ factors have significant ageeffects - state and trait anxiety (Spielberger et al., 1971) and extraversion,
neuroticism, and psychoticism (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975) all diminish with
advancing age. Comparisons with normative data from college samples may
21
therefore be problematic. Further, Geron et al. (1986) suggested that various sports
attracted athletes from different sociocultural and sociodemographic backgrounds.
Although scores on the POMS and EPQ (excluding the lie scale) are affected little
by background variables, nevertheless, a technique of matching subjects and groups
on relevant sociodemographic factors may be necessary in sports research.
Personality dimensions are increasingly seen as very important as at- tempts
are made to understand and explain sporting behavior. This study has adopted the
approach of Morgan and Pollock (1977) and the sport classification model of
Schurr et al. (1977) to provide some consistency and conformity for the findings.
Eventually, a model with reliable and predictive accuracy may •provide sport
psychologists, coaches and athletes alike with the information needed to assist
individual performances. Ultimately, the ability to understand and apply the
knowledge of sporting personalities should benefit sports participants.
Résumé
L'étude de la personnalité est un domaine d'importance croissante en
psychologic du sport où des efforts sont réalisés pour comprendre, expliquer et
prédire les niveaux d'engagement et de réuissite. Afin de mieux appréhender ces
relations, 312 etudiants de 17 ans ont complété une batterie d’inventaire de
personnalité et d'état de l'humeur: STAI, EPQ et POMS. lls ont ensuite été répartis
dans des groupes en fonction de leur participation sportive, du type de sport
pratiqué et du niveau de pratiqué. La MANOVA indique que les sportifs ont des
profils de personnalité significativement differents des non pratiquants. Les tests
univariés montrent que les participants sont davantage extravertis et actifs, moins
anxieux, névrotiques, déprimés et confus. Des différences liées au sexe apparaissent
22
quant au type de sport et au niveau de pratique. Les sportifs d'élite ont un profil
d'humeur significativement different des athlètes de moindre niveau et
correspondent bien au profil “iceberg” decrit par Morgan (1980). Ces résultats
confirment l'idée selon laquelle la pratique sportive est associée à une bonne santé
mentale.
Resumen
En la psycología deportiva la personalidad representa una area de busqueda
que sigue levantando un enorme interés. A1 mismo tiempo mucha atención se
endereza a la comprensión, explicación y predicción de los niveles de implicación
deportiva y de buen éxito. Para comprender de manera más ahondada estas
informaciones, 312 estudiantes han llevado a cabo unos cuestionarios concernientes
la personalidad y la condición del humor que comprendía lo STAI, EPQ, POMS y
además, fueron divididos segiln la participación al deporte, al modelo deportivo, y
al nivel de buen éxito obtenido. De la MANOVA se evidenció que los atletas que
practican ei deporte, respeto a los no practicantes tienen un perfil de personalidad
diferente. Las pruebas han evidenciado que los practicantes resultan más extraversos y presentan mucha fuerza, tienen menor ansiedad, neurosis, depresión y
confusión. Entre los practicantes se han puesto en evidencia diferencias de genero
relacionadis al modelo deportivo y al nivel de buen éxito. Los atletas de élite
presentaron un perfil del humor particolarmente diferente de los atletas no de élite,
pero homogéneo con el perfil del "ice-berg" de Morgan (1980). Los resultados
confirman la hipótesis que la partecipación deportiva está junta con una positiva
salud mental.
23
Zusammenfassung
Personlichkeit ist zu einem zunehmend wichtigen Bereich in der
Sportpsychologie geworden, wenn versucht wird, das Mass des Sportengagmentes
und erfolgs zu verstehen, zu erklliren und vorherzusagen. Urn diese Beziehungen
genauer zu verstehen, fiillten 312 Studenten der Stufen 11 and 12 eine Batterie von
Personlichkeits und Stimmungszustands Fragebogen aus, die den STAI, den EPQ
und den POMS umfasste, und wurden danach kategorisiert nach (1)
Sportteilnahme, (2) ausgeiibte Sportart und (3) erreichtes Erfolgsniveau. Eine
mehrfaktorielle Varianzanalysergab, class Sportteilnehmer im Vergleich zu NichtTeilnehmern signifikant unterschiedliche Personlichkeitsprof.tle aufwiesen univariate Tests zeigten, class die Teilnehmer extravertierter und lebhafter sind
sowie weniger iingstlich, neurotisch, depressiv und verwirrt. Festgestellte
Geschlechtsunterschiede bei den Sportteilnehmern zogen sich iiber die Sportarten
und das Erfolgsniveau hinweg. Bei Eliteathleten wurde ein Stimmungsprofil
gefunden, das signifikant unterschiedlich war von Nicht-Eliteathleten, und welches
fast kongruent ist mit Morgans (1980) «Eisberg-Profil». Die Resultate unterstiitzen
die Auffassung, class die Sportteilnahme im Zusammenhang steht mit positiver
geistiger Gesundheit.
Riassunto
Nella psicologia dello sport la personalità è un'area di ricerca che sta
suscitando notevole interesse e nello stesso tempo inolta attenzione viene rivolta
alia comprensione, spiegazione e predizione dei livelli di coinvolgimento sportive e
di successo. Per comprendere in modo più approfondito queste relazioni 312
studenti hanna completato una batteria di questionari di personalità e relativi allo
24
stato dell'umore che comprendeva lo STAI, l'EPQ e il POMS e inoltre, essi sono
stati distinti in funzione della partecipazione allo sport, al tipo di sport e allivello di
successo ottenuto. Dalla MANOVA è emerso che colora che praticano sport,
rispetto al non praticanti, hanno un profilo di personalità differente. I test-univariati
hanno mostrato che ipraticanti sono più estroversi e mostrano più vigore, sono
meno ansiosi, nevrotici, depressi e confusi. Fra i praticanti sono state evidenziate
differenze di genere in relazione al tipo di sport e al livello del successo. Gli atleti
di elite hanno mostrato un profilo dell'umore significativamente differerite dagli
atleti non di elite e relativamente omogeneo con il «profile dell'iceberg» di Morgan
(1980). I risultati confermano l'ipotesi che la partecipazione sportiva è associata con
una positiva salute mentale.
References
Aamodt, M.G., Alexander, C.J., & Kimbrough, W.W. (1982). Personality
characteristics of college non-athletes and baseball, football, and track
team members. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 327-330.
Boyle, G.J. (1985). Self-report measures of depression: Some psychometric
considerations. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 45-59.
Boyle, G.J. (1987). A cross-validation of the factor structure of the Profile of
Mood States: Were the factors correctly identified in the first instance?
Psychological Reports, 60, 343-354.
Boyle, G.J. (1988). Central clinical states: An examination of the Profile of Mood
States and the Eight State Questionnaire. Journal of Psychopathology and
Behavioral Assessment, 10, 205-215.
25
Boyle, G.J. (1991). Experimental psychology does require a multivariate
perspective. Contemporary Psychology, 36, 350-351.
Chan, C.S., & Grossman, H.Y. (1988). Psychological effects of running less on
consistent runners. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 875-883.
Colley, A., Roberts, N., & Chipps, A. (1985). Sex-role identity, personality, and
participation in team and individual sports by males and females.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 16, 103-112.
Cooper, L. (1969). Athletics, activity and personality: A review of the literature.
Research Quarterly, 40, 17-22.
Cox, R.H. (1985). Sport psychology: Concepts and applications. Dubuque, IA:
Brown.
Craighead, D.J., Privette, G., Vallianos, F., & Byrk:it, D. (1986). Personality
characteristics of basketball players, starters and non-starters. International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 17, 110-119.
Cratty, B.T. (1986). Psychology and Physical Activity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Daino, A. (1985). Personality traits of adolescent tennis players. International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 16, 120-125.
Daiss, S., Le Unes, A., & Nation, J.R. (198 ). Mood and locus of control of college
and professional football players. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 63, 733-734.
DeMers, G. (1983). Emotional states of high caliber divers. Swimming Technique,
May-July, 33-35.
.
Dowd, R., & Innes, J.M. (1981). Sport and personality: The effects of type of sport
and level of competition. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 58, 79-89.
26
Eysenck, H.J., & Eysenck, S.B.G. (1975). Manual for the Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Eysenck, H.J., Nias, D.K.B., & Cox, D.N. (1982). Sport and personality.
Advances in Behavior Research and Therapy, 4, 1-56.
Foster, R.W. (1977). A discriminant analysis of selected personality variables
among successful and unsuccessful male high school athletes. International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 119-127.
Franke, R. (1985). Psychological counselling and personality testing of top level
sportsmen. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 16, 20-27.
Frazier, S.E. (1987). Introversion-extraversion measures in elite and non-elite
distance runners. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 64, 867-872.
Fuchs, C., & Zaichkowsky, L. {1983). Psychological characteristics of male and
female body builders: The iceberg profile. Journal of Sport Behavior, 6,
136-145.
Geron, E., Furst, D., & Rotstein; P. (1986). Personality of athletes participating in
various sports. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 17, 120-135.
Gondola, J.C., & Tuckman, B.W. (1982). Psychological mood states in “average”
marathon runners. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 1295-1300.
Hagberg, J. M., Mullin, J. P., Bahrke, M., & Limburg, J. (1979). Physiological
profiles and selected psychological characteristics of national class
American cyclists. Journal of Sports Medicine, 19, 341-346.
Harris, D.V. (1973). Involvement in sport: A somatopsychic rationale for physical
activity. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.
27
Hendry, L. (1968). Assessment in personality traits in the coach-swimmers
relationship. Research Quarterly, 39, 543-551.
Hendry, L.B. (1975). Personality and movement: A university study. Journal of
Human Movement Studies, 1, 19-23.
Heusner, M.V. (1952). Personality traits of champion and fanner champion
athletes. Illinois: Unpublished Thesis, University of Illinois.
Huberty, C.J., & Morris, J.D. (1989). Multivariate analysis versus multiple
univariate analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 302-308.
Iso Ahola, S.E., & Hatfield, B. (1986). Psychology of Sports. Dubuque, IA:
Brown.
Johnson, R.W., & Morgan, W.P. (1981). Personality characteristics of college
athletes in different sports. Scandinavian Journal of Sports Science, 3, 4149.
Kirkaldy, B.D. (1982). Personality and sex differences related to positions in
team sports. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 13, 141-153.
Klavora, P. (1977). An attempt to derive inverted-U curves based on the
relationship between anxiety and athletic performance. In D.M. Landers &
R.W. Christina (Eds.), Psychology of motor behavior and sport. Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Kroll, W. (1970). Current strategies and problems in personality assessment of
athletes. In L.E. Smith (Ed.), .Psychology of motor learning. Chicago, IL:
Athletic Institute.
28
Kroll, W., & Carlson, B.R. (1967). Discriminant function and hierarchical grouping
analysis of karate participant personality profiles. Research Quarterly for
the American Association of Health and Physical Education, 38, 405-411.
LeUnes, A., & Nation, JR. (1982). Saturday’s heroes: A psychological portrait of
college football players. Journal of Sport Behavior, 5, 139-149.
McGowan, R.W., & Jordan, C.D. (198S). Mood states and physical activity.
Louisiana Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance
Journal, 15, 12-13, 17, 32.
McNair, D.M., Lorr, M., & Droppleman, L.F. (1971). Profile of Mood States
Manual. San Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
Mahoney, M.J. (1989). Psychological predictors of elite and non-elite performance
in Olympic weightlifting. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 20, 112.
Martens, R. (1975). The paradigmatic crisis• in American sport personology.
Sportwissenschaft, 5, 9-24.
Meyers, M., Sterling, J., & LeUnes, A. (1988). Psychological characterization of
the collegiate rodeo athlete. Journal of Sport Behavior, 11, 59-65.
Miller, B.P., & Edgington, G.P. (1984). Psychological mood distortion in a
sporting context. Journal of Sport Behavior, 7, 91-94.
Miller, B., & Miller, A. (1985). Psychological correlates of success in elite
sportswomen. Journal of Sport Psychology, 16, 289-295.
Morgan, W.P. (1968). Personality characteristics of wrestlers participating in the
world championships. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 8,
212-216.
29
Morgan, W.P. (1974). Selected psychological considerations in sport. Research
Quarterly, 45, 324-339.
Morgan, W.P. (1978). Sport personology: The credulous-skeptical argument in
perspective. In W.F. Straub (Ed.), Sport psychology: An analysis of athlete
behavior. New York: Mouvement Publications.
Morgan, W.P. (1979). Prediction of performance in athletics. In P. Kavora & J.V.
Daniel (Eds.), Coach, athlete, and the sport psychologist. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics Publishers. Morgan, W.P. (1980). The trait psychology
controversy. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 51, 50-76.
l\l{organ, W.P. (1985). Selected psychological factors limiting performance: A
mental health model. In D.H. Clarke & H.M. Eckert (Eds.), Limits of
human performance (pp. 70-80)_ Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Publishers.
Morgan, W.P., Brown, D.R., Raglin, J.S., O'Connor, P.J., & Ellickson, K.A.
(1987). Psychological monitoring of overtraining and staleness. British
Journal of Sports Medicine, 31, 107-114.
Morgan, W.P., & Costill, D.L. (1972). Psychological characteristics of the
marathon runner. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 12, 4246.
Morgan, W.P., & Johnson, R.W. (1977). Psychological characterizations of the
elite wrestler: A mental health model. Medicine and Science in Sports, 9,
55-56.
Morgan, W.P., & Johnson, R.W. (1978). Psychological characteristics of
successful and unsuccessful oarsmen. International Journal of Sport
30
Psychology, 11, 38-49.
Morgan, W.P., O'Connor, P.J., Ellickson, K.A., & Bradley, P.W. (1988).
Personality structure, mood states, and performance in elite male distance
runners. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 19, 247-263.
Morgan, W.P., & Pollock, M.L. (1977). Psychologic characterization of the elite
distance runner. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 301, 382403.
Ogilvie, B.C. (1968). Psychological consistencies within the personality of high
level competitors. Journal of American Medical Association, 205, 156-162.
Riddick, C.C. (1984). Comparative psychological profiles of three groups of
female collegians: Competitive swimmers, recreational swimmers, and
inactive swimmers. Journal of Sport Behavior, 7, 160-174.
Robinson, D., & Howe, B. (1987). Causal attribution and mood state relationships
of soccer players in a sport achievement setting. Journal of Sport Behavior,
10, 137-146.
Rushall, B.S. (1975). Psychodynamics and personality in
sport: Status and
values. In H.T.A. Whiting (Ed.), Readings in sports psychology. London:
Kimpton.
Schurr, K.T., Ashley, M.A., & Joy, K.L. (1977). A multivariate analysis of male
athlete personality characteristics: Sport type and success. Multivariate
Experimental Clinical Research, 3, 53-68.
Silva, J., Schultz, B., Haslam, R., & Murray, D. (1981). A psychophysiological
assessment of elite wrestlers. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
52, 348-358.
31
Smith, T. (1983). Competitive trait-anxiety in youth sports: Differences according
to age, sex, race and playing status. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57, 12351238.
Spilberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L., & Lushene, R:E. (1971). Manual for the state
trait anxiety inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Tenenbaum, G., & Milgram, R.M. (1978). Trait and state anxiety in Israeli student
athletes. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 34, 691-69.
Tharion, W.J., Strowman, S.R., & Rausch, T.M. (1988). Profile and changes in
moods of ultramarathoners. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 10,
229-235.
Thomas, T., Zabas, C., Bahrke, M., Araujo, J., & Etheridge, G. (1983).
Physiological and psychological correlates of success in track and field
athletes. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 17, 102-109.
Warburton, R.W., & Kane, J.E. (1966). Personality related to sport and physical
ability. In J.E. Kane (Ed.), Readings in physical education. London:
Physical Education Association. Williams, L.R.T. (1985). Personality
differences and achievement level in sport. Australian Journal of Science
and Medicine in Sport, 17, 28-30.
Williams, J., & Getty, D. (1986). Effect of level of exercise on psychological
mood states, physical fitness, and plasma beta-endorphin. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 63, 1099-1105.
Wilson, V., Morley, N., & Bird, E. (1980). Mood profiles of marathon runners,
joggers and non-exercisers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 50, 117-118.