PERSONALITY AND THE ATHLETE:Athletic Motivation Inventory, Personality Sport Type

<< THE MEASUREMENT OF PERSONALITY:Projective Procedures, Structured Questionnaire

SITUATIONAL FACTORS RELATED TO ANXIETY AND MOOD:Type of Sport >>

Sport Psychology (PSY407)

Lesson 16

PERSONALITY AND THE ATHLETE

Structured Questionnaires Designed For Athletes

In addition to the MMPI and the 16Pf, sport psychologists also use other inventories that may be considered

personality inventories. So far we have learned that we could measure the personality trait of self-confidence

using Vealey's (1986) Trait Sport-Confidence Inventory. We learned that we could measure task and ego goal

orientation using either the Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ; Duda 1989), or the

Perceptions of Success Questionnaire (POSQ; Roberts, 1993). We learned that we could measure attentional

focus using Nideffer's (1976) Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Styles (TAIS). These inventories were

designed to measure specific personality disposition or traits.

In addition to the specific trait inventories, sport psychologists have developed general personality inventories

designed to measure personality traits in athletes. These inventories have generally been developed for the

purpose of studying the relationship between personality and athletic performance. You should know that no

scientific study to date has shown a strong statistical relationship between personality variables and athletic

ability. Personality and psychological testing can play an important role in player development, but no evidence

exists to justify its use in making personnel decisions.

In this section three personality/psychological inventories will be mentioned, they are:

Athletic Motivation Inventory

Winning Profile Athletic Instrument

Troutwine Athletic Profile

Athletic Motivation Inventory

The Athletic Motivation Inventory (AMI) was developed by Thomas Tuko, Bruce Ogilvie, and Leland Lyon at

the Institute for the Study of Athletic motivation at San Jose State College (Tutko & Richards, 1971, 1972).

According to its authors, the AMI measures eleven personality traits related to high athletic achievement. They

are:

Drive

Aggression

Determination

Responsibility

Leadership

Self-confidence

Emotional control

Mental toughness

Coachability

10.

Conscience

11.

Trust

The reliability and validity of the instrument has been questioned by many researchers. However, Tutko and

Richards (1972) say that thousands of athletes have been tested and that the AMI was originally based upon the

16PF and the Jackson Personality Research Form. Studies suggest that AMI is a poor predictor of psychological

strength of ice hockey players.

Sport Psychology (PSY407)

Winning Profile Athletic Instrument

The Winning Profile Athletic Instrument (WPAI) was developed by Jesse Llobet of Psy-Metrics. The

WPAI is a fifty-item inventory that measures conscientiousness and mental toughness. Llobet (1999)

reported internal reliability coefficients of .83 and .87 for these two factors respectively. When

completing the instrument, athletes are asked to use their own sport as a frame of reference for

answering questions.

Troutwine Athletic Profile

The Troutwine Athletic Profile (TAP) was developed by Bob Troutwine, a professor of psychology at

William Jewell College (Carey, 1999); Rand, 2000). Psychometric properties of the TAP have not been

published in any of the mainline sport psychology journals; nor has anything scientific been published

about the validity of the test in terms of predicting athletic success.

The Credulous Versus Skeptical Argument

Many sport psychologists are polarized on the issue of the credibility of personality research. On one

side, a few researchers believe that positive and accurate predictions can be made about sport

performance from personality profiles based on measured traits. Proponents of this position are

considered credulous in nature are generally willing to use results of personality testing in predicting

athletic success. On the other side are sport psychologists who tend to be skeptical, minimizing the

value of personality assessment in predicting athletic success.

Personality is not a strong predictor of athletic performance, but it is a predictor. Based upon what is

known about personality, it is unreasonable to expect a high correlation between a personality

disposition and a physical skill. A person's basic personality should be viewed as just one factor that can

contribute to athletic success.

Personality and Sport Performance

Since 1960, several comprehensive literature reviews have been completed in an attempt to clarify the

relationship between personality and sport performance (Cofer & Johnson, 1960; Cooper, 1969;

Hardman, 1973; Ogilvie, 1968, 1976; Morgan, 1980b).

Literature shows a consistent relationship between personality and sport performance when (a)

response distortion is removed, and (b) data are analyzed using a multivariate approach. A multivariate

approach is used when multiple measures of personality are analyzed simultaneously, as opposed to

separately.

It is good to remember that the relationship between sport performance and personality is far from

crystal clear; it seems equally true that certain general conclusions can be drawn.

Athletes versus Nonathletes

Athletes differ from nonathletes on many personality traits (Gat & McWhirter, 1998). Research shows

that athletes who participate in team and individual sports are more independent, more objective, and

less anxious than nonathletes. From Hardman's (1973) review it is also clear that the athlete is often

more intelligent than average. Cooper (1969) described the athletes as being more self-confident,

competitive, and socially outgoing than the nonathletes.

Sport Psychology (PSY407)

Athletes tend to be alert, enthusiastic, forthright, self-sufficient, reality based and practical, and exhibit

low anxiety, emotional detachment, low superegos, and high levels of sensation seeking.

Personality Sport Type

Can personality profiles of athletes in one sport be reliably differentiated from those of athletes in another

sport? The first real attempts to answer this question were made with bodybuilders. Research by Henry (1941),

Thune (1949), and Harlow (1951), for example, suggested that bodybuilders suffer from feelings of masculine

inadequacy, and are overly concerned with health, body build, and manliness. Studies showed that bodybuilders

were high in achievement motivation and resistance to change, but relatively normal in other traits measured.

Researches were also carried out on other athletes; results showed that when football players and wrestlers were

contrasted with gymnasts and karate participants, significantly different personality profiles emerged. The

wrestlers and football players had similar profiles, while the gymnast and karate athletes differed from each

other, as well as from the wrestlers and football players.

Schurr, Ashley, and Joy (1977), in their signal research, clearly demonstrated that personality profile differences

exist between players of team and individual sports, and between players of direct and parallel sports. Team

sport athletes were observed to be more anxious, dependent, extraverted, and alert-objective, but less sensitive-

imaginative, than individual sport athletes. Direct sport athletes (basketball, football, soccer, etc.), were observed

to be more independent and to have less ego strength than parallel sport athletes.

Super-athletes are runners, swimmers, cyclists, and triathletes who are dedicated to endurance activities. Super-

adherer would also differ from athletes in other sports in certain personality traits. The literature shows that

athletes in one sport often differ in personality type and profile from athletes in other sports. It seems

reasonable for example to expect a football player to be more aggressive, anxious, and tolerant of pain than a

golfer or a tennis player. However, the point still needs to be made that the state of the art (or science) is still

not so refined that one could feel justified in arbitrarily categorizing young athletes based on their personality

profiles.

Player Position and Personality Profile

Now here as well the same concept can be applied to whether athletes of a certain sport exhibit different

personality profiles based on player position.

In recent years we have experienced an age of super specialization in team sports. In baseball, outfielders are

inserted based on whether they hit left or right handed. In football the offense and defense of the same team

rarely come in contact with each other. In volleyball, hitters and setters have specialized roles that dictate the

sorts of defensive and offensive assignments they fulfill. Similar kind of specializations can be observed with

most other team sports.

In a study reported by Schurr, Ruble, Nisbet, and Wallace (1984), a comparison was made between players

position in football and personality traits. Using the Myers-Briggs Type inventory (MBTI), the authors

concluded that linesmen differ significantly from backfield players in terms of judging and perceiving traits.

Linesmen tend to be more organized and practical, while defensive and offensive backs are more flexible and

adaptable. Interestingly, No reliable differences were noted between offensive and defensive linesmen, while

offensive backs tended to be more extraverted and defensive backs more introverted.

Personality Profiles of Athletes Differing in Skill Level

It is basically the ability to distinguish between successful and unsuccessful athletes in any particular sport using

personality traits has never been particularly successful. Foe example if we are using collegiate wrestlers and

karate participants we can not successfully distinguish between the successful and unsuccessful performers.

Sport Psychology (PSY407)

Likewise using tennis and baseball players we can not distinguish between successful and unsuccessful players.

Similarly a research was done and the researchers were unable to distinguish between starters and nonstarters in

high school boys basketball.

The lack of relationship between personality traits and skill level are the results of the Schurr et al.

(1977) research. Successful and unsuccessful sport participation in this study was determined based on

whether or not the athlete earned a letter or award. The results of this comparison using the global

factors of the 16 PF failed to show a significant relationship between performance and personality. It

does not seem reasonable to expect that a group of first string athletes could be separated from a group

of second string athletes based solely on personality traits. Both of these groups consist of highly skilled

athletes in the first place, or they would not be on the team. Additionally the task of differentiating

between two groups of relatively successful performers on the basis of skill itself is very tenuous and

arbitrary task.

One exception to the general rule is that skill level cannot be differentiated as a function of personality

may occur when elite athletes are compared with athletes of lesser ability. As elite athletes move up the

athletic pyramid, they become more alike in their personality and psychological traits. At the base or

entrance level of sport, athletes are very heterogeneous, or have different personalities. However,

certain personality traits will enhance an athlete's likelihood of advancing to a higher level, while other

traits will undermine it. Through a process of natural selection, at each higher level of the athletic

personality pyramid, the athlete become more alike, or more homogeneous, in their personality traits.

When trying to differentiate between athletes of varying skill levels in the middle and lower parts of the

pyramid, we meet with failure. Elite athletes however will exhibit similar profiles and will differ as a

group from less skilled groups.

The Female Athlete

The conclusions and generalizations that have been drawn from the previous comparison areas have

come primarily through research conducted on male and female subjects. This is not to say that the

conclusions would have been any different if female subjects had been used. Indeed, we should expect

the results to be essentially the same.

A research shows that the "Comparisons of college athletes and nonathletes, or athletes from different

sport groups, did not appear to be consistent in the literature dealing with females". After reviewing

much of the available literature on the female athletes and personality, Williams (1980) cautiously

concluded that the "normative" female differs in personality profile from the successful female athlete.

Specifically, the female athlete is found to exhibit personality traits much like those of both the

normative male and the male athletes (i.e., assertive, achievement-oriented dominant, self-sufficient,

independent, aggressive, intelligent, and reserved). For example Female body builders were observed to

be more extraverted, more vigorous, less anxious, less neurotic, less depressed, less angry, and less

confused (Freedson, Mihevic, Loucks & Girandola, 1983)

References

Cox, H. Richard. (2002). Sport Psychology: Concepts and Applications. (Fifth Edition). New York:

McGraw-Hill Companies

Lavallec. D., Kremer, J., Moran, A., & Williams. M. (2004) Sports Psychology: Contemporary Themes.

New York: Palgrave Macmillan Publishers

Table of Contents: