PERSONALITY AND SPORTS

 Introduction to Personality

 Personality Defined

 Theories of Personality

 The Big Five Personality Traits

 Summary

 References

INTRODUCTION TO PERSONALITY

The study of personality has intrigued psychologists for most of the twentieth century. Sport
psychologists have been no exception; according to Ruffer (1975, 1976a, 1976b), almost six hundred
original studies of the relationship of personality to sport performance had been conducted by the mid
1970’s alone By way of update, Fisher (1984) set the figure at well over one thousand. More recent
estimates are not available, but it is certain that the number is substantially larger at this date.

Though considerable skepticism has been expressed about the type and quality of inquiry done
in many of those investigations, the quest for the link between sport and personality continues
unabated. This interest arises out of a desire to find better answers to questions of importance to sport
scientists, questions such as:

1. What personality traits are at work in producing the response in the face of competitive pressure?

2. What personality traits may contribute to good leadership from coaches and players?

PERSONALITY DEFINED

Lazarus and Monat (1979. p. 1) define personality as “the underlying, relatively stable,
psychological structure and processes that organize human experience and shape a person's activities
and reactions to the environment." Essentially, what Lazarus and Monat refer to is the notion that a core
personality exists and is more or less "the real you." In other words, there are core components of
personality by which you know yourself and are known by others, and these are generally quite stable
and unchanging. For the most part a healthy self-concept is stable and unchanging, just as is being
aggressive. Similarly, being warm and friendly and trusting of others are core traits. They may be
buffeted by life events, but generally will withstand these trials and tribulations with little alteration. The
core you, simply put, does not change much once it is set. Looking at only the personality core as a
means of explaining behavior clearly has limitations; there is much more to each of us than a set
psychological core.
 Allport (1937, p. 48) provides us with a way incorporating more into the personality than the
static core traits by offering the following definitional stance: "Personality is the dynamic organization
within the individual of those psychophysical unique adjustments to the environment. “Though laced
with sexist language, Allport’s time tested work in the area of personality theory and research provides
us with an additional facet or component of the personality, that of peripheral states. This is not to deny
the considerable influence of the psychological core, but Allport’s emphasis on dynamism allows for
more changeable peripheral state to exert on influence oh behavior. Some aspects of our personalities
are always in a state of flux. For example, our responses to religious, political, or racial issues are often
subject to variability. Also, daily events take their toll in such areas as depression, anxiety and other
related mood states. The dynamic interaction between the core (trait) and peripheral (state) portions of
each of us composes the essence of what is known as personality.

Hollander (1967) has taken the discussion a step further by talking about a psychological core,
typical responses, and role-related behaviors. Hollander has maintained the core as conceptualized
earlier in this discussion and broken the peripheral portion into typical responses and role-related
behaviors. We respond to typical daily events with fairly predictable behaviors, but in ways that are
more amenable to change than are the core traits. In other words, typical responses operate at a level
slightly less entrenched than the core. Role-related behaviors are the most superficial, therefore
malleable, aspect of the personality. Each of us is called upon daily to fulfill a number of different roles,
and we accomplish them in ways that get us by but are not always representative of our true core
predispositions. How many times have you had to refrain from stating your true opinion about a life
event because role expectations did not allow for honest expression? One final point about Hollander's
model merits attention. The social environment is a constant source of pressure on adjustment.

THEORIES OF PERSONALITY

Theories concerning the nature of personality are numerous, all striving to explain why the
human organism behaves as it does. These various theories have guided further theorizing and research
about personality, and we will examine six of them.

1. Biological Theories

One theory advanced to account for behavior is the constitutional theory of William Sheldon
(Sheldon, 1940, 1942) Sheldon’s theory takes the position that there are basic somatotypes or body
types that are predictive of personality. For instance, Sheldon’s ectomorph is characterized by leanness
and angularity of build, and responds behaviorally with a high level of activity; tension, and introversion.
The classic mesomorph is likely to be very muscular and athletic and responds to environmental stimuli
with aggression, risk-taking, and leadership. It follows logically that team leaders would emerge from
such a somatotype. Finally the endomorph has a more round body type and reacts behaviorally with
joviality, generosity, affection, and sociability. Jolly Old Saint Nick most closely serves as the prototype
for the endomorphic individual. Clearly, the three somatotypes are stereotypes and, as such, they suffer
from all of the shortcomings and criticisms of such a conceptualization. The reader is referred to
Eysenck, Nias, and Cox (1982) for a review of Sheldon's theory as it relates to sport.

More closely related to sport is Dishman's psychobiological theory (Dishman, 1984), which is
gaining acceptance as a means of predicting exercise adherence. Dishman's contention is that biological
factors, such as body composition, interact with psychological variables, such as motivation, to produce
an index of exercise compliance.

2. Psychodynamic Theory

One of the more well-developed, complex, and controversial theories about human behavior is
the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud. The cornerstone of Freud's theory is that humans are
inherently bad and, if left to their own devices, will self-destruct. This pessimism has fueled Freudian
thought since its formative days in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The psycho-analytic model is an
intrapsychic one; that is, the psyche is made up of an id, an ego, and a superego, with the id and the
superego in a constant state of conflict over control of the psychic. The arbiter of this eternal dispute is
the ego, and its strength is a prime determinant of adjustment. Should the id win the intrapsychic
conflict, a hedonistic thrill seeker in a constant search of pleasure is produced. Should the superego
become dominant, a dogmatic moralist is the end result. When the ego is able to arbitrate a healthy
rapprochement between the pleasure-seeking id and the moralistic superego, a healty, well-adjusted
person is produced.

Unfortunately, the psychoanalytic model has focused almost exclusively on pessimism and
pathology, and this preoccupation with abnormality has served to limit its applicability to the more
normal manifestations of behavior. In as much as sports participant, on the whole, appear to have no
more and no fewer psychological problems than do nonparticipants, the Freudian model has limited
utility for the sport psychologists. On a broader scale, however, psycho-analytic thought has served as
an impetus for a mammoth amount of research and a number of competing theories.

3. Humanistic Theory

A view counter to the Freudian model is that of the humanists. Beginning in the eighteenth
century with the writings of the French philosopher, Jean Jacques Rousseau, all the way to the recent
works of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers, humanists have adopted a stance that is diametrically
opposite to that of the psychoanalysts. To the humanist, the nature of man is basically good and
behavior, rather than being determined by deep, dark psychic forces, is free. The capacity for growth
and change is at the heart of this personal freedom. In the analytic model, badness must be kept in
check by laws rules, mores, and folkways if the person is to adjust properly. Thus, when a person turns
out bad, it is because society has failed. To the humanist, society with all its structures is seen as a
potential corruptive force, when a person turns out had, it is because society interfered natural
expression of goodness.
4. The Behavioral Model

The behavioral approach has been warmly embraced by sport psychology. The behavioral
coaching procedures discussed earlier represent one contribution from the behaviorists. The emphasis
on modeling and social reinforcement as espoused by Bandura represents a second major offering. Most
certainly, the performance enhancement and anxiety reduction strategies so integral to improving sport
performance have had considerable impact on sport psychology practice and research. Finally, the use
of reinforcement principles as a means of facilitating exercise adherence is another valuable
contribution. In brief, the behavioral model, with its emphasis on learning new productive behaviors and
unlearning old counterproductive ones, has been a bright beacon of light for sport psychology as a
whole.

5. Trait Theory

Much research in sport has been triggered by the trait (or factor) approach to personality as
advanced by such psychologists as Gordon Allport, Raymond Cattell, and Hans Eysenck. Trait theorists
contend that personality is best understood in terms of enduring traits or predispositions to respond in
similar ways across a variety of situations. This is not to say that behavior is invariable, however, a strong
tendency exists to respond in persistent, predictable, and measurable ways. Out of this belief has arisen
a host of psychometric instruments that have purported to assess these various traits. Much sport
research (and controversy) has been generated by trait psychology.

6. The Interactional Perspective

In an attempt to bring some clarity to the issue of personality within sport, an interactional
model has emerged. The interactional perspective suggests that behavior is, in fact, an interaction of the
person and the environment. The interactive model is summed up by a single formula advanced more
than sixty years ago by Kurt Lewin (1935), as follows: B =f(P,E). A significant point here is that traits are
still viewed as pertinent determinants of behavior, but not nearly so salient as the purists in trait
psychology.

The Big Five Personality Traits

One of the more exciting events in the study of personality to come along in years is the big five
personality traits proposed by Costa and MeCrae (1985). Summarizing a substantial number many
different methodologies for doing the "big five”. Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism,
Conscientiousness and Openness to Experience. In the case of Extraversion, such elements as sociability,
activity, and the tendency to experience positive emotional states are part and parcel of this trait. There
is evidence in the sport personology literature to suggests that athletes as a group would score higher
on the Extraversion dimension. As for Agreeableness, it relates to interpersonal style. On the other
hand, low-A people tend to be negative and more unapproachable. In the sport realm, it might be
hypothesized that coachable athletes would be high-A people. Concerning Neuroticism, the authors
talking of a more clinically-related scale pertaining to poor coping mechanisms and resulting
psychological distress. Where athletes might fall on trait is speculative; our hunch is that they would be
no more or less represented on this trait than would the population at large. The fourth trait composite,
Conscientiousness, contrasts well-organized, scrupulous, and diligent people with those who are lax,
disorganized, and lackadaisical. The application of this trait to sport research is unclear, though the
argument could be made that successful athletes may differ from less succcessful ones in terms of their
organizational skills. The final big five trait, Openness to Experience, relates to creativity, sensitivity, and
behavioral flexibility. Costa and McCrae (1992) do stress that clinical psychologists would probably
regard this trait as an indicator of good mental health, but they are not so confident that such is always
the case. They suggest that conformity and conventionality are also viable paths to good adjustment. In
terms of sport, it could be argued that conformity and conventionality would be more productive
avenues for expression than creativity and imagination. Admittedly, each of the hypotheses advanced
concerting sport research are nothing more than speculation. Obviously, research is needed to see if the
big five can breathe some new life into trait psychology as related to sport

SUMMARY

1. The study of the relationship bctween personality and sport performance has generated much
interest within sport psychology.

2. Personality is composed of core traits and peripheral states (what Hollander further breaks down into
typical responses and role-related behaviors). Constantly exerting pressure on each of these facets of
the personality is the social environment.

3. A number of competing theories attempt to explain human behavior.

4. Biological theories include the somatotype theory of Sheldon, who classifies people according to body
type and temperament, and the psychobiological model of Dishman, which is used to account for
exercise adherence.

5. The psychodynamic or psychoanalytic model of Sigmund Freud represents a detailed though

pessimistic model for explaining human behavior. An emphasis on intrapsychic conflict, inherent
badness, and determined behavior permeates the Freudian model.

6. Counter to the psychoanalytic approach is the humanistic model most closely identified with Carl
Rogers and Abraham Maslow. Key concepts in the humanistic model include inherent goodness of the
organism and freedom of choice. The fully functioning person of Rogers and the self-actualized
individual of Maslow are key conceptualizations used to account for superior adjustment.

7. The behavioral model suggests that the goodness/badness issue is best left to the philosopher;
however, behaviorists are some-what in consonance with the analysts on the determined nature of
behavior though they would suggest a very different explanation for how behavior becomes entrenched.
The behavioral approach has been warmly embraced by sport psychologists due to its utility in
improving sport performance.

8. Trait theory has been popular in sport psychology because many researchers have felt that sport
performance can be explained trait dispositions. The model has spawned much research and
controversy.

9. The interactional perspective that posits that behavior is a function of both personality and the
environment is increasingly popular within sport psychology.