This article was downloaded by: [Western Michigan University]

On: 10 December 2014, At: 15:18

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

The Journal of Psychology:

Interdisciplinary and Applied
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjrl20

Sportsmanship in Young
Athletes: The Role of
Competitiveness, Motivational
Orientation, and Perceived
Purposes of Sport
a
Todd A. Ryska
a
College of Education , University of Texas at San
Antonio
Published online: 02 Apr 2010.

To cite this article: Todd A. Ryska (2003) Sportsmanship in Young Athletes: The Role
of Competitiveness, Motivational Orientation, and Perceived Purposes of Sport,
The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 137:3, 273-293, DOI:
10.1080/00223980309600614

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980309600614

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
 and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014
 The Journal of Psychology, 2003, 137(3),213-293

Sportsmanship in Young Athletes:

The Role of Competitiveness, Motivational
Orientation, and Perceived
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

Purposes of Sport
TODD A. RYSKA
College of Education
University of Texas at San Antonio

ABSTRACT. The purpose of the study was to evaluate measures of competitiveness,

motivational orientation, and perceived purposes of participation as predictors of sports-
manship in a sample of 319 young participants in sports. Hierarchical regression analyses
indicated that intrinsic reasons for sports participation, such as enhanced self-esteem and
task mastery, predicted higher levels on multiple dimensions of sportsmanship, above and
beyond the influence of competitiveness, motivational orientation, and various demo-
graphic variables. In contrast, extrinsic purposes for participation in sports, such as to
obtain social status and a high-status career. contributed to lower levels on 3 of the 4
sportsmanship dimensions. These results are discussed with regard to developing a com-
petitive sport setting that promotes ethical standards of interpersonal behavior for young
participants in sports.
Key words: competitiveness, motivation, sportsmanship, young athletes

GIVEN THE ESTIMATED 48 TO 5 1 MILLION CHILDREN who participate in

competitive sports each year in the United States, a popular debate has arisen
concerning the role of organized sport participation in the development and pro-
motion of prosocial attitudes in young people (Coakley, 1996; Gough, 1998;
Shields & Bredemeier, 1995). Initial research has indicated that participation in
sports has the potential of fostering both positive and negative perceptions among
its young participants. For example, children’s involvement in sport has been
linked positively to self-concept (Marsh, 1998), self-esteem (Kavussanu & Har-
nisch, 2000), body image (Miller & Levy, 1996), achievement attitudes (Curry,

Address correspondence to Todd A. Ryska, University of Texas at Sun Antonio, College of

Education, Sun Antonio, Tx 78249: tryska@utsa.edu (e-mail).

213
 274 The Journal of Psychology

Snyder, Cook, Ruby, & Rehm, 1997), and general mental health (Steiner,
McQuivey, Pavelski, Pitts, & Kraemer, 2000).
Other researchers have linked competitive sport participation by youth neg-
atively to altruism (Blair, 1983, moral development (Bredemeier, Weiss,
Shields, & Cooper, 1986; Shields & Bredemeier, 1995), and sportsmanship (Alli-
son, 1982) in contrast to their nonparticipating peers. The outgrowth of this
research seems to suggest that the impact of sport participation on children’s
prosocial attitudes would be better understood through an assessment of partici-
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

pants’ subjective appraisals of the sport setting rather than by simply comparing
participants with nonparticipants (Vallerand & Losier, 1994; Weiss & Brede-
meier, 1986, 1991). Although individual differences in competitiveness, motiva-
tional orientation, and perceived purposes of sport would appear to influence the
development of prosocial attitudes within the sport context, a direct test of these
intrapersonal variables is lacking in pediatric sport research.
Goal perspective theorists (Duda, 1993; Nicholls, 1989) defined sport moti-
vation in terms of how an individual construes personal success within the com-
petitive sport setting. A task-involved athlete derives his or her perceived com-
petence largely from self-based informational sources such as task mastery, skill
improvement, and maximal effort in the pursuit of goals. In contrast, ego involve-
ment in sport reflects a sense of personal success based on social comparison
standards such as outperforming opponents, demonstrating superior ability with
little effort, and receiving positive external evaluations (Duda & Nicholls, 1992;
Jagacinski & Nicholls, 1990; Nicholls, 1989). These motivational orientations
reflect not only how personal competence is developed within the competitive
sport setting but what personal benefits are expected through sport participation
(Duda, 1992; Nicholls, 1989).
The participation goals of task-involved athletes are largely intrinsic in
nature and include experiencing cooperation, learning new skills, and developing
citizenship, whereas ego-involved athletes tend to emphasize extrinsic participa-
tion goals such as increasing social status and popularity, getting ahead in life,
and gaining a competitive edge (Duda, 1989a; Walling & Duda, 1995; White &
Duda, 1994). Ego-involved athletes expect to develop greater competitiveness as
a result of their sport participation, whereas task involvement is strongly related
to the participation expectations of social aftiliation within teammates, sport skill
improvement, and ethical development (Ommundsen & Roberts, 1996; Roberts,
Hall, Jackson, Kimiecik, & Tonymon, 1995). Preliminary results have also linked
specific motivational dispositions to prosocial attitudes toward sport. Task-
involved athletes tend to exhibit higher levels of social character and are less
accepting of unsportsmanlike play and cheating in themselves and others than are
their ego-involved peers (Duda, Olson, & Templin, 1991; Ryska & Richey,
1999).
Empirical findings have been more equivocal with regard to the relationship
between athletes’ motivational dispositions and levels of competitiveness (Gill,
 Ryska 215

1993; Roberts, 1993). Although White and Duda (1994) found that ego-involved
athletes demonstrated a greater tendency than their task-involved counterparts to
participate in sport for its competitive aspect; other studies have observed low to
moderate relationships between competitiveness and measures of achievement
motivation (Gill & Deeter, 1988; Gill, Dzewaltowski, & Deeter, 1988). Such
results may be explained by the fact that both ego- and task-involved participants
have an equal capacity to be competitive within the context of sport, but the rela-
tionship between competitiveness and specific athlete behaviors and affect
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

depends on whether competitiveness is derived from an ego-based or from a task-

based motivational perspective. Thus, it may be argued that a predictive model of
sportsmanship should include athletes’ levels of competitiveness as well as the
motivational perspectives they use to derive personal feelings of competence in
sport participation.
Although researchers have conceptualized sportsmanship in various ways, two
themes are consistently present in nearly all definitions of the construct. Athletes
who exhibit high levels of sportsmanship appear to balance feelings of intense
striving and playfulness as well as develop ethical standards that supersede strate-
gic gain within the competitive context (Feezell, 1986; Shields & Bredemeier,
1995). The standards that athletes apply to their behavior within the competitive
context are influenced largely by personal expectations of sport participation.
Turiel (1983) and colleagues (Turiel, Killen, & Helwig, 1987; Turiel,
Smetana, & Killen, 1991) suggested that participation goals help formulate per-
sonal perceptions of the achievement setting and, in turn, play an influential role
in the development of ethical attitudes. Duda (1989b) stated that the anticipated
benefits of participation in competitive sport may be categorized as extrinsic
(e.g., to obtain a high-status career or to enhance one’s social standing) or intrin-
sic (e.g., to learn new skills or to increase self-esteem) and appear to be related
to athletes’ motivational orientations. Duda (1996) also speculated that positive
prosocial attitudes toward sport would typically be demonstrated by athletes
whose major reasons for participation are intrinsic in nature.
As athletes become more competitive, their participation goals become more
extrinsic in nature, which suggests that these athletes view sport not only as a
means to personal ends but that their reasons for participation tend to deviate
from those considered positive by society at large (Adler & Adler, 1994; Gough,
1998). Initial support for this contention has revealed an inverse relationship
between the level of competitive sport involvement and sportsmanship (Brede-
meier, 1995; Carpenter & Yates, 1997; White, 1995). However, pediatric sport
research is not clear with regard to how athletes’ participation goals affect their
sportsmanship above and beyond the influence of competitiveness and achieve-
ment goal perspectives.
I designed the present study to extend the theoretical foundation of sports-
manship research by examining the influence of competitiveness, motivational
orientation, and perceived purposes of sport participation on young athletes’
 276 The Journal of Psychology

sportsmanship. In particular, I used hierarchical multiple regression to assess the

role of participation goals on various dimensions of sportsmanshipover and above
the impact of athlete demographic variables, competitiveness, and motivational
orientation. On the basis of the existing youth sport motivation and sportsmanship
literature, I hypothesized that intrinsic purposes of sport participation would be
positive predictors of sportsmanship, whereas I expected lower levels of sports-
manship among athletes reporting extrinsic expectations of sport participation.
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

Method
Participants

Participants were 319 young adolescent boys (n = 185) and girls (n = 134) in
the southwestern United States who were participating in the extracurricular com-
petitive youth sports of soccer (n = 105),swimming (n= 80), tennis (n = 56), horse-
back riding (n = 42), and cycling (n = 36). Participants ranged in age from 10 to 15
years (M = 12.65, SD = 0.90), had an average of 2.46 (SD = 0.85) years of com-
petitive sport experience, and practiced their sport an average of 8.73 (SD =
0.76) hr per week. For a majority of these athletes (65.3%), participation in their
current sport was their sole exposure to organized youth sport. The ethnic com-
position of the sample was largely Anglo-American (n = 213, 67%) with Mexi-
can American (n = 63,20%), African American (n = 32, lo%), and Asian Amer-
ican (n = 11, 3%) athletes also represented.

Procedure

I provided sport administrators, coaches, and parents a brief written descrip-

tion of the study and secured informed consent for each participant. Prior to sur-
vey administration, I assured the participants of the anonymity and confidential-
ity of their responses as well as their ability to terminate participation at any time
and for any reason. The survey was administered to athletes prior to a scheduled
practice, and the order of the questionnaires was counterbalanced so as to com-
bat any potential response biasing. Each participant was fully debriefed at the
conclusion of testing as to the purpose of the study. I used a multivariate design
to determine the relative role of the predictor variables (i.e., athlete competitive-
ness, achievement goals, and participation motives) on the criterion variable
(sportsmanship dimensions).

Measures

Competitiveness. I used the Competitiveness subscale of the Sport Orientation

Questionnaire (SOQ; Gill & Deeter, 1988) to measure the level of dispositional
competitiveness demonstrated by the athletes. The SOQ Competitiveness sub-
 Ryska 277

scale indicates the degree to which an individual desires to enter the sport
achievement setting, strive for success, put forth efTort, achieve goals, and
attempt to meet competitive challenges. It contains 13 items rated on a 5-point
scale anchored by strongly agree ( l ) , neither agree nor disagree (3), and strong-
ly disagree (5). Two representative items include “I thrive on competition” and
“The best test of my ability is competing against others.” The SOQ Competitive-
ness subscale has acceptable levels of internal consistency (as = .94 to .95) and
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

stability (a = 39) among youth and intercollegiate sport populations (Gill, 1993;
Gill & Deeter; Gill et al., 1988). Its reliability estimate was .92 for the present
sample.

Motivational orientation. I used the Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Ques-
tionnaire (TEOSQ; Duda & Nicholls, 1989) to assess individual differences in
the tendency to identify with task- and ego-oriented achievement goals within the
competitive sport setting. Athletes were asked to think of when they felt most
successful in their respective sport and then respond to 7 task-related items (e.g.,
“. . . when something I learn makes me want to go and practice more”) and 6 ego-
related items (e.g., “. . . when others can’t do as well as me”). Items are scored
on a 5-point scale anchored by strongly disagree ( 1) to strongly agree (5). The
reliability and validity of the TEOSQ subscales have been substantiated among
various samples of young athletes (Duda, Chi, & Newton, 1990; Ryska, Yin, &
Boyd, 1999; Voight, Callaghan, & Ryska, 2000; Williams, 1994). The internal
consistency of the Task and Ego subscales were adequate for the present sample,
a s = .82 and .73, respectively).

Perceived purposes of sport. I used the Purpose of Sport Questionnaire (PSQ;

Duda, 1989a) to measure athletes’ perceptions regarding the personal benefits
they expect to derive from participating in their respective sport. I selected four
of the original seven PSQ subscales as most relevant for the present study, includ-
ing the intrinsic purposes of MasteryKooperation and Enhanced Self-Esteem as
well as the extrinsic purposes of High-Status Career and Social StatusIGetting
Ahead. Each PSQ subscale item is preceded by the stem, “A very important thing
[sport] should do is . . .” and scored on a 5-point scale anchored by strongly dis-
agree (l), neutral (3), and strongly agree (5).
The MasteryKooperation subscale (7 items) represents the degree to which
an athlete expects to improve his or her skills and learn to cooperate with team-
mates and coaches while participating in sport (e.g., “. . . teaches me to work
cooperatively with others”). The High-Status Career subscale (6 items) repre-
sents the degree to which sport participation will enable the athlete to obtain a
high level of education and a financially lucrative career (e.g., “ . . . gives me the
skills that will get me a top job”).
The Enhanced Self-Esteem subscale (6 items) indicates the degree to which
participation is viewed as a means to improve one’s level of self-esteem (e.g.,
 218 The Journal of Psychology

“ . . . makes me feel important”). Finally, the Social StatudGetting Ahead sub-

scale (7 items) indicates the degree to which a player expects that sport partici-
pation will increase his or her popularity and advancement up the social ladder
(e.g., “ . . . gives me the chance to be friends with popular kids”). Adequate reli-
ability estimates have been reported for the PSQ subscales (Duda, 1989b;
Walling & Duda, 1995; White, 1995). Each of the four PSQ subscales demon-
strated adequate reliability in the present sample with Cronbach alpha coefi-
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

cients ranging from .72 to .86.

Sportsmanship. I used the Multidimensional Sportsmanship Orientations Scale

(MSOS-25) (Vallerand, Briere, Blanchard, & Provencher, 1997) to assess the
extent to which athletes are predisposed to behave in a sportsmanlike manner
during their sport training and competition. The MSOS-25 measures this theo-
rized orientation in sport along five behavioral dimensions. The Full Commit-
ment subscale reflects the degree to which athletes expend maximal effort,
acknowledge mistakes, and attempt to improve skills (e.g., “I think about ways
to improve my weaknesses,” and “I don’t give up even after making many mis-
takes’’). The Social Conventions subscale reflects an athlete’s respect for, and
tendency to engage in, social behavior deemed appropriate for his or her partic-
ular sport (e.g., “I acknowledge my opponent’s good work after a win,” and
“After a competition, I congratulate the opponent for his good performance”).
The Rules and Officials subscale reflects the athlete’s concern for adhering
to sport rules and obeying officials (e.g., “I respect the referee even when he or
she is not good,” and “I really obey all the rules of my sport”). The fourth sub-
scale (Respect for Opponent) measures the respect and concern an athlete holds
for his or her opponent (e.g., “When an opponent gets hurt, I ask the referee to
stop the game so that he or she can get help,” and “If I see that an opponent is
wrongly penalized, I try to fix the situation if I can”). The Negative Approach
subscale reflects an athlete’s negative approach toward participation (e.g., “After
a competition, I use excuses for a bad performance,” and “I criticize what the
coach makes me do”).
Respondents are asked to indicate how true each of the subscale items is for
them personally along a 5-point scale anchored by not at all (1) and very much so
(5). Although the psychometric properties of the Negative Approach subscale are
suspect, the remaining subscales of the MSOS-25 have demonstrated reliability
and stability among competitive youth sport participants (Vallerand, Briere, et al.,
1997). With the exception of the Negative Approach subscale (a = .54), the relia-
bility estimates for this sample were adequate for the four remaining subscales,
ranging from .72 to .78. The original alpha coefficient for the Social Conventions
subscale was .67. The deletion of Item 21 (i.e., “Win or lose, I shake hands with
the opponent after the game”) improved the alpha level to .72. For heuristic pur-
poses, the modified version of this subscale was included in the survey.
 Ryska 219

Results

Preliminary Analyses

The means, standard deviations, and zero-order intercorrelations for the

SOQ, TEOSQ, PSQ, and MSOS-25 subscales are given in Table 1. All subscale
scores were normally distributed; however, a there was a slight negative skew-
ness in the masterykooperation, task orientation, and full commitment data, indi-
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

cating that athletes scored considerably higher on these variables. Likewise, a

slight positive skewness was present in the high-status career data, demonstrat-
ing that athletes scored rather low on this subscale.
To ensure the proper use and interpretation of the fitted regression model, I
conducted an initial test for the presence of multicollinearity among the predic-
tor variables by evaluating their pairwise coefficients of simple correlation. Table
1 indicates that no intercorrelation exceeded the standard of r 2 . 7 0 (Tabachnick
& Fidell, 1996). However, this diagnostic may not disclose all the multi-
collinearity present among the predictors.
Thus, I also calculated the mean of the variance inflation factors (VIF) to
assess the degree to which multicollinearity affected the sum of the squared
errors in the standardized regression coefficients. Mean VIF values considerably
larger than 1 are indicative of serious multicollinearity (Neter, Kutner, Nacht-
sheim, & Wasserman, 1996). With the present mean VIF value at 1.06, multi-
collinearity did not appear to be a problem among the predictor variables.
I found low to moderate correlations (rs = -.32 to S O ) among the predictor
variables of competitiveness, motivational orientation, and perceived purposes of
sport. Likewise, intercorrelations among the mean scores of the sportsmanship
subscales were moderate, ranging from .22 to .48. The variables of task motiva-
tion, masterykooperation, and self-esteem were positively related to three of the
four dimensions of sportsmanship.
Conversely, ego motivation was negatively related to each aspect of sports-
manship, and competitiveness was negatively correlated with the sportsmanship
dimension of full commitment to sport. A significant negative correlation was
also observed between the expectation of obtaining a high-status career and both
sportsmanship factors of respect for one’s opponent and full commitment to par-
ticipation. Similarly, the expectation of enhancing one’s social status and getting
ahead through sport participation was negatively related to adherence to social
conventions and full commitment to participation.
Prior to conducting the regression analyses, I recoded the motivation orien-
tation data to clearly discern the achievement goal perspectives demonstrated by
the sample. Both theoretical and empirical considerations of the TEOSQ scales
have rendered task and ego motivation as orthogonal dimensions (Chi & Duda,
1995; Duda, 1993; Duda & Nicholls, 1989). Ostensibly, various levels of both
task and ego motivation may be adopted by athletes. However, most athletes tend
 Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

TABLE 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Zero-Order Correlations for the Study Variables

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Task motivation 3.78 0.60

2. Ego motivation 2.89 0.69 -.12
3. Competitiveness 3.82 1.20 -.23 .29
4. Masterylcooperation 4.49 0.58 .28 -.03 .I8
5. High status career 3.49 0.64 -.05 .20 .22 .06
6. Enhance self-esteem 4.05 0.61 .22 -.09 -.32 .38 .4I
7. Enhance social status 2.58 0.31 -.14 .19 .07 .24 .so .08
8. Social conventions 4.38 0.61 .28 -.40 .07 .15 .02 .24 -.I7
9. Rules and officials 4.21 0.66 .I7 737 .04 .15 -.13 .25 -.08 .46
10. Respect for opponent 3.59 0.93 .31 -.44 -.lo .28 -.20 .25 -.09 .48 .37
11. Full commitment 4.20 0.76 .42 -.36 -.23 .12 -.26 .I8 -.20 .35 .43 .22

p C .01 = .13; p 5 ,001 = .18.

Note. N = 319. For gender, 0 = male and 1 =female. Critical values of rare as follows: p S .05 = .09;
 Ryska 281

to predominate in one motivation orientation versus the other. The fact that high
task involvement in sport does not necessarily imply low ego involvement, and
vice versa, has important implications with regard to the predictive quality of the
TEOSQ subscales.
I therefore created a categorical variable of motivational orientation to clear-
ly distinguish the achievement goal perspectives adopted by the present sample.
Cases were assigned to low or high status on both task involvement and ego
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

involvement according to the median-split method. Dummy coding resulted in

the assignment of each athlete to one of four motivation groups designated as
polymotivated (0 = high tusk-high ego), task motivated ( 1 = high tusk-low ego),
ego motivated (2 = low tusk-high ego), and not motivated (3 = low tusk-low
ego).The final sample used in the regression analyses consisted of 89 (28%), 134
(42%), 58 (18%), and 38 (12%) athletes representing these four motivation
groups, respectively.

Multiple Regression Analyses

I tested the hypothesized predictive model through hierarchical multiple

regression analyses on each of the four sportsmanship dimensions. This method
permitted identification of the direct and moderating effects of competitiveness,
motivational orientation, and perceived purposes of sport by the partial increment
in R2 associated with each predictor variable as well as the total amount of vari-
ance explained in sportsmanship at each step of the hierarchical analysis.
The first regression analysis (Table 2) revealed significant main effects for
the demographic variables of gender (p = .32, p < .Ol) and competitive experi-
ence (p = -.2 1, p < .05) that explained nearly 9% of the variance in social con-
ventions, adjusted R2 change = .OW, F change (5, 313) = 2.17, p < .05. Specifi-
cally, athletes with greater competitive experience tended to report less adherence
to the social conventions of their respective sports, and girls scored higher in this
aspect of sportsmanship than boys, F = 8.13, p < .05, B = .25, SE B = .lo, d =
.24. In Step 2 of the regression, a main effect for motivational orientation (p = .35,
p < .01) contributed an additional 10% of explained variance in social conven-
tions, adjusted R2 change = .102, F change (7, 31 1) = 3.77, p e .01.
Comparisons of group means indicated that athletes who were highly task
motivated scored significantly higher in social conventions than the other moti-
vation groups, whereas the athletes who were not motivated scored significantly
lower in this sportsmanship dimension than the other groups. Step 3 of the
regression revealed that beyond the influence of the demographic, competitive-
ness, and motivation variables, the masterykooperation (p = .18, p < .05) and
high status career (p = -.47, p < .01) purposes of sport contributed an addition-
al 15% of explained variance in social conventions, adjusted R2 change = .152, F
change (1 1,307) = 5.28, p < .001. In particular, athletes who participated in sport
to improve their skills and cooperate with others were more likely to adhere to
 Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

N
m
w

TABLE 2. Hierarchical Regression Model Predicting the Sportsmanship Dimension of Social Conventions

[3
Predictors Step Model R2 A R ~ Adj. R 2 AAdj. R 2 AF

Step 1: Demographic variables

Gender (male = 0) .32** .27**
Age .07 .10
Ethnicity .09 .12
sport -. 10 .I2
Experience -.21* -.17* ,124 ,124 .086 ,086 2.17*
Step 2: Competitiveness -.I2 -.07
Motivational orientation .35** .32** .268 ,144 .188 ,102 3.77**
Step 3: Masterylcooperation .18* .23*
High-status career -.47** -.34**
Enhanced self-esteem .19* .17
Enhanced social status -.09 -.05 .424 .I72 .340 .152 5.28***

Nore. N = 3 19.0 = standardized regression coefficients for variables in model. Adj. (adjusted) R 2 = cumulative amount of variance explained after entry
of variables in step adjusted for the number of predictors. AAdj. R Z= change in variance accounted for after entry of variables in step. AF = F ratio
for AR2 attributable to entry of variables in step.
* p I.05. * * p I.01. ***p I.001.
 Ryska 283

the social conventions of their sport, whereas athletes who viewed their sport par-
ticipation as a means to advanced educational and sport career opportunities
exhibited lower levels of adherence to social conventions. The total model
explained 34% of the variance in social conventions sportsmanship.
The second regression analysis (see Table 3) revealed that the demographic
variables did not predict the sportsmanship dimension of respect for one's oppo-
nent, adjusted R2 change = .045,F change (5, 3 13) = 1.31, ns. A main effect for
competitiveness(p = -22, p < .05) and motivational orientation (0 = .32, p c .Ol)
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

emerged from Step 2, contributing nearly 10% of explained variance, adjusted R2

change = .095, F change (7, 31 1) = 2.28, p < .05. Both competitive and highly
ego-motivated athletes reported less respect for the opponent.
Step 3 of the regression indicated that beyond the impact of these variables,
athletes' perceived purposes of sport contributed an additional 12% of explained
variance, adjusted R2 change = .123, F change (1 1,307) = 4.12, p < .01. Specif-
ically, there was a positive relationship between masterykooperation and respect
for the opponent (p = .23, p < .05), indicating that athletes who reported higher
levels of this type of sportsmanship were more likely participating in their sport
for task mastery and cooperative reasons. In contrast, athletes who used their
sport participation to increase their popularity and social standing among peers
demonstrated less respect for their opponents (p = -.41, p < .01). When all the
variables were included, the model explained a total of 26.3% of the variance in
this sportsmanship dimension.
The third regression analysis (see Table 4) revealed significant main effects
for gender (p = .20, p < .05) and competitive experience (p = .26, p < .01) that
explained 9% of the variance in the sportsmanship dimension of full commit-
ment, adjusted R2 change = .093, F change (5, 313) = 4.56, p < .01. More expe-
rienced athletes demonstrated greater commitment, and boys scored higher in
this form of sportsmanship than did girls, F = 10.21, p < .01, B = .32, SE B =
.08, d = .18. In Step 2 of the regression, a main effect emerged for both compet-
itiveness (p = -.24, p < .01) and motivational orientation (p = .48, p < .001), con-
tributing an additional 17% of explained variance, adjusted R2 change = .173, F
change (7, 311) = 3.77, p < .001. More competitive athletes reported less com-
mitment to their sport and both polymotivated and athletes who were highly task
motivated scored higher in this sportsmanship than their peers who were highly
ego motivated or not motivated.
Beyond the effects of the demographic, competitiveness, and motivation
variables, the perceived sport purposes of high status career and enhanced self-
esteem were both positive predictors of full commitment sportsmanship, adjust-
ed R2 change = .163, F change (1 1, 307) = 6.37, p < .001. Greater commitment
to sport was exhibited by athletes whose purpose in participating was to obtain a
high status career, (p = .25, p < .01) as well as increase their level of self-esteem
(p = .18, p < .05). The model variables collectively explained 42.9% of the vari-
ance in full commitment sportsmanship.
 Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

TABLE 3. Hierarchical Regression Model Predicting the Sportsmanship Dimension of Respect for Opponent

D
Predictors Step Model R2 AR2 Adj.R2 AAdj. R 2 AF

Step 1: Demographic variables

Gender (male = 0) -.lo .07
Age .04 .01
Ethnicity .13 .06
sport .17* .12
Experience -.I3 -.08 ,099 ,099 ,045 .045 1.31
Step 2: Competitiveness -.22* -. 16*
Motivational orientation .32** .24* ,212 ,113 .140 ,095 2.28*
Step 3: Masterylcooperation .23* .18*
High-status career -.03 .MI
Enhanced self-esteem .I0 .I 1
Enhanced social status -.41** -.38** ,380 .168 .263 ,123 4.12**

Note. N = 3 19. = standardizedregression coefficients for variables in model. Adj. (adjusted) R 2 = cumulative amount of variance explained after entry
of variables in step adjusted for the number of predictors. AAdj. R 2= change in variance accounted for after entry of variables in step. hF = F ratio
for AR2 attributable to entry of variables in step.
*p 5.05. * * p I .01. * * * p 5.001.
 Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~

TABLE 4. Hierarchical Regression Model Predicting the Sportsmanship Dimension of Full Commitment

P
Predictors Step Model R2 AR2 Adj. R 2 AAdj. R 2 AF

Step 1: Demographic variables

Gender (male = 0) .20* .15*
Age .06 .02
Ethnicity .16* .14
sport .09 .10
Experience .26** .23** ,120 ,120 .093 .093 4.56**
Step 2: Competitiveness -.24** -.21*
Motivational orientation .48*** .41*** ,333 ,213 ,266 .173 7.61***
Step 3: Mastery/cooperation -. 17* -.12
High-status career .-35** .20*
Enhanced self-esteem .18* .16*
Enhanced social status -.05 -.03 ,446 .113 .429 .163 6.37***

Note. N = 3 19. p = standardized regression coefficients for variables in model. Adj. (adjusted) R 2 = cumulative amount of variance explained after entry
of variables in step adjusted for the number of predictors. AAdj. R 2 = change in variance accounted for after entry of variables in step. AF = F ratio
for AR2 attributable to entry of variables in step.
*p 5 . 0 5 . **p 2.01. ***p I .001.

N
m
VI
 Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

TABLE 5. Hierarchical Regression Model Predicting the Sportsmanship Dimension of Rules and Omcials

P
Predictors Step Model R2 AR2 Adj. R 2 AAdj. R’ AF

Step 1: Demographic variables

Gender (male = 0) .24** .20*
Age .I0 .08
Ethnicity .I6 .14
sport .09 .10
Experience -, 16* -.13* ,103 .I03 .087 ,087 2.85**
Step 2: Competitiveness .27** .23**
Motivational orientation .18* .16* .316 .213 ,243 .156 7.12***
Step 3: Masterylcooperation .17* .14*
High-status career -.33** -.28**
Enhanced self-esteem .20* .16*
Enhanced social status -.05 -.03 ,429 ,113 ,367 .128 3.88**

Nore. N = 3 19. p = standardized regression coefficients for variables in model. Adj. (adjusted) R 2 = cumulative amount of variance explained after entry
of variables in step adjusted for the number of predictors. AAdj. R* = change in variance accounted for after entry of variables in step. A F = F ratio
for AR* attributable to entry of variables in step.
* p 5.05. **p 5.01. ***p 5 .001.
 Ryska 287

The final regression analysis (see Table 5) revealed significant main effects
for gender (p = .24, p < .05) and competitive experience (p = -.16, p < .05) that
explained nearly 9% of the variance in the sportsmanship dimension of rules and
officials, adjusted R2 change = .087, F change (5, 313) = 2.85, p < .01. Athletes
with more experience tended to disregard the rules and officials of their respec-
tive sports to a greater degree than those who were less experienced. In addition,
girls on the whole tended to adhere to the rules and obey the officials more than
did boys, F = 6.09, p < .01, B = .34, SE B = .09, d = .17. In Step 2 of the regres-
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

sion, main effects for competitiveness (p = .27, p < .01) and motivational orien-
tation (p = .18, p < .05) contributed an additional 15% of explained variance in
rules and officials, adjusted R2 change = .156, F change (7,3 1 1) = 7.12, p < .OO1.
Specifically, more competitive athletes exhibited higher regard for the rules
and officials than did less competitive athletes. A comparison of motivational ori-
entation group means indicated that polymotivated and athletes who were high-
ly ego motivated reported greater respect for rules and officials than athletes who
were highly task motivated, who, in turn, scored higher in this sportsmanship
than non-motivated athletes.
Step 3 of the regression analysis revealed that above and beyond the impact of
the preceding variables, the sport purposes of mastery/cooperation (p = .17, p <
.05), high status career (p = -.33, p c .Ol), and enhanced self-esteem (p = .20, p <
.05) accounted for an additional 12% of the explained variance in rules and offi-
cials, adjusted R2 change = .128, F change ( I 1, 307) = 3.88, p < .01. Athletes who
participated in sport to improve their skills, cooperate with others, and enhance
their self-esteem reported greater regard for the rules and officials of their respec-
tive sports. Lower levels of this sportsmanship were evidenced among athletes par-
ticipating in sport to achieve greater educational and sport career opportunities.The
set of predictors explained a total of 36.7% of the variance in this sportsmanship
dimension.

Discussion

Initial sport psychology research has revealed a relationship between athlete

motivational orientation, personal expectations of sport participation, and
achievement-related behavior (Duda, 1989b; Duda et a]., 1991). The present
results extend this work by demonstrating the impact of specific participation
goals on dimensions of sportsmanship above and beyond the influence of athlete
competitiveness and motivational orientation. This line of inquiry has important
implications with regard to the behavior of young athletes, given the general
observations that (a) young athletes observe their professional sport role models
engaged in increasingly unsportsmanlike behavior; (b) a greater number of
young athletes are participating in competitive sports for extrinsic reasons; (c) a
philosophy of “survival of the fittest” has been largely adopted by sport orga-
nizers, coaches, and parents; and (d) current rates of athlete de-selection are con-
 288 The Journal of Psychology

siderable at the competitive youth level (Blinde & Stratta, 1992; Blundell, 1995;
Coakley, 1996; Ogilvie & Howe, 1986).
The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic goals on sportsmanship as demonstrat-
ed by the present sample of athletes is conceptually aligned with the basic tenets
of self-determination theory (SDT Deci & Ryan, 1985). This theory proposes
that the personal well-being and social development of individuals largely results
from satisfaction of the innate psychological needs of autonomy, relatedness, and
competence. The content of an individual’s goals affects the degree to which
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

goal-directed behavior satisfies these basic psychological needs and, in turn, pos-
itively affects psychological health (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Relevant results from clinical and social psychology research indicate that
the pursuit of intrinsic goals is more likely to lead to satisfaction of autonomy,
relatedness, and competence needs and is associated with positive psychologi-
cal outcomes such as personal integrity, collectivistic attitudes, and biopsy-
chosocial values (Kim, Butzel, & Ryan, 1998; Ryan & Frederick, 1997;
Williams & Deci, 1996). In contrast, indicators of negative mental health
including alienation, narcissism, and lower prosocial values have been linked
to an emphasis on extrinsic aspirations (Kasser & Ryan, 1996; Kasser, Ryan,
Zax, & Sameroff, 1995).
In this study, athletes who participated in sport for the intrinsic reasons of
learning new skills, experiencing cooperation, and enhancing self-esteem exhib-
ited greater sportsmanship, whereas lower levels of prosocial attitudes were evi-
dent among athletes who endorsed extrinsic participation goals such as enhanc-
ing social status or obtaining a college scholarship or professional career. The
impact of participation goals on various dimensions of sportsmanship was sig-
nificant beyond the contribution made by athlete motivational disposition. This
finding is important because it infers that the description of self-motivated sport
behavior, as offered by goal perspective theory (Duda & Nicholls, 1992), may be
incomplete. Although the constructs of task and ego motivational orientation
encompass the notion of competence needs, they neglect to address the basic
needs of autonomy and relatedness that form the basis of much of self-deter-
mined behavior in competitive sport.
Although the present study demonstrates that the psychological outcome of
prosocial attitudes is significantly affected by the types of goals athletes pursue
in their sport participation, what remains unclear is the underlying relationship
between the satisfaction of specific psychological needs and the development of
these prosocial attitudes. Although SDT contends that the satisfaction of all three
psychological needs is important for personal growth and well-being, it may be
the case that satisfaction of one of these particular needs is relatively more influ-
ential in the development of sportsmanship. Further research in this area should
focus on the relative extent to which the needs of autonomy, relatedness, and
competence are not satisfied among extrinsically motivated athletes such as those
represented in the present sample. Knowledge of a discernible pattern would
 Ryska 289

assist professionals as they attempt to facilitate prosocial attitudes and behaviors

among athletes in the competitive youth sport setting.
SDT also proposes that the manner in which an individual’s goal-directed
behavior is regulated affects his or her ability to satisfy the basic psychological
needs and, ultimately, achieve personal well-being. The goal regulatory processes
of internalization and integration are particularly important in the development and
maintenance of proper social behavior (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Virtually every social
setting prescribes certain behaviors and values although they may not be automat-
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

ically accepted or adopted by its participants. SDT delineates the process through
which such behaviors become self-determined. Internalization reflects the degree to
which required behavior is accepted and pursued, whereas integration represents
the extent to which such behavior is adopted as the individual’s own and stems from
his or her sense of self. In essence, greater personal autonomy or self-regulation in
behavior is represented by higher levels of both internalization and integration.
Sport researchers have generally assumed that a higher frequency of observed
sportsmanship necessarily represents greater social and moral development. How-
ever, SDT might suggest that the degree to which an athlete internalizes and inte-
grates prosocial behavior would probably provide a more accurate assessment of
his or her social development than manifest levels of sportsmanship.
For example, the present findings indicated that extrinsically motivated ath-
letes were disrespectful toward opponents yet demonstrated relatively high
sportsmanship with regard to the rules and officials of their sport. It is possible
that these athletes used prosocial attitudes in an instrumental manner to increase
the likelihood of achieving their extrinsic participation goals. Whereas unsports-
manlike behavior toward opponents helps create a competitive advantage and
cames with it little negative repercussion, it would be personally advantageous
for these athletes to act in a prosocial manner toward officials who have pre-
scribed authority over their goal-oriented behavior. However, although the
prosocial attitudes of these extrinsically motivated athletes are highly internal-
ized, these same athletes have little personal integrity. Professionals working
within the competitive youth sport setting agree that the ultimate purpose of pro-
moting sportsmanship is to achieve a high level of autonomous prosocial behav-
ior among a majority of young and adolescent athletes.
Although research indicates that coaches, parents, and teammates are influ-
ential in establishing normative prosocial behavior among young athletes
(Shields, Bredemeier, Gardner, & Bostrom, 1995; Vallerand, Deshaies, & Cuer-
rier, 1997), little is known regarding the specific impact each of these parties has
on the regulatory mechanisms involved in sportsmanship. Further research in this
area is warranted. Intervention programs such as those offered by Beedy (1 997)
and Miller, Bredemeier, and Shields (1997) would benefit from the ability to (a)
assess the degree of self-determination in prosocial behaviors among athletes and
to (b) mobilize those individuals within the sport context who are most effica-
cious in facilitating the personal autonomy of such behaviors.
 290 The Journal of Psychology

REFERENCES
Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1994). Social reproduction and the corporate other: The institu-
tionalization of afterschool activities. The Sociological Quarterly, 35, 309-328.
Allison, M. T. (1982). Sportsmanship: Variations based on sex and degree of competitive
experience. In A. 0. Dunleavy, A. W. Miracle, & C. R. Rees (Eds.), Studies in the soci-
ology of sport (pp. 153-165). Ft. Worth: Texas Christian University Press.
Beedy, J. (1997). Sports PLUS: Developing youth sports programs that teach positive val-
ues. Hamilton, MA: Project Adventure.
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

Blair, S. (1985). Professionalization of attitude toward play in children and adults.

Research Quarterly in Exercise and Sport, 56, 82-83.
Blinde, E. M., & Stratta, T. (1992). The “sport-career death” of college athletes: Involun-
tary and unanticipated sport exits. Journal of Sport Behavior; 15, 3-20.
Blundell, N. (1995). So you want to be a tennis pro? Melbourne, Australia: Lothian Press.
Bredemeier, B. J. (1995). Divergence in children’s moral reasoning about issues in daily
life and sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 453-464.
Bredemeier, B. J., Weiss, M. R., Shields, D. L., & Cooper, B. (1986). The relationship of
sport involvement with children’s moral reasoning and aggressive tendencies. Journal
of Sport Psychology, 8, 304-3 18.
Carpenter, P. J., & Yates, B. (1997). Relationship between achievement goals and the per-
ceived purposes of soccer for semiprofessional and amateur players. Journal of Sport
& Exercise Psychology, 19, 302-3 1 1.
Chi, L., & Duda, J. L. (1995). Multi-sample confirmatory factor analysis of the Task and
Ego in Sport Questionnaire. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 66, 91-98.
Coakley, J. (1996). Socialization through sports. In 0. Bar-Or (Ed.), The child and ado-
lescent athlete: Vol. 6. Encyclopaedia of sports medicine (pp. 353-363). Oxford, UK:
Blackwell Scientific Publications.
Curry, L. A., Snyder, C. R., Cook, D. L., Ruby, B. L., & Rehm, M. (1997). Role of hope
in academic and sport achievement. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 73,
1257-1267.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior: New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R, M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, I 1 , 227-268.
Duda, J. L. (1989a). Goal perspectives, participation and persistence in sport. Interna-
tional Journal of Sport Psychology, 20, 42-56.
Duda, J. L. (1989b). The relationship between task and ego orientation and the perceived
purpose of sport among male and female high school athletes. Journal of Sport & Exer-
cise Psychology, I I , 3 18-335.
Duda, J. L. (1992). Motivation in sport settings: A goal perspective approach. In G.
Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 57-91). Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics.
Duda, J. L. (1993). Goals: A social cognitive approach to the study of achievement moti-
vation in sport. In R. N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L. K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook of
research on sport psychology (pp. 421436). New York: Macmillan.
Duda, J. L. (1996). Maximizing motivation in sport and physical education among chil-
dren and adolescents: The case for greater task involvement. Quest, 48, 290-302.
Duda, J. L., Chi, L., & Newton, M. (1990, May). Psychometric characteristics of the
TEOSQ. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the North American Society for the
Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity, University of Houston, TX.
Duda, J. L., & Nicholls, J. G. (1989). Psychometric properties of the Task and Ego Ori-
 entation in Sport Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript.
Duda, J. L., & Nicholls, J. G. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in school
work and sport. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 29&299.
Duda, J. L., Olson, L. K., & Templin, T. (1991). The relationship of task and ego orienta-
tion to sportsmanship attitudes and the perceived legitimacy of aggressive acts.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62, 79-82.
Feezell, R. M. (1986). Sportsmanship. Philosophy of Sport, 8, 1-13.
Gill, D. L. (1993). Competitiveness and competitive orientation in sport. In R. N. Singer,
M. Murphey, & L. K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook of research in sport psychology (pp.
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

314-325). New York: Macmillan.

Gill, D. L., & Deeter, T. E. (1988). Development of the Sport Orientation Questionnaire.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 59, 191-202.
Gill, D. L., Dzewaltowski, D. A., & Deeter, T. E. (1988). The relationship of competitive-
ness and achievement orientation to participation in sport and nonsport activities. Jour-
nal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10, 139-150.
Gough, R. (1998). Moral development research in sports and its quest for objectivity. In M.
J. McNamee & S. J. Parry (Eds.), Ethics and spons (pp. 2542).. London: E & FN Spon.
Jagacinski, C. M., & Nicholls, J. G. (1990). Reducing effort to protect perceived ability:
“They’d do it but I wouldn’t.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 15-21.
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential
correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
22, 80-87.
Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Zax, M., & Sameroff, A. J. (1995). The relations of maternal and
social environments to late adolescents’ materialistic and prosocial values. Develop-
mental Psychology, 31, 907-9 14.
Kavussanu, M., & Harnisch, D. L. (2000). Self-esteem in children: Do goal orientations
matter? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 229-242.
Kim, Y., Butzel, J. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1998, June). Interdependence and well-being: A
function of culture and relatedness needs. Paper presented at The International Society
for the Study of Personal Relationships, Saratoga Springs, NY.
Marsh, H. W. (1998). Age and gender effects in physical self-concepts for adolescent elite
athletes and nonathletes: A multicohort-multioccasion design. Journal of Sport & Exer-
cise Psychology, 20, 237-259.
Miller, J. L., & Levy, G . D. (1996). Gender role conflict, gender-typed characteristics,
self-concepts, and sport socialization in female athletes and nonathletes. Sex Roles, 35,
1 1 1-122.
Miller, S., Bredemeier, B., & Shields, D. (1997). Sociomoral education through physical
education with at-risk children. Quest, 49, 114-129.
Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., & Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied linear
regression models (3rd ed.). Chicago: Irwin Press.
Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Ogilvie, B. C., & Howe, M. (1986). The trauma of termination from athletics. In J. M.
Williams (Ed.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (pp.
365-382). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
Ommundsen, Y., & Roberts, G. C. (1996). Goal orientations and perceived purposes of
training among elite athletes. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 83, 4 6 3 4 7 1.
Roberts, G. (1993). Motivation in sport: Understanding and enhancing the motivation and
achievement of children. In R. N. Singer, M. Murphey, & K. L. Tennant (Us.), Hand-
book of research on sport psychology (pp. 405420). New York: Macmillan.
Roberts, G. C., Hall, H. K., Jackson, S. A., Kimiecik, J. C., & Tonymon, P. (1995). Implic-
 292 The Journal of Psychology

it theories of achievement and the sport experience: Effect of goal orientations on

achievement strategies and perspectives. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 81, 219-224.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrin-
sic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.
Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective
vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529-565.
Ryska, T. A., & Richey, V. (1999). Motivational goals, purposes of sport, and sportsper-
sonship among Hispanic female athletes. Unpublished manuscript.
Ryska, T. A., Yin, Z., & Boyd, M. (1999). The role of dispositional goal orientation and
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

team climate on situational self-handicapping among young athletes. Journal of Sport

Behavior; 22, 410425.
Shields, D. L., & Bredemeier. B. J. (1995). Character development and physical activity.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Shields, D. L., Bredemeier, B., Gardner, D., & Bostrom, A. (1995). Leadership, cohesion,
and team norms regarding cheating and aggression. Sociology of Sport Journal, 12,
324-336.
Steiner, H., McQuivey, R. W., Pavelski, R., Pitts, T., & Kraemer, H. (2000). Adolescents
and sports: Risk or benefit? Clinical Pediatrics, 39, 161-166.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New
York: HarperCollins.
Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Turiel, E., Killen, M., & Helwig, C. C. (1987). Morality: Its structure, functions, and
vagaries. In J. Kagan & S. Lamb (Eds.), The emergence of moral concepts in young
children (pp. 155-144). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Press.
Turiel, E., Smetana, J., & Killen, M. (1991). Social contexts in social cognitive develop-
ment. In W. Kurtines & J. Gerwitz (Eds.), Morality, moral behavior; and moral devel-
opment (pp. 261-282). New York: Wiley.
Vallerand, R. J., Briere, N. M., Blanchard, C., & Provencher, P. (1997). Development and
validation of the Multidimensional Sportspersonship Orientations Scale. Journal of
Sport & Exercise Psychology, 19, 197-206.
Vallerand, R. J., Deshaies, P., & Cuerrier, J. P. (1997). On the effects of the social context
on behavioral intentions of sportsmanship. International Journal of Sport Psychology,
28, 126-140.
Vallerand, R. J., & Losier, G. F. (1994). Self-determined motivation and sportsmanship
orientations: An assessment of their temporal relationship. Journal of Sport & Exercise
Psychology, 16, 229-245.
Voight, M., Callaghan, J., & Ryska, T. A. (2000). Relationship between goal orientation,
self-confidence, and multidimensional trait anxiety among Mexican-American female
youth athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior; 23, 271-288.
Walling, M. D., & Duda, J. L. (1995). Goals and their associations with beliefs about suc-
cess in and perceptions of the purposes of physical education. Journal of Teaching in
Physical Education, 14, 140-156.
Weiss, M. R., & Bredemeier, B. J. (1986). Moral development. In V. Seefeldt (Ed.), Phys-
ical activity and human well-being (pp. 374-390). Reston, VA: American Alliance for
Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance.
Weiss, M. R., & Bredemeier, B. J. (1991). Moral development in sport. In K. B. Pandolf
& J. 0. Holloszy (Eds.). Exercise and Sport Science Reviews, 18, 331-378.
White, S . A. (1995). The perceived purposes of sport among male and female intercolle-
giate and recreational sport participants. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26,
490-502.
 Ryska 293

White, S. A., & Duda, J. L. (1994). The relationship of gender, level of sport involvement,
and participationmotivation to task and ego orientation. International Journal of Sport
Psychology, 25, 4-18.
Williams, G . C., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Internalizationof biopsychosocial values by med-
ical students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 767-779.
Williams, L. (1994). Goal orientations and athletes’ preferences for competence informa-
tion sources. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16, 4 1 6 4 3 0 .
Downloaded by [Western Michigan University] at 15:18 10 December 2014

Original manuscript received August 21, 2001

Final revision accepted July 22, 2002