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 healthy, 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 person ology 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 successful 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 between 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.
