Slur/Irrfixuu. .1...
A-I.l.. :‘ .
{arr-14v. :1‘
3 . ..Luv. 1.:
zed h: .
bah. . . .
. ... .
. . .. . .
y ‘ . n
. A .. n . 4 I.
.
. ‘ . A _. . z
. . . ... .
I u. | a . U
., ‘ . . .A I
. . .vmunuuF-ffi

‘ "flow?
“11.0... ..v. !
finflfiflT}:

v
\

.n. ....w ..

, air ..m...,....x..fl.snu;.. .
n. V; \f: E .- fl. 7 -v .

n 41... ... .wuflrtr . __

m. 42v
;
...tuflwh-
{a ......i

'h l'...'hl .V
x ..fi

,. . _ ... t... ..w......
. x .uvaugi aflkfiflflé .. ..W% (MW ..
.. amnwy; u-..“ .fiflfifir
.. .....n. , ...L.
5. 3:3? h 35%;; «$3. a
.. am? ....Mrg é .Sumwufi. -1. y
: §.,L&W. .r “F
:1..va JEFF ...
.. .. 5:..." ....rflw.
lie...“ E Lama v
f .54... r ,
5&3Awmwn: .
hfifii. .ru..- . .
. .-grewmaa. .
"...th y‘ . y It I!

r. w
Kauwwu "a? i...
‘ 3x5??? -
r 11.... ififlflrfiu a
.17 I »
uNr”.In|I I)

v

, . 3K1.“ r r C!
s
Po.-

'0
.

It

.mw,
1
‘
~
t

w
b

J;

:I, F
t.‘ I
no 57"}.

tau.

“1.? .
do“. u‘
.... . u 2907......

g.
(1‘, . I

. . . I .
. . . 1.. . ..
v lu.‘ - ti!) V .0-
. . .113010‘10'PL II!“ I f), v
,,,,, )‘avvov..§.:c.)\:al»al§.flfi:ql. ..xlo
$1,391.... ‘i!v0v-.‘b. .Mvir.-v‘n
I)... : It’ll...»
1...: at" o‘ol..v.v.r
. .

V .
vlnolh Ill.

. 2:355“
r

J

my: I
., . ‘

'. t'w‘u‘
.z-hum.
.“ziw

‘ ‘4‘)
"I q
A.

New

. . 5"; o}, ‘30.! I 0 .
n]!‘~lu|lal.tLttfltlv¢
. .1vrrll:01‘1lt. {I

‘1. 5-1.?”

|. v.3. 1.
JV]... ...Nn}
. ... ...

7.
'7

. . . . . 4.
y ‘ovlluiiqn
. .rhILIVr. Vuh‘...‘
. .‘oY'IoII.

 

 

 

.. 5 .vi rFt-I‘.
‘ ‘I All: . ”I l 0 r-vanl
A ...

 

‘ ...viou } p
. ;.$|9| ,
. . . l1 , 171.0‘othnnd.
‘ ‘ ‘61:!vtboz ....l . xv .
...: vbgq".t$ on? hc|l.lt .
... 1: I. .II vuul.V 190:.th
.. I331... IlV... .

:1: ,

. \

A . I
‘ ...a~..1:£v.n.v $\:.
. ....y.... VH9.“ .117. .4}! n , 1

cl -..-.c. . .
u.l~I-|| '9! .I
.11

, .UHHHPMNKA.
Iggfiwwflm. “if-

‘Olll‘

 

I‘Hssns
"7

V lllllllllllllllllllllllll\Hllllllllllllllllll l

3 1293 01563

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

PERCEPTIONS OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE IN SPORT FOR
AMERICAN ADOLESCENT ATHLETES AND NONATHLETES

presented by

Charles T. Stein

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Master of Science degree in Physical Education &
Exercise Science

mam

Major professor

Date May 20, 1997

0-7639 MS U is an Aflirmau'w Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

LIBRARY

Michlgan State
Unlverelty

 

 

 

PLACE ll RETURN BOX to remove We checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

usu leAn Afflrmetlve Action/Equal Oppomnny lnetltulon
WWI

PERCEPTIONS OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE IN SPORT FOR AMERICAN
ADOLESCENT ATHLETES AND NONATHLETES

By

Charles T. Stein

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Physical Education and Exercise Science

1997

ABSTRACT

PERCEPTIONS OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE IN SPORT
FOR AMERICAN ADOLESCENT ATHLETES AND NONATHLETES

By

Charles T. Stein

The present study was designed to determine if male and female adolescent athletes and
nonathletes difl‘ered in terms of the importance they placed on their subjective meanings of
success and failure in sports. The study also examined the role experience played in
determining these subjective meanings. In Phase 1, an open-ended questionnaire was used
to ask adolescents to provide components of success and failure in sports. Results of
Phase 1 were used in Phase 2 to assess athletic status differences and gender differences
on the perceived importance of those components. Factor analysis revealed two success
("task-oriented" and "competitive-oriented" meanings) and three failure factors ("lack of
achievement potential ", "lack ability/time", "lack competitive-oriented" meanings).

MAN OVAs revealed Athlete x Gender interactions for all factors except lack competitive-
oriented meanings. Female athletes rated these meanings as more important than did

female nonathletes.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank Dr. Deborah L. Feltz for being the only person to give me a
chance to prove my capabilities. Her patience and guidance during my thesis work and
throughout my career as a graduate student proved to be invaluable in the part of my
learning and maturation process as a human being. Her door was always open to me even
when my questions or problems were not school related. The amount of compassion and
understanding she exhibited at just the right moments helped me to make it through my
graduate career. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr.
Martha Ewing, Dr. Yvonne Smith, and Mr. John Fitzpatrick. The time and care they gave
to their participation in this paper proved to make the difference to the quality of this
thesis.

I would also like to thank all of my friends in the crew, especially Guap, and fellow
graduate students for giving me all of their support without my ever having to ask for it
and for listening to me when I needed to talk.

Finally, I would like to thank two very special people in my life, my parents, Tom and
Mary Ann Stein. The love and support they have given me my whole life is what has
given me the strength to believe in myself that I can accomplish anything. The amount of
time and energy they have put into making my life worth while shines as an excellent
example of the way parents should raise their children. It is my hope and dream that I can
somehow pay them back in a way that shows how much I love, appreciate, and respect

them. Thank you Mom and Dad. I love you very much.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE
List of Tables ................................................................................... vii
List of Figures ................................................................................. ix
Chapter I: INTRODUCTION
Nature of the Problem .......................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem ..................................................... 5
Research Questions .............................................................. 6
Definitions of Terms ............................................................. 6
Limitations ........................................................................... 6
Basic Assumptions ............................................................... 7
Delimitation ......................................................................... 7
Chapter 11: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Attribution/Achievement Motivation .................................... 8
McClelland ............................................................... 9
Atkinson ................................................................... 9
Weiner ...................................................................... 10
Maehr and Nicholls ................................................... 11
Cultural diversity in achievement behavior 12
The universality of achievement behavior ...... 12
Athletes and Nonathletes ...................................................... 16
Experience ........................................................................... 19
Gender ................................................................................. 22
Chapter III: METHOD
Phase 1 ................................................................................ 26
Subjects and Design .................................................. 26
Questionnaire I ......................................................... 27
Procedure ................................................................. 27
Treatment of Data .................................................... 29

iv

Phase 2 ................................................................................
Subjects and Design ..................................................
Questionnaire II ........................................................
Treatment of Data ....................................................

Chapter IV: RESULTS
Phase 1 Results ....................................................................

Phase 2 Results ....................................................................
Factors that Define Success in Sports .......................
Factors that Define Failure in Sports .........................
Comparisons of Athlete and Gender Groups on Success
and Failure Definitions ..............................................
Relationship Between Experience and Success/Failure
Definitions ................................................................

Chapter V: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Success and Failure Factors in Sport ....................................
Gender and Athletic Group Differences for Success and Failure
in Sports ..............................................................................
Relationship Between Experience and Success/Failure
Definitions ...........................................................................
Future Directions .................................................................
List of References ............................................................................

29
29
3O
32

34
37
37
38

40

48

53

55
56

58

Appendices

Appendix A
Appendix B:
Appendix C:

Appendix D:

Appendix E:

Appendix F:

Appendix G:

Appendix H:

Lee's Open-Ended Questionnaire ................ 65
Demographic Questionnaire ........................ 67
Human Subject Approval ............................ 69
Consent Form ............................................. 70
Frequency of Responses for Male and Female

Adolescent Athletes and Nonathletes .......... 71
Stein's Closed-Ended Questionnaire ............ 79
Intercorrelations Among Factors for Success

and Failure in Sports ................................... 8]

Factor Loadings and Initial Statistics
for All 25 Items for Success and
Failure in Sport ........................................... 82

10.

ll.

12.

13.

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE

. Frequencies of Sports Experiences by Athletic Status

and Gender .....................................................................

Frequencies of Sports Experiences by Athletic Status
and Gender ......................................................................

. List of Top 25 Items for Success Among Adolescent Athletes

and Nonathletes in Rank Order ........................................

List of Top 25 Items for Failure Among Adolescent Athletes
and Nonathletes in Rank Order .......................................

. Rotated Factor Loadings: Factors for Success in Sport

Rotated Factor Loadings: Factors for Failure in Sport ......

. Means, Standard Deviations, and Group Numbers for

All Success and Failure Factors ........................................

. Frequency of Responses of Male Athletes for Success in Sports

Frequency of Responses of Female Athletes for Success in
Sports ..............................................................................

Frequency of Responses of Male Nonathletes for Success in
Sports ..............................................................................

Frequency of Responses of Female Nonathletes for Success in
Sports ..............................................................................

Frequency of Responses of Male Athletes for Failure in Sports

Frequency of Responses of Female Athletes for Failure in
Sports ..............................................................................

PAGE

28

31

35

36

38

39

41

71

72

73

74

75

76

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

Frequency of Responses of Male Nonathletes for Failure in
Sports ..............................................................................

Frequency of Responses of Female Nonathletes for Failure in
Sports ..............................................................................

Intercorrelations Among Factors for Success and Failure in
Sports ..............................................................................

Rotated Factor Matrix for Success in Sport .....................

Rotated Factor Matrix for Failure in Sport .......................

viii

77

78

81

82

83

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure l: Harter’s version of White's competence motivation
theory ..............................................................................

Figure 2: Mean task-oriented factor scores ......................
Figure 3: Mean competitive-oriented factor scores ...........
Figure 4: Mean lack of achievement potential factor scores

Figure 5: Mean lack of ability/time factor scores ..............

ix

18

42

43

45

46

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Natureoftheflrohlem

The purpose of this study was to determine if American adolescent athletes and
nonathletes differ in terms of the importance they place on their subjective meanings of
success and failure in sports. The study also examined whether years of experience in
sports influenced the importance athletes placed on these subjective meanings. A third
purpose of the study was to determine if gender differences existed in the importance that
athletes and nonathletes placed on these subjective meanings.

Athletes and nonathletes are thought to differ in their subjective meanings of success
and failure in sports because subjective meanings are learned in a specific context through
experience and from significant others (Amster, 1964;1(ess, 1976). Athletes and
nonathletes learn about success and failure in sports difierently. Athletes learn fiom direct
experience with success and failure. Nonathletes learn more indirectly, such as through
observation.

The role of success and failure in sports has been studied extensively from the
perspective of attributions (e.g., Bird & Brarne, 1978; Gill & Gross, 1979; Roberts, 1978;
Scanlan & Passer, 1980). Success has generally been found to be attributed to internal
factors such as ability and effort; whereas, failure has tended to be attributed to external
factors such as luck and task difficulty. However, most studies have not used a subjective
meaning approach to examining the causes of success and failure in sports. Rather, they
have used either a closed-ended approach where the respondent must choose among four
attributions (ability, effort, task difficulty, luck) or an open-ended approach where the
respondent is asked to think about a specific success/failure experience and provide the
main reason for the outcome. These typical attributional approaches do not allow for the

DUI range of responses one might offer for success and failure in sports.

I

2

Subjective meanings, however, are the definitions that groups of people, from different
ages, genders, and cultures, give to certain words (Osgood, Miron, & May, 1975). These
definitions may be simple or complex, depending on a group's experience with the
phenomenon. For instance, the English have few words for snow, but the Inuit have many
(Dorais, 1990). Similarly, the social context and culture in which athletes and
nonathletes learn, develop, and live will influence how they define beliefs about success
and failure in sports. Once this development and achievement start to occur, experience
will also play a big role in influencing individuals' subjective meanings. However, there
has been little research conducted on the association between one's experience in sport and
the subjective meanings of success and failure in sport.

Speculation has been offered on how experience might influence success and failure in
sport. Lee (1995) emphasized certain factors that may influence the role experience has
on individuals in sport. One factor that may influence the role of experience on individuals
is the environment. Some environmental considerations include (a) the proper facilities
available to play sports; (b) time in one's schedule to play sports (Kang, 1987; Yoon,
1993); (c) parental desire for their adolescent to participate in sports; (d) the amount and
degree of positive or negative praise and support an adolescent receives; and (e) the
quality of the organized sports program. These five factors, and probably many others,
create a foundation upon which experiences are formulated. These experiences, in turn,
act as yet another integral part of how subjective meaning influences the definitions of
success and failure in sport for athletes and nonathletes.

One study that addressed the perception of success and failure in sport for adolescents,
using a subjective meaning approach, was conducted by Lee (1995). The purpose of her
study was twofold: (a) to determine if Korean and American adolescents differed in terms
of defining their success and failure within school and sports contexts, and (b) to
determine if male adolescents differed from female adolescents in terms of the importance

of subjective meanings of success and failure within school and sports contexts.

3

Lee (1995) had two phases in her study. In Phase I, a list of words was generated by
subjects regarding their perceptions of success and failure in sports and school. An open-
ended questionnaire, containing 20 blanks was used for the subjects to write in words that
denoted their perceptions of success and failure in sports and school. A second
questionnaire for Phase H was generated by tabulating the frequency of responses for
males and females in Phase I and using the top 25 from both lists in a Likert scale rated on
importance for success and failure. Lee used the Phase II questionnaire to generate
factors of subjective meanings of success and failure in sports and school for adolescents.
She also examined gender differences in these factors.

According to Lee (1995), in terms of sports, American adolescents indicated factors
such as "dedication” and "innate ability" to be associated with success in sport. The items
included in dedication were confidence, work hard, do my best, attitude, self-esteem,
participation, dedicated, motivation, team work, and practice. The items included in
innate ability were speed, athletic ability, strong, physical fitness, smart, and good at
sports. Korean adolescents, on the other hand, considered only one factor, " effort, " in
defining success in sport. Korean efi‘ort consisted of practice, regular exercise,
confidence, basic training, effort, diligence, and interest. Factors for American adolescents
for failure in sport included a ”bad attitude" and a "negative environment." Items for bad
attitude included do not care, bad sportsmanship, bad loser, low self-esteem, temper, bad
mood, injury, fatigue, smoking, do not know rules, and no union. A negative environment
for American adolescents consisted of bad places to play, stupid practice, too competitive,
and friends. Korean adolescents perceived " poor facilitative environment, " "low effort,"
and "task difficulty and lack of support" to be indicators of failure in sport. Items in a
poor facilitative environment included lack of facilities, lack of equipment, poor
environment, and no available time. Low effort for Koreans included items such as lack of
effort, lack of will, laziness, and fat. The items for task difliculty and lack of support

consisted of too hard to play, no instructor, no money, and fear of injury.

4

For American adolescents, innate ability and dedication appeared to be the
prevalent factors for success in sport (Lee, 1995). Lee suggested that the US.
adolescents had more explicit meanings in defining success in sports because they had
more experience in athletics than did Korean adolescents.

In regard to perceptions of failure in sports, a bad attitude and a negative environment
were two prevalent factors for US. adolescents (Lee, 1995). Failure was found to be
either internal (resulting fi'om a bad attitude), and therefore, seen in part to be due to a
lack of effort, or failure was found to be external (because of a negative environment) and
therefore was viewed as beyond one's control (Miller, 1976). This type of rationale helps
to preserve one's self-esteem; the individual gave it their all, but because the task was too
dimcult, they were not lucky enough, or the environment was too negative, they failed.
However, it was not their fault.

Lee (1995) found only two gender differences among American adolescents in terms of
definitions of sport success and none for definitions of sport failure. In terms of
definitions of success, girls assigned more importance for their success in sports to the
amount of dedication that was put forth in the athletic endeavor. Boys, on the other hand,
assigned more importance for their success in sports to innate ability. Lee's results
partially supported Ewing's (1981) findings for antecedents of success in sport implying
that ability for success in sport was more important for American boys than for American
girls; whereas mental dedication for success in sport was more important for American
girls than for American boys. However, Lee combined athletes and nonathletes in her
sample and she did not control for years of athletic experience in comparing boys and
girls. Boys had more experience playing sports than girls in her sample. The role that
years of sport experience plays in these gender differences is yet unknown.

Even with controlling years of experience, boy and girl athletes may have different
subjective meanings for success and failure in sport because of socialization differences.

Boys and girls may have the same number of years of experience in playing sports, but

5

may have different interpretations of their sport experiences. These different
interpretations might be attributed to the way boys and girls have been introduced into the
realm of sports by significant others (Coaldey, 1994). Gilligan (1982) discusses how boys
are socialized through separation and individuation, while girls are socialized through
interdependence. This socialization leads parents to encourage boys and girls differently
(Hoffman, 1972). Boys grow up to be more independent and confident, while girls grow
up tending to be more dependent and less self-confident. Sassen (1980) contends that
when these girls grow up to be women, they have a hard time handling many of the
different aspects of sport, including success. Some women go as far as to feel guilty for
being successful in sport. The reason for this relates back to how these women were
socialized as girls by their parents.

Lee (1995) deciphered the different role experience played between her American and
Korean samples. However, how one's experience in sport affects the importance of
subjective meanings for male and female American adolescent athletes has not been
investigated. Athletes with more experience in playing sport may rate different factors of
success/failure as more important than nonathletes or athletes with less experience in
playing sport because of greater exposure to actual success and failure events that occur in
sport.

Statemcnuzfltherblcm

The present study is a replication and extension of Lee's (1995) study with American
adolescents. The focus of the present study was to determine if male and female American
adolescent athletes and nonathletes differed in terms of the importance they placed on their
subjective meanings of success and failure in sports. The study also examined the role that

experience plays in determining subjective meanings for American adolescents in sports.

6
W

The following questions guide this study:
1. How do American adolescents define success and failure in sports?
2. Do athletes and nonathletes differ in the importance they place on the factors they
perceive to define sport success and failure?
3. Do boys and girls differ in the importance they place on the factors they perceive to
define sport success and failure?
4. For athletes, do years of playing experience correlate with the degree of importance on
perceived factors for defining success and failure in sport?
5. For athletes, do the correlations between years of playing experience and degree of
importance on the obtained perceived factors differ by gender?

Dcfinitionsnflsms

Antecedents a single factor or implication linked directly or indirectly to a concept.
Implications can be environmental, biological, or social in nature (Triandis, 1972).

Athlele— an individual who is currently involved or was involved in athletics at an
organized and competitive level for at least four years in a school or in a nonschool sport.

Consequent— a singular factor that is neither a necessary nor a sufiicient cause of
behavior, but can be considered a "contributing cause" that helps to establish patterns of
behavior (Triandis, 1972).

Nonalhlcle— an individual who was not currently participating in organized sports and
had no more than 3 years of previous experience in organized sports, school/nonschool.

SubjectimMeaning- in the present study, a term used to describe the summed
perceptions of the antecedents provided by subjects for this study.

The limitations to this study were as follows:
1. There was no means to validate the answers given by each student to each item.

2. All subjects were volunteers.

7
E . E .

For the purpose of this study, the following assumptions were made; first that the
participants were able to understand the questionnaire and were willing and able to
provide their causes of success and failure in the sports context; and second, that the
subjects' responses were their own.

I: l' . .
The generalizability of the results of this research are limited to high school adolescents

in the Midwest.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The topic of success and failure in sport has been quite intriguing to investigators in
sports psychology and has been studied in various ways. Achievement motivation and
attribution theory have been the common theories used to provide insight and perspective
on this topic. The study of different cultural concepts of success and failure has also been
employed as well as the use of perceived competence. The research in this chapter is
divided in to four sections. The first section on attributions/achievement motivation
presents approaches to the study of success and failure by presenting different theories to
help explain how achievement behavior is linked to subjective meanings. This section also
helps clarify why subjective meanings are pertinent to the study of success and failure.

The second section focuses on athletes and nonathletes and discusses the inference of
perceived ability in explaining possible differences in subjective meanings of success and
failure in sport. Experience and environment is the third section in this review which
focuses on how the environment and experience may play an influential role in formulating
athletes' and nonathletes' definitions of success and failure in sport. Gender is the final
section in this chapter in which socialization and subjective meanings of success and failure
in sports are looked at through the male and female perspective.

The role of success and failure attributions in sports has been studied extensively.
Achievement motivation theory has come to the forefront of this research. Part of the
purpose of this section is to discuss the three theoretical approaches by McClelland,
Atkinson, and Weiner, their limitations, and Maehr and Nicholl's new approaches to

achievement motivation.

McClelland

The idea of an achievement process of a culture was hypothesized by McClelland
(1961). The cycle of this achieving process hypothesis for a culture was as follows: Child
rearing-«Personalityu-Achieving Society. The idea behind this hypothesis is that children
learn from social experiences at a very young age, which creates or sets a foundation for
their personality trait of achievement motivation, which in turn determines their
achievement motivation as an adult. McClelland's hypothesis of achievement motivation
was believed to stand constant across time and situations (McClelland & Winter, 1969).
However, this general hypothesis to achievement motivation does have some drawbacks.

Maehr (1974, 1978) noted that when a personality approach to achievement motivation
is used to study success and failure, other important factors could be ignored such as
social cues, task, definitions, situational and contextual factors, and social expectations.
Second, there is also the strong possibility that different cultural or subcultural groups may
have different ways of establishing achievement tasks and goals. McClelland's theory
leaves little room for any flexibility when dealing with these different subgroups or
cultures. Finally, McClelland's approach has been unsuccessful when studying women and
has created a gender bias because the theory is based on interpretations from men.
Atkinson

The approach that Atkinson took on achievement motivation was from a more
individual perspective. Rather than focusing on personality traits, Atkinson and his
colleagues chose to emphasize the interaction of personal disposition and the situation
(Atkinson & Feather, 1966; Atkinson & Raynor, 1974). Atkinson correlated preferences
for different probabilities of achieving success or avoiding failure to individual differences
in motivation. Atkinson came up with a model to explain this approach using a probability
variable to represent the two components: tendency to achieve success and tendency to

avoid failure.

10

Again, criticisms arose due to some conceptual and methodological problems in this
theory. Atkinson's theory put too much emphasis on personality (Brawley & Roberts,
1984; Maehr, 1974; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980) even though other variables such as the
instrumental value of the task (Raynor, 1969) and locus of control (Feather, 1969) have
been incorporated into it. This theoretical approach, like McClelland's, was also based on
interpretations from men and is, therefore not appropriate for women. There were also
some cultural limitations that restricted cross-cultural studies.

Weiner

Weiner, Frieze, Kukla, Reed, Rest, and Rosenbaum (1971) identified the four main
standard causal attributions for achievement success and failure: ability, effort, luck, and
task difiiculty. This attributional theory of achievement motivation has become the basis
for a majority of the follow up research on achievement motivation. Attribution theory
directs attention to a gamut of cognitive constructs that trait approach does not, such as
perceived control, interpersonal evaluation, and expectancy of success. There are also
wide range affects that are cognitively determined such as pride, guilt, shame, and
hopelessness. The theory views the individual's affective and cognitive reactions to an
achievement-oriented success or failure as partially determined by the causal attributions
used by the person to explain the cause of the outcome (Lee, 1995). Weiner et al. (1971)
went on to classify these attributions into a two-dimensional system consisting of (a)
control (internal-ability and effort or extemal-luck and task difficulty) and (b) stability
(stable-ability and task difficulty or unstable-effort and luck). Continuing in this form of
consistency, researchers have observed that success is attributed internally more than
failure, and failure tends to be attributed to external factors (Fitch, 1970; Frieze & Weiner,
1971; Wolosin, Sherman, & Till, 1973; Wortman, Constanzo, & Witt, 1973). This
tendency to take personal credit for success and to shift blame for failure to extemal

factors is generally interpreted as an egocentric or self-enhancing bias (Gill, 1980).

11

A criticism of this theory is that this model of attribution is too culture-specific and
sex-typed in terms of the nature of "achievement" tasks (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980). Also,
the four attributions mentioned earlier are not adequate by themselves because other
individuals may make other causal explanations in achievement situations (Bukowski &
Moore, 1980; Frieze, 1975; Roberts & Pascuzzi, 1979). Finally, this theory has been
criticized because it ignores the fact that different behavior may represent different goals
or achievement orientations in sport and laboratory specific settings (Kukla, 1972, 1978;
Maehr & Nicholls, 1980).

MafihLandLIicthls

In attempting to redefine achievement motivation, Maehr (1974, 1978) took the
approach that the will to achieve occurred universally in nature. Based on this belief,
Maehr created three necessary conditions for defining achievement behavior. The first
condition for achievement behavior occurs in reference to a standard of excellence which
can be determined by a person based on his or her experience of success or failure.
Second, the individual realizes that he or she is in some part responsible for the outcome.
The third defining condition recognizes that there is some level of challenge, which creates
a sense of uncertainty regarding the outcome for the individual (Maehr, 1974, 1978). The
reason this definition was created was to enhance the study of achievement behavior
within specific contexts or situations.

Maehr and Nicholls (1980), based on this redefinition of achievement motivation,
argued that there must be an investigation of the purpose and meaning of individuals'
behavior patterns in order to understand the meaning and purpose of peoples' behavior.
Thus, they came up with a new definition for achievement motivation, which proposed
that "achievement motivation should be defined in terms of its purpose or meaning for
people rather than in terms of overt behavior or the characteristics of situations in which

the behavior occurs" (p. 227).

12

Maehr and Nicholls (1980) formulated two complementary approaches for this new
definition of achievement motivation. The first approach dealt with attaining the "meaning
of achievement and achievement behavior for any given group or for individuals within a
group" (p. 227). The ideology of the second approach dealt with "defining a class or
classes of achievement behavior in terms of meaning or goals of behavior" (p. 23 5). The
first approach, which pertains to cultural diversity, will be discussed as it relates to the
subjective meaning of success and failure. The second approach will be discussed as it
relates to a universal pattern of behavior.

WWI. Analyzing achievement motivation in terms
of the subjective meaning of behavior and achievement for a group, or individuals who
make up that group, is the purpose of this first approach by Maehr and Nicholls (1980).
The diversity aspect plays a crucial role because there is an indefinite number of meanings
for achieving. Understanding the behavior in the same manner as the persons who
demonstrate it is very critical, even though this makes comparisons of groups almost
unattainable due to the different definitions of the groups (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980).
Looking at the concepts of success and failure was the place to start for Maehr and
Nicholls (1980) to derive definitions of achievement behavior.

According to Maehr and Nicholls (1980), success and failure are psychological states
that are determined by an individual’s perception of attaining or not attaining his or her
goals. In addition, these goals are pursued through the amount of desire that one
possesses. Since the amount of diversity that is involved in meanings of terms for different
groups of individuals is indefinite, perceived causes of success and failure will also vary
throughout the different groups of individuals.

Iheunimsalinmfiachiflememhehayim. The second approach to Maehr and
Nicholls' (1980) definition of achievement behavior involves the meaning or goals of
behavior. This approach tries to find universals among individuals across cultures or

subcultures. Maehr and Nicholls (1980) proposed three forms of achievement behavior

13

that theoretically present meaningful definitions of achievement motivation boundaries.
Attribution theory is the basis of these three forms, which include: ability, task, and social
approval.

The goal of ability oriented achievement behavior is to "maximize the subjective
probability of attributing high ability and minimize the probability of attributing low ability
to oneself" (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980, p. 18). This definition correlates with the approach-
avoidance principle of behavior. People might approach task situations where they think
they can perform strongly, and actively avoid specific tasks where they think they would
perform poorly. Weiner (1972) believes that the expectations of outcome on future tasks
are mostly due to the attributions of ability and task difliculty, which are both seen as
stable causal factors. Thus, causal attributions are the mediators of achievement behavior
as they determine expectancies. So if athletes attribute their success to a certain high
ability on a task, they will come to expect future performance on the same task to be just
as, if not more, successful. The important factor seen in mediating achievement behavior
is the attribution of ability (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980), which is supported by Nicholls
(1975, 1976a, 1976b) and Sohn (1977).

The foundation of task-oriented achievement behavior shifis away from the
attributional factor of ability to that of quality, specifically the quality of one's work. This
type of achievement behavior is important in explaining those individuals who do their best
on a task even though they might not demonstrate the best or most ability (Nicholls,
1972). Instead, the person's goal is to produce a better performance, or solve a problem.
This desire to do so is ofien determined by the effort they put forth to accomplish their
goal. Many athletes who have demonstrated this behavior have expressed how much they
love a challenge and how much their love for the game has driven them to succeed despite
of their limited talent or ability. As it can be seen, the athlete's irmnediate goal is to find

the behavior, not necessarily the ability or competence, necessary for success.

14

The third achievement behavior proposed by Maehr and Nicholls (1980) is social-
approval motivation. Social approval-oriented behavior is directed at maximizing the
chances of attributing high effort to oneself and minimizing the chances of attributing low
effort to oneself. Therefore, effort is the key attribution devoted to this achievement
behavior rather than ability. Behavior is directed at producing and maintaining high levels
of effort rather than ability, so when a lack of effort is apparent in an athletic performance,
the level of virtuous intent is questioned rather than the level of the ability of the
performer. Athletes who are social approval-oriented will often communicate the fact that
they put forth a good effort, no matter what may have been the outcome of the game.

Researchers now have better perspectives and comprehensions about the theories and
the differentiated definitions for the causal attributions and achievement behaviors that
encompass achievement motivation theory. It is easier to see the roles success and failure
have when applying these theories to athletes and nonathletes in sports. Attributions are
causal in nature, being narrower and more specific in their meanings, while subjective
meanings are the actual definitions of what it means for athletes and nonathletes to have
success or to have failure in sport. By beginning to examine the subjective meanings of
success and failure for athletes and nonathletes in sport, researchers may better understand
the similarities and differences between athletes and nonathletes and males and females.

In the field of psycholinguistics, meanings are considered by some researchers as
internal states (Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1957). Other researchers see these
meanings as a psychological process of interpretation (Ogden & Richards, 1923).
Regardless of which view one takes, meanings are still considered to be perceptual
components for some term. The perceptual components of a term constitute the meaning
of that term for that individual (Slobin, 1971). These perceptual components also
represent the cognitive structures that exist in the mind of that individual for that term
(Osgood et al., 1957). In society, concepts or meanings of words are learned through

certain contexts such as experience and from significant others (Kess, 1976). Amster

15

(1964) continues to explain context in terms of meaning. Context is very important and
can change the meaning of the word or concept. Therefore, the social context or culture
in which an athlete develops, learns, and lives will influence how he or she defines and
develops terms for success and failure in sports. The subjective meanings that one may
have in sport may depend on contextual variables such as age, gender, or ability. Different
subjective meanings have been supported in research for success and failure, not only for
different subjective cultures (Triandis, Kitty, Shanmugam, Tanaka, & Vassilou, 1972;
Osgood, Miron, & May, 1975), but also for gender (Ewing, 1981).

Several studies used Triandis' (1972) antecedent-consequent approach to solicit
subjective meanings from subjects. Triandis used this antecedent-consequent approach for
investigating the influence that a culture or subjective culture had on its members' ways of
perceiving certain beliefs, values, and attitudes and found cultural differences in the
subjective meanings of such concepts as success and failure (Triandis et al., 1972).
Antecedents and consequents were obtained by Triandis et al. (1972) through an open-
ended questionnaire. Subjects were not limited to specific responses and were free to
choose the terms that were important to them. For example, the questions "If you have
_____, then you have success in sport", and "If you have success in sport, then you have

", require individuals to respond with antecedents and consequents for success in
sport. The use of the open-ended questionnaire was then followed by a second study
using a closed-ended questionnaire that utilized the most frequent responses to the success
questions for each group of respondents (e. g. males and females) in the open-ended
questionnaire.

Lee (1995) discovered a problem with Triandis et al.'s (1972) questionnaire. Lee's
(1995) study brought to the attention of others that the Triandis approach may bring about
problems of translations in cross-cultural studies, such as hers. The Triandis format limits
subjects' free thought processes in the course of selecting words because subjects are

limited to providing only nouns or phrases in the blank space. Therefore, Lee (1995)

16

modified Triandis et al.'s (1972) questionnaire by making her open-ended questionnaire

grammar-free, allowing for subjects to fill in the blanks with nouns, adjectives, verbs, and

even sentences. Through the Triandis and Lee approaches, subjective meanings can be

used to understand the formation of athletes' and nonathletes' definitions of success and

failure in sport. How athletes and nonathletes come to acquire subjective meanings for

their definitions of success and failure in sport is discussed next.
Athletesandflonathletes

When boys and girls start to participate in sports, they experiment playing different
sports to find out which ones they like, and for which ones they think they are skilled or
have the potential to become skilled. The sports children like and are good at are the
sports that these children play. Unfortunately, there are some boys and girls who think
they do not have any ability for sports. They may love a certain sport, but they think they
may not have the athletic ability to participate in that sport. When they experience failure
in that sport, their peers and significant others take notice, and this is the point at which
most of these children cease playing sports because they now feel self-conscious of their
inadequate ability for sports. Consequently, these children's self-confidence may also
decrease. This is the point where children may form concepts of "athletes" and
"nonathletes." Harter's (1978) perceived competence theory helps support why athletes
and nonathletes form different definitions of success and failure in sports.

Harter’s (1978) perceived competence theory attempts helps explain how individuals
gain perceptions of ability. Harter defines perceived competence as the sense one has of
his or her ability to master a task resulting fi'om cumulative interactions with the
environment. Specifically, Harter's perceived competence theory focuses on achievement
and mastery motivation (Harter, 1978). This theory is based in drive theory and
incorporates two components, socialization and affective processes, to account for the

development of competence and subsequent behavior.

l7

Perceived competence is seen by Harter as a multidimensional motive, which contains
three domains: cognitive, social, and physical (Harter, 1978). The cognitive domain
involves school and academic performance. Issues of popularity with one's peers
consumes the social domain, and the physical domain emphasizes perceived ability at
sports and outdoor games. Harter's model also includes implications of success and
failure, socializing agents, reinforcement effects, and motivational orientations in one's
perceived competence (see Figure 1).

Harter's (1978) perceived competence theory explains that mastery attempts in specific
domains result in success or failure and are evaluated by significant others. Perceived
success has an element of optimal challenge which leads to perceived competence and
intrinsic pleasure. At the same time, failure results in a lack of perceived competence,
more anxiety towards mastery situations, and decreased intrinsic motivation to pursue
mastery attempts.

A majority of the sport research on perceived competence theory focuses on the issues
of youth sport dropouts and participant status. Many studies have found that older sport
participants (9-11 years old) were higher in perceived physical competence than same-age
nonparticipants (F eltz & Petlichkoff, 1983; Klint, 1985; Klint & Weiss, 1987; Roberts,
Kleiber, & Duda, 1981; Ulrich, 1987).

In an application of Harter's ( 197 8) theory, athletes have an increased perception of
their ability and skill in what they can accomplish in athletics. These perceptions by
athletes may be sharper and more concrete than nonathletes' perceptions because athletes
have been in an environment that has provided them with experiences. As an athlete's
relationship between perceived ability and experience grows, mostly through positive
physical activity interactions, so does his or her self-confidence or sport confidence.

This model offers a possible explanation for a different formation of subjective
meanings of success and failure. This model may support the fact that athletes and

nonathletes have different definitions when it comes to success and failure in sports.

 

 

”cur—O 5.20.520..."
20¢... uuzgjuz.
..SUOm w>=<0uz

”25:0 bz<03=263
20¢“. muss-.552.
4500a Nib-no;

\

 

     

  

zo=<bz£¢o

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

#22226: «ESE‘. ..amumfiflfifl
OEZE—Xu >cwhn<1 032.82:
8528 ..o 3.3:: ”Sousa
29:35.. .2255. a 35.23 .8
. 322218 J
8285.. 3a.. . 323.36 22.2: 22:35.. 1:55.

 

 

18

 

 

. 322223
/ Spacey. :22

 

 

 

 

 

 

- u==u<uda-
tax/SJ. _ 032.53

 

mmm<u¢0mo mmm\<m¢02_

K K,
22:28:

muzgumioo

 

 

 

 

Figural. Harter's version of White's competence motivation theory.

19

Nonathletes lack the sports playing experience and may base their definitions of success
and failure in sport on observation of others. Thus, the main difference between athletes
and nonathletes in their definitions of success and failure in sport is the factor of
experience, and this factor is explored next.

Experience

The role experience plays in firrther determining the definitions that athletes use for
success and failure in sports has not been studied. One possible factor that may influence
the role of experience on these individuals is the environment. Five aspects of
environment are pertinent to this discussion: proper facilities, time availability, parental
desire for their children to participate in sports, the amount and type of support and praise
provided to individuals who play sports, and the quality of the organized sports program.
It is these five aspects of environment that help to determine the experiences adolescents
have in sports, and it is the experiences, in tum, that determine if adolescents continue to
participate in sports.

The first environmental aspect to consider is if there are proper facilities available to
play sports. Coaldey (1994) explains that publicly firnded youth sports programs are being
cut in communities facing government budget crises. The same thing is happening with
high school sports in school districts that have high proportions of low-income families.
Varsity sports programs are being cut or dropped in many of the big city and poor rural
schools (Miles, 1991; Swift, 1991). Coaldey (1994) goes on to explain that as this
continues to happen, fewer and fewer adolescents from low-income backgrounds have
opportunities to participate in sports such as baseball and football because these are two
sports that require facilities that are expensive to maintain. On the other hand, basketball
among youths in this low-income bracket is growing in popularity in part because it is
somewhat easier and more cost efficient to maintain a usable gym as opposed to

maintaining the upkeep of a football or baseball field.

20

Varsity sport programs in middle and upper income areas also feel the threat of cuts by
the government, but they are usually saved by "participation fees" that are paid for by the
athletes and their families (Coakley, 1994). These fees are often too much for the lower-
income youths, so they end up getting their sports programs cut instead of playing sports
they enjoy. Unless the proper facilities, equipment, and training are provided in these
public school athletic programs, adolescents from lower income brackets are at a
disadvantage in regards to developing their skills in sports. As a result, these adolescents
could miss out on valuable sport experiences that they may never be able to regain. Thus,
a lack of good and proper facilities might be attributed by adolescents as to how they
perceive success and failure in sport. One factor may be that if proper facilities are not
available, practices will be harder to hold, and failure will result fiom losing a game. Also,
if practices are hard to hold, adolescents might not be able to learn and improve as much
as if they had the proper facilities for training. Thus, performance in itself would decline
and failure in sport may again be the result. A "poor environment" was reported in Lee's
(1995) study as part of the subjective meaning that respondents gave for doing badly in
sport.

A second aspect of environment that may influence the role of experience for
adolescents is the time availability in one's schedule to play sports. What is happening
today is that more and more adolescents are being asked to shoulder more responsibility.
For example, in low-income families, especially those with only one parent, adolescents
are often expected to care for younger siblings when they get out of school every
afternoon. Other adolescents are expected to get jobs after school to help pay the family
bills. Then there are other adolescents who have children of their own. This problem
more often than not affects female more than male adolescents because it is the female
adolescents who are often left with the responsibility of caring for their children. One
girls' team basketball coach explained, "It's not at all unusual that on a given day there may

be two or three girls who aren't at practice because of responsibilities at home" (Dobie,

21

1987). As adolescents seem to be inheriting more and more adult problems in today's
society, they are watching their chances for experiences in sport diminish, and as a result
more athletes are involuntarily turning into nonathletes. It is quite possible that
adolescents who do not have the time available to play or even practice sports perceive
time availability as a definition of failure in sport. "Time availability" was another item in
Lee's (1995) study that respondents gave as an antecedent for failure in sport.

The desire parents have for their child to participate in sports, and the amount of
encouragement that is given to the adolescent to participate in sports is quite a critical
environmental factor in determining how the adolescent's experience in sport is influenced,
either positively or negatively. Parents and coaches are part of the determining factor that
either makes the athletic experience enjoyable or destructive for their children.

Parents who get their children involved in organized sports want their children to have
positive and enjoyable experiences. Berlage (1982) emphasized that at a time when so
many activities in industrial societies are age-segregated, organized sport programs
provide activities that often involve both parents and children. Unfortunately, some
parents want their children's sport experiences to be so positive that they often go
overboard. These parents become too emotionally involved in their children's sports and
actually push their children to do things that they might not be physically or mentally ready
to do. A study in Michigan indicated that when parents become too emotionally involved
in the organized youth sports of their children, their behavior often overwhelms and
creates anxiety for their children (State of Michigan, 1978). Thus, the enjoyment, or lack
there of, regarding the experience may influence the child's definitions of success and
failure. Supportive parents may be part of the definition of sport success for those
children who perceive they have it. Whereas, other children may believe their parents
contribute to their failure.

The last aspect of how environment influences the experiences of athletes deals with

the concern of the quality of the organized sports programs. Coakley (1994) explained

22

explicitly that in organized games, the amount of personal involvement, or playing time, is
often limited to all but the most skilled players. This range of involvement is limited to the
specialization of positions. When lO-year-olds describe themselves as defensive tackles,
or center fielders or left wingers or center halfbacks, it is a sure sign that the range of
personal involvement has been unnecessarily limited in their sport experiences (Coakley,
1994). These positions are obviously not the star positions that relegate the playing time
and experience, thus these kids are missing very important opportunities to gain
experience in sport and to expand their social relationships. The problem with organized
sports for kids is that sitting on the bench is an all-too-fi'equent experience, especially for
those who need playing time the most (Coakley, 1994). As with the other environmental
influences, the playing time that a child gets may influence the subjective meaning of
success and failure.
Gender

Just as athletes and nonathletes are socialized into and out of sport, so are boys and
girls. Gilligan (1982) claims that there is a definite gender barrier in sports and one reason
for this gender barrier stems fi'om the different way in which boys and girls are socialized.
Boys are socialized through separation and individuation, while girls are brought up to be
interdependent through love and care. Results indicate that girls are more in touch with
their feelings and emotions. Girls are seen as weak and abnormal by boys for this reason.
For boys, it is very important to be competent in sports skills (Roberts, 1978; Scanlan,
1982) and characteristics of feelings and emotions are just not viewed as fitting into the
competence in sports equation. Veroff (1969) suggests that boys may establish their self-
worth and peer standing through comparison in sports activities. Hoffman ( 1972) also
makes the point that girls are encouraged by their parents differently from boys. Boys
grow up to be more independent and confident and girls grow up tending to be more
dependent and less self-confident. Harter’s ( 197 8) competence motivation theory provides

a possible explanation for why girls are brought up in a more dependent-oriented

23

environment. Girls' mastery attempts may meet with more negative social influence,
especially fiom their parents. As this happens, girls develop a more extrinsic motivational
orientation, which produces a low perceived competence and external perception of
control. Also, when girls mastery attempts fail, not only is low perceived competence and
external perception of control created, but so is anxiety. These two components from the
failed mastery attempts act to decrease girls' competence motivation and could possibly
increase their socialization for dependency. This dependency that girls are socialized for
creates problems later on when they experience success, especially in sports.

Sassen (1980) continues this discussion by introducing the topic of success. Sassen
(1980) contends that girls grow up fearing success, which is derived in one of two ways.
The first way girls learn to fear success is when they are successful at another's expense.
There is a tremendous amount of guilt felt due to the belief that the success is undeserved.
The second way girls fear success is from all the responsibility that results from achieving
success. The pressure to be repeatedly successful can leave a bad taste in the mouth of
some and this can, quite frankly, become too heavy of a burden for some girls who are not
ready, nor socialized, for it. When these girls grow up to be women, they feel as though
they either do not deserve to be successful under certain circumstances, or the pressure to
replicate the success they did achieve is too much to handle.

A study designed by sociologist Janet Lever (1976, 1978, 1980) focused attention on
the differences in the informal games played by boys and played by girls. The findings of
Lever indicated several differences between the games boys and girls play. Boys play
outside more than girls, and when they play with fiiends, boys play in larger groups.
These groups tend to be more age-mixed and more competitive for the boys. The games
boys play are more goal-orientated and more complex, meaning there are more rules,
more positions, and more teamwork.

Lever (1978) explains that girls' activities are very different. These activities are

usually very spontaneous, imaginative, and free from many rules. When it comes to

24

interpersonal competition, girls have far less experience because their style of competition
is indirect and more individually based. The research clearly shows that directly after
birth, girls are treated differently from boys. Girls under the age of 12 are less likely than
boys to have experiences that encourage competition in a wide range of physical activities.
When boys and girls have such different experiences in dealing with play during childhood,
additional questions are raised. One pertinent question is if boys and girls are socialized
differently in sport and have separate experiences, then how does this affect their
subjective meanings of success and failure in sports?

Maehr and Nicholls (1980) hypothesize that success and failure might have different
meanings in gender. Some studies support this claim (Ewing, 1981; Roberts & Duda,
1984). The results indicate that gender differences exist in perceived ability and subjective
meanings in defining success and failure in sports. Maehr and Nicholls (1980) continue to
say that women do not attribute success to high ability, but interestingly enough, women
do attribute failure to poor ability. Rather, girls tend to attribute success to effort (Veroff,
1969; Bukowski & Moore, 1980). It is safe to assume that boys and girls have difl‘erent
goals for achievement. Referring back to Maehr and Nicholls' (1980) three forms of
universality in achievement motivation, this creates an implication that girls are less
achievement-oriented than boys because boys have goals that are more ability-oriented and
girls have more of a combination of ability-oriented goals and social approval-oriented
goals, which is more effort-oriented.

Ewing's (1981) study found that there were gender differences in definitions of success
and failure in general achievement situations and in sports. Results indicated that high
school boys thought more tangible and objective aspects (money and skill) were
antecedents for success in general achievement situations. High school girls identified
more personal, subjective, and internal aspects (doing your best, firn, understanding, trying

hard, and patience) as antecedents for success in general achievement situations.

25

For success in sports, Ewing (1981) revealed that high school boys indicated "ability,"
"skill," and "hard work" as antecedents , and girls indicated "playing your best,"
"teamwork," and "determination" to be their antecedents. Boys identified "innate ability"
to be more of an important factor, while girls identified "dedication" to be the more
important factor.

For failure in sports, Ewing's (1981) study showed that high school boys perceived
more stable factors (no talent, no ability, and no dedication) as the antecedents for failure
in sports. Girls, on the other hand, perceived attitude-oriented items (no interest, don't
care, no will, and bad attitude) as being the antecedents to failure in sports.

The summary of this study may suggest that boys are more ability-oriented than girls
and girls are more effort-oriented than boys. Therefore, the socialization that boys and
girls receive when they are young represents different goal orientations that ultimately
determine how these boys and girls define their subjective meanings of success and failure
in sport.

This review of literature is appropriate for the purposes of this study, which are to
determine if male and female American adolescent athletes and nonathletes differ in terms
of the importance they place on their subjective meanings of success and failure in sports.
It is also the intent of this study to examine the role experience plays in determining

subjective meanings for American adolescents in sports.

CHAPTER III
METHOD

This study attempted to discover consistencies and inconsistencies in success and
failure definitions that may exist between athletes and nonathletes as well as between
males and females. This study also examined the relationship between extent of
experience in sports and the importance of success and failure definitions. The
methodology used to collect these data involved two phases. The first phase used an
open-ended questionnaire format to gather components of success and failure for
American adolescents. The second phase used a closed-ended questionnaire format, using
the most fi'equent responses obtained in Phase 1 as forced choices in Phase 2.

21121311
Subjectunillcsim

The subjects involved in this study were 176 American high school students from
Grades 9 through 12. There were 97 males and 79 females, specifically, there were 68
males who were athletes with experience in playing sports and there were 29 males who
were nonathletes. Nonathletes were defined as students who were currently not
participating in organized sport and had no more than 3 years of prior organized sports
experience. The rationale for using 3 years experience as the division point between an
athlete and a nonathlete is that although most youths have experimented with at least one
sport, an individual who has been involved in a particular sport for at least 4 years is
considered to be beyond the experimentation phase and to have made a commitment to
that sport. There also were 42 females who were athletes with experience in playing
sports and 37 females who were nonathletes. These students were obtained from high

schools in a suburban area in a midwestem state. All subjects were volunteers.

26

27

The ethnicity breakdown of the sample was as follows: 74% Caucasian, 1% Afiican
American, 10% Asian American, and 11% listed as Other (mixed ethnicities). The sports
experience of athletes and nonathletes is listed by frequency in Table 1.

Questionnaiml

An open-ended questionnaire was prepared to obtain components of success and
failure in sports. The instrument used was difi‘erent from Triandis et al.'s questionnaire in
terms of format. The open-ended questionnaire asked subjects to supply many
components of success and failure in sport. The following questions were asked: (a)
Make a list of everything you can think of about yourself which causes you to feel that you
can do well in sports, (b) Make a list of everything you can think of about yourself which
causes you to feel that you would do badly in sports. The researcher then provided 20
blanks which allowed the subjects to write down as many responses as possible (see .
Appendix A).

In addition to the open-ended questionnaire, subjects completed a demographic
questionnaire (see Appendix B). This questionnaire was designed to ask general
information that may affect the adolescents' definitions of success and failure in sports
such as gender, how they got involved in sports, and past experiences in sport.
Procedum

Prior to the collection of any data, the approval of human subjects was obtained from
Michigan State University (see Appendix C). Permission was obtained from high school
principals and classroom teachers following an explanation of the purpose and methods of
the study (see Appendix D). Parents of the subjects involved and the subjects themselves
were also asked for their permission to participate in this study.

Adolescents were administered the questionnaire in a classroom setting in their grade
level groups or after school (before or after their athletic practices). The researcher
provided short verbal instructions and told the adolescents to work individually on the

questionnaires. The instructions informed the participants of their responsibility to

28

Table 1

 

 

F

M

 

17

None

11

ll

15

6789

10

10

11

12

13

14

15

 

29

provide as many responses as possible for each of the questions on the questionnaire.
Participants were also informed that this was not a test of intelligence and that the results
would only be reported as group findings. Further, each questionnaire had the same
instructions and the researcher was present to administer all of the questionnaires and to
answer any and all questions.
Ireatmenmt‘rhenata

The responses from the open-ended questions were tabulated by frequency of
responses. First, the data were tabulated as to the total number of different responses for
the components of success and failure. The data were then categorized into responses of
athlete and nonathlete adolescents respectively. The athlete/nonathlete data were
categorized further into female and male responses. A list of responses for each of the
two questions (components of success in sport, components of failure in sport) was
completed and responses were listed in descending order from most fi'equent to least
frequent in each category (see Appendix E). The 25 most frequent responses were then
chosen fiom the four subject lists in the success question and the four subject lists in the
failure question. This was done to create equality between the four subject groups in each
question and to lessen any confiision as to why certain word items were chosen over
others. The top 25 responses from the success question and the top 25 responses from the
failure question were then used to construct the second questionnaire for Phase 2. The
number of items chosen for the second questionnaire (25) was based on the perceived
tolerance and attention span of adolescents for completing this type of questionnaire.

ma2

SubjeclamiDesign

The second phase of this study formally tested the differences in definitions of success
and failure among the different athletic/nonathletic gender groups. Subjects were drawn
from the same geographic area as in Phase 1. The new subjects for Phase 2 were 185 high
school students fiom Grades 9 through 12. There were 62 males and 46 females who

30

were experienced athletes, and there were 38 males and 39 females who had no more than
3 years experience in organized sports and were thus considered nonathletes. All subjects
were volunteers. As in Phase I, the majority of students were Caucasian (69%), followed
by 9% African Americans, 7% Asian Americans, 3% Latino, 1% Native American, and
13% listed as Other (mixed ethnicities). The sports experience of athletes and nonathletes
is listed by frequency in Table 2.

D . . II

In this questionnaire (see Appendix F), the response categories formed the basis for
constructing the Component Questionnaire which was employed in order to examine
gender differences and athletic differences in the importance of success and failure
definitions in sports. The questions for success and failure were the same as the two
questions that were used in Phase 1, except that the participants were forced to rate the
degree of importance for each item on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (very important) to 7
(least important). To be specific, subjects were asked to mark for each of the two
questions the degree of importance for each of the 25 responses: (a) How important are
the following things in making you feel that you can do well in sports, (b) How important
are the following things in making you feel that you would do badly in sports?

The same demographic questionnaire, as was used in Phase 1, was administered to
gather general information from the participants (see Appendix B). Four additional
questions (Items 10-13) were added to the questionnaire for the respondents which asked
them to rank in importance (a) the most important thing in playing sports (playing well,
playing fairly, beating opponent); (b) success in sport (winning the game, playing to
potential, outplaying opponent); (c) failure in sport (losing the game, not playing to
potential, not outplaying opponent); (d) experience in sport (playing a lot, learning from

mistakes, winning many games).

31

Table 2

r‘H‘l'

 

 

MJ:

F

M

 

17

10

None

10

11

234

ll

13

5

67009

12

10

ll

12

13

14

 

32

The majority of the male athletes currently involved in athletics indicated football
(16%) as being the most played sport. The majority of female athletes indicated they were
currently active in soccer and swimming, both 15%. For nonathletes, 87% of the males
said that they were involved at one point in time in organized sports with soccer and
football being the most played sport (21%). Female nonathletes (68%) said they were at
one point or another involved in athletics with basketball (15%) being the most frequent.
Male nonathletes (24%) indicated consideration in joining one of their school's organized
sports teams with soccer being the most popular team to join (5%). Female nonathletes
(33%) said they would consider joining one of their school's organized sports teams with
basketball being the team to join (10%).

IIcatmemnfithQData

A factor analysis method was employed to generate factors that could then be used to
compare responses between athletes and nonathletes and males and females. The subjects'
responses to the two questions were analyzed separately by question. Varimax Rotation
Technique was used in the factor analysis. Varimax rotation is most commonly used in
this type of factor analysis because it allows for discussion of a person's score on one
factor without having to take into account his or her scores on the other factors. Items
with factor loadings of .50 or over were retained for a factor. Only factors which
contained at least three variables, did not also have items which loaded heavily on another
factor, and had initial Eigenvalues greater than 1 were reported. The rationale for using
this criterion was based on Streiner's (1994) argument that retaining factors with less than
an Eigenvalue of 1 and fewer than three items results in a greater probability of retaining
too many factors. This would be too many "in the sense that, if the study were replicated
with a new group of subjects, the first few retained factors may be the same both times,
but the weaker ones would likely differ from one replication to the next" (p. 63).

A commonly used measure of reliability, Cronbach alpha, was used to assess internal

consistency of the construct indicators, depicting the degree to which they "indicate" the

33

common latent (unobserved) consistency. A commonly used threshold value for
acceptable reliability is .70 (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1992).

A 2 x 2 (Athletic category x Gender) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) test
was used to determine differences among the group using the raw factor scores. The F-
statistic was used as an approximation based on Wilks's criterion. Because of the
exploratory nature of this study, an alpha level of p < .10 was used for all analyses. Post
hoc tests for simple effects in the event of a significant interaction were conducted using a
Tukey WSD procedure (W iner, 1971).

Pearson correlations were used to examine the associations between years of
experience in playing sports and importance ratings from the derived factors for success

and failure. Separate correlations were calculated for males and females.

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS

This chapter is divided into two major sections. The first section deals with results of
Phase 1 relating to the overall responses of the subjects, as well as differences between
responses of the adolescents who were athletes and nonathletes and between male and
female adolescents. The second section deals with the results of Phase 2 which are
reported in terms of (a) perceptions of success in sports by athletic status and by gender,
and (b) perceptions of failure in sports by athletic status and by gender.

BhaseiRcsults

As I mentioned in Chapter 3, responses of the subjects were tabulated in descending
order in frequency tables for male and female athletes, and male and female nonathletes,
separately. Among those responses, 25 top ranking responses were selected from male
and female athletes', and male and female nonathletes' frequency tables. Thus, each
question consisted of 25 items for Phase 2. The 25 items for success and the 25 items for

failure are listed in Tables 3 and 4.

34

35

 

 

 

Table 3
‘10 H ‘II o ‘ stings”: ‘l él“ ..touor.t“ rid.

QIch

_Athletes Frequencies Nonathletes—__Erequencies

M F M F

Athletic ability 63 37 Athletic ability 27 19
Physical fitness 28 24 Physical fitness 26 28
Like sports 9 16 Like sports 19 17
Team work 6 21 Team work 10 21
Good attitude 12 22 Good attitude 4 1]
Competitive 14 12 Competitive 8 10
Hardwork l 0 1 5 Hardwork 6 12
Smart 17 6 Smart 9 10
Confidence 13 12 Confidence 4 8
Desire 10 15 Desire 5 6
Determination 1 O 14 Determination 5 7
Support 8 11 Support 8 7
Experience 13 10 Experience 4 3
Follow instruction 6 12 Follow instruction 6 6
Dedication 9 7 Dedication 6 7
Physical stature 8 5 Physical stature 8 4
Practice 3 8 Practice 7 3
Mentally tough 8 6 Mentally tough I 4
Like winning 4 4 Like winning 4 6
Good concentration 3 7 Good concentration 4 1
Good coaches 0 9 Good coaches 2 3
Aggressive 5 2 Aggressive 3 2
Good sportsmanship 4 2 Good sportsmanship 2 3
Leadership 3 6 Leadership 2 O
Imspjrit J) 0 Temspirit 3 6

 

 

Note. 11 = 68 for male athletes, n = 42 for female athletes, 11 = 29 for male nonathletes,

and n = 37 for female nonathletes.

Table4
' o u 'tr 0 . ‘auorg

Order

36

 

!11 E . 11 11 E .

 

 

M F M F
Out of shape 21 14 Out of shape 13 33
Lack athletic ability 17 13 Lack athletic ability 18 13
Bad physical stature 2 14 Bad physical stature 13 4
No time to practice 2 10 No time to practice 8 13
No confidence 14 10 No confidence 4 5
No interest 4 2 No interest 11 14
Laziness 3 ll Laziness 6 9
Bad attitude 5 13 Bad attitude 4 7
Injury 8 4 Injury 9 4
Bad coaches 2 14 Bad coaches 3 2
Pressure 4 7 Pressure 3 5
Not competitive 0 10 Not competitive 2 5
Lack experience 3 2 Lack experience 4 7
Lack desire 1 3 Lack desire 0 11
Fear of success 1 4 Fear of success 1 6
Not mentally tough 8 1 Not mentally tough O 2
Self-conscious 0 4 Self-conscious 1 6
Easily intimidated 4 4 Easily intimidated 0 0
Drugs 5 1 Drugs 1 0
Lack dedication 3 1 Lack dedication O 3
Low self-esteem 7 0 Low self-esteem 0 0
Indecisiveness 0 4 Indecisiveness 2 0
Frustration 2 4 Frustration 0 0
No concentration 3 1 No concentration 0 2
Smoking 1 1 Smoking 2 2

Note. n = 68 for male athletes, 11 = 42 for female athletes, n = 29 for male nonathletes,
and n = 37 for female nonathletes.

As indicated in Table 3, male athletes reported "athletic ability" far more fi'equently
than the three other groups in defining success in sport. Female athletes reported "athletic
ability" somewhat more frequently than male and female nonathletes. The next highest
response, which was similar across all groups, was physical fitness. In terms of
perceptions of failure, all groups indicated that "out-of-shape" and "lack athletic ability"

were the most frequent definitions of failure in sports.

37

BhaseZBcsults

Two factor analyses were conducted: one for the subjective meaning of success and
one for the subjective meanings of failure. Varimax rotation was employed for the factor
analyses. The table of intercorrelations among factors are also contained in Appendix G.
The factor analyses are reported first, followed by MANOVAs to determine athlete and
gender differences. Lastly, Pearson correlations are reported between athletic experiences
and the raw scores on the factors.

The results of the investigation in this section are reported as follows:

1. Factors that define success in sports.

2. Factors that define failure in sports.

3. Comparison of athlete and gender groups on success and failure in definitions.
4. Relationship between athletic experience and success/failure definitions.
WWW:

A factor analysis of the 25 items regarding the importance of each in making
adolescents feel that they can do well in sports revealed four initial factors with
Eigenvalues greater than one. These factors along with their factor loadings are contained
in Appendix H.

Inspection of the rotated factor matrix revealed that Factor 4 (Eigenvalue = 1.06, %
variance = 4.2) had only one item that met the criteria for retainment and thus was deleted.
Factor 2 (Eigenvalue = 1.53, % variance = 6.1) had only two items that met the criteria
for retainment and was also deleted. These two retained items (good sportsmanship and
teamspirit), however, suggest the possibility of a distinct factor and should be pursued as a
possible factor with item modifications in future research. The first factor (Eigenvalue =
13.25, % variance = 53) and third factor (Eigenvalue = 1.18, % variance = 4.7) had
enough items to be retained. However, the Eigenvalue for Factor 3 dropped to 0.82 in the

final statistics. Factor 3 was still retained because of its conceptual interpretation. The

38

first factor labeled "task-oriented meanings" contained four items (hardwork, team work,
athletic ability, and likes the sport). The third factor appeared to measure "competitive-
oriented meanings" which consisted of three items (being aggressive, like winning, and
physical stature). The rotated factor loadings and final statistics for success in sport can
be found in Table 5.

TableS
E IE I l' 'E E S 'S

 

 

 

Item no. WW
4 3 M SD
Factor 1 "Task-oriented meanings" 1.93 1.13
5 Hardwork .75 .26
4 Teamwork .62 .12
1 Athletic ability .57 .36
3 Likes the sport .57 .33
Factor 3 "Competitive-oriented meanings" 2.58 1.33
22 Being aggressive .22 .70
19 Like winning .16 .60
17 Physical stature .17 .52
Total Variance -Per factor 51.6 3.3
-Cumulative 51 .6 59.4
Eigen Value 12.89 .82
MW .85 -72
E l D E E 'l . S

A factor analysis regarding the importance of 25 items in making male and female
athletes and nonathletes feel they would do badly in sports revealed three factors.
The first factor appeared to measure "lack of achievement potential meanings", which was
composed of seven items (lack dedication, low self-esteem, drugs, no concentration, easily
intimidated, smoking, and fiustration). The second factor labeled "lack ability/time
meanings" was composed of five items (out of shape, lack athletic ability, no time for
practice, bad physical stature, and injury). The final factor was called "lack competitive-

oriented meanings" and consisted of three items (fear of success, lack experience, and not

39

competitive). Although the Eigenvalue for the third factor dropped fiom 1.28 to 0.90 in
the final statistics, the factor was retained because of its conceptual contribution and the
exploratory nature of the study. Table 6 contains the rotated factor loadings for failure in

sport. Loadings for all 25 items for both success and failure are contained in Appendix H.

 

 

Table 6
E l E I 1' . E t] E .1 . 5
Item no. Eamoflmdmgs—JMQLMeanL—_
1 2 3 M SD
Factor 1 "Lack of achievement potential meanings"
2.52 1.56
20 Lack dedication .80 .27 .29
21 Low self-esteem .76 .29 .36
19 Drugs .73 .25 .22
24 No concentration/focus .69 .39 .30
18 Easily intimidated .68 .39 .31
25 Smoking .59 . 18 .27
23 Frustration .59 .34 .38
Factor 2 "Lack ability/time meanings" 2.52 1.40
1 Out of shape .24 .73 .22
2 Lack athletic ability .23 .68 .19
5 No time to practice .34 .67 .27
4 Bad physical stature .29 .59 .25
9 Injury .21 .56 .34
Factor 3 "Lack competitive-oriented meanings"
3.08 1.59
14 Fear of success .39 .11 .67
13 Lack experience .24 .34 .66
12 Not competitive .35 .34 .54
Total Variance -Per factor 55.8 4.9 3.6
-Cumulative 55.8 60.7 64.3
Eigen Value 13.96 1.22 .90

CoeficrenLAlphL .93 -86 -78

 

40

......J. . ;.--... -..- . . .. - .... ' ~t-.."..

Research questions two and three asked whether athletes and nonathletes and boys and
girls differ in the importance they place on the factors perceived to define success and
failure in sport. These two questions were examined using a 2 x 2 (Athlete x Gender)
MANOVA for the two success factors and another 2 x 2 MANOVA for the three failure
factors. Means, standard deviations, and group numbers for all factors are contained in
Table 7.

The results for the success factors (task-oriented and competitive-oriented aptitude)
indicated a significant overall multivariate main effect for athlete group, Wilks' = .95, E (2,
176) = 4.73, p = .0]; gender, Wilks' = .96, E (2, 176) = 3.29, p = .04; and for an Athlete x
Gender interaction, Wilks' = .97, F_ (2, 176) = 2.63, p = .075. As an interaction supersedes
any main effects, follow-up univariate E tests were conducted only for the interaction
effect. Follow-up univariate E tests revealed a significant effect for task-oriented
meanings, E (1, 177) = 4.57, p = .034 and competitive-oriented meanings, E (1, 177) =
3.44, p = .065. Post hoc tests for simple effects of the task-oriented meanings indicated
that female athletes found this success factor to be more important for defining success in
sport than did female nonathletes. This interaction is illustrated in Figure 2. Post hoc
tests for simple effects of the competitive-oriented meanings indicated that both groups of
males (athletes/nonathletes) and female athletes rated this second success factor as more
important in defining success in sport than female nonathletes. This interaction is

illustrated in Figure 3.

41

 

 

Table 7
war -|0-0.‘l-0| .to to on In: 0 a ‘ ._to
__Athletes__ _Nonathletes_
DependentMeasure Males Females Males Females—
Success
Task-oriented meanings
M 1.92 1.53 2.02 2.36
SD 1.28 .55 1.03 1.33
n 62 46 35 38
Competitive-oriented meanings
M 2.34 2.39 2.50 3.27
SD 1.31 .85 1.31 1.64
n 62 46 35 38
Failure
Lack of achievement potential meanings
M 2.72 2.18 2.37 2.78
SD 1.89 1.16 1.37 1.57
n 57 44 36 37
Lack ability/time meanings
M 2.64 2.22 2.36 2.77
SD 1.76 .82 1.20 1.45
n 57 44 36 37
Lack competitive-oriented meanings
M 3.00 3.17 2.86 3.33
SD 1.76 1.39 1.62 1.53
n 57 44 36 37

 

 

42

Females

Males

Males

Females

 

 

 

3.0——
25-—

T

a

S

k

0

r 2.0-—

i

C

n

t

e

d 1.5 —~

F

a

C

t

O

r 1.0--

M

e

a

n

S
0.5 ~—
0.0

 

:1 Athletes - Nonathletes

EiguIiZ. Mean task-oriented factor scores for athlete (n = 108) and nonathlete (n = 77)

groups of males and females.

43

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.5 T
Females
C
o
m 3.0 —-
P
e
t
i
i 2.5 -- Males
r
v Males Females
e
0
f 2.0 -~
i
e
n
t
e
d 1.5 -—
F
a
c
t
o 1.0 ~-
r
M
e
a 0.5»
n
s
0.0 .1
[:1 Athletes - Nonathletes

Eiguril. Mean competitive-oriented factor scores for athlete (n = 108) and nonathlete

(n = 77) groups of males and females.

44

The results for the failure factors (lack of achievement potential meanings, lack
ability/time meanings, and lack competitive-oriented meanings) also indicated a significant
overall multivariate effect for an Athlete x Gender interaction, Wilks' = .96, E (3, 168) =
2.22, p = .087, but no main effects. F ollow-up univariate E tests revealed a significant
effect for lack of achievement potential meanings, E (1 , 170) = 3.89, p = .050 and lack
ability/time meanings, E (l, 170) = 4.20, p = .042. Post hoc tests for simple effects of the
lack of achievement potential meanings revealed that female athletes considered this first
failure factor to be more important in terms of defining failure in sports than did female
nonathletes. This interaction is illustrated in Figure 4. Post hoc tests for simple effects of
the lack ability/time meanings revealed that female athletes also rated this second failure
factor to be of more importance when defining failure in sports than did female
nonathletes. This interaction is illustrated in Figure 5. The third failure factor had no
significant interactions to report.

Correlations were conducted between athletic experience and the two success and
three failure factors for athletes. Athletic experience was defined as the number of years a
participant played in his/her best sport. Correlations were first performed with male and
female athletes together, then correlations were conducted separately for gender in order
to examine the last two research questions for this study. Negative correlations indicated
a positive relationship because the questionnaire responses were ordered with "1" being
most important and "7" being least important on the Likert scale.

The first set of correlations for male and female athletes combined indicated that only
one failure factor, "lack ability/time meanings", was significantly correlated with years of
playing experience (I = .19, p = .05). The more years of playing experience that athletes
had, the less importance they placed on the "lack ability/time meanings" in defining failure
in sports. However, when the second set of correlations were run separately for male and

female athletes, the only significant correlation was for female athletes on the competitive-

45

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.5 ——
L
a
C 3.0——
k

F

A Males emales
c
h
i 2.5-~
e Males
v
e Females
m
e
n 2.0 --
t
P
o
t 1.5 i
F
a
c
t 1.0—-
o
r
M
e
a 0.5 -_
n
s

0.0 l

:1 Athletes - Nonathletes

EiguIeA. Mean lack of achievement potential factor scores for athlete (n = 108) and

nonathlete (n = 77) groups of males and females.

46

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.5 —
L 3.0 --
a
c Females
k Males
A
b 2.5 ~—
i Males
: Females
t
Y
/ 2.0 -~
T
i
m
e

1.5 ——
F
a
c
t
o
f 1.0 +
M
e
a
n
s 0.5 -—

0.0 l

[:1 Athletes - Nonathletes

Emmi. Mean lack of ability/time factor scores for athlete (n = 108) and nonathlete
(n = 77) groups of males and females.

47

oriented success factor. Female athletes showed a significantly negative relationship with
the "competitive-oriented meanings" factor (r = .27, p = .07). For female athletes, the
more experience they had playing sports, the less importance they placed on "competitive-
oriented meanings" for defining success in sports.

Cohen (1988) suggested that values of . 10, .30, and .50 represent small, medium, and
large correlations respectively. In relation to this study, female athletes approached a
medium correlation (.27), between playing experience and perceived minimal importance

of competitive-oriented meanings for defining success in sports.

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The main purpose of this study was to determine if male and female American
adolescent athletes and nonathletes differed in terms of the importance they placed on their
subjective meanings of success and failure in sports. This study also examined the role
experience had in determining subjective meanings for American adolescents in sports.
The results are discussed in terms of (a) the success and failure factors that were found,
(b) the differences in importance of success and failure meanings among
athletes/nonathletes and gender groups, and (c) the relationship between experience and
the success/failure definitions.

SuccessandiailureEactorsirLSport

Firstly, the labeling of the 2 success and 3 failure factors was dificult to do because not
all of the items in each success/failure factor appeared to be tied to the same construct.
The naming of the factors is, of course, subjective and another researcher may come up
with a different set of labels. However, it is important to determine a label that in some
way ties the variables together. The labels used in this study for success in sport were
"task-oriented meanings" and "competitive-oriented meanings". These two factors
difi‘ered somewhat from Lee's "dedication" and "innate ability" factors for success in
sports. First, "task-oriented meanings" contained items in addition to hardwork and
teamwork that were not included in Lee's "dedication" factor. These items included
("athletic ability" and "likes the sport"). The last item may seem to be common sense, but
it represents an enjoyment component that is absent fi'om any of Lee's (1995) factors.
Liking a sport creates a passion to perform well. That in and of itself is a motivating
factor for achieving success in sports. Athletic ability loaded on an "innate ability" factor
in Lee's study. In the present study, "athletic ability" seemed to be a part of the hardwork,

teamwork, and enjoyment aspects of being a successfirl athlete.

48

49

Research suggests enjoyment to be the primary factor children use to continue or
discontinue sport participation. In earlier research, Brustad (1988), assumed enjoyment to
be an indicator of positive affect, but such a definition was believed to be too vague and
confirsing (Kimiecik & Harris, 1996). Instead, enjoyment is starting to be considered as a
flow. Csikszentmihalyi (1990) writes, "Enjoyment is characterized by this forward
movement: by a sense of novelty, of accomplishment. . . .After an enjoyable event we know
that we have changed, that our self has grown: in some respect we have become more
complex as a result of it" (p. 46). Continued sport participation may also depend on this
cycle of self-improvement. Seeing oneself gradually improve in sports throughout the
years may indeed ignite an athlete's passion to achieve success in sports. Kimiecik and
Harris (1996) define enjoyment as, "an optimal psychological state (i.e., flow) that leads to
performing an activity primarily for its own sake and is associated with positive feeling
states" (p. 256). This explanation of the evolvement of enjoyment as a definition may
present a strong argument for why "likes the sport" is such a pertinent antecedent for
adolescents in defining success in sports.

The second success factor found in the present study was "competitive-oriented
meanings. " "Competitive-oriented meanings” included being aggressive, like winning, and
physical stature. The physical stature item was similar to Lee's (1995) items of "strong"
and "physical fitness" in her innate ability factor, but the factor in the present study
represented more than "innate ability"; it included an attitude toward winning.

These two orientations, task and competitive, reflect the criteria individuals use to
subjectively define success in achievement settings (Duda, 1989). When an individual is
task-oriented, success is perceived more subjectively rather than more competitively
oriented in nature. For an individual who is competitively oriented, success is still
perceived subjectively, but this subjective success means being better relative to others in a
challenging task (Duda, 1989). In Duda's (1989) study on task and ego orientations in the

high school setting, these two orientation definitions suggest that task-oriented meanings

50

for success in sport evoke more of a social responsibility and emphasize a greater
importance on personal mastery. Competitive or ego-oriented meanings elicit more of an
emphasis on fame and fortune paralleled by a stellar career. There seems to be a definite
balance between these two orientations, however, there is evidence that this balance is not
stable over time.

A problem arises when the idea of ego-orientation is adopted at the expense of task-
oriented meanings. This issue becomes even more pertinent when years of competitive
involvement are examined (Chaumenton & Duda, 1988). Chaurnenton and Duda (1988)
believe that the ego-oriented meanings that are dealt with in a sport situation context
become more pronounced as an individual moves fi'om one level of competition to the
next i.e. (middle school to high school or high school to college). Thus it appears that
competitive or ego-oriented meanings comprise more negative connotations when
compared not only with task-oriented meanings, but with years and level of athletic
Playing eXPefience-

The Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ) was developed by
Duda and Nicholls (1992) to assess individual differences of task and ego involvement in
athletic settings. Chi and Duda (1995) found that relationships exist between the
(TEOSQ) and (a) sport success, (b) sport participation, (c) attitudes on sportsmanship,
and (d) intrinsic interest and enjoyment. The task-oriented meanings in this study
correlate with some of the task involved items on the (TEOSQ). "Hardwork" in the
present study was similar to Item 7 on the (TEOSQ), "I learn a new skill by trying hard"
and Item 8, "I work really hard". Item 5 on the (TEOSQ), "I learn something that is fun
to do" is similar to "likes the sport" in the present study. The competitive-oriented
meanings found in the present study were not compared to the (TEOSQ) ego items
because the competitive-oriented meanings presented more of an attitude toward winning

as opposed to an attitude toward the self (ego).

51

Three factors ("lack of achievement potential meanings", "lack ability/time meanings",
and "lack competitive-oriented meanings") were found to be subjective meanings of failure
in sports for adolescents. These three factors difi‘ered in some respects fiom Lee's (1995)
"Bad attitude" and "Negative environment" factors for failure in sport. The "lack of
achievement potential meanings" contained the items drugs, no concentration, and easily
intimidated that were absent in Lee's study. "Lack ability/time meanings" indicated three
items that were not found in Lee's study for defining failure in sports: lack athletic ability,
no time for practice, and bad physical stature. Finally, ”lack competitive-oriented
meanings" had items not included in Lee's for defining failure in sports: fear of success,
lack experience, and not competitive. This last item was particularly interesting because it
contradicted an item found in one of Lee's failure factors which was "too competitive."
There is a possibility that the difi‘erent findings from the two studies was due to the
difl‘erent subject pools in each study. Lee had a more diverse subject pool that included
more urban youths. The present study contained more female athletes, and more white
and suburban youths. Difl‘erent people in different environments may place difi‘erent
importance on meanings for success and failure in sport.

The first factor "lack of achievement potential meanings" included the following items
(lack dedication, low self-esteem, drugs, no concentration/focus, easily intimidated,
smoking, and frustration). These items were grouped together because they represented
either internal or external qualities that were felt to deter success in athletics and instead
promote an environment for failure. However, all items represent the qualities an
individual can work on and eventually overcome.

The second factor for failure in sports was labeled "lack of ability/time meanings". It
contained five items (out of shape, lack athletic ability, no time to practice, bad physical
stature, injury). The importance of "lack athletic ability" as an item in defining failure in
sport deviates from findings in previous research. Bukowski and Moore (1980), for

instance, discovered that ability was found to be a major contributor or dominant factor

52

only in causing success. In terms of defining failure, "ability" was rated only average.
Although effort appeared to be perceived among the dominant causes of success and
failure in sport, ability was regarded as a dominant cause with respect to success only
(Bukowski & Moore, 1980).

In Lee's (1995) study, she found that lack of ability was not a factor in defining failure
in sports for American adolescents. Lee reported that there were no lack of ability items
in the list of top 25 items of failure for Americans. Lee (1995) attributed the reasoning
behind this discovery to Miller's (1976) self-serving attributional bias style. Lee (1995)
maintained that for Americans in achievement situations, there persists a need to maintain
or enhance self-esteem. When success is achieved, it is attributed to aspects of personal
control such as ability and effort and thus self-esteem is enhanced. However, when failure
is the outcome, in an achievement situation, this failure is attributed to aspects beyond an
individual's control such as environment, luck, and task difficulty. This logic is motivated
by the need to protect one's self-esteem. Lee concluded that attributing failure to lack of
ability would be damaging to the self-esteem of an individual. Lee inferred that this is the
reason why the lack of ability factor did not show up in her study. Then why did this
failure factor surface in this present study? Again, it may be attributed to the difl‘erent
subject pools between Lee's study and this present study.

Given the subtle differences in the present sample in the factors that comprise
definitions of success and failure in sport, researchers should consider using the subjective
meaning approach when conducting research on this topic. A subjective meaning
approach would allow the researcher to tap the qualities of success and failure in sport
that are most meaningfirl to a particular population. The sample in the present study
reflects youths fi'om suburban, white, middle class backgrounds. The items and factors
may change fiom urban to suburban youth, high school to college populations, or racial
and ethnic cultures.

53

In addition, the nature of the question may tap slightly different underlying meanings of
success and failure. Specifically, in the present study, the question was worded as, "How
important are the following things in making you feel that you can do well (would do
badly) in sports". Ifthe question(s) was worded using "one" in place of "you", the
response may have reflected more "causal" meanings. Instead, one could argue that the
personalized "you" type of questions reflected more attributional responses on the part of

the participants.

 

The main purpose of this study was to determine if there were any differences in
defining success and failure in sports between gender and also athletes and nonathletes.
The results of this study showed that there were indeed gender and athletic group
differences in the subjective meanings for success and failure in sports, but the most
significant findings revealed intra-gender differences between athletes and nonathletes.

In terms of the two success factors (task-oriented meanings and competitive-oriented
meanings), female athletes thought "task-oriented meanings" were significantly more
important than did female nonathletes in defining success in sports. In her study, Duda
(1989) found a definite link between female athletes and task orientation. In fact, female
athletes associated athletics with working with others and the significance of trying one's
best.

Other studies such as Maloney and Petrie (1972), who studied Canadian adolescents in
grades 8 through 12, found that participants in organized sports, especially males, were
more likely to be oriented toward skill and victory than females and nonparticipants, who
favored more task-oriented characteristics.

In 1976, Loy, Birrell, and Rose studied the same topic only this time focusing on
college students and adults. Findings fi'om their research indicated that females and
nonathletes were less likely to embrace what they call a "professional" sport orientation,

that is a win-at-all-costs orientation.

54

For the second success factor in this study, female nonathletes were the only group
who thought competitive-oriented meanings were not important for subjective meanings
of success in sports. Female athletes and both groups of males thought this factor was
significant. The suggestion is made by Nicholson (1979) that if athletes tend to have a
different orientation toward participating than nonathletes, there also may be personal
characteristics, attitudes, or outlooks that vary between a female athlete and nonathlete.

Due to the sex roles and stereotypes brought forth in sport on female athletes by
society, it may very well be that there is a sense of overcommitrnent on the part of female
athletes to achieve, especially when defining, success in sports. Female athletes may feel
that they have to commit and work twice as hard in order to gain acceptance and respect
in a male dominated sport society. So what does it take on the part of the female athlete
to make this leap fi'om "outcast" to "leader" in the realm of sports?

According to Ogilvie (1979), it takes a strong personal identity. Ogilvie (1979)
conducted interviews of successfirl female athletes. Through these interviews, the female
athletes indicated that they attributed their achievement in their respective sports to a
strong personality. One woman in particular listed the characteristics that composed her
strong personality. The characteristics included: setting high goals, having a positive
mental set, self-direction, independence, aggressive, leadership, and risk taking.

Thus, the findings in the present study are at odds with some of the previous work
comparing gender and athletic categories (e.g., Loy et al., 1976; Maloney & Petrie, 1972).
Female athletes are much more like their male athlete counterparts in defining success in
sport than like nonathletic females.

Vealey suggested (1988) that elite female athletes are less influenced by traditional
gender role socialization and possess as much confidence as males. Vealey explained that
in motor performance research, sport psychologists have indicated that females are lower
in self-confidence than males. This may very well be due to the process of gender-role
socialization. That is, since sport is perceived as being primarily a male activity and a

55

majority of sports behaviors are likened to male behaviors, females may feel inadequate in
an athletic capacity. Vealey continues to explain that females may feel less competent,
think that they have less social support than their male counterparts, and receive fewer
awards for sport participation and success.

Gender role research indicates that females in competitive sport possess more
"masculine" qualities than do female nonparticipants (V ealey, 1988). Vealey predicts fi'om
this research that females who enter into an elite level of sports participation are not
afl‘ected as much by traditional gender roles and tend to have as much confidence as
males.

Results fi'om Vealey's (1988) study revealed that elite female athletes strongly believe
that they have the ability to be successful at their sport. Also, these elite athletes base
their feelings of competence and satisfaction on how well they perform instead of whether
they win or lose. Vealey indicated that it may be elite athletes have learned to focus on
and evaluate themselves on standards that are personally controllable. It would have to be
assumed that this type of mentality fi'om elite athletes has developed over time through
sporting experience. The implication here is that if subjective meanings/definitions of
success and failure in sport come fi'om experience, and if the experience is in sport, then
the "socializing" in sport becomes more pronounced for defining success and failure than
would traditional gender "socializing."

 

The second focus of this study was to examine the relationship between years of sport
experience and the subjective meanings of success/failure for athletes. Correlations were
run together and separately by gender using the two success and three failure factors and
years of athletic experience. All athletes involved in this study indicated the "lack
ability/time meanings" factor as being negatively correlated with years of playing
experience. The more years of playing experience athletes had, the less importance they
placed on this failure factor. However, when gender was isolated, only female athletes

56

showed a relationship (negative) between years of experience and the success factor
"competitive-oriented meanings". The more experience female athletes had in athletics,
the less importance they placed on this success factor. A possible explanation for why
there was a noted gender difl‘erence for "competitive-oriented meanings" in the present
study is due to the fact that male athletes had more years of playing experience than
female athletes causing female athletes to have a restricted range in experience with which
to correlate to competitive-oriented meanings.

Bukowski and Moore (1980) discuss how experiences can have different influences on
difi‘erent people. These two researchers state, "the understanding of the attributional
process may be usefitl for the understanding of how persons construct a social reality and
how they extract meaning fi'om their experiences" (p. 198). That is, male and female
athletes may not experience success and failure in sport to the same degree. The gender
difl‘erence in the correlations run for this section of the present study could very well
represent difl‘erent ways these two groups of athletes were socialized into sport and why
only female athletes placed less significance on "competitive-oriented meanings" with the
more experience they had in sport.

EumreDiIections

There are several possible fiiture research directions this study could take. First, it
would be interesting to conduct this study in a college setting. There would possibly be
more dramatic difl‘erences in the results because subjects would be a little older than the
subjects in this present study and would have more experience in playing sports.

Second, it would be suggested that the use of interviews be included in any possible
follow-up studies. The interviews would extract explicit meanings of success and failure
in sports. This present study did not do this, so the reasons behind the definitions for
success and failure in sports were never provided. Interviews might create more concrete
insight and understanding as to why adolescents have different subjective meanings of

success and failure in sports.

57

Third, it would be beneficial to confirm the factors through a replication study. In the
present study, good sportsmanship and team spirit were two items that just missed making
it to the group of success factors in Phase 2. A replication with a larger sample size might
increase the number of items in the factors or increase the number of factors.

Fourth, conducting a factor analysis using an Oblique rotation is recommended. An
Oblique rotation, moreso than a Varimax rotation, redefines and allows for correlation of
the factors in order to make sharper distinctions for the meanings of these factors. This
could clear up any discrepancies there might be with the items in the factors and the
success/failure factors themselves.

Finally, the present study revealed a failure factor "lack ability/time meanings" that did
not show up in Lee's (1995) study. It would be beneficial to see if this factor showed up

in follow-up studies and if so, for what gender and athletic group(s).

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Amster, H. (1964). Semantic satiation and generalization: Learning? Adaptation?
Bushnlogicalfiulletmz, 273-286

Atkinson, J.W., & Feather, NT. (1966). Atheoraaofmotivation. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.

Atkinson, J .W., & Raynor, J .O. (1974). Motivation and achievement.
Washington, DC: V.H. Winston.

Berlage, G.I. (1982). Children's sports and the family. W 43-47.

Bird, A.M. and Brarne, IN. (1978). Self versus team attributions: A test of the "
I'm OK, but the team's so-so" phenomenon. WM 260-268.

Brawley, L. R., & Roberts, G. C. (1984). Attribution in sport: Research
foundations, characteristics, and limitations. In J. M. Silva & RS. Weinberg (Eds)

Psychologicalioundationsflsponwp. 97-213). Champaign, IL. Human Kinetics.

Brustad, R. J. (1988). Affective outcomes in competitive youth sport: The

influence of intrapersonal and socialization factors. WW
PsycholongQ, 307-321.

Bukowski, W.U. & Moore, D. (1980). Winners' and losers' attributions for
success and failure in series of athletic events. WSW 195-210.

Chaumenton, N., & Duda, J .L. (1988). Is it how you play the game of whether
you win or lose?: The effect of competitive level and situation on coaching behaviors.

lournalnLSportBehavior. 11(3), 157-174.

Chi, L., & Duda, J. L. (1995). Multi-sample confirmatory factor analysis of the

task and ego orientation in sport questionnaire. Wind
mm. 91-93

Coakley, 1.]. (1994). Sportlnfincietstsrreaandfiontmxersies St. Louis,
Missouri: Mosby-Yearbook, Inc.

58

59

Cohen, J. (1988). StatisticaLEoweLAnalysisfoLtheBehavioraLScienscs.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). W. New
York: Harper & Row.

Dobie, M. (1987). Facing a brave new world. Mom November 8.

Dorais, L.J. ( 1990). 1_O_QQ_inuit_\aLQIds (p.61). Quebec, Canada: Association
inuksiutiit Katimajiit, Groupe d' etudes inuit et circumpolaires, Universit e Laval.

Duda, J. L. (1989). Relationship between task and ego orientation and the

perceived purpose of sport among high school athletes. W3:
Bmhnlogy. 11318-335

Duda, J. L. ,& Nicholls, J. G. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in
schoolwork and sport. loumalnfEducationalEsyshologajfil, 290-299.

Ewing,M..E (1981) . .- - - ' -
Females Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana.

 

Feather, N. T. (1969). Attribution of responsibility and valence of success and
failure 1n relation to initial confidence and perceived locus of control. .Imnmlgf

WW4; 129-144

Feltz, D. L. & Petlichkofl‘, L. (1983). Perceived competence among interscholastic
sport participants and dropouts. CmdimlonmalanpphedSmnjcienceJ, 231-235

Fitch, G. (1970). Effects of self-esteem, perceived performance, and choice on
causal attributions. loumalprersonalinLandSociaUZsychology, 16, 311-315.

Frieze, I H (1975). Women' s expectations for and causal attributions of success
andfailure. InM...TS Mednick, S. S. TangriandLHW Hofinan(Eds.,) mm

W (pp 158-169). New York: Holt, Rinehart
& Wrnston.

Frieze, 1., & Weiner, B. (1971). Cue utilization and attributional judgments of
success and failure. W32, 591-605.

Gill, D.L. (1980). Success-failure attributions in competitive groups: An exception
to egocentrism. WW 106-114.

Gill, D. L. ,& Gross, J. B. (1979). The influences of group success-failure on
selected interpersonal variables. In G. C. Roberts and K. M. Newell (Eds) Eacholmflf

motoahehaviorzandsportlm Champaign, IL. Human Kinetics.

60

Gilligan, C. (1982). We: Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.

Hair, J., Anderson, RE. ,Tatharn, R..L ,& Black, W. C. (1992). Mnltivarjatetma
Wings. New York. Macmillan Publishing Company.

Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered: Toward a developmental

model. Humanlkvelopment41, 34-64

Hofinan, L. W. (1972) Early childhood experiences and women's achievement
motives. ImmalnfiSQcIallssncsfl 129-155.

Kang, S. (1987). EnhancementofphysicalMucationandassignments. Paper

presented in the 6th international sport science conference seminar.

Km, JP. (1976). Psycholinguistimhtroductorxfierspectixes. New York, NY:
Academic Press, Inc.

Kimiecik, J. C. & Harris, A. T. (1996). What is enjoyment? A
conceptual/definitional analysis with implications for sport and exercise psychology.
humalnfSporLandExerc’meBsychologaJ; 247-263.

Klint, K A (1985) Earticrpmonrnotmesandsdfiperceptionmfsurrentand
fonnerathletesmxouthgymnastrcs Unpublished master's thesis. University of Oregon,

Eugene.

Klint, K.A., & Weiss, MR. (1987). Perceived Competence and motives for
participating in youth sports: A test of Harter's competence motivation theory. loumalgf

Smnmholnsxi 55—65.

Kukla, A. ( 1 972). Foundations of an attributional theory of performance.
BsxchologicalRerrieraalQ, 454-470.

Kukla, A. (1978). An attributional theory of choice. In L. Berkowitz (Ed. ),
AdmcesansxpenmemaLsocraLpsxchology, Vol.2. New York. Academic Press.

Lee, I. (1995). BerceptionufsuccessandfailurejnspmfonKoreanand
Amerimadolescema. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.

Lever, J. (1976). Sex differences in the games children play. W 478-
487.

Lever, J. (1978). Sex difi‘erences 1n the complexity of children' s play. American
SociologicalRerrierraA; 471-483

 

61

Lever, J. (1980). Multiple methods of data collection: a note on divergence.
UrbanLife40. 199-214.

Loy, J., Birrell, S., & Rose, D. (1976). Attitudes held toward agonistic activities
as a firnction of selected social identities. Quest, 26, 81-93.

Maehr, ML. (1974). Culture and achievement motivation. American
W9. 387-396-

Maehr, M. L. (1978). Sociological origins of achievement motivation. In D. Bar-

tal and L. Saxe (Eds) Sosialpsyrholmofleducatiomlheomandresearchmp. 205-
224). New York. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.

Maehr, M. L. ,& Nicholls, J. G. (1980). Culture and achievement motivation: A

second look InN. Warren(Ed.,) WW(VOL 2, pp. 221-
267). New York: Academic Press.

 

 

Maloney, T. ,& Petrie, B. (1972). Professionalization of attitudes toward play
among Canadian school pupils as a function of sex, grade, and athletic participation.

IoumalofleisureResearch, 4,184-185.
McClelland, DC. (1961). Iheashierdmsncim. New York: Free Press.

McClelland, D.C., & Winter, D.G. (1969). Motivatingmmmiaachiexement.
New York: Free Press.

Miles, G. (1991). Prep sports could lose budget race. DSAIQday. July 30,
Section C (Cover Story).

Miller, D. T. ( 1 976). Ego-involvement and attributions for success and failure.
loumalnffiersonalrtxandfiomalksychologyjfi. 901-906

Nicholls, J. G. (1972). Creativity tn the person who will never produce anything
original and usefirl: The concept of creativity as a normally distributed trait. American

Bsycholosy41. 717-727

Nicholls, J. G. (1975) Causal attributions and other achievement-related
cognitions: efforts of task outcomes, attainment value and sex. W

W 379-389.

Nicholls, J. G. (1976a). Effort rs virtuous, but it's better to have ability: Evaluative

responses to perceptions of effort and ability. lournalofResearchinEmonalmLJQ. 306-
315.

 

62

Nicholls, J G. (1976b). When a scale measures more than rts name denotes: The

case of the Test Anxiety Scale for children. loumaloLConsnltingandflinical
BushnlogyAA. 976-985

Nicholson, CS. (1979). Some attitudes associated with sport participation among
junior high school females. WW 661-667.

Ogden, C.K., & Richards, IA. (1923). IheMcaningfiiMeaning. New York:
Harcourt Brace J ovanovich, Inc.

Ogilvie, B. C. (1979). The personality of those women who have dared to succeed

insport. InJ..H Goldstein(Ed.,) WWW
Winn (pp. 149-156). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence, Erlbaum Associates.

Osgood, C. E. ,Miron, M. & May, W. (1975) MW
W. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., & Tannenbaum, PH. (1957). The Measurement of
Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Raynor, J. O. (1969). Future orientation and motivation of immediate activity. An
elaboration of the theory of achievement motivation. Bsxchologisalkemlé, 606-610.

Roberts, G. C. (1978). Children' s assignment of responsibility for winning and

losing. In F. Smoll & R Smith (Eds) BsxchologicaLperspectirLeainyouthsports (pp.
145-171). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

Roberts, G.C., & Duda, J. (1984). Motivation in sport: The mediating role of
perceived ability. Macrame. 312-324.

Roberts, G.C., Kleiber, DA, & Duda, J.L. (1981). An analysis of motivation in
children's sports: The role of perceived competence in participation. loumalfiflSpoIt
WI. 206-215-

Roberts, G.C., & Pascuzzi, D.L. (1979). Causal attributions to explain winning

and losing in sport environments: Theoretical implications. IoumalgfiSponmm
1, 203-211.

Sassen, G. (1980). Success anxiety in women. A constructivist interpretation of rts
sources and its significance. WW5; 13-25.

Scanlan, T.K. (1982). Social evaluation: A key development element in the

competition process. In R Magill, M. Ash, & F. Smoll (Eds), Childmitupon (pp. 138-
152). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

 

 

 

 

63

Scanlan, T.K., & Passer, M.W. (1980). Self-serving biases in the competitive
sport setting: An attributional dilemma. .1321.1mal.12£Sport.Brutzhologxfia 124-136.

Slobin, D.I. (1971). stcholinmusties. Berkeley: University of California.

Sohn, D. (197 7) Affect-generating powers of effort and ability: Self attributions
of academic success and failure. JoumalofEdueanonalstchologaa 500-505

State ofMichigan. (1978). WWW (phase
II: agency sponsored sports), Ann Arbor, Mich.

Streiner, D.L. (1994). Research methods in psychiatry. Canadianloumalgf
W39. 135-140.

Swift, EM. (1991). Why Johnny can't play. SportslllustratedJi, 60-72. .5

Triandis, HQ (1972). The W. New York, NY: I.
Wiley Publishing.

 

Triandis, H..C ,Kitty, K. ,Shanmugarn, A.V. ,Tanaka, Y., & Vissiliou, V. (1972).

Cognitive structures and the analysis of values. In W (pp.
181-262). New York: Wiley-Interscience.

Ulrich, B. D. (1987). Perceptions of physical competence, motor competence, and
participation in organized sport: Their interrelationships rn young children. Research

Quarterlvforfixerciseandfiportai; 57-67.

Vealey, R. S. (1988). Sport-confidence and competitive orientation. an addendum

on scoring procedures and gender differences. W
19, 471-478

Verofi‘, J. (1969). Social comparison and the development of achievement
motivation. In C. P. Smith (Ed.,) Achievemenuelatedmtivesinnhildrenmp. 321-333).

Weiner, B. (1972). Attribution theory, achievement motivation and the
educational process. RerdemofEdurationalReseamlLAZ, 203-215.

Weiner, B. ,Frieze, I. ., Kukla, A., Reed, L. ,Rest, S. ,&Rosenbaum, R (1971).
Perceiving the causes of success and failure. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley,

RUE Nisbett, S. Valins, andB. Weiner(Eds.), WWW
behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

Winer,B-J- (1971). Statisticalprinciplesincxperimentalfiesim(2nd ed). New
York: McGraw-Hill.

 

 

64
Wolosin, RJ. ,Sherman, S. J, & Till, A. (1973). Effects of cooperation and
competition on responsibility attribution after success and failure. loumalfiiExpedmental
SomalstchologaE 220-235.

Wortman, C. B. ,Costanzo, P. R, & Witt, T. R (1973). Efi‘ects of anticipated
performance on the attributions of causality to self and others. lQuInaLoLBeIsonalinLand
SocialstcholongZ, 372-381

Yoon, Y (1993) Ananalvsrsmphvsrcalfiusatmadmmrstratmstatepfthe
WWW. Unpublished thesis, Korea Kyowon University.

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDICES

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX A E

 

 

65

Appendix A
Lee's Open-Ended Questionnaire

A Please provide answers to the following two questions.

F“ PCP”

Your answers do not need to be in order of importance.

This is not a test of intelligence and there are no right or wrong answers.
There is no time limit. Take all the time you need and give us answers that are
important to you. Please fill in as many blanks as possible.

Your answers are anonymous. Do not put your name on this questionnaire.

1. Please make a list of everything you can think of about yourself which causes you to
feel that you can do well in sports.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

66

2. Please make a list of everything you can think of about yourself which causes you to
feel that you would do badly in sports.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX B

 

 

67

 

Appendix B
Demographic Questionnaire
Instructions: Please check the appropriate answer or fill in the required information.
Age: Sex:_ M _F Grade in school:_9th _10th _1 1th _12th
Race: _African American _Latino _American Indian
_Asian American _White _Other
(Please specify)

Below are some questions about your experience in sports. By SPORTS we mean those
that have organized practices, scheduled competitions, and coaches.

 

Experience in sports Circle one (Yes or No)
1. Are you involved in organized sports? Yes or No

List which ones:

2. Have you ever been involved in organized sports? Yes or No

List which ones:

 

3. Were your parents ever involved in organized sports? Yes or No
List which ones:

 

4. Are you a member of your school's sports teams? Yes or No
List which ones:

 

5. Ifno, do you plan to join a sport team in your school? Yes or No
List which ones:

 

If you have participated in sports, please answer the following questions. If you
have not participated in sports, please go to question #10.

6. How long have you played your best sport? years

7. How important is it to you to be involved in sports?
1 2 3 4 5
not at all a little somewhat important very important

8. How satisfied are you with your playing experience in your best sport?
1 2 3 4 5
not at all a little somewhat satisfied very satisfied

9. How much playing time do you get during a game? I played:
1 2 3 4 5
no time less than half halfof time most of time all the time

 

 

 

 

68

Everyone please answer the following questions. Please rank accordingly: 1=most
important, 2= second in importance, 3= least important.

10. When playing sports, the important thing is:
playing well
playing fairly
beating opponent __

11. To me, success in sport is:
winning the game
playing to potential
outplaying opponent _

 

12. To me, failure in sport is:
losing the game
not playing to potential
not outplaying opponent _

 

13. To me, experience in sport is:
playing a lot _
learning from mistakes
winning many games

 

 

APPENDIX C

 

 

 

OFFICE OF
RESEARCH
AND
GRADUATE
STUDIES

University Committee
Research Involving
Human Subjects
(116111118)

Michigan State University
232 Administration Building
East Lansmg, Michigan
48824-1046

517/355-2180
FAX. 517/432-1171

{he Menigan Slate Universny
1054 is Insririiiionai Diversriy.
Excellence In Action

MSU .5 an .4" rn'arrvr-rirnon.
:‘GUJ -i)000Imi'.‘:.'v HlSIIIuIIOH

   
 
 
 
 
   

MICHIGAN STATE
U N I V E R S l T Y

May 1, 1996

 

69

TO: Charles Stein
10004 Bergmen
Huntington Woods, MI 48070

RE: IRE“: 94-243
TITLE: ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF SELF-ESTEEM FOR
AMERICAN AND KOREAN ADOLESCENT ATHLETES
REVISION REQUESTED: 03/28/96
CATEGORY: l-C
APPROVAL DATE: 05/01/96

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects'(UCRIHS)
review of this preject is complete.. I am pleased to adVise that the
rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately
grotected and methods to obtain informed consent are appropriate.
gerefore, the UCRIHS approved this progect and any reViSions listed
a ove.

RENEWAL: UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with
the approval date shown above. Investigators planning to
continue a progect be and one year must use the green renewal
form (enclosed with t e original agproval letter or when a. -
project is renewed) to seek u date certification. There_is a
maximum of four such expedite renewals possible. Investigators
wishing to continue a proyect beyond that time need to submit it
again or complete reView.

REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in Brocedures involving human
‘subjects, rior to initiation of t e change. If this is done at
the_time o renewal, please use the green renewal form. To
reVise an approved protocol at ang other time during the year,
send your written request to the CRIBS Chair, requesting revised
approval and referenCing the project's IRB # and title._ Include
in your request a description of the change and any reVised
instruments, consent forms or advertisements that are applicable.

pnosnms/

CHANGES: Should either of the followin arise during the course of the
work, investigators must noti UCRIHS Eromptly: 11) roblems
(unexpected Side effects, comp aints, e c.) involv1ng uman
subjects or 12) changes in the research environment or new
information indicating greater risk to the human sub ects than
existed when the protocol was preViously reviewed an approved.

If we can be of any future help, lease do not hesitate to contact us
at (517)355-2180 or FAX (517)4 2- 171.

Sincerel

  
  
 

aavid E. Wright, Ph.D.
UCRIHS Chair

DEW:bed

cc: Deborah L. Feltz

. t -..u '1' LA£JVLA

 

APPENDIX D

7O

Informed Consent Form
Department of Physical Education and Exercise Science
Michigan State University

Investigator: Inwha Lee and Charles Stein

I have freely consented to allow my students to participate in a study conducted by
Charles Stein, master's degree student in the Department of Physical Education and
Exercise Science at Michigan State University.

The purpose of this study is to examine whether there are any differences according to
gender and athletic experience among adolescents in their perceptions of success and
failure in sport.

I understand that my students are free to refiise to answer certain questions or discontinue
their participation at any time without penalty. I understand that if they choose to
participate in this study, it will take about 10 minutes or less to complete the
questionnaires. I understand that my students‘ identity will remain anonymous in any
report of research findings.

I agree to participate voluntarily in this research.

fléa‘ I04 4/«9-%

Principal/Director's signature Date

I, the undersigned, have defined and fiilly explained the study to the above subjects.

7
.- /

staid

Investigator's signature Date

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX E

 

 

 

7 1
Appendix B

Frequency of Responses for Male and Female Adolescent Athletes and Nonathletes

Table 8

W

W
Athletic ability
Physical fitness
Smart
Competitive
Confidence
Experience
Good attitude
Desire
Determination
Hardwork
Dedication
Like sports
Mentally tough
Support
Physical stature
Follow instructions well
Team work

Love of sports
Aggressive

Good sportsmanship

Willing totry

Freqnem Warm

63
28
17
14
13
13
12
10
10
10

AbUIGO‘O‘WOOOOOO

Like winning
Practice

Good concentration
Leadership
Consistency

Goals

Not intimidated
Family history

No drugs

Cocky

Do what it takes
Past success

In the zone

T.V.

Music

Off the streets

No alcohol
Environment
Equipment

Dealing with pressure

.5

I—It—dI—It—II—lI—lh-lt—‘t—II—‘HNNNNNwww-hg

 

 

 

Table 9

72

W

W
Athletic ability
Physical fitness
Good attitude
Team work
Like sports
Desire
Hardwork
Determination
Competitive
Confidence
Follow instruction
Support

Experience

Good coaches
Good health
Practice

Good concentration
Dedication

Frequency W

37
24
22
21
16
IS
15
14
12
12
12
11
10

9

8
8
7
7

Mentally tough
Smart

Leadership

Physical stature

Set goals

Can handle pressure
Like winning

Doing your best
Good sportsmanship
Visualization
Aggressive

Well rounded

Good listener
Consistency

Open to criticism

5
i—ii—ii—iNNNNw-AAUIMOQQE

 

 

 

Table 10

73

EteqnmnfkesnonsesnfMaleNonathletesfoLSumessinSmrts

Wm

Frequency 310mm

 

Athletic ability
Physical fitness
Like sports
Team work
Smart
Competitive
Support
Physical stature
Practice
Hardwork
Dedication
Follow instructions well
Desire
Determination
Confidence
Like winning
No drugs
Experience
Good concentration
Good attitude
Aggressive
Team spirit
Accept criticism

27
26
19
IO

NWWAAAAAhWMOGO‘QWmWO

Integfity
Leadership
Respect
Visualization
Good coaches
Good sportsmanship
T.V.

High energy level
Consistency
Being successful
Patience
Perfectionist
Mentally tough
Try hard
Equipment

:3

i—iu—au—ii—ii—ii—Ai—Ai—ii—iNNNNNNE

 

Table 11

74

EmumcxofkesmnsesnffiemaleflonathletesfoaSuccessiriSpons

WW

Physical Fitness
Team work
Athletic ability
Like sports
Hard work
Good attitude
Competitive
Smart
Confidence
Determination
Dedication
Support

Desire

Follow instructions well
Like winning
Team spirit
Physical stature
Mentally tough
Friendly
Practice

21
19
17
12
11
10
10

whthO‘OtO‘GQQQOO

Experience

Can handle pressure
Good sportsmanship
Good coaches
Energetic
Aggressive

No drugs

Set goals

Honesty
Consistency

Family history
Open to criticism
Well rounded
Inspiration

Good concentration

.5

t—o—di—ii—iHi—INNNNNWWWWE

 

 

75

Table12
E EE Ellllll fiEl 'S

Wham—_Jremzrlencxflntdflhmm

 

Out of shape Lack experience
Lack athletic ability 17 No time to practice
No confidence 14 Frustration

Injury 8 Losing

Not mentally tough 8 Bad coaches

Low self-esteem 7 Bad physical stature
Drugs 5 Bad luck

Bad attitude 5 No set goals

No interest 4 Politics

Easily intimidated 4 Lack desire
Pressure 4 Authority problems
Lack dedication 3 Lack aggression
Selfish 3 Overconfident
Overly aggressive 3 Smoking

No concentration 3 Fear of success
Laziness 3 Bad referees

Not consistent

E
i—ii—ni—ai—Ai-di—Ii—oi—Ii—ai—Ii—INNNNNWE

 

 

Table 13

76

EllllfsE'l'S

Wrasse
Out of shape

Bad physical stature

Bad coaches

Bad attitude

Lack athletic ability
Laziness

No confidence

Not competitive
No time to practice
No interest
Pressure

Bad sportsmanship
Indecisiveness
Frustration

Injury
Self-conscious
Easily intimidated
Fear of success
Don't like losing
Bad influences
Lack desire

No interest

Frequency W

l4
14
14
13
13
11
10
10
10

NWWWAb-b-bA-hvtfloo

Lack experience
Try too hard
Having a bad day
Impatient

No support
Winning not important
Not mentally tough
No concentration
Overconfident
Hearing impaired
Environment

Bad preparation
Over aggressive
No fun

Bad grades

Drugs

Alcohol

Smoking

Lack dedication

E

i—Ii—oi—a—u—oi—ir—Ii—Ii—Ii—Ii—ti—ii—au—oNNNNNE

 

Table 14

77

E EB Elllll ll fiE'l '5

Wm
Lack athletic ability

Bad physical stature

Out of shape

No interest

Injury

No time to practice
Laziness

Lack experience

Bad attitude

No confidence

Losing

Not doing well and know it
Pressure

Bad news prior to game
Bad coaches

Smoking

Fregnmcy Warm

18
13
13
11

Nwwwwhbbboiooxo

Frequency

 

Not competitive
Don't like orders
Lack aggression
Indecisiveness
Stupid

Drugs

Alcohol
Discrimination
Make too many mistakes
No respect
Overconfident
Self-conscious
Penalty prone
Fear of success
Need glasses
Bad team

 

Table 15

78

E [E EElll ll {1151.5

Wm
Out of shape

No interest

No time to practice
Lack athletic ability
Lack desire
Laziness

Lack experience
Bad attitude

Fear of success
Self-conscious
Pressure

Not competitive
No confidence

Bad physical stature
Injury

Lack dedication

Frequency W

33
14
13
13
ll

wh-bmmeOflflO

 

Not a team player
Not mentally tough
Best not good enough
Eat too much prior to game
Bad coaches

No concentration
Smoking

Don't like orders

Too cocky
Perfectionist

No support
Environment

No money

No patience

Too competitive

E
i—ni—Ii—Ai—Ii—ii—Ai—ii—INNNNNNWE

 

 

APPENDIX F

 

 

 

79

Appendix F
Stein's Closed-Ended Questionnaire

1. How important are the following things in making you feel that you can do well in
sports. Please rate each one on a scale of (very important) to (least important).

l=Very important 7=Least important
. Athletic ability I 2 6
Physical fitness
Like sports
Team work
. Good attitude
Competitive
Hard work
Smart
Confidence
Desire
. Determination
Support (family/fi'iends)
. Experience
Follow instructions well
. Dedication
Physical stature
Practice
. Mentally tough
Like winning
. Good concentration
. Good coaches
. Aggressive
. Good sportsmanship
. Leadership
. Team spirit

parentheses:—

 

NNNNi—ii—ii—i—ii—ii—iu—ii—ii—ni—I
wu—opoospiMJ-XWNHP

N
A
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

h-i—II—Il—‘I—dhdhdt-dh—IHHHU—lh—‘HHHHU—l—ih-d—lh—lh—I
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
bub-##3##bhhh-fihhhbhhhbbAA-h-h
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\
\IQQQQQQQQQQQQQQNQQQ\lflflflflfl

N
M

80

2. How important are the following things in making you feel that you would do badly
in sports. Please rate each one on a scale of (very important) to (least important).

l=Very important 7=Least important
Out of shape
Lack athletic ability
Bad physical stature
No time to practice
No confidence
No interest
Laziness
Bad attitude
- Injury
Bad coaches
. Pressure
. Not competitive
. Lack experience
. Lack desire
. Fear of success
. Not mentally tough
. Self-conscious
. Easily intimidated
Drugs
. Lack dedication
. Low self-esteem
. Indecisiveness
. Frustration
. No concentration/focus
. Smoking

09°89‘P'PP’Nr-r

H
.0

3 .

 

NNNNi—Ii—Ii—ii—ai—ii—bi—ai—Ii—I
wu—opooqoiuitszi-a

N
.5
\IQQQQQQQQQQQQNQQQQQQQQQQQ

i—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—ai—ii—ii—ii—ii—ii—i—ii—ii—ii—ii—i
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
wwwwwwwwuwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
AbAA-fi-fi-fiAA-fiA-hA-khh-b-bAA-bh-hb-b
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\

N
M

 

 

APPENDIX G

 

 

 

 

 

 

81
Appendix G
Table 16
I l . ! E E 5 IE 'I . S
haters
I 2 3 4 5
Success
1. Task-oriented meanings 1.00
2. Competitive-oriented meanings .55 1.00
Failure
3. Lack of achievement potential meanings 1.00
4. Lack ability/time meanings .68 1.00
W -68 .62 1.00

 

T .

 

APPENDIX H

 

82

Appendix H
Factor Loadings and Initial Statistics for All 25 Items for Success and Failure in Sport

 

 

Table 17
E l E l l . E S . S
W
Hardwork .75 .36 .26 . 19
Determination .68 .50 .28 . 10
Good attitude .66 .55 .08 .17
Teamwork .62 .38 . 12 .29
Desire .61 .46 .32 .10
Physical fitness .59 .07 .44 .28
Competitive .59 .1 l .56 . 15
Confidence .57 .44 .22 .21
Athletic ability .57 .04 .36 .33
Like sports .57 .30 .33 .14
Dedication .55 .35 .44 .16
Practice .54 .41 .40 .23
Follow instructions well .48 .32 .27 .38
Good sportsmanship .26 .70 .08 .33
Team spirit .28 .70 .29 .13
Good concentration .30 .69 .46 .11
Good coaches .22 .52 .41 .23
Smart .32 .34 .29 .34
Being aggressive .22 .26 .70 .01
Like wimting .16 .19 .60 .04
Physical stature .17 .14 .52 .39
Leadership .42 .41 .50 .16
Mental toughness .48 .30 .48 .20
Experience .24 .10 .46 .38
Support .26 .36 .07 .73
Total variance -Per factor 53.00 6.10 4.70 4.20
-Cum. 53.00 59.10 63.90 68.10

Wain: 13-25 1.53 1-18 L06

 

 

‘zr.r .' . .