Sports Management – Page 68 – The Sport Journal

Athletics as a Predictor of Self-esteem and Approval Motivation

Submitted by: Keith Bailey, Patrice Moulton, Ph.D., and Michael Moulton, Ed.D.

Abstract

Past research has found a negative correlation between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation (Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson, 1976). This relationship has not been explored specifically for individuals who participate in athletics. The purpose of this study was to compare athletes and non-athletes on their levels of self-esteem and approval motivation, and to determine if a positive correlation exists for athletes in contrast to the negative correlation found in the general college population. A significant difference was found between athletes and non-athletes in their levels of self-esteem and approval motivation.

Previous research has been conducted in order to identify and explore personal attributes which are associated with participation in sports. There has been a significant relationship found between athletics and the attribute of self-esteem (Kumar, Pathak, & Thakur, 1985). Studies based on the general population suggest a significant negative relationship between self-esteem and an attribute known as approval motivation. Self-esteem is defined as, “an intrapsychic structure: an attitude about the self” (Baumeister, Tice, & Hutton, 1989, p. 547). Coopersmith (1967) defined self-esteem as “the evaluation which the individual makes and customarily maintains with regard to himself” (p. 4-5). Kawash and Scherf (1975) asserted that, “there is probably no personality trait more significant in the context of total psychological functioning than self-esteem” (p. 715). Approval motivation is defined as the desire to produce positive perceptions in others and the incentive to acquire the approval of others as well as the desire to avoid disapproval (Martin, 1984; Shulman & Silverman, 1974).

Geen (1991) listed three conditions that he felt must be met before he considered approval motivation to have occurred. First, an individual must be in direct contact with a person or a group of people, such as an audience or a partner or partners in interaction. Next, the social presence has a nondirective effect. This means that the social group does not provide direct cues on how the person should act in the situation. Finally, the socially generated effect on the individual is considered an intrapsychic state, and this state is capable of initiating and/or intensify behavior.

Research has shown that an individual’s level of approval motivation can be used to predict how he or she will react to expectations or influences of others. Smith and Flenning (1971) conducted a study that investigated the connection between subjects’ need for approval and their susceptibility to subtle unintended influence of biased experimenters. They found that individuals with a high need for approval altered their behavior in the direction of the experimenter’s expectancy, while those in the low approval motivation group did not. Past research has also found a negative correlation to exist between self-esteem and approval motivation (Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson, 1976). This indicates that as an individual’s level of self-esteem increases, their need for approval from others decreases. There is no research at this time that has examined the relationship of athletic participation on the negative correlation between self-esteem and approval motivation or on approval motivation alone. However, research has examined the affect of athletic participation and coaching style on self-esteem.

Taylor (1995) conducted a study where he compared athletic participants and nonparticipants in order to ascertain if participating in intercollegiate athletics had an effect on self-esteem. He reported that athletic participation did have a positive effect on self-esteem, but it was not strong enough to have a statistically significant effect on its own. Kumar, Pathak and Thakur (1985) compared individual athletes, team athletes, and non-athletes on their levels of self-esteem using the Self-esteem Inventory (Prasad & Thakur, 1977). The Self-esteem Inventory (Prasad & Thakur, 1977) had two subscales: the personally perceived self, and the socially perceived self. They found that individual athletes were significantly higher on personally perceived self and socially perceived self than team athletes and non-athletes.

Research examining coaching behaviors has found that a coach’s instructional style can have an impact on individual’s with low self-esteem. Smoll, Smith, Barnett, and Everett (1993) examined the effect of coach’s instructional style on self-esteem. Eighteen male head coaches and 152 male Little League Baseball players were studied with 8 of the head coaches participating in a workshop that was designed to increase their supportiveness and instructional effectiveness. A preseason measure of self-esteem of the 152 players who played under the 18 coaches was taken. Post-season measures of the players’ self-esteem were assessed and compared to their preseason score. It was found that players who scored low on self-esteem in the preseason assessment showed a significant increase in their general self-esteem scores in the postseason assessment.

There has been no research conducted at this time that has examined the variable of approval motivation among athletes. However, research investigating other aspects of athletic participation suggests a need for approval among athletes. For example, research in conformity has found that rookies and newcomers to teams quickly learn and adopt attitudes and behaviors of veteran players and team leaders. This influence can be found to affect the athletes’ beliefs and behaviors in both athletic and non-athletic situations (Carron, 1980). Also, Harris (1973) examined the motivational factors related to athletic participation and concluded that motivational forces such as love, social approval, status, security and achievement are basic components to the overall motivational structure which would encourage someone toward athletic participation. Finally, additional research conducted by Smith (1990) indicated that some athletes continue to participate in sports although they do not want to in order to avoid letting down coaches or family members (as cited in Thorton, 1990).

The purpose of this study was to compare athletes and non-athletes on levels of self-esteem and approval motivation. The researchers proposed the following hypothesis. First, there would be a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes in levels of self-esteem and approval motivation. Second, for non-athletes, as supported by past research, there would be a negative correlation between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. Finally, for athletes, the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation would be positively correlated.

Methods
Four hundred ninety-two undergraduate students over the age of 18 attending core courses at a small southern university volunteered to participate in this study. There were 94 athletes and 398 non-athletes with the participant’s ages ranging from 18 years to 49 years, with a mean age of 21.95 years. Participants were provided with a description of the project and inform consent forms prior to receiving the questionnaire.

After returning the signed informed consent forms, participants were given a questionnaire that contained a demographics sheet, Revised Martin-Larsen Approval Motivation Scale (MLAM) (Martin, 1984), and the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSS) (Rosenberg, 1989). The MLAM is a questionnaire consisting of 20 statements designed on a five point Likert-type scale. This instrument measures an individuals level of approval motivation “by assessing both the desire to receive positive evaluations and social reinforcements and avoid negative evaluations and social punishment” (Martin, 1984, p.509). The MLAM has a total range of summative scores from 20 to 100 and a total range of mean scores from one to five. Higher scores indicate a greater need for social approval while lower scores indicate a lower need for approval. This scale has stability coefficients ranging from .73 to .93, and a reliability coefficient of .79.

The RSS is a ten item Guttman scale designed to measure an individuals level of self-esteem. It is unidimensional, which means that individuals may be ranked along a single continuum from very low to very high. Scores range from 10 to 40 with higher scores indicating a higher level of self-esteem and lower scores indicating a lower level of self-esteem. This measure has been found to have a test-retest reliability of .85 (Rosenberg, 1989).

The survey required approximately 35 to 40 minutes to take and participants were allowed to withdraw at any time without penalty. Participants did not place their names on the answer sheet and their signed informed consents were kept separate from their answer sheets to insure anonymity. All participants were treated according to the ethical guidelines concerning research set forth by the American Psychological Association.

Results
The data was analyzed using a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to determine if there was a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. The MANOVA revealed that there was a significant main effect found between the two groups (see Table 1). The results of the MANOVA also revealed that there were no interaction effects between the two groups. This supported the first hypothesis that there was a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation.

Table 1 Degrees of Freedom, F Values, and Levels of Significance for Self-esteem and Approval Motivation
	df	F	Sig.
Self-esteem	1	21.8685	.0001
Approval motivation	1	4.2735	.0392

A Pearson r correlation was computed to examine the nature of the relationship between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation for both the athlete and non-athlete groups. For non-athletes, a negative correlation was found to exist between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation (r = -.4503, p< .001). This finding is consistent with the findings of past research that examined the relationship between self-esteem and approval motivation in the general population (Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson, 1976). The second hypothesis of this study was supported.

A negative correlation was found to exist between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation for the group consisting of college athletes (r = -.4534, p< .001). Resulting in the rejection of hypothesis three. This finding suggests that athletes, like non-athletes, exhibit a negative correlation between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation.

Discussion
The findings of this study suggest that there is a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. These findings mirror those of Kumar, Pathak, and Thakur (1985) who found that athletes have higher levels of self-esteem than non-athletes. In this study, a portion of the subjects were Division I college aged athletes. There are several factors that may have contributed to these athletes having higher self-esteem than non-athletes, such as receiving special treatment. For example, many of these athletes may have received scholarships to college for their athletic skills, been allowed to travel to other schools to compete, and had access to uniforms and other athletic wear that served to set them apart from their non-athletic peers. In addition, these athletes may have received special attention from the press and fans, and received certain rewards that non-athletes have not received. Further, athletes have the unique opportunity to develop close friendships with team members and identify with the team itself.

Results of the current study indicate that there is a statistically significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variable of approval motivation. However, despite being statistically significant there is some question as to whether these findings have everyday applicability (see Table 2). Further research is needed to determine if there is a true behavioral difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variable approval motivation, and if so what aspect of athletic participation is responsible for this difference.

Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations for Athletes and Non-Athletes on the Variables of Self-esteem and Approval Motivation
	Mean		Standard Deviation
	Self-esteem	Approval Motivation	Self-esteem	Approval Motivation
Athletes	34.1064	2.5840	4.6315	.4373
Non-athletes	31.3668	2.7045	5.2139	.5234

There are a number of possible reasons why the need for athletes to receive praise or to avoid the rejection of others, is met through sport participation. Athletes, especially at the collegiate level, receive many benefits from participating in sports. For example, athletes receive praise and support from their parents, peers, coaches, fans, and community. In addition, personal rewards are obtained through the athlete’s athletic prowess and identity with the team. Many of the athletes competing at the Division I collegiate level bring with them to college successful high school experiences in athletics. Therefore, athletes in this study may have received approval for a number of years through athletic participation. Due to the history of approval and reward associated with athletic participation, athletes may not need to engage in further approval seeking behaviors.

It should be noted that the athletes in this study are most likely the elite athletes from their high school programs. They are good at what they do and have excelled in athletics for many years. Therefore, the athletes in this study due to their history of athletic success, may be more likely to participate in Division I athletics. Athletes with low self-esteem and high needs for approval may not be as likely to reach Division I college athletics. Future research may wish to examine approval motivation and self-esteem in youth sports and high school athletics to determine if there is consistency of findings.

As predicted, there was a negative correlation found between self-esteem and approval motivation for non-athletes. This finding was consistent with those of Larsen, Martin, Ettinger, & Nelson (1976) who also examined the relationship between approval motivation and self-esteem in the general population. However, what was not predicted was the negative correlation that was found between the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation for the group of collegiate athletes. Although there was a significant difference between athletes and non-athletes on their levels of approval motivation, these results imply that athletic participation does not alter the negative relationship between self-esteem and approval motivation. The results of this study suggest that athletes are more likely to view themselves positively and see themselves as worthy and are less likely to engage in approval seeking behavior than non-athletes.

The findings of this study lead to several additional questions concerning the difference between athletes and non-athletes on the variables of self-esteem and approval motivation. Future research may wish to explore factors that contribute to the differences found in self-esteem and approval motivation for athletes, such as the number of years experience, ethnicity, gender, and types of athletic experience.

References
Baumeister, R.F., Tice, D.M., & Hutton, D.G. (1989). Self-presentational motivations and personality differences in self-esteem. Journal of Personality, 57, 547-579.

Carron, A.V. (1980). Social psychology of sport. Ithaca: Mouvement Publications.

Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Geen, R.G. (1991). Social motivation. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 377-399.

Harris, D.V. (1973). Involvement in sport: A somatopsychic rationale for physical activity. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.

Kawash, G.F. & Scherf, G.W. (1975). Self-esteem, locus of control, and approval motivation in married couples. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31, 715-720.

Kumar, A., Pathak, N., & Thakur, G.P. (1985). Self-esteem in individual athletes, team members, and nonathletes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 178.

Larsen, K.S., Martin, H.J., Ettinger, R.H., & Nelson, J. (1976). Approval seeking, social cost, and aggression: A scale and some dynamics. The Journal of Psychology,94, 3-11.

Martin, H.J. (1984). A revised measure of approval motivation and its relationship to social desirability. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 508-519.

Prasad, M.S. & Thakur, G.P. (1977). Manual and directions for Self-esteem Inventory. Agra: Agra Psychological Research Cell.

Rosenberg, M. (1986). Conceiving the self. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company

Shulman, A.D. & Silverman, I. (1974). Social desirability and need approval: Some paradoxical data and a conceptual re-evaluation. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 27-32.

Smith, R.E. & Flenning, F. (1971). Need for approval and susceptibility to unintended social influence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36, 383-385.

Smoll, F.L., Smith, R.E., Barnett, N.P., & Everett, J.J. (1993). Enhancement of children’s self-esteem through social support training for youth sport coaches. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 602-610.

Thornton, J.S. (1990). Playing in pain: When should an athlete stop? The Physician and Sportsmedicine, 18, 139-142.

Taylor, D.L. (1995). A comparison of college athletic participants and nonparticipants on self-esteem. Journal of College Student Developement,36, 444-451.

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-27T17:35:44-06:00February 11th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Coaching, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

Satisfaction Levels of Elite Track and Field Athletes in South Korea

Submitted by: Young-Jun Park, Ed.D., Dick DeSchriver, Ph.D., Lawrence Bestmann, Ph.D. and Jon “YeanSub” Lim

Abstract

The general problem of this study was to examine the level of satisfaction of elite track and field athletes in South Korea with six factors; facilities, equipment, financial support, head coach’s technical ability, training methods, and leadership.

The subjects were 194 track and field athletes who were selected from a 1997 ranking list of the top five athletes in each track and field event. A survey questionnaire was distributed to each subject with a return rate of 80% (N = 168). Statistical analyses were conducted using the SPSS-Window statistical package. Descriptive statistics, independent t-tests, one-way ANOVA and Post Hoc tests were used to analyze the data.

Results of this study indicated there were statistically significant differences among means of the six factors. The results of the post hoc test indicated financial support was significantly lower than facilities, head coach’s technical ability, training methods, and leadership. The findings indicated the majority of the track and field athletes were satisfied with all aspects of their facilities, head coach’s technical ability, training methods, and leadership. However, athletes were not satisfied with financial support from their club, company or school. Results of this study indicated financial support should be improved for track and field athletes in South Korea.

In spite of its general popularity throughout most of the world, track and field is not a popular sport in South Korea. Since the peak of its popularity in the 1986 Asian Games and the 1988 Seoul Olympics, the number of track and field athletes has been declining (KAAF, 1997). Many young athletes have been changing to other sports, and recruitment of potential track and field trainees has become difficult (KAAF, 1997). The reasons for this have not been clearly identified. Also, financial support for research and development in track and field is lacking in the R.O.K. In particular, studies relating to the satisfaction levels of the tract and field athletes toward their sport and career, respectively, has been very limited (Lee, 1992).

The general problem of this study was to examine the level of satisfaction of elite track and field athletes in South Korea with facilities, equipment, financial support, head coach’s technical ability, training methods, and leadership.

METHODS
Subjects
The subjects in this study were both male and female elite track and field athletes whose performance in 1997 ranked them among the top five as their track and field events in South Korea. The list of these athletes was obtained from the Korean Amateur Athletics Federation (KAAF). Since there were a total of 22 events for men and 20 events for women, the sample included 110 (22X5) males and 100 (20X5) females. Therefore, the sample included a total of 210 athletes. However, taking into consideration that 16 athletes placed in the top five in more than one event, the actual targeted number of potential subjects was 194. Eighty-seven per cent of the subjects (N=168) responded to the questionnaire.

Instrument
The researcher constructed a survey questionnaire instrument for the subjects to indicate their satisfaction levels. Responses to questions were made on a five point Likert scale and were averaged to yield the overall satisfaction level for each factor.

Statistical Analysis
Descriptive statistics: frequency, percentage distribution, the mean and standard deviation were used to analyze subjects’ demographic characteristics. One-way ANOVA was conducted to determine if there were statistically significant differences among the means of the athletes’ satisfaction levels. The Student Newman-Keuls method as a post hoc test was conducted to determine specifically athletes’ satisfaction levels. Statistical significance was accepted at p<.05.

RESULTS
Demographic Characteristics of Subjects
Of a total subjects (N=168), 90 (58.3%) were male athletes, and 78 (41.7%) were female athletes. Seventy-two (42.9%) athletes were ages of 18 to 21 and 60 (36.9%) were ages of 22 to 25. Only six athletes (3.6%) were over 30 years old.

One hundred athletes (59.5%) were members of university teams and 56 (33.3%) were members of company or club teams. A few were on high school teams. The classification of the subjects by event shown in Table 1, indicated track (58.9%), field (36.4%), and multiple event athletes (4.7%). The majority of the subjects became track and field athletes through encouragement from their coach or physical education teacher. Most subjects competed for more than five years, but less than 15 years.

Table 1 Classification of the Subjects
Event	N	%
Track (58.9%)
Sprint	25	14.9
Hurdle	16	9.5
Middle and Long distance	58	34.5
Field (36.4%)
Jumping	31	18.5
Throwing	30	17.9
Decathlon and heptathlon (4.7%)	8	4.7
Total	168	100.0

One hundred twelve athletes (67%) changed their main event more than once during their track and field career. Their reasons for changing were as follows: the opportunity to obtain better results (28.5%), poor record (23.2%) or dislike of their primary event (21.4%). Of those athletes who did change their main event, 90 athletes (80.7%) were satisfied with the results.

Satisfaction Levels
One hundred fourteen athletes (67.8%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their weight training facilities and 98 (58.3%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their track training facilities. For the field training facilities, 94 athletes (56.7%) were satisfied or very satisfied.

Sixty-eight athletes (42.0%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their training equipment, and 82 (45.2%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their competition equipment. For personal training items, 66 athletes (39.2%) were satisfied or very satisfied.

Ninety-six athletes (57.1%) indicated they were satisfied or very satisfied with their head coaches’ personal communication skills, and 92 (54.7%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their head coaches’ technical skills and knowledge. Eighty-four athletes (50.0%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their head coaches’ strategy.

Eighty-four athletes (47.6%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their head coaches’ training methods, and 96 (57.1%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their head coaches’ training schedule. Eighty-four athletes (50.0%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the coaches’ feedback.

One hundred two athletes (62.9%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their head coaches’ friendliness, and 110 (68.7%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their head coaches’ ethical conduct. As for the head coaches’ ability to motivate, 102 athletes (62.9%) of the subjects were satisfied or very satisfied.

Only 50 athletes (29.9%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the financial support they received from their team, club, company or school. Most athletes were not satisfied with the financial support form their team. Many athletes in this study received financial support from their family.

Differences in Athletes’ Satisfaction Levels
The results of the one-way ANOVA revealed there were statistically significant differences among means of the six factors; facilities, equipment, financial support, head coach’s technical ability, training methods, and leadership (Table 2).

The results of the post hoc test indicated financial support was significantly lower than facilities, head coach’s technical ability, training methods, and leadership (Table 3).

Table 2 One-way ANOVA for the Satisfaction Factors
Factors	DF	MS	F
Between	5	47.56	*81.82
Within	996	0.58
Total	1001
*p<.05

Table 3 Results of Student Newman-Keuls Post-Hoc Analysis
Factor	Facilities	Equipment	Ability	Method	Leadership
Financial Support	5.62*	3.20	5.45*	4.43*	5.62*
*P<.05

DISCUSSION
The results of this study indicated the top South Korean track and field athletes were generally satisfied with facilities, head coach’s technical ability, training methods and leadership. However, they were not satisfied with their financial support.

Athletes’ satisfaction levels with their financial support from the club, company or institution was relatively low. Because of that, most athletes indicated they are dependant upon financial support from their parents. In this regard, many young athletes have been changing to other sports, and recruitment of potential track and field trainees has become difficult (KAAF, 1997).

In 1997, the Korean Amateur Athletic Federation also established a new policy by which prize money can be given to the athletes who set a new national record, Asian record, world record or who are awarded a medal from world wide competitions (KAAF, 1998). This might be one of the ways to increase motivation and satisfaction for track and field athletes. For an athlete to be satisfied with one’s sport, he or she must have appropriate motivation to participate in the activity (IAAF, 1998).

RECOMMENDATIONS
As a result of this study, the following recommendations were made:

Track and field coaches must discern whether the event in which their athletes compete is appropriate. If it is believed to be inappropriate, the athletes must be encouraged to change their event. By doing so, the athletes may obtain better results and thus experience greater satisfaction.
It is desirable to expend more money on providing athletes with quality training equipment needed to increase satisfaction.
It is desirable to develop a financial support plan, if implemented, could increase track and field athletes’ satisfaction and thus result in greater interest in participating in track and field.
A study should be conducted with subjects that are representative of all track and field athletes, as opposed to only elite performers.
The level of athletes’ satisfaction with regard to their room and board should also be identified.
Specific data on the financial support given to teams, as well as allocations given to individual athletes should be analyzed.

References
Choi, J., Lee, K., & Kim, H. (1995). Comprehension of statistical analysis. Seoul: Jau Academy.

IAAF (International Amateur Athletic Federation), (1998). Http://www.iaaf.org/Sport/track field.html.

IAAF (International Amateur Athletic Federation), (1998). Http://www.iaaf.org/Iaaf/dev.html.

Jackson, S. (1996). Toward a conceptual understanding of the flow experience in elite athletes, Journal of Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67(1), 76-90.

KAAF (Korean Amateur Athletic Federation), (1988). The Interesting Track and Field, KAAF Press, Seoul. 5-50.

KAAF (Korean Amateur Athletic Federation), (1997). The World of Track and Field, 1, KAAF Press. Seoul.

Kang, S. (1996). Research Methods in Physical Education, 21century Education Press, Seoul, 163-186.

Korea Olympic Committee (KOC), (1997). The training plan for national team in 1998, Department of Athletes Training, Seoul.

Lee, K. (1992). The Theory and Performances of Sport, Jiam-Sa, Seoul, 429-598.

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-27T17:38:41-06:00February 11th, 2008|Sports Facilities, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

You Go Girl ! The Link Between Girls’ Positive Self-Esteem and Sports

Submitted by: Allison M. Schultz

Positive self-esteem is a favorable perception of one’s self, or, how happy you are with just being you. In general, feelings of self-esteem contribute to a person’s self-worth, confidence and competence. These feelings of worthiness, assurance and proficiency can influence a person’s life in regard to personal aspirations, motivation, achievement potential and relationships (Melpomene Institute, 1996). A person’s self-esteem is affected by and formed from a variety of circumstances in life, some of which are:

degree of parental expectations, encouragement and influence
degree of peer expectations, encouragement and influence
involvement in making of decisions
development of talents, hobbies or interests
influence and importance of role models
extent of emphasis on body image
experiences and interactions during education
participation in physical activity and/or sports (Kopecky, 1992)

Many studies have been done to investigate the self-esteem of young girls and have concluded that as girls move from grade school to high school, their self-esteem levels drop (Feldman & Elliott, 1990; Gilligan, Lyons & Hammer, 1990; How Schools Shortchange Girls, 1992). For example, one study found that 69% of grade school boys and 60% of grade school girls responded that they were “happy the way I am”. The same study found 46% of high school boys and only 29% of high schools girls reported being “happy the way I am”. Overall, girls self-esteem dropped at a rate three times that of boys. Feelings of low self-esteem in adolescence are one contributing factor that increases the likelihood of a young girl dropping out of school or becoming pregnant. The low self-esteem seen in girls does not disappear with maturity; girls with low self-esteem often grow to be women with low self-esteem. Low levels of self-esteem are linked to increased rates of depression, substance abuse, suicide and eating disorders in both adolescents and adults (How Schools Shortchange Girls, 1992; Melpomene Institute, 1996).

What can be done about the decrease in self-esteem? What can girls do to maintain their self-esteem as they mature? To answer these questions, it is important to look at what boys are doing differently from girls as both groups move from grade school to high school. One important difference to consider is the rate of sports participation among boys and girls. As girls move from grade school to high school, they drop-out of sports at a rate six times higher than boys (Women’s Sports Foundation, 1998). Could the lower rate of sports participation among girls be linked to a lower self-esteem? In order to answer the question, it is essential to consider two factors: what contributes to the development of self-esteem and the benefits of sport participation.

For girls living in the 1990s, self-esteem is linked to both physical attractiveness and physical competence. Prior to the 1990s, however, the main factor contributing to a girls’ self-esteem was physical attractiveness (Nelson, 1994). Coupling self-esteem to both competence and beauty is a step in the right direction, although it’s still unfortunate that girls place so much importance on physical attractiveness as it relates to their happiness. Recognizing that young girls often compare themselves to unrealistic standards of beauty can help parents better understand, guide and influence their children (Nelson, 1994; Women’s Sports Foundation, 1998). In attempting to de-emphasize the importance their daughters place on beauty and emphasize the importance of physical competence, parents may find it helpful to utilize the benefits of participation in sport.

Participating in sport is one way that girls can develop physical competence. Girls learn to appreciate their bodies for what they can do, instead of the perceived appearance by oneself or by others. In a sport environment girls learn to control their bodies and to rely on acquired physical skills. Partaking in sport also helps girls trust and rely on themselves and teammates while working toward common goals. In a sense, participation in sport allows each girl to become her own personal cheerleader – cheering on her physical self and what might be possible; not just standing on the sidelines, or in the bleachers, cheering others on (Nelson, 1994). Involvement in athletics provides lessons in teamwork and leadership, the development of citizenship, and community involvement. Membership in sport also offers girls a greater pool of adult role models from where they can draw guidance and support (Melpomene Institute, 1996; Murtaugh, 1988). Additionally, girls find new friends in the sport setting. For girls, this sense of friendship is essential, being liked by other girls is sometimes more important than having others see them as smart or independent (Feldman & Elliott, 1990).

A study published by the Women’s Sport Foundation on over 30,000 girls compared athletes to non-athletes.

The study stated that athletes were more likely than non-athletes to:

score well on achievement tests
feel “popular” among one’s peers
be involved in other extracurricular activities
graduate from high school (three times more likely)
attend college and obtain a bachelor’s degree
stay involved in sport as an adult
aspire to community involvement
not become involved with drugs (92% less likely)
not become pregnant (80% less likely)

(Women’s Sports Foundation, 1998).

It is important that parents realize the many contributions participation in sport can make to young girls’ development. The positive aspects of sport can help girls maintain their self-esteem as they make the difficult transition from grade school to high school.

References

Feldman, S. & Elliott, G. (Eds.). (1990). At the threshold: the developing adolescent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gilligan, C., Lyons, L., & Hammer, T. (Eds.). (1990). Making connections: The relational worlds of adolescent girls at Emma Willard School. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

How Schools Shortchange Girls – The AAUW Report. (1992). New York, NY: Marlowe & Company.

Kopecky, G. (1992). The age of self-doubt. Working Mother, July, 46-49.

Murtaugh, M. (1988). Achievement outside the classroom: The role of nonacademic activities in the lives of high school students. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 19, 383-395.

Melpomene Institute. (1996). Melpomene Institute packet -Girls, physical activity and self-esteem. St. Paul, MN.

Nelson, M.B. (1994). The stronger women get, the more men love football – sexism and the American culture of sports. New York, New York: Avon Books.

Women’s Sports Foundation. (1998). Eisenhower Park, East Meadow, New York.

U.S. Sports Academy2017-08-07T15:37:24-05:00February 11th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology, Women and Sports|Comments Off

Analysis of Selected Physical and Performance Attributes of the United States Olympic Team Handball Players: Preliminary Study

Submitted by: Brian Bergemann, Ph.D.

During the Spring of 1995, prior to the Olympic Games in Atlanta, the United States Team Handball team and coaches came to the United States Sports Academy in Daphne, AL for testing. Dr. Thomas P. Rosandich, president of the U.S. Team Handball Federation, and the president of the United States Sports Academy hosted the testing at the Alabama campus. Testing of the athletes consisted of laboratory tests of maximum oxygen uptake, computerized strength measures, blood tests, etc., and a battery of field tests that included assessments of physical characteristics, and physical performance components. This paper reports the results of the field test battery.
Skills test batteries have been used in physical education and in sport to assess various components of the skills of players. These assessments served the teacher and coach to determine a player’s level of ability, or their progress, weaknesses and strengths. These test batteries for sports performance usually dealt with the physical fitness components like strength and endurance, or the motor skills components, like speed, agility, power, or accuracy.

Batteries of tests for team handball have not been developed in the United States. The purpose of this investigation was to construct a team handball test battery that would be reflective of the skills, abilities, physical fitness components and anthropometric factors that contribute to high levels of performance, and to establish a database of performances by the National Team Handball players. Additional purposes for developing the test included using the test to screen potential players at the National level, to provide teachers in the schools and colleges with tests that are inexpensive and easy to administer, and to provide self-administered tests that would train the athletes to improve their performance in team handball.

Methods
Subjects
The United States National Handball team came to the United States Sports Academy in Daphne, Alabama for testing in June of 1995 prior to the Atlanta Olympic Games. There were 20 players in attendance. Their ages ranged from 22.01 to 31.73 years with an average age of 26.69 years (sd = 2.94).

Test Selection and Procedures
The coaches and this investigator discussed the test items and agreed that they were relevant to the sport. The test items included:

Anthropometric measurements: height, weight, hand breadth, arm length, and arm span
Hand grip strength
Running speed: 20 m dash
Vertical jump: take-off of dominant leg with one step, non-dominant leg with one step, and both legs
Accuracy throw: a 7 m throw at a automobile tire hanging vertically from the goal. 2 points for shots through the center, 1 point for hitting the tire but not passing through the center. The player had 10 throws.
50 m dribble test: Five cones are placed in a straight line with 5m between each cone. Player runs 25m, passing each cone alternately on the right and left sides, then goes completely around the last cone and returns to the start line alternating as before. The ball is dribbled once per cone.
Jump and throw test: A volleyball net 2.44 m high placed 7 m from the goal with a tire hanging vertically from the top of the goal. The bottom of the tire rested on the floor. The player had 10 throws. Two points were awarded for hitting the tire or passing through the center and 1 point for passing through the goal mouth.
Endurance test: Four tires are placed on the corners of a basketball court that has the dimensions of 15.24 m by 25.61 m. The player runs diagonally on the first leg, then along the short side, then diagonally again, and then returns to the start. This constitutes one lap. The runner runs 10 laps for a total of 900m; 90 m per lap.

Results
The results of the anthropometric testing are shown in table 1. The data for the skills tests are shown in tables 2 and 3. The mean vertical jump for the dominant leg was 54.03 cm (21.27 in), the non-dominant leg was 46.72 cm (18.39 in), and for both legs was 62.15 cm (24.47 in). This is higher than vertical jumps of 52.8 cm (20.8 in) for professional soccer players (Raven, Gettman, Pollock, & Cooper, 1976), 53.3 cm (21 in) for college basketball players (Noble & Maresh, 1979), but less than 67.0 cm (26.4) for elite men volleyball players (Gladden & Colaccino, 1978). Olympic men’s volleyball players were tested doing the vertical jump with a 4-step approach, as in a spike approach and averaged 94.2 cm (37.1 in). This approach run was estimated to add 10.2 to 15.4 cm (4 to 6 in) higher than the standing position vertical jump off of both legs (McGown et al., 1990). The maximum height reached when the player took off from the dominant leg was 3 m (9 feet, 10.1 in), the non-dominant leg was 2.92 m (9 feet, 7 in), and both legs was 3.08 m (10 feet, 1.26 in).

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-27T17:48:39-06:00February 11th, 2008|Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

Descriptive Comparisons of United States Military Physical Fitness Programs

Submitted by: Gordon R. Strong, Ed.D.

Although technology has changed the nature of conflict over the years, physical fitness remains an important component of the effectiveness of every military service member. Many of the changes (night vision goggles, anti-chemical gear, etc.) allow fighting to continue around the clock, further establishing the need for fitness and endurance. Furthermore, with force reductions and continually chancing world conditions, all personnel from the U.S. military services must be ready and fit at all times. A Department of Defense directive (1308.1) stated that individual service members must possess the stamina and strength to perform successfully any potential mission. To do this, the directive mandated each US military service develop a quality fitness program that improves readiness and increases combat effectiveness of their personnel. This paper will briefly describe the physical fitness and fitness evaluation programs of each United States military service.

Army
The directive that governs the Army Physical Fitness program is Field Manual 21-20, Physical Fitness Training (1998). The manual is very complete covering topics like, leadership responsibility, components of fitness, proper exercise techniques, nutrition, environmental considerations, etc. The Army program mandates vigorous, regular (3-5 times a week) physical training and directs unit commanders to lead the training. The Army also dedicates time and effort developing and training fitness experts. The Army offers a four-week training program covering all aspects of physical fitness training and how a soldier’s body functions. After completing the training program, the selected individuals are called Master Fitness Trainers and they become responsible for training others in the area of fitness while helping ensure units conduct sound, safe physical fitness training.

The Army physical fitness test is used to get an accurate evaluation of a soldier’s fitness level and is accomplished twice each year by all Army personnel. The evaluation involves a weigh-in, push-ups, sit-ups and a two-mile run. The standards below are the minimum requirements for a male between the ages of 22-26.

Body Composition*	Push-ups (2 Minutes)	Sit-ups (2 minutes)	2 Mile Run
22	40	60	16:36 mins

* Each military service conducts annual weigh-ins using standard height vs weight tables. If members are over their maximum allowable weight they are then measured for percent body fat. The method of measurement for all four military services is the circumferential tape measure method.

Navy
The Navy program is governed by Navy Instruction 6110.1E (1998). Like the Army guide to fitness, the instruction clearly states the importance of every Navy member maintaining personal fitness by participation in regular exercise. The instruction mandates that commanders aggressively support the goal of attaining and maintaining fitness by requiring a minimum of three aerobic exercise periods per week. It further stipulates the periods must be 40 minutes to allow for proper warm-up and cool-down with at least 20 minutes of continuous aerobic activity.

The Navy fitness evaluation, which is conducted twice each year, includes a weigh-in, a sit and reach flexibility test *(individuals must – in a sitting position with legs straight, flat on the floor, touch their toes), sit-ups (curl-ups), push-ups and a 1.5 mile run (or a 500 yard swim). The standards below are for a male between the ages of 20-29:

Body Composition	Sit and Reach	Curl-ups (2 minutes)	Push-ups (2 minutes)	1.5 Mile Run
22	Pass*	40	29	13:45 mins

Marines
The Marine Physical Fitness Program is governed by Marine Corps Order 6100.3J Physical Fitness (1988) and Marine Corps Order 61001B Weight Control and Personal Appearance (1993). The Marine program is very similar to Army and Navy Programs. The orders stress the importance of physical fitness as essential to the day-to-day effectiveness and combat readiness of the Marine Corps, as well as, an indispensable aspect of leadership. The program specifically mandates every Marine will participate in physical training at least 3 hours a week (3 exercise periods).

The Marine fitness evaluation is administrated twice every year. The test includes pull-ups for males (flex arm hang for females), sit-ups and a 3 mile run (1.5 mile run for females). Every Marine under the age of 46 must participate in the testing. The standards below are the minimums for a male between the ages of 17-26:

Body Composition	Pull-ups	Sit-ups (2 minutes)	3 Mile Run
18*	3	40	28 minutes

* Maximum allowable percent body fat (female 26 percent) for the establishment of an alternate weight standard if members are over their recommend weight.

Air Force
The Air Force Program is governed by two Instructions, Air Force Instruction 40-501 The Air Force Physical Fitness Program (1998) and AFI 40-502 The Weight Management Program (1994). Both Instructions focus on the annual evaluations that are required, an annual weigh in and a cycle ergometery test. The instructions stress the importance of all Air Force members being physically fit to support the increasing and changing requirements of the Air Force mission. The instruction does not, however, mandate exercise periods but leaves the method and responsibility of achieving and maintaining physical fitness up to each individual.

The annual fitness evaluation is used as an indicator of an individual’s fitness level and to motivate members to participate in a year round physical conditioning program emphasizing aerobic fitness. The current evaluation program involves each member completing a cycle ergometer test once a year. The stationary cycle test is designed to measure how efficiently the heart and lungs work as a machine to transfer oxygen to the muscles. The test uses heart rate to estimate aerobic capacity (VO2max).

The standards below represent the annual minimum requirements for an Air Force male between the ages 25-29

Body Composition	Cycle Ergometer
20	34 ML/KG-min

Summary
The US military services are consistent in stressing and testing two of the five major areas (muscular strength, muscular endurance, body composition, flexibility, and aerobic capacity) that define physical fitness, aerobic capacity and body composition. The Army, Navy and Marines also stress muscular strength and muscular endurance by testing these areas during their fitness evaluations twice a year (the Air Force is currently evaluating the addition of push-ups and sit-ups to its annual evaluation program). The Navy is the only service that evaluates flexibility. All the services, except the Air Force, mandate participation in regular (3 times a week) exercise programs.

The one constant is the importance of physical fitness for members of each military service. Military historian William Nash once noted the “success and general efficiency of every military establishment is, in a very large degree, dependent upon the physical fitness, endurance, and condition of the individual units of which it is composed.” Because individuals need to be alert, energetic and possess stamina, the statement by William Nash would appear just as important for today’s military service members as it was when soldiers first carried their weapons and walked into combat.

References

Department of Defense. (1981). Department of Defense Directive on Physical Fitness and Weight Control Programs. (Directive No. 1308.1). Washington DC: Author.

Nash, W. (1972). Military Science and Tactics and Physical Education. New York: AMS Press, Inc.

United States Air Force. (1998). Air Force Instruction 40-501, The Air Force Physical Fitness Program. Bolling AFB, DC: HQ AFMOA/SGOP

United States Air Force. (1994). Air Force Instruction 40-502, The Air Force Weight Management Program. Bolling AFB, DC: HQ AFMOA/SGOP

United States Army. (1998). Field Manual 21-20: Physical Fitness training. Washington DC: Headquarters US Army.

United States Marine Corps. (1988). Marine Corps Order 6100.3J. Washington DC: Headquarters United States Marine Corps.

United States Marine Corps. (1993). Marine Corps Order 6100.10B. Washington DC: Headquarters United States Marine Corps.

United States Navy. (1998). OPNAV INSTRUCTION 6110.1E. Washington DC: Naval Military Personnel Command.

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-27T17:49:07-06:00February 11th, 2008|Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off