Tag Archives: aggression

Amateur Soccer Players and the Phenomenon of Motivation

January 14, 2014
Submitted by Papanikolaou Zissis and Dr. Asterios Patsiaouras
ABSTRACT
The relationship between various types of psychological and social motivation in
amateur soccer players was examined in this paper.Twenty eight males and
14females who participated in this study regularly engaged in soccer. The amateur
soccer players ranged in experience from beginning to advanced soccer, with the
majority self-reporting at an intermediate level. Subjects were given Butts Short
Scales for the Measurement of Sport Motivation. Males and females soccer players
scored similarly on the aggression scale. Female amateur soccer players scored
significantly higher on the conflict scale than did male soccer players. Identical
means were found for males and females on the competence scale. There were no
differences found between males and females on the motivational scales for
competition and cooperation. Due to the small number of subjects who have
participated, general conclusions can only be made with great caution.
INTRODUCTION
Interest in the sport of soccer has greatly increased in recent years, bringing men
and women into fields. According to FIFA survey of 2007 (41), 265 million male and
female players in addition to 5 million referees and officials make a grand total of
270 million people or 4% of the worlds population-who are actively involved in the
game of soccer. Among the most pleasing signs is the continuing growth of the
womens game. The number of men and women playing soccer is expanding the
world over. One especially important statistic that can be drawn from the number of
registered players is the proportion made up by youngsters, who constitute 54.7%
of all registered male players and as many as 69.6% of the women. The greater
number of young players in the womens game is a reflection of the impressive
growth in womens football, which has also resulted in a significant increase in the
number of registered amateur players (up 130% compared to 16% in the mens
game). These figures dearly indicate that FIFA and its associations are on the right
track to increasing the popularity of soccer even further in the future.
Understanding and enhancing motivation has long been a major concern in sport.
Without motivation athletes would not desire to excel in their sport, coaches would
no longer strive to unify the team, and a players drive to set and reach goals would
end. Roberts (28) defines motivation as those personality factors, social variables,
and/or cognitions that come into play when a person undertakes a task at which
he/she is evaluated, enters into competition with others, or attempts to attain some
standard of excellence. (p. 5).
The biggest and most common reason that affects soccer performance is soccer
motivation or lack of it. Without motivation all soccer players will crumble under the
various pressures and problems soccer manages to throw up. Generally, speaking

motivation is guided by the hope of success and the fear of failure. When you lack
the self-belief and confidence, there is a good chance you also lack motivation.
Motivation is an internal energy force that determinates all aspects of our behavior,
it also impacts on how we think, feel and interact with others. In sport, high
motivation is widely accepted as an essential prerequisite in getting athletes to
fulfill their potential. However, given its inherently abstract nature, it is a force that
is often difficult to explain fully. Some coaches, appear to have a magic touch
being able to get a great deal more out of a team than the sum of its individual
parts; others find motivation to be an elusive concept they are forever struggling to
master. Motivation is a dynamic and multifaceted phenomenon that can be
manipulated, to some degree at least in the pursuit of superior sporting
performance.
Some theories and models of motivation were examined, as they relate to sport.
The study of motivation is the investigation of the energization and direction of
behavior (28). Early theories of motivation (Mechanistic theories) viewed humans as
being passive and driven by psychological drives. More recently, however, cognitive
approaches have been developed to explain behaviour from the beliefs or thoughts
that people have. The following are some major approaches to motivation, followed
by the theory that is the basis of this paper.
Roberts (28) suggests that the search for the right theory of motivation is not yet
within our grasp; however many excellent efforts are available. Need Achievement
Theory, introduced by Murray (25) and further developed by McClelland and
Atkinson (24), suggests two motive states that elicit action: (a) the motive to
achieve success, and (b) the motive to avoid failure. This theory reflects the
philosophy of our Western society, which places value on gaining rewards, high
achievement, and moving forward and improving our position within society (5).
Research in sport with Need Achievement Theory has been inconclusive.
In recent years, the cognitive approach has been the dominant paradigm in
understanding motivation. This refers to how cognitions or thoughts govern
behavior. Within this approach is Attribution Theory, which is concerned with the
methods and attributes that an individual uses in attempting to account for the
causes of behavior (36,37,38). The way in which one attributes the cause of an
outcome will affect the expectation of future successes and failures. The
expectation of future outcomes will affect the striving for achievement (28).
Although this theory has focused upon why people expect to succeed, it neglects to
explain why people want to succeed.
More recently, Social Cognitive Approaches have incorporated affect, expectations,
and values in order to explain motivated behaviors (28). Banduras (2) theory of
Self-Efficacy refers to the assessment of ones own capability in performing at a
given level. This theory suggests that the self-perception of the performer
determines motivations and aspirations and not the actual ability of the performer.
Research within the sport setting indicates self-efficacy to be a modest predictor of
sport performance (11, 12, 23), although many others factors may contribute to
behavioral change (3,12).

The perception of ones competence may also determine behaviors in sport. Harter
(17) developed a model of perceived competence which suggested that perceived
competence and intrinsic pleasure gained from success will increase achievement
striving, while perceived incompetence and displeasure may lead to anxiety and a
decrease in achievement striving. Much of the research with Harters model has
been performed with children with favourable results; however, children have
notoriously been inaccurate in estimating their comparative ability (13, 26, 29,32).
A model developed by Butt (4) focuses on the motivational components specific to
sport and is the basis of this study. Butt indicates that motivation in sport evolves
on four levels: (a) the biological, (b) the psychological, (c) the social, and (d) the
reinforcement level. The first and the fourth levels provide two major sources, or
influences of sports motivation: (a) a biological energy or life force, and (b) a set of
learned reinforcements. These reinforcements may be extrinsic (i.e., overt rewards)
or intrinsic (i.e., feelings of well-being and personal growth). The psychological and
social levels contain the five constructs that will be examined in this paper.
Aggression, conflict, and competence are the three styles of sport motivation
contained within the psychological level, and the other two constructs of
competition and cooperation contains the level of social motivation.
The aggressive athlete appears to have a great deal of energy, and thus seems to
be eager, active, and impulsive. If frustrated, the aggressive athlete may verbally or
physically attack others. This involves feelings of power, vivacity, anger, and
strength, and often lacks self- control. He or she may also be quick to find fault in
others (5).
The conflict-ridden athlete often complains and makes excuses. This athlete may be
unhappy, and is usually slow to fulfil his or her goals. Life energy is channeled into
opposing purposes and pursuits, such as the desire to express impulse versus quilt
for the expression of impulse. Energy is used to mediate the struggle between
opposing purposes. Conflict can result in self-destructiveness, self-absorption,
blaming others, complaints, worries, depression and inactivity, weeping, and other
nervous symptoms (5).
The competence oriented athlete usually displays more maturity and selfinsight
than the others. This athlete seeks new challenges and displays confidence in his or
her sport. Life energy is channeled into interacting effectively and purposefully with
the environment. The individual expects to have the effect on the environment that
he or she desires to have and the expectations are realistic. Joy, pleasure, elation,
and self-esteem accompany activity and interaction with the environment. Setbacks
and failures are accepted as a realistic part of development from which new
learning and new development may evolve(5).
The level of social motivation contains the constructs of competition and
cooperation. The motivation of a competitively oriented athlete is derived primarily
from the desire to defeat others. A contest or competitive sporting event is seen as
a chance to dominate others and display assertiveness. The competitively
motivated athlete also places importance on status and position, which may lead to
frustration and resentment if such goals are not achieved (4).The individual wants

to defeat others, to be number one, to have rivals, and sees the environment as an
adversary over which one must triumph (5).
The cooperative athlete sees others as partners in the sporting event or contest.
The contest is seen as an opportunity for personal growth and skill development.
The cooperative athlete is usually good-natured and shows concern for his or her
competitors while striving for personal excellence (4). The major social motive in a
contest is derived from participating with others, from feeling part of the group,
team or club. The individual desires to raise the performance of all as a group
experience, cares for others, empathizes, and congratulates others. The perception
of the environment is that of supportive and interdependent with the self (5).
One of the most popular and widely tested approaches to motivation in sport and
other achievement domains is self-determination theory, that examines the effect of
the social context on motivation and individual behaviors (9,10, 30). This theory is
based on a number of motives or regulations, which vary in terms of the degree of
self-determination they reflect. Self-determination has to do with the degree to
which your behaviors are chosen and self-initiated. The behavioral regulations can
be placed on a self-determination continuum. From the least to the most selfdetermined they are amotivation, external regulation, introjected regulation,
identified regulation, integrated regulation and intrinsic motivation.
According to Hungarian psychologist MihalyiCsikszentmihalyi (7,8), the highest level
of intrinsic motivation is flow state. Flow is characterized by complete immersion in
an activity to the degree that nothing else matters. Central to the attainment of flow
is a situation in which there is a perfect match between the perceived demands of
an activity and an athletes perceived ability or skills. During flow, selfconsciousness is last and athletes become one with the activity.
Motivation has been studied in many sports such as figure skating (31); rugby (19);
and gymnastics (39). There is a lack of research, however, on the motivation of
soccer. Research is necessary in this sport due to the favor of its participants and
increasing popularity and participation by men and women of all ages. Therefore,
this literature review is limited to test data from other types of athletes, and other
psychological studies involving male and female soccer players.
Gender differences investigated in this study pertained to differences in motivation.
Investigating the motivations of competitive and amateur soccer players is a
necessary step in understanding this complex and popular sport. The diversity
among the many theories and models of motivation reminds us of the vast number
of possibilities as to why we behave the way we do in sport. Measuring a construct
such as motivation in sport is a difficult task due to the endless, number of variables
in an athletes personality. However, human nature dictates that similarities do exist
among our personalities which, if measured, help us to predict our behavior.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The purpose at this study was to examine the relationship between various types of
psychological and social motivation in soccer and to compare motivation between
male and female amateur soccer players. For the purpose of this paper, motivation
was operationally defined as the score on the Sport Motivation Scale.The hypothesis
of this study was: There will be no difference on any of motivational scales between

male and female soccer players (aggression, conflict, competence, competition and
cooperation).
METHODS
Research Design
The research design employed was a descriptive study. Amateur soccer players who
played in the area of Philadelphia, USA, were asked to complete Butts (4) short
scales for the Measurement of Sport Motivation. Forty-two adult male and female
amateur soccer players completed and returned the questionnaires.
Subjects
Participants were 42 adult (age 18 years or over) soccer players, males (n=28) and
females (n=14), who regularly engaged in soccer (worked out at least two days per
week). The male subjects ranged in the age from 18 to 38 years (M=28.74.50),
and the females ranged in age from 20 to 35 years (M=283.80). Subjects were
members of two amateur soccer teams chosen by the first researcher.
Measuring Instrument
Subjects completed Butts (4) short scales for the Measurement of Sport Motivations
questionnaire. The survey was developed to measure motivation specifically in the
sport context. The scales measured the motivational components of aggression,
conflict, competence, competition and cooperation. These constructs were
measured by 10 items on each scale. Internal consistency measures ranged from .
69 (aggression) to .74 (competition). Test-retest reliability ranged from .50
(competence) to .80 (conflict) across a two-week interval. A total of 52
questionnaires were distributed (26 at each team) with 42 being returned for a
return rate of 80.8%. Four weeks allowed for returning the questionnaire. No
questionnaires were received after that time.
Data analysis
Descriptive statistics were calculated for the Sport Motivation Scales. A one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) was computed to determine differences between
genders. Correlation coefficients were also computed to investigate the
relationships among the five components of motivation.
RESULTS
A one-way ANOVA was performed to compose gender with five components of
motivation: (a) aggression, (b) conflict, (c) competence, (d) competition, and (e)
cooperation. The overall scores are listed in Table 1. Table 2 indicates the mean
values for this study and previously studied athletes from other areas of sport who
were given the Sport Motivation Scales. Realizing the dangers of visual comparison
of means, it appears that subjects in this study were responding differently from the
other groups, especially in competence and cooperation. At the very least, the data
suggest that further study in this area would be of interest.
Table 1.Motivational Component Scores for the Soccer Players by Gender.

Table 2. Mean Values for the Sport Motivation Scales for Various Athletes

With respect to male and female soccer players, females scored significantly higher
on the conflict scale (M=3.14) than the males (M=1.71) (F=5.40). The other four
motivational components were not found to be significantly different between males
and females. Results are provided in Table 3.
Interestingly, there were identical means for both males and females on the
competence scale (M=7.29).
Table 3.Results of ANOVA for Gender and the Five Motivational Components

In an attempt to test Butts (4) theory, correlation coefficients were computed to

investigate the relationships among the five motivational components (see Table 4).
As predicted by Butts theory, the psychological component of competence was
significantly correlated with the social component of cooperation (r=.66). Further
support for her theory was a significant correlation of the psychological component
of aggression with the social component of competition (r=.51). However,
aggression was also correlated with competence (r=.46) and cooperation (r=.38),
which were not consistent with Butts theory that there would be no correlation
between their components.
Table 4. Correlation Coefficients Comparing the Five Motivational Components and
Amateur Soccer Players

The results indicated differences between males and females on the conflict scale,
and similarities among males and females on the aggression, competence,
competition, and cooperation scales.
DISCUSSION
The information gained from this study suggested more similarities than differences

between male and female amateur soccer players. Due to the limited number of
subjects in this study, interpreting the data for these groups was difficult, and
general conclusions should be made with great caution.
Males and females scored similarly on the aggression scale. Very often society sees
men as the more aggressive sex, making this similarity difficult to explain. Klein (20)
suggests that women athletes may feel an increase in control over their bodies, the
aging process, and other aspects that may lead to feelings of empowerment. Their
feelings of empowerment by the women may have been presented on this
questionnaire in the aggression scale. Some of the responses in the aggression
scale included the words powerful, excited, and full of energy. These are all
words that could suggest feelings of empowerment.
Female soccer players scored significantly higher on the conflict scale than did male
soccer players. One explanation for the womens higher scores on the conflict scale
may be due to the stereotype and/or belief that muscular women do not look
feminine. Klein (20) suggests that gender role conflict can occur in female athletes
when women desire to build athletic body (muscle mass), but also want to remain
attractive to men.
Another explanation for the higher conflict score for the women concerns the
questionnaire itself. The 10 responses on the questionnaire that measured conflict
contained certain words or phrases that may have been stereotypically attributed to
women more than men. For instance, Item 6 reads, moody for no real reason, and
Item 12 states, guilty for not doing better. Words such as moody and guilty
have been thoughtby many to pertain to womens feelings more than men (34),
possibly making it less likely for a male to answer yes to questions such as these.
Identical means were found for males and females on the competence scale. Both
sexes scored high on this scale with the greatest number of yes responses than
with any other scale on the questionnaire. This may be due, in part, to the ease of
taking good on this scale. Some of the items on the competence scale include
trustworthy, improving yourself and happier than ever, making it more likely
for the participants to answer yes to these items if they wanted to appear in a
positive manner.
According to Butts (4) theory a tendency of one of the psychological components of
motivation would predict dominance in one of the social components of motivation
of either competition or cooperation. Since there were no significant differences
between males and females in the competition or cooperation scales, one cannot
predict dominance at any social components of motivation with the subjects in this
study. Although female amateur soccer players were significantly higher on the
conflict scale, they were not higher on the competition scale, as predicted by Butts
theory that a higher conflict score will likely result in a higher competition score.
A study examining the relationship between athletes goal orientations and their
levels of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation indicated that British Collegiate athletes
with task-related or personal mastery goals were far more likely to report high selfdetermination than athletes with ego-orientated or social comparision-type goals
(27).

A recent study showed that during competition deemed to be important,

intrinsically motivated athletes developed task-oriented (positive) coping strategies
(1).Grbzet al. (16) indicated that male soccer players rated improvement and
21,4% of the players rated the team spirit as their participation motive.
Results of Gillet andRosnet (15) revealed that male athletes perceived themselves
as being more competent than female athletes, but female athletes exhibited a
higher self-determinated profile. This is not surprising given male athletes typically
display higher self-confidence than female athletes (21, 33, 35). One explanation
suggested for gender differences in perceived competence may be that males are
boastful and think they will do better than they do (22). Also their results showed
that male athletes exhibited more external regulation and less intrinsic motivation
than female athletes. In other words, females appeared to take part in sport
activities for the pleasure derived from the activity itself more than for extrinsic
motives. These results were in line with past studies in the sport context (6, 14) and
confirmed that gender differences should be taken into consideration in the sport
domain. However, contrary to a study conducted by Hollembeak and Amoroses (18)
their findings did not confirm that females reported higher scores on perceived
autonomy and perceived relatedness than males. They proposed that future
investigations should continue to explore gender differences in basic need
satisfaction in order to gain a better understanding of the motivational processes
underpinning sport participation.
When interpreting the results of this study, it is important to consider the need for a
possible revalidation of Butts (4) Short Scales for the Measurement of Sport
Motivation. Some items may need to be reworded or omitted to ensure equal
interpretation by males and females, as well as subjects of various racial groups and
socioeconomic statuses. Ideally, this inventory would have the ability to be valid
considering the changing attitudes in society so it can be utilized in the future.
Overall, this information will be useful to those involved in the sport of soccer. Since
female soccer players scored significantly higher than male soccer players on the
conflict scale, soccer coaches may need to become more sensitive to issues of
female soccer players, and provide a supportive atmosphere to beginning female
players.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The present research was on attempt to broaden our understanding of soccer
players motivation. When comparing gender with motivation, female soccer players
scored significantly higher on the conflict scale than did male amateur soccer
players. No differences were found on the scales of aggression, competence,
competition, or cooperation.
In conclusion, investigating the motivation of amateur male and female soccer
players is a necessary step in understanding this complex and popular sport.
Measuring a construct such as motivation in sport is a difficult task due to the
endless number of variables in an athletes personality. However, human nature
dictates that similarities do exist among our personalities, which, if measured, can
help us to predict our behavior.

Future studies would be enhanced by administering the Short Scales for the
Measurement of Sport Motivations (4) to professional, semi-professional, college,
high schools competitive male and female soccer players. Generalizations may be
easier to make for strictly competitive subjects due to their similar goals and soccer
lifestyle. Administer the questionnaire to the same subjects over a period of time.
Subjects could be tested over several months or years to investigate any changes in
motivational styles. Other methods of studying soccer players should be utilized to
investigate their motivational components. In-depth interviews and field studies
could provide information not easily gained via questionnaire.
APPLICATIONS IN SPORT
The results of this study provide useful informationto those who are involved in the
sport of soccer (coaches, educators, participants etc.). Since female soccer players
scored significantly higher than male soccer players on the conflict scale, soccer
coaches should be more sensitive to issues of female soccer players, trying to offer
a supportive atmosphere for the amateur female players. This will be beneficial for
the motivation of the players, not only for the females but also for themales.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to all soccer players who made this research
possible with their willingness to participate.
REFERENCES
1. Amiot, C. E., Gaudreau, P., & Blanchard, C. M. (2005).Self-determination, coping,
and goal attainment in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26, 396-411.
2. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4. Butt, D.S. (1978). Short scales for the measurement of sport motivations.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 10, 203-216.
5. Butt, D.S.(1987).Psychology of sport (2nd ed.). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
6. Chantal, Y., Guay, F., Dobreva-Martinova, T., &Vallerand, R. J. (1996). Motivation
and elite performance: An exploratory investigation with Bulgarian athletes.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 27,173182.
7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco, CA:
Josey-Bass.
8. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New
York: Harper and Row.
9. Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (1985).Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human
Behavior. New York: Plenum.
10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in
personality. Nebraska symposium on motivation, 38,237-288. Lincoln, NE: University
of Nebraska Press.
11. Feltz, D. L. (1982). Path analysis of the casual elements in Banduras theory of
self-efficacy and an anxiety-based model of avoidance behavior. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 764-781.
12. Feltz, D.L. (1988). Gender differences in the causal elements of self-efficacy on a
high avoidance motor task. Journal of Sport Psychology, 10, 151-156.

13. Feltz, D.L., &Petlichkoff, L. (1983). Perceived competence among interscholastic

sport participants and dropouts. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 8, 231235.
14. Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., Brire, N. M., &Provencher, P. (1995). Competitive
and recreational sport structures and gender: A test of their relationship with sport
motivation. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26,24-39.
15. Gillet, N., &Rosnet, E. (2008). Basic Need Satisfaction and Motivation in Sport.
www.athleticinsight.com, vol. 10/3.
16. Grbz, B., Altintas, A., Asci, F.M. (2007). Participation motives of 9-15 years old
Turkish soccer players. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, suppl.10,
http://www.ssm.org.jssm.org.
17. Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered: Toward a developmental
model. Human Development, 21, 34-64.
18. Hollembeak, J., &Amorose, A. J. (2005). Perceived coaching behaviors and
college athletes intrinsic motivation: A test of Self-Determination Theory. Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 20-36.
19. Kerr, J.H. (1988). A study of motivation in rugby. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 128, 269-270.
20. Klein, A.M. (1993).Little big men. New York: State University of New York Press.
21. Krane, V., & Williams, J. M. (1994) Cognitive anxiety, somatic anxiety, and
confidence in track and field athletes: The impact of gender, competitive level and
task characteristics. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 25, 203217.
22. Lirgg, C. D. (1991). Gender differences in self-confidence in physical activity: A
meta-analysis of recent studies. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 294
310.
23. McAuley, E. (1985). Modeling and self-efficacy: A test of Banduras model.
Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, 283-295.
24. McClelland, D. C., & Atkinson, J. W. (1953).The achievement motive. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts.
25. Murray, H.A. (1938).Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University
Press.
26. Nicholls, J.G. (1978). The development of the concepts of effort and ability,
perception of attainment, and the understanding that difficult tasks require more
ability. Child Development, 49, 800-814.
27. Ntoumanis, N. (2001). Empirical links between achievement goal theory and
self-determination theory in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19, 397-409.
28. Roberts, G.C. Motivation in sport and exercise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics,
1992.
29. Roberts, G.C., Kleiber, D.A., &Duda, J.L. (1981). An analysis of motivation in
childrens sport: The role of perceived competence in participation. Journal of Sport
Psychology, 3, 206-216.
30. Ryan, R.M., &Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55,
68-78.
31. Scanlan, T.K., Stein, G.L., &Ravizza, K. (1989). An in-depth study of former elite
figure skaters: 2.Sources of enjoyment. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,
11, 65-83.

32. Ulrich, B.D. (1987). Perceptions of physical competence, motor competence, and
participation in organized sport: Their interrelationships in young children. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 58, 57-67.
33. Vargas-Tonsing, T. M., & Bartholomew, J. B. (2006). An exploratory study of the
effects of pregame speeches on team efficacy beliefs. Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology, 36, 918933.
34. Walsh, M.R. (1987). The psychology of women: Ongoing debates. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
35. Wark, K. A., & Wittig, A. F. (1979). Sex role and sport competition anxiety. Journal
of Sport Psychology, 1, 248-250.
36. Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3-25.
37. Weiner, B. (1986).An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York:
Springer-Verlag.
38. Weiner, B., Frieze, I., Kukla, A., Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum, R. M. (1971).
Perceiving the causes of success and failure. In E.E. Jones, D.E. Kanose, H.H. Kelly,
R.E. Nisbett, S.Valanis, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of
behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
39. Weis, M.R., Weise, D.M., &Klint, K.A. (1989). Head over heels with success: The
relationship between self-efficacy and performance in competitive youth
gymnastics. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 444-451.
40. Wrisberg, C.A., Donovan, T.J., Britton, S.E., & Ewing, S.J. (1986). Assessing the
motivations of athletes: Further tests of Butts theory. In D.M. Landers (Ed.), Sport
and elite performers. 3, 185-194. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
41. FdrationInternationale de Football Association (2007). Retrieved Dec. 15,
2010, from www.fifa.com.