Competition

Matt Vaartstra
University of Idaho
Edited from: Andy Gillham and Damon Burton

COMPOSE QUICK ANSWERS TO

THESE 2 QUESTIONS
What

is your personal
definition of competition?

What

does COMPETITION
mean to you?

WHAT IS COMPETITION?

Rewards are often a

central component of
many personal
definitions of
competition.
Most of us assume
that sport creates
winners and losers
and winners get more
perks or rewards than
do losers.

Reward Definitions
Competition: A situation in which
rewards are distributed unequally on the
basis of performance by the performers.
Cooperation: A social process through
which performance is evaluated and
rewarded in terms of the collective
achievements of a group of people
working together to reach a particular
goal.

REWARD-DEFINITION
COMPETITION QUIZ

DIRECTIONS Which of these situations is

competition according to the Reward Definition?
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

Participating in a PSYCH 100 experiment and told to

perform their best.
Same experiment but you get $10 if you perform to some
level.
Playing football in the park on Sunday afternoon with
friends.
Football game ends in a tie.
Youre alone in your living room trying to make 7 out of 10
putts from 10 feet .
During your daily 5 mile run on your regular course with 3
friends, nobody says anything, but each picks up the pace
the last 200 meters trying to finish first.

Problems w/ Reward Definitions

For every winner, there has to be one or
more losers.
Does not account for differences in
individual reactions to competition.
Assumes the reward to be the same for
every competitor.

Intrinsic

vs. extrinsic rewards

Problems w/ Reward Definitions

Differences between competition and

cooperation are emphasized, rather
than their similarities.
You

have to cooperate in order to

compete.
Competition requires both within-team and
between-team cooperation.

Competition as a Process

Martens Process Model

4

stages to the competitive process

Explains why people respond differently to
competition
Social

comparison process

Stage #1:
Objective Competitive Situation

Four objective criteria that must be present in

order to conclude that competition is
occurring
1. A standard of comparison is identified for the
team or individual
2. Another person is present
3. This person knows the standard
4. This person evaluates whether the standard has
been obtained

What are the advantages / disadvantages of

the Objective Competitive Situation (OCS)?

Stage #2:
Subjective Competitive Situation

How an athlete perceives, accepts, and

appraises the OCS.
SCS

is affected by personality traits,

perceived importance of competition,
perception of the comparison standard, and
perceived response capabilities.

As a result, athletes seek out

competition, enter it reluctantly, or
attempt to avoid it.

Stage #3: Response

After the appraisal of the OCS, athletes

experience positive and negative
adaptations, preparing them for
competition.
Physiologically
Psychologically
Behaviorally

Stage #4: Consequences

Athletes perception of consequence

(e.g., success or failure) is more
important than the actual outcome.
Athletes

perceive positive or negative

consequences as a result of participation.
These consequences impact:
Short

and long term emotions

Perceptions of competence
Future decisions to compete

Variable Factors in OCS

Social Environment
Presence

of others

Who?
How

many?
Audience or co-actors?
Attributes
Ability

Age
Sex

of opponents

Variable Factors in OCS

Physical Environment
Playing

field conditions
Weather

Rewards
Tangible
Intangible

Task Characteristics
Performance

demands
Rules of contest

Martens Motto
Athletes first, winning second
To broaden Martens earlier motto, a
revised motto, Personal excellenceThe foundation for success highlights
the relationship shared between
personal development and success.

Bringing the Motto to Life

Striving to win vs. Actually winning
Appreciating the journey vs. the
destination
The challenge becomes practicing what
you preach.
Community-wide philosophy
development.

Problems Associated with

Competition
Win-at-all-costs mentality
Promotes youth sport dropout
Reduces motivation for those that
remain involved
Reduces enjoyment for unsuccessful
competitors
Facilitates a short-term focus only

Myths of Competition

Myth 1: Competition is a powerful

motivational strategy.

Truth: Competition provides the greatest

motivation when the level of challenge is
moderately difficult and matches the
current capabilities of the athlete.

Motivation and Competition

High

Anxiety
Level of
Challenge

Boredom
Low

Low

Athletes
Skill Level

High

Myths of Competition

Myth 2: Competition is an effective

quality control strategy.

Truth: Typically, competition can be an

effective strategy to improve a skill.
However,

competition leads to shortsightedness, and athletes sacrifice longterm improvement and learning in order
to achieve short-term success.

Myths of Competition

Myth 3: Competition develops positive

character traits.

Truth: Winning can be a double-edge

sword for teaching character
development.

If athletes wants to win too much, they may lie,

cheat, or develop bad character traits.
Athletes who resist temptation, develop positive
character traits that last a lifetime.

Myths of Competition

Myth 4: Competition is a fair process

that insures that the best team
normally wins.

Truth: The playing field is rarely level,

and even when it is, winning is very
uncontrollable and often pursued via
unfair methods.

Competition: Good or Bad?

Competition is neither good nor bad.

Rather, it is simply a neutral process
and depends on the athletes
appraisal of the OCS, response, and
perception of consequences.

Competition and Cooperation As

Complimentary

Competition and cooperation are not

polar opposites.

The dynamics of how competition and

cooperation complement one another
should be taught.

Top performers employ a blend of

competition and cooperation strategies.

Competition vs. Cooperation

Cooperative activities produce more open
communication, sharing, trust, friendship, and
enhanced performance compared with
competitive activities.
Johnson & Johnson (1985)

Review of 122 studies

Cooperation improved performance more than
competition in 65 studies (8 showed opposite
effects)
Cooperation improved performance more than
individual efforts in 108 studies (6 showed
opposite effects)
Questionable tasks and contests however

What

ways do athletes have

to cooperate in order to
compete?

Association Model of Competition

Cooperative

Cooperative games
Frisbee
Assembly lines

Sport

Noncompetitive

Competitive

Hermit

War with no rules

Noncooperative

Taking a Hint from Recess

Coakly (1997)
Unorganized

games result in increased

cooperation, decision making, creativity,
and action things that rule-centered
organized sport stifles.
Coaches, teachers, and sport directors
should take a hint from the behaviors of
children when games are spontaneous.

Taking a Hint from Recess

Coakly (1997)
Unorganized

sport behaviors: Kids modify

games to maximize cooperation, success,
and enjoyment.
Increased

action and scoring opportunities.

More constant involvement during the game.
Closely-matched teams.
Friendship development and maintenance.