Self-Presentation in Sport

Question 1

Self presentation

Answer 1

• refers to the process by which individuals attempt to control the impressions others form on them

Question 2

Public vs. private Self-presentation

Answer 2

• maintenance of private self occurs entirely at the cognitive levels (self is the audience)
• maintenance of public self is always overt behaviour (others are the audience)
• interest is only on factors that affect self-presentations to others

Question 3

Primary Self-Presentation Goals

Answer 3

• self-presentation may be used in three interrelated yet distinct ways
• maximize one’s reward-cost-ratio–social and material outcomes
• self-esteem enhancement and maintenance–complaints vs criticism
• development of identity–create and maintain a particular identity

Question 4

Leary and Kowalski’s two component model

Answer 4

• two discrete processes, each of which operates according to different principles and is affected by different antecedents
  Impression Motivation:
• desire to create a particular impression
  Impression Construction:
• the kind of impression management tactics that are used to make the desired impression

Question 5

Leary 1992

Answer 5

• Motivation to engage in sport (improve physical appearance)
• People’s choices of sport (chose activities whether they can present favourably)
• quality of the athletic performance (choking and social loafing
• Emotional reaction from engaging in sport (competitive anxiety)

Question 6

Self-handicapping

Answer 6

• A proactive attributional strategy that is sometimes used before performance to increase personal responsibility for success and decrease personal responsibility for failure

Question 7

Self-handicapping behaviour

Answer 7

• altering the amount or quality of practice
• creating or exaggerating physical problems such as illness or injury
• focusing on real or imagined character flaws

Question 8

self-reported self-handicapping

Answer 8

• claims of being ill or injured
• socially anxious
• in a bad mood
• victim of a bad event

Question 9

Berglas and Jones

Answer 9

• undergraduate psychology students volunteered to take two intelligence tests
• after the first test all subjects received feedback that they answered between 70-80% of the questions correctly
• half the subjects answered solvable questions (contingent success feedback group) while the other half answered unsolvable questions (non-contingent success feedback group)
• following the feedback subjects were given the opportunity to ingest one of two drugs (actual placebos) before the second intelligence test
  Activil: enhance intellectual performance
  Pandocrin: inhibit performance
• as predicted subjects in the non-contingent success group self-handicapped (ingested the drug Pandocrin) to a greater extent that their contingent success counterparts
• in short, by choosing to self-handicap, subjects could blame the drug rather than their lack of ability, should they fail (or do worse on) the re-test.

Question 10

Study: Self-handicapping Among Competitive Athletes

Answer 10

Purpose: To examine if there were individual differences among athletes in the extent to which they self-handicap prior to an event that has potential for self-esteem loss (important vs. unimportant events)
Study 1:
- completed the 25 item self-handicapping scale
- coaches evaluated practice effort
Discussion: before entering into an important performance situation, low self-handicappers change their behaviour whereas high-self handicappers do not.
Study 2: completed self-handicapping questionnaire 2 weeks before the first tournament of the season
- on the day prior to each event participants complete questionnaire eliciting practice time, hours worked, physical and person problems
Results: both studies provide initial evidence for the utility of an individual difference approach to self-handicapping in athletes
- in both studies there were significant differences in the amount of effort put forth when preparing for an athletic event
specifically high self-handicappers withheld effort and practice before important efforts compared to low self-handicappers.

Question 11

Social Anxiety

Answer 11

• want to make certain impression on others, but doubt they will be successful

Question 12

Social Physique Anxiety

Answer 12

• feeling that ones physique is being negatively evaluated by others

Question 13

Study: Social Physique Anxiety, Body Esteem and Social Anxiety in Bodybuilders and Self-Reported Anabolic Steroid Users

Answer 13

Purpose: To examine the relationship between SPA, upper body esteem, social anxiety, and body dissatisfaction in self-reported anabolic steroid using bodybuilders, non-using bodybuilders, active exerciser and non exercising individuals
Conclusions:
- AS-using bodybuilders had significantly lower levels of SPA than the other non-user groups
- AS-using body builders had significantly higher upper body strength ratings than other groups
- suggest that AS use may play role in increasing positive feelings about SPA
- Suggests that when steroid use is stopped positive body image may disappear

Question 14

Social Physique anxiety and the type of sport

Answer 14

Purpose: to compare SPA levels between self-presentational and non presentational athletes
Group 1 (self-presentational athletes): 31 national level aerobic competitors with a mean age of 16.80
Group 2 (Weight restricted athletes): 50 national level light weight rowers with a mean age of 18.73
Group 3 (Athlete control–non weight restricted athletes): 37 national level soccer players with a mean age of 17.91
Group 4 (non-athlete control):
47 undergraduate psychology students with a mean age of 20.25 (did not play sports/did physical activity)
Measures: 9-item version SPA scale
Results:
- no significance difference was found among groups