42

CHAPTER – 2

REVIEW OF RELATED

LETERATURE

43

CHAPTER-2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The necessary background for formulating the problem, objectives and

hypotheses of the study has been provided in previous chapter. Further, to

put the problem in a proper perspective the review of related literature is

presented in this chapter. This will not only provide the state of the art in

the area under investigation but will also point out the gap that exists and

the direction, it should take along with providing the necessary background

in the light of which the results of the present study are to be interpreted.

According to Carter Good (1963) 1- “the key to the vast store house

of published literature may open doors to sources of significant problems

and explanatory hypothesis and provide helpful orientation for definition of

the problem, background for selection of procedure and comparative data for

interpretation of results. In order to be creative and original, one must read

extensively and critically as a stimulus to thinking.”

“Since effective research is based upon past knowledge, this steps helps

to eliminate the duplication of what has been done and provide useful for

hypothesis and helpful suggestions for significant investigation citing studies

that so substantial arrangement and those that seem to present conflicting

conclusion, helps to sharpen and define under-standing of existing

knowledge, icon the problem are, provides a back -ground for the research

projects and makes the reader aware of the status of the issue”

44

Best & Kahn (1986) 2: thus, the review of related studies provides a

basis for designing the study and quantifying the variable involved. The

review is also concerned with questions such as; what has been done in the

field of personality, attribution style and sports achievement? What are the

limitations of the work accomplished? What are the directions along which

further efforts should be made? The review of study in the present context,

pertains to the studies related to personality, attribution style and sports

achievement, the variable used in the study. The related literature will be

reviewed here in two parts. In the first part, the studies pertaining to

personality and performance in sports will be given. The second part will deal

with the review of the studies in attribution and sport performance.With a

view to gather comprehension information the review of related studies has

been divided into two parts.

1. STUDIES CONDUCTED ABROAD

2. STUDIES CONDUCTED IN INDIA

2.1. STUDIES RELATED TO PERSONALITY AND SPORTS

ACHIEVEMENTS:

Substantially large amount of research has been done to find

relationship between sports activity and personality development. The major

amount of research has compared either sportsmen with controls or

categories within sports with respect to their personality characteristics.

Although it is very difficult to conclude that sports give rise to particular

kind of personality characteristics, the results clearly borne out statistically

45

significant differences in some of the personality dimensions between

sportsmen and controls or between team games and individual games or

between high achievers and low achievers.

The term “review” means to organize the knowledge of the specific area

of research to evolve an edifice of knowledge to show that his study would be

an addition to this field .The task of review of literature is highly creative and

tedious because researcher has to synthesise the available knowledge of the

field in a unique way to provide the rational for this study.

2.1(a). STUDIES CONDUCTED ABROAD:

Pezer and Brown(1980)3 on inter collegiate women basketball teams

showed that the players in the winning teams had greater will to win than

the losing teams.

In a more recent study Dowd and Innes (1981) 4 found significant

differences on the 16 P.F between squash and volleyball players and between

high and average level competitors. They note: “the present analysis showed

differences at high levels of participation which suggest that those who by

special enthusiasm, drive and ability have graduated to positions of success

may be identifiable as having a common constellation of personality

characteristics.”

More recently investigators have attempted to understand sport

preferences by examining the sources of satisfaction that people get from

participating in different sports. For instance, Wankel and Kreisel (1985) 5

found intrinsic motivations like excitement of the sport, personal

accomplishment, improving one’s skills were rated more highly than

46

extrinsic factors like pleasing others, winning rewards and winning the

game.

Studies using arousal concepts like extraversion, impulsivity and

sensation seeking have proved more useful in understanding sport

preference. For example, Rowland Et Al (1986) 6 found high sensation

seeking males preferred running/jogging, weight-lifting and hiking.

Shergil(1991)7 Who studied Personality Differences of successful and

un- successful Volleyball player.

Zimbardo, Keonugh and Boyd (1997) 8 if a preference for a particular

temporal dimension, past present or future becomes chronic, then it may

function as a personality trait exhibiting a static rather than fluid nature.

Greenwold, Mc Ghee and Schwartz (1998) 9.The gender difference self-

evaluations could be further examined using a more implicit measure that

would not encourage boys to overestimate, or allow girls to underestimate,

their positive qualities and achievements.

Kallipuska (1998) 10 conducted a study to survey the relationship

between personality factors and the success of top athlete’s sports. The

study was confined to three fields of the athletic sports, cross-country skiing,

biathlon and shooting tests used the self-esteem scale, the modified

Mehrabian and Epstein empathy scale. Preliminary results showed that

among top athlete’s men seem to get higher score on self-esteem and

narcissism than women. On the other hand, women have better self-

assertiveness than men.

47

Hogan, J., Rybicki, S.L., Matowildo, S.J., and Borman, W.C. (1998)

11.Relations between contextual performance, personality and occupational

advancement. Human performance examined the personality factor of

conscientiousness and its relationship with contextual performance when

organizational reward systems are taken into account. More specifically, they

anticipated that if the organization rewards contextual performance with

approval and acceptance then conscientiousness should be a significant

predictor. However, if status were the reward for contextual performance

then conscientiousness would not be a significant predictor but rather a

personality variable known as ambition would be.

Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) 12 however time perspectives are

generally considered fluid in nature, thus individuals can influence the

balance among these temporal orientations, depending on ‘situational

demands, resources assessments or personal and social appraisals to

negotiate strategies that satisfy new goals and avoid adverse consequences.

In other words, students who are confident to their abilities (past positive)

and who believe that their efforts produce results (low present hedonistic) are

more likely than those who do not, to work towards a future goal (future) to

which they are committed and with which they can identify. Thus by

harnessing their perspectives, they are able to regulate their behaviour to

persist with their students to achieve their educational goals.

Rawathorne and Elliot (1999) 13. This argument is also corroborated

by a Meta analysis of the experimental literature that has examined the

48

effects of performance and mastery achievement goals of intrinsic motivation.

The Meta analysis showed that the undermining effect of performance goals

relative to mastery goals was evident only when the experimental procedures

induced a performance avoidance orientation.

Dweck (1999) 14 proposed that the precursors of self- handicapping are

based on a learning history encourages the development of a ‘fixed-entity’

theory of competence.

Borman, W.C., Penner, L.A., Allen, J.D., and Motowildo, S.J.,

(2001) 15. Personality predictors of citizenship performance conducted

behaviour of the this type contributes to maintenance and enhancement of

the social structure within an organization, which can improve all job

performance behaviour cannot be fully specified in a job description, but are

none the less necessary for successful job performance.

Farmer, Jarvis, Berent and Corbett (2001) 16 however, scholastic

achievement is not likely to be the only source of self-esteem in you people,

as for example social competence or sporting skills may play an equal or

alternative role.

Salgedo, J.F. (2002) 17. The big five personality dimensions and

counter productive behaviours examined various forms of cwb separately.

The criteria considered in this study were absenteeism, accident rate, and

deviant behaviour (e.g.) theft, substance abuse, property damage,

organizational rate breaking, and other irresponsible behaviours.

49

Elliot and Church (2003) 18. The associations between self

handicapping and achievement goals have also been of particular interest

among researchers in their attempts to understand self-handicapping better.

2.1(b). STUDIES CONDUCTED IN INDIA; Thakur and Ojha (1981) 19 conducted a study on Indian sample of

(n=90) different games i.e. (table tennis 30, badminton 30 and football 30) by

administering them the Cattle’s 16 p.f. almost similar characteristics have

been found in the three groups except on a few factors viz., b.i. and 0 of the

test.

Sharma (1984) 20 tested a sample consisting of 282 university

representing sportsmen and 256 non-sportsmen on 16 p.f., general mental

ability test and self concept scale. Results of this study indicated that both

samples differ markably on aggression, emotional stability, intelligence and

happy-go-lucky factors. University representing sportsmen were found

higher on positive self-concept than non-sportsmen. No significant

differences we found among university representing sportsmen and non-

sportsmen on intelligence variable. Sharma (1985) 21 conducted a study

on 256 males and 248 females selected from propulsive sampling and this

sample was tested on 16 p.f. and achievement tests. Main findings of this

study indicated that personality traits are highly related to performance in

sports and games. There are certain personality traits that contribute to

increment in sports capacity in one category of games while the same may

not help in another category of games.

50

Dureha (1986) 22 compared the personality characteristics of

sportsmen and non-sportsmen. He found significant differences in

personality characteristics of the two groups.

Dureha (1991) 23 observed inter-university hockey players to be

warm-hearted, easy-going, less intelligent, more emotionally stable,

aggressive, happy-go-lucky, socially bold, tender-minded, vigorous,

confident, self-disciplined, conscientious and relaxed and suggested that

these factors might have contributed to playing ability and ultimately of

winning performance.

Yadav (1992) 24 studied selected personality variables, adjustment

and socio-economic status of mass and class athletes of college and

university levels. The results indicated that mass sports athletes were more

venturesome and placid whereas, class athletes were more intelligent and

experimenting.

Shukla and Sharma (1994) 25 found personality differences between

state level selected and non-selected hockey players. There were significant

differences in 8 out of 16 factors.

Sheikh. (1994) 26 showed female adolescents (600) who were failed

independent to be showing higher achievement scores than their field

dependent counterparts.

Sudhir and Khiangte (1997) 27 intellectually gifted and high creative

were found superior in abstract thinking, more assertive, tender minded,

placid and spontaneous.

51

Bhargava and Sexena (1997) 28 prolonged deprivation was found to

affect differently adolescent boy and girls (n=60) in age range 16 to 18 years.

The extremely deprived female group was found to be more emotionally

balanced, having greater empathy although more dependent and with more

difficulty in establishing personal relationship and having greater anxiety

concerning their body functions then their male counterparts.

Mishra and Singh (1998) 29 found male and female graduates of low

SES unable to make proper adjustment with environmental situation due to

poor facilities of accommodation, transportation and communication.

Kumar and Shukla, (1998) 30 administered personality test on 80

high achieving and 80 low achieving male hockey players. High achievers

were those who had participated in national or international tournaments,

low achievers were those who had never achieved such distinctions through-

out their sports life and 80 non-sports persons were also included in study.

These groups were matched on the variable of age and education e.p.q.

Rotter’s locus of control scale; “will to win” questionnaire and Batter’s self-

esteem inventory were administered to these groups individually. High

achieving hockey players were found to be extrovert, dominating, less

anxious, emotionally stable, internally controlled and having personal and

social self-esteem in comparison to other groups. Kumar and Shukla, (1998)

They found that high achieving hockey players were found to be extrovert

than low achieving players.

Bawa and Debnath, (1999) 31 investigated to determine the

relationship of various personality traits with competition performance in

52

gymnastics. The purpose of the study was to determine significance of

differences in personality characteristics among high, mediocre and low

performance in competitive gymnastics championship.16 p.f. by cattell and

eber (1971) was administered on each subject. ANOVA was applied to find

out the significance of difference in various personality characteristics among

the three groups.

Sharma (1999) 32 investigation was primarily designed to pin-point

the differences among various sports disciplines on the parameter of

personality. For this purpose 100 athletes of Guru Ghasidas University

Bilaspur (m.p.) belonging to 10 disciplines were selected. The introversion,

extroversion inventory prepared by dr. p.f. Aziz and Rabha Agnihotry

(1991) was used. Results revealed that difference in personality pattern of

players of both sex of individual and team games were not found except

volleyball players. Mostly all the male and female players were of extrovert in

nature in various sports. This was also found that personality patterns of

sports had not been affected by the game differences.

Arora, (1999) 33 in addition to parental behaviours, physical

handicaps like visual impairment did not affect adversely visually impaired

students of class viii and ix who were found to be easy going, imaginative

and having normal degree of ego strength.

Chaturvedi (1999) 34 found high creative tribal to be warmhearted

intelligent, emotionally stable, excitable, enthusiastic and self controlled

than the low creative.

53

Upadhyay, Yogesh (2000) 35 investigates the significant differences, if

any between the personality traits of rural and urban consumers. A sample

of 400 heads of house hold living in urban and rural areas of two Indian

districts was administered Tripathi personal preference schedule

(K.R.Tripathi, 1973) and a multi traits scale of 15 normal personality

variables. There were no significant difference between the personalities of

these two consumer groups.

D’souza, Urs and James (2000) 36 personality and academic

achievement in high school students. Neurotic tendency and lower academic

performance.

Saraswati, Swami Niranjan Ananda (2001) 357discusses yoga as a

life long process in understanding the necessities of life, managing the

human mind and potential and transforming the personality. Imbalance in

mind create minter conflicts (anxiety, stress and depression) which in turn

lead to deep psychological problems called samskaras for which yoga has

devised certain systems of practice as remedies. The practice of asanas helps

in the management of the body and health, leading to physical balance and

harmony, pranayama, mudras and bandhas channel the physical forces,

providing the opportunity to deal with the mind and help in the development

and shaping the personality at all stages.

Chandan Manna, (2002) 38. The purpose of the study was to analyse

and compare the tribal and non tribal boys in some selected personality

factors. Eighty tribal boys from Jhargriam of West Bengal and same number

54

of non-tribal boys from center of the same state were selected as subjects.

The subjects were within 10 to 12 years of age. Bengali version of Porter and

Cattle’s children personality questionnaire (cpq) was used to analyse the

fourteen personality factors of the subjects. The raw scores were converted to

sten scores. The data were statistically analysed for testing difference

between two means by‘t’ test. Results revealed that the subjects of the tribal

group were more mild obedient, and submissive. The non-tribal group

appeared to be more intelligent, serious, restrained, zestful, but careless.

Singh (2003) 39 compared high and low achievement athletes, at

different level of competition, and found that high achiever has higher will to

win as compared of low achiever athletes. Therefore the investigator decided

to study this aspect of the personality of boxer’s champions and non-

champions. It has been proclaimed that Tyson and Mohd. Ali, who have

reigned for years in the boxing ring, had the will to win in great measures.

D’souza, Urs and Ramaswamy (2003) 40 personality and academic

achievement in high school students. Low self-esteem and decreased self-

concept.

Monin (2003) 41 as a result, it has not been possible to determine

whether fluency effects how deeply people process available information. Our

findings are therefore novel because they show that fluency is used not only

directly as a cue for judgment but also indirectly as a mechanism for

strategy selection.

55

Sindhu and Singh (2006),42 the main objective of the study was to

compare the champion and non- champion boxers on will to win traits of

personality ,at their different levels of participation. It was hypothesized that

champion boxer would have significantly higher level of will to win than non-

champions.

Upadhyaya, P. (2006) 43. examines the difference in the personality

traits of high and low emotionally intelligent student- teacher. A sample of 78

student-teachers studying in Ewing Christian College, Allahabad was

selected for study. The test of emotional intelligence and personality

inventory were used for collecting data and these tools were developed by

K.S. Mishra. The statistically method used in the study for analysis of data

were mean s.d. and‘t’ test.

FINDINGS- Students-teacher with low emotional intelligence are more

uneasy and worried about future-unhappy felling and failure are lets

cautions, irregular and like to take more rust, restrain others. Have lack of

energy and feel tired and uninterested and conform to the opinion or

accepted path taken by most people. Students-teacher with high emotional

intelligence are more competent, and have more self -confidence, hard

working, help others constructive way, more motivated, energetic and full of

enthusiasm and turn away from accepted or given path or opinion. The

fifteen personality traits like experiment v/s conservative, emotionally stable

v/s excitable, spiritual v/s materialist, social v/s self-centred, adaptive v/s

56

rigid, inquisitive v/s non-curious, relaxed v/s tense, affectionate v/s

undemonstrative, self-critical v/s happy-go-lucky, group dependent v/s

autonomous, humble v/s assertive, more analytical v/s less analytical,

forthrightrs v/s crooked, dominant v/s submissive, conscientious v/s

unscrupulous are not different in case of student-teacher with high and low

emotional intelligence. The study cites two references.

Moreover, these findings suggest a resolution for inconsistencies in the

fluency literature for instance; some research suggests that fluent stimuli are

perceived as being more familiar than diffluent stimuli.

Singh,kumar and Singh(2009),44 who found that the score of

catching, passing, throwing, shooting, footwork and dribbling of low

performances and high performances differ significantly at 0.01 level of

confidence, in favour of high performances.

2.2. ATTRIBUTION STYLE AND SPORTS ACHIEVEMENT:

2.2 (a). STUDIES CONDUCTED ABROAD:

Attribution theory seems to have acquired relevance to sports

performance in recent past. Some of the research studies conducted in this

field throws light on the nature of this variable operating in sports

performance. A review of these studies is provided here.

Lefebvre (1979) 45 recorded the causal attribution of 30 Belgium

athletes. The subjects were candidates for the Olympics in Montréal 1976.

The main objectives of the study dealt with the cognitive attributions of

57

athletic performances to the underlying causes, being ability, effort, task

difficulty and luck. As predicted ability especially efforts were considered as

the primary causes for good achievement, while lack of efforts and bad luck

were important attributions for bad achievements.

Roberts and Pascuzzi (1979) 46 administered an open ended

questionnaire to 346 college students to determine the causal elements used

in sport situations. Results show that the 4 traditional elements of ability,

effort, luck and task difficulty were used 45% of the time. However, the

theory advanced by Wiener (1974) is based on the dimensions of locus of

control and stability, and not on the elements per se. when subject’s

responses were content analyzed for dimensional properties. It was

concluded that 100% of the responses could be placed within the 4 cells of

Weiner model. Results support the applicability of the Weiner achievement

behaviour model to sport environments, but only when a careful analysis of

causul attributions is made to determine their dimensional relevance.

Bukowski and Moore (1980) 47 examined 77 boys (aged 7-16 years)

who participated in a series of athletic events at an overnight camp evaluated

the importance of possible causes for success and failure in these events.

These reasons included those four traditional attributions of ability, effort,

luck and task difficulty and other attributions suggested in previous person

perception studies of the causes of outcomes in achievements related tasks.

Findings reveal that luck and difficulty were perceived as having little

58

importance, success was attributed to internal factors, the differences

between winner’s and loser’s provided little evidence for the presence of a self

serving bias in their evaluation of the items, and the differences between

actors and observers were not entirely consistent with the hypothesis that

actors attribute outcomes to situational factor and observers attribute the

same outcomes to dispositional factors.

Caron and Spink (1980) 48 examined the stability of causal

attributions over repeated test days using (2 win, loss) x 2 (immediate, 2 day

delay) x 3 (post game 2 week, 4 weeks) design. Male high school football

players outline the degree of causality attributed to ability, effort, luck, task

difficulty and officiating. Results clearly support the view that attributions

are stable over four week’s interval. However, co-relational analyses revealed

that there is only a moderate consistency of individual differences in

attribution over repeated tests. Thus, retrospective judgments of causality

may not be reliable.

Lau and Russel (1980) 49 extended the generality of attribution

research by exploring several important issues in a highly involving real

world setting in which attributions naturally occur: athletic competition. 107

newspapers accounts of baseball and football games were coded for

attribution contests. These data support a motivational or self-enhanced

explanation for the tendency to make internal attributions for success and

external attributions for failure. No support was found for Miller and Ross’s

(1975) combinations that this tendency is mediated by expectancies. It was

59

also found that more attributions were made after unexpected, as opposed to

the expected outcomes. There was a tendency for relatively more stable

attributions to give after outcomes.

Rajeski and Lowe (1980) 50 investigated the effects of ability (high vs.

low), effort (high vs. low), and outcome (success vs. failure) on casual

attributions. After riding a bicycle aerometer 120 male undergraduates

attributed a cause of their increased or decreased performance to ability,

effort, task difficulty and luck. Results indicate that successful outcomes

were attributed to both ability and effort and that unsuccessful outcomes

were attributed to a lack of ability but not a lack of effort. While the task was

seen as easier following success, the perception of low effort mediated this

relationship. Results support a situational specific conceptualization of sport

achievement. It is suggested that physiologically related ability may be

viewed as relatively unstable. Relative to intellectual tasks, sport-related

effort may be more salient and more quantifiable and may exert a greater

influence on subsequent attributions for sport achievement.

Spink and Roberts (1980) 51 assessed the effects of perceived

outcome on the causal attributions of 70 undergraduate racquetball players.

Prior to a 2 person racquetball game, subjects indicated their expectancy of

success against their opponent. Following the game, subjects rated their

performance satisfaction, own competency, and opponents competency, as

well as rating the extent to which the outcome was due to internal or

external failures. Results show that the clearly perceived outcomes were

60

attributed internally, while the ambiguous outcomes were attributed

externally. Objective outcome may not be the determinant of success and

failure causal attributions.

Yukelosn Et Al. (1981) 52 tested. Kukla’s attribution theory of

performance and addressed the mediating link between causal attributions

and subsequent actions in a competitive motor task. Two experiments were

conducted with 184 male college students. Experiments 1 determined the

effect of perceived task difficulty and attribution instructions on the ball

tossing performance of high achievers while competing against a standard of

excellence. Results indicate that high achievers performed with greater

intensity when receiving an effort rather than ability orientation instructional

set and when they perceive themselves to be behind a normative score of

their classmates. Low as well as high achievers were added to the 2nd study

and were placed in face to face competition instead of a competition against

a standard of experiment ii support Kukla’s theory in that high achievers

performed best when they perceived themselves to be behind on opponents

score midway through the experiment, whereas low achievers performed best

when they perceived themselves to be ahead. Results from the cognitive

assessment procedures, however, failed to support the performance findings.

Weinberg Et Al. (1982) 53 conducted a study on male and female

(n=60) athletes to highlight the effect of evaluation on causal and trait

attributions at the pursuit roter task. Subjects were asked to perform ten

trails and were provided bogus feedback via a computer. After assessing

61

causal and trait attributions subjects performed ten more trails and again

given bogus performance feedback. Results indicated a significant sex main

effect with females viewing luck as a more important causal determinant of

performance than males. The success-failure main effect indicated that

subjects attributed primarily to internal factors of ability and efforts whereas

failure was attributed to the task difficulty.

Auvergne (1983) 54 conducted a study on (n=45) high and low

achiever skiers and recorded their causal attributions. Three groups were

made on the basis of their performance i.e. above average, average and below

average groups. Analysis revealed that how athletes (skiers) who obtained

high, average or poor competition results differed with respect to

achievement and causal attributions (skiers) attributed success internally

and failure externally than did athletes whose performances were poor. Low

achieving athletes were less consistent in their causal attributions for both

success and failure.

Humble (1983) 55 conducted two experiments and determined if 8-10

years old children could be directionally influence in their causal attributions

for success or failure on motor achievement task. In 1st experiment 84

subjects were provided cause effect information about a motor task and then

experienced a single trail of manipulated success or failure at a task. Only

those subjects who were informed that effort was necessary for task success

and then experienced success attributed their task outcome to the

62

hypothesized cause (effort) at a significant rate (pc .002). In experiment ii

168 subjects received cause effect information but were given three trails of

either success, failure, or mixed outcomes. Hypothesized attribution

tendencies were again limited to conditions where subjects were told that

effort was necessary and then experienced either all or mostly success

outcomes. These results indicate that the treatment has potential for

influencing causal attributions within prescribed situations. Experiment had

revealed that the influence was not always internalized by subjects.

McCauley Et Al (1983) 56 argued that the previous research in

academic achievement setting has indicated that causal attributions for

success and failure outcomes are important determinants of effective

reactions to the outcomes in sports. They examined the relationship between

the dimensions underlying causal attributions and effective reaction to

performance outcomes in table-tennis. 62 undergraduates played a table

tennis game against an opponent matched on sex, ability and completed the

causal dimension scale. Attribution processes were important determinants

of effective reactions, particularly for winners. In contrast to previous

findings, the locus of causality dimension was not an important determinant

of effect. Instead, controllability appeared to be the most influential causal

dimension. Winner attributions were more internal, stable and controllable

than those of losers. But attributions were of an internal, unstable and

controllable nature for both winners and losers.

63

McCauley (1984) 57 conducted a study on female gymnasts (n=52)

and it was seen that perceptions of causality and success in women’s inter

collegiate tournament and to determine the relative influence of perception of

success on causal explanation for performance and the reciprocal influences,

if any, of causal attributions on perceptions of success. Gymnasts completed

the Russell’s (1982) causal dimension scale performance of each event. The

score awarded by the judges for each event was employed as an objective,

absolute measure of performance. Analysis revealed more internal, stable

and controllable attributions for performance were made by those gymnasts

who scored high and perceived their performance as more successful than

those gymnasts who scored lower and perceived their performance as less

successful.

Rajeski and Brawley (1983) 58 discussed the sport psychological

perspectives of attribution theory in terms of present and future concerns

and present a critical evaluation of existing approaches to the study of sports

attribution. Typical characteristics of such an investigation and their

problems are outlined. Some inherited from psychology and others unique to

sport.This critical analysis under scores the narrowness of previous

interests. The broad scope of attribution is presented to emphasize the

wealth of research problems that could be studied in addition to these

concerning self-focus on achievement outcomes. Recent investigations of

attribution in sport are briefly described to exemplify new research

directions. These examples sketch the importance of subject’s phenomology,

the situational and internal variables affecting attributions and a

64

developmental comment. If future studies recognize the rich array of social

inference problems within the sport context and confront previous

investigative errors, the results should be productive decade of attributions

research in sport psychology.

Mark Et Al (1984) 59 conducted two studies to examine the

attribution style of winners and losers in the second round of organized

squash (study 1) and racquetball (study 2) tournaments. In 1st study

subjects included six players in the top section of the local league, 16 players

with at best 3 years of experience, and 37 novice players. In study 2 subjects

including 16 players of highest ability, 4 above average and 6 average were

taken. Subjects reported their attributions on the causal dimension scale.

Results indicate that there is no difference between players of different

experiences/ability level. Winners and losers did not differ in the locus of

causality of their attributions, but winners, relative to losers, made more

stable and controllable attributions.

A field study was conducted by Roberts and Duda (1984) 60 which

was designed as to determine the variables that best predict perceptions of

success and failure, to examine this relationship for males and females, and

to investigate the factors that lead to perceptions of demonstrated ability in

males and females. 48 female and 49 male undergraduate racquetball

players completed a questionnaire assessing their own and opponent’s

perceived ability, self confidence, reason for enrolling in racquetball class,

and the importance placed on winning prior to a 2 person racquetball game.

65

Immediately after the contest a second questionnaire was administered that

measured perceived satisfaction in the game (subjective success and failure),

perception of own and opponent’s demonstrated ability, and the causal

attributions of winners and losers. Regression analysis revealed that

perception of demonstrated ability was significantly related to perception of

success and failure for both men and women. However, males and females

used different information variables to determine whether ability had

been displayed. For males, outcome and attributions to task

difficulty and strategy predicted perception of ability

for females; attribution to skill and luck were more important.

Tenenbaum Et Al (1984) 61 examined the distinction between sports-

specific attributions and general locus of causality by administering Rotter’s

Ent-Ext. Loc scale and wingate sports ach. responsibility scale on 69 team

athletes, 38 individual athletes. Both scales were found to be reliable and

valid through the probabilistic research model. Correlations should be

examined separately from general loc. Results also suggest that successful

events should be examined separately from unsuccessful events and a

distinction should be made between individual and team athletes.

Kimiecik and Duda (1985) 62 examined distinctions between open

ended and forced choice causal attributions between open ended and forced

choice causal attributions of 48 (9-12 years old) boys in a competitive sport

setting. Subjects participated in a 1 on 1 basketball games and were

interviewed after the games. A significant number of subjects experienced

subjective success regardless of whether they won or lost, which suggests

66

that an objective outcome (win vs. loss) may not be the best way of defining

success and failure in sport setting. When given the opportunity to respond

freely subjects attributions were categorized as ability, effort, opponent

difficulty, and luck. Finally, the attribution pattern for winners and losers

differed significantly as function of the type of attribution assessment

utilized. It was concluded that there may be a relationship among perceived

compliance, subjective perceptions of success and failure and causal

attributions.

Rierdon Et Al (1985) 63 examined the generality of self-serving

attribution biases and gender differences in attributions in an individual

sport competition on 54 male and 25 female adult racquetball players

involved in a small local tournament were asked to make attributions for the

outcome of their matches in open ended format. Raters categorized subject’s

responses along the dimension of locus of causality, controllability and

stability. Results indicate that the self-serving bias was observed following

wins in both males and females. Only female evidenced external attributions

following losses. Males maintained a preference for internal attributions.

Males made more unstable attributions than females, and this was

particularly true following wins. Results are interpreted as proving evidence

for the externals validity of the notion that females are attribution ally

modest. Cautions are offered concerning the use of the term self-serving bias

in competitive situations.

Tenanbaum and Furst (1985) 64 have conducted a study to delineate

the relationship between enduring sports attribution, and outcomes such as

67

perceived ability and sport type. The study has also examined the

relationship between sports specific enduring and state attributions. The two

tests Wingate sports achievement responsibility scale (wsars) and the causal

dimension scale were given to 138 athletes who participated in individual

sports (events) boxing, table tennis, track and field events (n=94) and team

sports: soccer handball and basketball (n=44). All athletes were tested both

prior to and following regular league and international competitions. Results

revealed that individual athletes assigned unsuccessful sports events more

internally than team athletes. A similar tendency was also found in

successful events. It was also noted that winners assigned the causes more

stable, controllable and partially more internally than losers. The higher

perceived ability, the more internal the responsibility for both successful and

unsuccessful events tended to rate the causes following a win more

internally than their counterparts. Athletes internal for unsuccessful events

tended to assign the causes following a loss more internally. But the

differences did not reach significance.

Hewitt and Jackson (1986) 65 examined 20 high school and

university tennis players rated the extend to which 5 factors (skill, hustle, off

day, bad conditions and luck) contributed to a personal win and a personal

loss, outcome was a significant factor only for the off day and hustle factors.

Tyler (1986) 66 assessed the sensitivity of group members to

attribution styles for group performance. 32 ice hockey players gave their

impressions of fictitious hockey player’s attributions for success or failure.

Attributions were either self-serving or group-serving (i.e. individuals blamed

68

themselves for group failure and shared responsibility for group success).

Subjects consistently reacted favourably to players exhibiting the group-

serving pattern; especially in terms of the condition such a person would

make the group- cohesiveness. Players from successful teams were judged to

contribute more to group cohesion than players from failing teams. This

attribution may contribute equally to group-cohesion under conditions of

success or failure.

Watkins (1986) 67 examined attributions for sporting outcomes given

by New Zealand newspapers using 27 undergraduates rating along three

dimensions (locus of causality) stability and controllability. These findings

suggest the stable causal explanations are more likely to be elicited by

expected rather unexpected outcome was supported.

Croxton et al (1987) 68 investigated gender differences in attitudes

towards sports attribution patterns after sports participation. 40 male and

40 female undergraduates responded to a sport emotional reaction profile

developed by T. Tutko and U. Tosi (1978) and competed in an athletic

contest against either a member of their own sex or a member of the opposite

sex. The outcomes were rigged so that half of the subjects experienced a win

and half of the experienced a loss. Results show that male expressed more

competitive and assertive attitudes towards sports participation and were

also more confident of success prior to the competition than females.

However, the attribution of winning males and females were basically the

same. Both losing males and females were basically the same. Both losing

males and females were more likely to focus on characteristics of the

69

opponents when losing to member of the opposite sex than when losing to a

member of their own sex.

The relationship between personal selfefficacy and causal explanation

given for performance in a competitive sport setting was examined by

Dancan and Mc Auley (1987) 69. The 84 undergraduates were manipulated

into high and low efficacy groups, engaged in competitive motor task against

an opponent, and then causal attributions for outcome. Analysis did not

reveal any significant differences between high and low efficacy groups.

Causal explanation for outcome, however, winners made more stable

controllable attributions than losers.

Robinson and Howe (1987) 70 determined which of the causal

dimensions of locus, stability and controllability were most clearly associated

with mood states profiles for both personal performance and team win or

loss outcomes. The causal dimension scale and the profile of mood states

were administered to 17 male university soccer players to assess attribution

inferences and mood profile over a three game period. Successful

performance was achieved by 7 subjects, whereas 10 subjects were

unsuccessful. Unavailable analysis revealed that the unsuccessful subjects

experienced significant pre to post game mood disturbance, while the

successful subjects demonstrated positive mood profiles for both pre and

post game conditions. Successful subjects also attributed positive mood

profiles for both pre and post game conditions. Successful subjects also

attributed significantly more too controllable and stable factors than did the

unsuccessful group.

70

Luginbuhl and Bell (1989) 71 examined 34 male athletes (10

horizontal jumpers, 12 sprinters and 12 throwers) specializing in one of three

track and field events. One athlete read a vignette about another performer

who performed below expectations and a fourth vignette about a pole vaulter

who performed above expectations. After each vignette, subjects were asked

to list three factors that contributed to the performance of the target person.

It was found that when the ego involvement of subjects was high (rating an

athlete from their own specialty area), they made situational attributions

than when their ego involvement was low (rating an athlete from another

specialty area). Subjects also made more dispositional attributions for

successful performance than for the unsuccessful one.

Shaw Et Al (1992) 72 examined (n=60) male undergraduates by

administering the self-efficacy questionnaire and causal dimension scale ii

(CDS ii) to measure the perceived psychological momentum participants were

randomly assigned to either a repeated success or a repeated failure group in

which success or failure was manipulated by having participants compete

against a highly skilled confederate. Each participant and confederate

performed three sets of 10 basketball free throws. Free throw self-efficacy,

perceived psychological momentum and causal dimensions were assessed

after each set. Results indicated that the success and failure manipulations

were effective in that the responses changed differently over time for both

groups. Experiencing competitive success increased perceptions of

momentum: experiencing competitive failure decreased perceptions of

momentum. In contrast, self -efficacy only changed in response to

71

competitive success, as the participants became more confident. Both groups

attributed the competitive outcome to internal, personally controllable and

unstable causes.

Kent, R.L., and Mertinko, M.J. (1995) 73. The organization used to

measure Attributional Style. This scale measure are extent to which an

individual attributions negative work place events to external, stable,

internal, controllable, and global causes with a five point linker scale. The

following is an example of a negative work scenario,” you recently received a

below average performance evaluation from your supervisor.”

Whittlesea and Williams (1998) 74 although no study has

specifically examined whether the “aha” experience associated with solving

problems might be confused with recollection, a number of students have

demonstrated that the related experience of surprise influences recognition

judgments.

Whittlesea and Williams. (2000) 75 suggested that the tendency to

call the pseudo homophones old may have resulted from a misattribution of

the surprise that participants experienced when an unfamiliar letter string

suddenly sanded like a real word.

Shpancer ET. Al. (2006) 76 a working mother (wm) has much less

time to spend with her child than a non-working mother (NWM). The review

of literature indicating offspring of employed mothers may enjoy beneficial

impact of it.

Higgins N.C. (2009) 77 the present study examined Attributional

Styles and the effects of Attributional feedback on expectations, emotions,

72

and persistence behaviour during repeated failure. Those with a functional

Attributional style who received functional feedback maintained higher

expectations and hopefulness for future success (next trial), and showed

greater persistence in the face of failure.

Higgins N.C. (2009) 78 Persistance, Attributions, Emotions, and

Expectations were measured before and after the feedback. Subjects

included 80 volunteers who were randomly assigned to the feedback groups

and who completed a series of questionnaires and a set of test trials.

Although all of the subjects became less optimistic (expecting less success on

the next trial ) prior to each new trial, it was the functional Attributional

style group that continued to expect to do better while the dysfunctional

Attributional style group’s expectations dropped dramatically over the trials.

When coupled with Attributional style, the type of feedback had a powerful

effect on persistence. Those with a functional Attributional Style who

received functional feedback maintained higher expectations and

hopefulness for further trials, and showed greater persistence. Those with a

dysfunctional attribution style who received dysfunctional feedback dropped

substantially in their expectations and hopefulness from trial to trial, and

showed little or no tendency to persist.

Leili Mosalanejad; Ahmad Alipor; Bahman Zandi (2010) 78 Blended

learning is a mixture of the various learning strategies and delivery methods

that will optimize the learning experience of the user. This research

evaluated psychological effect of blended learning on student. This research

is a quasi-experimental study. 41students participated in two groups and

73

they registered in the course of psychological diseases in the first semester of

2008–2009. Then, they were randomly divided into groups of traditional and

blended methods. Data were gathered through attribution measurement test

and neo personalitytest(neofife).Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate

the patterns of data distribution. Analytic statistics such as paired-t test and

student t-test were utilized to compare the differences of between the mean

scores in pre and post tests. Then analysis of variance (ANOVA test) and chi

square tests applied to evaluate the effects of research variables on each

other. The mean score of academic achievement in the blended education

group (mean=15.67, sd=1.65, t=3.06, p=0,004), was higher than that of the

traditional education (mean=13.88, sd=2.06). In surveying the interaction

between attribution style, type of teaching, and scores of academic

achievement, it was revealed that there was a significant relationship

between global–local favourable condition (p=/04, f=10/52). Evaluating the

interaction between type of teaching , student’s final scores and personality

type based on ANOVA test revealed that there was a significant relationship

between all personality factors(openness, extraversion, agreeableness and

conscientiousness), except neuroticism criterion. The use of this educational

method with standard designing strategies is recommended for teaching

medical sciences.

A second major approach to achievement motivation rejects the

expectancy – value formulation and analyzes instead the attributions that

people make about achievement situations. In general, attribution theory

concerns how people make judgments about someone’s (or their own)

74

behaviour-that is, the causes to which they attribute behaviour.

Considerable research has found that people typically attribute bahaviour

either to stable personality characteristics, termed dispositions, or to the

situations that were present at the time the behaviour occurred.

Encyclopedia Britannica Online (2010) 79.

2.2 (b). STUDIES CONDUCTED IN INDIA:

Gill Et Al (1982) 80 explored what kind of causal attributions are given

in team competition and how the attributions of the winning and losing team

differ. 352 open ended attributions were obtained in two field studies with

162 college women of volleyball teams and 2 in laboratory experiments with

128 undergraduates subjects completed attribution items following

competition. All attributions were classified along the three causal

dimensions of locus of causality, stability and controllability. Attributions

were also classified as referring to self, to team-mates, to team as a whole, or

to other factors and then sorted into specific categories. Log linear analysis

revealed that attributions were predominantly internal, unstable and

controllable. a significant win/loss effect reflected tendency for members of

winning teams to use controllable and particularly unstable attributions

more than members of losing team. Attributions refer to the team as a whole

rather than to individual or other factors and team work was an especially

popular causal explanation. Findings suggest that research on attributions

in team competitions should focus on causal dimensions rather than the 4

75

traditional attributions of effort, ability, luck, and task difficulty and that

further attention, should be given to team referent causal explanation.

Aggarwal and Misra (1986) 81 conducted a study on 40 female

subjects categorized into two internally and externally controlled by

administering the Levenson and Millers (1975) i.e. locus of control scale.

Findings of this study revealed that success was attributed to self by

externals whereas effort by both externals and internals. Internally

controlled subjects made consistent attributions across positive and negative

outcomes. While externally controlled subjects made situation and context

based attributions. It was concluded that internally controlled subjects

utilized information processing while externally controlled subjects employ

self-protective process in attribution.

Dalal and Sethi (1988) 82 compared attribution of success and failure

of high and low achiever subjects. They found that high achievers exhibit an

increased tendency in comparison to low achievers to attribute success to

their own efforts and to attribute failure to both lack of effort and task

difficulty. They also found that effort responses correlated with Internal

causes and expectation with stable causes.

2.3. THE OVERALL VIEW:

The review of research literature related to the problem presented in the

foregoing pages, indicates that these studies were limited to personality and

attribution style but very few studies have been conducted on sportsmen

relating to their achievement. So far as known to the investigator no such

76

study has so far been conducted in India regarding the personality and

attribution style. The present study deviates from previous investigations in

that it covers such a wide field and collects data from relatively large number

of cases. It covers male sportsmen of north zone universities. The present

study covers a large sample on the basis of which definite conclusion can be

drawn to the personality of high and low achieving sportsmen and

attribution style of high and low achieving sportsmen. Thus, the researcher

reasonably realized the importance and utility of the present research study

and is very optimistic about its usefulness for educationists, psychologists,

sports teachers and community at large.

***************************************

77

REFERENCES:-

1. Good, Carter V (1963), Introduction to Educational Research, New

York: Appleton Enturi – Crofth, 542 Pp.

2. Best John .W. and Kahn. James V. (1986) Research in Education,

Prentice – Hall Of India Private Limited New Delhi Fifth Edition, P.39

3. Pazer,V.and Browan, M.(1980),Will to Win and Athletics.

Int.Jr.Sp.Psych; 11(2),121-131.

4. Dowd, R. & Innes,J. (1981). Sport & Personality: Effects of Type of

Sport and Level of Competition.Perceptual and Motor Skills. Journal of

Sports Psychology, Vol. 5 (3), 79-89

5. Wankel, L. & Ksiesal P. (1985): Factors Underlying Enjoyment of Youth

Sports: Sports and Age Group Comparison. Journal of Sports

Psychology, 7, 51-64.

6. Rowland, G. Franken, R. & Harrison K. (1986): Sensation Seeking &

Participation In Sporting Activity. Journal of Sports Psychology 8, 212-

220

7. Shergill,H. (1991), Presonality difference between successful and non-

successful female Volley ball players, Indian Jornal of sports Science&

Physical Education 3(2),87-93.

8. Zimbardo, P.G., Keough, K.A.and Boyd, J.N. (1997).Present Time

Perspective as a Pre4dictor of Risky Driving. Personality and Individual

Difference, 23, 1007-1023.

78

9. Greenwold, A.,Mc. Ghee, D., and Schwartz, J.(1998).Measuring

Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition; the Implicit Association

Tests Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74, 1464-1480.

10. Kalliopuska, M.(1998).Personality and Motivational Factors of the Top

Athletes. Paper Presented In the International Congress of Psychology,

Montreal Canada

11. Hogan, J., Rjbicki, S.L. Motowide, S.J., and Borman, W.C. (1998),

Relations between Contextual Performance, Personality,and

Occupational Advancement. Human Performance, 11, (2 And 3), 189-

207.

12. Rawathorne,L.J.and Eliot, A.J.(1999).Achievement Goals and Intrinsic

Motivation ;A Meta Analytic Review Personality and Social Psychology

Review,3,326-344.

13. Zimbardo,P.G. and Boyd, J.N. (1999). Putting Time in Perspective; A

Valid, Reliable Individual Differences Metric Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271-1288

14. Dweck, C.S. (1999).Self Theories;Their Role in Motivation, Personality

and Development, Philadelphia, P.A. Psychology Press.

15. Borman, W.C., Penner, L.A., Allen, T.D.,and Moto Wilds, S.J. (2001),

Personality Predictors of Citizenship Performance. International

Journal of Selection and Assessment, a (Land 2), 52-69.

16. Former, R.F., Jarvis, L.L., Berent,M.K. and Corbett, A.(2001).

Contributions to Global Self-Esteem; the Role of Importance Attached

79

To Self-Concept Associated With the High Factor Model Journal of

Research in Personality, 23, 1-17.

17. Salagado, J.F. (2002).The Big Five Personality Dimensions and

Counterproductive Behaviours. International Journal of Selection and

Assessment, 10 (1 And 2), 117-125

18. Elliot, A.J.,and Church, M.A., (2003).A Motivational Analysis of

Defensive Pessimism and Self Handicapping. Journal of Personality,

71(3), 369-396

19. Thakur, G.P. & Ojha, M. (1981): Personality Differences of Indian

Table-Tennis, Badminton & Football Players on Primary Source Traits

in the 16 P.F. International Journal of Sports Psychology, Vol. 12, 196-

203

20. Sharma, D.V. (1984): Socio-Psychological Differentials of Non-

Sportsmen and University Representing Sportsmen. Unpublished

Ph.D. Thesis Punjab University Chandigarh.

21. Sharma, V.P. (1985) A Study Of Relationship Between Intelligence

Scholastic Achievement In Sports At Different Levels Of Socio-

Economic Status Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis Kurukshetra University

Kurukshetra.

22. Dureha, D.K. (1986), Comparison of Personality Characteristics of

Sportsman and Non-Sportsman. National Sports Conference November

1986 Extraversion, Neuroticism and Attitudes towards Sports and

Handball Players and Non-Players. Snipes Journal, 2 (3-6).

80

23. Dureha, D.K. (1991), Assessment of Personality Traits of Inter-

University Level Hockey Players. Abstracts-Cum-Souvenir, First

International and Sixth National Conference of Sport Psychology, Delhi

24. Yadav, S. (1992), Selected Personality Variables, Adjustment And

Socio-Economic Status As Related To Performance In Mass And Class

Sports. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Punjab University, Chandigargh.

25. Shukla, N.B. And Sharma,S.S. (1994), Personality Characteristics of

State Level Selected And Non-Selected Hockey Players. Abstracts,

Ninth National Conference on Sports Psychology, Nagarjuna Nagar

26. Sheikh, G.Q. (1994).A Study of Personality Traits, Psychogenic Needs

and Academic Achievement of Rural and Urban Female Adolescent

Students In Relation to There Cognitive Style. Unpublished Doctoral

Dissertation In Education, Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla.

27. Sudhir, M.A. and Khiangte, V. (1997). Personality and Creativity

among Secondary School Students; A Study in Talent Development

Indian Educational Review, Vol.32 (2) 115-125

28. Bhargava, M. and Saxena, A.(1997). Sex Differences in Personality

Dynamic of Extremely Prolonged Deprived Adolescents. Sis Journal of

Projective Psychology and Mental Health, Vol.4 (2), 155-160

81

29. Mishra, S and Singh, R.P (1998).Personality Adjustment of Graduates

With Reference to There Socio-Economic Status. Praachi Journal of

Psycho-Cultural Dimensions, Vol.14 (1), 43-44.

30. Kumar, A & Shukla, P.S. (1998), Psychological Consistencies within

the Personality of High and Low Achieving Hockey Players. Paper

Presented In the International Congress of Psychology Montreal

Canada

31. Bawa, G.S. & Debnath, K. (1999) Personality Characteristics Indian

Male Gymnasts: Sai Scientific Journal Vo.22 (2) 20-26.

32. Sharma, R.K. (1999), A Comparative Study of Personality of Athletes

Belonging to Various Sports and Games, Indian Journal of Sports

Studies, 1-5.

33. Arora, S. (1999). Personality Configuration of Congenially Visually

Impaired Children Social Science International Vol.15 (2), 46-54.

34. Chaturvedi, S.(1999).Prolonged Deprivation as Determinant of

Personality and Mental Health of Visually Impaired Children.

Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation in Education, Dayalbagh

Educational Institute Agra.

35. Upadhyay, Yogesh (Mahatma Gandhi, Chitra Koot, G. Amodaya,

Vishwavidyalaya, Chitrakoot.).Personality Difference between Rural

and Urban Consumers. An Empirical Invertigation, Abhigyan, 2000,

18(1), 15-21.

82

36. D’souza, L, Urs, G.B. and James.M.S. (2000). Assessment of Shyness;

Its Influenceon the Personality and Academic Achievement of High

School Students. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 27, 286-289.

37. Saraswati, Swami Niranjan Ananda. (Bihar Yoga Bharti, Munger). Yoga

and Personality. Journal of Projective Psychology and Minute Health,

2001, 8(1), 19-22

38. Chandan, manna. (2002).Personality Differential of Tribal and non

tribal Boys. Bangladesh Journal of Sports Science.Volume-2

39. Singh Baljeet. (2003).A comparative study of high and low achievement

athletes at different level of competitions.Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis,

Punjabi University, Patiala.

40. D’souza, L, Urs, G.B. And Ramaswamy C.(2003).Relationship of Self-

Esteem with Shyness, Personality and Academic Achievement in High

School Students. Artha-9 Journal of Social Science, 1, 228-234

41. Monin, B. (2003). The Warm Glow Heuristic; When Liking Leads of

Familiarly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1035-

1048

42. Sindhu , A.S. and Singh, A.(2007) Will to Win of Champion and non-

Champion Boxer at different levels of Competion. Jornal of sports an

sports 32 Science.VOL.-29(1)P.6

43. Upadhyaya, P. (2006) Personality of Emotionally Intelligent Student

Teacher. Journal of Education Studies, Vol.4, No.1 & 2 P.O. 37-41.

83

44. Singh, Jaspal, Kumar, Raj, Singh, Kulwant (2009). Construction and

standardizations of specific skill test battery for male handball players.

Jornal of sports an sports Science.VOL. 32(1)P.21

45. Lefebvre, L.M. (1979): Achievement Motivation and Causal Attributions

in Male and Female Athletes.International Journal of Sports

Psychology. Vol. 10, 31-41

46. Robert, G.C. & Paccuzi, D. (1979): Causal Attributions in Sports: Some

Theoretical Implications, Journal of Sports Psychology. Vol. 1(3), 203-

211.

47. Bukowski, W.M. & Moore, D.W.(1980).Winners & Looser Attributions

for Success and Failure in a Series of Athletic Events. Journal of

Sports Psychology Vol. 2 (3), 195-210.

48. Caron, A.V. & Spink, K.S. (1980).The Stability of Casual Attributions.

Canadian Journal of Sport Sciences. Vol. 5 (1), 19-24.

49. Lau, R.& Russell.D. (1980): Attribution in the Sports Pages.Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 39(1), 29-38.

50. Rajeski, W.J. & Lowe, C.A. (1980): The Role of Ability and Effort in

Attribution for Sports Achievement, Journal of Personality, Vol. 48(2),

233-244.

51. Spink, K.S. & Roberts, G.C. (1980): Ambiguity of Outcome and Causal

Attributions.Journal of Sports Psychology. Vol. 2(3), 237-244

52. Yukelson, D; Weinberg, R.S., West, G. & Jackson, A. (1981):

Attribution and Performance: An Empirical Test of Kukla’s Theory.

Journal of Sports Psychology. Vol. 3(1), 46-57.

84

53. Weinbery, R.S. Poteet, D. Morrow, J.R. & Jackson, A. (1982): Effects of

Evaluation on Causal and Trait Attributions of Male & Female.

International Journal of Sports Psychology,Vol. 13,165-175.

54. Auvergne, S.(1983).Motivation & Casual Attributions for High and Low

Achieving Athletes. International Journal of Sport Psychology Vol.

14:85-91.

55. Humble, C. (1983): Influencing Children’s Causal Attributions for

Personal Achievement Outcomes. Journal of General Psychology, Vol.

109(2), 225-267.

56. McAuley, E. Russell, D. & Gross, J.B. (1983): Effective Consequences

of Winning And Loosing: An Attributional Analysis. Journal of Sports

Psychology. Vol. 5(3), 278-287.

57. McAuley, E. (1984): Success and Causality in Sports. The Influence of

Perception, Journal of Sports Psychology. Vol. 7, 13-22.

58. Rajeski, W.J. & Brawley, L.R. (1983): Attribution Theory in Sports.

Current Status and New Perspectives: Journal of Sports Psychology,

Vol. 5(1), 77-79.

59. Mark, M.M. Mutrie, N. Brooks, D.R. & Harris, D.V. (1984): Causal

Attribution of Winners And Looser In Individual Competitive Sports:

Towards A Reformulation or Self Serving Basis. Journal of Sports

Psychology. Vol. 6(2), 184-196.

60. Robert, G.C. & Duda, J.L. (1984): Motivation In Sport: The Mediating

Role of Perceived Abilty. Journal of Sports Psychology. 6(3), 312-324.

85

61. Tenenbaum, G., Furst, D. & Wingertan, G. (1984): Attribution of

Causality in Sports Events: Valibation of the Wingate Sport

Achievement Responsibility Scale. Journal of Sports Psychology, Vol.

6(4), 430-439

62. Kimiecik, J.C. & Duda, J.L. (1985): Self Serves Attributions Among

Children A Competitive Sport Setting: Some Theoretical And

Methodological Considerations, Journal Of Sport Behaviour Vol. 8(2),

78-79.

63. Reirdon, C.A., Thomas, J.S. & James, M.K. (1985): Attribution in a

One on One Sport Competition.Journal of Sports Behaviour. Vol. 8(1),

42-53.

64. Tenenbaum, G. & Furst, D. (1985): The Relationship between Sports

Achievement Responsibility, Attribution and Related Situational

Variables, International Journal of Sports Psychology. Vol. 16, 254-

269.

65. Hewitt, J. & Jackson, S. (1986): Differential Attributions for Win-Loss

in Competitive Tennis: Perceptual and Motor Skills. Vol. 63 (2), 970.

66. Taylor, D.M. & Taylor, J.K. (1986): Group Member’s Responses to

Group Serving Attributions for Success and Failure. Journal of Social

Psychology Vol. 126(6), 775-781

67. Watkins, D. (1986): Attributions in the New Zealand Sports Pages.

Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 126(6), 817-819.

86

68. Croxton, J.S., Chiachia, D., and Wagner, C. (1987). Gender Difference

in Attitudes towards Sport and Reactions to Competitive Situations.

Journal of Sport Behaviour. Vol. 10(3), 167-177.

69. Duncan, T. & Mc Auley, E. (1987). Efficacy Expectations and

Perceptions of Causality in Motor Performance Journal of Sports

Psychology, Vol. 9 (4), 385-393.

70. Robinson, D.W. & Howe, B.L. (1987): Causal Attributions and Mood

State Relationship of Soccer Players In A Achievement Setting. Journal

of Sport Behaviour, Vol. 10(3), 137-146.

71. Luginbuhl, J. & Bell,A.(1989): Causal Attributions By Athletes : Role of

Ego-Involvement. Journal of Sports and Exercise Psychology. Vol.

11,399-407.

72. Shaw, M.J. Kzewaltowski D.A. & Mcelroy M. (1992): Self-Efficacy and

Causal Attributions as Mediators of Perceptions of Psychological

Momentum. Journal of Sports & Exercise Psychology. Vol. 14, 134-

147.

73. Kent, R.L., And Martinka, M.J. (1995). The Measurement Of

Attributions In Organizational Research. In M.J. Martinko (Ed.)

Attribution Theory. An Organizational Perspective (P.P. 17-34). Delray

Beach.

74. Whittlesea, B.W., And Williams, L.D (1998 ). Why Do Strangers Feel

Familiar, But Friends Don’t ? A Discrepancy- Attribution Account of

Feelings of Familiarity. Acta Psychological, 98, P141-165.

87

75. Whittlesea, B. W., and Williams, L.D (2000). The Source of Feelings of

Familiarity. The Discrepancy–AttributionHypothesis. Journal of

Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26, P 547-

565.

76. Shpancer, N., Melick, K., Sayre, P., and Spivey, A. (2006) Quality of

Care Attributions to Employ versus Stay At Home Mothers. Early Child

Development and Care. 176:2, 183.

77. Higgins .N.C. (2009), Attributional Feedback Alters Short-Term

Persistence After Failure Presented 21st Annual Convention of the

Association for Psychological Science, San Francisco, CA.

78. Leili Mosalanejad, Ahmad Alipor, Bahman Zandi.(2010), A Blended

Education Program Based on Critical Thinking and its Effect on

Personality Type and Attribution Style of the Students. Directory of

open Access Journals, 2010, Lund University Libraries (p.2).

79. Motivation Encyclopedia Britannica. (2010) Motivation(behaviour)

Attribution theory- Encyclopedia Britannica Online. P. (3-14)

80. Gill, D.L., Rudar. M.K. & Gross, J.B. (1982): Open Ended Attribution

in Team Competition, Journal of Sports Psychology. Vol. 4 (2), 159-

169.

81. Aggarwal, R.And Mishra, G. (1986). Locus of Control and Attributions

for Achievement Outcomes. Psychological Studies, Vol., 31, 15-20.

82. Dalal, A.K. & Sethi, A. (1988). An Attribution Study of High and Low

Achievers In India. Journal of Social Psychology. Vol. 12(8), 55-64.