Motivational Factors which influence Sport Performance & Participation of young adolescents in an Australian setting.

David Darvill, Luke Macnamara, Aaron Moseley, Clinton Pelham, and Ben Quigley.

The purpose of this study was to examine and investigate the various motivational factors influencing youth participation in sport, and also to assess the relative impact of positive and negative feedback on performance. A total of 20 males and 20 females (n = 40) from a primary school (Grade five and six) participated in the study. Each of the subjects responded to a modified version of the Sport Motivational Scale (SMS; Briere, Vallerand, Fortier, Tuson, Blais & Pelletier, 1995). Subjects also completed multiple running tasks, with the aim of identifying the effects of different types of feedback. An analysis of the results illustrated that significant difference existed between males receiving positive feedback and the following groups.

Key Words; Motivation, Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, Feedback, Gender.

When discussing issues such as motivation, there are many theories and viewpoints, which need to be taken into account. More specifically an issue with increasing importance is what motivates young athletes. This is an area which has been subject to much research in recent years, as has the idea of positive versus negative feedback. Children and young adolescents participate in such a wide range of physical activities, with a variety of reasons as to why they do this. Such reasons can be classified under a variety of motivational categories, which are defined below. These categories or subscales are what the Sports Motivation Scale (SMS), the questionnaire used in the study, is based on.

From past studies, it appears that the major motives young athletes give for their participation are enjoyment, to improve their skills, to be with friends, for arousal, thrills and excitement and to become physically fit. This present investigation sought to extend the previous research in this area and to increase our understanding of the reasons for youth participation in organised sports. However, many questions remain only partially answered or unanswered altogether. To what degree do male and female athletes differ in their motives for participating? What are the differences between the two genders? Determine the effect various techniques have on motivational influences?

Our hypotheses were as follows:

• Positive feedback will significantly enhance running performance
• Youth participants have significantly higher levels of intrinsic motivation as opposed to extrinsic motivation and amotivation.
• Females are inclined to be more intrinsically motivated than males.

Data recorded in the results section was collected from a group of forty participants aged between 11 and 12 years of age. The group consisted of 20 females and 20 males from a primary school (grades 5 & 6). Students were sampled selectively to include competitive (n = 10 males; n = 10 females) and non-competitive (n = 10 males; n = 10 females) subjects.

Respondents completed a simplified version of the Sports Motivation Scale (SMS: Pelletier et al., 1995). Before completing the questionnaire all subjects completed informed consent forms which informed them and their parents of its purpose and how it was to be completed (appendix 2). Subjects responded to the questionnaire by marking where their answer fell on a 7-point lickert scale (Does not apply to me = a score closer to 1; Applies to me sometimes = a score closer to 4; Applies to me = a score closer to 7).

Prior to participating in the experiment a letter of consent was sent to the parents of the participants involved. This letter detailed the aims and objectives of the study as well as the procedures involved. Once the letters of consent were returned three researchers visited the school and administered the SMS in two different classrooms. In both cases the senior researcher introduced everyone, explained the purpose of the project, asked for co-operation, and distributed and collected the questionnaires with the help of the assistant researchers.

The subjects were then taken into the playground for an analysis of how negative and positive feedback affects sporting performance. Subjects were split into four groups by the head researcher and his two assistant researchers. The subjects consisted of two groups receiving negative feedback (n=10 males; n = 10 females) and two groups receiving positive feedback (n= 10 males; n = 10 females). Each group then did two runs over a distance of 60 metres. Prior to the second run, each individual was given either negative or positive feedback depending on which group they were in. Each group of ten did their sixty metre run individually, were given feedback and allowed adequate time to recover, before commencing their second time trial.

The initial analysis involved collating all data received from the Sports Motivation Scale questionnaire and the running task completed by the students. Scores were tallied for each subscale which represented the different types of motivation, as well as the times recorded for the completion of the running task (both prior to and following the inclusion of feedback).

All analyses involving One Way ANOVA were carried out using a 0.05 significance level. Using a One Way ANOVA analysis (0.05) on the subscales in relation to gender, there was found to be only one instance where a significant difference existed. This was found where males had a significantly higher response for IM- Stimulation, than females.

This involved grouping the three forms of IM and grouping the three forms of EM. These two groups were then both compared to Amotivation using One Way ANOVA. What was found was that there was significant difference between the grouped IM and Amotivation, and also between the grouped EM and Amotivation. However, there was no significant difference between IM and EM, which were quite closely matched.

Before any feedback was given to the participants, they completed the running task once. Calculations of this data showed that there was no significant difference between any of the groups prior to any feedback being given. However, when analyses was completed on the results of post-feedback testing , significant difference showed up. Males who received positive feedback were producing scores significantly better than both females who received positive feedback, and females who received negative feedback. The greatest difference was found between positive feedback males and negative feedback females.

In another comparison were we able to find significant difference. This occurred through post-positive feedback males having significantly faster times than pre-negative feedback males.

The analytical results of the present investigation provide further support for the findings of a number of previous studies (Gill et al., 1983; & Gould et al., 1985). The contributions and relationships made with these studies provides the basis for comparisons and analysis of the types of motivation. As was the case with other

One purpose of our investigation was to determine if differences existed between the male and female subjects in their perceived motivational climate, and the difference the performance feedback had on the two genders.

Our results indicated that positive feedback on males produced significantly greater performances than the two groups of females receiving both types of feedback. These results are consistent with Gill et al. (1983) study where males place greater importance on achievement and status than their female counterparts.

Although not significant, the results of the study mirror that of Chantal et al. (1996) in which female athletes were more strongly characterised by higher levels of intrinsic motivation than their male counterparts. Therefore it illustrates why females consider enjoyment, friendship and having fun to be greater components of their participation in sport. The findings of the current study corroborate that by Pelletier et al. (1995) which suggests that in comparison with their male counterparts, females participate for more intrinsic reasons which include satisfaction and enjoyment.

Also consistent with the previous study’s findings, males which received positive feedback during and after their physical performances, showed significantly greater improvements than other males that received negative feedback. This illustrates that the improvement of adolescent males regarding performance is highly benefited by encouragement, emotional support, and the assistance of teaching cues in a positive manner. This support can come from either teachers, coaches, team-mates and family.

The primary observed sex difference of boys favouring extrinsic motivational factors such as achievement and status, seems logical with greater sporting opportunities available particularly at the elite level with a greater chance of status attainment. This was particularly evident with the observation of our performance task which showed the male subjects more competitive for success, and to impress others located within the testing environment.

Our thanks goes out to the staff and students of Claremont College Randwick for their assistance in research for the current study.

Email correspondence: S.Burke@mackillop.acu.edu.au