A Comparative Study on Personality Traits of Handball Players at Different Level of Participation

Psychology is the scientific study of human mind and behavior. Hoe we think, feel, act and interact individually and groups. Psychology is concern with all aspects of behavior and thoughts, feelings and motivation underlying that behavior it is a thriving academic discipline and a vital professional practice. We all are interested in what makes people tick and how this understanding can help solve major problems in the society. Psychology is science and psychologist study human behavior by observing, measuring and testing, them arriving at conclusion that is rooted in sound scientific methodology. (Cherry, 2013) Motivation in athletics drives people to achieve widely-admired accomplishments. Recently I had the opportunity to work on a project regarding a professional athlete. The job was that of a Tennis Pro at an athletic club. The results provide a good illustration of the value and limitation of personality assessments in this area. The key value of personality assessments in athletics has to do with qualities that describe the ―type‖ of athlete a person may be and the likelihood they will perform a certain way in certain situations (Dumouchell, 2010). In order to achieve optimum performance in games and sports physical education teachers, coaches and trainees has to understand about all these factors that contributes to overall performance. These factors are physical fitness, technical and tactical level of sports man, physiological make-up of the performer and the trainer. Teachers and coaches must train the performer through these aspects of training (Suresh, 2004).

METHODOLOGY

Selection of the subjects: To serve the purpose of the study Thirty five (N=35) male players who had participated in all India inter university handball championship held and thirty five (N=35) male players who had participated in Senior National Handball championship were selected purposively as subject for the study. The age of the subject ranged from 16-30 year. Administration of Questionnaire: To assess the personality traits of subjects, Questionnaire the Big Five Inventory (BFI) developed by Oliver P. John was selected as a criterion measure. The questionnaire was administered individually by the research scholar to all the subjects with the request that they shall give correct and accurate answers. All the subjects were given necessary instructions, on the basis of instructions given in the questionnaire. Subjects were told that not to give answers in right and wrong and they should express their frank opinion as what they fell about themselves according to each question of the questionnaire. It contains 44 items, likert- type scale with items answered on a five point scale from agree strongly to strongly disagree. Only factors are measured with the help of the questionnaire:

2. Agreeableness – means a person is good natured, co-operative and trusting. 3. Conscientiousness – means a person is responsible, orderly and dependable. 4. Neuroticism – means a person is anxious, prone to depression and worries a lot. 5. Openness – means a person is imaginative; independent minded and has divergent thinking. Twenty- nine items have positive worded statements and fifteen have negatively worded ones. Statistical Technique: The statistical technique applied in order to examine the hypotheses of the study was, ―independent t-test‖, SPSS 20 version was also used.

In order to compare the personality traits of Handball players at different level of participation statistical technique ―independent t-test‘ was employed and level of significance was set at 0.05.

Table 1 shows that scores of mean and standard deviation scores of personality factor in case of extraversion for the male university level handball players was 24.91 + 4.84; agreeableness 29.37 + 6.94; conscientiousness 29.20 + 4.48; neuroticism 21.86 + 4.53; openness was 34.94 + 6.43; and for the male national level handball players was extroversion 26.51 + 3.07; agreeableness 29.83 + 5.64; conscientiousness 28.63 + 4.60; neuroticism 23.69 + 3.45; and lastly in openness 32.97 + 4.50.

Graphical representation of mean score of personality traits in figure 1 show that players of national level have mean score higher than in Extroversion, Agreeableness, neuroticism.

Extroversion calculated t (1.65) is less than the tabulated t value (2.00) with df 68.00 at 0.5 level of significant difference thus, there is no significant difference between University and National level Handball player. Agreeableness calculated t (0.30) is less than the tabulated t value (2.00) with df 68.00 at 0.5 level of significant difference thus, there is no significant difference between University and National level Handball player. Conscientiousness calculated t (0.53) is less than the tabulated t value (2.00) with df 68.00 at 0.5 level of significant difference thus, there is no significant difference between University and National level Handball player. Neuroticism calculated t (1.90) is less than the tabulated t value (2.00) with df 68.00 at 0.5 level of significant difference thus, there is no significant difference between University and National level Handball player. Openness calculated t (1.49) is less than the tabulated t value (2.00) with df 68.00 at 0.5 level of significant difference thus, there is no significant

On the basis of the results of the study, the hypothesis stated that there would be significant difference between university and national level handball players is hereby not accepted. The present result may be owing to the factor that the sample size taken for the study might have been one of the reasons. Further though there have not been statistically significant difference but if we look at the mean scores it is observed that the national level handball players mean scores are higher than university players in only some factors. The present work may be taken as a preliminary finding; more in depth work is essential in this direction. As personality has become essential and prime focus at all stages of life and especially for the players as present day have lot of anxiety and consciousness with regard to their personality.

Ak, E., & Koçak, S. (2010). coincidence-anticipation timing and reaction time in youth tennis and table tennis players 1.Perceptual and motor skills, 110(3), pp. 879-887. Allen, M. S., Greenlees, I., & Jones, M. (2011). An investigation of the five-factor model of personality and coping behaviour in sport. Journal of sports sciences, 29(8), pp. 841-850. Bartholomew‗s, J. B., Seifert, J., & Portman, R. S. Motivation Among Highly Active Individuals. Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(5), pp. 334-347. CM Gonçalves, G., Rabelo, I. S., & Rubio, K. (2014). Assessment of Personality in Brazilian Athletes. International Journal of Applied, 4(3), pp. 86-91. Courneya, K. S., & Hellsten, L. A. M. (1998). Personality correlates of exercise behavior, motives, barriers and preferences: An application of the five-factor model. Personality and Individual Differences, 24(5), pp. 625-633. Dunn, J. G., & Dunn, J. C. (1999). Goal orientations, perceptions of aggression, and sportspersonship in elite male youth ice hockey players. Sport Psychologist, 13, pp. 183-200. Dunn, J. G., Gotwals, J. K., & Dunn, J. C. (2005). An examination of the domain specificity of perfectionism among intercollegiate student- Differences, 38(6), pp. 1439-1448. Egloff, B., & Gruhn, A. J. (1996). Personality and endurance sports. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(2), pp. 223-229. Hendricks, J. W., & Payne, S. C. (2007). Beyond the big five: Leader goal orientation as a predictor of leadership effectiveness. Human Performance, 20(4), pp. 317-343. John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 3, pp. 114-158. Jones, G., & Swain, A. (1992). intensity and direction as dimensions of competitive state anxiety and relationships with competitiveness. Perceptual and motor skills, 74(2), pp. 467-472. Jones, G., Hanton, S., & Swain, A. (1994). Intensity and interpretation of anxiety symptoms in elite and non-elite sports performers. Personality and Individual Differences, 17(5), 657-663. Kaiseler, M., Polman, R. C., & Nicholls, A. R. (2012). Effects of the Big Five personality dimensions on appraisal coping, and coping effectiveness in sport. European Journal of Sport Science, 12(1), pp. 62-72. Landers, R. N., & Lounsbury, J. W. (2006). An investigation of Big Five and narrow personality traits in relation to Internet usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 283-293. McDaniel, S. R., Lim, C., & Mahan, J. E. (2007). The role of gender and personality traits in response to ads using violent images to promote consumption of sports entertainment. Journal of Business Research, 60(6), pp. 606-612. O'Sullivan, D. M., Zuckerman, M., & Kraft, M. (1998). Personality characteristics of male and female participants in team sports. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(1), pp. 119-128. Rees, T., Hardy, L., Ingledew, D. K., & Evans, L. (2000). Examination of the validity of the social support survey using confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71(4), pp. 322-330. Rhodes, R. E., & Courneya, K. S. (2003). Relationships between personality, an extended theory of planned behaviour model

Sáez DE Heredia, R. A., Muñoz, A. R., & Artaza, J. L. (2004). The effect of psychological response on recovery of sport injury. Research in Sports Medicine, 12(1), pp. 15-31. Smith, H. S., & Laufer, A. (2014). Opioid induced nausea and vomiting. European journal of pharmacology, 722, pp. 67-78. Smoll, F. L., Smith, R. E., Barnett, N. P., & Everett, J. J. (1993). Enhancement of children's self-esteem through social support training for youth sport coaches. Journal of applied psychology, 78(4), pp. 602. Taylor, D., O‘Toole, K. S., Auble, T. E., Ryan, C. M., & Sherman, D. R. (2001). Sensation seeking personality traits of recreational divers. Tok, S. (2011). The big five personality traits and risky sport participation. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 39(8), pp. 1105-1111. Vollrath, M. (2001). Personality and stress. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42(4), pp. 335-347. Watson, A. E., & Pulford, B. D. (2004). PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES IN HIGH RISK SPORTS AMATEURS AND INSTRUCTORS 1. Perceptual and motor skills, 99(1), pp. 83-94. Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The five factor model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and individual differences, 30(4), pp. 669-689.