| Literature DB >> 30730958 |
Javier Courel-Ibáñez1, Bernardino Javier Sánchez-Alcaraz1, Alberto Gómez-Mármol2, Alfonso Valero-Valenzuela1, Juan Antonio Moreno-Murcia3.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to classify a randomized sample of adolescents according to their violent and sportsmanship attitudes to determine the influence of personal and social responsibility levels on each cluster. The sample comprised of 595 adolescents, aged between 12 and 15 years old (M ± SD = 13.9 ± 2.3 yr). Participants completed the Multidimensional Orientations Towards Sports Scale, the California School Climate and Safety Survey and the Personal and Social Responsibility Questionnaire. Cluster analysis was conducted to classify adolescent' profiles according to the violence and sportsmanship scores. Discriminant analysis, Pearson correlation and ANOVA tests were performed to identify the relationships between personal and social responsibility levels on each cluster. Cluster analysis identified three well-defined profiles: cluster 1 (sportsmanlike and nonviolent), cluster 2 (sportsmanlike and violent) and cluster 3 (unsportsmanlike and nonviolent). Results confirmed a negative impact of aggressiveness on obedience and pro-social behaviours during school stages, but sportsmanship mitigated this negative influence. The sportsmanlike and nonviolent profile obtained the highest personal and social responsibility level. The lowest personal responsibility scores came from sportsmanlike and violent adolescents. This study emphasizes the potential of positive attitude towards sport and physical education to magnify (or mitigate) adolescents' responsibility according to specific profiles. To reduce violent behaviour and improve sportsmanship attitudes would contribute to a better development of personal and social responsibility in adolescents. The current findings may serve to orientate professionals dealing with adolescents in the role of sportsmanship development as an educational tool to mitigate violent behaviour.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30730958 PMCID: PMC6366707 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211933
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Summary of instruments used to evaluate adolescents.
| Questionnaire / Dimension | Questions |
|---|---|
| Main question: | |
| Commitment to doing sport | E.g. “ |
| Social conventions | E.g. “ |
| Respect towards rules and judges | E.g. “ |
| Respect towards opponent | E.g. “ |
| Negative sportsmanship | E.g. “ |
| Main question: | |
| Violence experienced | E.g. “ |
| Violence observed | E.g. “ |
| Main question: | |
| Social responsibility | E.g. “ |
| Personal responsibility | E.g. “ |
Means, standard deviations and structure coefficient of variables according to the cluster solutions.
| Cluster / Variable | Cluster 1 | Cluster 2 | Cluster 3 | Function 1 | Function 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commitment to doing sport | 4.55 ± 0.44 | 4.34 ± 0.55 | 3.69 ± 0.82 | .108 | .091 |
| Social conventions | 4.67 ± 0.41 | 4.21 ± 0.78 | 3.30 ± 0.90 | .064 | .230 |
| Respect towards rules and judges | 4.62 ± 0.43 | 4.41 ± 0.46 | 3.35 ± 0.87 | .228 | .160 |
| Respect towards opponent | 3.71 ± 0.79 | 2.63 ± 0.76 | 2.78 ± 0.81 | .618 | .638 |
| Negative sportsmanship | 4.31 ± 0.58 | 3.93 ± 0.76 | 3.22 ± 0.74 | .387 | -.320 |
| Violence experienced | 1.26 ± 0.30 | 1.82 ± 0.78 | 1.63 ± 0.63 | -.123 | .303 |
| Violence observed | 1.69 ± 0.63 | 3.01 ± 0.72 | 2.12 ± 0.84 | -.707 | .505 |
*Higher combined intra-group correlation.
Fig 1Distribution of adolescents in clusters according to canonical discriminant functions.
Mean comparisons in social and personal responsibility between clusters.
| Cluster comparisons | Social responsibility | Personal responsibility | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (95%CI) | U3 (CL) | Mean (95%CI) | U3 (CL) | ||||
| 0.30 | 0.62 | 73.2 (67.0) | 0.10 (-0.03, 0.24) | 0.20 | 57.9 (55.6) | ||
| 0.32 | 0.68 | 75.2 (68.5) | 0.34 | 0.62 | 73.2 (67.0) | ||
| 0.01 (0.14,0.12) | 0.03 | -51.2 (-50.8) | 0.23 | 0.40 | 65.5 (61.1) | ||
CI = Confidence Interval.
*Significant differences (Student’s t-test p<0.017). Effect sizes: d = distance in number of standard deviation units between clusters; U3 = percentage of the first cluster which the upper half of the cases of the second cluster exceeds; CL = probability that a person picked at random from the first cluster will have a higher score than a person picked at random from the second cluster.
Fig 2Social (dark bars) and personal (light bars) responsibility mean differences between clusters.
Data are Means with Standard Deviation (M±SD).