Sport Psychology

Discussion on The Role of Personality in Sports
Name
Institution

TOPIC ONE: NBA FEUD
The escalating brawl between Ron Artest, Ben Wallace and a section of the fans can be explained by the biological theories of aggression, in any one of three ways. The theory explains why some players and fans may have been involved in the confrontation, and others weren’t. The first approach, which considers abnormality in chromosomal structure, suggests that people who possess the XYY chromosomal structure are more prone to violence than others. The second theory postulates that people with higher testosterone level, usually men, are more likely to participate in violent acts. The final biological theory suggests that some individuals’ brain structures and anatomy accommodate a higher tolerance for aggression. This is mainly among people with abnormal prefrontal cortex and amygdala.
I can also use the sociological theories to explain the incident. The first, the Contagion Theory, supports that the actions of the fans, such as hurling bottles at the visiting players only occurred due to their safety in the crowd. The Emergent Norm Form Theory can be used to explain that the unprecedented violent behavior of the fans happened due to the emergence of an unprecedented violent act on the court (Mikaila, 2013). However, the most viable explanation lies in the Value-Added Theory. My personal opinion is that the conduct of Wallace was a result of several factors, such as the fact that his team was less than a minute from being dealt a major loss at home, as well as the seemingly unfair challenge by Artest.

The on-court media’s commentary and their reaction were acceptable. It was the newsroom personality attempt to provide color to the fight that exhibited an element of media irresponsibility. The call on disciplinary action, however, was the right course of action.
TOPIC TWO: PERSONALITY IN SPORT
The extensive research that has been undertaken to establish if there is a relationship between performance in sport and an athlete’s attributes stems from the need of consistent results. Towards the end of the twentieth century, stakeholders in sports realized that they were not only offering entertainment and employment, but the participants and the fans demand accountability and recognition of excellence. Coaches, therefore, began to explore ways to predict the potential performance of their players by analyzing the personalities.
Just like in any other career, there are specific attributes that make for excellent sportspeople. However, given the diversity of sports and the roles that these athletes play in them, no single checklist can be used to ascertain performance. Moreover, the natural skill limit of a player is a significant influence, and no matter how positive a player is, there are things they can not do simply because the capability does not allow them. Some of these characteristics include extroversion, tolerance, patience and the willingness to learn from experience. Some of these traits are best suited to player-leaders, while some serve the followers or athletes that rely on their individualism to prosper. I do not see an ethical concern in coaches using the personality criterion to decide on the type of athletes they wish to work with (Mirzaei et al., 2013).
TOPIC THREE: SELF-REPORT QUESTIONNAIRES
I would support a talent-search coach who employs self-report questionnaires to their scouted athletes for various reasons. The first is that self-reporting is a pro-active undertaking. It is therefore easy to sift out the under-motivated individuals. Moreover, since most athletes are not experts who express themselves, especially in a formal setting, a self-report questionnaire allows them to write or type their opinions and responses at their own pace and at the location they feel most at ease. Also, a self-report questionnaire can incorporate both the structured and unstructured questions. While the formal section makes for excellent statistical analysis, the open questions allow the interviewer to gain an extra perspective on the personality of their subjects. It is, therefore, an ideal approach to a scout that is open-minded, as opposed to the one with a fixed set of requirements (Demetriou & Cecilia, 2015).
However, the approach comes with the cost of having to sift through a random assortment of personal information. It is tedious to normalize the data, and thus making logical decisions becomes more difficult. There is also no guarantee on the rate of responses, as well as the reliability of the information provided.
My only concern, if I were an athlete, of being subjected to the self-report tests is the confidentiality of the information I provide, in case it is used to manipulate or harm me at a professional level in my career later on.

References
Demetriou, C., Bilge U. O., and Cecilia A. E. (2015). Self-Report Questionnaires. The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology, 1, 1-2.
Mikaila M. L. A. (2013). Emergent Norm Theory. The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, 1, 1-2.
Mirzaei, A., Reza N., & Farideh S. (2013). The Relationship between Personality Traits and Sports Performance. European Journal of Experimental Biology, 3(3), 439-442.