Comparative Study of Personality Characteristics Between Combative and Team Game Players-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Comparative Study of Personality Characteristics Between Combative and Team Game Players

Published:2023-04-15 Issue:2 Volume:3 Page:148-150
ISSN:2583-1712
Container-title:Integrated Journal for Research in Arts and Humanities
language:
Short-container-title:Integr. J. Res. Arts Humanities

Author:

Patel Shri Krishna^ORCID,Singh Raghvendra

Abstract

The purpose of the present investigation was to compare the personality characteristics of players who engage in combative games with those who engage in team games better to comprehend the distinctions between the two categories of players. The study examined 96 male athletes aged 21–26 who competed in intercollegiate competitions in their combative sport. The data was collected with the Big Five Personality Questionnaire by Oliver, P. John & Sanjay Srivastava was used to gather data (1999). The independent samples t-test compared combative game players and team game players. The significance threshold was 0.05. The results showed that combative and team sports differed in Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness to experience (p<0.05) but not in Neuroticism (p>0.05).

Publisher

Stallion Publication

Reference11 articles.

1. Hardy, L., Jones, G., & Gould, D. (2018). Understanding psychological preparation for sport: Theory and practice of elite performers. John Wiley & Sons.

2. Piepiora, P., & Witkowski, K. (2020). Personality profile of combat sports champions against neo-gladiators. Arch. Budo, 16, 281-293.

3. Piepiora, P. (2020). A review of personality research in sport. Pedagogy and Psychology of Sport, 6(4), 64-83.

4. Rogowska, A. M. (2020). Personality differences between academic team sport players and physical education undergraduate students. Physical education of students, 24(1), 55-62.

5. John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., and Soto, C. J. (2008). “Paradigm shift to the integrative big-five trait taxonomy: history, measurement, and conceptual issues,” in Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, eds O. P. John, R. W. Robins, and L. A. Pervin (New York, NY: Guilford Press), 114–159.