Psychological Characteristics of Football

INNOVATIVE THOUGHTS pISSN 2321-5143 eISSN 2347-5722
International Research Journal

Retrieved from: http://itirj.naspublishers.com/
Volume 3, Issue 6, June 2016
-
1
ITIRJ
PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FOOTBALL PLAYERS

ACCORDING TO THEIR PLAYING POSITIONS
Goswami, Sukanta1 and Sarkar, L. N.2
Abstract
The purpose of this paper was to compare the psychological characteristics among the
players of football in relation to the player position. The analysed sample included forty five male
players who participated in the All India football competitions. The age levels of the subjects were
ranged from 18-25 years. Subjects were divided into three groups (each group consists of fifteen
players) on the basis of their position of play (defenders, midfielders and forwards). Purposive
sampling method was used for the study. To measure the psychological characteristics of the subjects,
self confidence was measured through questionnaire suggested by Hardy and Nelson
(1992),aggression was measured through questionnaire developed by Buss & Perry (1992) and
achievement motivation was measured through questionnaire developed by Kamlesh (1990) was
administered. Statistical technique i.e. one way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was employed to find
out the inter-group differences and post-hoc test i.e. LSD was used for further analysis. To test the
hypothesis, the level of significance was set at 0.05. The results revealed that the self confidence
among the players in the different positions defender group is maximum in comparison to that of
midfielder and forward groups; forward players shows better in aggression and achievement
motivation than defender and midfielder players. Finally, it was revealed that the defenders and
midfielders football players were similar with regard to self confidence, aggression and achievement
motivation. The differences found in the studied variables with regard to the playing position are
related to players' needs regarding the actions they perform.
Keywords: Team sport, Self-confidence, Aggression, Achievement motivation, Role evaluation.
INTRODUCTION
Now a day’s sports performance in competitive sports is determined by a combination
of psycho-physiological factors, technical skill, tactical insight and state of mind. Psychology has
enormous potential and it is really an exciting and challenging field of knowledge. It continues to
grow at an accelerating pace and offers us the hope of both understanding and improving our lives.
Football is basically a team game. It has developed into a highly skilful area. In football generally
players are divided into two categories. Offensive and defensive players are meant for scoring by
combining their techniques and tactics. Most sport psychology researchers recommended that
confidence is an essential contributor to optimal sport performance and important psychological factor
that affects sport performance. Elite athletes repeatedly have to perform under high pressure,
motivated and more self-confident to do well in their respective event at the highest standard
compared to non-elite athletes.
Research has identified successful athletes have a higher confidence level than less successful
athletes (Andrew, Grobbelaar, & Potgieter, 2007; Cox, Shannon, McGuire, & McBride, 2010; Gill &
13
1
ITIRJ
Ph.D Research Scholar, Lakshmibai National Institute of Physical Education, Gwalior (M.P.), India.
2
Professor & H.O.D, Department of Health Education, Lakshmibai National Institute of Physical Education, Gwalior (M.P.),
India.
Williams, 2008; Woodman & Hardy, 2003; Zinsser, Bunker & Williams, 2010). In contemporary
sports aggression plays a significant role, we can say that aggression as an unprovoked physical or
verbal assault. In sport, the performance can be affected by aggression that can be positive or negative.
It also proved that positive aggression can improve performance. Leuens (2008) found a strong
relationship between the motivational influences on the outcome of athletic performance. According to
Tod, Thatcher, & Rahman, (2010) setting a specific goal to achieve is achievement motivation. Anshel
(1997) reported a remarkable difference in the sport psychological characteristics of successful and
less successful athletes, successful athletes shows a high level of self-confidence, achievement
motivation, mental toughness, intelligence, sociability, creativity, stability and high self-image.
Furthermore, researchers indicate that success in sport is a direct outcome of healthy mental skills
according to the Mental Health Model (Gill et al., 2008). However, not a great deal of research has
been conducted on the psychological characteristics of players in different playing positions in team
sport. Some research in this area has been conducted in American sport such as basketball, volleyball,
and American football (Nation & Leunes, 1983; Cox, 1987; Cox & McManama, 1988). Schurr, Rusle,
Nisbet, & Wallace (1984) reported personality dimensions and playing positions of American
footballers and found differences between playing positions and personality dispositions regarding
extroversion-introversion; impractical-realistic; calculative-intuitive, and judging-perceiving. The
purpose of the study was to know and compare the differences among the footballers of different
playing positions on psychological characteristics.
METHODOLOGY
Participants
To facilitate the study, forty five all India inter-university men football players consisting of
defenders, midfielders and forwards were selected from the all India inter-university men football
tournament held at LNIPE, in the year 2015. The age levels of the subjects were ranged from 18-25
years. Subjects were divided into three groups (each group consists of fifteen players) on the basis of
their position of play (defenders, midfielders and forwards). Purposive sampling method was used for
the study. The requirements for the collection of data through administration of questionnaires were
explained to the subjects so as to avoid any ambiguity of the effort required on their part and prior to
the administration of the questionnaire. All the subjects participated in this study voluntarily and
responded to the questionnaire without bias.
Measures
Self Confidence: Standard Hardy and Nelson (1992) questionnaire for self confidence was used to
scale the self confidence level. The test consists of four questions with six levels of responses. The
levels of changes from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The respondents were made to encircle the
appropriate number which suited their attitude. This scoring range of this questionnaire was 4 to 24.
The higher score indicate the high level of self confidence.
Aggression: Standardised Buss & Perry (1992) questionnaire for sporting aggression was used to scale
the aggressiveness of football players. The test consists of 29 questions with five levels of responses.
The level changes from extremely uncharacteristic to extremely characteristics. The respondents were
14
made to encircle the appropriate number which suited their attitude. This inventory was scored with
the help of the scoring key given below. The range of score was from 4 to 20. The higher the score the
ITIRJ
more aggressive the player.

Achievement Motivation: The standardized psychological tool devised by M.L. Kamalesh (1990) was
used to quantify the sports achievement motivation of players. This inventory consists of 20
statements. Each statement has two responses. Among the two responses the most appropriate one is
correct response. The respondents made a tick mark (√) on any one of the two responses that fits to
them best. The correct statement was given two marks and incorrect statement was given zero. The
total score constitutes the achievement motivation score. The larger score higher the achievement
motivation.
Data Analysis
Descriptive statistics (Mean, Standard Deviation, Skewness, Kurtosis, Standard Error of
Skewness and Standard Error of Kurtosis) were calculated for all measures. Data screening was used
to ensure all dependent variables met the assumptions necessary for the use of parametric statistics
before data analysis. In addition, one way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was employed to find out
the inter-group differences. To test the hypothesis, the level of significance was set at 0.05. For further
analysis, LSD test was used as the Post-Hoc Test. Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS)
version 20.0 was used.
RESULTS
For testing the normality of the data (Table 1) skewness and kurtosis (descriptive statistics)
has been performed.
Table 1. Overall Descriptive Statistics for the data on Psychological variables of Football Players
Std.
Mean Deviation Skewness Kurtosis
Std. Std. Std.
Variables Statistic Error Statistic Statistic Error Statistic Error
Self Confidence 17.36 0.38 2.52 0.217 .354 -1.239 .695
Aggression 92.44 0.85 5.68 -0.030 .354 -0.018 .695
Achievement 24.67 0.67 4.49 0.393 .354 -0.051 .695

Motivation
Valid N (list wise) = 45
As a guideline, a skewness value more than twice its standard error indicates a departure from
symmetry. Since none of the variables skewness is greater than twice its standard error, hence all the
variables are symmetrically distributed. Similarly, as a guideline, kurtosis values more than twice its
standard error indicates a significant kurtosis. The value of kurtosis for the data to be normal of any of
the variable is not more than twice its standard error of kurtosis hence none of the kurtosis values are
significant. In other words the distribution of all the variables is meso-kurtic.
15
Table 2 shows the mean, standard deviation and standard error of mean of football players
ITIRJ
with regard to psychological variables.

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics for the Data on Psychological Variables of Football Players in
Different Playing Positions
Std. Std.
Psychological Variables N Mean Deviation Error Minimum Maximum
Self Confidence Defenders 15 18.73 2.25 0.58 15.00 22.00
Midfielders 15 17.67 2.55 0.66 14.00 22.00
Forwards 15 15.67 1.80 0.46 13.00 20.00
Total 45 17.36 2.52 0.38 13.00 22.00
Aggression Defenders 15 90.33 5.54 1.43 82.00 102.00
Midfielders 15 90.93 5.08 1.31 80.00 98.00
Forwards 15 96.07 4.86 1.26 89.00 106.00
Total 45 92.44 5.68 0.85 80.00 106.00
Achievement Defenders 15 23.20 3.99 1.03 16.00 28.00

Motivation
Midfielders 15 23.60 3.31 0.86 18.00 28.00
Forwards 15 27.20 5.12 1.32 20.00 36.00
Total 45 24.67 4.49 0.67 16.00 36.00
Table 2 shows that the mean value of self-confidence of defenders group is 18.73, midfielders
group is 17.67, and forwards group is 15.67. It is clear the mean value of self confidence is highest
among the players in the defender group in comparison to that of midfielder and forward group. A
glance at Table 2, the mean value of aggression of defenders group is 90.33, mean value of midfielders
group is 90.93, mean value of forwards group is 96.07, it is clear the mean value of aggression is
highest among the players in the forward in comparison to that of other positions. On the basis of the
results obtained above, it may be inferred that the achievement motivation among the players in the
different positions forward players is maximum because the mean value of achievement motivation of
forwards group is 27.20. On the other hand the mean value of defender group is 23.20 and midfielder
group is 23.60.
Table 3. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Results with regard to Psychological Variables
and Plying Position among the Football Players
Sum of Mean Sig.(p

Source of Variation Squares df Square F-value value)
16
Self Confidence Between Groups 72.71 2 36.36 7.36* 0.00

ITIRJ
of the Players
Within Groups 207.60 42 4.94
Total 280.31 44
Aggression of Between Groups 297.91 2 148.96 5.58* 0.01
the Players
Total 1419.11 44
Achievement Between Groups 145.60 2 72.80 4.12* 0.02
Motivation of
the Players
Total 888.00 44
* Significant at the 0.05 level.

It is evident from Table 3 that results of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) among various
playing position (defenders, midfielders and forwards) with regard to psychological variables and the
p-values of variables self confidence of the players is 0.00, Aggression of the players is 0.01, and
Achievement Motivation of the players is 0.02 are found statistically significant as they are less than
0.05; the obtained F-ratios of self confidence of the players is 7.36, Aggression of the players is 5.58,
and Achievement Motivation of the players is 4.12 are found greater than critical value i.e. F (.05, 2,42) =
3.22.
Since the F-value is significant, the null hypothesis of no difference among the means of three
groups is rejected. Therefore, Post-hoc test (LSD) is applied to find out differences between paired
means among various playing position (defenders, midfielders and forwards) with regard to
psychological variables of football players. The results of Post-hoc test have been presented in
psychological variables wise. Table shows accordingly below.
Table 4. Comparison of Mean Values of Self-Confidence in Post-Hoc Test (LSD) among the Players’
Positions
95% Confidence
Interval
Mean
Difference Std. Lower Upper
Variable Positions (I) Positions (J) (I-J) Error Sig. Bound Bound
Self Confidence Defenders Midfielders 1.07 0.81 0.20 -0.57 2.70
of the Players
Forwards 3.07* 0.81 0.00 1.43 4.70
Midfielders Defenders -1.07 0.81 0.20 -2.70 0.57
Forwards 2.00* 0.81 0.02 0.36 3.64
Forwards Defenders -3.07* 0.81 0.00 -4.70 -1.43
Midfielders -2.00* 0.81 0.02 -3.64 -0.36
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

17
From Table 4 it can be seen that the difference between defender and forward groups on their
ITIRJ
self confidence is significant at 5% level, as the p-value for this mean difference is 0.00 which is less
than 0.05. Similarly, the p-value for the significance of difference between midfielder and forward
groups on their self confidence is significant at 5% level; the p-value is 0.02, which is less than 0.05.
However, there is no significant difference between the means of the defender and midfielder groups
as far as self-confidence are concerned because the p-value is more than 0.05.
From the above findings it can be very easily understood by looking to the graphics in Figure
1. Dependent variable (Self Confidence) on the Y axis and the independent variable (Playing
Positions) on the X axis. From Figure 1, it is clear the mean value of self confidence is highest among
the players in the defender group in comparison to that of midfielder and forward groups. On the basis
of the results obtained above, it may be inferred that the self confidence among the players in the
different positions defender group is maximum.
Figure 1. Means Plot Showing a Visual Representation of the Group Means of Self Confidence in
Three Different Playing Positions
Table 5. Comparison of Mean Values of Aggression in Post-Hoc Test (LSD) among the Players’
Positions
95% Confidence
Interval
Mean
Aggression of Defenders Midfielders -0.60 1.89 0.75 -4.41 3.21
the Players
Forwards -5.73* 1. 89 0.00 -9.54 -1.93
Midfielders Defenders 0.60 1. 89 0.75 -3.21 4.41
Forwards -5.13* 1. 89 0.01 -8.94 -1.33
5.73*
18
Forwards Defenders 1. 89 0.00 1.93 9.54

Midfielders 5.13* 1. 89 0.01 1.33 8.94
ITIRJ

From Table 5 it can be seen that the p-value for the significance of difference between
defender and forward is 0.00, midfielder and forward is 0.01, which is less than 0.05, which shows
that forward players shows better in aggression than defender and midfielder, however, there is no
significant difference between the means of the defender and midfielder groups as far as aggression is
concerned because the p-value is more than 0.05.
2. Dependent variable (aggression) on the Y axis and the independent variable (playing positions) on
the X axis. From Figure 2, it is clear the mean value of aggression is highest among the players in the
forward group in comparison to that of midfielder and defender groups. On the basis of the results
obtained above, it may be inferred that the aggression among the players in the different positions
forward group is maximum.
Figure 2. Means Plot Showing a Visual Representation of the Group Means of Aggression in
Four Different Playing Positions
Table 6. Comparison of Mean Values of Achievement Motivation in Post-Hoc Test (LSD) among the
Players’ Positions
95% Confidence
Interval
Mean
Achievement Defenders Midfielders -0.40 1.54 0.80 -3.50 2.70
19
Motivation of
Forwards -4.00* 1.54 0.01 -7.10 -0.90
the Players
ITIRJ
Midfielders Defenders 0.40 1.54 0.80 -2.70 3.50

Forwards -3.60* 1.54 0.02 -6.70 -0.50

Forwards Defenders 4.00* 1.54 0.01 0.90 7.10
Midfielders 3.60* 1.54 0.02 0.50 6.70

From Table 6 it can be seen that the p-value for the significance of difference between
defender and forward is 0.01, midfielder and forward is 0.02, which is less than 0.05, which shows
that forward players shows better in achievement motivation than defender and midfielder players,
however, there is no significant difference between the means of the defender and midfielder groups as
far as achievement motivation is concerned because the p-value is more than 0.05.
3. Dependent variable (achievement motivation) on the Y axis and the independent variable (playing
positions) on the X axis. From Figure 3, it is clear the mean value of achievement motivation is
highest among the players in the forward group in comparison to that of midfielder and defender
groups. On the basis of the results obtained above, it may be inferred that the achievement motivation
among the players in the different positions forward group is maximum.
Figure 3. Means Plot Showing a Visual Representation of the Group Means of Achievement
Motivation in Four Different Playing Positions
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The results of the study revealed that the psychological variables self-confidence, aggression
and achievement motivation had no significant differences among defenders and midfielders of
football players. This indicated that defenders and midfielders of football players were having similar
type of self-confidence, aggression and achievement motivation. The analysis of the study also
20
revealed that there is significant difference between the means of the defender and forward, and
midfielder and forward groups as far as self-confidence, aggression and achievement motivation are
ITIRJ
concerned. The defend line players proved better in case of self-confidence compared to other two
groups i.e. midfielders and forwards. Self confidence characterizes the defenders handle extreme
degree of pressure and fight for struggle. Researchers indicated that athletes with higher levels of self-
confidence expend more effort, resist failure, and determine more difficult goals. All these results
show us the importance of confidence in sport performance (e.g., Burton, 1988; Jones, Swain, &
Hardy, 1993; Martens, Burton, Vealey, Bump, & Smith, 1990). On the other hand forward players
proved better in case of aggression and achievement motivation compared to other two groups i.e.
midfielders and defenders. The forward players using aggression to tackle his opponent to win the
ball. According to the Cognitive Evaluation Theory of Deci and Ryan (2002), individual’s motivation
differs depending on the difference in their perceived competence and self-determination. In a study of
one ninety-nine team-sport athletes, Kirkcaldy (1982) revealed that offensive players are more tough-
minded, aggressive and extroverted than their defensive teammates. Cox and Yoo (1995) reported
significant differences for anxiety control, concentration, and confidence between linesmen and
backfield players in American football. They also found a significant difference between offensive and
defensive players in relation to their anxiety control with offensive players recording higher scores.
This finding is consistent with the results of Sarmento, Catita, & Fonseca (2008) showed that amateur
players presented a higher level of amotivation in comparison with professional players and their
sportive competence was at a lower level; nonetheless, they reported lower levels of identified
regulation. Overall, some research (Mahoney, Gabriel, & Perkins, 1987; Orlick and Partington, 1988)
has shown the link between extremely high levels of motivation and the achievement of elite status.
For example, the athlete that is highly motivated to succeed knows the importance of physical
preparation and that motivation carries over to their training. If the athlete is physically prepared he or
she gains confidence in knowing that they have done what they need to do. This high confidence level
caries over and results in decreased anxiety because the athlete knows that they have put in the time, is
prepared, and is confident in their chances for success. Grobbelaar and Eloff (2011) researched netball
players and found differences between the players’ on-court positions and their level of psychological
skills. For example, goal shooters recorded the lowest psychological skill levels. Similarly, Eloff,
Monyeki, & Grobbelaar (2011) also reported significant positional differences in the mental skill
levels of field hockey players. The goalkeepers showed the lowest scores in self-confidence,
commitment, stress control, relaxation, activation, focusing and refocusing of the twelve mental skills,
whereas the midfielders outperformed the other positional groups in four such as; self-confidence,
stress control, focusing, refocusing of the twelve mental skills tested in the study. It is expected that
each sport has its own unique demands and that differences in psychological dispositions, do not
necessarily apply to all sports. Correspondingly, Kruger (2010) indicated this observation with her
findings on the differences between successful and less successful field hockey players regarding their
achievement motivation, goal setting, self-confidence, imagery, and mental preparation. However,
Coetzee, Grobbelaar, & Gird (2006) identified psychological skills such as concentration, goal
orientation, performing optimally under pressure, achievement motivation, arousal control and goal
setting as important discriminating factors between successful and less successful soccer teams.
Subsequently, there is a need for more research within the context of young, developing sportspersons
(including soccer players) to examine the psychological and team previous circumstances of overall
performance to provide a strong theoretical foundation for applied psychological intervention
programmes. These results may not generalize to other sports, other levels of experience, or to
21
females. The results of this study might be generalized to the male football population in India.
Certainly more research in this area is recommended, to substantiate the current findings and to
ITIRJ
broaden our understanding of self-confidence, aggression and achievement motivation. Future

research in this area is recommended, to investigate the interaction of a variety of psychological

factors and performance. This study supports the importance of sport psychological skills and provides
a foundation for further investigation into the contributing factors for excellence during adolescent
sport participation. It is therefore recommended that future research on adolescents should include
different cultures, genders, different sporting codes and also that the participants should be randomly
selected. In addition, the results supported the general assumption that a differences exists between
playing positions in team sports and various psychological variables.
REFERENCES
Anshel, M.H. (1997). Sport Psychology: From theory to practice. 3rd ed. Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch
Scarisbrick Publishers.
Andrew, M., Grobbelaar, H.W., & Potgieter, J.C. (2007). Sport psychological skill levels and related
psychological factors that distinguish between rugby union players of different participation
levels. South African journal for research in sport, physical education and recreation, 29(1), 1-
14.
Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The Aggression Questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 63, 452-459.
Burton, D. (1988). Do Anxious Swimmers swim slower? Re-examining the elusive anxiety
performance relationship. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10, 45-61.
Coetzee, B., Grobbelaar, H.W., & Gird, C.C. (2006). Sport psychological skills that distinguish
successful from less successful soccer teams. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 51, 383-401
Cox, R.H. (1987). Relationship between psychological variables and player position in women's
volleyball. Unpublished manuscript, Kansas State University.
Cox, R.H., & MCMANAMA, J.L. (1988). The psychological side of women’s volleyball. Coaching
Volleyball, 22-24.
Cox, R.H., & Yoo, H.S. (1995). Playing position and psychological skill in American football. Journal
of Sport Behavior, 18, 183-195.
Cox, R.H., Shannon, J.K., McGuire, R.T., & McBride, A. (2010). Predicting subjective athletic
performance from psychological skills after controlling for sex and sport. Journal of Sport
Behaviour, 33(2), 129-145.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2002). Psychol Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Eloff, M., Monyeki, M.A., & Grobbelaar, H.W. (2011). Mental skill levels of South African male
student field hockey players in different playing positions. African Journal for Physical, Health
Education, Recreation and Dance, 17, 636-646.
Gill, D.L., & Williams, L. (2008). Psychological Dynamics of Sport and Exercise. 3rd ed. Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Grobbelaar, H.W., & Eloff, M. (2011). Psychological skills of provincial netball players in different
22
playing positions. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and
Recreation, 33, 45-58.
ITIRJ
Hardy and Nelson. (1992). Assessment of Self Confidence cited by Alagaonkar, J. (1997). Sports
Psychology, Pune; Vidyarthi Griha Prakashan Publishers, 157
Jones, J. G., Swain, A. B. J., & Hardy, L. (1993). Intensity and direction dimensions of competitive
state anxiety and relationships with performance. Journal of Sports Sciences, 11, 525-532.
Kamlesh, M.L. (1990). Manual of Sports Achievement Motivation Test. NIS Scientific Journal, 13(3),
28-39.
Kirkcaldy, B.D. (1982). Personality and sex differences related to positions in team sports.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 13, 141-153.
Kruger, A. (2010). Sport psychological skills that discriminate between successful and less successful
female university field hockey players. African Journal for Physical Health Education,
Recreation and Dance, 16, 240-250.
Leuens, A. (2008). Sport Psychology. 4th Ed. New York: Psychology Press.
Mahoney, MJ., Gabriel, T.J., & Perkins, T.S. (1987). Psychological skills and exceptional athletic
performance. The Sport Psychologist, 1, 181-199.
Martens, R., Burton, D., Vealey, R.S., Bump, L.A., & Smith, D.E. (1990). Development and
validation of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2. In R. Martens, R.S. Vealey, & D.
Burton (Eds.), Competitive anxiety in sport Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 117-190.
Nation, J.R., & Leunes, A.D. (1983). Personality characteristics of intercollegiate football players as
determined by position, classification, and redshirt status. Journal of Sport Behavior, 6, 92-102.
Orlick, T., & Partington, J. (1988). Mental links to Excellence. The sport Psychologist, 2, 105-130.
Mccaffery, N., & Orlick, T. (1989). Mental factors related to excellence among top professional
golfers. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 20, 256-278.
Sarmento, H., Catita, L., & Fonseca, A., (2008). Kinesiol Res Trends Applic. 34, 631-638.
Schurr, K.T., Rusle, V.E., Nisbet, J., & Wallace, D. (1984). Myers-Biggs type inventory
characteristics of more and less successful players on an American football team. Journal of
Sport Behaviour, 7, 47-57.
SPSS Inc. SPSS for Windows, Version 20.0. Chicago, SPSS Inc.
Tod, D., Thatcher, J., & Rahman, R. (2010). Sport Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan.
Woodman, T., & Hardy, L. (2003). The relative impact of cognitive anxiety and self-confidence upon
sport performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of sport sciences, 21, 443-457.
Zinsser, N., Bunker, L., & Williams, J.M. (2010). Cognitive techniques for building confidence and
enhancing performance. (In Williams, J.M., ed. Applied Sport Psychology. 6th ed. New York:
McGraw Hill Publishers. 305-335.).
23
ITIRJ
Miscellany
Scope of Innovative Thoughts International Research Journal (ITIRJ)
The ITIRJ provides a forum for scholarly discussion on topics in a multidisciplinary aspect.
Manuscripts can be on any topic and subject of study such as Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, Chemical Sciences,
Social Sciences, Medical sciences, Pharmacy, Engineering, Pedagogical Sciences, Applied Research areas, Languages and
Literature etc. In addition, the Journal publishes research articles, book reviews, editorials, guest articles, comprehensive
literature reviews, and reactions to previously published articles. The ITIRJ publishes articles written in Six Languages; English,
Hindi, Arabic, Urdu, Tamil and Malayalam.
Review Process
Each article submitted to us is undergone through a Peer Review process. The review report will be sent to the author
along with Acceptance/ Rejectance/ Modification letter.
Manuscript Submission Guidelines
An electronic version in Microsoft Word format on email should be submitted online at www.naspublishers.com. Thus
submitted articles will immediately be displayed under the link ‘New Arrivals’ on the web. It is mandatory to enter the
correspondence postal address with PIN and Contact telephone numbers while submitting the articles. Every article should have an
abstract just under the title and all the references should be arranged as per the APA. It may be needed to send a hard copy of the
same if requested later with the destination address. Authors will have to remit the publication fee only after receiving the
acceptance letter.
E-mail: naspublishers@gmail.com
1. The articles must be either in .DOC or .DOCX format and be submitted online at www.naspublishers.com
2. All manuscripts must be 1 ½ line spaced and must adhere to the guidelines published in Publication Guidelines of the
American Psychological Association (5th Edition). Tables and figures, however, should be imbedded within the text itself
rather than at the end of the document.
3. All figures and artwork must be scaled to fit within the page size (4.5” column width) and included electronically within the
document.
4. The paper should be prefaced by a short Abstract.
5. References should be listed at the end of each paper in alphabetical order of authors and arranged as per APA format.
6. Papers already published elsewhere will not be accepted for publication in this journal.
7. Papers published in this Journal cannot be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Publisher.
Subscription Charges:
Journal Title Single Issue Half an year One year
Conflux Journal of Education `500 for `2000 for `3600 for
(monthly) Institutions/Libraries. `400 Institutions/Libraries. Institutions/Libraries.
for individuals. `1800 for individuals. `3500 for individuals.
($25 for Foreign ($120 for Foreign ($240 for Foreign
subscribers) Subscribers) Subscribers)
Cognitive Discourses ` 500 for `1000 for `1800 for
International Institutions/Libraries. Institutions/Libraries. Institutions/Libraries.
Multidisciplinary Journal `400 for individuals. `900 for individuals. `1750 for individuals.
(bi-monthly) ($25 for Foreign ($60 for Foreign ($120 for Foreign
Subscribers) Subscribers) Subscribers)
Innovative Thoughts ` 500 for `1000 for `1800 for
International Research Institutions/Libraries. Institutions/Libraries. Institutions/Libraries.
Journal `400 for individuals. `900 for individuals. `1750 for individuals.
(bi-monthly) ($25 for Foreign ($60 for Foreign ($120 for Foreign
Subscribers) Subscribers) Subscribers)
Journal of Pedagogic `500 for ` 500 for `800 for
Researches and Renovations Institutions/Libraries. `400 Institutions/Libraries. Institutions/Libraries.
(bi-annual) for individuals. `400 for individuals. `750 for individuals.
($25 for Foreign ($25 for Foreign ($50 for Foreign
subscribers) Subscribers) Subscribers)
Demand Draft should be taken in favor of Fathima, payable at Federal Bank, Malappuram, Kerala, India.
24
ITIRJ
PEER REVIEWED RESEARCH JOURNALS
JOURNAL OF
INNOVATIVE THOUGHTS CONFLUX PEDAGOGIC
COGNITIVE DISCOURSES
International Research Journal Journal of Education RESEARCHES AND
International Multidisciplinary Journal
pISSN 2321-5143 pISSN 2321-1075 pISSN 2320-9305 RENOVATIONS
eISSN 2347-5722 eISSN 2347-5692 eISSN 2347-5706 ISSN 2347 - 7482
Bi-monthly, Print/online Bi-monthly, Print/online Monthly, Print/online Bi-annual, Print only
http://itirj.naspublishers.com http://cjoe.naspublishers.com
Submit articles online at http://cdimj.naspublishers.com
Submit articles at
www.naspublishers.com
25
ITIRJ
26
ITIRJ

Psychological Characteristics of Football

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psychological Characteristics of Football

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INNOVATIVE THOUGHTS pISSN 2321-5143 eISSN 2347-5722

International Research Journal

PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FOOTBALL PLAYERS

more aggressive the player.

Aggression 92.44 0.85 5.68 -0.030 .354 -0.018 .695

Achievement 24.67 0.67 4.49 0.393 .354 -0.051 .695

Valid N (list wise) = 45

with regard to psychological variables.

Self Confidence Defenders 15 18.73 2.25 0.58 15.00 22.00

Midfielders 15 17.67 2.55 0.66 14.00 22.00

Forwards 15 15.67 1.80 0.46 13.00 20.00

Total 45 17.36 2.52 0.38 13.00 22.00

Aggression Defenders 15 90.33 5.54 1.43 82.00 102.00

Midfielders 15 90.93 5.08 1.31 80.00 98.00

Forwards 15 96.07 4.86 1.26 89.00 106.00

Total 45 92.44 5.68 0.85 80.00 106.00

Achievement Defenders 15 23.20 3.99 1.03 16.00 28.00

Forwards 15 27.20 5.12 1.32 20.00 36.00

Total 45 24.67 4.49 0.67 16.00 36.00

Sum of Mean Sig.(p

Self Confidence Between Groups 72.71 2 36.36 7.36* 0.00

* Significant at the 0.05 level.

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

Forwards Defenders 1. 89 0.00 1.93 9.54

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

Midfielders Defenders 0.40 1.54 0.80 -2.70 3.50

Forwards -3.60* 1.54 0.02 -6.70 -0.50

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

broaden our understanding of self-confidence, aggression and achievement motivation. Future

research in this area is recommended, to investigate the interaction of a variety of psychological

PEER REVIEWED RESEARCH JOURNALS

You might also like