Social identity and prosocial and antisocial behavior in youth sport |
| |
| Institution: | 1. School of Physical and Health Education, Nipissing University, 100 College Drive, Box 5002, North Bay, Ontario, Canada P1B 8L7;2. School of Sport & Exercise Sciences, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom;3. School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen''s University, Canada;1. Technische Universität München, Georg-Brauchle-Ring 60/62, 80992 München, Germany;2. University of Konstanz, Sportwissenschaft Fach 30, 78457 Konstanz, Germany;3. University of Bayreuth, Universitätsstraße 30, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany;4. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Geb. 40.40, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany;1. Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia;2. Faculty of Physical Education and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada;1. University of Stuttgart, Department for Sport and Exercise Science, Division I Exercise- and Health Sciences, Nobelstr. 15, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany;2. Bielefeld University, School of Public Health, WHO Collaborating Centre for Child and Adolescent Health Promotion, PO Box 10 01 31, D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany;3. University of Oldenburg, Institute of Sports Science, Ammerländer Heerstr. 114-118, D-26129 Oldenburg, Germany |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectivesTo examine (a) the effects of social identity on prosocial and antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents, and (b) whether any effects of social identity on prosocial and antisocial behavior were mediated by cohesion.DesignProspective, observational.MethodsMale and female youth–sport participants (N = 329; Mage = 15.88 years) completed questionnaires at the beginning, middle and end of the season assessing three dimensions of social identity (cognitive centrality, ingroup ties, ingroup affect), cohesion (task, social) and prosocial and antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents.ResultsWith the exception of cognitive centrality (which was therefore not analyzed further), all measures of study variables proved reliable. Structural equation modeling indicated the following: Ingroup affect had a positive effect on prosocial teammate behavior, Task cohesion mediated a positive effect of ingroup ties on prosocial teammate behavior and a negative effect of ingroup ties and ingroup affect on antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents. Social cohesion mediated a positive effect of ingroup ties on antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents. Prosocial opponent behavior was not predicted by any dimension of social identity.ConclusionThe findings highlight that social identity may play a salient role in regulating prosocial and antisocial behavior in youth sport, and changes in cohesion may partially explain these effects. |
| |
| Keywords: | Social identity Prosocial behavior Antisocial behavior Group cohesion Youth sport |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
