Competitive Orientations Among Intercollegiate Athletes : Is Winning the Only Thing ?

In this exploratory investigation of competitive orientations, intercollegiate athletes from a highly competitive Division I program and nonathletes from the same university completed Gill's Sport Orientation Questionnaire (SOQ) which assesses competitiveness, win and goal orientation; Vealey's Competitive Orientation Inventory (COI) which assesses the relative importance of performing well (performance) and winning (outcome) in competitive sports; and Helmreich and Spence's Work and Family Orientation Questionnaire (WOFO), a general achievement orientation measure. A Gender X Athlete/Nonathlete MANOVA yielded both gender and athlete/nonathlete main effects and no interaction. The gender difference was most evident for competitiveness scores, with males scoring higher than females on competitiveness and win orientation. Athletes scored higher than nonathletes on most measures, but especially so on the sport-specific competitiveness score. Athletes also placed more emphasis on performance and less on outcome than nonathletes did. A secondary analysis compared the eight athletic teams and revealed considerable variation among teams. Generally the team differences were not gender differences but seemed to reflect the competitive structure of the activity. Article: Individual differences in achievement orientation and competitiveness are quite obvious among sport participants and these differences logically relate to sport achievement behaviors and success. According to both Atkinson's (1974) achievement motivation theory and more current cognitive approaches, highly achievement-oriented individuals approach achievement situations, try hard and strive for success against achievement standards, and persist in the face of failure. These same achievement behaviors should lead to success in athletics. Highly successful athletes are those who enter competitive sports and accept challenges, who set and strive for high performance standards, and who persist in those efforts until they attain their goals. Thus, highly successful athletes should be characterized by high achievement motivation. Despite the appealing logic of the relationship between achievement orientation and athletic success, sport psychology research has not demonstrated any consistent relationship between global achievement motivation constructs and sport achievement behavior. One major shortcoming in the sport psychology research on achievement is the inadequacy of general achievement motivation measures. Over the last 10 years sport psychologists increasingly have recognized the value of sport-specific constructs and measures in their research and practice. Martens' competitive anxiety work, and particularly the development and use of the Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT; Martens, 1977), illustrated the importance of sport-specific measures and initiated consideration of the unique characteristics of sport in our research and measures. Several sport psychologists have taken sport-specific concerns to the area of achievement orientation. Ewing (1981) developed a measure of goal orientations for sport, and with her colleagues (Pemberton, Petlichkoff, & Ewing, 1986) has begun to examine the psychometric properties of her measure. Along with the development of her sport confidence inventory, Vealey (1986) developed a competitive orientation measure that assesses the degree to which an individual is oriented toward performing well (performance) or winning (outcome) in competitive sports. Recently, Gill and her colleagues (Gill, 1986; Gill & Deeter, in press; Gill, Dzewaltowski, & Deeter, 1988) developed a sport-specific, multidimensional measure of achievement orientation known as the Sport Orientation Questionnaire (SOQ) and provided evidence for its reliability and validity. The initial work of these investigators suggests that sport-specific achievement constructs and measures will provide greater insight into sport achievement and competitive behavior than is possible with more global achievement approaches. The primary focus of this study was to examine the competitive achievement orientations of high level intercollegiate athletes using more sophisticated sportspecific measures than had been available in the past. More specifically, Gill's SOQ and Vealey's COI, both sport-specific competitive orientation measures, and the Work and Family Orientation Questionnaire (WOFO; Helmreich & Spence, 1978), a multidimensional achievement orientation measure, were administered to male and female athletes from varied intercollegiate teams, and to male and female nonathletes from the same university. The SOQ assesses three dimensions of sport achievement orientation: (a) competitiveness—the basic achievement orientation toward competitive sport reflected by such items as "I enjoy competing against others" and "I am a determined competitor," (b) win orientation—a specific focus on winning reflected by such items as "Winning is important" and "I hate to lose," and (c) goal orientation—a focus on personal standards reflected by items such as "I set goals for myself when I compete." Gill and her colleagues provided psychometric evidence for the stability, internal consistency, and reliability of the three factors and reported that the measure separates competitive sport participants and nonparticipants. However, the SOQ has not been used with high level athletes. The COI assesses the relative emphasis that individuals place on performing well (performance) and winning (outcome) in competitive sports. Respondents rate how satisfied they would be with each of all possible combinations of performance level (very good performance, above average performance, below average performance, very poor performance) and outcome (easy win, close win, close loss, big loss), and the scoring system yields the relative proportions of variance associated with performance and with outcome. Vealey reports adequate variability among COI cells as well as acceptable test-retest reliability, and notes that COI performance relates to sport confidence and internal control. The WOFO is a general achievement orientation measure (not sport-specific) with three primary dimensions of (a) mastery—the desire for challenge, (b) work—the desire to work hard, and (c) competitiveness—the desire to win in interpersonal competition. A fourth score, personal unconcern, reflects a lack of concern for the negative reactions of others, but Spence and Helmreich (1983) note that this score has not been useful in their work and they no longer recommend its use. In general, the test developers have provided good evidence for the psychometric properties of the measures, but the measures have not been used to probe competitive orientations of high level athletes. The current study is an exploratory comparison of male and female intercollegiate athletes and nonathletes on both general and sport-specific achievement orientations. Although evidence on sport-specific achievement orientations is limited, some literature suggests that athletes should be higher than nonathletes on both general and sport-specific achievement orientation. In their work with the multidimensional WOFO, Spence and Helmreich (1983) reported that varsity athletes were higher than general college students on achievement scores, and especially were higher on competitiveness. Similar results are expected in our study, but differences between athletes and nonathletes should be clearer with the sportspecific measures. Most sport psychologists (e.g., Scanlan, 1978) propose that competitiveness develops as more general achievement orientation is differentiated and directed toward specific sport activities. Thus, sportspecific measures developed to assess this directed achievement orientation should more clearly differentiate athletes from nonathletes. Indeed, previous work (Gill et al., 1988) indicates that the SOQ, and especially sport competitiveness, differentiates competitive sport participants and nonparticipants when the more general WOFO scores do not. Previous work also suggests gender differences, with males being more competitive and win-oriented than females. Spence and Helmreich typically find males scoring higher than females on competitiveness, but do not find consistent gender differences on the other achievement dimensions. Previous work with the SOQ (Gill, 1986; Gill & Deeter, in press) consistently yields strong gender differences, with males scoring higher than females on competitiveness and win orientation but not on goal orientation. An important subquestion is whether athletes are particularly win or goal oriented as compared to nonathletes. Certainly popular wisdom suggests that successful athletes are highly win oriented. However, some sport psychology research and many of our applied interventions suggest that a performance orientation is more appropriate. In her initial work on sport confidence, Vealey (1986) proposed that a performance orientation was associated with greater control and confidence, and thus greater athletic success. Duda (in press) recently reviewed considerable work on goal perspectives and sport behavior and concluded that athletes may not be as ego-involved and focused on win-loss outcomes as we often assume. Instead, perceived ability and task involvement, which are similar to performance orientation, seem more associated with sport achievement. Duda also notes that males emphasize ego-involved goals more than females do, adding further support for predicted gender differences in sport achievement orientation. The second major analysis of this study compared the eight athletic teams on the achievement orientation measures. Because the literature does not suggest any specific differences, and because we sampled only one team in each sport, this was simply an exploratory analysis to see if differences between athletes and nonathletes were consistent across teams. That is, if athletes generally are high on sport achievement orientation, are all teams similarly high on competitiveness and do they exhibit similar levels of performance and outcome orientation? The use of both the SOQ and the COI, which assess sport orientation differently and rely on slightly different underlying constructs, may provide a more complete picture of athletes' sport achievement orientations.