Running Head Assessing types of motivation between elite and leisure track and field athletes
1. Running Head 1
Running Head: Assessing types of motivation between elite and non-elite track
and field athletes
Abidemi Bolaji (ID 25110049)
Newham University Centre
17/08/2015
Name of Degree: BSC (Hons) Business Management and Psychology
Name of supervisor: Sharon Charabi
2. Running Head 2
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... 3
Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………4
Introduction................................................................................................................................... 5
1. Literature background………………………………………………………………………8
2. Self-Determination Theory (SDT)…………………………………………………………10
2.1 Intrinsic motivation…………………………………………………………………...11
2.2 Extrinsic motivation……………………………………………………………………13
2.3Amotivation………………………………………………………………………….16
3. The SMS-28…………………………………………………………………………………..18
3.1 Criticisms of the SMS………………………………………………………………….19
4. Methods ................................................................................................................................... 22
4.1 Results .................................................................................................................................... 24
5. Discussion................................................................................................................................ 29
6. Conclusion............................................................................................................................... 32
In conclusion, The purpose of this study was to provide a review of the (SDT) Self-
Determination theory of motivation within sport and to assess the different types of motivation in
elite and non-elite athletes using the Sport Motivational Scale; another reason for choosing the
current topic for the academic research was to understand a bit more the topic of motivation in
relation to athletes and explain what motivates someone to put their efforts, commitment and
time in a sporting activity.............................................................................................................. 32
There are various definitions of Motivation provided by various researchers and philosopher all
slightly difference from time to time. Since then Motivation concepts and theories have evolved
and there is not one that could be said to be the more appropriate to explain motivation within the
human beings, so the current study was not going to provide the groundbreaking findings that
philosophers and psychologist have been looking for; however, the current study has been able to
give a general and understandable description of motivation and how it can be evaluated within
the context of sport........................................................................................................................ 32
Human beings are creatures with endless potentials and understanding the blue print behind their
motivation is the key to unlock their potential.............................................................................. 32
References.................................................................................................................................... 33
Appendix...................................................................................................................................... 36
3. Running Head 3
Abstract
The hypothesis on which the current study is based is that athletes are more likely to have higher
Intrinsic Motivation compare to the non-athletes; while non-athletes are expected to have higher
Extrinsic Motivation and Amotivation compared to athletes.
Motivation is an important factor of individuals’ decision-making process and the interaction
between motivation and perception of limitations determines, in a large degree, sport
participation (Alexandris et al. 2002).
The purpose of this paper is to (a) provide a review of the (SDT) Self-Determination motivation
theory within sport (b) and to assess the different types of motivation in elite and non-elite
athletes using the ‘Echelle de motivation dans les Sport’ (Briere et al. 1995) translated to English
‘Sport Motivational Scale-SMS-28’ (Pelletier et al. 1995).
4. Running Head 4
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my supervisor Sharon Charabi for her guidance, understanding, and
patience during the research for the current study. I would also like to thank Coach Zaar for
allowing me to use his athletes as part of my research and the athletes themselves both elite and
non-elite for their time.
5. Running Head 5
Running Head: Assessing types of motivation between elite and leisure track and field
athletes
Introduction
Who is an athlete? An athlete is someone who participates in physical exercise or sports,
especially in competitive events (The free dictionary, 2015).
The above is the academic definition of what an athlete is, which I do not totally agree with. Yes,
is true an athlete is someone that takes part in competitive events, what the ‘academic’ definition
of an athlete fails to acknowledge, is that an elite athlete is a rare combination of talent, hard
work and the right psychological profile.
Athletes are seen as super humans, who have pushed their body and mind through barriers that
would not be possible for a common person. It is not secret that athlete put their body through
rigorous training and diets all tailored around the aim to achieve a prefix goal.
This work is based on motivation within elite athlete professional track and field (runners)
athletes in order to find out what motivates athletes to push on even when it does not seem to be
light at the end of the tunnel compared to people who engage in an sporting activity for reasons
which does not involve competing at events and win medals.
Sports are ‘institutionalized competitive activities that involve rigorous physical exertion or the
use of relatively complex physical skills by participants motivated by internal or external
rewards’ (Coakley, 2007). This definition highlights the institutionalization of rules and
regulations which characterises modern sports and also the complex components of the physical
and psychic skills of participants.
The reasons why individuals engage in sports and the role that sports play in society has changed
over time with the first records of sports dating back from 3200BC (Lee, 1983). Previous sports
6. Running Head 6
involved numerous physical activities such as leaping, running, throwing, chasing, wrestling,
swimming and climbing.
Crowther (2007) believed that these activities were a result of instinctual drives (e.g. hunting and
surviving) rather than for entertainment.
Today, everyone knows the best methods to training, has access to the best facilities and most
nutritional foods. Often what separate the ‘leisure’ athletes and the elite athletes are their mental
qualities.
For several decades’ motivation has been a central topic in general psychology (Weiner, 1992) as
well as, more recently, in sport and exercise psychology (Roberts, 2001).
The Goal Setting Theory pioneered by Professor Edwin Locke (1968) is a psychology based
motivational technique used to increase an individual’s commitment towards achieving a
personal goal. The hypothesis is that when an individual had specific goals or standards of
performance to meet, the performance effects would be more pronounced than when specific
goals were lacking (Locke and Bryan, 1966). Through this motivational model which
emphasizes the effect that motivation has on goals that are difficult to achieved, other
motivational phenomena have been explained (Miner, 2015).
The first explanation provided by the goal motivational theory, was on the effect of feedback or
knowledge of performance had on the individual’s performance effectiveness (Locke and Bryan,
1966). Another explanation provided as a goal setting phenomenon, is the popular Parkinson’s
Law (1955) which claims that work expands to fill the available time for its completion (Bryan
and Locke, 1967). It was hypothesized that task pace and effort is adjusted in relation to the
undertaken task difficulty (Parkinson, 1955).
7. Running Head 7
Unfortunately, since Locke’s (1968) work was published two decades ego a vast amount of
researches have been undertaken on the topic of motivation and the role it plays in sport.
The objective of this study is to determine what motivates athletes and non-athletes to practice
their chosen and sport. The hypothesis is that athletes are more likely to have higher Intrinsic
Motivation compare to the non-athletes; while non-athletes are expected to have higher Extrinsic
Motivation and Amotivation compared to athletes.
The purpose of this paper is to (a) provide a review of the (SDT) Self-Determination motivation
theory within sport (b) and to assess the different types of motivation in elite and non-elite
athletes using the ‘Echelle de motivation dans les Sport’ (Briere et al. 1995) translated to English
‘Sport Motivational Scale-SMS-28’ (Pelletier et al. 1995). The academic research paper will
begin a definition on motivation before I start to analyze the various studies done on the subject
matter.
8. Running Head 8
1. Literature background
In the 20th century sport psychology is a relatively young discipline (Borns, 2008) with the first
laboratory for experimental psychology founded by Wilhelm Wundt in Germany (Leipzig) in
1879. After that in 1920 Robert Werner Schulte in Berlin and Coleman Griffith in 1925 in the
USA (Illinois) established the first sport laboratory, with the International Society of Sport
Psychology (ISSP) founded in 1965 across Europa and the United States.
Motivation is a Latin word which means ‘to move’ and fundamentally, what moves people to
act and why people think and do what they do is what it is studied by motivational psychologists
(Weinner, 1992) .
Motivation is an important factor of individuals’ decision-making process and the interaction
between motivation and perception of limitations determines, in a large degree, sport
participation (Alexandris et al. 2002)
“There is no one way to motivate. As coaches we may sometimes feel that we should be the ones
who provide the impetus for motivation to the athletes. In reality, it is the athlete, regardless of
age or gender who must be motivated, and must successful athletes have a certain amount of
self-motivation”. (Guthrine, 2003)
For the past two centuries psychologists have looked at the concept of motivation, providing
some general definition of the construct (Vallerand, 2004: p.428). Like many other psychological
concept motivation has been defined in many different ways. One of the many definitions of
motivation, is Vallerand’s (2004), who describes motivation as “the intensity (e.g. the degree of
9. Running Head 9
effort put forth to accomplish the behavior/goal), and direction (e.g. indication of whether the
individual/athlete approaches or avoids a particular situation) of behavior”. Another definition
restating Gredler, Broussard and Garrison (2004) generally define motivation as “the attribute
that moves us to do or not to do something” (p. 106). When exploring the wide and complicated
world of sport motivation, there are often two types of motivations that are mostly mentioned;
intrinsic motivation (IM) and extrinsic motivation (EM).
Intrinsic motivation is behavior that is performed for personal enjoyment, interest, or pleasure.
As observed by Deci et al. (1999), “intrinsic motivation energizes and sustains activities through
the spontaneous satisfactions inherent in effective volitional action. It is manifest in behaviors
such as play, exploration, and challenge seeking that people often do for external rewards” (p.
658). Researchers often contrast intrinsic motivation with extrinsic motivation, which is behavior
carried out to attain contingent outcomes.
Theoretical perspectives on sport and exercise motivation are numerous with the Self-
Determination theory the one more embraced by sport psychologist; also other advocated related
theory is the Goal Setting theory (Locke and Latham, 1968). According to Vallerand and Fortier
(1998), Self-Determination theory is especially helpful in studying individual patterns of sport
participation, as people may engage in activities for different reasons.
10. Running Head 10
2. Self-Determination Theory (SDT)
Humans have an inborn tendency to move in direction of greater self-regulation, competence and
integration in action – that is the organismic assumption on which the Self-Determination theory
(SDT) is built on (Pelletier et al., 2012).
Deci and Ryan (1985) identified the following psychological needs relatedness, autonomy and
competence as the three basic psychological needs that have to be supported and fulfilled for the
actualizing and integrative processes of an individual.
Relatedness: this need is achieved through reciprocal care with others, with interpersonal
connections seen as the feeling of belonging with others and the community as a whole.
Autonomy: according to Deci and Ryan (2002) is when an individual is able to behave in ways
that matches her or his personal interests and values. Behavior of an autonomous individual will
be an authentic expression of the self.
Competence: refers to the ability that is manifested when the opportunity to express own
capacities, develop own confidence and to seek new challenges is presented to an individual.
Individuals will naturally internalize and integrate on going behavioral regulations, when the
three basic needs are met, this is the view proposed by the Self-Determination theory (Ryan,
1995).
Within the Self-Determination theory the degree to which behaviors are internalized is
represented by increasing levels of an individual’s self-determination motivation and autonomy,
as internalization is viewed in term of continuum autonomy (Ryan and Connell, 1989; Vallerand,
1997).
The Self-Determination theory has been confirmed for promoting and understanding optimal
motivation in sport, as large numbers of studies in sport domain incorporates the SDT framework
11. Running Head 11
(Vallerand, 2007: pp. 330). Research has demonstrated (more specifically) that when motivation
is autonomous individuals will have long time commitment (Pelletier, Fortier, Vallerand and
Briere, 2001) and greater interest (Briere, Blais, Vallerand and Pelletier, 1995).
Also examined were the three basic needs mentioned earlier, with results showing that
fulfillment of the needs is associated with absence of aversive physical symptoms in both adults
(Adie, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2008; Briere et al., 1995; Pelletier et al., 2001) and young adults
(Reinboth, Duda and Ntoumanis, 2004), increase subjective vitality and sport satisfaction
(Pelletier et al., 2013). Thwarting of basic needs, in contrast leads to more negative outcomes
(Ntoumains, Bartholomew, Ryan, Bosch, Thogeresen & Ntoumanis, 2011) and less determine
motivation (Deci et al., 2012).
2.1 Intrinsic motivation
The phenomenon of intrinsic motivation was first acknowledged within experimental studies of
animal behavior, where it was discovered that many organisms engage in exploratory, playful,
and curiosity-driven behaviors even in the absence of reinforcement or reward (White, 1959:
cited in Ryan and Deci, 2000: p.56).
Individuals who engage in sport because they enjoy it and find that learning new things
interesting and satisfying are often said be intrinsically motivated. An example of an athlete that
is intrinsically motivated is an athlete that does events’ related training during the off-season,
because he or she naturally enjoys keeping fit and be active.
Tosi et al. (1990) claimed that intrinsic motivation acts as a driver to participate in sport as result
of beliefs and the founded value in doing the activity, and also inspires participation without
external incentives.
12. Running Head 12
There are at least three dimensions to intrinsic motivation: to know, to accomplish, and to
experience new stimuli (Vellard et al. 1992; Pelletier et al. 1995; Weinberg and Gould, 2003
cited in Wilson, 2006).
Intrinsic motivation to know: refers to engaging in an activity for pleasure to learn (Vellard et al.,
1992) and attempting to learn new concepts within sport participation (Pelletier et al., 1995;
Weinberg and Gould, 2003 cited in Wilson, 2006).
Intrinsic motivation to accomplish: is engaging in a activity for the pleasure and satisfaction of
trying to surpass one’s self and reach personal objectives (Villard et al., 1992; Vallerand and
Loiser, 1992; Alexandris et al., 2002).
Intrinsic motivation to experience stimuli: refers to individuals/athletes who take part in an
activity/event for the purpose of sensory and aesthetic pleasure (Vallerand, 1992) for example
fun and excitement (Alexandris et al., 2002).
In humans, intrinsic motivation is a pervasive and important one. This natural motivational trend
is a crucial element in cognitive, social, and physical development because it is through acting on
one’s innate interests that one grows in knowledge and skills (Ryan and Deci, 2000: p.56).
Various operations definitions have been purposed for intrinsic motivation, but the two most
used measures have been behavioral measure of intrinsic motivation called the ‘‘free choice’’
measure (Deci, 1971) and self-reports of interest and enjoyment of the activity per se (Ryan,
1982; Harackiewicz, 1979).
13. Running Head 13
During the ‘free choice’ measure participants presented a task under changeable conditions such
as getting rewards or not. The experimenter then tells participants to no longer work on the target
task any longer, leaving participants in the experimental room alone with various distractor
activities as well as with the original target task. They thus have a period of ‘free choice’ about
whether to return to the activity, and it is assumed that, if there is no extrinsic reason to do the
task (e.g., no reward and no approval), then the more time they spend with the target task, the
more intrinsically motivated they are for that task. This measure has been the mainstay through
which the dynamics of intrinsic motivation have been experimentally studied (Deci, 1971 cite in
Ryan and Deci, 2000: p.57)
Despite the observable evidence that humans are liberally endowed with intrinsic motivational
tendencies, this propensity appears to be expressed only under specifiable conditions. Research
into intrinsic motivation has thus placed much emphasis on those conditions that elicit, sustain,
and enhance this special type of motivation versus those that subdue or diminish it (Ryan and
Deci, 2000: p.58).
2.2 Extrinsic motivation
An extrinsically motivated athlete, is someone that does not engage in an event for the simple
pleasure of the event itself but rather to obtain some sort of external reward (Vallerand,
2004:p.428) or to avoid punishment (Deci and Ryan, 1985). In track and field an example of an
extrinsically motivated athlete is one take part in the Olympic Games to receive a medal and for
the fame and fortune that comes with being at the event.
14. Running Head 14
In a book titled ‘Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior’ published By
Ryan and Deci in 1985, they identified four dimensions to extrinsic motivation namely:
integrated regulation, identified regulation, introjective regulation, and external regulation (Ryan
and Deci, 1985; Weinberg and Gould, 2003). These types of extrinsic motivation vary in terms of
their innate levels of self-determination, from low to high level (Vallerand and Perrault, 1999).
Introjected regulation: this type of regulation exists when an athlete feel internal pressure to
participate and their behaviour is driven by controlling imperatives, resulting in the engagement
of activities to avoid feelings of guilt and anxiety (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Kingston et al., 2006;
Alexandris et al., 2002) (e.g. an athlete that goes training because he/she will feel guilty if he/she
does not go). The results related with the outcomes become the main reasons for participating in
an activity (Vallerand, 2004: p.429).
Identified regulation: is internally driven, but still focuses on a result that is external (Pelletier et
al., 1995 cited in Kingston et al., 2006) and participants normally identify with the activity,
because it is perceived as having value (Weinberg and Gould, 2003 cited in Wilson, 2006;
Alexandris et al., 2002).
External regulation: is the most controlled form of extrinsic motivation and refers to behaviour
that is regulated by obtaining external material rewards (e.g. medals, trophies) or constraints
imposed by others (e.g. social pressure) (Kingston et al., 2006). Participants either feel that they
have no choice or that they are rewarded for participating (Weinberg and Gould, 2003; Wilson,
2006).
15. Running Head 15
Integrated regulation: is the most autonomous form of extrinsic motivation takes place when an
athlete engages in an activity to profit different aspects of his/her life, rather than for the
enjoyment of participating itself (Weinberg and Gould, 2003; Wilson, 2006). Participation is out
of personal choice and individuals experience the lowest form of the controlling factor
(Vallerand and Fortier, 1998; Kingston et al., 2006). An example could be an athelete that
decides to stay home Friday night, instead of hanging out with friends in order to be ready for the
event the next day.
The formulation that these different types of motivation lay along a continuum of relative
autonomy was tested by Ryan and Connell (1989) through the study of elementary children
achievement behaviour (e.g. doing homework). During the study, also assessed were the school
children introjected, external, identified and extrinsic reasons for exercising these behaviors.
Ryan and Connell (1989) concluded that according to a quasi-simplex (ordered correlation)
pattern the four types of regulation were intercorrelated.
Associated with the different types of extrinsic motivation were the subject’s differences in
attitude and adjustment. For instance, the elementary students displayed less interest, value,
effort and even showed a habit of blaming others (e.g. teachers) for anytime there was a negative
outcome; the more they were externally regulated.
Ryan and Connell (1989) findings regarding types of extrinsic motivation have been extended to
other subsequent studies.
These studies showed that more autonomous extrinsic motivation is correlated with higher
quality learning (Grolnick and Ryan, 1987), greater psychological well-being (Sheldon and
Kasser, 1995), less dropping out (Vallerand and Bissonnette, 1992) and greater engagement
(Connell and Wellborn, 1990).
16. Running Head 16
There is one observation that I have to make. People often believe that an athlete
driven/motivated by external rewards as ‘bad’ and not a very good role model for young people,
but it is my opinion that has an athlete gets better in his/her chosen sport they also become more
competitive and getting rewarded for showing the skills gained through long hours of painful
training has a way of compensating them for their effort and dedication, which they believed
they have earned. Because in most cases people are intrinsically motivated at the start of
something; this same view is shared by Ryska (2003) who sees improvement of competition as
the reason why athletes change from intrinsic motivation to extrinsic motivation. These athletes
participate in sport as a means to personal ends, and diverge from reasons that are perceived as
positive by the wider society (Gough, 1998).Therefore, external rewards can replace intrinsic
motivation thereby decreasing self-motivation and regulation (Kingston et al., 2006).
2.3 Amotivation
Amotivation is characterised by a total absence of motivation and human behaviour is largely
influenced by amotivation (Kingston et al., 2006). Whitehead (1993) state that continuous failure
in sport results in amotivation. Hence, an amotivated athlete does no longer have a reason for
taking part in sport. In their opinion, there is no connection between their actions and the purpose
when participating in sport is no longer apparent to athlete (Alexandris et al., 2002).
People’s motivation differs in line with changes in their perception of self-determination and
competence, according Deci and Ryan (1985, 1991) cognitive evaluation theory.
Vallerand et al. (1995) stated that Intrinsic Motivation (IM) or Identification should increase
through events that lead to gains while decreasing (Amotivation) lack of purpose and
17. Running Head 17
intentionality in one’s actions, (Introjection) actions performed with feeling of pressure in order
to avoid guilt/anxiety or attain pride/ego-enhancements (Deci and Ryan, 1985) and (External
Regulation) behaviors performed to satisfy an external demand or obtain an externally imposed
reward contingency.
This theory has been supported by a substantial amount of field and laboratory research (Deci
and Ryan, 1985, 1991; Vallerand, 1993) over the last two decades.
In the realm of sport athlete exhibited self-determined forms of motivation towards sport, the
more they perceived themselves as competed and self-determined (Briere et al., 1995) with
interpersonal behavior another determinants of motivation is.
Research done in the past regarding perceptions of coaches behaviors (Pelletier et al. 1988),
parents behavior (Grolnick, Ryan and Deci, 1991) and teachers behaviors, have demonstrated
that self-determined forms of motivation can be fostered while reducing Amotivation if feedback
of competence and a clear structure of rationale for doing an activity is provided (Vellerand et al.
1995). Interpersonal behaviors and autonomy supportive behaviors providing opportunities for
choice where the sense of autonomy of the individual is enhanced, has been found to have a
similar effect (Pelletier et al., 1995).
Having said that, instances where coaches do not care for the athlete can foster
Amotivation. Such impersonal behavior has also been shown to undermine Identification and
Intrinsic Motivation (Fortier et al., 1995).
18. Running Head 18
3. The SMS-28
To have an instrument that validly and reliably measure the different motivational forms
towards sport it is necessary, in order to study the different relations between motivations,
consequences and determinants in the sport domain. That is why existing measures of Intrinsic
and/or Extrinsic sport motivation such as Weiss, Brenemeier and Shewchuk’s (1985) instrument
of pits Intrinsic Motivation against Extrinsic Motivation on the same continuum; and even
Dwyer’s (1988) and McAuley et al. (1989) sport Intrinsic Motivation scale which solely assesses
Intrinsic Motivation present conceptual problems, weak factorial structures and do not permit to
assess all seven constructs. When conducting research on sport motivation it is important that the
instrument used is based on valid theoretical conceptualization and that the scale can adequately
assess (which other existing scale could not do) Intrinsic, Extrinsic and Amotivation toward
sport. In light of that importance the EMS was developed and validated by Briere et al. (1995).
Made up of seven subscales of four items each and originally constructed in French, the Echelle
de motivation dans les Sport (EMS) scale evaluate the three different types of Intrinsic
Motivation (to accomplish, to know, to experience stimulation and to accomplish things), three
types of Extrinsic Motivation (introjection, identification and external regulation) and
Amotivation. The EMS focuses on the athlete’s perceived reasons for engaging in the sport and
in the scale motivation is operationalized as the underlying ‘why’ of behavior (Deci and Ryan,
1985). Therefore the items represent possible answers to the question athletes are asked “why do
you practice your sport?” consequently reflecting the different motivational types (Tuson, 1995).
600 athletes with a mean age of 18.4 years, recruited from different sports background were
involved in the preliminary and validation studies of the EMS scale. The ‘Echelle de motivation
dans les Sport’ revealed a satisfactory internal consistency levels (a mean alpha score of .82), in
19. Running Head 19
addition of showing temporal stability of moderate to high indices over one month period (mean
test-retest correlation of .69) (Blais, et al. 1995).
The seven-factor structure of the ‘Echelle de Motivation dans les Sport’ was confirmed through
results of a confirmatory factor analysis ‘LISREL’ (Fortier et al. 1995). Finally, the EMS was
able to predict sport drop-out (Pelletier et al., 1988), and to support the construct validity of the
scale a correlation analysis was done among the seven subscales. The correlation analysis was
then extended to other psychological construct (e.g. interest towards sport, satisfaction and
positive emotions experienced during sport practice) relevant to the sports domain.
3.1 Criticisms of the SMS
The psychometric properties of the SMS have been questioned by a number of researchers in
recent years.
Among the critics of the SMS were Mallett, Jackson, Newcombe and Otero-Forero (2007) who
claimed that without a measure of integrated regulation the scale did not represent all the
constructs in the in the Self-Determination theory framework. Mallet et al. (2007) also suggested
the removal of certain items from the scale and that the intrinsic subscales should be combined
into one measure; with support from a study in which the confirmatory factor analysis yielded
lower fit indices for the SMS subscales (Martens and Webber, 2002).
In light of these findings, a revised version of the SMS entitled the SMS-6 was proposed (Mallet,
et al., 2007).
The fundamental structure of the scale across majority of the samples across literature was
confirmed by Pelletier et al. (2007), with variable results acknowledged in some specific studies.
20. Running Head 20
Pelletier et al. (2007) concluded that variability was the result of psychometric properties and
sample differences of some of the items.
In addition they claimed that the in the SMS-6 suggested by Mallet et al. (2007) may have
problems of its own.
The identified problems were mainly of external validity and lack of insufficient information
about the new items (Pelletier et al. 2013).
In addition some of the added items as part of the suggested integrated subscales were simply
modified to be applicable to sport and there were taken from other Self-Determination based
motivation scales, such as the Motivation Towards the Environment scales (Pelletier, Tuson and
Green-Demers, 1998). Even though some of the proposed items overlapped with the items
measuring intrinsic/identified regulation, they did fit reasonably well.
An alternative measure of sport motivation as conceptualized by the Self-Determination Theory
is the Behavioral Regulation in Sport Questionnaire (BRSQ) developed by Lonsdale, Hodge and
Rose (2008). The brains behind the BRSQ used a complete new set of items, in contrast to
Mallet et al. (2007) SMS-6 scale.
There were two versions of the BRSQ, the BRSQ-6 and BRSQ-8 proposed by Lonsdale et al.
(2008). Both versions contained similar items, however they differed in the type of motivation
they assess; the BRSQ-6 assesses general intrinsic motivation rather than all three types of
intrinsic motivation, while the BRSQ-8 measures the three different forms intrinsic motivation
(accomplishment, knowledge and experience new stimuli) as proposed by Pelletier et al. (1995)
and also assesses integrated, identified, introjected, external regulation and amotivation.
(Pelletier et al, 2013). Overall the scale and subscales had all good internal consistency, good one
week test-retest reliability and good factorial validity as a result of four studies. Having said that
21. Running Head 21
there were some inconsistency when assessing the relationship between the BRSQ-6 and the
index of burnout and flow; there was also inconsistency detected when testing for a simplex
pattern of correlation among the six subscales to assess the construct validity (Vallerand et al.,
2013).
While overall the differences between the intrinsic motivation and identified/itegrated
regulation (self-determined subscales) and the external and introjected regulation (non-self-
determined subscales) were supported by test results; with finer discrimination detected to be
lacking between flow and burn-out concepts, intrinsic motivation, identified/integrated
regulation and between introjected and external regulation scores in relations with Amotivation.
Although, the BRSQ in sum does look to assess the Self-Determination Theory constructs with
no apparent discrimination among the self-determined forms of motivation assessed by the
subscales and among the non-self-determined forms of motivation asses by the subscales (Rocchi
et al., 2013).
22. Running Head 22
4. Methods
Participants
A total sample of 20 participants of whom 10 were elite athletes (8 males; 2 females) and
10 were non-elite athletes (3 females; 7 males) with a mean age of 25.10. The recruited
participants were track and field athletes (sprinters, long distance and hurdlers) with running
their main event. Participants were recruited through word of mouth at their training complex
(Mile End track and field stadium) both recreational athletes and elite athletes.
All subjects were asked to participate in person in order to collect data for this study. Data were
anonymous after the both groups filled out the questionnaires and participation was completely
voluntary. No compensation was provided to the athletes that took part in the research.
Procedure
Participants completed a paper questionnaire entitled Sport Motivation Scale – 28 (SMS-
28). The study was advertised as an anonymous questionnaire about type of motivation in
athletes and non-athletes. The questionnaire assessed participants’ reasons for engaging in their
chosen sport activity. Prior to beginning completing the questionnaire all participants were
required to read and sign a consent form and were informed of the purpose of the study as well
as their participant rights. The coach of the elite athletes was asked for permission to oversee
the questionnaires after a practice, and after practice was over he allowed the questionnaires to
be handed out.
Non-athletes who had not yet begun training or had just finished running on the track were
also asked to participate on site.
23. Running Head 23
Measures
The study is a 3x2 mixed design and was analyzed using an ANOVA.
The IV groups in the study were the type of motivation in athletes vs. non-athletes. The type of
the data that was analysed was Nominal (groups) and Interval (scale). The groups had two levels
(athletes and no athletes) while the scale had three levels which were the types of motivation
(intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation and amotivation). The within groups IV in the present
study was scale of motivation.
Sport Motivation Scale – 28 (Pelletier et al., 1995)
Using the self-determination framework, the scale was developed with the aim to measure
people’s level of motivation towards their chosen sport. The degree to which the listed motives
were paralleled with they own personal reasons for doing the sport was reported by partecipants.
Subjects were scored on the following categories: Intrinsic Motivation (to know, to accomplish
and to experience new stimulation), Extrinsic Motivation (Identified Regulation, Introjected
Regulation and Integrated Regulation) and Amotivation (Malett et al., 2007) using a 7 point
Likert scale ranging from 1 (does not correspond at all) to 7 (corresponds exactly).
24. Running Head 24
4.1 Results
The results of the study are as follow.
The Mauchly test is not significant, which means that Sphericity can be assumed (Table.4).
There is a significant different between type of motivation that were found across groups
(athletes vs. non-athletes) f (2, 32) =123.05, p<.001.
There was a significant interaction between types of motivation between athletes and non-
athletes (fig. 1) suggests that athletes have higher level of Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation than
non-athletes, who had higher level of Amotivation f (2, 32) = 11.24, p,.001.
Levene’s test was significant for Intrinsic motivation but not for the other types (Table.3).
There was a significant different between athletes and non-athletes, with results showing it being
higher within athletes t (14.53) = 2.90,p< .017 (p=.011).
Also there was no significant difference in Extrinsic motivation between athletes and non-
athletes, even though there was a trend to be higher among athletes t (17) = 1.43, p=.172 (not
significant). There was also a significant different in Amotivation, as it was higher is non-athletes
t (18) = -3.02, p<.017 (p=.007).
Table .1 - Statistics
Gender Sport Age
N Valid 20 20 20
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 1.2500 1.5000 25.1000
Table. 2 - Within-Subjects Factors
Measure: Motivation
factor1 Dependent Variable
1 Intrinsic
2 extrinsic
3 Amotivation
25. Running Head 25
Table.3 – Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-
tailed
)
Mean
Differenc
e
Std.
Error
Differenc
e
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Intrinsic Equal
variance
s
assume
d
5.84
1
.027
2.82
1
17 .012 20.05556 7.10821 5.05855
35.0525
6
Equal
variance
s not
assume
d
2.90
3
14.53
1
.011 20.05556 6.90915 5.28751
34.8236
0
Extrinsic Equal
variance
s
assume
d
.855 .368
1.42
6
17 .172 7.18889 5.04184
-
3.44846
17.8262
4
Equal
variance
s not
assume
d
1.46
7
14.49
6
.164 7.18889 4.89979
-
3.28645
17.6642
2
Amotivati
on
Equal
variance
s
assume
d
1.74
3
.203
-
3.01
9
18 .007 -8.30000 2.74894
-
14.0753
1
-
2.52469
Equal
variance
s not
assume
d
-
3.01
9
16.06
4
.008 -8.30000 2.74894
-
14.1256
0
-
2.47440
26. Running Head 26
Table. 4 - Mauchly's Test of Sphericitya
Measure: Motivation
Within
Subjects Effect
Mauchly's
W
Approx. Chi-
Square df Sig.
Epsilonb
Greenhouse-
Geisser
Huynh-
Feldt
Lower-
bound
factor1 .694 5.481 2 .065 .766 .883 .500
Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized transformed
dependent variables is proportional to an identity matrix.
a. Design: Intercept + Sport
Within Subjects Design: factor1
b. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected
tests are displayed in the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.
27. Running Head 27
Table. 5- Tests of Within-Subjects Effects
Measure: Motivation
Source
Type III Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
factor1 Sphericity
Assumed
21910.674 2 10955.337 123.048 .000
Greenhouse-
Geisser
21910.674 1.531 14308.638 123.048 .000
Huynh-Feldt 21910.674 1.767 12401.380 123.048 .000
Lower-bound 21910.674 1.000 21910.674 123.048 .000
factor1 * Sport Sphericity
Assumed
2000.896 2 1000.448 11.237 .000
Greenhouse-
Geisser
2000.896 1.531 1306.674 11.237 .001
Huynh-Feldt 2000.896 1.767 1132.502 11.237 .000
Lower-bound 2000.896 1.000 2000.896 11.237 .004
Error(factor1) Sphericity
Assumed
2849.067 32 89.033
Greenhouse-
Geisser
2849.067 24.501 116.285
Huynh-Feldt 2849.067 28.269 100.785
Lower-bound 2849.067 16.000 178.067
29. Running Head 29
5. Discussion
The purpose of this study was to try providing a general understanding of what motivates
elite athletes and non-athletes to take part in a particular sport, by assessing the different
types of motivation (Intrinsic, Extrinsic and Amotivation) based on the Self-Deterination
Theory framework.
There was a significant different between the two assessed groups Intrinsic motivation
level, suggesting that generally an elite athlete’s drive to engage in a sporting activity
comes from ‘within’ and this motive can either be because he/she wants to accomplish
something within their chosen sporting field, wants to know more about the practiced
sport (e.g. better training technique to gain advantage over competitors) or to experience
new stimuli. This finding is slightly against the general public’s perception of what is the
driving force behind an athlete’s motivation, as many believe that they are just after the
glory, prestige and prizes (e.g. medals and money).
Surprisingly elite athletes also had higher level of Extrinsic motivation, even thought
there was no significant difference between the groups. Prior to these findings, the
expectation was for the non-athletes to have more reasons to be extrinsically motivated as
they are more likely to engage in sport for reason such as image (fashion, looks and
media), people (peers, role models and social) and health and wellbeing. Having said
that, it is also easy to understand why elite athletes had higher Extrinsic levels as family
be a reason for a person to begin a career in sport.
Studies done on the influence of family in development of talent by Bloom et al. (1985)
reported that parents allowed they children to decide whether they want to practice a
sport formally or not during their early years; followed by a period of dedication by the
30. Running Head 30
individual in their teenage years, in which the parents provide moral and financial
support. Bloom et al. (1985) findings also stated that in the later years when the
individual was then a full time athlete the role of the parents became meanly of moral
support (Cote, 1999: p.397).
In addition, another reason why Extrinsic motivation was higher among elite athletes,
could be because an athlete is more likely to keep up the hard work and stay motivated if
they can see their efforts materialized through rewards (e.g. medals) and personal
achievement (e.g. beating competitors, breaking records).
On the Amotivation side non-athletes as predicted had higher levels Amotivation, with
results showing a significant difference compared to the elite athletes. Why non-athletes
were more amotivated, could be because there is no added pressure (e.g. providing
financial income for self/family) for their reason to commit to a sport are simply for
social, hobby, health and wellbeing. Which means that if any of the reasons for why they
practice the sport become compromised, or they feel incompetent or failure to value the
sport or its outcome; they are more likely to lack motivation and become amotivated.
A limitation to the study was that it did not assess all the subscales within the different
types of motivation. Furthermore, another limitations to the study were the size of
participants as there was a small number of athletes and non-athletes, also the accuracy of
the questionnaire as the participants completed the questionnaire during a time when they
would rather be practicing their sport; which could have made the participants not
reading the questions carefully and answering them in a hurry.
31. Running Head 31
There may also be some doubts regarding the applicability of the findings as one could
say that they cannot be applied to other sports, as the subjects were mainly track and field
(runners) practitioners. However, to some extent the findings can still be applied to other
sporting fields, due to the flexibility of the items in the questionnaire as they are not
specific to one particular sport.
Future studies should include follow up research on each different subscales within the
different types of motivation. Also, future studies should focus on study of ‘talent’ and
the impact it has on motivation through a longitudinal study by tracking a person’s for
sport from school years (e.g. looking at P.E records) all the way to their adult years and
see if them having a talent for a sport has motivated them to take on the sport on a more
professional and competitive level.
32. Running Head 32
6. Conclusion
In conclusion, The purpose of this study was to provide a review of the (SDT) Self-
Determination theory of motivation within sport and to assess the different types of
motivation in elite and non-elite athletes using the Sport Motivational Scale; another
reason for choosing the current topic for the academic research was to understand a bit
more the topic of motivation in relation to athletes and explain what motivates someone
to put their efforts, commitment and time in a sporting activity.
There are various definitions of Motivation provided by various researchers and
philosopher all slightly difference from time to time. Since then Motivation concepts and
theories have evolved and there is not one that could be said to be the more appropriate to
explain motivation within the human beings, so the current study was not going to
provide the groundbreaking findings that philosophers and psychologist have been
looking for; however, the current study has been able to give a general and
understandable description of motivation and how it can be evaluated within the context
of sport.
Human beings are creatures with endless potentials and understanding the blue print
behind their motivation is the key to unlock their potential.
33. Running Head 33
References
Amorose, A.J. and Horn, T.S. (2000) '', Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, Vol. 22, pp. 64-
65.
Bollak, S., Taka¡cs, J., Kalmar, Z., Dobay, B. (2011) 'External and internal sport motivations of
young adults', Original Paper, Vol. 3, pp. 101-102.
Borms, J. (2008) Directory of Sport Science: A Journey Through Time : the Changing Face of
ICSSPE, 5th edn., USA: Human Kinetics.
Brunel, P.C. (1999) 'Relationship between achievement goal orientations and perceived
motivational climate on intrinsic motivation', Scandinevian Journal of Medicine & Science in
Sports, Vol. 9, pp. 365-367.
Eix, T. (2001) Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation in Sport: An Analysis of Gender Differences,
USA: Carleton University.
Graham, S. and Weiner, B. (1996) Theories and Principles of Motivation, USA: Prentice Hall.
Kerr, J. H. (2014) Motivation and Emotion in Sport: Reversal Theory, 1st edn., USA:
Psychology Press.
Kian, T. S., Yusoff, W. F. W. and Rajah, S. (2014) 'DEVELOPMENT OF MOTIVATION
STUDIES: THE CHRONICLES', International Journal of Economics, Commerce and
Management, Vol. 2(7), pp. 1.
Konttinen, N. (2006) Running head: PARTICIPATION IN TRACK AND FIELD SPORTS The
interaction of goal orientation and perceived competence in predicting sustained participation in
competitive sports: A longitudinal study of track and field youth athletes, Finland: Research
Institute for Olympic Sports.
Lai, E. R. (2011) Motivation: A Literature Review, USA: Pearson.
34. Running Head 34
Li, W. (2004) Examining the relationships between ability conceptions, intrinsic motivation,
persistence, and performance, USA: Louisiana State University.
Locke, A. E. and Latham, G. P. (1985) 'The Application of Goal Setting to Sports', Sport
Psychology Today, vol 7(), pp. 206-215.
McKenzie, J. (2012) 'Aspects of sport motivation, an analytical bibliography of British Library
resources ', SPORT & SOCIETY The Summer Olympics and Paralympics through the lens of
social science, pp. 1-2.
Moreno, J. A., Cervelló, E. and González-Cutre, D. (2010) 'The achievement goal and self-
determination theories as predictors of dispositional flow in young athletes ', Anales De
PsicologÃa , Vol. 26(2), pp. 390-392.
Morrow, J. R. (2011) Measurement and Evaluation in Human Performance, 4th edn., USA:
Human Kinetics.
Pelletier, L.G., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R.J.,Tuson, K. M., Briere, N. M. and Blais, M. R.
(1995) 'Toward a New Measure of Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, and Amotivation
in Sports: The Sport Motivation Scale (SMS)', JOURNAL OF SPORT & EXERCISE
PSYCHOLOGY, Vol. 17, pp. 36-40.
Pelletier, L. G., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., Tuson, K. M., Brière, N. M., & Blais, M. R.
(1995). Toward a new measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation in
sports: The Sport Motivation Scale (SMS). Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 17, 35-53.
Roberts, G. C and Treasure, D. C. (2012) Advances in Motivation in Sport and Exercise, 3rd
edn., USA: Human Kinetics.
Ryan,R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000) 'Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and
New Directions', Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 56-65.
SPRAY, C. M., BIDDLE, S. J. H. & CHATZISARANTIS, N. L. D. (2006) 'Understanding
motivation in sport: An experimental test of achievement goal and self-determination theories',
European Journal of Sport Science, Vol. 6(1), pp. 43-45.
35. Running Head 35
Tenenbaum,G. and Eklund, R.C. (2007) Handbook of Sport Psychology, 3rd edn., USA: John
Wiley & Sons.
Vallerand, R.J. and Ratelle, C.F. (2002) 'Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: A Hierarchical
Model', in Edward L. D. and Ryan R. M. (ed.) Handbook of Self-determination Research. USA:
University Rochester Press, pp. 37-38.
Van Heerden, C. H. (2014) 'The relationships between motivation type and sport participation
among students in a South African context', Journal of Physical Education and Sport
Management, Vol. 5(6), pp. 67-68.
Vellerand, R. J. (2004) 'Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation in Sport', Encypledia of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 2, pp. 427-430.
Weinberg, R. S. (2003) 'GOAL SETTING IN SPORT AND EXERCISE: RESULTS,
METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH1', REVISTA
DE PSICOLOGIA DEL DEPORTE, vol 8 (7), pp. 116-117.
36. Running Head 36
Appendix
Appendix A
Gender
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Male 15 75.0 75.0 75.0
Female 5 25.0 25.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Appendix B
Sport
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Athletes 10 50.0 50.0 50.0
NonAthletes 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Appendix C
Between-Subjects Factors
Value Label N
Sport 1.00 Athletes 8
2.00 NonAthletes 10
