Psychology of Sport and Different Cases - Essay Example

?a) A team that consistently wins has just lost a game: A team that consistently wins would consider that the task of winning the next game is very stable under the stability dimension header. This shows us that the team believes that it has ability to win the next game. However, if this team loses the game they would associate with external locus of control. They would say that they lost the game because the other team was very difficult and the opponent team could have beaten any other team. They would not associate this failure with their internal locus of control. They will never say that they lost because they were under prepared or played badly. Since they consistently win, this loss would be considered as something that was beyond their control and they not because of any fault of their own, but because of the fact that other team outplayed them in the match as the opponent team was too good to be beaten not just by this tea, but by any other team in the league. Similarly, the team who won the game won the game would states that they won the match purely on their ability and they were the better team on the day. b) A team that tends to lose has just won a game;  In this case, the stability factor would be completely different that what was in the previous situation. Here the stability factor is completely unstable. The team would not believe that they can win the game. However, they would give the credit of winning to themselves and declare that it was the hard work put in by the coaches and the players that lead to the victory. They may also state that they have prepared very hard for the game and defeated a better team on their own without any help from any external factor. This is because attribution theory states that people tend to associate winning with themselves and losses with some external factors. However, since this is something that the team can cherish therefore they will associate the victory with their hard work and effort. Similarly, the team who would lose this match would associate this loss with the external factor such as the referee’s mistake, the wet pitch or the home ground’s advantage that the other team had etc. c) A player made a physical error on a relatively easy play: The player would never accept that he made the error. He would rather believe that it was the referee’s mistake and he did not break any law of the game. This again would fall on the unstable stability factor and external locus of control. Since the players did not want to accept that he made the error he would put it on the external factors such as the referee’s mistake, the pitch was slippery or any other reason that would put the blame on external factors and would reveal this player from the blame of committing a foul play. Similarly, the other players in the team who will lose a point because of this player’s mistake would question his sincerity to the team’s cause. d) The underdog team won: The underdog team’s win will lie in the unstable head. However, since it is a win they would associate it with their hard work and effort. They would once again give the credit to the coach and the players saying that they were working on this match for months and it is because of their hard work only that they have won this match. The other team (superior team) would give the credit to external factors. They would say that they deserved two or three penalties which the referee failed to spot. They would say that the referee was not giving the right decisions which cause their team a match. They would also say that the crowd created an atmosphere which made it impossible for them to win. e) A player failed to catch a pass after slipping on the field: The player would associate the failure because of the poor luck or the good luck of the opponents. He would once again say that the pitch was not good enough to play the match. He will also state that it was not because of any of his mistake that he missed the pass and blame the external factors for the failure. This again matches the main attribution principle that people associate failures with some unexpected circumstances, but think that all the gains are associated with their hard work and good performance. The entire team would consider that he missed the pass because of this lack of effort or he did not train very hard in the practice. f)  The team, despite making several physical and mental errors, beat a poorly skilled opponent: The team would consider that the other team was too weak and hence they won the match despite making so many errors. They would ignore the moments of brilliance from their own play and would consider that this team was gifted to them by a very weak opponent. This would be attributing good results to the external circumstances. This happens very rarely when the outcome if good, but there are points to ponder from the game. However, had this team lost the match making same errors, they would associated the loss with external factors. This shows us that a good outcome can be related to external factors, but a bad outcome is never owned by any person, sportsman, or any team. g) A batter just struck out against a "poor" pitcher: The batter would consider that he is not good enough to play the game or he would never bat any more. He would instead try his luck in any other sport or in any other field in the same game. Since, the batter knew that the pitcher is an extremely poor player and hence there is no way he could have lost his wicket against this player, he is associating the loss to himself and is not giving any credit to the poor. He would think that it was the good luck of the pitcher that he struck out. Had he got out against a better pitcher, he would have associated the loss to any other outside factor rather than attributing the loss to his lack of skills. h)  The referee called a penalty that disallowed your team's goal: I would attribute this as an external factor that caused our team to suffer. I would definitely consider it as a refereeing mistake and not because my team was at fault. This happens when the stability factor is unstable and locus of control is external. The referee was in control to either refuse or grant this penalty. He went against the wishes of my team and supporter and thus I would consider that the referee is at mistake. If the striker completes a goal from this penalty and my team loses the match then it would be the referee to blame and not my team because the referee was in a position to rule the penalty or decide against it. Hence, I would attribute this loss to the wrong decision of the referee rather than attributing it to the poor foul or play committed by my team members. i) The team just lost to an opponent with inferior skills: There was no way that the team could have been beaten by such a poor team. This could have not happened possibly. Hence, the blame of the loss goes to the external factor. It was either the referee or the crowd that acted as 12th man and despite playing our best, our team lost to a inferior opponent. In this case, the team would associate the loss to external factors because there is no way the inferior team could have beaten this team. Hence, the locus of control in this type of loss is external and stability factor is unstable. References: Anshel, M.H. (2011) Sports Psychology: From Theory to Practice. 5th edition, Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco Green, C.D. & Benjamin, L.T. (2009). Psychology gets in the game. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Anderson, C. A., Krull, D. S., & Weiner, B. (1996). Explanations: Processes and consequences. In E. T. Higgins, & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 271-296). New York: Guilford PressRoehampton University. (2011). SPORT PSYCHOLOGY: The importance of attributions - or how to learn from success and failure alike. Retrieved on 20 September 2011. http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/attribution.html Williams, J. (2005). Applied Sports Psychology: Personal Growth to Peak Performance. McGraw-Hill Read More