Transcript Biological Psychology Modules 3 & 4

Chapters 11-12 (LeUnes):
Leadership and Group Cohesion Audience
Effects on Sport
Psychology of Sport
Sep 28-Oct 5, 2009
Class #14-17
Definition of a Leader...
One that leads or guides
One in charge or command of others
One who has influence, especially of a
political nature
American Heritage Dictionary Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
What are the Common Traits of a Leader?
Can you find characteristics common
to the great leaders of both past and
present?
Does every leader have to have
certain traits?
Leadership Traits - The Big 8
Self-confidence
Trustworthiness/Integrity
Assertiveness
Emotional stability
Sense of Humor/Sociability
Self-awareness and self-objectivity
Cognitive skills
Emotional Intelligence
What not to do:
Have an insensitive, abrasive, or bullying style
Be aloof or arrogant
Betray personal trust
Have self-centered ambition
Fail to constructively face obvious problems
Micro-manage
Select poor subordinates
Think short-term
Don’t adapt to your boss’s different style
Overly depend on a “sponsor” or mentor
Common Leadership Traits
What do leadership studies have in
common?
Let’s look at a few in more detail…
Intelligence
Definition:
The capacity to acquire and apply
knowledge
Application:
To make difficult decisions
To find information
To synthesize and interpret data
Discussion:
Is it necessary to be intelligent to be a
good leader?
Self-Confidence
Definition
Confidence in oneself or one’s abilities
Application:
Willing to tackle difficult situations
Confident in own abilities
Discussion:
Can self-confidence be a hindrance in
certain situations and/or contexts?
Integrity
Definition
Rigid adherence to a code or standard of
values
Application:
Being able to make the ‘right’ decision
Modelling ethical propriety
Discussion:
Can integrity hinder a leader from making
certain decisions?
Sociability
Definition
The disposition or quality of being sociable.
Application:
Being able to work with different groups
towards a common goal
Being seen as a positive leader from a variety
of groups
Discussion:
Is it possible to be an effective leader without
social skills?
Trait Theory:
“The Great Man Theory”
Focuses solely on the leader
Emphasis on core traits for ‘success’
Organizations should focus the
selection process on these traits
Effective for individuals:
Allows for growth/change
Reflection
How about in sports???

John Wooden is always mentioned
when talking about the best leaders in
sports…
Vince Lombardi:
“Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing…”
Behavior Theory:
But what of the situation?
What of the subordinates?
What of the culmination of different
events and situations?
Situation-Contingent Leader Influence
Contingency Trait Theories
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
- Personality traits that lead to leader effectiveness
in one situation may lead to failure in another
- Personality traits are linked here to the specific
situation
- Examples: Doug Collins; Bobby Knight
Coach Doug Collins had differences
with his young star...
Bobby Knight:
“My way or the
highway…”

Discipline is his trademark…
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Two Factors involved:
Personality of the leader
Degree to which the situation gives the
leader power
Two types of motivation involved:
Relationship motivation
Task motivation
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Born or not born debate…
Supporters of this theory feel leadership
training programs are of little to no value
They can only enhance power and
influence that the leader already
possesses
Path-Goal Theory
Situation Specific Leader Influence
This theory is concerned with the
situations under which various
leader behaviors are most
effective
Effective leadership is a function of
learned behaviors that are situation
specific
Path-Goal Theory
Emphasis is on the needs and goals
of the athlete
Coach is viewed as more of a
facilitator
Coach helps athlete to realize his or
her goals
Bottom line: Guide the athlete to
success
Tom Landry and Roger Staubach may be
good examples of this theory...
Path-Goal Theory
Born or not born debate…
Here, the view would be that individual
can be taught to be a good leader
Life Cycle Theory
Emphasis in leadership behavior on
the subordinates and not the leader
The type of leadership style for any
specific situation depends on the
maturity of the subordinate
Life Cycle Theory
Task structure behavior decreases
with increased maturity
Relationship behavior is low when
dealing with athletes of both low and
high levels of maturity but high when
dealing with athletes of moderate
levels
Case (1987):
Sport Psychology implications
Feels young athletes who lack
maturity and highly skilled and mature
athletes would not respond well to
high task structure
They would benefit from coaches high in
relationship motivation
Moderately mature athletes need
more structure
But less relationship motivation
Life Cycle Theory
Born or not born debate…
Again, the view here would be that
individual can be taught to be a good
leader
The Ohio State/Michigan Studies
- Initiating Consideration: the extent to
which a leader is approachable and shows
personal concern for employees
- Initiating Structure: the degree to which a
leader concentrates on group goal
attainment
The idea here is that leadership behavior ca be
trained
Okay, so far we can break leadership
theories down like this:
Trait – Innate
Behavior – Can be
Trained
Universal
Trait or Great
Man Theory
Michigan and
OSU studies
Situation Contingent
Fiedler’s
Contingency
Model of
Leadership
Path-Goal
Theory
Life Cycle
Theory
Other theories:
The Functional Model
Chelladurai’s Multidimensional
Model
The Functional Model
Leadership does not rest with one
person but rests on a set of behaviors
by the group that gets things done
Any member of the group can perform
these behaviors
This model places greater emphasis
on how an organization or task is
being led rather than who has been
formally assigned a leadership role
The Functional Model
A sport example of this model would
be a group or committee that has
been established to determine the
club’s social activities for the season
Chelladurai’s Multidimensional
Model
Proposed indicator of effective leadership
Performance outcomes
Member satisfaction
Interaction of three components of
leadership are involved here:
Prescribed leader behaviors
Established norms
Preferred leader behaviors
Athletes prefer these in their coach
Actual leader behaviors
Coach’s actual behaviors
Best case scenario:
Congruence
Congruence between all three types
lead to optimal performance and
satisfaction
Possible Problems…
All three leader behaviors are incongruent
If actual is incongruent with both prescribed
and preferred – outcome is that coach will
be fired
If prescribed and actual are congruent but
incongruent with preferred – outcome is
good performance despite low satisfaction
If actual and preferred are congruent but
prescribed is incongruent – outcome is a
satisfied but low performance athlete or
team
Playing Position and Leadership
Those playing the central positions
are often the leaders
Example: In baseball from what
position do you find go on to become
managers? Catchers
Leadership Scale for Sport (LSS)
See handout
Group Cohesion
The strength of the bonds among
group members
Interpersonal cohesiveness:
Enjoyment of one another’s
company
Task cohesiveness: Commitment to
the group’s task
Factors Affecting Team Cohesion
Groups Size
Task
Team Tenure
Satisfaction
Groups Size: Social Loafing
A group-produced reduction in
individual output on easy tasks in
which contributions are pooled
Individuals in a group who are
working below their potential
Ringelman’s (1880’s) experiments
Individual output declines on pooled tasks
in all his experiments
For example in a rope-tugging task
Units pulled in rope-tugging task:
1 person 100
2 people 186
3 people 255
8 people 392
Social Loafing
Ingham et al (1974)
Blind folded rope pulling
DV: Effort
IV: Thought people were behind them
or not
Subjects pulled 18% harder when they
thought they were alone
Latane, Williams, and Harkins
(1979)

Sat participant in a
group of 6 people…
– Blindfolded participant and
had them put on
headphones
– Played clapping or
shouting over headphones
– I.V. thought they were
making noise alone or
with 5 others
– Results: 1/3 less noise
when they thought others
were also making noise
Why does loafing happen ?
Diffusion of responsibility:
In a group we feel able to share responsibility
and this may lead to a reduction of effort
Free-rider effect:
If we feel like our contribution is not
essential…still benefit from the group and give
little in return (low input, high output)
Sucker effect:
Willing to do your share but not more than that
(esp. if others are free-riding)
Since everyone is benefiting and getting credit,
you don’t want to be the sucker who does all the
work (and no recognition), therefore do the
minimum requirement
We loaf less when…
If personal efforts are identifiable
If a task is challenging, appealing, or involving
If the task is meaningful and important
If we think our contribution is essential
If we are working with friends vs. strangers
If the group expects to be punished for
poor performance
If the group is small
If the group is cohesive
Task
Interactive vs. Coactive sports
Team Tenure
Team half-life
Team Satisfaction
Martens and Peterson (1971)
Williams and hacker (1982)
Social Facilitation
If performance can be individually
evaluated, the presence of others will
be arousing (improve performance on
simple tasks but interfere with
performance on complex tasks)
Triplett (1898)
One of first sport or social psychology
experiment
We mentioned this during our talk first
week of semester
Zajonc (1965)
Proposed that the mere presence of
others increases arousal which in turn
affects our performance
Zajonc (1969)
Cockroach study
Cockroach placed in a tube with a bright
light at one end of the tube…
To escape the light, the cockroach had to
run down the tube and into a darkened
box at the other end of the tube…
DV: Speed of escape
IV: Presence or absence of other cockroaches
Results: Cockroaches were faster to
escape when other cockroaches were
present
Criticisms of Zajonc
Support for this model was eroded when
later studies showed that the type of
audience was important e.g. home or
away fans
The exact mechanism behind the social
facilitation has yet to be determined but all
of the following have been proposed:
heightened self-awareness, selfconsciousness, self-presentation concern,
self-monitoring and self-attention
Michaels et al. (1982)
Secretly rated pool players in a hall as
above average or below average ability…
Then a group of confederates came and
stood by their table as they played
The above average players' shot
accuracy improved from 71 to 80%
accurate, while the below average
players slipped from 36 to 25% accurate
Does the Yerkes-Dodson Law applies
here?
The Home Advantage
The presence of a supportive and
interactive audience
Is it real?
Why might it be?
Are their other factors involved than the
court/field?
HOME ADVANTAGE
The belief that a home crowd causes
an advantage for the home team
It is believed that this effect is more
prominent in sports such as
basketball and ice hockey where the
audience are located very close to the
court
The Home Advantage
Functional Assertive Behavior
Superior performance by home team
Dysfunctional Assertive behavior
Inhibited performance by away team
The Hostile Crowd
Case Study: Pacers vs. Pistons
Fight started on the
court…
But then players went
into the stands…
DISTRACTION EFFECT
Barron suggested that crowds cause a
distraction to the performer as a performer
can only attend to a small number of cue’s
while performing
He therefore suggested that simple tasks
were best performed in the presence of a
crowd while complex tasks will be best
performed in isolation
Home Disadvantage
Critical games
Does it cause the home team to “choke”
Self-Presentation Effects
Can sometimes hurt a home team
player’s performance
Baumeister and Steinhilber (1984, 1995)
Critical games might be a home
disadvantage
Self-Presentation Effects
Cottrell questioned the fact that the mere presence
of others would raise arousal levels
He suggested that audiences can have a calming
effect on performers in some circumstances
He suggested that arousal only occurred in front of
an audience when the performer perceived the
audience to be assessing their performance
Self-Presentation Effects


Too much self-attention
Case Studies: Kenny Rogers; Alex
Rodriguez
Basking in Reflected Glory
Everyone enjoys being associated
with a winner
See next slide 
J-E-T-S: JETS, JETS, JETS
Credits
Several slides in this presentation prepared by the
following:
http://www.lennonportal.net/index_files/leader.ppt#257,2,What
is the definition of a Leader?
http://web2.uwindsor.ca/faculty/busad/facpages/reavley/ID07lea
dership.ppt#260
http://www.business.mcmaster.ca/courses/com2ba3/2BA3%20
Week%2011.ppt
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:VH460txzlnkJ:www.
queens.herts.sch.uk/Pe/POWERPOINT_ALEVEL/leadership.ppt+Chelladurai+Multidimensional+Le
adership+PPT&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5
http://www.rickmansworth.herts.sch.uk/departments/PE2/staffar
ea_files/Resources/a2revisionpresentation.ppt