A Social Psychology of Physical Activity By RAINER MARTENS

Within this century, physical edu- cators have begun to search for the complex physiological, psychological, and social factors that interrelate and act as antecedents and consequences of involvement in physical activity. Such areas as exercise physiology and kinesiology have made initial contribu- tions to the understanding of these an- tecedents and consequences. More re- cently, psychology and sociology of sport have emerged as sub-disciplines of considerable importance. Just be- ginning to emerge as an area in its own right is social psychology. This paper* delineates the relationship of social psychology with physical activ- ity, and distinguishes between social psychology and its parent sciences- psychology and sociology. In addition, some of the concerns of a social psy- chology of physical activity are out- lined.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND THE OTHER SCIENCES

The sciences are commonly cate- gorized into three main bodies: the

About the Author Dr. Rainer Martens is presently on the

staff of the Motor Performance and Play Research Laboratory, Children's Research Center, University of Illinois. He has a num- ber of published articles in the Research Quarterly, Journal o f Motor Behavior, Jour- nal of Personality and Social Psychology. His research interests are concerned with the Social Psychology of physical activity.

physical sciences, the biological sci- ences, and the social sciences. Within this scheme, psychology is a hybric being partly a biological and partly a social science. This paper is concerned with the social science aspect. Where psychology is concerned with the be- havior of human beings in relation- ship to their environments, social psy- chology is concerned with human behavior in relationship to the social parts of those environments. Social psy- chology as a behavioral science may be defined as the "study of how human behavior is influenced by the presence, behavior, and products of other hu- man beings, individually and collec- tively, past, present, and future."l

Social psychology has been viewed as a special field within sociology. In fact, some behavioral scientists con- sider social psychology to be "micro- sociology." Regardless of the teminol- ogy, the relationship between sociology and social psychology is important. General sociology is concerned with the forms and processes of collective be ha via^ Sseiaf psychology, however, deals with the articulation between the individual as an actor and as a target

*This paper was written while the au- thor was supported in part by a research grant to the Motor Performance and Play Research Laboratory via the Adler Zone Center by the Department of Mental Health of the State of Illinois and by United States Public Health Service Research Grant MH- 07346 from the National Institute of Nen- tal Health.

A Social Psychology of Physical Activity 9

of effects, and with larger social entities as they affect and are affected by indi- viduals. Thus, social psychology may be considered an interdisciplinary field of study analogous to biophysics and biochemistry. Similarly, social psychol- ogy has attained some maturity and in- dependence from its parent disciplines and is considered as a distinctive field. This distinctiveness rests in two major factors: (1) its interest in the individual as a participant in social relationships, and (2) its emphasis on understand- ing the "social-influence processes" un- derlying these relationships.

Social psychology is primarily con- cerned with the process of social in- fluence. Social influence occurs when- ever one individual responds to the actual or implied presence of one or more other individuals. It may occur in the reciprocal effect of one person upon another in social interaction, or between a group and an individual, or in the relationship between two or more groups. The goal of the social psychologist is to understand these so- cial-influence processes and to predict the behavior of individuals on the basis of these understandings. Conse- quently, the social psychologist as- sumes that social behavior is not ca- pricious but has some recurring order ---or cause and effect. Obviously, every individual has some social experiences that are unique, associated with par- ticular moments; whereas, other ex- periences recur again and again in much the same order or with much the same cause or effect. Social psy- chology attempts to understand the influences producing regularities and

diversities in human social behavior through objective study and the use of scientific methods.

A SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

A social psychology of physical ac- tivity may be defined simply as the application of social psychological theory and methods to the study of human social behavior while involved in physical activity. Physical activity, in this definition, is a somewhat more general term encompassing a large variety of vigorous activities ranging from highly competitive sports to more simple forms of human movement as found in games and calisthenics. In- volvement refers to the relationship an individual has with physical activity. As Kenyon2 notes, involvement may refer to actual participation or primary involvement, and also to such forms as the observance of sporting events or secondary involvement.

Most readers will quickly recognize that the study of human social behavior while involved in physical activity is not really any new development. Phys- ical education literature has examples of social psychological research ap- pearing as early as the 1940's.* The purpose of this paper therefore is not to propose that physical educators be- gin investigating a new field. Physical educators have long been aware that social psychology has considerable

* It is interesting to note that the first so- cial psychological study ever completed (Triplett, 1898) was concerned with the fa- cilitating effects of competition and co-ac- tors on bicycle riding and fishing-reel wind- Ing.

10 QUEST

application to physical education. What is proposed here as "new" is the approach to investigating social psychological phenomena as related to physical activity.

Approaches to Social Psychology HistoricalIy, three distinct ap-

proaches for studying social behavior have influenced modern social psychol- ogy. The oldest is social philosophy characterized by conjecture and specu- lation, usually in the absence of any systematic gathering of factual infor- mation. The next stage known as social empiricism arose in rebellion against the socia1 philosophy approach. A nineteenth century development, social empiricism is characterized by system- atic data-gathering not related to the- ory. This stage, while going beyond con- jecture, is often guided by it. The third and most advanced stage, a twentieth century development, is known as so- cial analysis and focuses on theory de- velopment in conjunction with the con- trolled testing of theoretically derived hypotheses. The major feature of this approach is to go beyond simple de- scriptive data to the level of verifying relationships between variables.

Research by physical educators per- taining to social psychological phe- nomena can best be described as ex- emplifying the social empiricism approach. Most has been oriented toward the investigation of practical problems rather than the resolution of broader theoretical problems. Unfortu- nately, most of this empirical research has not evolved from any systematic research program or from theory. This

unsystematic testing of relationships be- tween variables has been termed the "shot gun" approach. This term de- scribes not only social psychoIogical re- search related to physical activity but much of the research conducted by phys- ical educators in general. Consequently, the social psychological research re- lated to physical activity has derived few, if any significant generalizations.

One other deficiency in previous social psychological research is note- worthy. Many investigations were con- ducted oblivious to existing theory and empirical observations formulated by social psychologists. Upon careful ex- amination of the social psychological literature, considerable research can be found that is quite relevant to physi- cal activity. Physical educators can certainly draw upon these findings to increase their understanding of social- influence processes occurring during physical activity. These social psycho- logical investigations provide valuable information by suggesting alternative hypotheses and procedural refinements. Fortunately, this shortcoming has come to the attention of some dedicated re- searchers. As a result, physical educa- tors today have a greater awareness of the research developments in the be- havioral sciences. Hopefully, the time is past for near-replication of experi- ments completed 20 years previously without utilizing the refinements sug- gested by these studies.

THE SOCIAL ANALYSIS APPROACH

The "new" approach advocated here is the development of a social psychol-

A Social Psychology o f Physical Activity 11

ogy of physical activity which aban- dons both the social philosophy and the social empiricism approaches. Rather than research guided by con- jecture and speculation and aimed solely at the description of social phenomena, "new" research should be directed at understanding the relation- ships underlying these social phenom- ena. Previously, the social empiricism approach provided a description of human characteristics and attributes associated with physical activity. Social analysis represents an extension of so- cial empiricism toward establishing a scientifically valid foundation for what is described. The new social psychol- ogy of physical activity needs to probe beneath the descriptive data to under- stand the nature of causal relation- ships. Social psychology of physical activity research needs to strive for the development of theory and the test- ing of relevant hypotheses derived from these theories.

To alleviate the possibility of con- fusion, the term "theory" needs pre- cise definition. For present purposes, theory is defined according to Ker- linger as:

. . . a set of interrelated constructs (concepts), definitions, and proposi- tions that presents a systematic view of phenomena by specifying rela- tions among variables, with the pur- pose of explaining and predicting the phenomena.3

In these terms, theory may be con- sidered the ultimate aim of science. Also, it is visibly evident that theory development in most subdisciplines of concern to physical educators has pro-

gressed very little. This failure is per- haps attributed to the applied nature of these fields and their heavy reliance upon the parent discipline. Because a social psychology of physical activity has no theories of its own, it is sug- gested that it is appropriate and par- simonious to borrow social psychologi- cal theories and determine their applicability to physical activity. Sys- tematic testing to determine the ap- propriateness of these theories can lead in one of two directions: (1) Support may be found for these theories, or (2) They may be found inappropriate for physical activity. If the latter is the case, the theory can either be aban- doned and a search made for another, or it may be modified based on theory- testing research. If no social psycho- logical theories are found to be ade- quate, physical educators must attempt to construct their own.

The diversity and complexity of be- havioral science research is nowhere manifested to any greater extent than in social psychological research. The complex social processes occurring be- tween individuals, individuals and groups, and between groups themselves form much of the substance of physical activity. The final section of this paper discusses some of these social processes and attempts to show the relationship between them and physical activity.

SOME CONCERNS O F "A SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY O F PHYSICAL ACTIVITY"

In studying social-influence proc- esses, social psychologists commonly

12 QUEST

refer to the constructs that they in- vestigate as variables. A variable is an attribute or condition which can vary in one or more ways and which can be systematically shown to affect or be affected by other attributes or con- ditions. Many social psychological variables can be either "dependent" or "independent" and are not perma- nently fixed as one or the other with regard to the direction of effect when applied to the study of human behavior involved in physical activity. In other words, interest may be either in the effects that social psychological vari- ables have on various aspects of physi- cal activity, or in the effects that physi- cal activity have on social psychological variables. In experiments using the former paradigm, the social psycho- logical variable would be the inde- pendent variable and that aspect of physical activity measured would be the dependent variable. In the latter experimental arrangement, the inde- pendent variable becomes some aspect of physical activity and the dependent variable is some social psychological variable.

So~*ial Influences on Motor Performance

A primary concern of a social psy- chology of physical activity is with an individual's behavior as influenced by other individuals when involved in physical activity. This problem is an example of the social psychological variable as the independent variable and some aspect of physical activity as the dependent variable. Several recent studies have investigated the effects of

passive and active audiences as well as co-actors on one component of physi- cal activity-motor behavior. For ex- ample, the presence of a passive audi- ence has been shown to impair motor skill acquisition but to facilitate the performance of a well-learned motor skill.4 Co-actors (other individuals per- forming the same task at the same time) have also been shown to facili- tate performance on a simple muscular endurance task.5 The influence of an active audience providing praise and re- proof (social reinforcement) on motor skill acquisition is another social proc- ess not yet clearly unders t~od.~ Obser- vational learning or imitation, coopera- tion, and competition are other basic social influence processes requiring fur- ther investigation.

Influence of Physical Activity on Social Performance

In contrast with the above research, a social psychology of physical activity is also concerned with how various facets of physical activity influence social performance. Problems in this area are exemplified by such questions as :

What are the effects of involvement in physical activities on social perform- ance?

What are the consequences of suc- cessful competitive experiences on social performance?

What, if any, social skills are ac- quired during participation in physical activities?

Are certain social skills more effec-

A Social Psychology of Physical Activity 13

tively acquired while engaging in inten- sive physical activity?

What is the effect of physique on personal perception and how does body image influence social performance? Answers to these questions would bring physical educators much closer to realizing and functionally assessing the attainment of the social objective so often claimed.

Paradoxically, this line of research probably has been less explored than any other. It is not difficult, however, to understand why. Manipulation of the independent variable has been difficult enough, but the dependent variable-i.e., social performance or social skills-has often seemed beyond measurement. Recently, however, so- cial psychologists have made substan- tial progress in measuring social per- formance.? Therefore, with the opera- tional measurement of social perform- ance being more feasible and with the methodological advances in the be- havioral sciences, the effects of partici- pation in physical activities on social performance should in the near future receive more experimental attention.

A ttitudes

Among the important social-influ- ence processes with which a social psychology of physical activity is con- cerned are such variables as attitudes, personality, and culture. Probably, the most widely studied social-influence process in physical education research has been the construct of attitude. The study of attitudes is most useful in accounting for individual differences in reacting to a given situation. In

large measure, attitudes conveniently sum up the past history of the individ- ual's social experience to allow differ- ential prediction of individual social behavior.

Attitude research in physical edu- cation probably offers the best ex- ample of using the social empiricism rather than the social analysis ap- proach. This research has typically assessed attitudes toward various sports, athletes, physical education pro- grams at every level, and competi- tion. As a whole, these studies have not been theory oriented, but directed toward practical ends. The variety of methods employed and the diversity of attitudes assessed have made it vir- tually impossible to reach any general- izations. The value of these studies lies in a cataloguing of attitudes for a small sample of the population at one par- ticular point in time. They do not probe beneath the surface to discover how the attitudes are formed or why they change.

A recent exception to the strictly empirical approach in the study of attitudes toward physical activity, how- ever, is noteworthy. Kenyons has used the social analysis approach by con- structing a model to characterize physi- cal activity as a social psychological phenomenon. His proposed model is based upon empirical data from which hypotheses may be derived for the study of attitudes toward physical ac- tivity. Even though, as Kenyon sug- gests, his model is only a crude begin- ning, it should be recognized as a big step in the right direction. Future at- titude research in physical education

14 QUEST

needs to investigate the underlying reasons for the formation of attitudes toward physical activity and how and why these attitudes change. Anecdot- ally, a most fascinating problem is to discover why such a discrepancy exists between positively expressed at- titudes toward physical activity and actual behavior!

Personality

Deeply entrenched in the sciences is a desire for parsimonious explanation of behavior. This desire is commonly bought at the price of grossly imprecise general statements about social be- havior. It is apparent that persons differ markedly in their orientations to the social environment. General statements about the reaction of per- sons to a particular situation must all too often be modified. Therefore, adequate development of a social psychology of physical activity will ultimately depend on the integration of personality constructs into the explan- ation of social behavior of individuals engaged in physical activity.

Personality constructs refer to an individual's unique characteristics. The contemporary view of personality fo- cuses on dispositions that lead individ- uals to typical responses rather than focusing on the responses alone. Dis- positions are considered to function within the individual's psychological field and to intervene between experi- ence and responses to social stimuli. A social psychology of physical activity is concerned with personality in two ways. First, it is concerned with the interaction of personality dispositions

and situational variables on individual behavior while involved in physical activity. Second, it is concerned with the impact of the social environment surrounding physical activity on per- sonality development.

Physical educators have been inter- ested in personality dispositions for some time, but the research to date typifies the "shot gun" approach. In- vestigation of such dispositions as anx- iety, need achievement, risk taking, authoritarianism, and internal and ex- ternal locus of control by physical educators suffers from the same weak- nesses identified in attitude research. Again, personality research offers a good example of the social empiricism approach. Any generalizations reached are extremely tenuous as a result of the diversity of methods used and sam- ples studied. These descriptive data are not without use, but only by em- ploying the social analysis approach can the nature of causal relationships between personality dispositions and components of physicaI activity be un- derstood. Finally, it is apparent that the consideration of situational vari- ables alone, without respect to the interaction of situation and personality, is a fruitless quest.

Culture

Another important influence on physical activity and sport is culture. A society's culture consists of the re- lationships and social arrangements passed on and institutionalized to routinely handle the characteristic problems of that s ~ c i e t y . ~ By providing social reality, the basic psychological

A Social Psychology of Physical Activity 15

effect of culture is to influence a society's members toward distinctive ways of thinking and acting. It should be important for physical educators to understand the effects of cultural norms on individual participation in physical activity. In social psychdogi- cal terms, norms and roles are in the nature of social expectancies which individuals share in their psycholugical fields. Roles refer especially to those particular expectancies regarding ap- propriate behavior for a person oc- cupying a position in a given situation.

From a social psychological point of view, physical educators need to be concerned about the cultural influences on individual behavior while involved in physical activity and the role of sport as a transmitter of cultural ex- pectancies. The importance of physical activities as a medium for such trans- missions is becoming increasingly rec- ognized as an integral part of the so- cialization process.

Although some researchers in the area of sociology of sport have demon- strated interest in culture as a variable of study, few have explored cultural effects on physical activity from a so- cial psychological or individual point of view. Answers to such questions as the following will increase our under- standing of the relationship between culture and physical activity:

What effect does role variation have on individual motor performanee?

What behavior is expected from in- dividuals occupying various roles in sports?

Is the establishment of roles into a

hierarchical order detrimental to cer- tain individuals occupying lower roles?

What is the relationship between sport participation and such culturally affected variables as social class, social mobility, and ethnic affiliation?

Many more questions can be asked, but the point is that little is known about the array of cultural influences affecting involvement in physical activ- ity.

The subcultural influences affecting individual involvement in physical ac- tivity are also of vital concern to the physical educator. Subcultures are di- visions of society represented in social class, community, and ethnic differ- ences. They are important in social psychology because of their influence on the values and behaviors of indi- viduals identified with them in a refer- ence group sense. Social class, for example, is a major subculture vari- ation based on the qualities valued in a society such as family standing, in- come, and education. Physical edu- cators can find the importance of subcultural influences on physical ac-

- tivity in such questions as:

What is the influence of the peer group, the family, a sibling, and the school on participation in and involve- ment with physical activity?

Do these early experiences affect an individual's disposition toward involve- ment in physical activity?

How does social class influence in- dividual involvement in physical ac- tivity?

What influences do ethnic distinc- tions based on racial, religious, and

16 QUEST

national origins have on individual involvement in physical activity?

Group Dynamics

Social psychology of physical activ- ity is also deeply concerned with the structure and processes of groups in- volved in physical activity. The study of groups, commonly referred to as group dynamics, is dedicated to in- creasing knowledge about the nature of groups, the laws of their development, and their interrelationships with indi- viduals, other groups, and larger in- stitutions. The affiliations individuals have in groups formed for purposes of involvement in physical activity possess the potential for affecting the individ- ual's actions and psychological states. Even though considerable research has appeared in the field of group dynam- ics, physical educators as well as social psychologists know very little about the dynamics of sport groups and the effects they may produce.

Some of the variables included in the study of the structure and processes of groups formed for the purpose of involvement in physical activity are: group productivity, group cohesive- ness, cooperation and competition, communication, leadership, and the power structure within the group. An- other important variable is the rela- tionships that exist between groups. For example, what effect does compe tition have on intergroup relations? What is the basis for intergroup con- flict and how can it be managed? If direct conflict does not occur, inter- group tension usually takes the form of hostility and prejudice. What methods

then can be employed to relieve such tensions? These and many other ques- tions indicate some of the variables and problems of concern in the study of the structure and processes of groups involved in physical activity.

Extensive reference to the completed social psychological research related to physical activity has not been made in this paper. It should be noted, how- ever, that a few physical educators have employed the social analysis approach '

to investigate social psychological phe- nomena related to physical activity. This research is noteworthy, but un- fortunately has not been very extensive and is overshadowed by the strictly empiricaI investigations. Today, as never before, physical educators and coaches alike are seeking greater un- derstanding of man's relationship with his social environment. Thus, the need for a concerted social analysis research program investigating the social psy- chology of physical activity on a much larger scale is warranted.

CONCLUSION

Thus far, the field of social psy- chology has been defined, distinguished from its parent disciplines, and the concerns of a subdiscipline called so- cial psychology of physical activity outlined. Social psychology was defined in terms of both its content and its method. Simply stated, its content deals with the individual's relationships with his social environment. Its method is that of modern psychology as an em- pirical science. A social psychology of physical activity is concerned with how

A Social Psychology of Physical Activity 17

human behavior is influenced by the recognized that physical activity plays presence, behavior, and products of no small role in the social life of man. other human beings individually and Therefore, the need to understand collectively, while involved in physical social behavior while involved in physi- activity. A social analysis approach cal activity increases as we spend ever- rather than a social empiricism ap- increasing amounts of time in such proach was advocated for this field of pursuits. For the creative and dedicated study. The social analysis approach is scholar, the world of social phenomena a three-step process which involves: is waiting to be explained. (a) the collection of carefully made observations, (b) the ordered integra- tion of these observations to permit REFERENCES

the statement of general principles de- 1. McGrath, J. E. Social Psychology: A Brief scribing the logical patterns into which Introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart

and Winston, 1965, p. 1. they fall, and (c) the utilization of 2. Kenyon, G. S. "Sport Involvement: A these general principles to predict fu- Conceptual Go and Some Consequences

ture observations. Thereof." Paper presented at Sociology of Sport Symposium, University of Wis-

Physical educators have long consin, November, 1968. 3. Kerlinger, F. N. Foundation of Behav- claimed a social objective in their ioral Research. New York: Halt, Rine-

programs. Over the years, however, hart and Winston, 1967, p. 11. little tangible evidence has been found 4. E ~ E ~ zd ' ' p " , ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ p l ~ to support the achievement of this ob- Motor Skill." Journal o f Personality and

Social Psychology, 12, 252-260, 1969, jective. Failure to rigorously study the 5. Martens, R., and Landers, ,,. 4,CMlc- social nature of man while involved tion Effects on Muscular Endurance."

Research Quarterly, 40, 733-737, 1969 in physical has been partiany 6. Roberts, G. C., and Martens, R. due to the complexity -and limitations Reinforcement and Complex Motor Per- of behavioral science research tech- formance." Research Quarterl~,'in Press.

7 . Argyle, M., and Kendon, A. "The Exper- niques. With improvements in these imental Analysis of Social Performance." techniques and the development of Advances in Experimental psycho log^,

Voi. 3. Edited by L. Berkowitz. New high speed computers, the ability to York: Academic Press, 1967. experimentally investigate the social 8. Kenyon, G. S. "A Conceptual ~ o d e l for

Characterizing Physical Activity." Re- concomitants associated with physical search euarterly, 39, 96-105; -six scales activity has greatly increased. for Assessing Attitude Toward Physical

Activity." Research Quarterly, 39, 566- Today, more than ever, research in 574, 1968.

the behavioral sciences seems particu- 9. Hollander, E. P. Principles and Methodr o f Social Psychology. New York: Oxford

larly challenging. It is now generally University Press, 1967, p. 239.