The Influence of One Negative Member on the Larger Group in a Team Sport Context

1. The Influence of One Negative Member on the Larger Group in a Team Sport Context Marissa Baker, HPER Department Introduction: A negative attitude can be spread from the individual expressing it to the people forced to work in close quarters with the individual. This is also true in a team sport setting. Expressions of negative attitude include: Being tardy to practice, complaining, gossiping about teammates, expressing negative body language, or blatantly disrespecting coaches/teammates. According to the research emotions are contagious on the conscious and subconscious levels and have the ability to spread through an entire team (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995; Parkinson, 2011; Chartrand & Bargh, 1999). This is important because Felps, Mitchell, and Byington (2006) propose that one single group member may be the reason for failure within the group. This individual is even described as cancer, spreading through the group until it is no longer functional. H2: Two simple frequency distributions were examined (one for each scale). The terms rated the most were all rated in the very slightly or not at all category. Proud (70), happy (59), inspired (58), and energetic (52) were among the highest emotions rated at this level showing that overall athletes did not feel positive emotions in the wake of a negative athlete. The highest rated negative terms in the extreme level were dissatisfied and irritable with 23 and 20 selections. Dissatisfied and irritable as well as angry were also rated the highest in the quite a bit category. It should also be noted that in the very slightly or not at all category, the highest negative emotion selected 61 times was scared, followed closely by nervous with 48 selections. Athletes rated positive emotions at a higher rate in the very slightly or not at all level than they rated negative emotions in the extreme level. With this information, hypothesis two will be rejected. H3: MANOVA indicated that there was a significant difference in the way different sports teams perceive a negative athlete; however, during the post-hoc Tukey test, it was determined that there was no significant difference after all. Therefore, hypothesis three was rejected because there was no significant difference in the way sports team perceived a negative athlete. H4: Ten independent t-tests (five for each scale) were run in order to compare the means between males and females in matched teams, for example, men’s and women’s basketball. Only one of the ten independent t-tests was found to be significant. There is a significant difference in how men’s golf’s positive affect is affected by a negative athlete compared to how the women’s golf team is affected by a negative athlete. (t=3.468, p=0.018). These results show that males and females, other than this one instance, do not perceive a negative athlete differently. Hypothesis four stated that men and women would perceive a negative athlete differently and is rejected because the research shows that they do not, except for within the golf teams. H5: Two independent t-tests were run comparing the means of group sports and individual sports on each scale. There was no significant difference in the way a negative athlete is perceived in terms of negative or positive affect. Therefore group and individual sports did not perceive a negative athlete differently, and H5 was rejected. Purpose: The primary purpose of this study is to identify the perceptions of the emotional effect of one negative athlete on other members of the team. Because emotions are contagious and can spread through a team like cancer, this study measures the degree to which one negative athlete has affected other members of the team on the emotional level. Methods: The survey used for this research is an adapted version of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) first developed by Watson, Clark, and Tellegen (1988). The survey (Retrospective PANAS) is a twenty item test that uses a five point Likert scale to understand the extent in which the participant experienced a particular emotion due to recalling a memory of working with a negative teammate. The survey was distributed to varsity athletes at UNCP through Qualtrics, an online survey software package. The questionnaire remained active in Qualtrics for one month (January 14-February 14, 2014) after the distribution of the survey for the purpose of data collection. Hypotheses: H1: The presence of a negative athlete will impact attitude of athletes. H2: The presence of a negative athlete will elicit negative emotions at a higher rate than positive emotions. H3: Sports teams will perceive the presence of a negative athlete differently. H4: Males and females will differ in their perception of a negative athlete. H5: Group sports will perceive the presence of a negative athlete differently than individual team sports. Conclusion: H1 failed to be rejected, while H2, H3, H4, and H5 were rejected. It is clear that a negative athlete impacts the attitude of his/her teammates by examining the means and the modes for positive and negative affect of the entire athletic population. This confirmed past research (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995; Parkinson, 2011; Chartrand & Bargh, 1999; Cope, Eys, Schinke, & Bosselut, 2010; Cope, Eys, Beauchamp, Schinke, & Bosselut, 2011) which stated that emotions are contagious on the conscious and subconscious levels and have the ability to spread through an entire team. Cope, Eys, Schinke, & Bosselut (2010) described a negative team member as the “bad apple phenomenon” and stated that when intermittent negative behavior becomes normal for an individual, other group members will feel increased negativity, inequity, and distrust. Cope, Eys, Beauchamp, Schinke, & Bosselut (2011) found that sixty percent of coaches believed a negative athlete breeds an environment of negativity within the entire team, rather than just one group member. Felps, Mitchell, and Byington (2006) also support hypothesis one with their research that stated that one bad apple can spoil the whole barrel and that one member can be the reason for failure within a group. H2 was rejected based on the simple frequency distributions,. The lack of positive emotions was much more common than the reporting of negative emotions at a higher rate. Contrary to this finding, Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Finkenauer, and Vohs (2001) found that negative events outweigh positive events. Additionally, bad outweighs good in most, if not all, aspects of life. At the time of their research there were no available research findings that opposed the theme that bad is stronger than good; however, this study contradicts this finding. Ashforth and Humphrey (1995) and Chartrand and Bargh (1999) also found that negative events outweigh positive events. More specifically, Chartrand and Bargh note that people are like chameleons in that just perceiving hostile behavior can lead to one acting in a more hostile manner. Supporting research by Barsade (2002) did not find that negative emotions outweighed positive emotions rather that they carry equal weight in contagion. H3 was rejected because no significance was found in the way different teams perceive a negative athlete. All sports teams, big or small, perceived a negative athlete to be relatively the same. Supporting research by Lucas and Lovaglia (1998) found that group size did not significantly affect positive emotions as reported by the group despite prior research that found that group size did in fact have an effect and that small groups tend to be more cohesive and satisfying than large groups (Thomas & Fink, 1963; Mullen, Symons, Hu, & Salas, 1989)(as cited in Lucas & Lovaglia, 1998). H4 was rejected because only one of the independent t-tests (men and women’s golf) was significant in the category of positive affect. This finding is contrary to Fujita, Diener, and Sandvik (1991) who conducted a research study to determine the differences in affect intensity amongst sex. Fujita et al., (1991) reported that women report negative emotions at a higher rate but also report positive affect at the same rate as men. Also contrary to these findings is research conducted by Koo, Rie, and Park (2004) that discovered that females reported negative emotions at a higher rate than men; however, women report positive emotions at a lower rate than men, thus differing from Fujita, Diener, and Sandvik’s work. Both research studies differ from this research because no significant difference was found in the way males and females perceive a negative athlete. H5 stated that group sports would perceive a negative athlete differently than individual sports and was rejected. There was no significant difference between group sports and individual sports in positive or negative affect. Contrary to this research are Smith, Seger, & Mackie (2007) who hypothesized that group emotions are distinct from individual emotions, and more importantly, emotional contagion depends on the degree to which the member identifies with the group. Data Analysis: Data analysis was conducted using SPSS. Overall, 115 athletes responded to the survey resulting in a 33% response rate. Of these athletes 77 (67%) were males and 38 (33%) were females. Hypothesis Testing H1: Mode analysis revealed that for positive affect, 70 of the 115 athletes reported not feeling proud and 50-60 athletes reported not feeling very enthusiastic, happy, relaxed, inspired, or energetic in the context of a negative athlete. For negative affect, 45-60 athletes of the 115 reported not feeling very scared or nervous in the context of a negative athlete; however, 30-35 of all athletes reported feeling angry, dissatisfied and irritable most at the quite a bit level. Mean analysis was used for positive and negative affect reported from the entire athletic population surveyed. Overall, the mean score for positive affect was 22.54 (SD=10.31) which is lower than the normal college student population which is 29.7 (SD = 7.9). The average score for negative affect was 26.51 (SD= 7.84). This number is greater than the average positive affect for the normal college student population which is 14.8 (SD = 5.4). Hypothesis one fails to be rejected because it is evident that the presence of a negative athlete will impact the attitude of athletes. Significance: These research findings are extremely important, not only in the world of athletics, but they could possibly be used in employment settings, family settings, or any groups that must work in close quarters together and may identify with each other. After conducting the study, it is evident that negative emotions/attitudes impact and can be spread to others. According to the study, negative emotions are not necessarily elicited at a higher rate than positive emotions. A huge finding in this study is the fact that all sports teams perceived a negative athlete relatively the same. This is important because it shows that negative attitudes and behaviors can be spread and perceived among all groups or athletic teams, in this scenario, despite group size, sex, or the particular sport one participates. Additionally, males and females perceived a negative athlete the same as well regardless of studies claiming that women are more emotional than men and report negative emotions at a higher rate. This information can be used to justify the importance of handling a situation in which a negative person, group member, or team mate is present. As the research shows, a negative member affects all in some way, shape, or form and can have negative consequences, such as failure for a sports team, if it is not handled. As the saying goes, the problem can only cause issues if nothing is done about it.