Aggression and Assertion in Sport
Aggression is often misunderstood by observers who mistake aggressive behaviour for well-motivated, assertive behaviour. Aggression has the intent to harm outside the rules and is hostile behaviour – it is reactive, out of control, and deliberate.
- Punching someone after a foul in rugby, or a deliberate attempt to hurt an opponent before a challenge is about to happen, are both examples of aggression, since the intent to harm exists in the aggressor's head before it takes place
- Assertion, by contrast, is well-motivated behaviour that remains within the rules – it is controlled, well-motivated, generally within the rules, goal-directed, and not intended to harm. A hard, fair tackle in rugby or a 50/50 challenge in a team game, where both players are honestly competing for the ball, are examples of assertion – there is no original intent to harm, even though injury may occasionally occur as a result of the players' actions
- A problem with these definitions is that it can be difficult to place sporting actions clearly into one category, since there is a grey area where the two overlap – e.g. a punch thrown while boxing is within the rules of the sport but has an intent to harm, so it could be classified as either. Similarly, a rugby tackle that makes legal contact with an attacker but includes some intent to cause pain (so the attacker drops the ball) sits in this grey area between the two
- Instrumental aggression describes aggression that has an intent to harm but is also within the rules of the sport
Causes of Aggression: Instinct Theory and the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
There are four main theories that attempt to explain the causes of aggression in sport.
- Instinct theory is an evolutionary theory which claims that all performers are born with an aggressive instinct that will surface under enough provocation – e.g. animals defending territory when invaded, or a player who has suffered a bad foul reacting aggressively to regain their reputation and win back respect, even at the risk of being sent off. A problem with this theory is that it does not explain why some performers can control their emotions when fouled while others cannot, or why aggression can appear in a different situation to when it was originally triggered
- The frustration-aggression hypothesis suggests that inevitable aggression occurs when a performer's goals are blocked and they become frustrated. A built-up frustration drive is reduced if an aggressive act is committed by the performer – this is known as catharsis, a term for 'letting off steam' or a release/channelling of frustration through aggression. However, if the aggressive drive is unable to be released, this can instead lead to further self-punishment or even greater frustration and aggression
- An example is a player fouled in a game of football who runs through towards the goal, wanting to retaliate but is released from this urge if the player who fouled him is sent off; however, if the fouled player is unpunished, the released aggression might instead be directed towards other players, or the player may bottle their frustration and wait to seek revenge with a foul of their own later in the game. Not all frustration leads to aggression in sport – some players are able to control their emotions, even when a bad tackle is committed against them
Causes of Aggression: Aggressive Cue Hypothesis and Social Learning Theory
- The aggressive cue hypothesis, developed by Berkowitz, suggests that increased frustration will lead to increased arousal levels and a drive towards aggressive responses, but this aggressive response only becomes likely if certain learned 'cues' are present in the situation – e.g. a basketball player who has been fouled may only act aggressively toward that specific opponent again if given the chance
- Social learning theory suggests aggression is a learned response, copied from others, particularly if such behaviour is reinforced. Bandura suggested aggression is learned through the process: observe → identify → reinforce → copy – aggression is learned from significant others or those held in high esteem, such as role models or a coach, and is more likely to be copied if witnessed live rather than through recorded footage, and if the behaviour appears consistent, powerful and successful
- A difficulty with social learning theory is that, as with instinct theory, it does not fully explain why some players react aggressively without being in a situation where they could have observed and copied others
- The four theories of aggression can be recalled using the acronym AS IF: Aggressive cue hypothesis, Social learning theory, Instinct theory, Frustration-aggression hypothesis
Preventing Aggression in Sport
Aggression is undesirable in sport since it can cause injury, a loss of concentration, and an increase in arousal and anxiety in the player, and coaches, players and referees can all play a part in reducing it.
- Strategies include: not reinforcing aggressive acts in training; punishing aggression with fines or sending players off; substituting an aggressive player or removing them from the situation; reinforcing non-aggression, e.g. with a fair play award; talking to players to calm them down; promoting peer group pressure within the team; walking away from the situation; applying the rules consistently and fairly; using mental rehearsal or relaxation to lower arousal; pointing out responsibilities to the team and non-aggressive role models; setting non-aggressive goals; channelling aggression into assertion; and applying sanctions immediately