Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports

Transcription

1 Chapter 11 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports M. Gomà-i-Freixanet 1. Introduction Our ancestors, when they were organized in hunter-gatherer societies, explored new territories in the pursuit of food and water, to have better opportunities for mating behavior and for child rearing. For example, we know that hunters who can engage successfully in the risky activity of hunting large animals signal their superior fitness (Smith & Bird 2000), and have more and healthier offspring, reinforcing the notion that successful hunting increases sexual access (Kaplan & Hill 1985) and choice. This exploratory behavior entailed gains (new resources, increased survival of the group) as well as risks that were mainly physical (increased probability of being injured or even losing one s life). Presently, in modern societies, human beings no longer need to explore new territories in search of food and water, but they still engage in exploratory behavior that entails risks. With the complexity of our contemporary societies, these risks are not limited to physical risks, but also entail legal, economic, social and political risks. Because the concept of risk is treated in several different areas of knowledge, the term risk does not have a unitary meaning and interpretation. For example, in the field of international relations and politics, prospect theory tries to give a new insight into risky decision-making (Levy 1992, 1997). The cornerstone of this theory is that decision makers accept risks to avoid losses, but refuse to take risks to make comparable gains. Specifically, most people are risk averse when facing an opportunity for a gain, but are risk acceptant when facing the prospect of a loss. This theory assumes that one s willingness to take risks depends on how problems are framed. Thus, the situation often shapes the decision. There are, however, a sizeable number of subjects in experimental research who do not exhibit the framing effect (Kahneman et al. 1991). This does pose a challenge to the framing concept. It is clear that other factors than framing effects are important in the decision to take risks. Not taking individual differences into account may not be problematic in a field such as economics that is more concerned with modal behavior, but in international politics, where the behavior of On the Psychobiology of Personality Edited by R. M. Stelmack Copyright 2004 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN:

2 186 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet a single leader often can have dramatic policy consequences, the introduction of individual differences in the equation is of high importance. Another theory devoted to risk is that of Weinstein (1980). In his seminal paper, Weinstein drew attention to the popular belief that people tend to think they are invulnerable, i.e. the expectation that misfortunes happen to others and not ourselves. This optimistic bias holds for a wide range of health and other outcomes. He used the term unrealistic optimism to define it. This theory draws attention to risk perception and the ways in which it may be mediated by experience. A recent work on a national sample of motorcyclists (Rutter et al. 1998) showed that the perceptions of risk predicted subsequent behavior, though generally in the direction not of precaution adoption but of precaution abandonment: the greater the perceived risk at time one, the more frequent the risky behavior at time two (one year later). Reversal theory is a general theory of motivation, originally developed by Smith and Apter (1975). It strives to provide a systematic structure to explain the connections between arousal level, the subjective perception of emotion, the influence of social context, and behavior. In this theory, the concept of paradoxical behavior is described. In the context of reversal theory, this concept refers to conduct that is not essential for human survival but is voluntarily undertaken and yet that appears to militate against the health, well-being, and even survival of the individual concerned, exposing him or her to gratuitous risk (Apter & Batler 1997: ). Such conduct includes the performance of potentially harmful behaviors (to self and/or others), e.g. participation in dangerous sports. Regarding the application of reversal theory in the field of sports, Kerr in a series of studies (Kerr 1989, 1991; Kerr & Svebak 1989) found that individuals who perform risky sports on a regular basis are arousal seekers as measured by the Arousal Avoidance subscale of the Telic Dominance Scale (TDS; Murgatroyd et al. 1978). Thus, it seems that individuals engaged in high-risk sports enjoy high arousal and indeed actively seek out situations where they can induce these pleasant feelings. The three theories described above are common in that they try to describe behavior related to risk taking. Prospect theory emphasizes the situation in which the decision has to be taken, the frame, as an important variable in risk taking; the concept of unrealistic optimism focuses the influence of experience in the perception of risk; and reversal theory emphasizes the meta-motivational states, i.e. the particular kinds of experiences that people seek will depend on which particular frame of mind they are in at any given point in time. Surprisingly, none of these theories take individual differences in personality into account. One theory that does involve the study of individual differences in risk taking and follows the trait theory tradition is Zuckerman s theory of Sensation Seeking (SS). Work on the first sensation seeking scale (SSS; Zuckerman et al. 1964) began in the early 1960s. It was based on the idea that there were consistent individual differences in optimal levels of stimulation and arousal, and that these differences could be measured with a questionnaire. Zuckerman described sensation seeking as a trait defined by the need for varied, novel, and complex sensations and experiences and the willingness to take physical and social risk for the sake of such experience (Zuckerman 1979: 10). This definition was first derived from types of items constituting the early forms of the SSS (until form V), and later from the research that related SSS scores to actual behavior, reported behavior, expectations, anticipations, and risk appraisals.

3 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 187 Minor changes to this definition were implemented (in italic) to adapt to empirical data. The current definition of SS is as follows: Sensation seeking is a trait defined by the seeking of varied, novel, complex, and intense sensations and experiences, and the willingness to take physical, social, legal, and financial risks for the sake of such experience (Zuckerman 1994: 27). Note that the term need has been substituted by the term seeking, as the former implies the subjective quality of compulsion and this does not seem to characterize the behavior of sensation seekers. The addition of intensity has been suggested because it seems that the common denominator of the sensations attractive to sensation seekers is that they all produce transient spurts of physiological arousal. The legal and financial types of risks were added because results from factor analyses of risk appraisal categories (Horvath & Zuckerman 1993) indicated that sensation seekers have a general risk-taking tendency regardless of the specific risk. The SSS has undergone several revisions (forms II to VI), but since its publication in 1978, has become the most widely used form of the scale (see Zuckerman 1979). Several improvements from previous versions were introduced in. First, a total score was developed based on the sum of the four ten-item subscales. This replaced the General scale in SSS II and IV which was not a satisfactory measure of overall sensation seeking as it lacked items from the Disinhibition subscale. Second, the correlations among scales were reduced to define unique factors that still maintained some correlation in order to justify a total score. Third, some items were discarded to ensure cross-cultural as well as cross-gender reliability. Finally, the total length of the scale was reduced to 40 items, 10 for each subscale, as shorter scales are more convenient for research projects. The four SS scales are defined as follows: (1) Thrill and Adventure Seeking (TAS). These items express a desire to engage in sports or other physically risky activities that provide unusual sensations of speed or defiance of gravity, such as parachuting, scuba diving, or skiing. Because most of the activities are not common, the majority of the items are expressed as intentions ( I would like... ) rather than reports of experience. An attitude item that summarizes the factor is: I sometimes like to do things that are a little frightening. (2) Experience Seeking (ES). This factor considers the seeking of novel sensations and experiences through the mind and senses, as in arousing music, art, and travel, and through social nonconformity, as in association with groups on the fringes of conventional society (e.g. artists, hippies). (3) Disinhibition (DIS). The items in this factor describe seeking sensation through social activities like parties, social drinking, and sex. An item describing the factor is: I like to have new and exciting experiences even if they are a little unconventional or illegal. (4) Boredom Susceptibility (BS). This factor describes an intolerance for repetitive experiences of any kind, including routine work and boring people. An item expressing the attitude is: The worst social sin is to be a bore. The has been used in a wide range of projects, including studies on the psychophysiological and psychopharmacological bases of SS, on individual differences in social behavior of SS, on the identification of the place of SS in the structure of personality, and on applied research that examined the expression of SS in common daily life.

4 188 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet 2. Sensation Seeking and Sports One implication of the SS construct in the context of sports is that the particular sport discipline one is more likely to participate in may be based on whether one is high or low on the SS trait. Of course, additional factors such as physical ability, economic status and age are important determinants as well. But in this chapter we will review the contribution of the SS trait to the specific area of sports, and discuss research that is relevant to this specific issue. A comprehensive summary of research conducted in the area of SS and sport participation is given in Tables 1 3. These tables are based on Zuckerman s paper (1983) where sports were classified into high, medium or low physical risk according to the associated risks involved. High physical risk sports are those with a high probability of serious injury or death as a consequence of practicing such a sport. Sports like climbing, parachuting, speleology or white water kayaking, where subjects have to struggle with the strong forces of nature fit into this classification. Medium physical risk sports are those with a higher probability of being injured than encountering death, the arena where the sport takes place is limited and the environment is static. Sports like boxing, karate, rugby or American football are good examples in this category. Low physical risk sports have a very low probability of a fatal injury occurrence. Sports such as running, gymnastics, bowling or golf fit into this classification. Tables 1 3 summarize 40 empirical studies that have been conducted on SS and risky sports. Only two papers that did not use the SSS, those of Kerr (1991) and Cogan and Brown (1999), were included. These authors used the Arousal Avoidance scale that is relevant to SS. In general, the studies reviewed compare groups participating in various kinds of sports with participants in other kinds of sports with similar or different level of risk, or with control groups. All but the two of studies reviewed are devoted to SS and sports. These studies do differ in several ways, including the sex of athletes, the kind of sport, the level of competition and the criteria of classification of individuals. Some of the studies differentiate genders, while others do not take this variable into account. Some use team sports such as rugby, while others use individual sports such as parachuting. Some compare different levels of competition, although the criteria are not the same in all the studies. Some studies use objective criteria such as height; other studies employ expert nominations, or membership on a national team. Others use different criteria to assign individuals to a given level of risk (number of accidents, level of uncertainty, inconsistency of the specific sports situations, or international grading systems as in kayaking or climbing). The control groups are also defined by different criteria, i.e. sports students, college students, general population or subjects selected specifically for not being enrolled in any risky sport. To make a more thoughtful analysis of the information that is reviewed, the tables are first analyzed individually, and then cross-analyzed to find similarities across them High Physical Risk Sports The studies in Table 1 are grouped into three categories: (1) studies that compare high-risk sports with sports of similar level of risk; (2) studies that compare high-risk sports with

5 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 189 Table 1: Studies relating Sensation Seeking to high-risk sports. Sport Author Experimental Control Differences Notes (sex, n) (sex, n) Scuba salvage diving Bacon (1974) Volunteer salvage divers College students (matched) SSS-IV Parachuting Hymbaugh and Garrett (1974) Sky-divers M&F21 Non-sky-divers M&F (matched) = TAS SSS-II Parachuting Racing Snowmobilers Police Firemen Kusyszyn, Steinberg and Elliot (1974) Risk-takers M85 Civil servants & college students M70 SSS-IV Mountain climbing Fowler, von Knorring and Oreland (1980) Climbers M11,F7 & students interested in climbing 9 Dental students not interested in climbing 32 SSS-IV Climbers and interested have lower platelet MAO Scuba diving (novices) Heyman and Rose (1980) Novice divers M29,F16 Same-sex students Subscales not analysed SS correlated + time length of 1st free dive, with depth of dive Skiing Connolly (1981) Skiers M27,F18 Non-skiers from health-spa (matched) Skiers who had accidents higher than others on TAS, DIS, Total Hang-gliding auto-racing Straub (1982) Hang-gliders 1 M33 Auto-racers 2 M22 Bowlers 0 M25 TAS 1 > 0 ES 1 > 0 DIS = BS = Total 1 > 0 TAS =0 ES 2 > 0 DIS 2 > 0 BS 2 > 0 Total 2 > 0 High vs. low risk: more number of injuries. Mountain climbing Parachuting Hang-gliding Racing Zaleski (1984) Miscellaneous risky sports M60 Controls matched by age M60 risk takers on the Choice Dilemma Questionnaire, & Intellectual Adventure Seeking. Rock climbing Robinson (1985) Elite climbers M30 Normative data M 377 STAI-T Rock climbing Levenson (1990) Rock climbers M18 Norms from college students M 686 DIS SSS-IV No data about significance.

6 190 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet Table 1: (Continued ) Sport Author Experimental Control Differences Notes (sex, n) (sex, n) Mountain climbing Cronin (1991) Climbers M&F20 Control M&F21 College students. Himalayas expedition Gomà-i- Freixanet (1991) Expeditioners 1 M27 Mountain climbers & skiers 2 M72 Sportsmen not related with mountaneering 3 M 221 Controls not engaged in any risky sports 0 M54 TAS 123 > 0 2 > 3 ES 123 > 0 2 > 3 DIS 2 > 0 BS = TAS-OUT 23 > 0 Total 123 > 0 2 > 3 E 123 > 0 N = P = L = Imp = So = Controlling for age. Surfing Windsurfing Kerr (1991) Surfers M32 Sailboarders M31 Weight traineers M39 PO SM AA Total risk sports arousal seekers & paratelic dominant individuals. Parachuting Motor-cycle racing Parachutists M18 Motor-cycle racers M21 Marathon runners M17 = PO = SM AA Total Hang-gliding Gliders M25 General public M25 = PO = SM AA Rodeo Hang-gliding Rainey, Amunategui, Agocs and Larick (1992) Rodeo athletes 1 M19 Hang-gliders 2 M28 Baseball 3 players M39 Wrestlers 4 M29 TAS = ES 2 > 134 DIS 1 > 34 BS 2 > 34 Total 1 > 3 2 > 134 College students. Rodeo not particularly on SS. White-water Campbell, Tyrrell and Zingaro (1993) Canoe & kayak paddlers M&F54 Norms from general population Anxiety correlated with TAS 0.30 & with Total 0.04 Speleology Alpinism Ski jumping Rossi and Cereatti (1993) Speleologists 1? 20 Alpinists 2?20 Ski-jumpers 3?7 Controls 0? 20 TAS 123 > 0 ES 12 > 0 DIS 123 > 0 BS 123 > 0 Total 123 > 0 1 > 3 Sex not stated. Did not control for age. Number of accidents correlates with Total & TAS. Parasailing Cantón and Mayor (1994) Parasailers M&F21 Tennis M&F30 = PO SM AA Total SS correlates 0.40 with AA

7 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 191 Table 1: (Continued ) Sport Author Experimental Control Differences Notes (sex, n) (sex, n) Hang-gliding Wagner and Houlihan (1994) Hang-gliders M&F170 Golfers M&F90 = STAI-T High risk sports Gomà-i- Freixanet (1995) Miscellaneous risky sports M 332 Controls not engaged in any risky sports M54 = TAS-OUT E = N = P = L = Imp = So Controlling for age. Everest expedition Breivik (1996) Everest expeditioners M7 Everest expeditioners M7 Elite climbers M38 Sports students M43 = TAS Sports students: TAS correlated 0.51 with physical risk, ES 0.47 with economic & 0.42 with intellectual risk, Total correlated with economic & physical risk. Bungee jumping Michel, Carton and Jouvent (1997) Bungee jumpers M51,F29 General public M50,F45 In F, ES & BS positively correlated with number of jumps. Rock climbing Skiing Piloting White-water Slanger and Rudestam (1997) Extreme 1 M20 High risk takers 2 M20 Athletes 0 M20 TAS 1 = 2 Total 1 = 2 TAS > 0 Total = 0 Controlling for age. Parachuting Breivik, Roth and Jorgensen (1998) Expert M21 Novice parachutists M14 Expert parachutists M21 Sports students M43 Novice parachutists M14 = TAS E N P = E = N P = STAI-T High risk sports Jack and Ronan (1998) High risk sports M&F93 Low risk sports M&F73 -OUT = Imp Controlling for age. High risk sports Zarevski, Marusic, Zolotic, Bunjevac and Vukosav (1998) High risk sports M94 Low risk sports M94 Discriminant analysis: ES, TAS, BS Regression analysis: ES, TAS

8 192 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet Table 1: (Continued ) Sport Author Experimental Control Differences Notes (sex, n) (sex, n) Snow boarding Cogan and Brown (1999) Snowboarders M36 Badminton players M26 = PO SM AA Total Risk vs. safe sports: 1. more number of injuries 1. more serious injuries High risk sports Gomà-i- Freixanet (2001) Miscellaneous risky sports F52 Controls not engaged in any risky sports F58 -OUT = E = N = P = L = Imp = So Controlling for age. Physical risky activities Hansen and Breivik (2001) School students M&F yrs Positive correlation between SS & physical risky activities, mainly with TAS 0.43 Alpinism Sánchez and Cantón (2001) Alpinists M&F? Mountain climbers M&F? = TAS Number of subjects by group not stated. 38 subjects in total M27,F11 Note: SSS = Sensation Seeking Scale; E = Extraversion; N = Neuroticism; P = Psychoticism; L = Lie; Imp = Impulsiveness; So = Socialization; STAI-T = Trait Anxiety; PO = Planning Orientation; SM = Serious mindedness; AA = Arousal Avoidance. TAS = Thrill and Adventure Seeking; ES = Experience Seeking; DIS = Disinhibition; BS = Boredom Susceptibility. low-risk sports; and (3) studies that compare high-risk sports with controls. When high-risk sports are compared to sports of similar level of risk, sportspersons do not differ from each other on the SSS, neither on the specific subscales nor on the total score. Studies such as those of Gomà-i-Freixanet (1991), Rossi and Cereatti (1993), Breivik (1996), Breivik et al. (1998) and Sánchez and Cantón (2001) illustrate these findings. Subjects did not differ on other scales that were administered like Extraversion and Neuroticism from the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ; Eysenck & Eysenck 1975), Impulsiveness from the Impulsiveness-Venturesomeness-Empathy Questionnaire (IVE; Eysenck & Eysenck 1978), and the Socialization scale from the California Psychological Inventory (CPI; Gough 1957), and trait-anxiety from the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Speilberger et al. 1970). These are the results we expected when comparing subjects practicing sports with similar level of risk. When high-risk sports are compared to low-risk sports, the subjects differ on all subscales of the SSS as well as on the total scale (Cantón & Mayor 1994; Jack & Ronan 1998; Rainey et al. 1992; Wagner & Houlihan 1994; Zarevski et al. 1998). Subjects also differed on the variable named TAS-OUT in the studies that included it. As some of the items from the Thrill and Adventure Seeking (TAS) subscale are concerned with sports and activities that the athletes can actually be participating in, the TAS-OUT, being the sum of the remaining three subscales, controls for the possibility of variance in total SS scores being unduly influenced by sports participation.

9 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 193 Table 2: Studies relating Sensation Seeking to medium-risk sports. Sport Author Experimental Control Differences Notes (sex, n) (sex, n) Body-contact sports Stirling (1977) Body-contact sports 1 M14 Football Cellini (1982) Criminal offenders on probation or parole M65 Rugby Freeclimbing Sports students Karate Different levels of risky sports Potgieter and Bisschoff (1990) Rossi and Cereatti (1993) Cantón and Mayor (1994) Davis and Mogk (1994) Rugby players M35 Free climbers 1? 20 Sport students 2? 20 Karate M&F53 Elite 1, subelite 2 athletes, sports students 3 M&F30bygroup Non-contact sports M11 Non-athletes 0 M11 Marathon runners Controls 0? 20 Tennis M&F30 Non-athlete controls 0 M&F30 TAS 1 > 0 ES = DIS 1 > 0 BS = Total 1 > 0 Total, TAS, ES, correlated with participation in football. Little correlation with non-contact sports TAS 2 > 0 ES 1 > 20 DIS12> 0 BS = Total 1 2 > 0 = TAS TAS23> 0 ES = DIS = BS = Total = = PO SM AA E3> 0 N = P3> 012 L = SSS-IV Violent impulsive criminals:, ES,. Football related to violent premeditated crime. Sex not stated. Did not control for age. Total SS correlates 0.40 with AA M vs. F: P M: N as excellence in sports Note: SSS = Sensation Seeking Scale; E = Extraversion; N = Neuroticism; P = Psychoticism; L = Lie; Imp = Impulsiveness; So = Socialization; STAI-T = Trait Anxiety; PO = Planning Orientation; SM = Serious mindedness; AA = Arousal Avoidance; TAS = Thrill and Adventure Seeking; ES = Experience Seeking; DIS = Disinhibition; BS = Boredom Susceptibility. When individuals who participate in high-risk sports are compared with controls (either college students, sports students, the general population, or simply non-athletes), the general tendency is still maintained with high significant scores in TAS, Experience Seeking (ES) and total scale, and even TAS-OUT. This pattern is not so clear with the Disinhibition (DIS) subscale. But when we take a closer look at the studies, we can observe that high-risk sportspersons when compared to the general population, and controlling for age (Gomà-i-Freixanet 1991, 2001; Zaleski 1984) also score significantly high on DIS. This effect is less clear when using sports students as a control group and it disappears totally when the contrast group is college students. This is probably due to the fact that these studies did not control for age and, in general, college students are younger than professional sportsmen. It is known that all SS scale scores decline with age (Zuckerman et al. 1978). Therefore, the older professionals, in general being in the age range, by not differing significantly from college students, score higher compared to their age group.

10 194 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet Table 3: Studies relating Sensation Seeking to low-risk sports. Sport Author Experimental Control Notes (sex, n) (sex, n) Running McCutcheon (1980) Runners M42,F20 Non-runners Males = TAS DIS Females TAS Total Matched controls. No correlation of SSS with order of finish in races. Gymnastics Straub (1982) Gymnasts F28 Bowlers F31 = TAS Physical Education Majors Wykoff (1982) Physical Education M52,F60 SSS college normative groups =TAS Athletes Gundersheim (1987) Athletes M123,F51 Non-athletes M 43, F 122 Males Females Athletes vs. Non-athletes SSS-IV College students. Contact male athletes SS than non-contact. Athletes Hartman and Rawson (1992) Athletes M&F56 Non-athletes M&F103 = TAS I College students. Athletes Schroth (1995) Athletes M&F152 Non-athletes M&F146 College students. Contact male athletes SS than non-contact. Note: SSS = Sensation Seeking Scale; E = Extraversion; N = Neuroticism; P = Psychoticism; L = Lie; Imp = Impulsiveness; So = Socialization; STAI-T = Trait Anxiety; PO = Planning Orientation; SM = Serious mindedness; AA = Arousal Avoidance. TAS = Thrill and Adventure Seeking; ES = Experience Seeking; DIS = Disinhibition; BS = Boredom Susceptibility. Thus, what these data exactly mean is that professional sportspersons actually score high on DIS. Overall, high-risk sportspersons either compared to athletes practicing sports with lower level of risk or to controls controlling for age (either general population or college students) show higher scores on the total SSS and on all its subscales, except Boredom Susceptibility (BS) when compared to controls. Some of these studies (e.g. Gomà-i-Freixanet 1991, 1995, 2001) also administered other questionnaires along with the SSS. They found that high-risk sportspersons, compared either to low-risk sportspersons or the general population, scored lower on the Arousal Avoidance scale of the TDS, and that they did not differ on the Impulsiveness scale of the IVE questionnaire when compared to either high or low level of risk and even to the control group. Compared to high or low-risk sportspersons, they also did not differ on the Trait Anxiety scale of the STAI inventory. When compared to controls they did not differ on the

11 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 195 Socialization scale of the CPI. On the Extraversion dimension from the EPQ, they scored significantly higher than the controls but did not differ from the other high-risk groups. These results show that sportspersons that practice sports with a high level of risk like the seeking of thrill, adventure, and unusual experiences, and are somewhat disinhibited and susceptible to routine. They also like practicing activities that increase arousal, they are neither impulsive nor anxious, and are extraverted and well socialized. Thus, sportspersons practicing high-risk activities, whether in an elite group or not, enjoy extreme environments with great opportunities for encountering stimulation through the mind and senses such as height, depth, speed, a great amount of light or darkness, and changes in climatic conditions (wind, temperature); they like new, exciting and unconventional but not necessarily illegal experiences, and they have an intolerance for repetitive and routine experiences. They do not feel high levels of anxiety that could interfere with the highly skilled performance required at these extreme conditions and they plan these actions very carefully. This is evident in the planning of expeditions that may last for years because the purchase of equipment is very expensive and obtaining permissions is a lengthy process. Finally, although they are unconventional, they follow the social rules and are well socialized. We must not forget that in general high-risk sports are practiced in small groups (alpinism, climbing, speleology, parachuting) where one s behavior can interfere with the group and sometimes one s life relies on the companionship and loyalty of the group Medium Physical Risk Sports Table 2 summarizes the empirical studies that have compared medium-risk sports either to lower risk sports, sports students or controls. Although there are not as many studies in Table 2 as in Table 1, they are sufficient to make group comparisons. When compared to athletes practicing low-risk sports, subjects engaged in medium-risk sports score significantly high on TAS and total score (Potgieter & Bisschoff 1990). This pattern was not replicated in the study of Cantón and Mayor (1994) probably because male and female subjects constituted the sample and this circumstance could mask the differences. It is known that female subjects score lower on the SS trait. In studies comparing athletes in medium-risk sports to sports students (Davis & Mogk 1994; Rossi & Cereatti 1993), only Rossi and Cereatti find a significant difference on the ES subscale. Finally in comparisons of medium-risk sports to controls, athletes score significantly higher on TAS, DIS, and total score (Rossi & Cereatti 1993; Stirling 1977). The comparisons seem to indicate that when we compare those who participate in medium-risk sports with those who participate in lower-risk sports or with control subjects, the former score higher on TAS and total scale score. When participants in medium-risk sports are specifically compared with controls, the DIS subscale appears as significantly different as well. These results probably could be explained by the following reasoning: when we compare medium-risk to low-risk sports, we are still comparing scores between athletes, even though they are participating in different levels of risky sports. Thus, both groups of athletes do not necessarily differ on DIS. By participating in sports with a different risk level it can be expected they do differ on the TAS subscale as this specifically measures thrill seeking. As control subjects are not engaged in any sports, the results on the DIS

12 196 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet subscale could probably be related to the fact that athletes generally have social habits that are more open than those of non-athletes. In summary, sportspersons practicing mediumrisk sports compared to low-risk sports and controls are thrill and adventure seekers and, specifically, when compared to subjects not practicing any given sport they exhibit the general pattern of athletes as being unconventional and open minded Low Physical Risk Sports In Table 3, the available empirical data about the relationship between SS and low-risk sports is summarized. As expected, no significant differences were found when comparing groups both practicing low-risk sports (Straub 1982) or when comparing physical education students interested in sports with college normative groups (Wykoff 1982). However, a different pattern appears when comparing athletes vs. non-athletes (Gundersheim 1987; Hartman & Rawson 1992; Schroth 1995). The results obtained from these three studies merit much credit as contrary to other studies they are highly homogeneous: the selected sports were teams sports, all the subjects were college students, the sample consisted of male and female subjects and the number of subjects was high. Those practicing a lowrisk sport compared to those not practicing any sport score significantly high on total scale score, TAS and DIS. The results seem to indicate that when we compare athletes practicing low-risk sports with non-athletes, controlling for age, sex, type of sport (team sports in these studies), and years of education (college students), the former are sensation seekers, thrill and adventure seeking, and more disinhibited. In relation to the DIS scale, as we said before, probably the difference is caused because team sports are related to competitions, and competitions entail frequent travel, meeting new people and celebrating the winning matches, especially in college settings where parties are so popular and welcome. From the summary of Table 3, we can conclude that, regardless of gender, college athletes are higher sensation seekers than college non-athletes, although the sports practiced entail low levels of risk. If we consult the results found in the three tables, we can make additional comparisons that can help us to have a better understanding of the relation between SS and different levels of risky sports Comparing Sports with Similar Level of Risk The review of the literature shows that when we compare groups engaged in sports with similar levels of risk, they do not differ significantly on any of the subscales of the SSS or on the total scale score. This holds regardless of whether: (1) they belong to an elite or near elite group as in the work of Davis and Mogk (1994); (2) they have made summits at heights higher that 8000 meters compared to elite mountain climbers (Breivik 1996; Gomà-i-Freixanet 1991); or (3) they belong to extreme as compared to high-risk takers as shown by Slanger and Rudestam (1997). These results mean that when sportspeople are at the top or upper level, they do not differ on the SS trait, i.e. all of them are attracted by variation and complexity, intense sensations, risks and adventures. Perhaps the level of SS should not be used to explain the difference between membership in the elite or near

13 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 197 elite groups. Rather, other factors, such as constitutional differences (e.g. muscle fiber type) would be more appropriate Comparing Sports with Different Level of Risk By contrasting different levels of risk in sports, we can distinguish three different levels, although comparing both extremes of risk shows the most clear cut result. When comparing high-risk sports vs. low-risk sports, those participating in high-risk sports differ on all subscales as well as in the total score. This means that high-risk sportspersons are genuine sensation seekers. When comparing high-risk vs. medium-risk levels (Gomà-i-Freixanet 1991), they still differ on TAS, ES and total score. When comparing medium to low levels of risk, they only differ on TAS and total score. These results mean that high-risk takers as compared to medium or low-risk takers are sensation seekers that like the thrill and adventure; are somewhat unconventional; and like new experiences involved in the practice of high-risk sports such as parachuting, climbing or motor racing Comparing Sportspersons Practicing Sports with Different Level of Risk to Controls When risky sportspersons, either practicing high-, medium- or low-risk sports, are compared to control groups, a general pattern appears despite the different criteria used to classify the control groups, i.e. college students, sports students, general population. Compared to controls, risky sportspersons score higher in TAS, DIS and total scale score in all three levels of sport risk. These results seem to indicate that compared to controls, risky sportspersons, either men or women, are high on the SS trait, on TAS and on the DIS subscale, e.g. Gomà-i-Freixanet 1991, 1995, Thus athletes, as compared to controls, like sports that provide unusual experiences and sensations, the opportunity for frequent travel, meeting new people, and the social activity associated with the participating in sporting activities. In the same way, they would not like sports characterized by routines, waiting time, and slow pace. 3. Overview Overall, some general findings regarding the SS Scale and its subscales in relation to sports can be drawn from this review: (1) The TAS subscale measuring thrill and adventure seeking seems characteristic of sports with high and medium levels of risk, and even of low-risk sports although to a lesser extent. (2) The ES subscale measuring experience seeking through the mind and senses (notably cognitive) seems characteristic only of sports with high levels of risk. (3) The BS subscale measuring boredom susceptibility only differs when comparing extreme levels of risk, that is, high- vs. low-risk sports.

14 198 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet (4) The total scale score and the DIS subscale seem characteristic of athletes at any level of risk as compared to control groups, or high-risk sports as compared to low-risk sports. Thus, what the total scale score measures seems to apply to sportspersons practicing sports with a given level of risk. In relation to DIS, we suggest that it relates to the liking of social activities around the sport, meeting new people, celebrating the summit or the winning game, being nonconformist and unconventional. This is in contrast to the more asocial aspect of the DIS subscale, such as disregard for social rules and taking drugs and alcohol. These results, in general, match those found in previous reviews, but they add a new finding in relation to the DIS subscale. Since the last revision by Zuckerman (1994), a great deal of empirical research has been published on sports, and especially on high-risk sports. Some of the caveats that limited previous research and findings have been improved since the 1990s. For example, the number of subjects has been increased as some of the selected sport activities samples had small (less than 15) numbers of participants. Second, since that decade most studies use Form-V of the SSS, which has been improved, and thus the use of the same version facilitates comparisons and generalization of results. Third, statistical procedures were also improved, e.g. using covariance analysis to statistically control for age differences between groups. Finally, the refinement of methodology and the increase in the number of subjects has allowed separate analyses for males and females. All in all, the results obtained in the research conducted since the 1990s seem to be more accurate from the methodological point of view than the previous ones and seem to indicate that TAS is mostly characteristic of sports with high and medium levels of risk; ES is only characteristic of sports with high levels of risk; BS only differs when comparing high vs. low levels of risk, and total and DIS seem characteristic of athletes at any level of risk as compared to controls, or high-risk sports as compared to low-risk sports. Thus, the SS theory provides a good framework to interpret the individual differences in the field of sport. 4. Conclusion In this chapter, we reviewed the contribution of the SS trait to the specific area of sports, and discussed research that is relevant to this specific issue. One implication of the SS construct is that the particular sports discipline one is more likely to participate in may be based on whether one is high or low on the trait. A comprehensive summary of research conducted in the area of SS and sport participation shows that the TAS subscale measuring thrill and adventure seeking seems characteristic of sports with high and medium levels of risk, and even of low-risk sports although to a lesser extent. The ES subscale measuring experience seeking through the mind and senses seems characteristic only of sports with high levels of risk. The BS subscale measuring boredom susceptibility only differs when comparing extreme levels of risk, that is, high- vs. low-risk sports. The total scale score and the DIS subscale measuring disinhibition seem characteristic of athletes at any level of risk as compared to control groups, or high-risk sports as compared to low-risk sports. Thus, what the total SSS measures seems to apply to sportspersons practicing sports with a

15 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 199 given level of risk. In relation to DIS, we believe it relates to the liking of social activities associated with the sport (like meeting new people, celebrating the summit, or the winning game), being nonconformist and unconventional. This is in contrast to the more asocial aspect of DIS like disregarding social rules and taking drugs and alcohol. References Apter, M. J., & Batler, R. (1997). Gratuitous risk: A study of parachuting. In: S. Svebak, & M. J. Apter (Eds), Stress and health: A reversal theory perspective (pp ). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Bacon, J. (1974). Sensation seeking levels for members of high-risk organizations. Unpublished manuscript. Described in: Zuckerman (1979, pp ). Breivik, G. (1996). Personality, sensation seeking and risk taking among Everest climbers. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 27, Breivik, G., Roth, W. T., & Jorgensen, P. E. (1998). Personality, psychological states and heart rate in novice and expert parachutists. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, Campbell, J. B., Tyrrell, D. J., & Zingaro, M. (1993). Sensation seeking among whitewater canoe and kayak paddlers. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, Cantón, E., & Mayor, L. (1994). The sensation of risk and motivational tendencies in sports: An empirical study. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, Cellini, H. R. (1982). Cognitive and personality trait differences of youthful offenders by property, violent impulsive, and violent premeditated offense groupings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL. Cogan, N., & Brown, R. I. F. (1999). Metamotivational dominance, states and injuries in risk and safe sports. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, Connolly, P. M. (1981). An exploratory study of adults engaging in the high-risk sport of skiing. Unpublished masters thesis, Rutgers University. Cronin, C. (1991). Sensation seeking among mountain climbers. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, Davis, C., & Mogk, J. P. (1994). Some personality correlates of interest and excellence in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 25, Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness: Their position in a dimensional system of personality description. Psychological Reports, 43, Fowler, C. J., von Knorring, L., & Oreland, L. (1980). Platelet monoamine oxidase activity in sensation seekers. Psychiatric Research, 3, Gomà-i-Freixanet, M. (1991). Personality profile of subjects engaged in high physical risk sports. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, Gomà-i-Freixanet, M. (1995). Prosocial and antisocial aspects of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, Gomà-i-Freixanet, M. (2001). Prosocial and antisocial aspects of personality in women: A replication study. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, Gough, H. G. (1957). Manual for the California Psychological Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Gundersheim, J. (1987). Sensation seeking in male and female athletes and nonathletes. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 18,

16 200 M. Gomà-i-Freixanet Hansen, E. B., & Breivik, G. (2001). Sensation seeking as a predictor of positive and negative risk behaviour among adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, Hartman, M., & Rawson, H. E. (1992). Differences in and correlates of sensation seeking in male and female athletes and nonathletes. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, Heyman, S. R., & Rose, K. G. (1980). Psychological variables affecting scuba performance. In: C. H. Nadeau, W. R. Holliwell, K. M. Newell, & G. C. Roberts (Eds), Psychology of motor behaviour and sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Press. Horvath, P., & Zuckerman, M. (1993). Sensation seeking, risk appraisal, and risky behaviour. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, Hymbaugh, K., & Garrett, J. (1974). Sensation seeking among skydivers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 38, 118. Jack, S. J., & Ronan, K. R. (1998). Sensation seeking among high- and low-risk sports participants. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, Kaplan, H., & Hill, K. (1985). Hunting ability and reproductive success among male Ache foragers: Preliminary results. Current Anthropology, 26, Kerr, J. H. (1989). Anxiety, arousal, and sport performance: An application of reversal theory. In: D. Hackfort, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds), Anxiety in sports: An international perspective. New York: Hemisphere. Kerr, J. H. (1991). Arousal-seeking in risk sport participants. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, Kerr, J. H., & Svebak, S. (1989). Motivational aspects of preference for and participation in risk and safe sports. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, Kusyszyn, I., Steinberg, P., & Elliot, B. (1974, July). Arousal seeking, physical risk taking and personality. Paper read at the 18th International Conference of Applied Psychology, Montreal, Canada. Levenson, M. R. (1990). Risk taking and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, Levy, J. S. (1992). Prospect theory and international relations: Theoretical applications and analytical problems. Political Psychology, 13, Levy, J. S. (1997). Prospect theory, rational choice and international relations. International Studies Quarterly, 41, McCutcheon, L. (1980). Running and sensation seeking. Northern Virginia Community College Journal, Fall Issue, 11. Michel, G., Carton, S., & Jouvent, R. (1997). Recherche de sensations et anhédonie dans les conduites de prise de risque. Etude d une population de sauteurs à l élastique [Sensation seeking and anhedonia in risk taking behaviours: Study in bungee jumpers]. L Encéphale, 23, Murgatroyd, S., Rushton, C., Apter, M. J., & Ray, C. (1978). The development of the Telic Dominance Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 42, Potgieter, J., & Bisschoff, F. (1990). Sensation seeking among medium- and low-risk sports participants. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, Rainey, D. W., Amunategui, F., Agocs, H., & Larick, J. (1992). Sensation seeking and competitive trait anxiety among college rodeo athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 15, Robinson, D. W. (1985). Stress seeking: Selected behavioural characteristics of elite rock climbers. Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, Rossi, B., & Cereatti, L. (1993). The sensation seeking in mountain athletes as assessed by Zuckerman s Sensation Seeking Scale. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 24,

17 Sensation Seeking and Participation in Physical Risk Sports 201 Rutter, D. R., Quine, L., & Albery, I. P. (1998). Perceptions of risk in motorcyclists: Unrealistic optimism, relative realism and predictions of behaviour. British Journal of Psychology, 89, Sánchez, M. C., & Cantón, E. (2001). La práctica de actividad físico-deportiva de riesgo como herramienta preventiva de conductas desajustadas psicosocialmente [The practice of physical risky sports as a preventive tool for socially maladjusted behaviors]. Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 10, Schroth, M. L. (1995). A comparison of sensation seeking among different groups of athletes and nonathletes. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, Slanger, E., & Rudestam, K. E. (1997). Motivation and disinhibition in high risk sports: Sensation seeking and self-efficacy. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, Smith, E. A., & Bird, R. L. (2000). Turtle hunting and tombstone opening: Public generosity as costly signalling. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 21, Smith, K. C. P., & Apter, M. J. (1975). A theory of psychological reversals. Wilts, UK: Picton Publishing. Speilberger, C., Gorsuch, R., & Lushene, R. (1970). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Stirling, J. (1977). Strength of the nervous system, extraversion-introversion and kinaesthetic and cortical augmenting and reducing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of York, UK. Straub, W. F. (1982). Sensation seeking among high and low risk male athletes. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, Wagner, A. M., & Houlihan, D. D. (1994). Sensation seeking and trait anxiety in hang-glider pilots and golfers. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, Wykoff, W. L. (1982). Are physical education majors sensation seekers? Unpublished manuscript. Cited in: Zuckerman (1983, p. 290). Zaleski, Z. (1984). Sensation seeking and risk taking behaviour. Personality and Individual Differences, 5, Zarevski, P., Marusic, I., Zolotic, S., Bunjevac, T., & Vukosav, Z. (1998). Contribution of Arnett s inventory of sensation seeking and Zuckerman s sensation seeking scale to the differentiation of athletes engaged in high risk and low risk sports. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, Zuckerman, M. (1979). Sensation seeking: Beyond the optimal level of arousal. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Zuckerman, M. (1983). Sensation seeking and sports. Personality and Individual Differences, 4, Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioural expressions and biosocial bases of sensation seeking. New York: Cambridge University Press. Zuckerman, M., Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Sensation seeking in England and America: Cross-cultural, age and sex comparisons. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, Zuckerman, M., Kolin, E. A., Price, L., & Zoob, I. (1964). Development of a sensation seeking scale. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 28,