MORAL ORIENTATION AND GOAL ORIENTATION AS MEANS OF PREDICTION OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIORS IN HANDBALL PLAYERS

MORAL ORIENTATION AND GOAL ORIENTATION AS MEANS OF PREDICTION OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIORS IN HANDBALL PLAYERS Ath YANNAKOS 1 M. PROIOS L. PAPASTERGIOU Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between aggressive behavior and dimensions of moral orientation and goal orientation of handball players. Another aim of this study was to investigate the percentage used to display each type of aggression per area during a game. The participants were 18 young athletes aged 19 to 21 years of the Greek National Team, who participated in the World Handball Championship held in Thessaloniki in 2011. They filled the Moral Orientation in Physical Education Questionnaire (MOPEQ; Proios, 2010a) and Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ; Duda & Nicholls, 1992). The examination of players aggressive behavior was achieved via observation (video analysis) by means of a specific program SportScout. The results revealed no statistically significant relationship between aggression (hostile and instrumental), and moral orientation (deontological and teleological) and target orientation (task and ego). This is possibly due to the small sample numbers in the short space of a single tournament. Keywords: Sport, aggression, moral orientation, goal orientation, handball. JEL classification: I19, I29 1. Introduction Aggression is the behavior that is intended to cause harm or injury (Berkowitz, 1983). The psychologists believe that aggression is divided into two forms and the hostile and the instrumental (Buss, 1961; Feshbach, 1970; Rule, 1974; Husman & Silva, 1984). The aim of the hostile aggression is mainly to bring injury, psychological violence to another person or to cause destructive and criminal activities (Tenenbaum, Stewart, Singer, & Duda, 1996), while the instrumental aggression is related to the search of some non-hostile targets. Aggressive behavior in sports is not presented as an innate desire or as something undesirable but depends on the interpretation of situations (Weinberg & Gould, 1995). 1 Ath. Yannakos, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece M. Proios, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece L. Papastergiou, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014 107

Moral Orientation And Goal Orientation as Means of Prediction of Aggressive Behaviors in Handball Players The study of aggression through various theories was an attempted for several decades. According to the theory of social learning, aggression is explained as a behavior learned through observation of other behavioral patterns, which then becomes the cause for demonstration of such acts (Weinberg and Gould, 1995). Apart from the view, expressed by theorists of social learning on the subject of motivation of aggression, there are other more recent theories, which explain in more detail this behavior. One of which is the theory of goal orientation in sports context (Nicholls, 1989). Nicholls suggested that goal achievement (achieving high skill or capacity) is achieved through two main orientations (task and ego). Another theory, which was considered as useful for the investigation of what causes aggression, is the moral development theory (Kohlberg, 1984). This theory holds that moral reasoning plays an important role in determining the moral choice and moral behavior (Blasi, 1980; Candee, 1976; Candee & Kohlberg, 1987; Kurtines & Greif, 1974). The aggressive behavior in sports has been called as the key of a successful athlete (Tutko, Lyon, & Ogilvie, 1969). Rascle, Coulomb, and Delsarte (2005) have proven that high-level players had higher instrumental aggression in relation to low-level players. Coulomb and Pfister (1998) noticed that players of the National League showed higher scores in instrumental aggression. A survey conducted by Stornes (2001) on handball athletes, has proven that, the players were less aggressive as long as the game was favorable to them. Findings of studies, where the motivation of athletes aggressive behavior was examined, have shown that there is a positive relationship with ego orientation (Treasure, 2000), while the task orientation relates with behaviors that are incombatible to aggression such as fun elements, justice elements, moral elements and respect elements towards the opposite team (Dunn & Dunn, 1999; Sage & Kavussanu, 2007). Furthermore, Duda, Olson, and Templin (1991) have proven, that a low and a high task ego in goal orientation is associated with high probability of existence of an aggressive act welcomed as more legitimate, namely damage to an opponent so she/he can stay out for a period. Other studies findings have argued that non-aggressive behavior has a positive relationship with the cognitive moral development (Blasi, 1980). The relationship between moral development and aggression was also supported by the findings of other studies (Bredemeier & Shields, 1984; Bredemeier, 1985). Bredemeier, Weiss, Shields, and Cooper (1986), and Bredemeier, Shields, Weiss, and Cooper (1987) argued that the low maturity of moral reasoning is associated with a greater tendency toward aggression. The examination of factors likely to encourage aggressive behavior in sport seems to be a matter of the utmost importance. This is because sport is considered to be an environment where the character of children can be developed. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between handball players aggressive 108 Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014

behavior and the dimensions of moral orientation and goal orientation. Another aim of this study is to investigate the rate to which appears every form of aggression per area during a match. In this study we considered that the instrumental aggressive behavior will be linked to concepts that have relation to positive behaviors such as ethical and moral orientation and goal orientation, while the hostile aggressive behavior was considered to be associated with negative behaviors as manifested through the teleological moral orientation and ego goal orientation. 2. Methods 2.1 Participants Participants were 18 Youth Greek National Team athletes. Their age varied from 19 to 21 years. They participated in the World Handball Championship held in Thessaloniki in 2011. Participation in the survey was voluntary. 2.2 Measurements Moral orientation was measured using the Moral Orientation Students in Physical Education Questionnaire (MOSPEQ; Proios, 2010a). MOSPEQ consists of 14 items, of which 7 items represent deontological and 7 items teleological ethics definitions of moral orientation in decision making in physical education settings. In order the needs of the present study to be satisfied, stem was modified by changing the term physical education with the term sports. Thus, the items were prefaced with the heading, "Do I believe that my actions in sport are characterized by...". For each item, subjects responded on a 9-point Likert-type scale anchored from 1 (strongly disagree) to 9 (strongly agree). Achievement goals. A validated Greek version (Papaioannou & McDonald, 1993) of the Task and Ego Orientation in Sports Questionnaire (TEOSQ; Duda & Nicholls, 1992) was used in order to assess dispositional goal orientations. The stem was "I feel most successful in my sport when..." TEOSQ is a questionnaire consisting of 13-items. It includes two independent subscales measuring task (seven items; e.g., I learn new skills) and ego (six items; e.g., I come first) orientations as regards participation in sports. For each item, subjects responded on a 5-point Likert- type scale anchored from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). TEOSQ has demonstrated adequate internal consistency with satisfactory alpha coefficients for both the task (a =.79) and ego (a =.81) subscales (Duda & Whitehead, 1998). Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014 109

Moral Orientation And Goal Orientation as Means of Prediction of Aggressive Behaviors in Handball Players Assessing aggression. The estimation of the players aggressive behavior was through observation (video analysis) by means of a specific program -SportScout. For the purposes of video analysis two evaluators were trained by a group of trainers. The evaluation of players athletic aggressive behavior (instrumental and hostile) was achieved through a 5-pointLikert-typescale, which examined the degree of risk of foul (retaining, repelling, hitting). 3. Results Descriptive statistics (Table 1) showed that the players had greater scores in instrumental (M = 1.51, SD = 1.10) than in the hostile aggression (M =.78, SD = 9.95). As concerning the dimensions of moral orientation the players scored higher in teleological (M = 8.28, SD =.75) than in the deontological orientation (M = 7.39, SD = 1.14). As concerning goal orientation, they scored higher in task (M = 3.78, SD =.54) than in the ego orientation (M = 2.72, SD =.75). Table 1 Descriptive Statistics for all variables Variables M SD Instrumental 1.51 1.10 Hostile.78 9.95 Deontological 7.39 1.14 Teleological 8.28.75 Task 3.78.54 Ego 2.72.75 The results of the examining of the percentage of aggressive actions by region in comparison with the instrumental aggression (see Table 2) revealed that the degree of intensity (1) a larger percentage (15.68%) occurred in the position of the left central defender, while a smaller percentage (.29%) occurred in the left side defender area. The degree of intensity (2) was found to have a greater percentage (14.53%) in the position of the left center-defender, and a smaller percentage (1.01%) in the left side of the defense. The degree of intensity (3) was found to have a greater percentage (7.63%) in the position of the right central defender, and a smaller percentage (0.43%) in the left side of the defense. The degree of intensity (4) occurred at a higher rate (2.59%) in the position of the right central defense, and smaller (.14%) in the left side of the defense. Finally, the degree of intensity (5) occurred at a higher rate (1.29%) in the position of the left central defender, and smaller (.14%) in the positions left side and right side of defense. 110 Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014

Table 2 Aggressive Actions instrumental Aggression by region Area Degree of intensity of aggression Total 1 2 3 4 5 Left side defender.29% 1.01% 0.43% 0.14% 0.14% (n=2) (n=7) (n=3) (n=1) (n=1) 14 Right side defender.58% 1.58% 1.29% 0.29% 0.14% (n=4) (n=11) (n=9) (n=2) (n=1) 27 Left intermediate defender 1.58% 6.91% 4.17% 1.73% 0.72% (n=11) (n=48) (n=29) (n=12) (n=5) 105 Right intermediate defender 3.31% (n=23) 7.77% (n=54) 5.04% (n=35) 2.30% (n=16) 0.29% (n=2) 130 Αριστερός κεντρικός αμυντικός 15.68% (n=109) 14.53% (n=101) 2.73% (n=19) 1.01% (n=7) 1.29% (n=9) 245 Right central defender 3.60% (n=25) 10.50% (n=73) 7.63% (n=53) 2.59% (n=18) 0.72% (n=5) 23 Total 174 294 148 56 23 695 Furthermore, the results for the percentage of aggressive actions by region relative to the hostile aggression (see Table 3) revealed that the degree of intensity (1) by a larger percentage (20.93%) occurred in the position of the right central defense while by a smaller percentage (2.33 %) occurred in right lateral position defense. Table 3 Aggressive Actions by region to the Hostile Aggression Area Degree of intensity of aggression Total 1 2 3 Right side defender 2.33% 0% 2.33% 2 (n=1) (n=0) (n=1) Left side defender 16.28% 4.65% 4.65% 11 (n=7) (n=2) (n=2) Right intermediate defender 13.95% 4.65% 0% 8 (n=6) (n=2) (n=0) Left intermediate defender 13.95% 0% 0% 6 (n=6) (n=0) (n=0) Right central defender 20.93% 6.98% 9.30% 16 (n=9) (n=3) (n=4) Total 29 7 7 43 The degree of intensity (2) was found to have a greater percentage (6.98%) in place of a forward defender and a smaller percentage (4.65%) in the position of the right and left intermediate defensive player. Finally, the degree of intensity (3) occurred at a higher rate (9.30%) in the position of the right central defense and at a lower (2.33%) in the right side defense position. Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014 111

Moral Orientation And Goal Orientation as Means of Prediction of Aggressive Behaviors in Handball Players 3.1 Correlations Pearson product-moment correlations were computed among scale scores (see Table 4). The results have shown a positive correlation between the two types of aggression, instrumental and hostile (r =.564, p <.05), between task orientation and teleological orientation (r =.58, p<.05), while the hostile aggression has shown a negative correlation in the task orientation in the «Project» (r = -.52, p <.05). Table 4 Correlations among for all the variables Variables 1 2 3 4 5 1. Instrumental - - - - - 2. Hostile.56* - - - - 3. Deontologigal.38.37 - - - 4. Teleological.15.12.41 - - 5. Task.02.52*.04.58* - 6. Ego.26.29.55*.16.12 Note: Statistical significant *p <.05 3.2 Moral orientation, goal orientation and athletic aggression A series of hierarchical multiple regression analyses (Table 5) were performed to test the ability of moral orientation and goal orientation, to forecast the formation of aggression behavior handball players. First hierarchical multiple regression: in the first step two predictors were entered: deontological and teleological moral orientation. This model was not statistical significant F (2, 15) = 1.27, p =.30, explained 14% of variance in instrumental aggression. After entry of goal orientations (task and ego) at Step 2 the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 15% (F (4, 13) =.57, p =.68). The introduction of goal orientations explained 1% variance in instrumental aggression, after controlling for task and ego orientation (R2Change =.01, F (2, 13) =.03, p =.96). The lack of significance of the coefficients of the variables involved in the model leads to rejection. Second hierarchical multiple regression: in the first step two predictors were entered: deontological and teleological moral orientation. This model was not statistically significant F (2, 15) = 2.30, p <.13 and explained 23% of variance in hostile aggression. After entry of goal orientations (task and ego) at Step 2 the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 47% (F (4, 13) = 2.22, p =.12). The introduction of goal orientations explained additional 17% variance in hostile aggression, after controlling for task and ego orientation (R2Change =.27, F (2, 13) = 1.88, p =.19). The lack of significance of the coefficients of the variables involved in the model leads to rejection. 112 Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014

Table 5 Hierarchical Multiple Regression Variable R R 2 R 2 Change B SE β t Instrumental aggression Step 1.38.14.14 Deontological.36.25.38 1.45 Teleological.02.38 -.01 -.01 Step 2.38.15.01 Deontological.32.33.33.95 Teleological.01.55.01.01 Task.01.69 -.01 -.01 Ego -.12.45 -.08 -.26 Hostile aggression Step 1.48.23.23 Deontological.42.20.51 2.07 Teleological.43.31.34 1.37 Step 2.63.47.27 Deontological.24.24.29 1.02 Teleological.07.39.06.19 Task.94.49 -.54-1.90 Ego -.06.32.05 -.20 Note: p >.05 4. Discussion Players aggressive behavior is also an issue, which concerns strongly enough the leaders of the sport. Pursuit of this study was to examine the relationship between aggression with motivational factors the moral orientation and aggression with motivational factors the goal orientation. Also, this study examined and the incidence of aggressive behaviors during a race by region. The results of descriptive statistics initially revealed that the aggressive actions of handball players move to 'permissible' limits in the context of achieving their goals. That they act in accordance with the elements that characterize the instrumental aggression. This finding is supported by those of other studies, which revealed that high level players have high rates of instrumental aggression (Coulomb & Pfister, 1998; Rascle, Coulomb, & Delsarte, 2005). In general, it can be said that instrumental aggression is a behavior reasoned, used for strategic purposes i.e. to obtain an advantage from the players to achieve their goal during the match. It was argued that, the instrumental aggressive behavior, other than typical for high-level players, was also to be found in winners (Ryan, Williams, & Wimer, 1990; Widmeyer & Birch, 1984). However, this claim was not supported by the findings of another study (McGuire, Courneya, Widmeyer, & Carron, 1992). Other studies have concluded that the aggressive act prevails where there is a large difference in Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014 113

Moral Orientation And Goal Orientation as Means of Prediction of Aggressive Behaviors in Handball Players outcome (score) (e.g. Goginsky, 1989; Harrell, 1980; McGuire, 1990; Wankel, 1973). As far as the moral orientation is concerned, results revealed that the handball players acts, according to them, are distinguished by elements of teleological moral orientation. To be more specific, they perceive that act taking into account the consequences that follow each act, and how they will gain happiness and perfection, both individual and group (Proios, 2010b). The present finding reinforces the argument, that athletes exhibit a stronger egocentric moral reasoning within the sport (e.g. Bredemeier & Shields, 1984, 1986, Shields & Bredemeier, 1995), but also by the findings of studies, that argued that participation in sports is associated with the insufficient sports fair play (Bredemeier & Shields, 1987; Bredemeier, 1995; Lemyre, Roberts, & Ommundsen, 2002). As far as the goal orientation is concerned, results revealed that the handball players actions are aimed to personal improvement (task orientation) to achieve the goal. Similar findings have been reported in other studies with athletes handball (Rascle & Coulomb, 2003), football (Boardley & Kavussanu, 2010), tennis (Pepijn & Kavussanu, 2001). The results of the connection of the task orientation with the instrumental aggression in this study is consistent with the claim that task orientation shows reduced aggression presenting positive social behavior (Sage & Kavussanu, 2007). However, taking the finding of another study into consideration, players with high ego goal orientation, have shown larger percentage of instrumental aggression (Rascle, Coulomb, & Pfister, 1998). It can be argued that the relationship between perspectives of goal orientation and the forms of aggression is not clear and requires further research for a clearer picture. From the findings of descriptive statistics as related to the instrumental aggression incidence frequency per position, regardless of the specific defensive system, it has been found that the position of the left central defender has shown the highest rate. With slightly less frequency the position of the right central defender, while the positions of intermediate defense (right and left) showed significantly lower incidence frequency rates. The positions of the side defensive players (left and right) had lower frequencies than any other position. As far as the hostile aggression incidence frequency per position is concerned, regardless of the specific defensive system, it has been found, that the position of the right central defense, showed the highest rate. A slightly lower frequency is noticed in the position of the left intermediate defender, followed by the position of the right intermediate defender and much smaller frequency rates shows the location of the left central defender. The position of the right side defensive player showed the lowest frequency than any other position. Our results are in agreement with the general notice contributed by Kotzamanidis (1992), who noticed, that after the 80 s and onwards, the defense operations were aimed to the center. 114 Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014

In a search conducted by Brown (1997), it is stated that the aggressive actions are more likely to occur when groups are dissatisfied regarding their performance both in the defensive and in offensive. In particular, when the central defensive player tries to defend his team avoiding possible goal in conjunction with the frustration from the low performance of his team, it can increase his chances of developing aggressive behavior. 5. Conclusions Finally, the test result of the relationship between aggressive behavior forms and dimensions of moral orientation and goal orientation did not reveal the existence of any connection between these variables. This finding reinforces the previous argument for the lack of a clear image about the relation between aggression and goal orientation. However, failure to find any relationship between variables examined in this study may be attributed to the small sample number. In this case, Hudson, (2009) states, that if the sample is small and the findings are not significant, the writers should recognize the possibility of an error and incorporate it into the limitations of the study. This does not mean that the research is not valid. Hopkins, Marshall, Batterham, and Hanin (2009) expressed the same opinion; when the sample is small, the likelihood of the study to lose its validity is reduced, designing and analyzing it for less consequence. In many sports, only a small number of athletes represent elite high performance of the sports spectrum. This leads to the inability to generalize the result obtained in a general population. Similar reports about the impact of sample size in the results of studies, are stated by other researchers too (e.g. Burton & Marshall, 2005; Gidycz, Warkentin, & Orchowski, 2007; Huang, Cherek, & Lane, 1999). Kimble, Russo, Bergman, and Galindo (2010) reported that the small sample size affected the results of the research, since there was not enough statistical power to detect significant differences. REFERENCES 1. Blasi, A. (1980). Bridging moral cognition and moral action: A critical review of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 88(1), 1-45. 2. Boardley, I. D., & Kavussanu, M. (2010). Effects of goal orientation and perceived value of toughness on antisocial behavior in soccer: The mediating role of moral disengagement. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 32, 176-192. 3. Bredemeier, B. (1995). Divergence in children s moral reasoning about issues in daily life and sport specific contexts. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 453-463. Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014 115

Moral Orientation And Goal Orientation as Means of Prediction of Aggressive Behaviors in Handball Players 4. Bredemeier, B, & Shields, D. (1984). The utility of moral stage analysis in the understanding of athletic aggression. Sociology of Sport Journal, 1, 138-149. 5. Bredemeier, B., & Shields, D. (1986). Moral growth among athletes and nonathletes: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 147(1), 7-18. 6. Bredemeier, B., & Shields, D. (1987). Moral growth through physical activity: A structural developmental approach. In D.R. Gould & M. R. Weiss (Eds.), Advances in pediatric sport sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 143-165). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. 7. Bredemeier, B., Weiss, M., Shields, D., & Cooper, B. (1986). The relationship of sport invelopment with children s moral reasoning and aggression tendencies. Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 304-318. 8. Bredemeier, B., Weiss, M. R., Shields, D., & Cooper, B. (1987). The relationship between children s legitimacy judgments and their moral reasoning, aggression tendencies and sport involvement. Sociology of Sport Journal, 4, 48-60. 9. Burton, J. M., & Marshall, L. A. (2005). Protective factors for youth considered at risk of criminal behaviour: Does participation in extracurricular activities help? Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 15, 46 64. 10. Buss, A. H. (1961). The Psychology of Aggression. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 11. Candee, D. (1976). Structure and choice in moral reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 1293-1301. 12. Candee, D., & Kohlberg, L. (1987). Moral judgment and moral actions: A reanalysis of Haan, Smith & Block s (1968) free speech movement data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 554-564. 13. Coulomb, G., & Pfister, R. (1998). Aggressive behaviors in soccer as related to competitive level and time: A field study. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21, 222-231. 14. Coulomb, G., & Rascle, O. (2006). Team sports players observed aggression as a function of gender, competitive level, and sport type. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(8), 1980-2000. 15. Duda, J.L., Olson, L.K., & Templin, T.J. (1991). The relationship of task and ego orientations to the sportsmanship attitudes and the perceived legitimacy of injurious acts. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62, 79-87. 16. Duda, J. L, & Nicholls, J. G. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in schoolwork and sport. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 290-299. 17. Duda, J. L., & Whitehead, L. (1998). Measurement of goal perspectives in the physical domain. In J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in Sport and Exercise Psychology Measurement (pp. 21-48). Morgantown WV: Fitness Information Technology. 116 Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014

18. Dunn, J. G. H, & Dunn, J. C. (1999). Goal orientation, perceptions of aggression, and sportspersonship in elite male youth ice hockey players. Sport Psychologist, 13, 183-200. 19. Feshbach, S. (1970). Aggression. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's manual of child psychology (3 rd ed., Vol. 2). New York: Wiley. 20. Gidycz, C. A., Warkentin, J. B., & Orchowski, L. M. (2007). Predictors of perpetration of verbal, physical, and sexual violence: A prospective analysis of college men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 8(2), 79 94.) 21. Goginsky, A. M. (1989). Microcosmic characteristics of aggression in professional ice hockey. Unpublished master s thesis. Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA. 22. Harrell, W. A. (1980). Aggression by high school basketball players: An observational study of the effects of opponents aggression and frustrationinducing factors. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 11, 290-298. 23. Hopkins, W. G., Marshall, S. W., Batterham, A. M., & Hanin, J. (2009). Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 41, 3-12. 24. Hudson, Z. (2009). Sample size, power and effect size What all researchers need to know. Physical therapy in sport, 10, 43-44. 25. Huang, D. B., Cherek, D. R., & Lane, S. D. (1999). Laboratory measurement of aggression in high school age athletes: Provocation in a nonsporting context. Psychological Reports, 85, 1251 1262. 26. Husman, B., & Silva, J. (1984). Aggression: definitional considerations. In J. M. Silva, & R. S. Weinberg (Eds.), Psychological foundations of sport (pp. 246 260). Champaign,IL: Human Kinetics. 27. Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays in moral development (Vol. II): The psychology of moral development. San Fracisco: Harper and Row. 28. Kimble, N., Russo, S., Bergman, B. & Galindo, B. (2010): Revealing an empirical understanding of aggression and violent behavior in athletics. Aggression and violent behavior 15, 446-462 29. Kurtines, W., & Grief, E. B. (1974). The development of moral thought: review and evaluation of Kohlberg's approach. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 453-470. 30. Lemyre, P., Roberts, G. C., & Ommundsen, Y. (2002). Achievement goal orientations, perceived ability, and sportspersonship in youth soccer. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 120-136. 31. McGuire, E. J. (1990). Antecedents of aggressive behavior in professional ice hockey. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON. 32. McGuire, E. J., Courneya, K. S., Widmeyer, W. N., & Carron, A. V. (1992). Aggression as a potential mediator of the home advantage in professoinal ice hockey. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 14, 148 158. Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014 117

Moral Orientation And Goal Orientation as Means of Prediction of Aggressive Behaviors in Handball Players 33. Nicholas. J. Brown (1997). Aggressive and assertive behavior of elite rugby players. ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing, p. 84. 34. Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press. 35. Papaioannou, A., & McDonald, A. I. (1993). Goals perspectives and purposes of physical education as perceived by Greek adolescents. Physical Education Review, 16, 41-48. 36. Pepijn K.C. & Kavussanu, M. (2010). Achievement goals and motivational responses in tennis: Does the context matter? Psychology of sport and exercise, 12, 176-183. 37. Proios, M. (2010a). Development and validation of Moral Orientation of Students in Physical Education Questionnaire (MOSPEQ). Educational Research and Evaluation, 16(3), 249-268. 38. Proios, M. (2010b). Development and validation of a questionnaire for the assessment of moral content judgment. International Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 7, 189-210. 39. Rascle, O., Coulomb, G., & Pfister, R. (1998). Aggression and goal orientations in handball: influence of institutional sport context. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 1347-1360. 40. Rascle, O., Coulomb, G., & Delsarte, A. (2005). Perceived motivational climate and observed aggression as a function of competitive level in youth male French handball. Journal of Sport Behavior, 28(1), 51-67. 41. Rule, B. G. (1974). The hostile and instrumental functions of human aggression. In W. W. Hartup & J. dewit (Eds.), Determinants and origins of aggressive behaviors. The Hague: Mouton. 42. Ryan, M. K., Williams, J. M., & Wimer, B. (1990). Athletic aggression. Perceived legitimacy and behavioral intentions in girls high school basketball. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 12, 48-55. 43. Sage, L., & Kavussanu, M. (2007). Multiple goal orientations as predictors of moral behavior in youth soccer. The Sport Psychologist, 21, 417-437. 44. Shields, D., & Bredemeier, B. (1995). Character development and physical activity. Champaign IL: Human Kinetics. 45. Stornes, T. (2001). Sportspersonship in elite sports: On the effects of personal and environmental factors on the display of sportspersonship among elite male handball players. European Physical Education Review, 7, 283-304. 46. Tenenbaum, G., Stewart, E., Singer, R. N., & Duda, J. (1996). Aggression and violence in sport: An ISSP position stand. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 27, 229-236. 47. Treasure, D. C., Carpenter, P. J., & Power, K. T. (2000). Relationship between achievement goal orientations and the perceived purposes of playing rugby union for professional and amateur players. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18, 571-577. 118 Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014

48. Tutko, T. A., Lyon, L. P., & Ogilvie, B. C. (1969). Athletic motivation inventory. San Jose, CA: Institute for the Study of Athletic Motivation. 49. Wankel, L. M. (1973). An examination of illegal aggression in intercollegiate hockey. Proceedings: Fourth Canadian Psycho-Motor Learning and Sport Psychology Symposium (pp. 531-544). University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, October 1973. 50. Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (1995). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology (pp. 467-479). Champaign,IL: Human Kinetics. 51. Widmeyer, W. N., & Birch, J. S. (1984). Aggression in professional ice hockey: A strategy for success or a reaction to failure? Journal of Psychology, 117, 77-84. Vol. VI Nr. 1 2014 119