Examining aggressive behaviour from a group perspective

Abstract

The three studies that comprise this thesis provide a first attempt at examining the relationships between social cognitive variables (i.e., group norms and collective efficacy perceptions) and aggressive behaviour from a group perspective. More specifically, the objectives of this dissertation were (a) to develop and validate a theory-based measure of group-related perceptions of normative and collective efficacy beliefs concerning aggressive behaviour in sport, and (b) to examine the relationships between these group-based perceptions and actual aggressive behaviour of sport teams.

The purpose of Study One was to develop and validate a reliable instrument to measure to group-based normative and collective efficacy perceptions. Based upon a strong empirical and theoretical foundation, along with the active participation of ice hockey experts and athletes, a measurement tool was developed which (a) operationalized the constructs from a holistic perspective , (b) was multi-dimensional, and (c) possessed strong psychometric properties. Support for the validity and reliability of the measures was achieved from both a conceptual and statistical standpoint.

Study Two was designed to examine the hypothesis that prior performance of aggressive behaviour is predictive of both normative perceptions of and collective efficacy for aggressive behaviour. While these proposed relationships were theoretically based, they were not demonstrated in the present sample at this point in the competitive season. The major impact of Study Two, however, les in the further validation of the group-based constructs. Because both the normative and collective efficacy perceptions were operationalized from a holistic perspective (i.e., an aggregation of the group's beliefs as a whole), it was necessary to show that these beliefs were indeed reflective of a group-based measurement. Based on the levels of analysis approach outlined by Kenny and LaVoie (1985), it was found that strong support existed for the true group nature of the collective efficacy perceptions, whereas, the group approach to measuring normative perceptions were questioned. Thus, even though the proposed causal relationships were not supported, evidence was found which strongly supported a group-based measure of collective efficacy for aggressive behaviour. Further, this aspect of group functioning was shown to be independent and unique from other perceptions of task-related collective efficacy in ice hockey.

Study Three was designed to re-examine the causal relationships described in Study Two at a later point in the competitive season and, to examine the ability of collective efficacy for aggression beliefs to predict future aggressive behaviour. While unacceptable team aggression did not predict group perceptions any better than during the first eight weeks, the analysis of this second time period did show that collective efficacy for aggression was a significant predictor of actual aggression in ice hockey.

As an initial attempt to examine aggressive behaviour from a group perspective the findings from these three studies reveal intriguing ideas for future research. Implications of the measurement protocol and analysis technique utilized in the study are discussed.