EFFECT OF COLLEGIATE ATHLETES’ PERSONALITY TRAITS ON
OCCURRENCE OF ATHLETIC INJURY

A THESIS
Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Graduate Studies
and Research
of
California University of Pennsylvania in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science

by
Kallie D. Balajthy

Research Advisor, Dr. Ellen J. West
California, Pennsylvania
2011

ii

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It has been a long and challenging year, but has not
come without its rewards.

Throughout this process at

California University of Pennsylvania I have grown and
developed as a professional and an individual. It has
instilled in me the importance of determination and
perseverance when pursuing a goal.

I would like to take

the time to thank those who have assisted me in achieving
my goals.
I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Ellen
West, and my committee members Prof. Jeffrey Hatton and Dr.
Linda P. Meyer for all their advice, revisions, and time.
I would also like to thank Dr. Thomas West for devoting his
time to guide and assist me throughout this process.
Thank you to all of the athletic directors and student
athletes at Lock Haven University and CalU, without whom,
this research would not have been possible.
I would also like to thank my classmates for their
friendship and understanding throughout the frustrations of
this year.
Finally, I would like to thank my parents for keeping
me grounded with their continued support and always
believing in me.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
SIGNATURE PAGE

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
INTRODUCTION
METHODS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Research Design
Subjects

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Preliminary Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Procedures

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Hypothesis

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Data Analysis
RESULTS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Preliminary Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Demographic Information
Hypothesis Testing

. . . . . . . . . . . . 15

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Additional Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Discussion of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

v
Implications to the Profession. . . . . . . . . . 24
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
APPENDIX A: Review of Literature

. . . . . . . . . 30

Personality Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Myers Briggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
The Big 5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

EPQ-BV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Other

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Injury Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
NCAA ISS . . . . . .
Prevalent Sports

. . . . . . . . . . . 44

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Personality and Injury . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Personality Traits

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Injury Occurrence

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Personality and Incidence of Injury. . . . . . . 55
Adjusting Personality, Decreasing Injury Risk. . . . 56
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
APPENDIX B: The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

vi
Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Delimitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Significance of the Study

. . . . . . . . . . . 63

APPENDIX C: Additional Methods . . . . . . . . . . 65
Preliminary Study Informed Consent Form & Email (C1) . 66
Preliminary Survey Code Page (C2)

. . . . . . .

. 69

Reliability Testing (C3) . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Primary Survey (C4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
IRB: California University of Pennsylvania (C5) . . . 91
Primary Study AD & Student Athlete Email (C6) . . . . 104
REFERENCES .
ABSTRACT

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table

Title

Page

1

Frequency for Academic Year . . . . . . . . . 15

2

Frequency of Primary Sports . . . . . . . . . 16

3

Primary Sports Mean Neuroticism Scores. . . . . 18

4

Primary Sports Mean Extroversion Scores . . . . 19

5

Type of Sport Neuroticism and Extroversion Scale

20

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

Title

Page

1

Pearson correlation coefficient of Injury . 73

2

Pearson correlation coefficient of Sport. . 74

3

Pearson correlation coefficient of Time . . 75

4

Pearson correlation coefficient of Severity. 76

1
INTRODUCTION

Annually in the United States, 2.6 million emergency
room visits occur due to athletic injuries of people
between the ages of five and twenty-four.1 This does not
account for the numerous injuries that are not seen in the
emergency room.

While it is impossible to eliminate these

injuries, a significant number of these injuries may
potentially be prevented.

Prevention requires an

understanding of the many different risk factors for
athletic injury.

Some of these factors include poor

biomechanics, nutrition, and psychological issues.
Psychology has been found to have a great influence on
the occurrence and recovery from injury and illness.2-9

One

main component of sport psychology that has been found to
influence the occurrence of injury is life stress.
Contributing stressors include social support, coping
skills, and personality.6 Personality is the basis of these
three stressors.

Personality determines how a person will

normally think, feel, and act.

When put in a particular

situation, a person’s personality will influence how they
respond to the circumstance.10
Dr. Hans J. Eysenck (1916-1997), a British
psychologist of German origin, is credited as being one of

2
the top specialists on personality.

Writing over 1,600

publications during his lifetime, he was an advocate of
researching the theory of personality.

His many

accomplishments developed his credibility and eventually he
came to be seen as an iconic figure in British psychology.11
According to Eysenck, personality has three central
elements.

In his research he mainly focuses on

extraversion (vs. introversion) and neuroticism, but also
includes psychoticism as a key trait.

These

characteristics are what make each individual unique and
separate the various personalities.12

Extraversion refers

to a person who is drawn towards active events and has a
tendency to become energized by them.8 This is due to the
fact that individuals that are extraverted generally have
lower arousal levels and therefore need to find stimulation
in external sources.

People who are introverted are the

opposite; they tend to be more reserved and have higher
internal arousal levels, decreasing the need for them to
seek out stimulation.12

Neuroticism is a mental state where

an individual has a predisposition to be overly emotional.
These excessive emotions can lead to psychological
distress.8

Individuals who have neurotic tendencies

normally will have a reactive autonomic nervous system

3
which makes them more emotionally unstable than individuals
lower in neuroticism.12
Research examining the effect of Eysenck’s personality
traits on an individual’s health has been analyzed, but
infrequently.

One study examined the influence

extraversion and neuroticism had on mortality rate.
Performed by Shipley et al8, the study used the Eysenck
personality inventory in a prospective cohort study.
Twenty-one years after the inventory was originally
distributed, researchers found those people who ranked
higher in neuroticism were at an increased risk of death
from heart disease.

However, they were unable to document

any significant findings attributing mortality rate to
extroversion.8
A similar study considered neuroticism and
extraversion in relation to burnout.

Burnout is a syndrome

that stems from excessive mental demands which create
emotional exhaustion.

This syndrome can lead a

deterioration of a person’s physical health.

In the study,

Shimizutani et al9 used a version of Eysenck’s personality
questionnaire when looking into causes of burnout.

They

found that burnout and neuroticism are strongly associated.9
According to the researcher, Piedmont, burnout is an

4
induced stress reaction in which personality can be
correlated with.13
A substantial amount of research suggests that
peoples’ personalities influence their mood and life
stress3,6-9,13.

It is important to understand what aspects of

personality promote stress in order to avoid injury.
Little research has actually been done that demonstrates
which of these aspects put individuals at greater risk of
injury.

By better understanding which personality traits

lead to a higher incidence of injury, clinicians will be
more prepared to prevent injuries.

They will be able to

recognize the athletes who have personality traits which
classify them at a higher risk for injury.
The potential prevention of these injuries can be
accomplished by using techniques geared around coping with
stress and over-intensity.

Some psychological techniques

that have been shown to work include self-talk, breathing,
and imagery.

Each of these skills allows the athlete to

relax and create a positive frame of mind.14
The purpose of this study was to examine the
collegiate athletes’ extraversion and neuroticism levels
and determine if there is a relationship when compared to
their injury occurrence.

This study will also look at

other factors such as individual sports verses team sports,

5
gender, and specific sports in order to determine what role
personality plays in injury occurrence.

6
METHODS

The purpose of this study was to determine if the
personality type of NCAA Division II athletes is related to
injury rate.

The study also looked into certain

demographics to find any correlations.

These demographics

include questions such as age, gender, sport, and sport
type (team or individual).

This section will include the

following subsections: research design, subjects,
preliminary research, instruments, procedures, hypothesis,
and data analysis.

Research Design

The research design for this study was descriptive.
The design had three independent variables of sport and
extroversion and neuroticism scales as measured by the
Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Brief Version (EPQ-BV).
The dependent variable in this research was injury
occurrence.

The strength of this study was in the internal

consistency and reliability of the personality portion of
the survey.

Values found by Sato11 on the test-retest

reliability of the EPQ-BV were .92 for each scale.
Internal consistency, measured by correlating results with

7
the with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised
Short (EPQR-S) form, found the two highly correlated (.88
and .89).12

Limitations of this study were caused primarily

from the injury occurrence portion of the questionnaire.
This portion of the survey had not previously been used in
any other research and was an original tool created by the
researcher of this study. Another limitation was related to
the low number of schools participating in the study.

Each

school used was comprised of similar students which
decreased the diversity of this study.

Subjects

The subjects used in this study consisted of 71 NCAA
Division II collegiate athletes currently participating in
their sport. This sample of subjects came from two
universities in Pennsylvania.

These schools included

California University of Pennsylvania and Lock Haven
University of Pennsylvania (chosen due to convenience).
The institutions’ athletic director distributed surveys or
allowed the researcher permission to distribute them online
via email and survey link.

All participation was voluntary

and responses were kept confidential.

The age subjects

ranged from 18-24 year old with a mean of 20.32.

There

8
were 27 males and 44 females that participated that
competed in a total of sixteen sports.

Team sports were

represented by 26 of the subjects, while 45 competed in an
individual sport.

Preliminary Research

Preliminary research consisted of creating the injury
occurrence portion of the questionnaire and determining its
reliability and validity.

Once the questionnaire was

created it was sent to a panel of experts who reviewed it
for validity.

The panel of experts included five certified

athletic trainers with experience in survey construction.
Feedback was given and the appropriate changes were made.
After the study was approved by the California University
of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board(IRB) and the
survey was edited by the panel of experts, the
questionnaire was then distributed to athletes at Penn
State Fayette (N=6) to begin the pilot study.

These select

athletes were volunteers who allowed the researcher to
email them the survey.

The athletes completed the

questionnaire twice for comparison to show the results are
repeatable. A consent form (Appendix C1) was given to each
volunteer by the institution’s athletic trainer.

This form

9
was similar to the primary study’s consent form, however on
the preliminary consent form participants were made aware
of the study and their involvement in its preliminary
research.

There was also a space at the bottom of the

consent form for athletes to include their email address.
The consent form also notified participants that they would
receive a code to type in a space provided at the beginning
of the survey (Appendix C2).

This made it possible for the

researcher to link the two questionnaires during data
collection.

All information was kept in a password

protected file on the California University of PA server.
After the completion of the preliminary research, all data
connecting the email address with the specific
questionnaires was deleted.

Participants were given three

days to complete the survey once the link was initially
emailed to them, with a reminder email each day.

One week

after the completion of the initial survey they received
the survey link again as an email, to be completed within
three days.

This process helped determine the

questionnaire’s reliability (Appendix C3).

Athletes who

participated in this procedure were not subjects in the
research study.

10
Instruments

The instrument used in this study was comprised of
both a questionnaire created by the researcher and the
Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Brief Version (Appendix
C4).

This questionnaire included three sections; 1)

demographics, 2) personality type, and 3) injury
occurrence.

The demographics section included questions

concerning age, current year in college, sport, and the
number of years they have competed collegiately.

The

personality type section was composed of the Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire Brief Version (EPQ-BV), which has
been previously researched.

On the EPQ-BV all even

numbered questions are for the neuroticism scale and odd
numbered questions are for the extroversion scale. Answers
are scored where A=1 B=2 C=3 D=4 E=5, except for two
reversed items (#13 and #19).

The answers were then added

together to obtain the extraversion and neuroticism score.
Injury occurrence was the final portion of the survey
and was designed by the researcher of this study. Each
participant was asked how many injuries they sustained in
the past 12 months, how long the injury kept them from
participating in practice/competition, and if the injury
required surgery.

For each injury they received a point.

11
They also received a point if the injury required surgery.
In relation to how long the injury kept the athlete from
participating, a point was awarded if they chose 1-2 weeks
or 2-3 weeks and two points were given if they chose a
month or more.

All points were then added to create an

injury severity score.

Procedures

Approval was first required from the California
University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board (IRB)
before any research was conducted (Appendix 5).

Once

approval was granted from the primary institution, the
athletic directors of each school were contacted by email
from the researcher to determine if they would be
interested in participating in the study (Appendix 6).

If

they agreed to participate, the athletic directors were
then emailed a cover letter and link to the survey
(Appendix 6) to forward by email to the athletes at their
school.

By submitting the questionnaire, the athlete

consented to allowing the researcher use of the data.

In

the introduction of the survey all athletes were given a
briefing explaining the procedure and purpose of the study.
They were also informed their participation was voluntary

12
and would be kept confidential.

Contact information of the

researcher was provided if participants had further
questions or concerns.
As each participant submitted the questionnaire, the
survey site kept track of all the data collectively.

This

data was then analyzed by the researcher and results were
determined.

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were based on previous
research and the intuition of the researcher from using
these resources.
1.

Athletes that score high on the neuroticism scale
will have an increased likelihood of injury.

2.

Athletes that score high on the extroversion
scale will have an increased likelihood of
injury.

3.

Individuals in a particular sport will have
similar personality traits.

13
Data Analysis

All data was found using PASW statistics 18.

The

level of significance was set at α ≤ .05 while testing the
hypotheses.
A MANOVA was used when analyzing the relationship
between sport and personality traits.

A Pearson product

correlation was then used looking at the neuroticism scale
and injury occurrence.

The same correlation was used to

examine injury occurrence and the extroversion scale.

14
RESULTS

The purpose of this study was to determine if an
athlete’s personality type influences the occurrence of
injuries by using a survey.

The following section contains

the data collected from the survey and is divided into the
following four subsections: preliminary results,
demographic information, hypothesis testing, and additional
findings. Analysis of the data was obtained using the PASW
Statistics 18 program.

Preliminary Results

A pilot study was first performed to determine the
survey’s test-retest reliability.
State Fayette (N=6) were utilized.

Participants from Penn
The ages of these

individuals ranged from 18-22 with a mean of 20.0.
participants of this pilot study were female.

All

The primary

sports played were volleyball (n=2), outdoor track (n=2),
field hockey (n=1), and basketball (n=1).

The statistics

and results for each question in the injury occurrence
portion of the pilot study is listed in Appendix C3.

15

Demographic Information

Subjects that completed this survey consisted of
collegiate athletes at Division II schools (n=2) in
Pennsylvania. A total of 73 student athletes completed the
survey.

Two surveys were discarded for not meeting minimal

age limit requirements or not providing sufficient answers.
Twenty-seven participants were male (38%) and 44 were
female (62%).

The age of the participants ranged from 18-24 years
old with a mean of 20.32 and standard deviation of 1.371.
The largest percent of students described themselves as
being juniors (32.4%) and the lowest categories were
sophomores and seniors, both with 21.1% (Table 1).

Table 1. Frequency for Academic Year
Academic Year
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior

F
18
15
23
15

Percent
25.4
21.1
32.4
21.1

Individuals from 16 sports participated, with the
highest percentage of athletes in men’s and women’s outdoor

16
track and field (Table 2).

These sports were divided into

categories of individual sports or team sports.

Individual

sports included cross-country, outdoor track, swimming &
diving, tennis, and wrestling.

The sports that were

considered team sports were baseball, basketball, field
hockey, football, soccer, softball, and volleyball.

When

divided into two categories it was calculated that the most
athletes participating in the study were involved in an
individual sport with a frequency of 45 (63.4%).

Table 2. Frequency of Primary Sports
Primary Sport
Baseball
Basketball(M)
Basketball(W)
Cross Country(M)
Cross Country(W)
Field Hockey
Football
Outdoor Track(M)
Outdoor Track(W)
Soccer(M)
Soccer(W)
Softball
Swimming &
Diving(W)
Tennis(W)
Volleyball(W)
Wrestling(M)

F
3
1
3
4
6
2
2
12
12
2
7
5
4

Percent
4.2
1.4
4.2
5.6
8.5
2.8
2.8
16.9
16.9
2.8
9.9
7.0
5.6

4
1
3

5.6
1.4
4.2

17
Hypothesis Testing

The hypotheses listed below were tested in this study.
Each was tested using a significance level set at α ≤ 0.05.
Hypothesis 1: Athletes that score higher on the
neuroticism scale will have an increased likelihood of
injury.
Conclusion 1: A Pearson correlation was calculated
examining the relationship between participants’ injury
score and level of neuroticism.

A weak negative

correlation that was not significant was found (r(2)= .092, p>.05).

Injury score is not related to neuroticism.

Hypothesis 2: Athletes that score high on the
extroversion scale will have an increased likelihood of
injury.
Conclusion 2: A Pearson correlation was used to
determine whether there was a relationship between the
participants’ injury score and level of extroversion.

A

weak non-significant correlation was found (r(2)= .212,
p>.05). Injury score is not related to an extroversion
scale.
Hypothesis 3: Individuals in a particular sport will
have similar personality traits.

18
Conclusion 3: Mean neuroticism and extroversion scores
for each sport can be found in Table 3 and Table 4. A
MANOVA was calculated examining the effect of the
participants’ primary sport on their extroversion and
neuroticism scores.

No significant effect was found

(Lambda(30,108)=.593, p>.05).

Neither extroversion

(p=.481) nor neuroticism (p=.178) scores were significantly
influenced by primary sport.

Table 3. Primary Sports Mean Neuroticism Scores
Primary Sport
Baseball
Basketball(M)
Basketball(W)
Cross Country(M)
Cross Country(W)
Field Hockey
Football
Outdoor Track(M)
Outdoor Track(W)
Soccer(M)
Soccer(W)
Softball
Swimming &
Diving(W)
Tennis(W)
Volleyball(W)
Wrestling(M)

Mean
20.6
28.0
18.0
29.2
30.3
27.0
27.5
22.7
27.6
37.5
26.2
30.2
23.5
30.5
31.0
26.0

SD
3.05
3.00
3.86
11.25
2.82
12.02
6.07
6.70
13.43
8.13
5.01
6.55
7.14
4.00

N
3
1
3
4
6
2
2
12
12
2
7
5
4
4
1
3

19

Table 4. Primary Sports Mean Extroversion Scores
Primary Sport
Baseball
Basketball(M)
Basketball(W)
Cross Country(M)
Cross Country(W)
Field Hockey
Football
Outdoor Track(M)
Outdoor Track(W)
Soccer(M)
Soccer(W)
Softball
Swimming &
Diving(W)
Tennis(W)
Volleyball(W)
Wrestling(M)

Mean
39.6
33.0
52.0
42.7
37.8
46.0
34.5
47.3
41.1
40.5
48.8
45.8
45.2
39.5
46.0
46.6

SD
3.78
2.64
7.93
13.77
5.65
6.36
9.99
10.46
6.36
6.69
9.85
14.45
3.69
4.50

N
3
1
3
4
6
2
2
12
12
2
7
5
4
4
1
3

Additional Findings

Additional tests were performed using the data found
in the personality and demographic portion of the
questionnaire and injury scores.
The first additional test compared the type of sport
(team or individual) and the extroversion and neuroticism
scores. The mean scores can be found in Table 5. An
independent samples t-test was used to examine the effect
of the type of sport with the two personality scores.

No

20
significant difference was found between sport type and
neuroticism (t(69)=-.038, p=.970).

No significant

difference was found between sport type and extroversion
(t(69)=.766, p=.446). The means of neither extroversion nor
introversion scores were significantly influenced by type
of sport.

Table 5. Type of Sport Neuroticism and Extroversion Scale
Personality
Neuroticism
Extroversion

Sport Type
Team
Individual
Team
Individual

Mean
26.6
26.6
44.8
43.0

SD
7.80
7.22
7.90
10.31

N
26
45
26
45

The second test used for additional findings was a
Pearson product correlation, used to determine the
relationship between extroversion and neuroticism.

A

moderate negative correlation was found (r=(69)= -.375, p<
.01), indicating a significant linear relationship between
the two variables. Extraverted individuals are less
neurotic.

21
DISCUSSION

The discussion of the findings is divided into the
following four subs-sections: 1) Discussion of Results, 2)
Implications to the Profession, 3) Recommendations, and 4)
Conclusion.

Discussion of Results

This study focused extraversion and neuroticism as
personality traits and how they relate to the occurrence of
injuries in athletics.

Studies such as this one, which

focus on the underlying factors of athletic injuries, are
important when developing injury prevention, treatment, and
rehabilitation strategies.15 Personality traits are one
possible factor that has not been the focus of many studies
and is lacking research. This study was designed to
increase knowledge of personality and sport.
The current study found that injuries in athletics are
not significantly influenced by the personality traits of
neuroticism (H1) or extraversion (H2).

Therefore, the

first two hypotheses of this study were rejected.
Most previous studies conflict with the rejection of
hypothesis one some of these studies include those

22
researched by Piedmont13, Shimizutani et al9, and Shipley et
al8.

A study by Raynor et al2 however did conclude that

neurotic individuals did not predict many risky health
behaviors.
The rejection of hypothesis two (H2) is supported in
previous studies by Shipley et al8 and Shimizutani et al9,
but differed from the results found in the study by Raynor
et al2.

Although none of these studies looked directly at

athletic injuries, they each attempted to relate
extraversion with a decrease in physical health.

Shipley

et al8 determined extraversion was not related to mortality
rates while Shimizutani et al9 found that people low in
extraversion have a higher burnout rate.

Both studies may

be compared to injuries in athletics illustrating a lack of
association between extraversion and injury occurrence.
This is disputed in the study by Raynor et al2 who
determined that individuals high in extraversion are more
inclined to engage in behaviors that are considered
detrimental to an individual’s health including cigarette
use, alcohol use, binge drinking, etc.
The third hypothesis which examined each sport’s
personality trait was also not supported by the data
collected in the sample of this study.

There is very

little research on this theory, but if a significant result

23
can be established that knowledge can be used to help
coaches, sport medicine staff, athletic directors,
referees, etc. understand what
communication/motivation/treatment technique each
individual team will respond to best.
Additional tests were also performed to determine any
supplementary results.

The first of these tests paired the

primary sports into two larger categories of individual and
team sports.

These two categories were then compared with

the personality traits.

Results of analysis showed that

neither extraversion nor introversion was significantly
influenced by the type of sport.

A study presented by

Eagleton et al.16 yielded results inconsistent with these
findings.

Eagleton et al16 concluded that team sports are

greater in extraversion than individual sports.

Results of

neuroticism however corresponded to the analysis of the
current study, having no significant influence on type of
sport.
The final additional analysis was used to determine if
there was a relationship between extraversion and
neuroticism.

This evaluation established a moderate

negative correlation which indicated that extraverted
individuals are less neurotic and neurotic individuals are
less extraverted.

24
The rejection of each hypothesis may have been
impacted by the low useable response rate of N=71. The
number of student athletes that received the questionnaire
was 785 for a completion of 9%.

With the small sample size

the distribution of these athletes by team was not
extremely accurate.

For example, the category of football

only had two responses while tennis (a much smaller team)
had five responses.

Even when categorized into sport type

(team and individual) the number of respondents for each
was not equivalent, with individual sports containing 63.4
percent of all participants.
The low response rate may also have influenced the
results for the personality scales.

The maximum scores for

the neuroticism and extraversion scales were each a total
of 60 points.

The range for the neuroticism scale was 12-

49 and the extraversion range was 21-60. This result does
not include the entire range (12-60) for either personality
trait.

Implications to the Profession

The findings of this study demonstrated that the
personality traits of an individual do not reflect the
severity of his/her sport injuries.

Athletic Training

25
requires that people in the profession work with a
multitude of personality types.

However extreme the

personality of an athlete, it is important that they all
receive the same quality treatment.

Like any human being,

Athletic Trainers have the potential to judge their
athletes and place them into categories of complainers or
tough-minded athletes, etc.

This study shows that no

matter the category an athlete may be placed in, the
severity of injury does not change.

According to this

study, personality traits, specifically extroversion and
neuroticism, do not influence injury.

Therefore an

athlete’s injury should not be judged by their personality.

Recommendations

There are many different personality traits other than
extroversion and neuroticism that make up an individual’s
personality type.

Future studies on this topic would

benefit from a more thorough personality questionnaire such
as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator which places an
individual into one of sixteen different personality
types.17 Also, subsequent studies may gain more insight to
this topic if a larger, more complete, sample size is used.

26
Further comprehension on the topic can facilitate the
reduction of athletic injuries.

Conclusions

The impact of personality traits on the occurrence of
injuries is an area that requires more research.

Overall

this study found no significance relating the personality
traits of neuroticism and extroversion to sport or injury
occurrence.

A moderate negative correlation was found

between extroversion and neuroticism.

If a correlation can

be found between personality types and occurrence of injury
preventative measures can be taken to help decrease
athletic injury and ensure a safer environment.
Understanding contributing factors to injury is crucial to
decreasing injury rate in athletics.

27
REFERENCES

1. Goldberg AS, Moroz L, Smith A, Ganley T. Injury
surveillance in young athletes. Sports Med. 2007;37
(3):265-278.
2. Raynor DA, Levine H. Associations between the fivefactor model of personality and health behaviors among
college students. J of American College Health.
2009;58(1):73-81.
3. Hudek-Knezevic J, Kardum I. Five-factor personality
dimensions and 3 health-related personality constructs
as predictors of health. Croat Med J. 2009;50:394-402.
4. Allread WG, Marras WS. Does personality affect the
risk of developing musculoskeletal discomfort?
Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science.
2006;7(2):149-167.
5. Liu XJ, Ye HX, Li WP, Dai R, Chen D, Jin M.
Relationship between psychosocial factors and onset of
multiple sclerosis. European Neurology. 2009;62:130136.
6. Brewer, BW. Developmental differences in psychological
aspects of sport-injury rehabilitation. J Athl
Training. 2003;38(2):152-153.
7. Galambos, SA, Terry, PC, Moyle, GM, Locke, SA.
Psychological predictors of injury among elite
athletes. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39:351-354.
8. Shipley, BA, Weiss, A, Der, G, Taylor, MD, Deary, IJ.
Neuroticism, extraversion, and mortality in the UK
health and lifestyle survey: a 21-year prospective
cohort study. Psychosomatic Med. 2007;69:923-931.
9. Shimizutani M, Odagiri Y, Ohya Y, et al. Relationship
of nurse burnout with personality characteristics and
coping behaviors. Ind Health. 2008;46:326-335.
10. Smith RE. Advances in cognitive-social-personality
theory: applications to sport psychology. Revista de
Psicologia del Deporte. 2008;17(2):253-276.

28

11. Hall J. The emergence of clinical psychology in
Britain from 1943 to 1958 part II: practice and
research traditions. Hist & Phil of Psych.
2007;9(2):1-33.
12. Sato T. The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire brief
version: factor structure and reliability. J of Psych.
2005;139(6):545-552.
13. Piedmont RL. A longitudinal analysis of burnout in the
health care setting: the role of personal
dispositions. J Personality Assessment.
1993;61(3):457-473.
14. Clark MA, Lucett SC, eds. NASM Essentials of Sports
Performance Training. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters
Kluwer; 2010.
15. Brooks JHM, Fuller CW. The influence of methodological
issues on the results and conclusions form
epidemiological studies of sports injuries. J of
Sports Med. 2006;36(6):459-472.
16. Eagleton JR, McKelvie SJ, DeMan A. Extraversion and
neuroticism in team sport participants, individual
sport participants, and nonparticipants. Perceptual
and Motor Skills. 2007;105(1):265-275.
17. Llorens J. Taking inventory of Myers-Briggs. American
Society for Training & Development. 2010;18-19.

29

APPENDICES

30

APPENDIX A
Review of Literature

31
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

When participating in athletics, injuries are common
and affect the athlete both physically and mentally. There
are many different variables in sports that can influence
the occurrence of injuries. This literature review will
look specifically at how an athlete’s personality type may
be a factor that will increase their occurrence of injury.
Athletes have a variety of personality traits.

Personality

and injury has not been a main focus most studies that look
at contributing factors to injury.

The following review is

a compilation of personality questionnaires, injury
surveillance techniques, and various studies that have
looked at both personality and injury.

Personality Questionnaires

There are many different tools that can be used when
trying to determine a person’s personality type.

Some have

been shown more effective than others, but the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator, Big Five personality dimensions, and EPQ-BV
are all reliable tests.

The proceeding sub-sections will

examine research studies that have used each of these
personality assessment tools.

32

Myers Briggs
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is an
assessment that categorizes personality into four sections,
with two options in each section.

These options are

extroverts or introverts, sensing or intuition, thinking or
feeling, and judgment or perception.
of sixteen different personalities.

This creates a total
There are many

different forms of the MBTI varying in length and specific
uses but each has the same function.
Beginning its use during World War II, the MyersBriggs Type Indicator is still being used as an insight
into individuals and working relationships.

There have

been some problems with the MBTI, but many of these issues
have been fixed statistically.1 The MBTI is currently one of
the most commonly used personality assessments. It has been
researched and found to have good reliability and validity,
being used in countless research studies that compare
personality to different facets of life.
Allread and Marras2 preformed a study that researched
employees’ personalities and how they related to manual
materials handing jobs (warehouse work). They hypothesized
that individuals whose work preferences did not match the
nature of their job requirements would report more stress

33
and strain compared to those who did not match. All 133
participants were given the MBTI and other questionnaires
relating to work environments. Results of this study showed
when employees’ personalities are matched to their work
they report a decrease of anxiety and physical discomfort.2
A study by Wu et al3 also implemented the Myers-Briggs
Questionnaire (form G).

Instead of comparing personality

to work environments like the previous study, their aim was
to determine if the Chinese culture of dentists differed
from other cultures that had previously taken the
assessment.

A total of 317 high school seniors that

applied to dental school completed the questionnaire.

A

chi-square analysis was performed to compare the dental
student applicants with scores from applicants from other
nations.

Using MBTI these researchers showed that a dental

school applicant’s culture may reflect their personality.3
Another study done by Sefcik, Prerost, and Arbet4 also
used the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (form M) to determine
the effect of personality.

This study looked at the effect

of personality on test performance of osteopathic medical
students.

The scores on the Medical College Admissions

Test (MCAT) and COMPLEX-USA Level 1 were used to compare
with the results of the MBTI using ANOVA using 264
participants.

The results of this study did not show much

34
statistical significance other than in the TF (thinking or
feeling) group that showed lower scores with COMPLEX-USA
Level 1.4

The Big 5
The Big 5, Five Factor Personality Questionnaire, and
Five Factor Model are all forms of the same assessment that
measure five different dimensions of personality.

These

dimensions include extraversion, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience.
Each dimension is then split into a higher degree or a
lower degree depending on a person’s intensity in that
specific personality factor.

There have been several

studies using these dimensions to compare personality to
multiple life events.
The study by Clark and Robertson5 is a meta-analysis of
the relationship between accident involvement and the Big
Five personality dimensions.

These five dimensions are

extraversion, neuroticism, conscientiousness,
agreeableness, and openness.

Articles were found using

PsycInfo and ABI-Inform databases along with a manual
search of review articles.

The inclusion criteria of

articles was that they must contain a measure of
personality which could be classified as one of the five,

35
and a criterion measure in terms of accidents or injuries.
Using these criteria 47 articles were found.

Data from the

articles were then coded and placed under one of the five
dimensions.

Correlations were done so that a positive

correlation indicated a high score on the personality
category, and low had high accident rates.

Results showed

that individuals low in agreeableness and conscientiousness
are more liable to be accident-involved.5
An article by Albu6 analyzed the Five Factor
Personality Questionnaire (CP5F). This Questionnaire
included six different scales instead of five, adding
autonomy.

The final scale assesses the participants’

tendency to five socially desirable answers.

The results

of this questionnaire were correlated with the Five-Factor
Personality Inventory (FFPI), and Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire (EPQ).

The social desirability was accounted

for by having two separate groups, one that participants
were motivated to show a favorable image of themselves and
a group that had no reason to give untruthful answers.
Results reflected a good internal consistency and concluded
the CP5F would be a good tool to use in the educational,
organizational, clinical, and health care domains.6
Raynor and Levine7 used the five-factor model of
personality to see how personality related to health

36
behaviors. The researchers used 583 college students and
administered the American College Health AssociationNational College Health Assessment and the five-factor
model questionnaire.

Researchers used SPSS for descriptive

and inferential analysis.

They also performed multiple

linear regression analyses in order to determine if
personality factors were related to health various health
behaviors.

The results showed that highly conscientious

people were more likely to engage in healthy habits and not
destructive ones whereas highly extraverted had the
opposite habits.7
An article by Hudek-Knezevic and Kardum examined how
the 5-factor personality traits along with 3 higher-order
health-related personality constructs (negative experience,
optimistic control, and passivity) relate to subjective
health outcomes and objective health conditions.
hundred twenty-two participants were used.

Eight

They were each

given the Big Five Inventory (BFI) to measure personality
dimensions.

Other previously researched scales were given

to assess their subjective and objective conditions.
Results showed that the three health-related personality
constructs can significantly predict all subjective health
measures.

The researchers concluded that the five factor

personality traits and three health related personality

37
constructs may be useful when trying to determine the
personality-health relationship.8
The study performed by Mitchell, et al9 looked at the
relationship between the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory
(RST) and the Five-Factor Model (FFM).

This was done using

668 undergraduate introductory psychology students as
participants.

The researchers predicted that Sensitivity

to Reward (SR) would have a positive relationship with
extraversion, neuroticism, and openness, and a negative
relationship with conscientiousness and agreeableness.
Sensitivity to Punishment (SP) was predicted to have a
positive relationship with neuroticism, agreeableness, and
conscientiousness, and a negative relationship with
extraversion and openness.
SR of participants.

SPSRQ was used to assess SP and

NEO-PI-R was administered to measure

the FFM personality domain and facet variables.

A

regression analysis was calculated with the findings and
indicated that SP was positively associated with
neuroticism and agreeableness, and negatively associated
with extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness.

SR was

positively associated with extraversion and neuroticism,
and negatively associated with agreeableness and
conscientiousness.

Researchers also found that at the

facet level there is a relationship between SP, SR, and

38
each domain.

These findings suggest there is an overlap

between RST and FFM.9
Lluis-Font reviews10 the Systems Net Theory in this
article.

This theory is an ideological and evolutionary

interpretation of the human mind and personality.

There

are two types of systems; horizontal and vertical (general
and specific).

The idea of a system’s net comes from these

horizontal and vertical systems intertwining, forming a
net.

The origin of traits and factors occurs where the

systems meet.

The rest of the net then describes the

structure of personality.10

EPQ-BV
The EPQ-BV is the brief version of the Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire. This version is said to be
accurate and reliable, while making it more acceptable to
use in research because of its shortened length11,12.
Hans Jurgen Eysenck (1916-1997) was an advocate of
clinical psychologists filling a strictly scientific role.
As a prominent writer and researcher he was the author of
approximately 1600 publications, including editing a large
number of books and journals.

His research mainly

consisted of his dimensional theory of personality.
Considering all of his accomplishments during his lifetime

39
Eysenck came to be seen as an iconic figure in British
psychology.13
Sato11 describes the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire
Brief Version (EPQ-BV) in this article.

Studies showed

however that the EPQR-A, abbreviated version of Eysenck’s
questionnaire, may be too brief decreasing the reliability
factor.

Sato then created a new shortened version hoping

to increase the reliability.

To test this new version the

researcher had 268 participants take the original and the
briefer version twice.

Results showed that the brief

version has a good internal consistency, test-retest
reliability, and concurrent validity.11
A few studies have used this questionnaire to examine
an individual’s health.

One such study looked at the

influence of neurotic and extroverted traits on mortality
rate.

Participants of this study began with baseline

testing that consisted of a sociodemographic and health
questionnaire, underwent a physical examination, and
completed the EPQ-BV. Twenty years later the mortality of
the participants was assessed.

Results showed that high

neuroticism increased the risk of death due to
cardiovascular disease. However, the researchers found a
lack of significant results associating extroversion to
mortality.14

40
Another study performed used 149 undergraduate college
students and gave them a survey on introversionextraversion (using the Eysenck personality questionnaire
brief version) and Residential Life Questionnaire.

In

doing so the researchers were looking at a relationship
between the two scales and how it affected the individual’s
feelings/reactions toward living on campus.

Correlations

were performed (using the results of the survey) that
related to personality, alcohol, community involvement, and
gender.

Results found that extraversion is associated with

drinking alcohol leading to risky behaviors including
infractions of residential life rules and negative opinions
of it.15
Burnout has been the topic of other studies relating
health issues to personality.

Burnout is a state of

emotional exhaustion that contributing factors include
overwork resulting in an individual’s inability to perform
their job. It has been stated that there are three elements
to burnout; emotional exhaustion, depersonalization of
others, and feelings of reduced personal accomplishment16.
Ralph L. Piedmont16 conducted a longitudinal analysis of
burnout in the health care setting.

He used a few

different questionnaires to determine if personal
dispositions play a role in burnout.

Moderately strong

41
correlations were found between scores of the personality
questionnaires and burnout.

These findings show that

personality does influence burnout.16
One study examined the relationship of nurse burnout
with personality and coping behaviors.

The researchers of

this study used the Copenhagen burnout inventory, nursing
job stressor scale, EPQ-BV, and the sort Japanese version
of Brief COPE to assess burnout and personality.

Their

analysis showed that neuroticism was more closely related
to personal, work-related, and client-related burnout then
extroversion.

Results imply that personality traits of an

individual are factors that may cause burnout and should be
addressed further.12
Instead of using the Eysenck Personality Inventory to
compare health hazards with personality, a study performed
by Eagleton et al17 compared personality types with
participants of team sports, individual sports, and nonsport participants. A short questionnaire was used to
gather results from 90 university undergraduates.

Results

showed that extroversion scores were higher for team sport
participants than for individual sport participants and
nonparticipants. No significance was found between high
neuroticism scores and team or individual sports.17

42
Other
Although the Myers-Briggs Personality Questionnaire,
Big 5, and EPQ-BV are all good tools to use to assess
personality types there are also many other assessments
that can be used as well.
in many aspects.

Each assessment is a different

The test that is used depends upon what

the purpose of a study is.
One study used multiple assessment tools in order to
look at ten personality traits and mortality from all
causes and specific causes.

Participants of this study

were employees of France’s national gas and electric
companies (EDL and GDF).

Those who chose to participate

were given an annual questionnaire that contained data on
health, lifestyle, individual, familial, social, and
occupational factors and life events.

The Bortner Type-A

scale, the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory, and the
Frossarth-Maticek-Eysenck Personality Stress Inventory were
used as personality questionnaires.

Statistics were

assessed using one way-ANOVA, with a linear trend fitted
across the hierarchical variables.

Mortality differences

were assessed using a chi square test.

After analysis the

researchers found that neurotic hostility was a personality
predictor of excess mortality.

Antisocial personalities

were found to be associated with cardiovascular mortality

43
and with mortality from external causes.

The results from

this study suggest that realizing personality traits can
help form prevention strategies.

However more research

should be done for evidence based prevention.18
Another study of personality and health by Liu et al19
looked into how psychosocial variables influence people
with multiple sclerosis (MS).

Forty-one subjects diagnosed

with MS for the first time were used.

Their level of

disability was assessed by neurologists, cognitive function
was assessed by psychologists.

Once these requirements

were fulfilled participants completed a life event scale.
Later an Eysenck Personality Questionnaire was administered
to analyze characteristics of personality structure.

It is

composed of 88 questions assessing four different
components of personality by an answer of yes or no.

SPSS

was used for statistical analysis of a t-test and
correlation between psychosocial factors and MS.

There was

a control group of healthy patients used and this analysis
showed a statistical difference between the control group
and group with MS.

People with MS have an increase of

depression, anxiety, obsession, phobia which may play an
important role in the progression of the disease.

Negative

emotions in the MS group showed a positive correlation for

44
neuroticisms in personality type and negatively for those
with introverted and extroverted personalities.19

Injury Surveillance

Injuries are a common occurrence in competitive
sports.

Throughout an athlete’s career they are likely to

sustain a number of injuries.

These injuries can range in

severity from a bruise, to broken bones, ruptured
ligaments, and possible paralysis.

There are so many

injuries that the National Collegiate Athletic Association
(NCAA) actually developed a system to track injuries in
particular sports.

National Collegiate Athletic Association ISS
The NCAA created an injury surveillance system (ISS)
in 1982.

This system helps with policies and risk

management.

It became web-based in 2005.

change in format came many new goals.

Along with the

Some of these goals

include providing tracking of every NCAA sport and also
detailed national, divisional, and conference summary
reports for comparison.

This surveillance system has

several uses such as allocation of sports-medicine

45
personnel and resources, grants, conference participation,
and research.20
An introduction and methods article was written
explaining the history and methods used by the NCAA ISS for
all sport-specific articles.

The ISS collects injury and

exposure data from a variety of NCAA institutions and
sports (sixteen total sports).

The data is then shared in

order to provide evidence-based decisions on health and
safety.

The entire NCAA athletic population is not used,

instead the ISS uses a proportioned sample.

Data is

collected through certified athletic trainers and is
voluntary.

Every spring the head athletic trainer at every

NCAA institution receives a letter requesting
participation.

They are asked to choose one primary sport

and any secondary sports for data collection in the three
collegiate seasons.

Secondary requests were randomly

selected, but all primary were selected.

The schools

selected were then sent instructions and a packet of injury
and exposure forms.

Inclusion criteria were number of

participants, number of events, and injuries.

During

statistical analysis injury rates, rate ratios, and rate
differences were used.

All had a 95% confidence interval.

Negative binomial regression was used to assess injury
rates over time.

It was also used to generate P values

46
comparing rates among divisions for competitions and
practices and to compare the pre/in/post seasons.

These

techniques were used on all sports and results can be found
in their subsequent articles.21

Prevalent Sports
Using the NCAA ISS professionals can predict injuries
not only collectively, but also by sport.

Many studies

have been done relating the different sports to the number,
severity, and common injuries athletes playing the sport
sustain among other things.

The studies performed using

NCAA ISS helps to educate sports medicine professionals as
to what injuries they need to focus prevention strategies
on.
Hootman, Dick, and Agel22 wrote an article summarizing
the data from the NCAA injury surveillance and in doing so
identify preventable risks.

Data that accumulated over 16

years (beginning in 1982) from 15 sports was used in the
research.

The total number of injuries calculated was

182,000.

These injuries include both game and practice

injuries that required medical attention and the loss of at
least one day in sport participation.

Results were

combined for all sports and game/practice was compared.
Games showed a significantly higher injury rate then

47
practices.

Practice injuries were further broken up into

pre/in/post season.

From these three practices preseason

showed the highest occurrence of injury.
have a 95% confidence interval.

These results

Of all the injuries

documented, more then 50% were to the lower extremity, the
ankle being the most common.

Conclusions were that by

using this surveillance system health care providers may be
able to use the results to help shape their injury
prevention strategies.22
Research was then performed looking at each sport
individually.

The sports used were baseball, women’s field

hockey, men’s football, men’s basketball, men’s lacrosse,
men’s soccer, women’s softball, women’s volleyball, women’s
basketball, women’s lacrosse, and men’s wrestling.
The NCAA article summarizing results for baseball
reviewed 16 years of data found on baseball injuries using
the Injury Surveillance System (ISS).

The results of the

ISS for baseball show that when compared to other NCAA
collegiate sports it has a low injury rate.

Baseball

players are most likely to have an injury during a game
then at practice.

Preseason practice showed injury rates

almost twice as high then regular season practice.

The

highest injury percentages occurred from sliding (13%) or
from the impact of a batted ball (10%).

Twenty-five

48
percent of all baseball injuries are severe and result in
10 or more days out of participation.23
Fifteen years of women’s field hockey injuries was
reviewed using the NCAA ISS.

It was found that injury

rates during games were twice as high as those in practice.
Most of these injuries occurred when the player was near
the goal or within the 25-yd line.

The cause of the

majority of injuries was contact with the ball or stick.
Game injury rates have been shown to be decreasing 2.5%
over the course of the study.

Concussion and head

lacerations increased.24
Sixteen years of football injuries were reviewed using
the NCAA ISS in hopes to identify potential areas for
injury prevention.

Football was found to have some of the

highest injury rates of all sports reviewed by ISS.
Results of this study found that for every 1000 athlete
exposures there were 36 injuries found during games.
number of injuries was reduced during practices.

The

The

injury rate during a game was found to be 9 times higher
then practice in season.

Most injuries that required

removal from participation for longer then 10 days were to
the knee, ankle, or upper leg and were caused by contact
with another player.25

49
Another article using the ISS created by the NCAA to
review collegiate men’s basketball injuries over a 16 year
span.

Many of the injuries found in this sport were to the

lower extremity (60%).

The most common injury was ankle

ligament sprains; however knee internal derangements were
the most common serious injuries.

The results showed that

there were more injuries during games then practices.

In

games there were 9.9 injuries per 1000 athlete-exposures
and only 4.3 during practices.

During the 16 calculations

showed an increase in head and face injuries.

The types of

injuries show clinicians that preventative measures can be
taken to avoid ankle and knee injuries.

Also with an

increase of head/face injuries steps need to be taken to
watch how much physical contact there is during this game.26
The researchers studying men’s lacrosse injuries
reviewed the results found by NCAA ISS.

The results found

that it is 4 times more likely for an athlete to get
injured during a men’s lacrosse game then it is during
practice.

Most of these injuries (about 50%) were to the

lower extremity.

The most common of the injuries were

ankle ligament sprains.

The occurrence of concussions has

increased, most likely from the changes in helmets that
occurred in 1995.

From these results researchers suggest

that the design of lacrosse helmets is investigated.27

50
The rate and occurrence of injuries in collegiate
men’s soccer was also discussed and reviewed by
researchers.
ISS.

Data for this review was found using the NCAA

The data from ISS found that the injury rate in men’s

soccer is 4 times higher during games then in practices.
Also when comparing practices, preseason was found to have
more injuries then in season and post season practice.
Lower extremity injuries were the most common, making up
two-thirds of all injuries.

These injuries during games

were usually the result of player-to-player contact.
However injuries during practice were usually noncontact.
The most common injury was ankle ligament sprains, although
internal knee derangements were the most common serious
injuries.28
Sixteen years of collegiate softball injury
surveillance was reviewed using the NCAA ISS for their
data.

Going over this data they attempted to determine

evidence based recommendations for injury prevention in the
sport.

After looking at the results found in ISS the

researchers determined that the most softball injuries
occurred during preseason when compared to in season and
post season.

They also found that players were 1.68 times

more likely to sustain an injury during a game then they
were during in season practice.

Most injuries found during

51
practice (55%) were from non contact and were ankle
ligament sprains and knee internal derangements.

Twenty-

three percent of game injuries occurred because of sliding.
Lower back strains, shoulder strains/tendinitis, and
quadriceps and hamstring strains were also found to be
common injuries.

From the injuries found the researchers

feel that equipment changes, neuromuscular training
programs, and throwing programs should be researched
further.29
Examining collegiate women’s volleyball injury
occurrences, researchers found that women’s volleyball was
more likely to have an injury during a game then at
practice.

Fifty-five percent of the sports injuries were

to the lower extremity and ankle ligament sprains were the
most common.

Upper extremity injuries account for about

20% of all game injuries.

Most injuries that occurred

during a game were in the front line.

Most of which were

from contact with another player or the floor.30
By reviewing the epidemiology of injury in women’s
basketball, the researchers hope to be able to provide
recommendations for the prevention of such injuries.
Results of the surveillance system showed that women’s
basketball has more injuries during games then at practice.
When looking at practices, more injuries occurred during

52
preseason then during regular season.

The majority of

injuries whether during practice or game was found to be to
the lower extremity.

Ankle ligament sprains, knee

injuries, upper leg muscle-tendon strains, and concussions
were the most common of these low extremity injuries.
Researchers suggested proper preseason conditioning as a
prevention technique after reviewing these findings.31
Researchers studied the injury occurrence of
collegiate women’s lacrosse players.

Their purpose was to

provide recommendations to prevent injuries in that
particular sport.

The NCAA ISS was the database used to

collect and analyze injury data.

Most injuries found by

the researchers occurred to the lower extremity.

Sixty

percent of all serious injuries were sprains, strains and
knee internal derangements.
noncontact.

Most of these injuries were

Ball handle was one of the main causes of

injury whether contact or no contact was involved.
Researchers found that in order to avoid such injuries
further research should look into proprioceptive,
plyometric, and balance training.32
NCAA ISS also reviewed injuries of collegiate male
wrestlers.

The surveillance system found different

concerns during practice and matches.

In the practice

environment the most prevalent health issue was found to be

53
skin infections.

During competition research shows that

the musculoskeletal system and head were most commonly
injured.

From these findings the researchers suggest that

weight management be included in ISS data to make it more
useable in wrestling.

Also they suggest hygiene play a

larger role in prevention of injury since many of the
injury occurrences are skin related.33

Personality and Injury

It has been shown that there are many different
influencing factors on injury occurrence.

Few of these

studies have looked at if personality can have an effect on
injury.

Determining cause of injury, which potentially

could be personality, can then lead to preventative
measures.

Personality Traits
Smith34 reviewed cognitive-social-personality theory
and how it relates to sport psychology.

The cognitive-

behavioral aspect to sports psychology is very important as
an intervention technique.

A greater understanding of

cognitive social personality increases understanding of
sport behavior.

This can be used when dealing with

54
individual behavioral differences in situations and as a
guide for beneficial coaching behaviors.34

Injury Occurrence
Goldberg, Moroz, and Smith35 reviewed literature on
injury surveillance.

This review should help identify the

key epidemiological and methodological issues that arise
when reading or conducting an injury surveillance study.
From the results recommendations can be made to guide
clinicians in the interpretation of data of this type of
study.

Literature was found using MEDLINE and PubMed.

Most literature used pertained to athletes, high school
athletes in particular.

The researchers came up with a few

conclusions after going through the 91 articles found.

The

first conclusion was that a meaningful definition of injury
must be found, including the severity and time lost from
participation.

Hours of exposure is also a key when

looking at injury surveillance along with data collection
that includes the greatest range of injuries (taking into
consideration the first two conclusions).35
Another study by Malinauskas et al36 looked at the
incidence of sport related injuries and how athletes view
supplements being related to treatment of injury.

The

researchers constructed a questionnaire that assessed sport

55
related injuries, supplements to treat injury, and sources
of this supplement information.

One hundred forty-five

athletes involved in university-supported athletics
completed this study (with the exception of golf and club
sports.)

Results showed that 93% of males and 88% of

females reported injury.

Seventeen percent to 34% of these

injured athletes showed an interest in using supplements as
a treatment method.

This shows that athletes would benefit

from learning more about the use of supplements.36
A study by Brooks and Fuller37 examined a variety of
epidemiological studies of sport injuries. They state the
importance of understanding the causes of sport injuries in
order to develop injury prevention, treatment, and
rehabilitation strategies.

Appropriate procedures should

be considered in research designs to reflect the true risks
of an injury within a study population.

If there is too

much variation in data analysis, with no consensus
agreements on methodology, studies will result in
conflicting conclusions.37

Personality and Incidence of Injury
Psychology has been found to contribute to the
occurrence and recovery from athletic injury.

Life stress

is one component of psychology, and influences sport

56
injury.

Factors of this stress-injury relationship are

social support, coping skills, and personality.

Therefore,

decreasing stress can lower the risk of injury.

Some

reasons for this include decreasing muscular tension,
reducing stress-induced narrowing of peripheral vision, and
enhancing concentration.38
One study looked further into the psychological
factors leading athletic injury.

The objective was to

establish injury rates among elite athletes and compare the
mood, perceived life stress, and injury characteristics. In
doing so psychological interventions may be created,
decreasing injury.

The study found that athletes who had

sustained an injury in the previous twelve months showed
significant mood disturbances and elevated life stress when
compared to athletes who had not been injured.39

Adjusting Personality, Decreasing Injury Risk

If personality does influence injury then it may be
beneficial to find a way to adjust personality in a way
that would decrease injury risk.

The article “Can

personality be changed?”39 reviews results found by multiple
studies and discusses how these results impact the idea
that a person’s personality may be altered.

Personality is

57
flexible and can change over a person’s lifetime.

Beliefs

can shape a personality and how a person functions (self
theory).

Therefore beliefs need to be changed in order for

personality to be altered.

Studies show that people either

have a fixed or malleable theory.

People with malleable

personalities tend to function better in life.

A study by

Blackwell, Trzesniewski, and Dweck39 shows evidence that
this malleable personality can be taught.39

Knowing what

personalities are more susceptible to injury can help
healthcare providers focus in on these traits and teach
individuals how to rethink and mold certain beliefs,
decreasing the likelihood of injury.
Another way to potentially prevent injuries is by
using techniques geared around coping strategies according
to Clark and Lucett.40 Tools such as self-talk, breathing,
and imagery can be used to help cope with stress and overintensity. These coping skills allow an individual to calm
himself or herself and create a positive frame of mind.41

Summary

Personality influences a person’s everyday actions and
contributes to how they will react and cope with certain
situations.

Different reactions and coping strategies can

58
alter the outcome of particular situations.

Some of these

situations include the occurrence and recovery from injury.
In athletics injury is a common occurrence.

There

have been many studies that have researched the causes of
these injuries.

Determining an underlying origin of injury

can help sports medicine professionals and others working
with athletes decrease the risk of sports related injury.

59

APPENDIX B
The Problem

60
THE PROBLEM

Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect
personality traits have on the injury occurrence of
Division II collegiate athletes.

This study also analyzed

each sport to see if a particular personality type could be
found associated with a certain sport.

It is important to

understand all aspects of injury in order to decrease their
occurrence.

If a certain personality type is more prone to

injury it should be adjusted in order to decrease injuries.
Also, knowing which personality a sport is likely to have
can help the medical staff and coaches associated with that
team prevent injuries.
Specifically, this study examined the personality
traits of neuroticism and extraversion vs. introversion.
Individuals that do not have neurotic tendencies have been
found to be emotionally stable compared to individuals that
are high in neuroticism.

Extraverted individuals differ

from introverts due to their natural arousal level.
Extraverted individuals have a lower arousal level then
introverted individuals which forces them look for more
sources of stimulation to increase their arousal level.11
The neurotic individual’s unstable emotions and the

61
increased external stimulation of extraverts may be a link
to an increased injury rate of people with those traits.
Therefore, it is important to determine the effect these
traits have on injury occurrence in order to prevent
injury.

Definition of Terms
The following terms were used in this research and are
defined for this study:
1) Injury - National Collegiate Athletic Association’s
Injury Surveillance System (NCAA ISS) (1) Occurred as
a result of participation in an organized
intercollegiate practice or competition and (2)
required medical attention by a team certified
athletic trainer or physician and (3) resulted in
restriction of the student-athlete’s participation or
performance for one or more calendar days beyond the
day of injury.20
2) Personality - Individual behavioral patterns which
help define a person’s identity.33
3) Introvert - A personality trait where the individual
has a naturally high arousal level causing them to
avoid stimulation.11

62
4) Extravert - A personality trait where the individual
has a naturally low arousal level causing them to seek
stimulation.11
5) Neuroticism - A personality trait where the individual
has a highly reactive autonomic nervous system, making
them emotionally unstable.11
6) Burnout - Emotional exhaustion caused by overwork and
continued exposure to excessive demands placed on
mental energy which results in a gradual decline with
the ability to perform job responsibilities.14,15
Basic Assumptions
The following are basic assumptions of this study:
1) The subjects answered all parts of the questionnaire
accurately and honestly.
2) Only injuries that occurred in the past year (12
months) were recorded.
3) Injuries that were recorded occurred during sport
play.
Limitations of the Study
The following are limitations of the study:
1) Only injuries that occurred in the past year could be
used due to memory recall.

63
2) Injury portion of the questionnaire had not previously
been used in research.
Delimitations of the Study
The following statement reflects the potential
delimitation of the study:
1) Only 785 subjects with a valid e-mail address as
recorded by the athletic director were able to view the
survey.
Significance of the Study
All athletes are at risk of sustaining an injury
because of the nature of athletics.

In one year 2.6

million people between the ages of 5 and 24 are sent to the
emergency room due to sport-related injuries.34 It is
important to understand factors that may contribute to
injury in order to help prevent it’s occurrence.

If

neuroticism and extraversion are linked to injury then it
is important to use this information to decrease the number
of incidents caused by those traits.

In order to determine

what trait an athlete has, it may be useful to understand
if particular sports are higher in that trait. This can be
done by looking at each sport individually and what the
most prevalent personality of that sport is, as found in
this study. Some suggestions which may help increase

64
introversion and reduce neuroticism are decreasing player
anxiety, finding other sources of stimulation, and
utilizing sport psychology.

Using this knowledge, health

care professionals will be able to work with these athletes
and adjust the aspect of their personality that puts them
at an increased risk.

65

APPENDIX C
Additional Methods

66

APPENDIX C1
Preliminary Study Informed Consent Form & Email

67

68

69

APPENDIX C2
Preliminary Survey Code Page

70

71

APPENDIX C3
Reliability Testing

72
Injury Occurrence Survey

The injury occurrence portion of the survey was
created by the primary researcher of this study.

Having

never been used before, analysis of this section was
implemented to determine the reliability of each question.
The injury occurrence section consisted of four questions;
(1) How many athletic injuries have you suffered from in
the last 12 months (injury)? (2) What sport were you
participating in when this injury occurred (sport)? (3)How
long did this injury keep you from practice/competition
(time)? and (4) Did it require surgery (severity)?.

The

following tables demonstrate the correlations between the
two answers given for each question in the preliminary
research study (N=6).

A Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for
the relationship between participants’ initial and final
response to the injury question of the survey.

A strong

positive correlation was found (r(4)=1.00,p<.001),
indicating a significant linear relationship between the
two variables (Figure 1).

73

Figure 1: Pearson correlation coefficient of Injury

A Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for
the relationship between participants’ initial and final
response to the sport question of the survey.

A strong

positive correlation was found (r(4)=1.00,p<.001),
indicating a significant linear relationship between the
two variables (Figure 2).

74

Figure 2: Pearson correlation coefficient of Sport

A Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for
the relationship between participants’ initial and final
response to the time question of the survey.

A strong

positive correlation that was not significant was found
(r(4)=.724,p=.103 (Figure 3).

75

Figure 3: Pearson correlation coefficient of Time

A Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for
the relationship between participants’ initial and final
response to the severity question of the survey.

A strong

positive correlation was found (r(4)=1.00,p<.001),
indicating a significant linear relationship between the
two variables (Figure 4).

76

Figure 4: Pearson correlation coefficient of Severity

77

APPENDIX C4
Primary Survey

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

APPENDIX C5
Institutional Review Board –
California University of Pennsylvania

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

APPENDIX C6
Primary Study Athletic Director & Student Athlete Email

105

106

107
REFERENCES

1. Llorens J. Taking inventory of Myers-Briggs. American
Society for Training & Development. 2010;18-19.
2. Allread WG, Marras WS. Does personality affect the
risk of developing musculoskeletal discomfort?
Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science.
2006;7(2):149-167.
3. Wu S, Miao D, Zhu X, Luo Z, Liu X. Personality types
of Chinese dental school applicants. Journal of Dental
Education. 2007;71(12):1593-1598
4. Sefcik DJ, Prerost FJ, Arbet SE. Personality types and
performance on aptitude and achievement tests:
implications for osteopathic medical education. JAOA.
2009;109(6):296-301.
5. Clark S, Robertson IT. A meta-analytic review of the
big five personality factors and accident involvement
in occupational and non-occupational settings. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology.
2005;78:355-376.
6. Albu M. CP5F: A new questionnaire for the evaluation
of the big five superfactors. Cognition, Brain,
Behavior. 2009;13(1):79-90.
7. Raynor DA, Levine H. Associations between the fivefactor model of personality and health behaviors among
college students. J of American College Health.
2009;58(1):73-81.
8. Hudek-Knezevic J, Kardum I. Five-factor personality
dimensions and 3 health-related personality constructs
as predictors of health. Croat Med J. 2009;50:394-402.
9. Mitchell JT, Kimbrel NA, Hundt NE, et al. An analysis
of reinforcement sensitivity theory and the fivefactor model. Eur. J. Pers. 2007;21:869-887.
10.Lluis-Font JM. Personality: systems net theory. IDR
Journal. 2005;3(4):213-238

108
11.Sato T. The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire brief
version: factor structure and reliability. J of Psych.
2005;139(6):545-552.
12.Shimizutani M, Odagiri Y, Ohya Y, et al. Relationship
of nurse burnout with personality characteristics and
coping behaviors. Ind health. 2008;46:326-335.
13. Hall J. The emergence of clinical psychology in
Britain from 1943 to 1958 part II: practice and
research traditions. Hist & Phil of Psych.
2007;9(2):1-33.
14.Shipley, BA, Weiss, A, Der, G, Taylor, MD, Deary, IJ.
Neuroticism, extraversion, and mortality in the UK
health and lifestyle survey: a 21-year prospective
cohort study. Psychosomatic Med. 2007;69:923-931.
15.Alarcon KT, Tryon WW. Predicting attitudes towards
authority based on personality in a university
residential life setting. Extraverson and Residential
Life. 2008;13(2):64-70.
16.Piedmont RL. A longitudinal analysis of burnout in the
health care setting: the role of personal
dispositions. J Personality Assessment.
1993;61(3):457-473.
17.Eagleton JR, McKelvie SJ, DeMan A. Extraversion and
neuroticism in team sport participants, individual
sport participants, and nonparticipants. Perceptual an
motor skills. 2007;105(1):265-275.
18.Nabi H, Kivimaki M, Zins M, et al. Does personality
predict mortality? Inter J Epid. 2008;37:386-396.
19.Liu XJ, Ye HX, Li WP, Dai R, Chen D, Jin M.
Relationship between psychosocial factors and onset of
multiple sclerosis. European Neurology. 2009;62:130136.
20.Dick RW. NCAA injury surveillance system: a tool for
health and safety risk management. Human Kinetics.
2006;2(1):42-44.
21.Dick R, Agel F, Marshall SW. National collegiate
athletic association injury surveillance system

109
commentaries: introduction and methods. J Athl
Training. 2007;42(2):173-182.
22.Hootman JM, Dick R, Agel J. Epidemiology of collegiate
injuries for 15 sports: summary and recommendations
for injury prevention initiatives. J Athl Training.
2007;42(2):311-319.
23.Dick R, Sauers EL, Agel J, et al. Descriptive
epidemiology of collegiate men’s baseball injuries:
national collegiate athletic association injury
surveillance system, 1988-1989 through 2003-2004. J
Athl Training. 2007;42(2):183-193.
24.Dick R, Hootman JM, Agel J, Vela L, Marshall SW,
Messina R. Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate
women’s field hockey injuries: national collegiate
athletic association injury surveillance system, 19881989 through 2002-2003. J Athl Training.
2007;42(2):211-220.
25.Dick R, Ferrara MS, Agel J, et al. Descriptive
epidemiology of collegiate men’s football injuries:
national collegiate athletic association injury
surveillance system, 1988-1989 through 2003-2004. J
Athl Training. 2007;42(2)221-233.
26.Dick R, Hertel J, Agel J, Grossman J, Marshall SW.
Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate men’s
basketball injuries: national collegiate athletic
association injury surveillance system, 1988-1989
through 2003-2004. J Athl Training. 2007;42(2):194201.
27.Dick R, Romani WA, Agel J,Case JG, Marshall SW.
Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate men’s lacrosse
injuries: national collegiate athletic association
injury surveillance system, 1988-1989 through 20032004. J Athl Training. 2007;42(2):255-261.
28.Agel J, Evans TA, Dick R, Putukian M, Marshall SW.
Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate men’s soccer
injuries: national collegiate athletic association
injury surveillance system, 1988-1989 through 20022003. J Athl Training. 2007;42(2):270-277.

110
29.Marshall SW, Hamstra-Wright KL, Dick R, Grove KA, Agel
J. Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate women’s
softball injuries: national collegiate athletic
association injury surveillance system, 1988-1989
through 2003-2004. J Athl Training. 2007;42(2):286294.
30.Agel J, Ralmieri-Smith RM, Dick R, Wojtys EM, Marshall
SW. Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate women’s
volleyball injuries: national collegiate athletic
association injury surveillance system, 1988-1989
through 2003-2004. J Athl Training. 2007;42(2):295302.
31.Agel J, Olson DE, Dick R, Arendt EA, Marshall SW,
Sikka RS. Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate
women’s basketball injuries: national collegiate
athletic association injury surveillance system, 19881989 through 2003-2004. J Athl Training.
2007;42(2):202-210.
32.Dick R, Lincoln AE, Agel J, Carter EA, Marshall SW,
Hinton RY. Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate
women’s lacrosse injuries: National Collegiate
Athletic Association Injury Surveillance System, 19881989 through 2003-2004. J Athl Training.
2007;42(2):262-269.
33.Agel J, Ransone J, Dick R, Oppliger R, Marshall SW.
Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate men’s wrestling
injuries: National Collegiate Athletic Association
injury surveillance system, 1988-1989 through 20032004. J Athl Training. 2007;42(2):303-310.
34.Smith RE. Advances in cognitive-social-personality
theory: applications to sport psychology. Revista de
Psicologia del Deporte. 2008;17(2):253-276.
35.Goldberg AS, Moroz L, Smith A, Ganley T. Injury
surveillance in young athletes. Sports Med. 2007;
37(3):265-278.
36.Malinauskas BM, Overton RF, Carraway VG, Cash BC.
Supplements of interest for sport-related injury and
sources of supplement information among college
athletes. Advances in Medical Sciences. 2007;52:50-54.

111
37.Brooks JHM, Fuller CW. The influence of methodological
issues on the results and conclusions form
epidemiological studies of sports injuries. J of
Sports Med. 2006;36(6):459-472.
38.Brewer BW. Developmental differences in psychological
aspects of sport-injury rehabilitation. J Athl
Training. 2003;38(2):152-153.
39.Galambos SA, Terry, PC, Moyle, GM, Locke, SA.
Psychological predictors of injury among elite
athletes. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39:351-354.
40.Dweck CS. Can personality be changed? Assoc for Psych
Science. 2008;17(6):391-394.
41.Clark MA, Lucett SC, eds. NASM Essentials of Sports
Performance Training. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters
Kluwer; 2010.

112
ABSTRACT
Title:

EFFECT OF COLLEGIATE ATHLETES’ PERSONALITY
TRAITS ON OCCURRENCE OF ATHLETIC INJURY

Researcher:

Kallie D. Balajthy ATC, PES

Advisor:

Ellen J. West EdD, ATC

Date:

May 2011

Research Type:

Master’s Thesis

Content:

Sport psychology has been found to be
linked to athletic injury. There are many
components of sport psychology, one of
these being personality. Currently there
are no studies relating injury occurrence
with personality type. If a correlation can
be found, the results could be used to
create prevention strategies to decrease
injury risk.

Objective:

To examine the relationship personality
traits of neuroticism and extroversion vs.
introversion have with the injury
occurrence of Division II collegiate
athletes.

Design:

Descriptive web-based survey

Setting:

Athletes (N=785) of two Division II schools
in Pennsylvania.

Participants:

Seventy three collegiate athletes at Lock
Haven University and California University
of PA completed the Personality and Injury
Occurrence survey. Final count of
participants N=71 (age= 20.32 1.371, 38%
male, 62% female).

Interventions:

A pilot study was conducted to determine
test-retest reliability. Participants
received a questionnaire that included a
demographic, injury occurrence, and
personality (EPQ-BV) section.

113

Measures:

This study included a dependent variable of
injury occurrence and three independent
variables. The first two independent
variables were of personality scales,
extroversion and neuroticism, and the third
of sport. Three hypotheses were tested. The
first two stated that athletes that score
high on the neuroticism/extroversion scale
will have an increased likelihood of
injury. The third hypothesis predicted
that individuals in a particular sport will
have similar personality traits. The survey
questions were coded via the researcher,
and a Pearson product correlation was used
to predict each question’s reliability.

Results:

All hypotheses were tested using a
significance level set at α≤.05. A Pearson
product correlation was used when analyzing
both personality scales and injury
occurrence. A weak negative correlation
that was not significant was found (r(2)=.092,p>.05) when comparing the relationship
between participants’ injury occurrence and
level of neuroticism. A weak nonsignificant correlation was found
(r=(2)=.212,p>.05) when determining a
relationship between participants’ injury
occurrence and level of extroversion. A
MANOVA was calculated to examine the effect
of the participants’ primary sport on their
trait scores. No significant effect was
found (Lambda(30,108)=.593,p>.05).
Additional findings included another
Pearson product correlation between
extroversion and neuroticism. A moderate
negative correlation was found (r=(69)=375,p<.01) indicating a significant linear
relationship. Finally, the primary teams
were sorted into two categories of team and
individual sport. An individual samples ttest was used to examine these two
categories and the personality traits. No
significant difference was found with sport
and neuroticism (t(69)=-.038,p=.970) or
extroversion (t(69)=.766,p=.446).

114

Conclusions:

This study revealed that no significant
results were found concerning personality
traits and injury occurrence or primary
sport. The rejection of each hypothesis was
most likely due to the low response rate
(9%).

Word Count:

461