Content uploaded by Samet Kose
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Samet Kose on Dec 30, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
| 35
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 8. No. 5. September, 2016
TEMPERAMENT AND CHARACTER DIMENSIONS OF PERSONALITY
IN SEDENTARY COLLEGE STUDENTS AND ATHLETES
Sebiha Golunuk Baspinar¹, Ercan Akin2, Vedat Ceylan2
Yalcin Tasmektepligil3, MD, PhD Samet Kose2*
1Afyon Kocatepe University, Physical Education and Sports Academy, Afyon
2Hasan Kalyoncu University, Department of Psychology, Gaziantep
3Ondokuz Mayis University, Yasar Dogu Faculty of Sport Sciences, Samsun (TURKEY)
*Corresponding author: sametkose@gmail.com
DOI: 10.7813/2075-4124.2016/8-5/B.6
Received: 15 Aug, 2016
Accepted: 20 Sept, 2016
ABSTRACT
In this study, we aimed to compare Temperament and Character Inventory results among athlete and
sedentary groups. Our sample consisted of 154 college students in Samsun, Turkey. Sociodemographic
information of the participants was collected and the Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) were
administered. In temperament dimension; mean scores of Reward Dependence, Attachment and Dependence
of athletes in the sample group were found significantly lower compared to the sedentary group. In character
dimension; the mean values of Self-directedness, Responsibility, Self-acceptance, and Enlightened Second
Nature subscales of the athlete students were significantly lower than the mean scores of the sedentary group.
Mean scores of Cooperativeness scale and Empathy were also significantly lower compared to the sedentary
group. Mean scores of Transpersonal Identification (ST2) subscale of athletes were significantly higher than
the student group. These findings suggested that athletes and sedentary students showed differences both in
temperament and character dimensions of the TCI.
Key words: Personality, Temperament, Character, College Students, Athletes
1. INTRODUCTION
Cloninger developed and described a dimensional psychobiological personality model that describes
normal and abnormal variations in temperament and character which are two essential components of
personality (Cloninger, Svrakic, & Przybeck, 1993). Cloninger proposed that these personality dimensions
occur in the early life, and they are precursors of adolescent and adult behavior (Cloninger, 1987; Sigvardsson,
Bohman, & Cloninger, 1987). Also, it has been identified as crucial information that they are genetically
homogeneous and independent from each other(Heath, Cloninger, & Martin, 1994; Stallings, Hewitt, Cloninger,
Heath & Eaves, 1996).Temperament dimension includes Novelty Seeking (NS), Harm Avoidance HA), Reward
Dependence (RD) and Persistence (P); the Character trait includes, Self-Directedness (SD), Cooperativeness
(C), and Self-Transcendence (ST) subscales(Cloninger et al., 1993).
Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) which is based on Cloninger’s psychobiological theory
built on the seven-factor model of temperament and character. Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI)
has been translated into several languages, the reliability and validity have been demonstrated in various
cultures.So far, Swedish (Brandstrom et al., 1998),Dutch (De la Rie, Duijsens & Cloninger, 1998; Duijsens,
Spinhoven, & Goekoop, 2000) French (Pelissolo, & Lepine, 2000), Japanese (Kijima, Tanaka, Suzuki, &
Kitamura, 2000), Spanish (Gutierrez et al, 2001), Korean (Sung, Kim, Yang, Abrams, & Lyoo, 2002), Chinese
(Parker, Cheah, & Parker, 2003) versions have been developed and psychometric properties were
reported.The Italian version has been studied in the psychiatric patient sample( Fassino et al., 2001)but validity
and reliability have not yet been done. Reliability and validity of TCI have also been reported for Belgium
(Hansenne, Le Bon, Gauthier, & Ansseau, 2001) and Australian societies (Parker et al., 2003).The process of
translating TCI into Turkish has been carried out by Kose andhis colleagues, and this version has been
approved by Cloninger as the Turkish TCI (Kose et al., 2004; Kose et al., 2004).
Personality traits are features that constitute the core characteristics of an individual's personality and
make him separate and distinct from other people. Therefore, the development of appropriate motivational
techniques to the individual features of the athletes and the interaction with the psychological characteristics of
motivation, of course, makes temperament and character assessment relevant regarding exhibiting superior
performance in competitive sports. An individual's ability to be successful in the sport, skill, physical and
physiological suitability as well as mental, psychological and sociological status must be at the highest level
(Turhan, 2008). Sedentary groups are also associated with their unique personality traits like athletes to
sustain their lives without any problems. At this point, it is important to determine to what extent temperament
and character dimensions are affected by participating in sports and if these athletes scores are comparable to
the Turkish and American normative values. This study may also contribute determining differences in
36 | PART B. SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES ISSN: 2075-4124
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
o
f
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
8
. No.
5
.
September
, 201
6
personality characteristics of in sedentary and athletes. Additionally, this study is also important regarding
promoting and developing the sports.
In this study, we examined personality traits of athletes and sedentary college studentsby using the
Turkish version of Temperament and Character Inventory.
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1. Participants
The participants of the study were 154 university students in Samsun province in Turkey. The study
protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Samsun 19 Mayis University. Each participant provided
informed consent. Written informed consents were obtained from the participants following the study protocol
was thoroughly explained.
2.2. Psychometric Measurements
2.2.1. Sociodemographic Data Form
This form includes demographic variables including gender, age, department, education, and
department.
2.2.2. Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI)
TCI is a self-administered, 240-item True/False questionnaire developed by Cloninger and colleagues
(Cloninger, 1987). Temperament dimension includes Novelty Seeking, Harm Avoidance, Reward Dependence,
and Persistence; the Character trait includes Self-Directedness, Cooperativeness, and Self-Transcendence
subscales (Cloninger et al., 1993). It measures the temperament dimensions of NS and HA using four
subscales, RD by three subscales, and P by a single 8-item scale. The character dimensions of SD and C are
assessed with 5subscales, and ST consists of 3 subscales. The TCI has been adapted into Turkish by Kose et
al. (2004), and no items were excluded as being irrelevant to Turkish culture. In this study, the average
Cronbach alpha value for Temperament dimensions were between 0.60 and 0.85 and for character dimensions
were between 0.83 and 0.82 in a normative sample in Turkey (Kose et al., 2004).
2.3. Statistical Analysis
All variables were screened for the accuracy of data entry, missing values, and homoscedasticity using
SPSS version 15 for Windows. Descriptive statistic was reported using means and standard deviations for
continues variables. One-Sample t-test was used to compare averages, and ANOVA was used for comparison
between groups. The data had less than 5% of missing items, and no pattern was detected. Degrees of
association between metric discrete variables were calculated by Pearson’s product-moment correlation
coefficients. Degrees of association between metric discrete variables were calculated by Pearson’s correlation
coefficients. A p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
3. RESULTS
In terms of temperament dimension; Novelty Seeking (NS) was found higher compared to the Turkish
normative values (µ=19.7, p<0.01), however, it was not different from American normative values (p>0.05).
The average scores of Impulsiveness (NS2) and Disorderliness (NS4) subscales of Novelty Seeking (NS) were
found to be significantly higher than both the Turkish and the American normative values (µ=4.4, p<0.01;µ=4.7,
p<0.01, respectively). Harm Avoidance (HA) scale values of the sample group were significantly lower than the
Turkish normative values and significantly higher than the American normative values (µ=15.5, p<0.01). The
average scores of Fear of Uncertainty (HA2) was found to be significantly lower than the Turkish normative
values (µ=3.5, p<0.01). The scores of Fatigability (HA4) was found significantly higher than the American
normative values (µ=3.8, p<0.01). The scores of Reward Dependence (RD) was found to be lower than
Turkish normative values and higher than American normative values (µ=13.2, p<0.01). Reward Dependence
subscale values and values of Attachment (RD3) and Dependence (RD4) subscales of this were found to be
significantly lower than both the Turkish and American normative values (µ=13.2, p<0.01;µ=4.1, p<0.01;µ=2.1,
p<0.01, respectively). The average scores of Sentimentality (RD1) subscale and Persistence were found lower
than American normative values (µ=7.0, p<0.05;µ=4.9, p<0.01, respectively).
Table 1. Comparison of average scores of TCI scale and subscales of the
sample group with Turkish and American normative values
University Students
(n=154) Turkish (n=683) American (n=300)
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
Novelty Seeking (NS)
19.7
4.3
18.5**
5.00
19.2
6.0
Exploratory Excitability (NS1) 6.0 1.8 6.3 1.9 6.3 2.3
Impulsiveness (NS2)
4.4
1.8
3.6**
1.9
3.7**
2.2
Extravagance (NS3) 4.5 1.8 4.6 2.1 5.0** 2.3
Disorderliness (NS4)
4.7
1.8
3.9**
1.8
4.3**
2.1
Harm avoidance (HA) 15.5 5.2 16.8** 6.4 12.6** 6.8
| 37
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 8. No. 5. September, 2016
*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01
Table 2. Correlation between our sample group and TCI scales
Coefficients ≥ 0.30 are shown in bold.
In terms of Character dimension; average scores of Self-directedness (SD) scale and Responsibility
(SD1), and Purposeful (SD2) subscales were found significantly lower than the American normative values
(µ=24.9, p<0.05;µ=4.2, p<0.01; µ=5.2, p<0.01, respectively). Moreover, averages scores of Resourcefulness
(SD3), Self-acceptance (SD4), and Enlightened Second Nature (SD5) were found to be significantly lower than
both the Turkish and American normative values (µ=2.9, p<0.01;µ=5.0, p<0.05; µ=5.8, p<0.01, respectively).
The scores of Cooperativeness scale and all of subscales were found to be lower than both the Turkish and
American normative values (µ=25.7, p<0.01;µ=5.5, p<0.05; µ=3.9, p<0.01; µ=4.2, p<0.01; µ=6.4, p<0.01;
µ=5.8, p<0.01, respectively). The average scores of Self-transcendence scale (ST), Self-forgetfulness (ST1)
and Transpersonal Identification (ST2) subscales were found to be higher than the Turkish and American
normative values (µ=20.5, p<0.01;µ=7.1, p<0.01; µ=5.3, p<0.01, respectively). The scores of Spiritual
acceptance was found significantly lower than both the Turkish and American normative values (µ=8.1,
p<0.01).
Table 3. Comparison of athletes and sedentary group
Anticipatory worry (HA1)
4.9
2.0
5.6**
2.3
3.2**
2.4
Fear of uncertainty (HA2)
3.5
1.6
4.1**
1.9
3.6
2.0
Shyness (HA3)
3.2
1.8
3.4
2.2
3.3
2.3
Fatigability (HA4)
3.8
1.9
3.6
2.3
2.5**
2.2
Reward dependence (RD)
13.2
2.8
14.1**
3.2
15.5**
4.4
Sentimentality (RD1)
7.0
1.8
6.9
1.9
7.3*
2.1
Attachment (RD3)
4.1
1.5
4.5**
1.9
4.7**
2.3
Dependence (RD4)
2.1
1.4
2.7**
1.4
3.
5**
1.6
Persistence (PS)
4.9
1.8
4.8
1.9
5.6**
1.9
Self
-
directedness (SD)
24.9
5.7
29.1**
6.2
30.7**
7.5
Responsibility (SD1)
4.2
1.8
5.1**
1.9
5.8**
2.0
Purposeful (SD2)
5.2
1.6
6.0**
1.6
5.5*
1.8
Resourcefulness (SD3)
2.9
1.3
3.4**
1.3
4.0**
1.2
Se
lf
-
acceptance (SD4)
5.0
2.0
5.7**
2.6
6.4**
2.8
Enlightened second nature (SD5)
7.7
2.0
8.9**
2.0
9.0**
2.5
Cooperativeness (C)
25.7
5.5
29.4**
5.9
32.3**
7.2
Social acceptance (C1)
5.5
1.7
6.3**
1.7
6.7**
1.5
Empathy (C2)
3.9
1.4
4.3**
1.5
5.3**
1.4
Helpfulness (C3)
4.2
1.4
4.8**
1.4
6.3**
1.6
Compassion (C4)
6.4
2.2
7.1**
2.7
7.6**
2.8
Pure
-
hearted conscience (C5)
5.8
1.4
6.9**
1.4
6.5**
2.0
Self-transcendence (ST) 20.5 4.5 18.6** 5.4 19.2** 6.3
Self
-
forgetful (ST1)
7.1
2.0
5.9**
2.2
5.9**
2.7
Transpersonal identification (ST2) 5.3 2.0 4.9* 2.1 4.6** 2.4
Spiritual acceptance (ST3)
8.1
2.1
7.8
2.8
8.7**
2.9
Scale NS HA RD P SD C ST
Novelty Seeking (NS) -0.255* 0.027 -0.170* 0.00 0.006 0.063
Harm Avoidance (HA) 0.167* -0.075 -0.253* 0.013 -0.015
Reward Dependence (RD) -0.079 0.138 0.374** -0.015
Persistence (P) 0.294** 0.127 0.069
Self-directedness (SD) 0.398** -0.233**
Cooperativeness (C) 0.145
Self-Transcendence (ST)
Scale Athletes (n=83) Sedentary (n=71) P
M SD M SD
Novelty Seeking (NS) 19.5 4.0 19.8 4.8 0.644
Exploratory excitability (NS1) 5.8 1.7 6.2 1.9 0.184
Impulsiveness (NS2) 4.6 1.6 4.3 2.0 0.290
Extravagance (NS3) 4.5 1.7 4.6 1.9 0.548
Disorderliness (NS4) 4.6 1.8 4.7 1.8 0.821
Harm avoidance (HA) 15.3 4.3 15.6 6.0 0.711
Anticipatory worry (HA1) 4.7 1.8 5.2 2.3 0.166
Fear of uncertainty (HA2) 3.5 1.4 3.6 1.9 0.758
Shyness (HA3) 3.3 1.5 3.2 2.0 0.741
Fatigabi
lity (HA4)
3.9
1.9
3.8
2.0
0.673
Reward dependence (RD) 12.4 2.3 14.2 3.1 0.001
Sentimentality (RD1) 6.8 1.8 7.2 1.8 0.182
Attachment (RD3) 3.8 1.4 4.5 1.5 0.004
Dependence (RD4) 1.8 1.3 2.5 1.5 0.003
Persistence (PS) 5.1 1.7 4.7 1.9 0.198
38 | PART B. SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES ISSN: 2075-4124
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
o
f
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
8
. No.
5
.
September
, 201
6
3.1. Comparison of athletes and sedentary group: In terms of TCI’s temperament dimension; the
average scores of athletes in Reward Dependence (RD) (µ=12.4, p<0.01), Attachment (RD3) (µ=3.8, p<0.01),
and Dependence (RD4) (µ=1.8, p<0.05)were found to be significantly lower compared to the sedentary group.
In terms of TCI’s character dimension; the mean scores of athletes in Self-directedness (SD) scale
(µ=23.5, p<0.01) and Responsibility (SD1) (µ=3.7, p<0.01), Self-acceptance (SD4) (µ=4.7, p<0.05), and
Enlightened Second Nature (SD5) (µ=7.3, p<0.01) subscales were significantly lower compared to the
sedentary university students. Furthermore, Empathy (C2) subscale of Cooperativeness (C) scores was
significantly lower in the athletes compared to the sedentary colleague students (µ=3.6, p<0.05). Mean scores
of athletes in Transpersonal Identification (ST2) subscale was significantly higher compared to the sedentary
university students (µ=5.6, p<0.05).
Table 4. Comparison of different sports branches with music and sedentary groups
Scale
Archery
(n=5)
Volleyball
(n=7)
Rugby
(n=10)
Futsal
(n=61)
Music
(n=26)
Sedentary
(n=45) P
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
N S
21.4
4.4
19.6
3.5
23.1
3.7
18.8
3.7
19.3
5.2
20.1
4.5
0.059
NS1 7.6
ab
1.1 6.0
ab
1.5 7.8
a
1.2 5.4
b
1.6 6.2
ab
2.0 6.3
ab
1.9 0.000
NS2
4.8
1.9
4.3
1.8
4.4
1.8
4.6
1.6
3.5
1.9
4.7
1.9
0.097
NS3 4.8 0.8 5.0 2.6 5.0 1.9 4.3 1.6 5.2 2.2 4.3 1.6 0.208
NS4
4.2
1.9
4.3
2.2
5.9
1.2
4.5
1.7
4.5
2.0
4.8
1.7
0.242
HA 16.4
a
bc 4.4 13.4
a
bc 3.0 9.5ab 4.9 16.4
a
c 3.5 14.8
a
bc 7.2 16.1
a
c 5.2 0.002
HA1 5.8 2.6 4.6 1.7 3.4 2.3 4.8 1.6 5.1 2.6 5.2 2.1 0.164
HA2 3.6
ab
0.9 3.1
ab
1.6 1.9
b
1.2 3.8
a
1.2 3.4
ab
2.1 3.6
ab
1.7 0.030
HA3
3.0
0.7
2.9
1.3
1.9
1.7
3.6
1.5
2.9
2.2
3.3
2.0
0.114
HA4 4.0 2.3 2.9 1.3 2.3 1.5 4.3 1.8 3.4 2.3 4.0 2.3 0.023
RD 12.4
a
b 2.7 13.3
a
b 0.8 12.4
a
b 2.8 12.3a 2.3 14.5b 3.6 14.0
a
b 2.8 0.007
RD1
6.8
1.3
7.6
1.3
6.5
2.4
6.8
1.8
7.3
2.1
7.1
1.7
0.623
RD3 3.8 1.9 4.0 1.4 4.4 1.1 3.7 1.4 4.6 1.6 4.4 1.5 0.051
RD4
1.8
1.3
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.9
1.2
2.6
1.5
2.4
1.4
0.084
P 5.8 0.8 5.4 1.0 6.3 1.5 4.8 1.7 4.9 2.1 4.6 1.8 0.065
SD
23.8
1.6
26.7
4.6
29.2
5.1
22.2
4.7
28.1
5.8
25.6
5.7
0.000
SD1 3.4
ab
1.3 4.4
ab
1.8
5.1
ab
1.8 3.5
b
1.5 4.9
a
1.9 4.5
ab
1.9 0.002
SD2 5.8 1.3 5.4 1.5 5.8 1.1 4.8 1.4 5.4 2.1 5.3 1.6 0.293
SD3
2.
6
1.3
3.1
0.9
3.8
1.3
2.6
1.3
3.4
1.1
2.8
1.3
0.017
SD4 3.0 1.4 4.4 1.8 5.7 2.1 4.7 1.6 5.7 2.8 5.2 2.0 0.040
SD5
9.0
a
0.7
9.3
a
1.1
8.8
a
1.8
6.7
b
1.9
8.7
a
1.9
7.9
a
1.9
0.000
C 24.0
a
b 4.7 27.4
a
b 5.7 27.2
a
b 7.4 24.5b 4.0 29.0a 7.5 25.0
a
b 5.0 0.009
C1 6.4 1.3 6.1 1.7 5.5 2.7 5.2 1.3 6.3 1.7 5.2 1.8 0.049
C2
3.0
1.2
4.0
0.8
4.2
2.0
3.5
1.2
4.6
1.5
3.9
1.3
0.018
C3 3.6 1.1 4.3 1.8 4.4 0.8 4.0 1.5 4.4 1.7 4.2 1.2 0.810
C4
5.8
3.7
6.4
3.1
7.1
2.9
6.2
1.8
7.3
2.2
6.1
2.2
0.209
C5 5.2 1.3 6.6 0.5 6.0 1.2 5.5 1.3 6.5 1.6 5.7 1.5 0.036
ST
16.6
6.9
18.9
5.4
20.1
5.8
21.6
3.6
20.0
4.2
20.0
4.7
0.099
ST1 5.6 2.7 6.4 1.7 6.8 2.5 7.4 1.9 6.7 1.8 7.3 1.9 0.198
ST2
4.8
2.9
4.1
2.5
5.0
2.7
6.0
1.6
5.0
2.3
4.8
1.8
0.031
ST3
6.2
2.3
8.3
1.8
8.3
2.7
8.2
1.9
8.3
1.7
7.
9
2.5
0.415
To the difference between groups, for the highest value we used “a”, and “b” for the lower and we used
“c” for the lowest value (a>b>c).
3.2. Comparison of athletes from different sports branches with sedentary and music study groups:
When evaluating between groups, the average score of athletes in Exploratory Excitability subscale (NS1) was
foundto be significantly different fromthe rugby and futsal groups, F(5,148)=4.966, p<0.05.This difference is
higher inthe rugby group(µ=7.8) compared tothe futsal group average (µ=5.4).
Self-directedness (SD) 23.5 5.2 26.5 5.8 0.001
Responsibility (SD1) 3.7 1.6 4.6 1.9 0.002
Purposeful (SD2) 5.0 1.4 5.3 1.8 0.309
Resourcefulness (SD3) 2.8 1.3 3.0 1.2 0.241
Self-acceptance (SD4) 4.7 1.7 5.4 2.3 0.036
Enlightened second nature (SD5) 7.3 2.1 8.2 1.9 0.006
Cooperativeness (C) 25.0 4.7 26.5 6.3 0.098
Social acceptance (C1)
5.4
1.6
5.6
1.8
0.393
Empathy (C2) 3.6 1.3 4.1 1.4 0.021
Helpfulness (C3) 4.1 1.4 4.3 1.4 0.427
Compassion (C4) 6.3 2.2 6.5 2.3 0.534
Pure-hearted conscience (C5) 5.6 1.3 6.0 1.6 0.155
Self-transcendence (ST) 20.9 4.4 20.0 4.5 0.245
Self-forgetful (ST1) 7.1 2.0 7.1 1.9 0.880
Transpersonal identification (ST2) 5.6 2.0 4.9 2.0 0.030
Spiritual acceptance (ST3) 8.1 2.1 8.0 2.2 0.817
| 39
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 8. No. 5. September, 2016
In Harm Avoidance Scale, it is found that there are significant differences between all groups,
F(5,148)=3.899, p<0.05. The average score of Harm Avoidance in the rugby group (µ=9.5) was found to be
lower than the average scores for both the sedentary group (µ=16.1) and the futsal group (µ=16.4).Likewise,
mean values of Fear of Uncertainty subscale (HA2) were found to be significantly low in the rugby group
(µ=1.9) compared to the futsal group (µ=3.8), F(5,148)=2.547, p<0.05.
Reward Dependence mean scores of the music group (µ=14.5) were found to be significantly higher
than the futsal group (µ=12.3), F(5,148)=3.367, p<0.05.In terms of character dimension, average scores of
music group (µ=4.9) in Responsibility subscale (SD1) were found significantly higher compared to the futsal
group (µ=3.5), F(5,148)=4.030, p<0.05.In Enlightened Second Nature subscale (SD5); significant differences
were found between average scores of the futsal group (µ=6.7) and the volleyball(µ=9.3), rugby (µ=8.8), music
(µ=8.7),and sedentary group (µ=7.9) in favor of the groups except for futsal, F(5,148)=7.702, p<0.05. In
Cooperativeness Scale, the average scores of the futsal group (µ=24.5) were found significantly lower than
music group (µ=29), F(5,148)=3.190, p<0.05.
4. DISCUSSION
In this study, we aimed to examine personality traits of athletes and sedentary college students by
Temperament and Character Inventory.
Recently it seems that the studies on temperament and character in college students are increasing. By
this context, regarding temperament dimension, while the values of sample groups in Novelty Seeking scale
were found to be higher than Turkish normative values, Fear of Uncertainty subscale (HA2) scores were found
lower than the Turkish normative values. While in sample group Fatigability (HA4) was found higher,
Sentimentality (RD1), and Persistence were found to be lower in American normative values. Sample group
values of Harm Avoidance scale and its subscale Anticipatory Worry (HA1) found to be significantly lower
when compared to the Turkish normative values, but these values were found significantly higher than
American normative values. Reward Dependence and its subscale Attachment and Dependence were
significantly lower than both Turkish and American normative values. On the other hand, Impulsiveness (NS2)
and Disorderliness (NS4) were considerably higher in Turkish and American normative values. When
comparing the athletes and sedentary groups, mean values of Reward Dependence, Attachment (RD3) and
Dependence (RD4) in athletes were significantly lower than the sedentary group scores. Regarding character
evaluation of athletes from different sports branches, sedentary group, and music group; the values of
Exploratory Excitability (NS1) of the rugby group were found to be significantly higher than the values of futsal
group while Fear of Uncertainty (HA2) values were significantly lower compared to the futsal group.
Individuals who get high scores in Reward Dependence (RD) are compassionate, devoted, dependent
and nervous. They are also prone to suggestion and socially dependent to people they meet often. Individuals
who are low in Persistence tend to be lazy, unstable, hesitant, and irregular. However, in our study scores of
Reward dependence were found to be lower than what we expected. We might speculate that the NS scores in
the rugby group caused these average low scores.
In terms of Character dimension; Self-Directedness and Cooperativeness values in sample group were
found significantly lower from both the Turkish and American normative values while Self-Transcendence and
its subscale Self-forgetful (ST1) and Transpersonal Identification (ST2) values are found to be significantly
higher from the Turkish and American normative values. Spiritual Acceptance (ST3) values of the sample
group were found significantly lower than American normative values. In athletes and sedentary groups; while
Self-Directedness scale and its subscales Responsibility (SD1), Self-Acceptance (SD4), and Enlightened
Second Nature (SD5) and Empathy(C2) values of the athletes group were found lower than the values of
sedentary group. Transpersonal Identification (ST2) values were found significantly higher than the values of
the sedentary group. In the athletes group’s comparison from different sports branches to the music group and
sedentary group; Responsibility (SD1) and Cooperativeness values of the music group were found significantly
higher than the values of the sedentary group. In Enlightened Second Nature subscale (SD5) futsal group has
the lowest values among other groups.
A person who is good at Self-Directedness is self-confident, responsible, trustworthy, and skillful, have
life goals, and have peace of mind. The individuals with low self-management are incriminating, help seeker,
irresponsible, unsafe, and could not identify themselves as responsive and with meaningful internal goals and
unable to follow them(Cloninger & Svrakic, 2000).In our sample group being low of self-management scores
and low scores in Novelty Seeking is accepted as a sign of personality disorders.Individuals who are good at
Self-directedness are motivated toward their success and they loss their motivation when they fail. People with
high Persistence have desire and effort to handle all barriers which may block them when achieving their
goals. The persons with cooperativeness are emphatic, socially tolerated, concerned toward others, helpful,
conscientious, and principled.Even if cooperativeness is seen necessary to gain success in sports, our findings
show that there is no such relation in these high-level competitive athletes (Kose et al., 2004).Individuals with
self-transcendence are dependent on moral values and in a state of acceptance.Negative relationship with
avoiding failuresseems to be an expected feature. At the same time, this situation supports the relationship
with self-directedness(SD) value.The reason why especially character scales differ in Turkish and American
communities can be explained by different culture and different evaluation of these concepts in the Western
40 | PART B. SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES ISSN: 2075-4124
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
o
f
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
8
. No.
5
.
September
, 201
6
societies. In Cloninger’s personality theory, temperament dimensions are hereditary and related to early
childhood, but character dimensions mature with age (Kose et al., 2004).
In Harm Avoidance scale the values of rugby group were found to be significantly lower compared to
the futsal and the sedentary groups. Average scores of the music group in Reward Dependence were found to
be considerably higher than the futsal group.The individuals with the tendency of Harm Avoiding(HA) seem to
have a vague fear, shyness and social frustration, passive avoidance of the obstacles and problems, fatigue
and anxiety and even pessimism with the expectation of challenges in situations that do not concern others
(Kose et al., 2004). Because they are dispirited, moody, anxious and see the negative sides of the events and
in expectations of harm even in the situations that have no possibility of harm they cause toadjustment disorder
and anxiety.Therefore the professional athletes with a high tendency to Harm Avoidance will be frustrated and
experience difficulties in being motivated.However, individuals with low tendency to Harm Avoidancewere
reported to be easily motivated because they are self-confident and optimistic when they are facing danger and
uncertainty (Turhan, 2008).Turhan also reported that professional athletes have a tendency to have lower
Harm Avoidance scores.In our study, it was thought that the rugby group’s lower HA scorescauseda tendency
of lower Harm Avoidancescores (Turhan, 2008).
The individuals with high Novelty Seeking are short-tempered, curious, easily bored, impulsive,
extravagant, and erratic. Freedom, discovery, and enthusiasm for seeking novel and unusual conditions with
potential rewards are the benefits of novelty seeking in terms of healthy adjustment. However,
impulsivity,bursting of anger, being potentially whimsical inrelationship and being anobserverin team works are
the negative side of novelty seeking. Thoughtfulness, flexibility, working systematically, and cautious approach
are obviously advantageous when they are necessary.Being tolerated toward monotony which potentially
make activities boring and languor are the negative sidesof low Novelty Seeking (Turhan, 2008).The
individuals with high novelty seeking compared to ones with low novelty seeking might attempt to sports more.
However,since they are impulsive, responsive,resentful, and easily bored either it is hard for them to be
motivated extrinsically and they might easily lose their motivation (Kose, 2004).Low Self-directedness is a
characteristic feature of people with personality disorders because they have difficulties to accept their
responsibility for their choices and they arelack of goal orientation, have chronic low self-esteem and lack
confidence. These individuals have a low tendency to cooperation.They tend to be intolerant, arrogant, and
opportunist (Cloninger& Svrakic, 2000).
According to Weinberd and Gould (1995) reportedsuccessful female athletes had different personality
profiles compared to the sedentary females. Compared to non-athletes, female athletes are success-oriented,
independent, aggressive, enthusiastic, well-balanced, and stubborn.Koruc and Bayar (1990) administeredthe
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) on 435 national team level athletes and other athletes that
are selected from different sports branches (track and field, basketball, archery, gymnastics, handball, boxing,
wrestling, weightlifting, judo, taekwondo, and shooting) and reported that male and female athletes compared
to non-athletes are more conscientious in personal responsibilities, sensitive, more attentive, and more
socializing.
REFERENCES
1. Brändstrom, S., Schlette, P., Przybeck, T. R., Lundberg, M., Forsgren, T., Sigvardsson, S.,
Adolfsson, R. (1998). Swedish normative data on personality using the temperament and
character inventory. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 39(3), 122-128. doi:10.1016/s0010-
440x(98)90070-0
2. Cloninger, C. R. (1987). A Systematic Method for Clinical Description and Classification of
Personality Variants. Arch Gen Psychiatry Archives of General Psychiatry, 44(6), 573-588.
3. Cloninger, C.R. (1993). A Psychobiological Model of Temperament and Character. Archives of
General Psychiatry, 50(12), 975-989.
4. Duijsens, I. J., Spinhoven, P., Goekoop, J. G., Spermon, T., & Eurelings-Bontekoe, E. H. (2000).
The Dutch temperament and character inventory (TCI): Dimensional structure, reliability and
validity in a normal and psychiatric outpatient sample. Personality and Individual Differences,
28(3), 487-499.
5. Fassino, S., Abbate-Daga, G., Leombruni, P., Amianto, F., Rovera, G., &Rovera, G. G. (2001).
Temperament and Character in Italian Men with Anorexia Nervosa: A Controlled Study with the
Temperament and Character Inventory. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 189(11),
788-794.
6. Gutierrez, F., Torrens, N., Boget, T., Martin-Santos, R., Sangorrin, J., Perez, G., &Salamero, M.
(2001). Psychometric properties of the Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) questionnaire
in a Spanish psychiatric population. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 103(2), 143-147.
7. Hansenne, M., Bon, O. L., Gauthier, A., & Ansseau, M. (2001). Belgian Normative Data of the
Temperament and Character Inventory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(1),
56-62.
8. Heath, A. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Martin, N. G. (1994). Testing a model for the genetic structure of
personality: A comparison of the personality systems of Cloninger and Eysenck. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 762-775.
| 41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 8. No. 5. September, 2016
9. Kijima, N., Tanaka, E., Suzuki, N., &Kitamura, T. (2000). Reliability and Validity of the Japanese
Version of the Temperament and Character Inventory. Psychological Reports PR, 86(3), 1050-
1058.
10. Koruc, Z., & Bayar, P. (1990). MMPI ile Sporcularin Kisiliklerinin Arastirilmasi I. Spor Bilimleri
Bulteni, 2(1), 21-25. [Turkish]
11. Kose, S., Kalelioglu, U., Aydin, N., Ak, I., Kirpinar, I., Reeves, R. A., Cloninger, C. R. (2004). The
Turkish version of the TCI: Reliability, validity, and factorial structure. Bulletin of Clinical
Psychopharmacology, 14(3), 107-131.
12. Kose, S., Sayar, K., Kalelioglu, U., Aydin, N., Celikel, F. C., Gulec, H., Cloninger, C. R. (2009).
Normative data and factorial structure of the Turkish version of the Temperament and Character
Inventory. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 50(4), 361-368. doi:10.1016/j.comppsych.2008.09.007
13. Parker, G., Cheah, Y., & Parker, K. (2003). Properties of the temperament and character inventory
in a Chinese sample. ActaPsychiatricaScandinavica, 108(5), 367-373.
14. Pélissolo, A., &Lépine, J. (2000).Normative data and factor structure of the Temperament and
Character Inventory (TCI) in the French version. Psychiatry Research, 94(1), 67-76.
15. Rie, S. M., Duijsens, I. J., & Cloninger, C. R. (1998). Temperament, Character, and Personality
Disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 12(4), 362-372. doi:10.1521/pedi.1998.12.4.362
16. Cloninger, C.R., & Svrakic, D.M. (2000) Personality disorders. Comprehensive Textbook of
Psychiatry. Sadock, B.J. &Sadock, V.A. (Eds.) New York, Lippincott Williams&Williams.
17. Sigvardsson, S., Bohman, M., & Cloninger, C. R. (1987). Structure and Stability of Childhood
Personality: Prediction of Later Social Adjustment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
28(6), 929-946.
18. Stallings, M. C., Hewitt, J. K., Cloninger, C. R., Heath, A. C., & Eaves, L. J. (1996). Genetic and
environmental structure of the Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire: Three or four
temperament dimensions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 127-140.
19. Sung, S. M., Kim, J. H., Yang, E., Abrams, K. Y., & Lyoo, I. K. (2002). Reliability and validity of the
Korean version of the temperament and character inventory. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 43(3),
235-243. doi:10.1053/comp.2002.30794
20. Turhan, M. (2008).Profesyonel Futbolcularda Motivasyonun Depresyon, Anksiyete ve Kisilik
Ozellikleri ile Iliskisinin Arastirilmasi (Master's thesis, Istanbul Maltepe Universitesi, Sosyal Bilimler
Enstitusu Psikoloji Bolumu, 2008). Istanbul [Thesis in Turkish].
21. Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (1995). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. Champaign,
US: Human Kinetic.