Influence of Perceived Parental Education Styles on Hardy Personality in Sport.

Author:Gonzalez-Garcia, Higinio


A hardy personality is defined as a personality factor characterized by the ability to cope effectively with stress, this personality factor comprise commitment (the way that an athlete is commit with his/her daily work), control (the feeling that an athlete control his/her life) and challenge (the ability to find challenge in all life tasks) (Golby and Sheard, 2004; Jaenes et al., 2009; Maddi and Hess, 1992). Also, hardy personality has been shown to relate to excellent achievements in sport, because have high levels of hardy personality is an important factor to facilitate the access to high sport performance (reach international and national successes, be involved in sport performance centers and work as a professional athlete) (Gonzalez-Garcia, 2017; Jaenes et al., 2009). Parental education is related to numerous variables of children psychosocial development, including personality variables (Kunnen et al., 2019; Torio et al., 2008). Concerning that, the more that children are educated towards hardiness, the better that they can perform in sporting context, and as a result, it can be a powerful tool to facilitate access towards success in sport (Gonzalez-Garcia and Pelegrin, 2015). As a novelty of this work, parental educational styles are measured in order to know if they are related to hardy personality. Therefore, due to the link and interest between parental education and hardiness, the present work pretends to shed light on this lack of evidence in literature.

Parental education styles, according to Aroca (2010, p.84) can be understood as "the set of patterns and parenting practices, whose objective is children socialization and education, where personality traits, past experiences and genetic characteristics, both parental and filial, that are contextualized within an intra, meso and macrofamiliar system immersed, in turn, within a specific transcultural and historical framework". In this research, the parents' educational styles were measured by dividing them into the following styles: democratic, authoritarian, permissive and protective (Vasconcelos-Raposo et al., 2015).

Although there are different classifications of parental education styles, the classic models were used to divide these styles into authoritarian, permissive, democratic (Baumrind, 1967; Baumrind, 1996). Specifically, authoritarian parents value obedience as a virtue, as well as dedication to important tasks, tradition, and preservation of order. They favour punishment, force rules, and/or keep children in a subordinate role to restrict their autonomy (Baumrind, 1996; Kaufmann et al., 2000; King et al., 2016).

On the other hand, permissive parents provide great autonomy to children if their physical survival is not jeopardized. The permissive adult prototype behaves in an affirmative, accepting, and benign way towards child impulses and actions. A permissive parent's fundamental objective is to free the child from control and to avoid authority recourse. They are not demanding of children in terms of maturity and responsibility in the execution of tasks (Banham et al., 2000; Wischerth et al., 2016).

Lastly, democratic parents do not only try to manage children by imposing mature roles and behaviours, but they also use reasoning and negotiation. These types of parents tend to direct children's activities rationally. They start from an acceptance of their own rights and duties, as well as the rights and duties of children. It is a style characterized by two-way communication, and a shared emphasis among social responsibility, autonomy development and child independence (Garcia et al., 2002; Mansager and Volk, 2004; Pelegrin et al., 2019; Warash and Markstrom, 2001; Winsler et al., 2005). In turn, each of these parenting styles present several implications in children's psychosocial development (Gonzalez-Garcia et al., 2015). Children of democratic parents generally demonstrate high social competence, self-control, motivation, initiative, autonomous morality, self-esteem, realistic self-concept, responsibility and self-regulated learning (Baumrind, 1996; Gonzalez-Garcia et al., 2015; Kaufmann et al., 2000; Torio et al., 2008). Children of authoritarian parents display poor emotional adjustment, low motivation for sports, autonomy, self-confidence, and high aggressiveness and anxiety in competition (Baumrind, 1996; Gonzalez-Garcia et al., 2015; 2019). Finally, children of permissive parents exhibit low levels of maturity, aggressiveness, success, but high sport competition levels, intrinsic motivation and self-regulated learning (Mansager, 2004; Warash and Markstrom, 2001; Winsler and Madigan, 2005).

Hardy personality is related to positive impacts in the sport field because athletes must commit to training daily (commitment). Because situations in sport require athletes to make quick decisions (control), each one of these situations faced by the athlete constitutes a personal growth opportunity (challenge) (Jaenes, 2009; Jaenes et al., 2009). In this sense, hardy personality is a multidimensional psychological variable that allows athletes to transform personal experiences into personal growth opportunities (Eschleman et al., 2010). Hardy personality is divided into three factors: control, commitment and challenge (Jaenes, 2009; Jaenes et al., 2009). In sport, the studies that have examined hardy personality with sport performance showed a positive relationship between both variables (Golby and Sheard, 2004; Gonzalez-Garcia, 2017; Jaenes et al., 2009; Maddi and Hess, 1992; Rezae et al., 2009). Maddi and Hess (1992) found a positive relationship between hardy personality and basketball performance, indicating that higher-performing players (higher leagues) had higher levels of hardy personality than lower-performing players (lower leagues). Another study by Golby and Sheard (2004) showed that those who participated in higher rugby leagues had higher levels of control, commitment and challenge than the rest from lower leagues. Similar results were found by Jaenes et al. (2009) in a marathoner's sample that showed athletes with better qualifications had better hardy personality levels. In a study by Ramzi and Besharat (2010), hardy personality was found to be associated with sport achievement and psychological well-being. Additionally, Rezae et al. (2009) showed that champion athletes had higher hardy personality levels, in comparison with non-champion athletes. According to Sheard and Golby (2010), international competitors scored significantly higher on commitment and resistance when compared to national athletes and other practitioners. In a doctoral thesis by Gonzalez-Garcia (2017), collective sport athletes demonstrated higher levels of challenge factor. In addition, athletes who compete internationally and spend more hours in sport training showed higher levels of hardy personality. On the contrary, De la Vega et al. (2010) found no differences between sport performance (better result in a race) and hardy personality levels in ten-kilometre runners and high mountain runners.

In addition, hardy personality subsumes the concept resilience. The main difference between the two concepts is that hardy personality seems to refer to a personality macrofactor that may include more variables (commitment, control and challenge) beyond resilience (Fernandez-Lasac and Crespo, 2011). More specifically, resilience is understood as the ability or competence of subject to deal with unfavourable situations and is conceived as a trait or individual's personality characteristic (Block and Kremen, 1996; Hill et al., 2018). Based on this definition, Grotberg (1995) elaborated on a series of characteristics that parents can create in their children to promote resilience, including social environment (e.g., people who love the...

To continue reading