Peculiarities of aggressiveness and its correlation with decision-making parameters in disabled and able-bodied athletes

Abstract

Aim. The purpose of this research is to analyze the peculiarities of personal aggression and its correlation with the parameters of decision-making in disabled and able-bodied athletes. Materials and Methods. We studied 30 athletes from the sports school “Kaskad” aged 16-21 and 30 athletes from the sports rehabilitation center “Impulse” aged 20-25. During our study, we used the following methodic: “Personal aggression and tendency to conflict” by E.P. Il'in, P.A. Kovalev and “Personal factors of decision-making” by T.V. Kornilova. Results. We found out significant differences between disabled and able-bodied athletes. In relation to aggression parameters, the results show the higher level of Susceptibility (U = 334.5, p < 0.05), Intractability (U = 347, p < 0.05), Intolerance (U = 298, p < 0.05) and Negative Aggression (U = 300, p < 0.05) in able-bodied athletes, while the higher level of Refusal to compromise (U = 99, p < 0.01) is typical for disabled athletes. In the factor structure of disabled athletes' aggressiveness, we revealed a specific factor that includes the opposition of such parameters as Refusal to compromise and Susceptibility. In able-bodied athletes, we discovered correlations between the decision-making and level of aggression: we found out inverse correlation between Rationality and Assertiveness (rs = -0.40, p < 0.05), direct correlation between Risk-taking and Temper (rs = 0.38, p < 0.05) and between Risk-taking and Tendency to conflict (rs = 0.37, p < 0.05). We found out different correlations between the decision-making and levels of aggression in disabled athletes in comparison with able-bodied athletes: we revealed direct correlations between Risk-taking and Intractability (rs = 0.39, p <0.05) and between Risk-taking and Positive aggression (rs = 0.41, p < 0.05). Conclusion. In a situation of uncertainty, able-bodied athletes choose defense strategies through conflict behavior, while disabled athletes prefer attack strategies regardless of the expected outcome and external evaluation.