Individual differences and risk taking in rock climbing

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.07.003Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives

The primary objective of the study was to challenge the notion that risk taking populations are homogenous, and that risk taking in sport necessarily reflects the expression of trait sensation seeking. A secondary objective was to examine the potential role of additional individual differences, such as self-efficacy and impulsivity, which have traditionally received limited attention.

Design

Quantitative cross-sectional study.

Methods

One hundred and sixteen active rock climbers completed the Impulsive-Sensation Seeking Scale, a domain-specific self-efficacy scale, and behavioral measures of ability, experience and risk taking in rock climbing.

Results

Those high in self-efficacy and male climbers were likely to take greater risks; small associations with age, sensation seeking and impulsivity were also observed, though these were not in the hypothesized direction and failed to predict unique variance in regression analyses.

Conclusions

To challenge themselves, rock climbers may take calculated additional risks when they feel confident in their ability to manage those risks. Researchers should not assume homogeneity within risk taking populations, or that people take risks in all domains due to elevated sensation seeking needs.

Introduction

Despite the risk of serious injury and mortality, the popularity of “high risk” sports such as rock climbing has increased exponentially in Western societies in recent years (Florenthal & Shoham, 2001; Pain & Pain, 2005; Schrader & Wann, 1999; Turner, McClure, & Pirozzo, 2004). Past research has focused on the individual differences that discriminate between risk taking sports participants and control groups, and as Della Fave, Bassi, and Massimini (2003) argue homogeneity within the high risk samples has traditionally been assumed. The present study investigated whether rock climbers adopt different risk-related behavioral strategies, and whether selected individual differences can be used to predict risk taking.

The study of risk taking has become virtually synonymous with sensation seeking theory in general, and the Sensation Seeking Scale V (SSS V; Zuckerman, 1994) in particular (Ferrando & Chico, 2001; Jackson & Maraun, 1996). Sensation seeking is an aspect of personality defined as “a trait defined by the seeking of varied, novel, complex, and intense sensations and experiences, and the willingness to take physical, social, legal, and financial risks for the sake of such experience” (Zuckerman, 1994, p. 27). A large body of research evidence confirms that sensation seeking is associated with the participation in a wide range of risk taking behaviors such as high risk sports, dangerous driving, drug taking, gambling, and promiscuous sex (Franques et al., 2003; Nicholson, Soane, Fenton-O’Creevy, & Willman, 2005; Zuckerman & Kuhlman, 2000).

Despite the popularity of sensation seeking theory, a number of concerns have been raised relating to its conceptual and empirical basis. Jackson and Maraun (1996) have argued that the validity of this body of research rests on the validity of the SSS V itself; furthermore, they criticize the SSS V's empirical development, and question its construct validity. Although sensation seeking may partially explain risk taking, the proportion of explained variance also appears to be relatively small (Himelstein & Thorne, 1985; Horvath & Zuckerman, 1993). Sensation seeking theory does not adequately account for the full range of motives mentioned by risk takers themselves for participating in high risk activities (particularly a sense of accomplishment and mastery), nor gives insight into how risk takers are able to overcome the state anxiety that would deter others from participating in such risky activities (Bandura, 1997; Ewert (1994), Ewert (2001); Slanger & Rudestam, 1997). The use of the SSS V with high risk sports participants is tautologous, as many items relate directly to the willingness to participate in high risk sports they are already known to engage in. In response to this limitation, Zuckerman (1994) has developed a new measure that avoids reference to specific behaviors altogether (the Impulsive-SSS; Imp-SS).

The Imp-SS also includes an impulsivity scale, as trait impulsivity is closely linked empirically and conceptually to sensation seeking (Zuckerman, 1994). Impulsivity, as conceptualized by Zuckerman, is defined as “the tendency to enter into situations, or rapidly respond to cues for potential reward, without much planning or deliberation and without consideration of potential punishment or loss of reward” (Zuckerman & Kuhlman, 2000, p. 1000). A number of factor analytic studies confirm that impulsiveness and sensation seeking load on the same factor as the broader conscientiousness trait within the ‘big five’ model of personality (Aluja, García, & García, 2004; Zuckerman, 2005; Zuckerman, Kuhlman, & Carmac, 1988; Zuckerman, Kuhlman, Joireman, Teta, & Kraft, 1993). Thus, sensation seekers may enter into risky situations quickly and recklessly in order to facilitate varied, novel, complex, and intense sensations and experiences. Impulsivity has been linked with the participation in antisocial forms of risk taking such as problem gambling, risky sexual behaviors, and recreational drug use (Butler & Montgomery, 2004; Clarke, 2004; Lejuez, Simmons, Aklin, Daughters, & Dvir, 2004). However, little empirical evidence exists regarding its relationship with risk taking in socialized domains, such as high risk sports. Rock climbers who fail to consider the consequences of their actions or underestimate the risks involved may, therefore, take greater risks.

Another variable that may influence risk taking behaviors is that of self-efficacy. Bandura (1997) postulates that one of the reasons why people take risks is that they believe themselves capable of coping with the situation, and have feelings of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy refers to an individual's “belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments” (Bandura, 1997, p. 3). People who have high levels of self-efficacy are more likely to set themselves challenging goals, expend effort, and persist in the face of adversity for longer (Bandura, 1997). This is consistent with studies suggesting that mastery and accomplishment, taken together with sensation seeking needs, are the main motives for participation in high risk sports (Ewert (1994), Ewert (2001); Slanger & Rudestam, 1997). According to Bandura (1997), self-efficacy beliefs are formulated by processing information derived from enactive mastery experiences (direct domain-specific engagement), and to a lesser degree vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion and physiological states. Hence, sports participants high in self-efficacy may be less likely to fear failure, and more likely to set themselves difficult goals and take calculated, as opposed to reckless risks (Kontos, 2004).

Existing studies of self-efficacy in high risk sports have established that participation typically leads to increased levels of self-efficacy (Brody, Hatfield, & Spalding, 1988; Norris & Weinman, 1996). Similarly, high risk sports participants often mention the need to be in control of the risks involved, and risk taking appears to represent a challenge to the more experienced (Della Fave et al., 2003; Robinson, 1985). High risk sports, such as rock climbing, are demanding activities that require specialized equipment and training to manage the risks involved (Fyffee & Peter, 1997). Indeed, elite rock climbers display dedication to training and skill advancement similar to professional athletes (Haas & Meyers, 1995). As levels of experience and ability increase, some rock climbers may, therefore, become motivated to engage in riskier forms of practice, in order to challenge themselves and maintain optimum levels of arousal (Franken, 1998). Hence, some climbers may deliberately engage in risky behavioral alternatives, while others may minimize the risks as much as possible. To date, little information exists regarding the prevalence and correlates of risk-related behavioral strategies in high risk sports.

An innovative study by Slanger and Rudestam (1997) examined the relationships between sensation seeking, self-efficacy and risk taking among male high risk sports participants including skiers, rock climbers, kayakers and stunt flyers. Participants were categorized into “extreme” and “high” risk taking groups depending upon their sport-specific behaviors. For example, climbers who climbed without protective ropes (“soloing”) were extreme risk takers, whereas those who only climbed using ropes were high risk takers. Results indicated that extreme risk takers had higher levels of self-efficacy than high risk takers, though mean SSS V scores were not significantly different. The authors concluded that high risk sports participants with elevated levels of self-efficacy were more likely to take greater risks due to greater mastery needs and the ability to manage their emotional states (Slanger & Rudestam, 1997). Confidence was also specifically named by participants as the most important disinhibiting factor in qualitative items. The lack of association with sensation seeking may reflect limitations of the SSS V; however, it is also important to note that the small sample of risk takers (N=40) and the dichotomization of risk taking, may have suppressed differences in the sample means. Also, the exclusively male sample did not allow the study of female high risk sports participants. Though past research (e.g., Byrnes, Miller, & Schafer, 1999) has shown that men tend to take greater risks than women in general, no analyses of the relationship between sex and risk taking in high risk sport have been conducted to date.

The association between age and risk taking has also been investigated. Research findings support the notion that risk taking generally declines with age (Martin & Leary, 2001; Nicholson et al., 2005; Powell & Ansic, 1997; Ungemack, 1994), though information is scarce regarding the association between age and risk taking within high risk sports (Feher, Meyers, & Skelly, 1998). Past research has typically incorporated samples with relatively restricted age ranges (often undergraduate students), and in some cases descriptive statistics have even been omitted (e.g., Horvath & Zuckerman, 1993).

The purpose of the present research was to study the relationship between selected individual differences and risk-related behavioral strategies in rock climbing. Sensation seeking theory (Zuckerman, 1994) predicts that those highest in sensation seeking will take greater risks in high risk sport in order to meet elevated needs for novel and intense sensations. Therefore, it was hypothesized that sensation seeking would be positively associated with risk taking in rock climbing (H1). Other forms of risk taking have been linked with impulsivity (e.g., Clarke, 2004). Thus, it was hypothesized that risk taking would be higher in impulsive rock climbers (H2). Self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1997) predicts that the greatest risk takers will be those with the strongest beliefs in their capacity to manage the situation and the risks involved. Thus, it was hypothesized that risk taking would be positively associated with self-efficacy (H3). Previous research suggests that risk taking generally declines with age, and that men typically take greater risks than women (Byrnes et al., 1999; Nicholson et al., 2005). Therefore, it was predicted that risk taking would be higher in young climbers (H4), and in male climbers (H5).

Section snippets

Participants

Of the 118 active British rock climbers from northern England approached (see Procedures for details), 116 (98%) agreed to participate in the study, completed an informed consent form, and yielded usable data. The 88 male climbers (M=31.92, SD=13.18 years of age) and 28 female climbers (M=28.11, SD=9.29 years of age) did not differ significantly in age, rock climbing ability or experience (all p>.05).

Measures

Impulsive Sensation Seeking (Imp-SS; Zuckerman, 1994): The 19-item Imp-SS Scale is comprised of

Results

Prior to analysis, data were examined for accuracy of data entry, missing values, and fit between data distribution and the assumptions of parametric and multivariate analysis (cf. Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). Expectation maximization procedures were performed to replace 26 randomly distributed missing values. Normality of variables was assessed statistically by examining skewness and kurtosis, and found to be satisfactory (p>.01). No cases were identified through large z scores as univariate

Discussion

The present study examined whether rock climbers adopt different risk-related behavioral strategies, and whether selected individual differences can be used to predict risk taking in rock climbing. There were a number of significant relationships between individual differences and risk taking in rock climbing. More specifically, both self-efficacy and sex differences (males higher) emerged as important predictors of risk taking in rock climbing. Sensation seeking, impulsivity and age were also

Acknowledgments

The first author was supported by The British Academy (Grant 39588). Portions of this research were presented at the Quinquennial meeting of the British Psychological Society (2005, Manchester, UK). The comments of Peter Clarke, Peter Martin, Gilbert MacKay and anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowledged.

References (49)

  • M.T.G. Pain et al.

    Risk taking in sport

    Lancet

    (2005)
  • M. Powell et al.

    Gender differences in risk behavior in financial decision making: An experimental analysis

    Journal of Economic Psychology

    (1997)
  • E. Slanger et al.

    Motivation and disinhibition in high risk sports: Sensation seeking and self-efficacy

    Journal of Research in Personality

    (1997)
  • C. Turner et al.

    Injury and risk-taking behaviour—A systematic review

    Accident Analysis and Prevention

    (2004)
  • J.A. Ungemack

    Patterns of personal health practice—Men and women in the United States

    American Journal of Preventive Medicine

    (1994)
  • A. Bandura

    Self-efficacy: The exercise of control

    (1997)
  • A. Bowling

    Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality

    Journal of Public Health

    (2005)
  • Participation statistics

    (2006)
  • E.B. Brody et al.

    Generalization of self-efficacy to a continuum of stressors upon mastery of a high-risk sport skill

    Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

    (1988)
  • J.P. Byrnes et al.

    Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1999)
  • D. Clarke

    Impulsiveness, locus of control, motivation and problem gambling

    Journal of Gambling Studies

    (2004)
  • P.T. Costa et al.

    Revised NEO personality inventory: Professional manual

    (1992)
  • E. Engelberg

    The perception of self-efficacy in coping with economic risks among young adults: An application of psychological theory and research

    International Journal of Consumer Studies

    (2007)
  • A.W. Ewert

    Playing the edge: Motivation and risk taking in a high-altitude wildernesslike environment

    Environment and Behavior

    (1994)
  • Cited by (121)

    • Personality, aggression, sensation seeking, and hormonal responses to challenge in Russian alpinists and special operation forces

      2021, Personality and Individual Differences
      Citation Excerpt :

      Our findings contradict those reported in Llewelyn and Sanchez, although it should be noted that we did not collect information about self-efficacy. Llewelyn and Sanchez (2008) state that the link between conscientiousness and domain-specific risk-taking may reflect the importance of being mindful about the influence of one's risk-orientation on others. We found that in predicting group membership (alpinist vs. Special Forces), conscientiousness was one of the significant dimensions, with Special Forces scoring higher (and hostility correlating negatively with conscientiousness in Special Forces only).

    • BMX RACE: PSYCHOSOCIAL PROFILE OF PERFORMANCE-ORIENTED ATHLETES

      2024, Journal of Sport and Health Research
    • Personality Variables and Risk Behaviours: A Perspective through Extreme Mountain Sports

      2023, Revista de Psicologia Aplicada al Deporte y al Ejercicio Fisico
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text