Reversal theory: A suggested way forward for an improved

understanding of interpersonal relationships in sport

David J. Shepherd
a,
*
, B. Lee
a
, John H. Kerr
b
a
Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
b
Faculty of Health and Sport Sciences, Kokushikan University, Tokyo, Japan
Received 1 June 2004; received in revised form 1 May 2005; accepted 1 August 2005
Available online 9 November 2005
Abstract
Objectives: To present a new methodological framework for the exploration of interpersonal relationships in sport.
Method: Analytical researchreview of reversal theory including, the theoretical structure, application to
relationship issues, and existing empirical studies.
Results: The following directions for future research were identied: (a) the role of reversal theory as an integrative
framework from which interpersonal relationships can be examined from a phenomenological perspective; (b) the
examination of interpersonal relationships from a dominance level; (c) the examination of dyad interaction at a
state level, exploring the moment to moment effect one individual has on the metamotivational experience of
another; (d) providing a framework from which an individuals reversal inhibitions or inappropriate strategies can
be examined; (e) considering an alternative general framework of applied practice and intervention strategies.
Conclusions: There is a need to examine the efcacy of theory, which encompasses both the experience of the
individual and the interaction between the dyad. Reversal theory has the potential to provide a comprehensive frame-
work fromwhich interpersonal relationships can be examined insport. Specic areas for future researchare identied.
q2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Reversal theory; Athletecoach relationship; Interpersonal issues; Theoretical issues
The need for theory in the study of interpersonal relationships
Within the last 10 years, several researchers involved in the study of interpersonal and social
relationships in general have called for the use of theoretical frameworks that are able to assimilate the
Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157
www.elsevier.com/locate/psychsport
1469-0292/$ - see front matter q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2005.08.003
* Corresponding author. Address: Admissions Department, United World College of S.E. Asia, 1207, Dover Road, Singapore,
Singapore 139654.
E-mail address: dsh@uwcsea.edu.sg (D.J. Shepherd).
knowledge gained to date (Aron & Aron, 1995; Berscheid, 1995, & Fincham, 1995). For example,
Berscheid (1995) proffered the view that, while grand theories have not always fared well in general
psychology, .the study of interpersonal relationships might prot from the development of a grand
theory of relationships (p. 530). Rook (1995) stated that calls for more descriptive research do not
contradict calls for theory development, however, to the extent that the descriptive work helps to ground
and inform the theoretical work (p. 603). This is a position supported by Sarason, Sarason, and Pierce
(1995): We believe that theory is important because it forces us to be as explicit as possible, helps us
organize our thinking and aids us in conducting research (p. 617). In sport psychology, Carron and
Hausenblas (1998) highlighted the need for the use of conceptual frameworks to explain relationships in
sports teams. They concluded that a conceptual framework does allow a complex area to be studied,
allows specic assumptions to be identied, and helps to clarify what is and is not known about a
phenomena). Thus, an important priority for advancing the understanding of interpersonal relationships
in sport and related contexts is to identify a theoretical or conceptual framework that would facilitate a
deeper understanding of the relationships involved. As Aron and Aron (1995) stated relationship theory
could involve an understanding of what moves people to do what they do and at the same time considers
how they feel and think about it (p. 560).
Such a theory would need to be able to place the individual experience of the relationship actors
concerned (e.g. coach, athletes, parents) at the centre of the process, rather than using a reductionist,
construct-based approach. It must take account of the individuals perceptions of the experience, account
for the emotional affect, and explain the frequent inconsistencies in behavioural responses. One general
psychological theory that can achieve this objective is reversal theory (Apter, 1982, & 2001). To date, it
has largely been absent from the sport psychology literature on interpersonal relationships in sport, even
though it has featured in other sport and exercise topics. For example, previous reversal theory research
using both quantitative and qualitative methods has focused on studying elite performance in sport
(e.g. mens international slalom canoeing, Males & Kerr, 1996, & Males, Kerr, & Gerkovich, 1998; elite
male golfers, Purcell, 1999; top-level rugby players, Wilson & Kerr, 1999; an elite male javelin thrower,
Legrand & LeScanff, 2003; women hockey players at an Olympic qualifying tournament, Kerr, Wilson,
Bowling, & Sheahan, 2004), and the acute effects of exercise on affect (e.g. Kerr & Kuk, 2001; Kerr &
van den Wollenberg, 1997, & Kerr & Vlaswinkel, 1993).
This paper argues that reversal theory (Apter, 1982, 2001) has the potential to provide an improved
understanding of interpersonal relationships in sport by extending previous theoretical developments
and providing a systematic framework for future research. The following sections will focus on the
efcacy of reversal theory for exploring interpersonal relationships in sport.
What is reversal theory?
The basic idea of psychological reversals in reversal theory originally arose from reections on child
guidance work carried out by Dr Ken Smith, a child psychiatrist, and Apter in the late 1970s in England.
Apter (1982), helped by his background in cybernetics, developed the original ideas into a full-edged
psychological theory over the years (Apter, 2001). To date, the theory has generated over a dozen books
and numerous research studies and published papers from virtually all areas of psychology.
Reversal theory is based on structural phenomenology and emphasizes the manner in which, for
example, an athlete interprets and structures his or her own motivation and emotion. According to the
theory, this experience is based on the interactions of a number of pairs of mental or metamotivational
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 144
states. These pairs of states exist together as alternative stable states within bistable systems and people
reverse between states on a relatively frequent basis. There are four pairs of metamotivational states,
(telicparatelic, negativisticconformist, masterysympathy and auticalloic states). The characteristics
of the different states are summarized in Table 1. The metamotivational states in the telicparatelic and
negativisticconformist pairs are known as the somatic states and are concerned with an individuals
interpretation of felt arousal. The states in the masterysympathy and auticalloic pairs are known as
transactional states. An important variable for the transactional states is felt transactional outcome,
which is the degree to which an athlete feels him or herself to be gaining or losing in a transaction or
exchange with others.
These four states are considered as the most important in the reversal theory approach to interpersonal
relationships. For example, a member of a volleyball team may be in the sympathy state when she feels
harmony and unity with other team members. A specialist place-kicker in American football may be in
the autic state when he is more concerned with his personal success rate than his teams success. Finally,
a coach in the alloic state may emphasize closely with her team, enjoying their successes and feeling
dejected by their defeats. Further, in reversal theory terms, interpersonal relationships in sport between,
for example, a coach and athlete, are dependent on: (a) the coach and athletes experience of transactions
between them (e.g. how they pay attention to each other, verbal communication, gestures and body
language)associated with masterysympathy metamotivation; and (b) the coach and athletes
experience of the relationship itself (e.g. formal or intimate, open or closed, democratic or
undemocratic)associated with auticalloic metamotivation.
Table 1
The characteristics of the four pairs of metamotivational states in reversal theory
Telic 5 Paratelic
Arousal-avoiding Arousal-seeking
Goal-oriented Sensation-oriented
Serious-minded Playful
Future-oriented Present-oriented
Planning ahead Spontaneous
Prefer important activity Prefer unimportant activity
Attempt to complete activity Attempt to prolong activity
Conformist 5 Negativistic
Desire to comply with rules Desire to break rules
Compliant Rebellious
Cooperative Stubborn
Agreeable Angry
Mastery 5 Sympathy
Willingness to compete Willingness to cooperate
Desire for control Desire for harmony/unity
Focus on toughness and strength Focus on tenderness and sensitivity
Autic 5 Alloic
Concern with self Concern with other(s)
Desire to gain Desire to give
Suffering loss unpleasant Suffering loss pleasant
Not identifying with other(s) Identifying with other(s)
Egoistic Altruistic
Focus on own feelings Focus on feelings of others
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 145
Also posited within reversal theory, is the notion that although some states may be less salient than
others, one of each pair of states is operative at any one time. This gives rise to changing sequences of
metamotivational state combinations (e.g. paratelicnegativisticauticmastery) over time. In addition,
people are likely to vary in the amount of time they spend in each state and each individual will have a
degree of internal bias towards one or other of each pair of states. This is known as metamotivational
dominance, and different types of metamotivational dominance form the basis of an athletes overall
motivational style. Reversal theory suggests that dominance proles may change over time and have a
developmental link (e.g. children tend to be more paratelic dominant than adults).
In addition, there are thought to be certain inducing agents that are likely to provoke reversals such as
events in the sport environment leading to contingent reversals: (a) frustration (when the needs of an
athlete in a particular metamotivational state are not being met); and (b) satiation (the longer an athlete
remains in a metamotivational state, the more likely it is that a reversal to another state will occur).
Different combinations of the somatic and transactional metamotivational states result in the possible
experience of 16 primary emotions. For each category, there are four pleasant and four unpleasant
emotions. The somatic emotions are pleasant: relaxation, excitement, placidity, and provocativeness;
unpleasant: anxiety, boredom, anger, and sullenness. The transactional emotions are pleasant: pride,
gratitude, modesty, and virtue, unpleasant: humiliation, resentment, shame, and guilt. This conceptual
arrangement provides a balanced, broad and orderly pattern of emotional experience (see Table 2).
Reversal theory also incorporates the concept of stress. In the theory there are two types of stress.
Stress caused by a mismatch in levels of felt and preferred levels of arousal or transactional outcome, is
known as tension stress, is reected in the experience of unpleasant emotions. Tension stress is thought
to arise from internal somatic or bodily sources and from external (to an athlete/coach) factors. When
tension stress occurs it produces effort stress, as the athlete tries to initiate some form of compensatory
coping behaviour aimed at reducing tension stress and the unpleasant emotions. When problems in
interpersonal relationships occur transactional tension stress is likely to result and, where it is found to
exist, point to negative aspects, or even a breakdown, in those relationships. The athletes perception is
primarily that they have somehow lost out (as opposed to gained) in his or her interactions with, for
example, coach or parent. When this perception of losing or negative outcome occurs, transactional
tension stress is experienced as one of four unpleasant emotions: humiliation (auticmastery);
resentment (auticsympathy); shame (alloicmastery); and guilt (alloicsympathy).
Table 2
Somatic and transactional state combinations and the resulting 16 primary emotions
State combination Pleasant Unpleasant
Somatic emotions
Telicconformity Relaxation Anxiety
Telicnegativism Placidity Anger
Paratelicconformity Excitement Boredom
Paratelicnegativism Provocativeness Sullenness
Transactional emotions
Auticmastery Pride Humiliation
Auticsympathy Gratitude Resentment
Alloicmastery Modesty Shame
Alloicsympathy Virtue Guilt
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 146
Although the description of reversal theory given above is brief (see, Apter, 1982, 1989, & 2001 for
detailed descriptions of reversal theory; Kerr, 1997, & 1999 for its applications to understanding
motivation, emotion and personality), it provides the basic components of a framework as a medium to
study of interpersonal relationships
Reversal theory and interpersonal relationships
The reversal theory framework has direct implications for understanding the processes involved in
interpersonal relationships in sport. These would include both coachathlete relationships where the
athlete is performing in an individual sport, as well as coachathlete and athleteathlete relationships in
team sports, in addition to athleteparent and athletesignicant other relationships. In reversal theory
terms, a psychologically healthy relationship could be described as one which allows both relationship
parties, for example, an athlete and parent to: (a) experience the full palette of metamotivational states on
a regular basis and not get stuck in any one state for prolonged periods; (b) experience the appropriate
states at the appropriate times, and (c) display appropriate interactions within each state. If the athlete
and parent can develop a metamotivationally diverse and exible relationship that allows them to
experience the above then it is likely that they develop a successful and rewarding relationship.
However, problems in relationships can result from social interactions that are characterised by
incompatible states, dominances (Lafreniere, Ledgerwood, & Murgatroyd, 2001). The following
sections explore specic examples of interpersonal problems using reversal theory.
Incompatible dominances
The innate imbalance in the preference for one state is known as dominance. It is not, however, a xed
trait dimension. Metamotivational inexibility and/or incompatibility in terms of dominance can lead to
interpersonal problems. For example, conict may result between a telic dominant basketball coach and
a paratelic dominant player, where the coach (because of his highly telic orientation) perceives the
player as not focusing, and not taking a particular session, or training in general seriously. The coach
would experience increased felt arousal, as they perceived their goals were not being met, and
experience this as tension stress in the form of anxiety. This is supported in developmental research
(Ruch, 1994, & Tacon & Abner, 1993) where research suggests that telic dominance increases with age,
a factor that may have implications for adult coaches who work with children or adolescent athletes.
The other three pairs of metamotivational states pose similar conict potentials, where a signicant
disparity exists between the coach and athlete in terms of metamotivational dominance. Tacon and
Abner (1993) used the Negativism Dominance Scale (McDermott, 1988a, & 1988b) with 1400
Canadians aged 2565. The participant cohort was also representative of a broad social and economic
mix. The authors noted that negativism declined with age, with proactive negativism being more
prevalent in poorer socioeconomic groups. As sport is often characterised as being highly structured in
terms of explicit rules and a plethora of subtle expectations or etiquette, there is clearly the potential for
conict between a highly conformist coach and a more rebellious adolescent athlete, or visa versa.
Anecdotal examples of this could relate to athletes such as Dennis Rodman (basketball) who appeared to
regularly enjoy breaking the rules and social expectations of the game. This type of behaviour would
clearly present a challenge to many coaches.
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 147
The two transactional states (auticalloic and masterysympathy) are by denition concerned with
perceived loss or gain in a social encounter. Incompatibilities here have clear implications for the
efcacy of any relationship. An overly auticmastery coach would probably be described as selsh, and
of using his/her athletes for personal gain (Ryan, 1996). Parents with this bias could be seen as living
their lives through the achievements of their children and dominating the decision making process to
serve their needs as a priority; examples of this exist in womens tennis as reported in Kerr (1997).
Reversal theory suggests that, to meet the psychological and emotional needs of athletes, coaches and
parents will frequently need to be in the alloicsympathy state if the athlete is to perceive him or herself
at the centre of the process rather being used as a pawn in the ambitions of others.
Disparities in metamotivational dominance can cause problems because the level of the felt variable is
incompatible with the level required to allow a positive emotion to be experienced, therefore generating
tension stress. If a signicant other is deemed responsible for this, relationship dissatisfaction is likely.
However, as metamotivational states do not operate in isolation, we should really consider an individual
as having an overall metamotivational dominance prole. This will reect an individuals bias across all
four metamotivational states. Reversal theory posits that in addition to individuals having a dominance
prole within a state, they may also experience a bias across states, known as salience. In sport, Kerr
(2001) illustrates the potential effect of a particular dominance prole when describing the case of
Mayuki, a Japanese swimmer who was forced out of competitive swimming by her male coachs
extreme telicauticmastery orientation.
He [coach] told her that studying was unimportant and that she should continue training and
competing. .Mayuki felt that she could not trust her coach and decided to work [study] and plan
towards her future. She passed the high school entrance examination and was happy with her success.
However, her performance had deteriorated and, when her times showed no signs of improving, the
coach told her to quit so that he could concentrate on another swimmer (Kerr, 2001, p. 111).
A classic example of a coach who has an authoritative, single-minded approach and places winning
ahead of the athletes personal interests would be characterized by a telicauticmastery orientation
prole. Dominance research, as posited by reversal theory has considerable potential as a research
paradigmwhen investigating the coachathlete relationship. It builds on the early sport specic models of
coachathlete interpersonal dynamics froma personality approach (e.g. Hendry, 1969, &Lanning, 1979),
coach leadership approaches (e.g. Chelladurai, 1990, & Smoll & Smith, 1989). It also incorporates the
central ideas of more recent, broader theoretical perspectives of motivation that have recently become
more prevalent in relationship research in sport. In particular, goal perspective theory (Ames, 1992, &
Nicholls, 1984) has been employed by Duda and Balaguer (1999), to draw together elements of the
mediational model (Smoll & Smith, 1989) and the multidimensional model (Chelladurai, 1993, &
Chelladurai &Riemer, 1998). Similarly, Mageau and Vallerand (2003) have offered a motivational model
of the coachathlete relationship, based on cognitive evaluation theory (Deci &Ryan, 1980, &1985), and
the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Vallerand, 1997, 2000, & 2001).
More recently, a change in focus has underpinned the work of Jowett and colleagues (Jowett, 2003;
Jowett & Cockerill, 2002, & 2003; Jowett & Meek, 2000), who have dened the athletecoach
relationship as the situation in which coaches and athletes affective, cognitive, and behavioural
components are mutually and causally interconnected. Subsequently, the basic relationship components
or properties between the coach and the athlete were operationalised through the constructs of closeness,
commitment and complementarity (Jowett & Ntoumanis, 2004). Recent isolated attempts include
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 148
Wyllemans (2000) model and Poczwardowski, Barott, and Henschens (2002) attempt to emphasise the
bidirectional or reciprocal dynamics involved in interpersonal relationships.
If reversal theory is to provide an effective framework from which interpersonal relationships are
studied, it should consider such theoretical and conceptual approaches as these cited earlier. Although,
such incorporations are limited thus far, several authors have started to address some of the fundamental
differences from a reversal theory approach and other approaches (i.e. goal perspective theory: Svebak,
1999; cognitive theories of emotion and motivation: Apter, 2001). Overall, as new theoretical
approaches are employed in the study of relationship issues, it will be useful to contrast the respective
strengths of each approach.
In summary, reversal theory can and does build on the foundation developed by earlier approaches by
evaluating the more consistent elements of human experience in a considerably broader context. In
addition to incorporating the goal perspective of the athlete or coach (telic orientation), and the desire to
perform for the intrinsic pleasure of doing so (paratelic orientation), reversal theory encompasses an
individuals bias towards conformity (conformistnegativity), the degree to which they themselves are
the focus of their experience (auticalloic) and how they experience the process of competition
(masterysympathy). It does therefore provide a broader theoretical from which the more stable
dimensions of a relationship can be examined.
Incompatible states
Whilst reversal theory has much to offer the study of interpersonal relationships at a dominance level,
it is the potential of gaining a deeper understanding of relationship issues at a state level that is likely to
prove the most enlightening line of research. Most approaches to date have examined relationships at a
construct or dispositional level, implying consistency over time, and ignoring the moment-to-moment
experiences of the individuals. Reversal theory acknowledges that individuals are often inconsistent in
how they experience similar circumstances and situations over time. Thus, an individual with even a
strong dominance for one particular state will normally experience the opposing non-dominant state, for
at least some of the time. Apter and Heskin (2001) suggest, .it is this notion of the dynamic nature of
human experience that distinguishes reversal theory from any kind of trait theory (p. 89). This is not
only intuitive but also supported across several empirical studies (Apter & Svebak, 1986; Lafreniere,
1997, & Young, 1998).
Kerr (2001) highlights both qualitative and quantitative studies that support the view, .that athletes
will generally perform best with their preferred performance metamotivational state combination
operative. However, athletes should remain psychologically exible and be prepared to work with or
deal with reversals, which may occur at any time prior to or during performance (p. 86). The
implications are that an athlete needs to understand this state combination and the coach would be
advised to try and create a climate in which it is most likely to be found.
Reversal theory posits that an individuals metamotivational state cannot necessarily be predicted by
observing a persons behaviour, performance or interactions (Apter, 2001, p. 16). Potential mismatches
in metamotivational state are possible. For example, as the coach is often seen to be in a power position
in relation to an athlete, it is plausible that an athlete may consciously hide their true metamotivational
state if they perceive the coach may perceive it negatively.
The study of interpersonal relationships at a state level is clearly complex, however, the moment-to-
moment changes in the way an individual experiences social interaction do occur in reality and can have
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 149
signicant consequences for both satisfaction and performance. Reversal theory does provide a
theoretical framework from which these interactions can be explained and has validated a range of
psychometric inventories and qualitative research paradigms from which they can be studied.
Inappropriate strategies
Reversal theory has identied ve areas where an individual may experience metamotivational state
problems. The rst two, relating to structural disturbances between partner states; these have been
studied in the area of psychopathology: inappropriate reversals (Apter, 1989, & Murgatroyd & Apter
1986), and inhibited reversals (Murgatroyd & Apter, 1984). The remaining three (functional, temporal,
and socially inappropriate strategies) are posited to occur within a particular state and focus on
inappropriate strategies used by an individual to achieve satisfaction or avoid dissatisfaction within a
state (Apter, 1989, 1990; Braman, 1988, & 1995). None of these have received extensive research to
date, however, the reader is directed to Lafreniere, Ledgerwood, and Murgatroyd (2001), for a review of
the work conducted in the areas of psychopathology, therapy and counselling, and to Kerr (2001),
(p. 113) for a discussion of the implications for sport.
Interpersonal relationships in sport
The athletecoach relationship is dynamic, multifaceted and extremely complicated. Deep
understanding of human interaction cannot be fully appreciated by measuring general constructs
alone. Wylleman (2000) noted that the lack of research may be: (a) because the study of relationships as
a eld, does not t neatly into any specic disciple of psychology; (b) due to an over-reliance on coach-
centred research; (c) due to methodological complexities; and (d) because not only have most sport
psychologists focused heavily on developing athletes mental skills, .but almost no sport
psychological intervention technique has been developed for optimizing athletes interpersonal
functioning (p. 560). He suggests an alternative approach to relationship studies in sport that
.emphasizes the need for a phenomenological approach whereby interpersonal relationships are seen
to be determined by an individuals own view and understanding of self and environment as it takes
place now, rather than by predetermined responses to external events (Wylleman, 2000, p. 562).
Reversal theory provides a structure that incorporates all of these observations, and allows these research
questions to be empirically tested.
Central to reversal theory in understanding relationship issues is the notion that the metamotivational
state of one person can directly inuence the phenomenological experience of the other party, be that
positive neutral or negative. For example, an athletes behaviour may be a contingent event that triggers
a reversal in a coach; her response may in turn, trigger a further reversal in an athlete. A realistic scenario
of this could be a coach in a telicconformistauticmastery state who is getting frustrated with a laid
back provocative athlete who is exhibiting a more paratelicnegativisticauticmastery prole. If the
athlete suddenly gets hurt the coach is likely to reverse, feeling concern for the athlete (telicconformist
alloicsympathy state combination). This in turn may alter the experience for the athlete.
Both parties have some degree of control when they are the primary variables affecting each other.
However, one of the strengths of reversal theory is its ability to recognize that the relationship can be
signicantly complicated if external factors are affecting one of the individuals. For example, a coach
who has received news of signicant budget cuts may have reversed to a metamotivational prole that is
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 150
experienced by the athlete as distracted and not focused on their personal development. Athletes will
frequently be in the autic-mastery state combination, and need to perceive high levels of felt
transactional outcome to sustain the positive emotion of pride. An athlete in an autic state wants the
coaches attention, if this is not perceived to be the case, the athlete will experience low transactional
outcome and experience negative emotions of resentment or humiliation. This relates to the reversal
theory conceptualization of stress, where the positive or negative experience in a particular state depends
on the level of the felt variable associated with that state. It is unlikely that a harmonious relationship can
be maintained if either party attributes the other as a source of the stressor. Whilst the athlete may
employ coping strategies to deal with the imbalance (effort stress) to overcome a specic event, repeated
experiences might have serious consequences for the relationship and athlete performance.
Kerr (2001) reviews the case of Jenny, a successful, elite level acrobatic skier, who had previously
produced good results at world cup level, That year her World Cup results were extremely poor. She
became aware that the coach was paying a great deal of attention to an 18-year-old teammate, where
previously, as the newcomer, Jenny had been the centre of the coachs attention. Increasingly, she felt
the coach had lost interest in her and began to feel isolated (p. 100). Reversal theory would predict that
Jenny was experiencing tension stress (Martin & Svebak, 2001), and this would manifest itself in
negative emotions such as humiliation. As Kerr point out, Jennys perception of her relationship,
whether correct or not, would probably prompt other inappropriate reversals. Jenny was described as
being more goal-focussed at this time and experienced the high levels of felt arousal as anxiety. In
addition she displayed signs of reversing to the negativistic state as she started to complain about
judging, poor tournament organisation, and her own bad luck; this would be experienced as anger or
anxiety in reversal theory terms.
The example of Jenny highlights the power of reversal theory to explain theoretically how a coach can
affect the motivational experience of an athlete at a specic state level and over a period of time,
contributing to dissatisfaction, burn out or drop out. The explanation is oversimplied, however, it does
provide a useful starting point from which empirical research can be undertaken. An interesting
perspective on this is discussed in Kerr (2001), drawing on work by Braman (1996) on the efcacy of
reversal theory to explain burn out in sport, and the difference between that and drop out rates in sport.
Reversal theory research on interpersonal relationships
Whilst research using reversal theory as a theoretical framework to explain the structure and
dynamics of interpersonal relationships is in the early stages, several studies are worthy of note. Reversal
theory has been employed in the area of psychotherapy (Apter & Smith, 1979). Initially presented as a
new perspective, in the context of family dynamics, it was soon examined as a potential new approach to
the eld generally (Apter, 1990; Murgatroyd, 1988, & Murgatroyd & Apter, 1984). Murgatroyd (1988)
noted the dissatisfaction felt by many writers in this eld when he reviewed the current state of theory
that underpins psychotherapy. He argued that the theory of psychological reversals did meet the
requirements sought by researchers in that it provided a framework for a theoretically consistent eclectic
therapy, it is an integrative theory, and provides a framework to the practice of psychological helping.
Critical comment on the use of reversal theory has been limited (Dryden, 1984, & 1985; Scott, 1986;
Sollard, 1987, & Hart, 1987), leading Murgatroyd (1988) to conclude that, all critics suggest that the
approach shows promise, has merits or is worthy of further development (p. 71).
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 151
Additionally, Wilson and Wilson (1998, 1999) have examined a range of therapeutic relationship
issues in both married couples and the therapistclient relationship. The case study approach examined
potential conict in these specic dyads and offered a diagnosis and intervention strategy based on a
reversal theory framework. Interestingly, the authors note the similarities between a married couple and
the coachathlete relationship. Just as athletes respond favourably or unfavourably to conditions in their
environment based on previous experiences within that environment.couples are triggered to react in
either positive or negative ways of being to the relationship environment (Wilson & Wilson, 1997,
p. 50). OConnor (1992) conducted a series of empirical investigations that examined compatibility in
the motherchild relationship. OConnor concentrated on the telicparatelic and conformistnegativistic
metamotivational pairs in a dominance research paradigm. She examined whether problems of
compatibility arose when members of a dyad occupied different or similar mode dominances. Using the
Telic Dominance Scale (Murgatroyd, Rushton, Apter, & Ray, 1978), OConnor formed three groups of
mothers described as highly telic (nZ14), highly reversible (nZ14) and highly paratelic (nZ15). The
mothers were presented with vignettes of three ctitious girls; one for each of the identied groups. The
mothers were asked to rate their perceived level of compatibility with the description of each child.
OConnor reported that, as hypothesised, strongly telic mothers associated with strongly telic children
and that strongly paratelic mothers identied more favourably with strongly paratelic children. She did,
however, report an unexpected nding that mothers from all three groups felt more compatible with a
highly reversible child than any of the mode dominant children. This was attributed to the
accommodating nature of highly reversible individual who would, .not resist, frustrate or oppose
the other persons mode (p. 57). It was argued that highly reversible people are capable of acting in an
accommodating and skilled manner when presented with potentially conicting states. OConnor found
similar results when she employed the same protocol with the conformistnegativistic states, except that
the highly negativistic mothers did not report compatibility with the highly negativistic child. This was
seen as unsurprising as, the essence of the negativistic mode is to act against some requirement, even if
this requirement is to act negativistly (p. 71). This presents an interesting research paradigm, and one
that if expanded to cover the other metamotivational states, may provide a valuable insight into the
coachathlete relationship at a dominance level.
Reversal theory researchers have now validated a range of psychometric questionnaires and
established several valid protocols for qualitative investigations. As such the opportunities to undertake
a wide range of studies is now possible.
Practical implications of reversal theory for improving interpersonal relationships in sport
Apter and Carter (2001) have made a number of recommendations for improving interpersonal
aspects of organizations which are equally relevant to teams. Many coaches and teams over-emphasize
the serious and mastery states over the others and this may lead to interpersonal difculties over time.
However, every metamotivational state can make a unique and essential contribution to a motivationally
rich working environment. Apter and Carter (2001) stated,
Thus, among other things, the telic state in employees can contribute direction and focus; the paratelic
state, infectious enjoyment of the work; the conformist state, compliance with regulations and routines;
the negativistic state, needed criticism and innovation; the mastery state, control and professionalism;
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 152
the sympathy state, a friendly atmosphere; the autic state, personal responsibility and a willingness to
take the initiative; the alloic state, team spirit. (p. 256)
To enhance relationships and functioning, coaches and athletes need to be motivationally versatile
and able to reverse frequently between states and as the situation demands. In order to help team efforts
athletes need to learn how to express and satisfy each metamotivational state in ways that develop
constructive approaches to team functioning. Problems may arise from individuals who display a limited
range of metamotivational states and express these in negative ways (Apter & Carter, 2001).
According to reversal theory, if athletes, coaches (and, in some cases, signicant others in
relationships with athletes), could be encouraged to regularly experience the full range of
metamotivational states; try and experience the right states at the right times; and to engage in the
appropriate behaviour when in each state, interpersonal relationships in sport could be considerably
enhanced. Drawing on these observations Kerr (2001)suggests that reversal theory has a role to play
when establishing a framework for eclectic practice in sport psychology. In support of this claim Kerr
highlights research by Males (1995, 1996). The presenting problems of four athletes are discussed from a
reversal theory perspective, specically in terms of the individuals inappropriate reversals. The authors
provide an explanation of the intervention strategy used, and a description of the outcomes.
At a team level reversal theory could provide a rational for enhancing team climate by manipulating
environment to encourage certain metamotivational states (e.g., inducing paratelic to break boredom of
training, or allow athletes to enjoy the high arousal associated with high-level competition).
Empowering athletes by establishing an auticmastery state combination through the provision of
leadership opportunities, and involving athletes in the decision making process may also be fruitful.
Whilst reversals are theorised not to be under voluntary control certain environments are associated with
particular metamotivational states (Apter, 2001, p. 29). Future studies are required to establish the
efcacy of this proposal.
Future research directions
The use of reversal theory as a theoretical framework to underpin relationship research is clearly in its
infancy; however, it has much to offer to the eld. Future research opportunities are extensive although
several themes are seen as priorities. Calls for theory integration were evident in psychotherapy in the
1960s and 1970s, and similar calls are now being made in both the general and sport specic aspects of
interpersonal relationship research. Studies that examine the basic tenants of the different approaches
would clearly be useful. Reversal theory could also examine the stable aspects of human experience in
terms of metamotivational dominance. In particular, an extension to the work of OConnors (1992) on
dyad compatibility would appear interesting. This would extend the work currently conducted at a
construct or dispositional level. Examining individuals within a relationship, during specic events
(state level research), will also be of valuable. Whilst the research methodology will be challenging, the
moment-to-moment interactions between a coach and athlete or an athlete and athlete are clearly critical
to athletic success as measured by both performance outcome and relationship satisfaction.
Relationships characterised by incongruity could be examined from a reversal theory perspective that
focus on the type of strategies employed. Evaluating coaches reversal inhibitions, or inappropriate
reversals, and the strategies employed to achieve satisfaction in a particular mode may well provide
a more in-depth understanding of relationship issues. This could extend to athletes, parents and
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 153
signicant others. Finally, Kerr (2001) has suggested that reversal theory could be a useful framework
from which an applied practice framework could be established. It would add value in investigating the
efcacy of introducing reversal theory constructs as part of a coach and/or athlete training programme
and as a framework from which consultancy work could develop.
Concluding comments
Reversal theory is not a complete or closed theory, although its major tenants have stood the test of
continued review by those who use it (Apter, 2001). It is not monolithic, but it certainly is
comprehensive. It challenges oversimplied theoretical and methodological assumptions, and places the
phenomenological experience of an individual at the centre of the approach. It does provide an effective
framework for understanding the phenomenological meaning an individual gives to their experience,
and establishes a link between experience, emotions and behaviour, and central to its approach is its
ability to explain paradoxes in experience, and the changes we often experience, even in the most
familiar circumstances.
It is encouraging to note that in recent years, interest in the topic of interpersonal relationships in sport
has regained some momentum, after having somewhat lost its thrust for a period of time. Conceptual
models, empirical research studies (both quantitative and qualitative) have now increased in number and
diversity, and the application of theories and methodologies from other areas of psychology is beginning
to be used to good effect.
Reversal theory was offered, in the present paper, as an integrative theoretical framework for the study
of athletecoach, athleteathlete, and athletesignicant other (e.g. parent) relationships in sport. The
approach has a potential to make a valuable contribution to the study of interpersonal relationships as it
can explain relationship issues from a range of perspectives (e.g. dominance level and state level).
However, research using this framework is clearly in its infancy. Lafreniere et al. (2001) describe the use
of reversal theory in clinical psychology and psychiatry as, .a particularly ambitious one, because it
involves a new way of understanding and of structuring the eld that in many ways cuts across
traditional category systems (p. 263). A similar description could correspondingly apply to the use of
reversal theory in interpersonal relationship research.
References
Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals, motivational climate, and motivational process. In G. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport
and exercise (pp. 161176). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Apter, M. J. (1982). The experience of motivation: The theory of psychological reversals. London: Academic Press.
Apter, M. J. (1989). Reversal theory: Motivation, emotion and personality. London: Routledge.
Apter, M. J. (1990). Reversal theory: Clinical implications. Anuario de Psicologia, 44, 517.
Apter, M. J. (2001). Motivational styles in everyday life: A guide to reversal theory. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Apter, M. J., & Carter, S. (2001). Management and organizations. In M. J. Apter (Ed.), Motivational styles in everyday life: A
guide to reversal theory. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Apter, M. J., & Heskin, K. (2001). Basic research on reversal theory. In M. J. Apter (Ed.), Motivational styles in everyday life: A
guide to reversal theory. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 154
Apter, M. J., & Smith, K. C. P. (1979). Psychological reversals: Some new perspectives on the family and family
communication. Family Therapy, 6, 89100.
Apter, M. J., & Svebak, S. (1986). The EMG gradient as a reection of metamotivational state. Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology, 27, 209219.
Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (1995). Three suggestions for increased emphasis in the study of personal relationships. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 559562.
Berscheid, E. (1995). Help wanted: A grand theorist of interpersonal relationships, sociologist or anthropologist preferred.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 529533.
Braman, O. R. (1988). Oppositionalism: Clinical descriptions of six forms of telic self-negativism. In M. J. Apter, J. H. Kerr, &
M. P. Cowles (Eds.), Progress in reversal theory (pp. 213222). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Braman, O. R. (1995). The oppositional child. Charlotte, NC: Kidsrights.
Braman, O. R. (1996). The role of response satiation in overtraining and burnout in sports. Paper presented at the rst
international workshop on motivation and emotion in sport: Reversal theory, Ysukuba, Japan.
Carron, A. V., & Hausenblas, H. A. (1998). Group dynamics in sport (2nd ed.). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information
Technology.
Chelladurai, P. (1990). Leadership in sports: A review. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 21, 328354.
Chelladurai, P. (1993). Leadership. In R. N. Singer, M. Murphy, & L. K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook on research on sport
psychology (pp. 647671). New York: MacMillan.
Chelladurai, P., & Riemer, H. A. (1998). Measurement of leadership in sport. In J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and
exercise psychology measurement (pp. 213226). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information technology.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. Advances in experimental
social psychology, Vol. 13. New York: Academic Press pp. 3980.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New York: Plenum Press.
Dryden, W. (Ed.). (1984). Individual psychotherapy in Britain. London: Harper Row.
Dryden, W. (1985). A critique of leading approaches. In J. Norcross (Ed.), Handbook of eclectic psychotherapy. New York:
Bruner Mazel.
Duda, J. L., &Balaguer, I. (1999). Toward an integration of models of leadership with a contemporary theory. In R. Lidor, & M.
Bar-Eli (Eds.), Sport psychology: Linking theory and practice (pp. 213230). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information
Technology.
Fincham, F. D. (1995). From the orthogenic principle to the sh-scale model of omniscience: Advancing understanding of
personal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 523527.
Hart, J. (1987). Why not more phenomenology and less structure?. In J. Norcross (Ed.), Handbook of eclectic psychotherapy.
New York: Bruner Mazel.
Hendry, L. B. (1969). A personality study of highly successful and ideal swimming coaches. Research Quarterly, 40, 299305.
Jowett, S. (2003). When the honeymoon is over: A case study of the coachathlete dyad in crisis. The Sports Psychologist, 17,
446462.
Jowett, S., & Cockerill, I. M. (2002). Incompatibility in the coachathlete relationship. In I. M. Cockerill (Ed.), Solutions in
sport psychology (pp. 1631). London: Thomson Learning.
Jowett, S., & Cockerill, I. M. (2003). Olympic medalists perspective of the athletecoach relationship. Psychology of Sport and
Exercise, 4, 313331.
Jowett, S., & Meek, G. A. (2000). The coachathlete relationship in married couples: An exploratory content analysis. The
Sport Psychologist, 14, 157175.
Jowett, S., & Ntoumanis, N. (2004). The coachathlete relationship questionnaire (CART - Q): Development and initial
validation. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 14, 245257.
Kerr, J. H. (1997). Motivation and emotion in sport: Reversal theory. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Kerr, J. H. (Ed.). (1999). Experiencing sport: Reversal theory. Chichester, England: Wiley.
Kerr, J. H. (2001). Counselling athletes: Applying reversal theory. London: Routledge.
Kerr, J. H., & Kuk, G. (2001). The effects of high and low intensity exercise on emotions, stress and effort. Psychology of Sport
and Exercise, 2, 173186.
Kerr, J. H., & van den Wollenberg, E. (1997). High and low intensity exercise and psychological mood states. Psychology and
Health, 12, 603618.
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 155
Kerr, J. H., & Vlaswinkel, L. (1993). Self-reported mood and running under natural conditions. Work and Stress, 7, 161177.
Kerr, J. H., Wilson, G. V., Bowling, A., & Sheahan, J. P. (in press). Game outcome and elite Japanese womens eld hockey
players experience of emotions and stress. Psychology of Sport and Exercise.
Lafreniere, K. D. (1997). Paratelic dominance and the appraisal of stressful events. In S. Svebak, & M. J. Apter (Eds.), Stress
and health: A reversal theory perspective (pp. 3543). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
Lafreniere, K. D., Ledgerwood, D. M., & Murgatroyd, S. J. (2001). Psychopathology, therapy and counseling. In M. J. Apter
(Ed.), Motivational styles in everyday life: A guide to reversal theory. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Lanning, W. (1979). Coach and athlete personality interaction: A critical variable in athletic success. Journal of Sport
Psychology, 1, 262267.
Legrand, F., & LeScanff, C. (2003). Tensionstress, effortstress and mood proling with an elite javelin performer.
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 4, 429436.
Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coachathlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of Sports Sciences,
21, 883904.
Males, J. (1995). Helping athletes perform: Integrating reversal theory and psychosynthesis in applied sport psychology. Paper
presented at the seventh international conference on reversal theory, Melbourne.
Males, J. (1996). A comparison of pre-competitive mood and stress in elite male lacrosse and volleyball players. Paper
presented at the rst international workshop on motivation and emotion in sport: Reversal theory, Ysukuba, Japan.
Males, J. R., & Kerr, J. H. (1996). Stress, emotion and performance in elite slalom canoeists. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 1736.
Males, J. R., Males, J. H., & Gerkovich, M. M. (1998). Metamotivational states during canoe slalom competition: A qualitative
analysis using reversal theory. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 10, 185200.
Martin, R. A., & Svebak, S. (2001). Stress. In M. J. Apter (Ed.), Motivational styles in everyday life: A guide to reversal theory.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McDermott, M. R. (1988). Measuring rebelliousness: The development of the negativism dominance scale. In M. J. Apter, J. H.
Kerr, & M. P. Cowles (Eds.), Progress in reversal theory (pp. 297312). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
McDermott, M. R. (1988). Recognising rebelliousness: The ecological validity of the negativism dominance scale. In M. J.
Apter, J. H. Kerr, & M. P. Cowles (Eds.), Progress in reversal theory (pp. 313325). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Murgatroyd, S. (1988). Reversal theory and psychotherapy: A review. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 1, 5774.
Murgatroyd, S., & Apter, M. J. (1984). Eclectic psychotherapy: A structuralphenomenological approach. In W. Dryden (Ed.),
Individual psychotherapy in Britain (pp. 389414). London: Harper and Row.
Murgatroyd, S., & Apter, M. J. (1986). A structuralphenomenological approach to eclectic psychotherapy. In J. Norcross
(Ed.), Casebook of eclectic psychotherapy (pp. 260280). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Murgatroyd, S., Rushton, C., Apter, M. J., & Ray, C. (1978). The development of the telic dominance scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 42, 519528.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Conceptions of ability and achievement motivation. In R. Ames, & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on
motivation in education, Vol. 1 Student motivation. New York: Academic Press.
OConnor, P. A. (1992). Reversal theory and motherchild compatibility. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Tasmania, Australia.
Poczwardowski, A., Barott, J. E., & Henschen, K. P. (2002). The athlete and coach: Their relationship and its meaning. Results
of an interpretative study. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 33, 116140.
Purcell, I. P. (1999). Verbal protocols and structured interviews for motives, plans and decisions in golf. In J. H. Kerr (Ed.),
Experiencing sport: Reversal theory (pp. 69100). Chichester, England: Wiley.
Rook, K. S. (1995). Relationship research at the crossroads: Commentary on the special section. Journal of social and personal
relationships, 12, 521522.
Ruch, W. (1994). Temperament, eysencks PEN system, and humor-related traits. Humor, 7, 209244.
Ryan, J. (1996). Little girls in pretty boxes: The making and breaking of elite gymnasts and gure skaters. London: The
Womens Press.
Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., & Pierce, G. R. (1995). Social and personal relationships: Current issues, future directions.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 613619.
Scott, C. (1986). The theory of psychological reversals: A review and a critique. British Journal of Guidance Counselling,
13(2), 139146.
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 156
Smoll, F. L., & Smith, R. E. (1989). Leadership behaviors in sport: A theoretical model and research paradigm. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 19, 15221551.
Sollard, R. N. (1987). Is there truth in psychotherapeutic packaging? In J. Norcross (Ed.), Handbook of eclectic psychotherapy.
New York: Bruner Mazel.
Svebak, S. (1999). Links between motivational and biological factors in sport: Areview. In J. H. Kerr (Ed.), Experiencing sport:
Reversal theory (pp. 129151). Chichester, England: Wiley.
Tacon, P., & Abner, B. (1993). Normative and other data for the telic dominance and negativism dominance scales. In J. H.
Kerr, S. Murgatroyd, & M. J. Apter (Eds.), Advances in reversal theory (pp. 165176). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 29, 271360.
Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Deci and Ryans self-determination theory: A view from the hierarchical model of intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 312318.
Vallerand, R. J. (2001). A hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport and exercise. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.),
Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 263319). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Wilson, B. A., & Wilson, L. L. (1997). The multiple selves of the therapist. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 8(2), 7382.
Wilson, B. A., & Wilson, L. L. (1998). The desire to control others. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 9(2), 1526.
Wilson, B. A., & Wilson, L. L. (1999). Offense mechanisms in couples. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 10(2), 3148.
Wilson, G. V., & Kerr, J. H. (1999). Affective responses to success and failure: A study of winning and losing in rugby.
Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 8599.
Wylleman, P. (2000). Interpersonal relationships in sport. Uncharted territory in sport psychology research. International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 31, 555572.
Young, J. A. (1998). Professional tennis players in ow: Flow theory and reversal theory perspectives. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Faculty of Science, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
D.J. Shepherd et al. / Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7 (2006) 143157 157