Who Takes Risks in High-Risk Sport?: The Role of Alexithymia

Abstract

People who have difficulty identifying and describing their emotions are more likely to seek out the experience of emotions in the high-risk domain. This is because the high-risk domain provides the experience of more easily identifiable emotions (e.g., fear). However, the continued search for intense emotion may lead such individuals to take further risks within this domain, which, in turn, would lead to a greater likelihood of experiencing accidents. Across three studies, we provide the first evidence in support of this view. In Study 1 (n = 762), alexithymia was associated with greater risk taking and a greater propensity to experience accidents and close calls. In Study 2 (n = 332) and Study 3 (n = 356), additional bootstrapped mediation models confirmed these relationships. The predictive role of alexithymia remained significant when controlling for sensation seeking (Study 1) and anhedonia (Study 2 and Study 3). We discuss the practical implications of the present model as they pertain to minimizing accidents and close calls in the high-risk domain.

Structural validation of three German versions of behavioral and motivational scales in high-risk sports

“…A good model fit was confirmed in varying samples (Barlow et al, 2015). Moderate correlations between DRT and Accidents (r = 0.31-0.54) and Close Calls (r = 0.52-0.64) were shown.…”

“…The ACCSI (Barlow et al, 2015) is a sixitem, two-factor inventory asking about experienced accidents (three items) and close calls (three items) on a seven-point Likert scale from one (never) to seven (always). A good model fit was confirmed in varying samples (Barlow et al, 2015).…”

“…Suggesting that sensation seeking is the single panoptic explanation for voluntary engagement in sports as diverse as Himalayan mountaineering (e.g., extended duration, long periods of boredom, physically painful) and skydiving (e.g., very limited duration, characterized by thrilling enjoyable sensations) seems overly simplistic and several studies have shown that the motives for participation in high-risk sport are more varied than this (Barlow et al, 2015;Barlow, Woodman, & Hardy, 2013;Castanier, Le Scanff, & Woodman, 2010;Castanier, Le Scanff, & Woodman, 2011;Frühauf, Hardy, Pfoestl, Hoellen, & Kopp, 2017;Kerr & Houge Mackenzie, 2012;Lafollie & Le Scanff, 2007;Woodman et al, 2013;Woodman, Hardy, Barlow, & Le Scanff, 2010;Woodman, Huggins, Le Scanff, & Cazenave, 2009). A number of qualitative studies have uncovered additional and alternative motives for participation in high-risk sports (e.g., emotion regulation, agency, challenge, nature) (Brymer, 2010;Brymer & Gray, 2010;Frühauf et al, 2017;Kerr & Houge Mackenzie, 2012;Willig, 2008;Woodman et al, 2010).…”

“…Nevertheless, the objective risk of the activity is undeniable, which is underlined by the higher rates of both acci- (Barlow et al, 2015;Gosteli et al, 2016). To contribute towards more safety in high-risk sports two further aspects have to be taken into account, namely objective risks and participants' behavior.…”

“…Thus, it is important to quantify accidents and close calls and relate them to participants' behaviors. This can be done by using the Accidents and Close Calls in Sports Inventory (ACCSI; Barlow et al, 2015). Research showed that accidents and close calls were positively correlated to DRT and negatively to PB (Barlow et al, 2015).…”