International Journal of Yogic, Human Movement and Sports Sciences 2018; 3(1): 28-30

ISSN: 2456-4419
Impact Factor: (RJIF): 5.18
Yoga 2018; 3(1): 28-30 A comparative study of intelligence among the sports
© 2018 Yoga
www.theyogicjournal.com person of different semi-content games
Received: 11-11-2017
Accepted: 13-12-2017

Mahesh Kumar
Mahesh Kumar
C.R.M. Jat. College, Hisar,
Haryana, India Abstract
A study was undertaken with an objective to find out the intelligence level among the semi-contact game
sportspersons. A total number of 200 (100 male and 100m female) players of semi-contact games like
Football, Kho-Kho, Handball and Basketball of Haryana state who participated at National and Inter
University level were selected as a sample of present study. In this study, it was found that female players
of semi-contact games were having high intelligence level as compare to their male players. In the
present study it was also discovered that Handball and Football players were found more intelligent when
compared with the Kho-Kho and Basketball players.

Keywords: Intelligence, semi-contact games, Football, Kho-Kho, Handball, Basketball.

Introduction
In the present level of cut throat competition in sports coaches and physical educators have
become more conscious and concerned about the psychological and sociological aspects of
sports rather than nearly physiological fitness and skill in the various activities. They realized
that psychological and sociological characteristics of the participants contribute more toward
their success than mere physical fitness. Kroll (1964) [8] emphasized saying that the players do
not play with their bodies alone but they use various mental process side by side. Hall (1908)
[4]
reiterated that physical education is not an end in itself but it is for the sake of mental and
moral culture. Intelligence in a human is considered multidimensional. Psychologist like
Thorndike (1928), Thurstone (1938), Cattell (1941, 1971) Vernon (1971), Carroll (1993) and
Gardner 91983) in the field of psychology believed and assessed that human has multiple
kinds of intelligence (Kamlesh, 2011 [6]; Pal et al., 2004 [9]; Cohen and Swerdlik, 2002 and
Kaufman, 2011) and when these are identified with the individual then we can deal with them
accordingly to the type of intelligence they possess (Badr and Radwan, 2010) [10]. Gardner
(1985) [3] said that Athletic intelligence is the capacity to use your whole boy as parts of the
body to solve problem, make something or put on some kind of production. Intelligence is
considered a major factor for achieving the peak in the field of sports. It is the main
psychological factor which effect the elite performance of an athlete. The researchers are
making an effort to find out the specific nature of intelligence among the sportspersons.
Therefore, the present study was carried out with the following objectives:
1. To find out whether there was any difference in Intelligence level among the sports
persons of different semi-constant games.
2. To find out whether there was any difference in Intelligence level between male and
female players of different semi-contact games.

Materials and Methods

Sampling
In the present study, multistage sampling plan in which stratified random sampling technique
and simple random sampling technique were used for selecting the samples. The present
investigation was conducted on a total of 200 sportspersons of Haryana State, who had
Correspondence
Mahesh Kumar
participated at National and Inter University level tournaments in semi-contact games like
C.R.M. Jat. College, Hisar, Football, Kho-Kho, Handball, Basketball. The subjects were in the age group of 18-25 years.
Haryana, India This group was further divided into two sub-categories having 100 males and 100 females
~ 28 ~
International Journal of Yogic, Human Movement and Sports Sciences

each. The selection of tools was governed by the semi-contact games were found more intelligent as compare
consideration of their (i) availability (ii) suitability to the to their male players.
sample (iii) reliability and validity. Keeping in view these
consideration, "The group test of General Mental Ability" Table 3: Mean scores on intelligence in different semi-contact
(Jalota, 1976) [5] was used in Hindi version to measure the games (male and female players combined)
intelligence level of sportepersons. Football Handball Kho-Kho Basketball C.D.
55.82 55.36 48.20 47.70 4.59
Collection of data and administration of tests
In order to collect the requisite data sampled the entire Table 3 shows that for intelligence level in semi-contact
population and decided the appropriate tools to measure the games the mean values of Football and Handball players is
attributes concerned and finally to administer tools on the significantly higher than the mean value of Kho-Kho and
sample were selected. The requisite data was then collected Basketball players. But there is no significant different in
and filled in prescribed questionnaires. After selecting the between the mean values of Football and Handball,
sample of the study and before conducting the tests, the Basketball and Kho-Kho players.
purpose of testing and technique to be employed in the study
of the subjects and all possible doubts were cleared. In this Table 4: Mean scores on intelligence for male and female players of
study questionnaire method was used. The questionnaire was semi-contact games
administered to all the subjects in accordance with the
Kho-Kho Handball Basketball Football C.D.
instructions laid down in the manual and under the direct
Male 47.04 53.88 44.12 51.48 6.50
supervision of the investigator. Female 49.36 56.84 51.28 60.16

Statistical procedures Table 4 reveals that the mean scores on intelligence for the
Keeping in view, the objectives as well as design of the study, female players of Kho-Kho and Handball has no significant
the appropriate statistical techniques were used to analyse the difference as compared to their female players in their
data. respective games.
It also indicates that the mean values of intelligence level of
Results and Discussion female players Football and Basketball games have a
significantly higher difference than that men players in their
Table 1: Analysis of variance for the data on intelligence in semi-
contact games.
respective games.

Source D.F. S.S. M.S. F-ratio Conclusion

Sex 1 1393.92 1393.92 10.14** It was found that in semi-contact games male players have
Semi-contact games 3 2930-02 976.67 7.10* less intelligence level than that of female players. It was also
Interaction 3 365.48 121.83 0.89 found that Handball and Football players have higher
Error 192 26406.00 137.53 intelligence level than that of Kho-Kho and Basketball
Total 199 31095.42
players. In this study it was found that in male section of
**significant at 0.01 level, *Significant at 0.05 level
F0.1 (1, 192) = 6.76, F0.5 (1, 192) = 3.89, F0.1 (3, 192) = 3.88, F0.5 (3,
semi-contact games Handball and Football players have high
192) = 2.65 intelligence level than that of Basketball players. It was also
found that Handball players have more intelligence level than
Table 1 reveals that F-ratio (10.44) of intelligence level in the Kho-Kho players. In female section it was found that
semi-contact games for sex is more than the table value of F Football and Handball players have high intelligence level as
(6.76) with (1.192) d.f. at 0.01 level. It shows that there is a compared to Kho-Kho players. It was also found that Football
very high significant difference in intelligence level among players have more intelligence level than that of Basketball
the sportsmen and sportswomen of contact games. players. It have found that male and female players of the
From Table 1, it can be inferred that F-ratio (7.10) of Kho-Kho and Handball have the same intelligence level. But
intelligence level in semi-contact games is more than the table the female players of basketball and Football have higher
value of F (3.88) with (3.192) d.f. at 0.01 level. It shows that intelligence level than their male players.
there is a significant difference in intelligence level among the
players of different contact games. References
Tale 1 shows that F-ratio (0.89) of intelligence level in semi- 1. Badr NM, Radwan L. Building up sports IQ in Handball
contact games for interaction is less than the table value of F and its relation with psychological fitness. Retrieved on
(2.65) with (3.192) d.f. at 0.05 level, therefore, there is no 11 August, 2011 from http://idosi.org/wiss/3(S)
significant difference in interaction (Sex × semi-contact 10/132.pdf, 2010.
games) of different sports group in semi-contact game 2. Cohen RJ, Swerblik ME. Psychological Testing and
players. Assessment: An Introduction to Test and Measurement
5th Ed. McGraw Hill Companies Inc., U.S.A, 2002.
Table 2: Mean scores on intelligence for male and female players in 3. Gardner. In Bruce A. Marlowe, Alan, S. Conestrari
semi-contact games (sports combined) (2006). Educational psychology in context: Readings for
future teacher. Retrieved from http://books-google.co.in,
Female Male C.D.
1985.
54.41 49.13 3.25
4. Hall GS. Physical Education in Colleges. Report of the
National Education Association, Chicago University of
From Table 2, it can be seen that mean difference of male and
Chicago Press, 1908.
female on intelligence data is more than the critical
5. Jalota S. The group general Mental Ability Test
difference. So, it may be concluded that sportswomen of
(GMAT), The Phycho-Centre, New Delhi, 1976.
~ 29 ~
International Journal of Yogic, Human Movement and Sports Sciences

6. Kamlesh ML. Psychology in Physical Education and

sports. Khel Sahitya Kendra Publishers, New Delhi,
2011.
7. Kaufman JC, Kaufman SB, Plucker AJ. Contemporary
Theories of Intelligence of the Oxford Handbook of
Cognitive Psychology. Retrieved on 6th Sep. 2010 from
http://www.scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/06/Kaufman-Kaufman-Plucker-in-
press.pdf, 2011.
8. Kroll W. Sixteen personality factor profiles of collegiate
wrestlers. Research Quarterly. 1964; 30:49-57.
9. Pal HR, Pal A, Tourani P. Theories of Intelligence.
Retrieved on 5th Sep. 2010 from
http://www.bhel.com/dynamic_files/press_files/pdf/pdf_
14-Mar-2005.pdf, 2004.

~ 30 ~