I or We? How Self-Categorization Shapes Decision-Making in Team Sports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: According to the Social Identity Approach, self-categorization influences how individuals define themselves, either as individuals or as members of a group, thereby affecting performance outcomes.To deepen our understanding of social identity's role, we conducted an experiment to examine its impact on a critical objective performance determinant: decisionmaking.Method: Ten professional basketball players viewed 14 immersive video clips twice, under two conditions: (a) personal identity and (b) social identity, with randomized conditions and clip orders.Upon each clip's conclusion, participants mimed and verbalized their decision as in a real game.In the personal identity condition, they were instructed to compete individually and make decisions that would maximize their own performance in this type of match situation.In the social identity condition, they were instructed to compete on behalf of their team and make decisions that would optimize team performance.To strengthen self-categorization, additional induction strategies were used, including image projections, team-specific jerseys, and tailored questionnaires.The data were analyzed using generalized linear models.Results: The analysis of 270 decisions revealed that players shot significantly more in the personal identity condition and passed more in the social identity condition.Reaction times also differed between conditions, but only for the drive decision.Discussion: These findings contribute to a growing body of research highlighting the influence of psychosocial factors on decision-making in team sports.They suggest that social identity can shape athletes' choices, underscoring the importance of integrating social and psychological dimensions into models of decision-making. HIGHLIGHTS• Self-categorization influences decision-making in team sports.• Players shoot more in the personal identity condition and pass more in the social identity condition.• This study provides objective evidence that self-categorization impact performance factors.• Individual differences exist, with some individuals exhibiting significantly reduced responsiveness to social identity effects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".