Central Annals of Sports Medicine and Research

Cite this article: Losa Iglesias ME, Becerro de Bengoa Vallejo R, Rodriguez Vazquez R (2016) The Motivation of Spanish Ultramarathon Runners Sports Coach-ing: Peak Per formance (Goal Setting, Motivation, Skill Acquisition). Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072.

*Corresponding authorMarta E. Losa Iglesias, Department of Health Sciences Rey Juan Carlos, University, Avda. Atenas s/n- 28922-Alcorcon-Madrid-Spain, Tel: 34 616962413; Email:

Submitted: 22 March 2016

Accepted: 30 May 2016

Published: 31 May 2016

ISSN: 2379-0571

Copyright© 2016 Losa Iglesias et al.

OPEN ACCESS

Keywords•Motivation•Ultra runners•Sports•Endurance

Research Article

The Motivation of Spanish Ultramarathon Runners Sports Coaching: Peak Performance (Goal Setting, Motivation, Skill Acquisition)Marta Elena Losa Iglesias1*, Ricardo Becerro de Bengoa Vallejo2, and Rocío Rodriguez Vazquez1

1Department of Health Sciences Rey Juan Carlos , University, Spain2Department of Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain

Abstract

Challenges in ultramarathons are unique to other sporting events, and motivation is a psychological key element to maintain commitment and adherence. The aim of this study was to determine personal motivations and examine the associations between motivation and socio-demographic characteristics among Spanish ultramarathoners. We used the Spanish version of the Sport Motivation Scale (SMS) and variables such as age, sex, educational level, and body mass index (BMI) to analyze a sample of semi-professional ultramarathon runners. Our results show that motivation is high among this group, mainly subject to introjected regulation and intrinsic regulation in order to experience stimulation. We also found that motivation was greater in women than men.

INTRODUCTIONUltrarunning is devoted to covering the sport of long distance

running, also known as ultramarathoning. The standard definition is anything greater than a marathon, or 26.2 miles. However, the shortest standard distance that is considered an “ultra” is the 50 kilometer distance, or 31.07 miles. Other distances include the 50 mile, 100 mile, 100 kilometers, and a series of events that last for specified periods of time, such as six, twelve, twenty-four, and forty-eight hours, as well as six days [1]. However, a consensus on the definition of an ultramarathon does not exist [2].

The challenges of competing in ultramarathons are unique to other sporting events. Ultramarathon runners do not compete with anyone else; rather, they compete with themselves. It is a test of their courage, energy, endurance, and their limits. Ultramarathon runners are not only responding to a challenge, they need to prove that they are able to achieve their goals when running. Ultrarunning is a unique sport that not only gives the athlete the solitude of running, but also provides the camaraderie and companionship that is not seen in many disciplines of other sports [3]. In this sense [4] studied the psychological characteristics of ultramarathoners and found that they share a common mood profile: less tension, depression, fatigue, confusion, and more vigor compared with non-runners. Further,

they had a significant reduction in tension and vigor and an elevation in fatigue after the race [5].

Another psychological key element in the sport necessary to gain commitment and adherence is motivation [4]. This feature is the most important and immediate determinant of human behavior [6]; it wakes, gives energy, directs, and regulates [7], thus being a psychological mechanism that governs the direction, intensity, and persistence of behavior [8].

One area that differs between ultramarathoners and athletes of other sports might be the personality [9] and the different motivation for each sport. Studies even find differences between marathoners and ultramarathoners regarding expectations and values for participation in long distance races. Results reveal that marathon runners show higher values in general health orientation and recognition while ultramarathoners value higher in social weight concern, psychological health orientation, and motives concerning the meaning of life [10].

As there are few evidences that support this idea, the aim of our study was to determine the particular and special motivations of ultramarathon runners and to examine the association between ultramarathoners motivation and their socio-demographic characteristics using a representative sample of Spanish runners.

Central

Losa Iglesias et al. (2016)Email:

Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072 (2016) 2/8

METHODS

Design, setting and participants

A descriptive survey was administered to a simple randomized sample of semi-professional, men and women ultramarathon runners in Madrid, Spain who were enrolled in a gym that specialized in ultramarathon training. We generated a random sample from this population using Epidat 3.1 for Windows (Epidemiological Analysis from Tabulated Data; software developed for the government of Galicia, Spain, and the Pan American Health Organization). Inclusion criteria required that the participants were training for the Madrid 24-hour ultramarathon that was taking place concurrent with data collection. The final random sample consisted of 35 semi-professional ultramarathon runners.

The questionnaire was administered by researchers who were in contact with the runners´ coaches to solicit their approval and administer the instrument to participants in the gym. The athletes were informed of the purpose of the investigation and were informed that participation was voluntary and confidential. They were also reminded that there were no correct or incorrect answers and were asked to reply as honestly as possible. The researchers were present while the athletes responded to the questionnaire to provide any necessary support and verify correct completion of the questionnaire. Of the 35 semi-professional ultramarathon runners offered the survey, 32 completed them, yielding a response rate of 91.4%.

Data collection tools

We distributed two standardized questionnaires to all participants. The first questionnaire included socio-demographic questions regarding personal and professional characteristics (age, gender, academic level, job type, and years of sport practice). The second questionnaire was the Spanish validated version [11] of the SMS [12]. The SMS consists of 28 Items, divided into 7 subscales of 4 Items each, that assess 3 types of intrinsic motivation (IM): IM to knowledge (Items 2, 4, 23, and 27), IM to achievement (Items 8, 12, 15, and 20), and IM to stimulating experiences (Items 1, 13, 18, and 25); 3 types of extrinsic motivation: external regulation (Items 6, 10, 16, and 22), introjected regulation (Items 9, 14, 21, and 26), and identified regulation (Items 7, 11, 17, and 24); and amotivation (Items 3, 5, 19, and 28). Each answers were scored according to a Likert scale of 7 points: 1 = does not correspond at all, 4 = corresponds moderately, 7 = corresponds exactly.

Statistical analysis

The main research objective was to identify the specific motivation of ultramarathoners for this sport. Consequently, we performed basic descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, percent distributions) for socio-demographic characteristics and the SMS results in order to determinate the motivational profile among ultramarathoners. Next, we examined if there were different results in the SMS related to socio-demographic characteristics using student t, ANOVA, and Chi square tests. We used the software package PASW (Predictive Analytic Software Statistics version 19.0; SPSS Inc, Chicago, Illinois) for data analysis.

Ethical considerations

Due to the sensitive nature of the issues raised in the survey, each runner was asked to respond anonymously to the questionnaire and gave their written consent. In order to maintain privacy and confidentiality, we did not collect identifying data such as names or addresses.

RESULTSCharacteristics of the 32 semi-professional ultramarathon

runners are shown in Table 1. The average age of sample was 38.78±6.36 year’s old, 70±10.36 kg and 174.8±6.74 cm of height Most of them (87.5%) were men and 12.5% woman, and in the total sample the 78.1% earned a bachelor’s degree. The occupations of ultramarathoners were diverse, with 12.5% being IT professionals. The sports brand most used by semi-professional ultramarathon runners was ASICS (37.5), followed for Nike (18.8%). The athletes had been running for approximately 8.5 years, with a majority of that time being devoted to ultramarathoning (8.2 years). There was only one person who had spent more years running compared to practicing ultramarathon as a sport. Body mass index (BMI) was normal in the 68.8% of runners, while 15.6% of the runners were either underweight or overweight.

Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, and 95% CI) for the 28 questions of the SMS. The highest average resulted from Question 2 (“The pleasure it gives me to know more about the sport that I practice”) and Question 26 (“I must do sports regularly”). Lower values corresponded to Question 3 (“I used to have good reasons for doing sports, but now I am asking myself if I should continue doing it”), Question 19 (“It is not clear to me anymore, I do not really think my place is in sports”) and Question 5 (“I do not know anymore, I have the impression that I am incapable of succeeding in this sport”). Distribution of the 7 main factors of motivation corresponding to the 28 Items of the SMS scale is summarized in Table 3. Introjection (M = 6.05, SD = 0.87) was the main factor of motivation followed by IM to Experience Stimulation (M = 5.48, SD = 0.3), and IM toward Accomplishments (M = 5.19, SD = 1.10), whereas the lower mean values corresponded to A motivation (M = 1.34, SD = 0.55).

Analysis by age and gender

All women in our study possessed a bachelor’s degree, while only 75% of men held this degree. The most representative age group among men was 31-35 years, whereas it was 36-40 years for women. Although men from our sample had practiced this sport longer than women (M = 8.5, SD = 5.09 years vs. M = 6.0, SD = 2.94 years respectively), the difference was not statistically significant. Differences between men and women were apparent only in regards to the BMI classification. This was due to the fact that 17.9% of men were overweight, whereas no women participants were overweight. The mean BMI was 20.2kg/m2 for women and 23.2 kg/m2 for men (p<0.05).

For both men and women, the highest averages among the 28 questions of the SMS (data not shown) were in Question 2 (“For the pleasure it gives me to know more about the sport that I practice”) and Question 18 (“For the intense emotions

Central

Losa Iglesias et al. (2016)Email:

Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072 (2016) 3/8

Table 1: Characteristics of the cohort.

N= 32 %

SEXMALE 87.5FEMALE 12.5

AGE GROUP

< 30 yrs. 9.431-35 yrs. 28.136-40 yrs. 28.141-45 yrs. 12.5≥ 46 yrs. 21.9

EDUCATIONAL LEVELUNIVERSITY LEVEL 78.1NO UNIVERSITY LEVEL 21.9

CURRENT OCCUPATION

LAWYER 6.3ADMINISTRATIVE 9.4FIREFIGHTER 3.1COOK 3.1FINANCIAL CONSULTANT 3.1ECONOMIST 6.3ELECTRICIAN 3.1ENTREPRENEUR 6.3NURSE 3.1COACH 3.1PHYRSIOTHERAPIST 3.1COMPUTER 12.5ENGINEER 6.3BAKER 3.1UNEMPLOYED 6.3POLICE 3.1UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR 3.1SCHOOL TEACHER 3.1PUBLISHER 6.3TAXI DRIVER 3.1TRANSLATOR 3.1

SPORTS BRAND

ADIDAS 12.5ASICS 37.5JOMA 3.1K- SUISS 12.5MIZUNO WAVE 3.1NEW BALANCE 3.1NIKE 18.8SAUCONY 6.3SKECHERS 3.1

YEARS RUNNING

1-3 yrs. 15.64-6 yrs. 25.07-9 yrs. 18.810-12 yrs. 25.0>12 yrs. 15.6

TIME PRACTISING THE SPORT of ULTRAMARATHON RUNNING

1-3 yrs. 15.64-6 yrs. 25.07-9 yrs. 18.810-12 yrs. 28.1

>12 yrs. 12.5

BMI CLASSIFICATION

UNDERWEIGHT 15.6NORMAL 68.8

OVERWEIGHT 15.6

I feel while that I am doing a sport that I like”). Another high response from men was to Question 26 (“Because I must do sports regularly”), while women responded highly to Question 9 (“Because it is absolutely necessary to do sports if one wants to be in shape”). The lowest values for both men and women related to Question 3 (“I used to have good reasons for doing sports, but now I am asking myself if I should continue doing it”), Question 19 (“It is not clear to me anymore; I don’t really think my place is in sport”), and Question 5 (“I don’t know anymore; I have the impression that I am incapable of succeeding in this sport”). The answers from Questions 2, 8, 15, 16, 18, and 20 were statistically significantly different between men and women.

Differences by gender for the seven factor subscale (Table 4) were higher for women in all factors, except the A motivation section, which was slightly higher in men. Only statistically significant differences were observed in the IM/Toward Accomplishments (p=0.01), It is important to note, however, that lack of statistically significant differences in the motivation analysis by gender could be due to the discrepancy in numbers of men (28) versus women (4) in this study. A more accurate analysis could be accomplished if the gender samples were equal in number.

Those participants who had been running for the greatest number of years were between 31 and 35 years old. Those over 45 years old had the highest a mean BMI values (24.1kg/m2). No statistical differences were found by age when assessing the seven subscale factors or the socio-demographic characteristics (Table 5). The motivation factor was slightly decreased with age, but it did not reach statistical significance.

Analysis by education level

Although no statistical differences were found in the characteristics of ultrarunners based on education level, those with a university degree had spent fewer years running and practicing this sport. Among the 28 questions of the SMS, only Question 7 (“Because, in my opinion, it is one of the best ways to meet people”) had answers that were statistically different with a mean response of 4.32, SD = 1.82 runners with bachelor’s degrees vs. A mean of 5.14, SD=0.38 from those without (p<0.04). Although all mean values in the subscale of the 7 factors, except EM identification, were higher in ultrarunners with higher educational levels, differences did not reach statistical significance (Table 6).

Analysis by BMI

Although no significant differences in motivation factors by BMI were found, the mean difference for BMI in the seven factors subscale was higher among underweight subjects except in the EM Introjection factor which was higher among individuals with normal BMIs. A motivation factor was higher among overweight subjects (Table 7).

Correlation between scale factors

Table 8 shows the correlation between the scale factors. The EM factor inversely influences the Introjection and A motivation factors. INTROJECTION showed a negative association with the A motivation factor (r = -0.424, p < 0.05). A strong correlation was found with toward accomplishments (r = 0.593 p < 0.01); to experience stimulation (r = 0.627p < 0.01) and to know.

Central

Losa Iglesias et al. (2016)Email:

Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072 (2016) 4/8

Table 2 : Sport motivation scale (sms).M, SD 95% CI

1. For the pleasure I feel having exciting experiences. M = 3.75, SD = 1.63 (3.16-4.34)2. For the pleasure it gives me to know more about the sport that I practice. M = 6.59; SD = 0.56 (6.39-6.8)3. I used to have good reasons for doing sports. but now I am asking myself if I should continue doing it. M = 1.13, SD = 0.71 (0.87-1.38)

4. For the pleasure of discovering new training techniques. M = 3.31, SD = 1.67 (2.71-3.92)5. I don't know anymore; I have the impression that I am incapable of succeeding in this sport. M = 1.19, SD = 0.59 (0.97-1.4)6. Because it allows me to be well regarded by people that I know. M = 2.03, SD = 1.33 (1.55-2.51)7. Because it is one of the best ways to meet people. M = 4.5, SD = 1.65 (3.91-5.09)8. Because I feel a lot of personal satisfaction while mastering certain difficult training techniques. M = 5.16, SD = 1.74 (4.53-5.78)9. Because it is absolutely necessary to do sports if one wants to be in shape. M = 6.06, SD = 1.16 (5.64-6.48)10. For the prestige of being an athlete. M = 2.69, SD = 1.71 (2.07-3.3)11. Because it is one of the best ways to develop other aspects of myself. M = 5.84, SD = 1.19 (5.41-6.27)12. For the pleasure I feel while improving some of my weak points. M = 6.03, SD = 0.9 (5.71-6.35)13. For the excitement I feel when I am really involved in the activity. M = 5.91, SD = 0.73 (5.64-6.17)14. Because I must do sports to feel good about myself. M = 6.00, SD = 1.5 (5.46-6.54)15. For the satisfaction I experience while I am perfecting my abilities. M = 5.53, SD = 1.22 (5.09-5.97)16. Because people around me think it is important to be in shape. M = 2.56, SD = 1.58 (1.99-3.13)17. Because it is a good way to learn lots of things which could be useful to me in other areas of my life. M = 5.38, SD = 1.45 (4.85-5.9)

18. For the intense emotions that I feel while I am doing a sport that I like. M = 6.19, SD = 0.82 (5.89-6.48)19. It is not clear to me anymore; I don't really think my place is in sport. M = 1.16, SD = 0.51 (0.97-1.34)20. For the pleasure that I feel while executing certain difficult movements. M = 4.03, SD = 1.67 (3.43-4.64)21. Because I would feel bad if I was not taking time to do it. M = 5.59, SD = 1.60 (5.02-6.17)22. To show others how good I am at my sport. M = 2.25, SD = 1.61 (1.67-2.83)23. For the pleasure that I feel while learning training techniques that I have never tried before. M = 4.25, SD = 1.44 (3.73-4.77)24. Because it is one of the best ways to maintain good relationships with my friends. M = 4.88, SD = 1.52 (4.33-5.42)25. Because I like the feeling of being totally immersed in the activity. M = 6.09, SD = 1.06 (5.71-6.48)26. Because I must do sports regularly. M = 6.53, SD = 0.72 (6.27-6.79)27. For the pleasure of discovering new performance strategies. M = 3.59, SD = 1.81 (2.94-4.25)28. I often ask myself; I can't seem to achieve the goals that I set for myself. M = 1.88, SD = 1.36 (1.38-2.37)

Table 3: Sport motivation scale (sms) by motivation type.M, SD 95% CI

INTRINSIC MOTIVATIONTO KNOW M = 4.44, SD = 1.13 (4.03-4.84)TOWARD ACCOMPLISHMENTS M = 5.19, SD = 1.10 (4.79-5.58)TO EXPERIENCE STIMULATION M = 5.48, SD = 0.63 (5.26-5.71)

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATIONEXTERNAL REGULATION M = 2.38, SD = 1.18 (1.96-2.81)INTROJECTION M = 6.05, SD = 0.87 (5.73-6.36)IDENTIFICATION M = 5.15, SD = 0.83 (4.85-5.45)

AMOTIVATION M = 1.34, SD = 0.55 (1.14-1.53)

Table 4: SPORT MOTIVATION SCALE (SMS) BY GENDER.

MALE FEMALEDiff (x) 95% CI p

M, SD

INTRINSIC MOTIVATIONTO KNOW M = 4.35, SD = 1.12 M = 5.06, SD = 1.16 0.71 -0.51 1.94 0.24TOWARD ACCOMPLISHMENTS M = 5.01, SD = 1.06 M = 6.44, SD = 0.24 1.43 0.33 2.53 0.01TO EXPERIENCE STIMULATION M = 5.41, SD = 0.60 M = 6.00, SD = 0.61 0.59 -0.07 1.25 0.08

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATIONEXTERNAL REGULATION M = 2.25, SD = 1.13 M = 3.31, SD = 1.25 1.06 -0.18 2.31 0.09INTROJECTION M = 5.98, SD = 0.89 M = 6.50, SD = 0.61 0.52 -0.42 1.46 0.27IDENTIFICATION M = 5.07, SD = 0.82 M = 5.69, SD = 0.83 0.62 -0.28 1.51 0.17

AMOTIVATION M = 1.35, SD = 0.58 M = 1.25, SD = 0.29 0.10 -0.51 0.71 0.74

Central

Losa Iglesias et al. (2016)Email:

Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072 (2016) 5/8

Table 5: Sport motivation scale (sms) by age group.

AGE GROUP x±SD 95%CI p

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION

TO KNOW

< 30 yrs. M = 4.33, SD = 0.52 3.04 5.63

0.5231-35 yrs. M = 4.94, SD = 1.22 4 5.8836-40 yrs. M = 4.33, SD = 0.79 3.73 4.9441-45 yrs. M = 4.5, SD = 1.17 2.63 6.37≥ 46 yrs. M = 3.93, SD = 1.5 2.54 5.32

TOWARD ACCOMPLISHMENTS

< 30 yrs. M = 5.17, SD = 0.88 2.99 7.35

0.2531-35 yrs. M = 5.33, SD = 1.11 4.48 6.1936-40 yrs. M = 5.69, SD = 0.66 5.19 6.241-45 yrs. M = 5.06, SD = 1.09 3.33 6.79≥ 46 yrs. M = 4.43, SD = 1.44 3.1 5.76

TO EXPERIENCE STIMULATION

< 30 yrs. M = 5.25, SD = 0.43 4.17 6.33

0.7631-35 yrs. M = 5.42, SD = 0.6 4.96 5.8836-40 yrs. M = 5.67, SD = 0.47 5.31 6.0341-45 yrs. M = 5.25, SD = 0.74 4.08 6.42≥ 46 yrs. M = 5.57, SD = 0.89 4.75 6.39

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION

EXTERNAL REGULATION

< 30 yrs. M = 1.67, SD = 0.76 -0.23 3.56

0.7431-35 yrs. M = 2.5, SD = 1.56 1.3 3.736-40 yrs. M = 2.56, SD = 1.1 1.71 3.441-45 yrs. M = 1.94, SD = 1.03 0.3 3.57≥ 46 yrs. M = 2.57, SD = 1.07 1.58 3.56

INTROJECTION

< 30 yrs. M = 5.75, SD = 0.5 4.51 6.99

0.3031-35 yrs. M = 5.92, SD = 1.01 5.14 6.6936-40 yrs. M = 5.72, SD = 1.03 4.93 6.5241-45 yrs. M = 6.63, SD = 0.43 5.94 7.31≥ 46 yrs. M = 6.43< SD = 0.55 5.92 6.94

IDENTIFICATION

< 30 yrs. M = 4.33, SD = 1.26 1.21 7.46

0.1631-35 yrs. M = 5.5, SD = 0.67 4.98 6.0236-40 yrs. M = 5.33, SD = 0.6 4.87 5.7941-45 yrs. M = 4.63, SD = 0.6 3.68 5.57≥ 46 yrs. M = 5.11< SD = 1.03 4.16 6.06

AMOTIVATION

< 30 yrs. M = 1.83, SD = 0.76 -0.06 3.73

0.3531-35 yrs. M = 1.42, SD = 0.77 0.82 2.0136-40 yrs. M = 1.36, SD = 0.45 1.01 1.7141-45 yrs. M = 1.06, SD = 0.13 0.86 1.26≥ 46 yrs. M = 1.14, SD = 0.24 0.92 1.37

Table 6: Sport motivation scale (sms) by education level.

University level No University level Diff (x) 95%CI p

M, SD

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION

TO KNOW M = 4.47, SD = 1.13

M = 4.32, SD = 1.21 0.15 -0.85 1.15 0.76

TOWARD ACCOMPLISHMENTS M = 5.27, SD = 1.2

M = 4.89, SD = 0.61 0.38 -0.59 1.34 0.43

TO EXPERIENCE STIMULATION M = 5.58, SD = 0.62

M = 5.14, SD = 0.56 0.44 -0.09 0.97 0.10

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION

EXTERNAL REGULATION M = 2.43, SD = 1.22

M = 2.21, SD = 1.1 0.22 -0.83 1.26 0.68

INTROJECTION M = 6.07, SD = 0.84

M = 5.96, SD = 1.04 0.11 -0.66 0.87 0.78

IDENTIFICATION M = 5.1, SD = 0.89

M = 5.32, SD = 0.61 0.22 -0.52 0.96 0.54

AMOTIVATION M = 1.36, SD = 0.59

M = 1.25, SD = 0.38 0.11 -0.38 0.60 0.65

Central

Losa Iglesias et al. (2016)Email:

Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072 (2016) 6/8

Table 7: Sport motivation scale (sms) by bmi classification.AGE GROUP M, SD 95% CI p

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION

TO KNOW

UNDERWEIGHT M = 5.00, SD = 1.70 2.88 7.12

0.47NORMAL M = 4.36, SD = 0.84 3.99 4.74

OVERWEIGHT M = 4.20, SD = 1.65 2.15 6.25

TOWARD ACCOMPLISHMENTS

UNDERWEIGHT M = 5.75, SD = 1.02 4.49 7.01

0.47NORMAL M = 5.07, SD = 1.09 4.58 5.55

OVERWEIGHT M = 5.15, SD = 1.26 3.59 6.71

TO EXPERIENCE STIMULATION

UNDERWEIGHT M = 5.80, SD = 0.41 5.29 6.31

0.27NORMAL M = 5.36, SD = 0.63 5.08 5.65

OVERWEIGHT M = 5.70, SD = 0.69 4.84 6.56

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION

EXTERNAL REGULATION

UNDERWEIGHT M = 2.85, SD = 1.05 1.54 4.16

0.46NORMAL M = 2.39, SD = 1.26 1.83 2.94

OVERWEIGHT M = 1.90, SD = 0.91 0.77 3.03

INTROJECTION

UNDERWEIGHT M = 6.00, SD = 0.66 5.18 6.82

0.98NORMAL M = 6.07, SD = 0.85 5.69 6.44

OVERWEIGHT M = 6.00, SD = 1.26 4.43 7.57

IDENTIFICATION

UNDERWEIGHT M = 5.45, SD = 0.78 4.48 6.42

0.62NORMAL M = 5.06, SD = 0.83 4.69 5.43

OVERWEIGHT M = 5.25, SD = 1.00 4.01 6.49

AMOTIVATION

UNDERWEIGHT M = 1.30, SD = 0.45 0.74 1.86

0.65NORMAL M = 1.30, SD = 0.46 1.09 1.50

OVERWEIGHT M = 1.55, SD = 0.97 0.34 2.76

Table 8: Correlation among the sport motivation scale (sms) factors.

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION AMOTIVATION

TOWARD ACCOMPLISHMENT

TO EXPERIENCE STIMULATION

EXTERNAL REGULA-TION

INTROJECTION IDENTIFICATION

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION

TO KNOW 0.593** 0.627** 0.326 0.116 0.305 -0.112TOWARD ACCOMPLISHMENT 0.776** 0.377* 0.215 0.362* 0.073

TO EXPERIENCE STIMULATION 0.388* 0.239 0.422* -0.019

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION

EXTERNAL REGULATION 0.256 0.501* -0.143

INTROJECTION -0.093 -0.424*

IDENTIFICATION -0.077

*p< 0.05; ** p< 0.001

DISCUSSIONUltramarathon runners´ motivation is very high and is

mainly subject to introjected regulation. Introjected regulation means that the individual has begun to internalize the reasons for his or her actions. Such internalization replaces the external source of control with an internal one. The literature emphasizes that introjected motivation can be a positive force, leading to a more complete internalization. If, during one’s own personal development, an individual is passing through such a positive form of internalization based on the introjection mechanism, they will feel positive emotions when experiencing achievement. However, internalization through introjection can also take a

negative direction as well and lead to development of the sense of shame, guilt, and anxiety [13]. To the extent that the behavior becomes valued and judged to be important for them, the internalization of extrinsic motives becomes regulated through identification, which constitutes the second source of EM in this sample of semi-professional ultramarathon runners. The runners in our sample were mainly middle-aged men with a level of high education, adequate BMIs, and employed in white-collar jobs requiring little to no physical activity. These characteristics could explain the fact that the motivation for practicing this sport is partially self-imposed, since they consider running mandatory to compensate their physical inactivity in the workplace.

Central

Losa Iglesias et al. (2016)Email:

Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072 (2016) 7/8

Intrinsic motivation, particularly in order to experience stimulation, constitutes the second motivation of these athletes who engage in this sport out of sensory and aesthetic pleasure. When analyzing the 28 points of the SMS, the pleasure of knowing more about this sport, feeling totally immersed in the activity, perfecting their abilities, improving their weak points, and the pleasure and intense emotions they feel when practicing this sport were considered the most important motivation factors for these athletes. For women, being in shape is an important factor whereas men consider sports as a must. This finding is in accordance with previous studies that reported two main reasons for women engaging in exercise are for weight control and an improved physique [14-16].

Often, all types of runners are grouped together for comparisons. However, recent studies suggest that there are different groups of runners motivated by different factors. One such study carried out by [17] determined that obligatory runner’s motivation differed from non-obligatory runners. The obligatory runners were more motivated by negative or external factors such as guilt of stopping, and weight control. In another study, committed runners who ran more than 40 miles per week were more motivated by mastery, competition, and weight regulation [18,19] found that runners’ motivation differed based on their level of running, goals, and experience.

As in previous studies, differences in motivation by gender are relevant among the athletes of our study. Women showed significantly higher IM rates regarding experience stimulation and accomplishments, which could be related to the shorter time period that the women had participated in this sport. However, contrary to previous studies carried out with Canadian and Spanish athletes, ultramarathon females in our study showed higher external regulation than men [11,19], which could be related to a non-self determined extrinsic motivation. In accordance to these studies, men reported higher a motivation than women.

Previous studies on motivation of competitive runners found an age-related decline of intrinsic motivation toward accomplishment [20,21], a trend which we also observed in Spanish ultramarathoners, although it did not reach statistical significance. Although general motivational factors were very similar, lower educational level correlated with a greater motivation level, perhaps because of the role of the social aspect of the sport compared to those with higher educational levels. The social motivation model suggests that “sport provides individuals opportunities to satisfy their need for social connections and belonging” [22]. Therefore, goals not only result from perceptions of ability, but also in perceptions of belonging as well; and in ultramarathoners of lower educational levels, social status, social recognition, and social affiliation could be of greater relevance. Although no statistical differences were found based on BMI values, a higher level of a motivation was detected among overweight ultramarathoners.

When we assessed the correlation between the seven subscales, we found strong and positive correlations between the three types of IM, similarly as described by Nuñez et al. in a sample of 496 Spanish athletes practicing 15 different sports [12]. IM toward accomplishments and IM to experience stimulation

showed a positive correlation with external regulation and identification which can be explained by an overlap between the subscales [12] and suggest an integrated regulation in ultrarunners that involves engaging in the activity from an extrinsic perspective in a “choiceful manner”. Thus, this type of runner seems to make their choice as a function of coherence with various aspects of self.

The present study had some limitations. First, the numbers of participants were low, making significant differences in sub-analysis difficult. Second, the SMS questionnaire may not have adequately measured all motivational factors and other factors may exist that were not examined.

CONCLUSIONMotivation is high among the Spanish ultramarathon runners

and it is mainly subject to introjected regulation and intrinsic regulation to experience stimulation. We found motivation to be greater in women than in men ultramarathoners. Our study corroborates the utility of SMS as a valid and reliable tool for measuring motivation in sports.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe authors thank the ultramarathon runners from Madrid,

Spain who participated in this study. The authors also extend their appreciation to the AEPODE of Spain (Spanish Association of Sports Podiatry), especially to the President Mr. Angel Gonzalez de la Rubbia who provided the fellows and the assistance needed for this study to be undertaken.

REFERENCES1. McConnell K, Horsley D. Extreme Running. London: Pavillion Books.

2007.

2. Nicolas M, Banizette M, Millet G. Stress and recovery states after a 24 h ultra-marathon race: A one month follw-up study. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2011; 12: 368-374.

3. Chase A, Hobbs N. The Ultimate Guide to Trail Running. Canada: The globe Pequot Press. 2001.

4. Tharion WJ, Strowman SR, Rauch T. Profile and changes in moods of ultramarathoners. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 1988; 10: 229-235.

5. Ultrarunning Introduction 2009. Retrieved from International Association of Athletics Federations.

6. Moreno JA, Cervelló E, Gonzalez-Cutre A. Analyzing motivation in sport. Psychology Notes. 2007; 25: 35-51.

7. Iso-Ahola SE, Clair B. Toward a theory of exercise motivation. Quest. 2000; 52: 131-147.

8. Roberts GC. Understanding the dynamics of motivation in physical activity: The influence of achievement goals on motivation processes. In: GC Roberts. Advances in motivation in sport and exercise Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. 2001.1-50.

9. Sage G. Introduction to motor behaviour: A neuropsychological approach. 1977.

10. McCutcheon LE, Yoakum ME. Personality attributes of ultramarathoners. J Pers Assess. 1983; 47: 178-180.

11. Stoll O, Würth S, Ogles B. Participation motives of marathon and ultra-marathon runners. Sportwissens chaft. 2000; 30; 54-67.

12. Núñez JL, Martín-Albo J, Navarro JG, González VM. Preliminary

Central

Losa Iglesias et al. (2016)Email:

Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072 (2016) 8/8

validation of a Spanish version of the Sport Motivation Scale. Percept Motor Skills. 2006; 102: 919-930.

13. Pelletier LG, Tuson DM, Fortier MS, Vallerand RJ, Brière N, Blais MR. Toward a new measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation in sports: the Sport Motivation Scale. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 1995; 17: 35-53.

14. Bond K. Running for their lives: A qualitative analysis of the exercise experience of female recreational runners. Women in Sport and Physical Activity Journal. 2005; 14: 69-82.

15. Frederick C, Ryan R. Differences in motivation for sport and exercise and their relations with participation and mental health. Journal of Sport Behavior. 1993; 16: 124-146.

16. Vansteenkiste M, Niemiec CP, Soenens B. The Development of the Five Mini-theories of Self-Determination Theory: An Historical Overview, Emerging Trends and Future Directions. 2010; 105-165.

17. Slay HA, Hayaki J, Napolitano MA, Brownell KD. Motivations for running and eating attitudes in obligatory versus nonobligatory runners. Int J Eat Disord. 1998; 23: 267-275.

18. Thorton EW, Scott SE. Motivation in the committed runner: correlations between self-report scales and behaviour. Health Promotion International. 1995; 10: 177-184.

19. Ogles BM, Masters KS. A Typology of Marathon Runners Based on Cluster Analyrsis of Motivations. Journal of Sport Behaviour. 2003; 26: 69-86.

20. Brière NM, Vallerand RJ, Blais MR, Pelletier LG. Développement et validation d´une mesure de motivation intrinsèque, extrinsèque et d´amotivation en contexte sportif: l´echelle de motivation dans les sports. International Journal of Sport Psychology. 1995; 26: 465-489.

21. Hodge K, Allen J, Smellie L. Motivation in masters sports: Achievement and social goals. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2008; 9: 157-176.

22. Burtscher J, Furtner M, Sachse P, Burtscher M. Validation of a German version of the Sport Motivation Scale (SMS28) and motivation analysis in competitive mountain runners. Percept Mot Skills. 2011; 112: 807-820.

Losa Iglesias ME, Becerro de Bengoa Vallejo R, Rodriguez Vazquez R (2016) The Motivation of Spanish Ultramarathon Runners Sports Coaching: Peak Per­formance (Goal Setting, Motivation, Skill Acquisition). Ann Sports Med Res 3(4): 1072.

Cite this article