↓ Skip to main content

Leading from the Centre: A Comprehensive Examination of the Relationship between Central Playing Positions and Leadership in Sport

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Leading from the Centre: A Comprehensive Examination of the Relationship between Central Playing Positions and Leadership in Sport
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0168150
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katrien Fransen, S. Alexander Haslam, Cliff J. Mallett, Niklas K. Steffens, Kim Peters, Filip Boen

Abstract

The present article provides a comprehensive examination of the relationship between playing position and leadership in sport. More particularly, it explores links between leadership and a player's interactional centrality-defined as the degree to which their playing position provides opportunities for interaction with other team members. This article examines this relationship across different leadership roles, team sex, and performance levels. Study 1 (N = 4443) shows that athlete leaders (and the task and motivational leader in particular) are more likely than other team members to occupy interactionally central positions in a team. Players with high interactional centrality were also perceived to be better leaders than those with low interactional centrality. Study 2 (N = 308) established this link for leadership in general, while Study 3 (N = 267) and Study 4 (N = 776) revealed that the same was true for task, motivational, and external leadership. This relationship is attenuated in sports where an interactionally central position confers limited interactional advantages. In other words, the observed patterns were strongest in sports that are played on a large field with relatively fixed positions (e.g., soccer), while being weaker in sports that are played on a smaller field where players switch positions dynamically (e.g., basketball, ice hockey). Beyond this, the pattern is broadly consistent across different sports, different sexes, and different levels of skill. The observed patterns are consistent with the idea that positions that are interactionally central afford players greater opportunities to do leadership-either through communication or through action. Significantly too, they also provide a basis for them to be seen to do leadership by others on their team. Thus while it is often stated that "leadership is an action, not a position," it is nevertheless the case that, when it comes to performing that action, some positions are more advantageous than others.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 98 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 23%
Student > Master 21 21%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 25 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 31 31%
Psychology 21 21%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 26 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2017.
All research outputs
#4,140,651
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#63,359
of 202,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,414
of 424,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,052
of 3,988 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,084 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,988 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.