1. Athletic Identity in English professional youth team footballers Mitchell, T.O, Richardson, D., Nesti, M.S. & Littlewood, M.A. Research Institute for Sport & Exercise Sciences Liverpool John Moores University Tom Reilly Building, Liverpool, L3 3AF e-mail: tom.mitchell@don.ac.uk w: www.ljmu.ac.uktom.mitchell@don.ac.ukwww.ljmu.ac.uk Tel: +44 01302 553945

2. Introduction To excel in high level competitive sport, athletes typically form a strong bond [Athletic Identity] towards their chosen endeavours (Bloom, 1985) Family, friends, teachers and others often support the development of this bond (Wiechman & Williams, 1997) AI (Athletic Identity) has been previously defined as; ‘the degree to which an individual identifies with the athlete role’ (Brewer, Van Raatle & Linder, 1993). Measured using the Athletic Identity Measurement Scale (AIMS) (Brewer and Cornelius, 2001)

3. SI: The degree to which an athlete views him / herself as occupying the athlete role (footballer) EX: The degree to which an individual’s self-worth is established through participating in the athletic role (footballer) NA: The degree to which an individual experiences negative emotions from unwanted sporting outcomes e.g. injury

4. Implications of a strong AI Positive implications; Performance (Horton and Mack, 2000), Increased motivation (Brewer, Van Raatle & Linder, 1993) Negative implications; Psychological distress when not training / competing (Coen & Ogles, 1993; Marcia, 1993; Spakes, 1998; Sparkes, 2000; Horton & Mack, 2000); Lack of post-career planning skills (Marcia, 1966, Blann 1986, Brewer, 1996). AI in youth team footballers is unknown despite heavy investment in youth development.

5. Aims of the Research 1.To gain a critical understanding of the existence of AI in elite youth team footballers. 2.To determine how distinct situational variables; individual club, level of play, year of apprenticeship (year one or year two) and living arrangements (living at home or away from home) affect levels of AI.

6. Methods 168 (N=168) youth team footballers (Age 16.6 + 0.3 years) completed the Athletic Identity Measurement Scale (AIMS) (Brewer and Cornelius, 2001) over the 2009-2010 season. Data Analysis Total AIMS scores and the three subscales factored by individual club and by the playing levels were analysed using a one-way ANOVA. Tukeys post hoc analysis was used to identify the location of any significant differences (p<0.05). Independent sample t-tests were used to determine any significant differences (p<0.05) in total AIMS score and the three aims subscales between; year of apprenticeship (year one or year two) and living arrangements (living at home or away from home)

7. Results: As a function of level A one-way ANOVA reported significant differences (F(166)=2.87, p=0.02) between the four playing levels for Exclusivity. Tukeys post hoc test located the significant difference (p=0.001) between the Premier League (PL) and League 2 (L2) players. PL players derive more self worth from football than their L2 counterparts.

8. Results: As a function of club Significant differences (F(11)=2.869: p=0.02). post hoc test located the difference to be between CHa and L2a (p=0.28). Significant differences across individual clubs for the Exclusivity subscale (F(11)=6.69; p =0.000). Tukeys post hoc test located 14 significant differences Findings suggest that club environment, culture and working practices of coaches are a key factor in AI (Exclusivity) development

9. Results: As a function of year An independent samples t-test reported significant differences (t=2.41, (166), p=0.017) between the two groups for the Social Identity Year ones have recently made a transition into full time training and competition. Year twos may see a lack of career progression opportunities by this stage

10. Results: As a function of living arrangements An independent samples t-test reported significant differences (t=2.55, (166), p=0.012) between the two groups for Exclusivity. Those living away from home may make more sacrifice to be a youth footballer.

11. Conclusions Higher level players and those living away from home derive more self worth (Exclusivity) from football than lower level players and those living at home. Year one apprentices view themselves as footballers to a greater extent (Social Identity) than year two apprentices. High levels of variability in Exclusivity amongst players from different clubs suggests environment, culture and working practices affect the level of AI.

12. Future Research Further studies using AIMS with this population More qualitative research methodologies to aid contextualisation of AIMS score. Broader theoretical frameworks e.g. Erikson, (1968) 8 Stages of Psychosocial Development.

13. Athletic Identity in English professional youth team footballers Mitchell, T.O, Richardson, D., Nesti, M.S. & Littlewood, M.A. Research Institute for Sport & Exercise Sciences Liverpool John Moores University Tom Reilly Building, Liverpool, L3 3AF e-mail: tom.mitchell@don.ac.uk w: www.ljmu.ac.uktom.mitchell@don.ac.ukwww.ljmu.ac.uk Tel: +44 01302 553945