{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025167785234899327, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013422818791946308, 'mean_word_length': 6.101190476190476, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Mean(ing) to Me: A Symbolic Interactionist Approach to Aggression in Sport Psychology

Despite the large amount of research on aggression in sport psychology, the underlying dynamics of how aggression functions in sport are not well-understood. This paper uses developments in symbolic interactionism (Blumer, 1966; Mead, 1934) to extend positivist forms of conceptualizing and theorizing about aggression (e.g., social learning theory, moral reasoning theory) within the sport psychology aggression literature. We further suggest how symbolic interactionism, in light of its adherence to social constructionism, allows for an additional conceptualization of aggression linked to athletic identities which are dynamic, multiple and social due to shifting actions and contexts within which athletes participate (Blumer, 1966; Messner, 2002). How a symbolic interactionist conception of aggression enhances our understanding of aggression in contrast to postpositivist understandings will be outlined. We conclude that in addition to postpositivist approaches, symbolic interactionism can be used to provide complementary understandings of how aggression functions in sport psychology contexts.