Inside and out: The social dynamics of sport

When we think about performance in sport, it’s easy to focus on the individual — their mindset, motivation, or technical ability. But performance rarely happens in isolation. For most athletes, sport is a deeply social experience, shaped by belonging, shared goals, and the influence of others. Whether it’s a close-knit team, a training group, or a coach–athlete relationship, the social environment plays a huge role in how athletes think, feel, and perform.

Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) helps explain why. The theory suggests that people derive part of their self-concept from the groups they belong to, in this case, their team, club, or sport community. This sense of belonging provides meaning, direction, and self-esteem. Yet, it also comes with an inevitable consequence: once we define who is “us,” we also define who is “them.”

How are groups created?

Groups in sport form for both practical and psychological reasons. Athletes come together to pursue a shared goal, like winning, improving, competing, but quickly develop emotional bonds and shared identities. According to Carron and colleagues (2002), team cohesion involves both task cohesion (the degree to which members work together to achieve goals) and social cohesion (the degree of interpersonal attraction and friendship within the group).

As groups develop, they tend to establish norms, these are unwritten rules about how to behave, train, and communicate. These norms help teams run smoothly and maintain structure, but they also shape identity and behaviour. For example, in some sports, being “tough” or “resilient” becomes a defining group value, influencing how athletes express emotion or deal with mistakes (Stevens et al., 2019). Over time, these shared beliefs influence not just performance, but also athletes’ sense of self and wellbeing.

Group membership can be incredibly rewarding. Feeling part of something bigger enhances motivation and commitment (Rees et al., 2015), and when athletes identify strongly with their team, they tend to experience greater confidence and emotional stability under pressure (Haslam et al., 2017). This social connection provides a buffer against stress and burnout, what Rees and colleagues describe as the “social cure.”

But not all groups are equal. The same processes that bring people together can also create exclusion, cliques, and hierarchies, especially when group identity becomes rigid or competitive within itself.

The positive side: belonging, cohesion, and shared purpose

When social identity is inclusive and supportive, the benefits extend far beyond performance. Belonging to a cohesive team can improve psychological wellbeing, foster empathy, and promote a sense of purpose (Jowett & Cockerill, 2003). Athletes who feel accepted are more likely to communicate openly, learn from mistakes, and support others.

Leadership is central to this process. Effective leaders shape the team’s culture by representing its shared values and ensuring that every member feels valued (Haslam et al., 2020). Research shows that when athletes perceive their leaders as “one of us”, representing the group rather than standing above it, motivation and trust increase dramatically (Fransen et al., 2014).

A strong sense of “we” can also lead to powerful performance effects. Athletes often report that their best moments occur when the team feels united, the communication flows, and everyone seems to anticipate one another’s movements. In these moments, the boundaries between self and team blur, performance feels effortless, collective, and deeply rewarding.

The darker side: in-groups, exclusion, and cliques

However, the social world of sport also has a darker side. When identity becomes tied to status or conformity, athletes who don’t fit the dominant culture may feel excluded. Tajfel and Turner (1979) argued that people naturally favour their in-group and may devalue out-groups to protect self-esteem. In sport, this might appear as cliques within teams, subtle forms of ostracism, or even bullying disguised as “banter” or “team bonding.”

Research shows that social exclusion can lead to anxiety, reduced motivation, and lower performance (Reinboth & Duda, 2006). Athletes who perceive themselves as outsiders may feel pressure to conform or hide aspects of themselves to gain acceptance. Hazing rituals, sometimes justified as ways to “earn respect”, can actually damage trust and cohesion (Stirling, 2009). Even small acts of exclusion can accumulate over time, eroding confidence and wellbeing.

In professional settings, this can create toxic cultures where mistakes are punished, communication is guarded, and performance suffers. In youth sport, these same dynamics can have lasting effects on identity, self-esteem, and enjoyment.

Beyond elite sport: the social side of school and recreational sport

These group dynamics aren’t limited to elite environments. At school or in recreational sport, belonging can be one of the most positive aspects of participation. Friendships often develop through shared goals, collective challenges, and the joy of movement. Research consistently shows that sport participation is associated with better mental health, self-esteem, and life satisfaction, largely due to its social nature (Eime et al., 2013).

For many young people, joining a sports team provides structure, identity, and a sense of belonging that can be protective against loneliness and low mood (Steptoe & Butler, 1996). Recreational sport also offers adults a social outlet that fosters connection and community, which are vital for wellbeing across the lifespan (Jenkin et al., 2018).

Yet, school and recreational sport can also reinforce social hierarchies. In many school settings, athletes, particularly those excelling in popular sports, become the “in-group,” often associated with popularity, attractiveness, or social capital (Adler & Adler, 1998). Those who don’t fit the “athletic type,” or who participate in less valued sports, can feel excluded or devalued. This can shape not only social relationships but also self-concept and participation choices.

Children who feel excluded from sporting circles may disengage from physical activity altogether, missing out on the physical and mental health benefits sport provides (Slater & Tiggemann, 2010). In this sense, sport can both connect and divide, acting as a social glue for some, and a source of exclusion for others.

Building healthy and inclusive team cultures

The challenge, whether in elite or recreational contexts, is to harness the social power of sport in ways that promote inclusion and wellbeing. Creating a psychologically safe environment, where athletes can speak up, make mistakes, and express themselves without fear of ridicule is critical (Edmondson, 1999).

Coaches and leaders can promote this by modelling respect, challenging harmful norms, and ensuring every athlete feels seen and valued. Celebrating diverse strengths, rather than rewarding only certain types of ability or personality, helps teams to thrive in both performance and connection.

Social identity leadership offers a powerful framework for this. Haslam and colleagues (2020) describe effective leaders as those who create, represent, advance, and embed a shared identity, one that brings people together without erasing individuality. When this balance is achieved, sport becomes not just a site of performance, but a community of belonging.

Take-home points

• Sport is a social experience, shaped by belonging, cohesion, and shared identity.

• Groups form through shared goals and norms, which influence behaviour, motivation, and wellbeing.

• A strong, inclusive team identity enhances performance and resilience — but rigid or exclusive identities can foster cliques and bullying.

• At school and in recreational sport, group belonging can boost mental health, but it can also reinforce social hierarchies.

• Coaches and leaders play a vital role in building inclusive cultures where all members feel valued and psychologically safe.

References

Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1998). Peer power: Preadolescent culture and identity. Rutgers University Press.

Bartholomew, K. J., Ntoumanis, N., Ryan, R. M., & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2011).

Psychological need thwarting in the sport context: Assessing the darker side of athletic experience. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 33(1), 75–102.

Bruner, M. W., Eys, M. A., Wilson, K. S., & Côté, J. (2014). Group cohesion and positive youth development in team sport athletes. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 3(4), 219–227.

Carron, A. V., Eys, M. A., & Burke, S. M. (2002). Team cohesion: Nature, correlates, and development. In J. M. Silva & D. Stevens (Eds.), Psychological foundations of sport (pp. 91–122). Allyn & Bacon.

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.

Eime, R. M., Young, J. A., Harvey, J. T., Charity, M. J., & Payne, W. R. (2013). A systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of participation in sport for adults: Informing development of a conceptual model of health through sport. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10(1), 135.

Fransen, K., Vanbeselaere, N., De Cuyper, B., Vande Broek, G., Boen, F., & Van Puyenbroeck, S. (2014). The myth of the team captain as principal leader: Extending the athlete leadership classification within sport teams. Journal of Sports Sciences, 32(14), 1389–1397.

Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., & Platow, M. J. (2017). The new psychology of leadership: Identity, influence, and power. Routledge.

Haslam, S. A., Steffens, N. K., Peters, K., Boyce, R. A., Mallett, C. J., & Fransen, K. (2020). A social identity approach to leadership in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 47, 101–117.

Jenkin, C. R., Eime, R. M., Westerbeek, H., & van Uffelen, J. G. Z. (2018). Sport and ageing: A systematic review of the determinants and trends of participation in sport for older adults. BMC Public Health, 18, 114.

Jowett, S., & Cockerill, I. M. (2003). Olympic medallists’ perspective of the athlete–coach relationship. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 4(4), 313–331.

Rees, T., Haslam, S. A., Coffee, P., & Lavallee, D. (2015). A social identity approach to sport psychology: Principles, practice, and prospects. Sports Medicine, 45(8), 1083–1096.

Reinboth, M., & Duda, J. L. (2006). Perceived motivational climate, need satisfaction and indices of well-being in team sports: A longitudinal perspective. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7(3), 269–286.

Slater, A., & Tiggemann, M. (2010). “Uncool to do sport”: A focus group study of adolescent girls’ reasons for withdrawing from physical activity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(6), 619–626.

Steptoe, A., & Butler, N. (1996). Sports participation and emotional wellbeing in adolescents. The Lancet, 347(9018), 1789–1792.

Stevens, C. J., Lane, A. M., & Terry, P. C. (2019). Mood and emotion regulation in sport. In R. J. Schinke et al. (Eds.), The Routledge international encyclopedia of sport and exercise psychology (pp. 381–398). Routledge.

Stirling, A. E. (2009). Definition and constituents of maltreatment in sport: Establishing a conceptual framework for research practitioners. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 43(14), 1091–1099.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.