Introduction

Almost all competitive sports rely on sports officials (referees, umpires, judges). In professional but also in amateur leagues, handball referees constitute a special sporting function. They are the “guardians of the rulebook” and ensure that sporting competition can take place. Because of the multitude of decisions they have to make in the course of a game, they stand in the limelight and are in permanent exchange with players and coaches (MacMahon et al., 2015). In addition to the high number of cues to be processed, handball referees also need to manage a high level of interaction and physical movement. According to the categories of officials provided by Plessner and MacMahon (2013), these characteristics lead to the conclusion that handball referees can be assigned to the group of interactors. This distinguishes them from reactors (e.g., line judges in tennis) who have a low to medium number of cues to observe and low physical demands, and sport monitors (e.g., gymnastics judges) who have low physical demands but a medium to large number of cues to monitor. Although there are commonalities between the three types of officials, the requirements for each official are different across the various sports. This is also reflected in the steadily growing body of literature (e.g., Livingston, Forbes, Wattie, & Cunningham, 2020; MacMahon & Plessner, 2008; MacMahon et al., 2015; for a review, see Hancock, Bennett, Roaten, Chapman, & Stanley, 2021). The scope of research ranges from visual attention (Hüttermann, Noël, & Memmert, 2017) to decision-making (Bloß, Schorer, Loffing, & Büsch, 2022; Souchon, Coulomb-Cabagno, Traclet, & Rascle, 2004), judgement (Fasold, Wühr, & Memmert, 2019) and judgement biases (Unkelbach & Memmert, 2010), and performance enhancement (Spitz, Wagemans, Memmert, Williams, & Helsen, 2021), to name but a few.

Research work related to personality, however, is an area that has received only minor attention in refereeing up to now (Hancock et al., 2021). In modern handball, personality can be considered crucial for successful performance, alongside other important factors such as self-efficacy (Diotaiuti et al., 2017) or mental toughness (Slack, Maynard, Butt, & Olusoga, 2013). Handball games can be intense and highly competitive, leading to conflicts between players, coaches, and sometimes even spectators. In addition, handball referees are often faced with situations during a game where they have to make split-second decisions under pressure. Therefore, they need to possess suitable personality characteristics to effectively manage and resolve conflicts by remaining calm, assertive, and capable of handling confrontational situations. This includes effective communication with players, coaches, and other officials. They must also be able to assert themselves, convey decisions clearly, and provide necessary instructions, all of which are essential to upholding the spirit of fair play, maintaining game integrity, and providing a positive experience for all participants.

Unfortunately, this exciting, albeit challenging job has been performed by fewer and fewer referees in recent years (Nikoleit, 2022). As a consequence of this shortage of referees, the maintenance of game operations is severely threatened in some regions. In view of the tense situation in handball refereeing, new impulses for recruitment are urgently needed, requiring focus on the personality characteristics needed for officiating more than ever (Livingston et al., 2017). Against this background, this study intends to contribute to emphasising and advancing personality research in handball refereeing by identifying specific personality characteristics that are considered necessary for the job of handball referees from the perspective of players and coaches. These individuals interact in the same sporting environment, so it can be assumed that they can accurately describe the essential personality traits of handball referees.

To date, there are only a few studies dealing with the personality profile of handball referees. In the context of personality research, the five-factor model (FFM; also called Big Five model) is the most widely accepted personality theory in the scientific community (Costa & McCrae, 1992; John, Naumann, & Soto, 2008). There is good evidence of the predictive power of personality traits in terms of athletic success and participation in physical activity (Allen, Greenlees, & Jones, 2013; Allen & Laborde, 2014), as well as a positive correlation with quality rankings of officials’ judgements (Sayfollahpour, Ganjooee, & Nikbakhsh, 2013). Valdevit, Ilić, Vesković, and Suzović (2011) found that differently ranked handball referees from Serbia and Montenegro did not show any significant differences in the observed personality features. Compared to the general population, however, it was shown that referees of all performance levels scored significantly higher on the scale of Extraversion and significantly lower on the scale of Neuroticism. In a recent study, Dodt, Fasold, and Memmert (2022a) examined the personality profile of German handball referees at expert level compared to the German general population. The researchers concluded that handball referees are significantly more extroverted, agreeable, responsible, and emotionally stable than the general population. In a subsequent study, Dodt, Fasold, and Memmert (2022b) found that amateur handball referees did not differ from expert referees, with the exception of slightly lower scores in the facets of sociability, energy level, and aesthetic sensitivity among amateurs. Despite these minor deviations, amateur referees still exceed the average general population in all five personality domains (Dodt et al., 2022b).

On a more conceptual level, personality characteristics are also reflected in referee research. Mascarenhas, Collins, and Mortimer (2005) developed a framework that describes five key areas of elite refereeing performance in the context of rugby union referees. The cornerstones model received widespread acceptance in terms of supporting, assessing, and training referees and includes the themes: (i) personality and game management, (ii) physical fitness, positioning, and mechanics, (iii) knowledge and application of the law, (iv) contextual judgement, and (v) psychological characteristics of excellence. The areas of fitness, positioning, and mechanics or the law application are considered easier to learn than contextual judgement and personality and management skills. Hence, the latter, as opposed to the more “robotic skills of the refereeing”, is what distinguishes the good referees from the not-so-good ones (Mascarenhas et al., 2005, p. 373).

The literature review provides clear evidence that, firstly, personality plays a significant role in the overall context of referee performance and, secondly, that particular personality traits are more pronounced in handball referees than in samples of the general population. Beyond this, there are no known studies that have used additional models besides the FFM or that have identified other critical psychological characteristics required in handball officiating. Methodologically, these studies are all based on self-reports, which is the most commonly used measure in the field of personality assessment (McDonald, 2008). Despite the advantages of being a practical, convenient, and easy to administer measure that provides direct insight into unique personal information, self-reports can also be viewed critically. For example, the referees surveyed might have responded in a way that puts them in a more favourable light, although these responses do not correspond to their actual thinking or behaviour (“socially desirable responding”; see Paulhus, 2017; Wetzel, Böhnke, & Brown, 2016). Another related concern is that referees did not necessarily rate themselves better in order to appear more favourable but because they had a distorted self-perception (John & Robins, 1994). Because of these biases, it appears worthwhile to consider another method of measuring personality traits, as self-report may not accurately represent these constructs. Instead of obtaining information about referees’ personalities through self-reports, asking other people (informants) about what constitutes referees’ personalities might lead to a more balanced and complete description of personality characteristics (Hofstee, 1994; Vazire, 2006). According to Hogan (1998), this method is based on the idea that other people can offer a unique perspective on an individual’s personality which, because of its objectivity, can be seen as an improvement or valuable addition compared to the more subjective self-reports. However, this method also has its shortcomings, as it is less efficient and it requires more effort to obtain data from third parties than simply asking the target (McDonald, 2008). Moreover, informants can never draw on as much information as the target person, as they do not have access to the target person’s thoughts, feelings, and motives (Paulhus & Vazire, 2007). Considering that referees are often seen as the “bad guys”, diminishing biases could also occur, i.e., informants might ascribe more negative characteristics to the referee or be guided by stereotypes.

After careful consideration of the pros and cons, the method of asking informants seems to be a promising approach, as it is more objective and less prone to socially desirable responses. In addition, informants (in the case of the present study, players and coaches) have often had the opportunity to observe referees in many different situations and behaviours. Consequently, their responses may cover a wide range of characteristics that are an unvarnished reflection of the referees’ personality. Lastly, following Hofstee’s (1994) point of view, one further argument for collecting information from players and coaches is that receiving a variety of responses from well-informed individuals increases the reliability of the findings.

Based on these considerations, the present study focuses on answering the following research question: What personality traits are necessary to perform the function of a handball referee?

In the context of this research question, this study pursues four objectives: (i) to address the phenomenon of handball referees’ personality for the first time by means of an open question, surveying individuals with long playing or coaching experience in handball; (ii) to establish a reference to existing research findings (Dodt et al., 2022b) in order to see whether these results from self-reports can be supported by the external perspective adopted in this study; (iii) to identify new patterns or constructs that go beyond the FFM; and (iv) to collate the findings of this study with conceptualisations that describe factors of excellence in refereeing to identify possible overlaps.

The findings of the present study could be of particular interest to sports scientists as a starting point for further targeted research. Moreover, those responsible for refereeing may incorporate the insights into new ways of recruiting as well as improving the content of training and further education. In addition, it could also be interesting for handball referees wishing to expand their knowledge on this topic. Lastly, coaches could benefit from the knowledge gained as they could get a comprehensive picture of this complex phenomenon, and thus better understand referees.

Method

The explanations and information reported in this section are guided by the “journal article reporting standards for qualitative research” (Levitt et al., 2018, p. 33). Procedures that support methodological integrity are described across the relevant sections of the paper. The same applies to the question of trustworthiness and credibility of this study (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The study was also conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2013).

Researcher description

The corresponding author has a strong connection to the research topic as he has been engaged in handball refereeing for more than 20 years. The phenomenon of the handball referees’ personality has always been of particular interest to him, and he would like to contribute to the further development and improvement of handball refereeing with the study at hand. The second author also brings years of research experience in invasion games and was involved in many research projects dealing with decision-making within the group of interactors.

Access to the survey was free and anonymous, so the participants were not known to the research team at any time, and thus existing relationships between researchers and participants did not have any impact on the process of data collection and analysis. Furthermore, the participants were able to complete the questionnaire independently, so there was no interaction or other influences emanating from the research team.

Recruitment process

In order to further extend the state of research based on self-reports, this study took the approach of interviewing other people to describe the personality characteristics necessary for handball referees as authentically and realistically as possible. For this reason, it seemed sensible to select handball players (inside perspective of the game) and coaches (outside perspective of the game) as participants. These individuals possess a high level of handball-specific knowledge and experience and are in intensive and regular contact with the referees. Hence, they should be able to accurately reflect on their idea of the referees’ personality.

After receiving the approval of the local Ethics Committee (ethics application no. 082/2020), participants were recruited via handball-related online platforms, social media, and mailing lists. In order to achieve heterogeneity and to cover a maximum variation of responses, the convenience sampling strategy (Patton, 2002) was chosen. The authors believe that this open access strategy would attract players and coaches of different ages, experience, and performance level, resulting in a balanced sample. In addition, the authors are convinced that each individual carries unique knowledge and therefore no participant should be categorically excluded.

The questionnaire included informed consent, which ensured that all participants agreed to the anonymous processing of data. Participation in the study was voluntary and no incentives or other compensation were promised. In order to meet the demand for an informative sample, a high number of participants was aimed for. Because the survey consisted of only one core question (apart from socio-demographic questions), and thus the effort for the evaluation was considered manageable, the survey was launched without an upper limit of participants. After one week, no more records were received. The existing data sets were screened, and the research team concluded that data saturation had been reached, that is, the redundancy of responses increased as the analysis progressed (Corbin & Strauss, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985), so that further data sets would most likely not have led to any new insights.

Participants

89 German handball players (38 women, 51 men) and 35 coaches (5 women, 30 men) agreed to complete the questionnaire. For detailed information on the age and experience of the participants in their sporting roles, see Table 1.

Table 1 Demographic Data on Age and Years of Experience
Full size table

The current performance level of the participants had a wide range from the professional leagues (1st to 3rd league; players: 10.1%, coaches: 14.3%) to the 4th league (players: 24.7%, coaches: 14.3%) and the other lower amateur leagues (players: 65.2%, coaches: 71.4%).

Data collection

For the data collection, an online qualitative survey with three open and three click box closed-response questions was created (see Table 2). Regarding the core question (question no. 6), the participants had the opportunity to give as many responses as they wanted and were free to express themselves without being restricted in their responses, e.g., by a pre-selection of personality traits. The method of a fully online survey was preferred to an interview because it allows as wide a range of participants as possible to take part in this study. In addition, the potential of this relatively novel method could be used to obtain a diversity of perspectives and a wide-angle lens on the topic of interest (Braun & Clarke, 2013; Braun, Clarke, Boulton, Davey, & McEvoy, 2021).

Table 2 Overview of the Questions of the Online Survey
Full size table

Apart from the purpose of the study, the approximate time needed to complete the questionnaire, and the reference to the anonymous processing of the data, no further information was provided. The data collection process took two weeks, starting from the creation to the closure of the survey. The participants needed between 5 and 18 min to complete the survey, with an average time of 8 min.

Analysis

The data analysis was composed of specific techniques of qualitative content analysis (Mayring, 2022; see also Mayring, 2019). Due to the open nature of the research question on the one hand and the theoretically based focus (personality traits) on the other, the content-analytical approach of this study followed both inductive and deductive analysis steps (Mayring, 2000, 2014). A mix of these different basic procedures offered interesting possibilities and a fully comprehensive analysis of the responses (Mayring, 2014). The basic idea behind this was first that a certain amount of the participants’ responses regarding the necessary personality traits of handball referees is reflected in the five broad factors of openness, conscientiousness, agreeableness, extraversion, and neuroticism and the associated facets (Soto & Jackson, 2020). Due to the underlying theory (e.g., NEO-PI‑R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) and the hierarchical structure of the FFM (scales and facets; see Table 5 in the Appendix), it was possible to structure the responses using an existing category system. On the contrary, this also meant that it had to be assumed that the participants would understand the open research question in a broader sense, i.e., beyond the framework of the FFM, and give responses that could not be captured by the model. These responses were addressed with another content analysis method in order to create a comprehensive overview through reduction and abstraction (Mayring, 2014, 2022).

The first step of the analysis therefore aimed at extracting a structure from the material on the basis of a theory-based category system. The underlying categories (facets) were predetermined, i.e., they were deduced from theory and remained constant throughout the analysis. The main source of reference for this procedure were the 240 items from the NEO-PI‑R manual (Costa & McCrae, 1992), which measure the 30 facets and thus indirectly the five scales of the Big Five model. The items are simple sentences describing specific behaviours or attitudes associated with a particular personality facet. Each facet is represented by eight items, thus providing a detailed description of the respective facet. For this reason, the items were used as a definition for the respective facet. The authors read each response line by line (in most cases only a single word) and checked whether the response was related to one of the category definitions. The coding rule was both simple and strict, as only responses with the same wording or semantic similarity were accepted for assignment. For example, the response that a handball referee should be “conscientious” is reflected in item 15 “I try to fulfil all tasks that are assigned to me conscientiously”. Following the coding rule, the response “conscientious” could therefore be assigned to item 15. According to the manual (Costa & McCrae, 1992), this item belongs to the facet “C3: Dutifulness” which in turn is associated with the scale of Conscientiousness. This principle of deductive category assignment (Mayring, 2014) was applied to all responses, resulting in a list of categories (facets) and associated scales related to original responses. Responses that did not meet the category definitions in this way were initially ignored for the time being in this procedure.

Nevertheless, the remaining responses were considered useful and should not be disregarded as they also contained valuable information beyond the scope of the FFM. In order to systematically analyse this material, the procedure of inductive category formation (Mayring, 2014, 2022) was applied in a second step. The aim here was to arrive at summarising categories that came from the material itself, rather than from theoretical considerations (Mayring, 2014). For this procedure, the two authors received support from two “critical friends”: one active handball player with 15 years of experience in semi-professional leagues and one coach with 22 years of experience up to the second division. Their role was to provide honest and impartial feedback and help resolve any ambiguities or uncertainties in terms of category definition and coding. As a criterion for the selection process in category formation, the extended team agreed to consider only responses related to personality. However, during a first run-through of the material, the team realised that the responses went beyond the boundaries of the concept of personality and were more akin to a comprehensive performance profile. In order not to neglect this information, the category definition was expanded with reference to the areas of refereeing performance (Mascarenhas et al., 2005). After this revision, the team again worked through the material, discussed the potential meaning of each response, formulated categories, and checked if responses occurred that were related to one of the category definitions. The result, similar to the first step, was a list of original responses that were grouped into four categories. Finally, the responses, category labels, and definitions from both analysis steps were translated from German into English by a certified translator.

As personality is a complex and multi-faceted construct, the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods can help to gain further insights for a comprehensive picture of the phenomenon (Nzabonimpa, 2018). That is, recording the existence of responses already reveals initial insights, while converting qualitative data into quantitative data additionally facilitates pattern recognition or otherwise to extract meaning from qualitative data (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2018; Sandelowski, Voils, & Knafl, 2009). For both inductively and deductively analysed data, Mayring (2014) suggests conducting frequency analysis to identify which categories occur most frequently and so represent the most salient characteristics. This was implemented in the present study by calculating both absolute numbers and percentages (Hannah & Lautsch, 2011). For this purpose, each of the 30 facets (1–30) and each of the five scales (1–5) of the FFM were first clearly labelled and given a code. Then, the facets and scales assigned to the original responses were coded accordingly. The inductively formulated categories were coded from 1–4 following the same principle. After assigning numerical values to the qualitative data collected, the datasets were transferred to SPSS (version 29) for further analysis. Both response frequencies and percent of responses were calculated. The latter presents a percentage from 0 to 100% and provides valuable information about the relevance of different responses within the datasets, allowing patterns to be identified between participants and comparisons to be made between different groups or categories.

The analyses showed that the 89 players gave a total of 338 responses and the 35 coaches gave 124 responses. An overview of the different types of responses and their distribution is displayed in Table 3.

Table 3 Overview of the Allocation of the Responses
Full size table

Findings

With regard to the first analytical step of deductive category assignment, the findings show that players and coaches mention personality traits from all five factors (openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism). However, the apparent differences in response frequencies indicate that particular factors and subordinate facets are rated as more relevant by the participants. In the following section, the findings are presented in the order of the acronym OCEAN, first for players and then for coaches. A complete overview of all findings can be found in Fig. 1 and 2 in the appendix.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Frequency of Raw-Data Themes and Assignment to Facets and Scales for Players. Note. N = 89. The number of quotes is indicated in paratheses (n; %)

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Frequency of Raw-Data Themes and Assignment to Facets and Scales for Coaches. Note. N = 35. The number of quotes is indicated in paratheses (n; %)

Full size image

Responses of players

The domain of openness to experience received the fewest responses of all five domains and consisted only of the general response openness (n = 3, 1.6%).

The domain of conscientiousness was the domain with the second highest relevance (n = 43, 22.2%). Especially notable was that handball referees should be consistent (n = 11, 5.7%), steadfast (n = 4, 2.1%), competent (n = 8, 4.1%), and accurate (n = 7, 3.6%). These more salient quotes can be grouped into the superordinate facets of self-discipline (n = 15, 7.8%), competence (n = 8, 4.1%), and order (n = 7, 3.6%).

By far the most responses can be assigned to the domain of extraversion (n = 101, 52.3%). Particularly striking were the frequencies of responses for confident (n = 35, 18.1%), assertive (n = 26, 13.5%), talkative (n = 12, 6.2%), and decisive (n = 10, 5.2%). This high number of quotes also leads to high expressions at the facet level in assertiveness (n = 71, 36.8%) and gregariousness (n = 19, 9.8%).

The domain of agreeableness received the second fewest responses (n = 9, 4.7%). The quotes tolerant (n = 3, 1.6%) and respectful (n = 2, 1.0%) were mentioned most frequently, but this did not lead to one facet standing out in particular.

Lastly, the domain of neuroticism (formulated positively as emotional stability) is in the middle position measured by quotation frequencies (n = 37, 19.2%). Player responses indicate that referees should be calm (n = 13, 6.7%) and self-secure (n = 10, 5.5%). Transferred to the facet level, this leads to a stronger weighting for anxiety (n = 13, 6.7%) and self-consciousness (n = 10, 5.5%).

Responses of coaches

As with the players, only a low relevance of the domain of openness to experience was found among the coaches, measured by the frequency of responses (n = 5, 7.1%). In addition to the general answer openness (n = 3, 4.3%), coaches also stated that handball referees should be eager to learn (n = 2, 2.9%). In total, this means the penultimate of five ranks for this domain.

The domain of conscientiousness also gained the second highest relevance amongst the coaches (n = 13, 18.6%). The facet of dutifulness pooled the most assignments (n = 6, 8.6%), otherwise the response frequencies did not indicate any clear outliers.

Similar to the players, the domain of extraversion was by far the most frequently addressed by the coaches (n = 39, 55.7%). Noteworthy are the quotations confident (n = 16, 22.9%) and talkative (n = 8, 11.4%) as well as the related facets of assertiveness (n = 19, 27.2%) and gregariousness (n = 12, 17.1%), which combine the most assignments.

The domain of agreeableness received the fewest responses of all five domains (n = 1, 1.4%). Being direct (n = 1, 1.4%) was the only quote that did not attribute any particular importance to this domain.

The domain of neuroticism is ranked third, only close behind the domain of conscientiousness (n = 12, 17.1%). The trait self-secure (n = 7, 10.0%), and thus the associated facet of self-consciousness was particularly emphasised by the coaches.

Categorisation of remaining responses

The second analytical step of inductive category formation resulted in the emergence of four themes. These categories included both responses that addressed personality qualities in a broader sense but also cognitive, interpersonal, and physiologically related responses. The labels for the themes as well as the descriptions were determined by the two authors with the support of the two critical friends.

  1. 1.

    Character & leadership: The social and mental skills as well as verbal and non-verbal interpersonal skills to communicate (interact) appropriately and effectively with players and coaches (e.g., being authoritarian or able to take criticism).

  2. 2.

    Judgement & decision making: The ability to adhere to the highest precept of the referee’s sporting role in any situation and at any time of the game, namely not to favour one team over another (e.g., being fair or impartial).

  3. 3.

    Game management: The ability to read a game and make decisions based on a solid knowledge of the rules that are appropriate to the course of the game and conducive to the flow of the game (e.g., understanding of the game or experience).

  4. 4.

    Physiological & cognitive demands: All the skills that ensure that referees can master the multitude of decisions and perceive and process situations quickly, confidently, and appropriately (e.g., quick perception or fitness).

The overview in Table 4 shows the raw-data themes and the grouping into the four superordinate categories. The most frequently mentioned quotes within the categories are presented below, indicated with the percentage of responses (percentage of each response out of total responses) in parentheses.

Table 4 Raw-Data Themes and Category System for Players and Coaches
Full size table

Character and leadership

The category character and leadership is most closely related to the research question and consequently combines most of the responses expressed by players (38.7) and coaches (38.9). From the participants’ point of view, it is necessary for handball referees to act in a sovereign manner (players: 4.8; coaches: 5.6), but likewise to be able to take criticism (players: 6.9; coaches: 7.4) in order to manage the game well. In addition, a certain degree of authenticity seems to be important for coaches (5.6) while exuding authority is of particular relevance for players (9.0).

Judgement and decision-making

This category concerns expectations of judgement and decision-making in handball refereeing (players: 31.0; coaches: 25.9). Being fair, impartial, neutral, objective, and unbiased as a referee is the foundation for equal opportunities and a sporting setting in which the best team may win. Since a sporting competition would hardly make sense without these prerequisites, it is not surprising that players (26.3) and coaches (22.2) alike emphasise these qualities. The ability to make fair decisions is often rooted in an inner sense of justice which was also reported by some players (4.8) and coaches (3.7).

Game management

The category game management (players: 17.9; coaches: 27.8) describes the balancing act between exercising the rules while accounting for the spirit of the rules. Game management in this context is understood according to the interpretation proposed by Mascarenhas, Collins, and Mortimer (2002). In the tension between “the art versus the science of refereeing” and “the appropriate versus the literal application of the rulebook”, it is particularly important in modern handball that referees adjust their decisions to the concrete game situation and reach consistency in their calls (Mascarenhas et al., 2002, p. 330). For this, players and coaches first require a profound knowledge of the rules (players: 4.1; coaches: 7.4) and a deep understanding of the game/handball (players: 6.2; coaches: 3.7). Beyond that, however, a certain feeling for the game—or what players (3.4) and coaches (7.4) also call tact—is needed.

Physical fitness and cognitive demands

The last category refers to physical fitness and cognitive demands (players: 12.4; coaches: 7.4). This area has basically no connection to the research question and is therefore only relatively poorly represented. However, the responses are of central importance in the overall context of refereeing and some players mentioned the relevance of quick perception (4.1) and fast decision-making (2.1). These quotes are indirectly linked to fitness (players: 2.8; coaches: 5.6) and the ability to concentrate (players: 2.1), as physical exhaustion has an impact on cognitive information processing, and thus the quality of decision-making (Bloß et al., 2022). Taking into account that the game has become increasingly faster in recent years due to rule changes, a good level of fitness has become almost essential.

Discussion

Given the importance of referees, it is surprising that the personality of handball referees has hardly received any attention in the scientific debate so far. The literature review revealed that the current state of knowledge is limited to self-assessments on the FFM, which makes it difficult to make comprehensive statements on which personality characteristics are necessary to perform the function of a handball referee. In order to contribute to the further development of personality-based research in handball refereeing, this study had two main objectives: (i) to identify relevant personality traits within the FFM and contrast them with results from referees’ self-reports; and (ii) to reveal and classify further personal characteristics in relation to existing findings. Based on a qualitative online survey, triangulation of different participants with a high affinity to handball from an inside perspective (players) and an outside perspective (coaches), and different approaches proved that particular personality traits within the FFM are considered relevant. Additionally, the analysis led to the emergence of four superordinate categories: (i) character and leadership; (ii) judgement and decision making; (iii) game management; and (iv) physical fitness and cognitive demands. Hence, the players and coaches highlight clear focal points in the referee personality that are highly relevant from their practical perspective.

In the following, the responses assigned to the FFM are first discussed regarding results of handball referees’ self-assessments (Dodt et al., 2022b). Then, the four superordinate categories are compared with prior research findings dealing with the characteristics of refereeing performance. Lastly, conclusions are drawn from the results, and suggestions are made as to which areas of personality could be of particular scientific interest for handball refereeing.

Comparison of the five-factor related findings with previous research

  1. 1.

    The low number of responses in the domain of openness to experience suggests that openness is not considered particularly relevant by players and coaches alike. Quotes indicating openness to imagination, aesthetics, feelings, actions, ideas, and norms or values (Costa & McCrae, 1992) could not be found in the dataset. This is in line with the self-assessments of handball referees (Dodt et al., 2022b), which are also inconspicuous compared to the general population.

  2. 2.

    The response frequencies combined under the domain of conscientiousness indicate that both players and coaches consider these characteristics as fundamentally relevant for the exercise of refereeing. The domain reflects traits such as competence, accuracy, and consistency, but also punctuality, reliability, and a sense of responsibility. In view of the role-specific requirement profile of a referee, these are indispensable qualities to meet the expectations of a sporting role model function. Non-personality-related quotes also express competence, such as knowledge of the rules or understanding of the game—attributes which are reflected in the category of game management and are also essential for refereeing. From the players’ point of view, quotes that refer to competence, accuracy, and consistency are comprehensible. Since referees need to directly intervene during the game, they influence the flow of the game, which is not always appreciated. To generate acceptance of the calls, fair, comprehensible, and appropriate decisions are necessary. The ability to act this way is reflected in the categories of judgement and decision-making and game management. However, research results have shown that, surprisingly, handball referees do not consider themselves to be more conscientious than the general population (Dodt et al., 2022b). Solely the facet of reliability revealed a significantly stronger expression in referees’ self-reports, which corresponds to one of the expectations of players and coaches.

  3. 3.

    The referees’ main task is to ensure that all players and team officials follow the rules of the game. When applying the rules, it can be assumed in most cases that referees are convinced—at least in the moment of the decision—that their decision is appropriate (MacMahon et al., 2015). In this context, the model of information processing (Plessner & Haar, 2006) describes a sequence in which an observable stimulus event (e.g., a player’s tackle) passes through different and complex “invisible” cognitive levels (perception, categorisation, memory, and information integration). Parts of this process, which have been named by the participants, can be found in the category of physical fitness and cognitive demands. In a final step, the framework leads to a behavioural response of the referee; a visible decision (e.g., 7‑metre throw and red card). Beside these cognitive abilities that result in a call (or no-call), however, there are also personal qualities that can help the referee sell these decisions. According to the authors, particularly the traits of assertiveness, decisiveness, and self-confidence, which are especially in demand in critical decisions (50:50 calls) or so-called no-calls (i.e., when the referee deliberately refrains from blowing the whistle despite foul play), support the acceptance of decisions. In addition to the respective hand signals, short and concise communication with players and/or coaches can give a stronger effect to the decision, which is documented with the quote of talkativeness. Because selling decisions is at least as important for the acceptance and the flow of the game as decision-making itself, it is not surprising that the most frequently mentioned responses can be assigned to the domain of extraversion. These findings are also consistent with the self-assessment of handball referees, who deviate significantly from the general population in this domain and the underlying facets (Dodt et al., 2022b).

  4. 4.

    Measured by word frequencies, personality traits indicating agreeableness do not seem to be relevant for players and coaches, as only the second fewest responses could be attributed to this domain. However, agreeableness should not be underestimated either, since respect and tolerance were mentioned by the group of players. Recent findings have also shown that referees’ scores for compassion, respectfulness, and trust are slightly above the average of the general population (Dodt et al., 2022b). One reason why these characteristics were not mentioned more often by players and coaches could be because values such as trust, respect, and tolerance are central pillars of the sport of handball. Because this is also a matter of course in the interaction between the referees and all those involved in the game, it was perhaps not necessary to mention this inherent interpersonal dealing explicitly.

  5. 5.

    In the last domain, neuroticism, players and coaches point out the presence of self-security. For players who interact regularly and directly with the referees on the court, an aura of calmness and serenity is also another important characteristic. The combination of self-security and calmness is particularly helpful in tricky or heated situations in order to maintain control of the game. An insecure, doubtful, or even anxious person would not be able to withstand the pressure and would easily tend to become unbalanced under stress (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Recent study results clearly indicate a low expression for handball referees in this domain (Dodt et al., 2022b). Important and beneficial characteristics of officiating are “not getting worked up” and being confident, stress-resistant, and resilient. Without these characteristics, the pressure to make quick decisions and to deal with criticism, insults, and wrong decisions would be difficult to manage. The participants also seem to go in line with these findings and mention the ability to deal with criticism and conflict, as well as mental strength, strong nerves, and a strong character which can be found in the category of character and leadership.

Classification of the inductively formulated categories in view of other team sports

In terms of contextualising and transferring the findings from the inductive strand, it seems reasonable to refer to the cornerstones model (Mascarenhas et al., 2005) already presented in the introduction as there are overlaps, e.g., in the areas of physical fitness, (contextual) judgement and decision-making, game management, and mastery of the rules (knowledge and appropriate application). The model is overarched by the psychological characteristics of excellence comprising confidence, mental fitness, and strength of character which are also represented in the category of character and leadership in the present study. All in all, the findings of this study provide good reason to suggest that the cornerstones model can also be useful for the development of referees in handball. While rule and rule application tests as well as video and fitness tests are already part of the standard repertoire, there are little or no systematic and comprehensive training interventions to improve referees’ personality and game management skills. This is surprising as communication and management skills are seen as critical to success in terms of dealing with the nuances of each game (Mascarenhas et al., 2005). Therefore, with the increasing professionalisation of handball, the growing media coverage, and the use of headsets (not only in professional leagues), the implementation of conflict management and communication training under high pressure is recommended.

Research investigating factors of football officiating excellence (Schnyder & Hossner, 2016; Slack et al., 2013) shares notable commonalities with the present study. Three of the emerged themes are of particular interest: (i) mental toughness attributes reflect issues such as confident and tough decision-making as well as a feeling for the game. A tough attitude and sports intelligence in turn was also quoted by the participants in the present study; (ii) effective game management qualities refer to empathy for players, accuracy and consistency of decisions, the correct application of rules, and communication to players and coaches. Being accurate, consistent, decisive, and empathic were also mentioned as necessary personality traits for handball referees. These traits—in combination with knowledge of the rules and understanding of the game—characterise good game management; and (iii) personal characteristics. Surprisingly, this was one of the least elaborated categories, which only showed commonalities with the present study in quotes on assertiveness, self-confidence, respect, and patience.

A juxtaposition of the results of the study at hand with previous research findings shows clear similarities, i.e., the characteristics of a good referee seem to overlap to a large extent. Although comparative cross-sports studies are lacking, those responsible for handball refereeing could take the lessons learned from rugby and football studies and apply them to their own areas of concern, e.g., referee recruitment or development.

Implications

First, the results of this study point out that many of the personality traits the participants considered necessary for the job of handball referee are related to the FFM. For this reason, it makes sense to conduct further studies with established scales on the Big Five (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1992; Soto & John, 2017), especially regarding longitudinal studies (see Gomà-i-Freixanet, Pla-Cortés, & Avilés-Antón, 2020). In this vein, on the one hand, it could be investigated whether the referees’ personality traits change over time and converge towards a “referee profile”, thus demonstrating a socialisation effect. Conversely, it could also be shown that the personality profiles of handball referees are relatively stable, which could support the idea of a selection effect, sometimes referred to as the gravitation hypothesis (Allen et al., 2013). The former would mean that referees would have to be developed towards this personality profile through targeted and personalised training, while the latter would reinforce a stronger focus on and improvement of the selection process.

Within the FFM, the domain of extraversion was referred to particularly often. Specifically, the facets of assertiveness and decisiveness were frequently mentioned and could therefore be considered almost indispensable characteristics for handball referees. Future research could start here and explore both constructs in more depth, e.g., using the assertiveness schedule (Rathus, 1973) or the need to evaluate scale (Jarvis & Petty, 1996). The knowledge gained could be incorporated into the recruitment process and translated into targeted measures to identify candidates who already exhibit these characteristics. This could lead to an increase in retention rates, as candidates with a high similarity to the “model referee” are less likely to drop out.

In the context of effective game management, the consistency of refereeing decisions is also particularly relevant, since players and coaches rely on previous decisions as a reference for further decisions (Brand, Schmidt, & Schneeloch, 2006; MacMahon et al., 2015). A good referee should thus not just strive to be consistent but consistently right. As a further impetus, future research may want to examine the tendency towards consistent behaviour using the preference for consistency scale (Cialdini, Trost, & Newsom, 1995). Individuals who do not have a desire to be consistent or to be perceived as consistent may have problems meeting expectations for the quality of their refereeing decisions. Hence, the level of consistency could prove to be another useful component in the selection process.

Furthermore, the findings provide evidence for self-efficacy and mental strength. The former could be examined with the referee self-efficacy scale (REFS; Labudek et al., 2019; Myers, Feltz, Guillén, & Dithurbide, 2012) and the latter with the Sports Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ; Sheard, Golby, & van Wersch, 2009). In particular, self-efficacy in referees could be of interest in view of the progressing introduction of headsets in non-professional leagues. Headsets allow much better communication between the referees, over and above the limited options otherwise available (hand signals and eye contact), thus increasing safety and facilitating game management. Hence, research could explore the effect of headset use on referees’ or couples’ self-efficacy, providing valuable insights for the development of young referees.

This study undertakes the balancing act between different approaches and techniques. In our view, one of the strengths of the present paper is the size of the sample, its heterogeneity and balance, and its high informative value. The triangulation of players and coaches from different levels of performance and experience provided both an “inside” and “outside” perspective. In addition, the use of different approaches to content analysis enabled a comprehensive evaluation of the material through procedures of structural extraction (deductive category assignment) and categorisation (inductive category formation). Furthermore, the findings could be deepened by adding quantitative methods of analysis. The indication of frequencies enabled a comparison with previous research results, which also enhanced trustworthiness and credibility. In conclusion, suggestions for further research could be made to improve refereeing in handball in general, but also to provide valuable practical support in the areas of referee recruitment and development.

Finally, we would like to note that the findings in the present study are not without limitations. Although the distinction between players and coaches made possible to include two different perspectives, we point out that the unequal sample sizes can be seen as a weakness. Both, in the assignment of the responses to the FFM and in the formation of categories, it becomes apparent that the players address a broader spectrum of responses than the coaches. However, it can only be speculated whether the coaches interviewed did not come up with further responses because they were not important to them or whether a higher number of interviewed coaches would have resulted in a wider range of responses. This leads to another weakness, which is inherent in the online survey. The research team did not have the opportunity to interact with the participants, so probing, which is naturally existing in a qualitative interview, was not possible. Therefore, it can not be ruled out that responses remained unattainable because the researchers were unable to bring the topic into the discussion (Nzabonimpa, 2018). In addition, Sandelowski et al. (2009) point to other reasons for non-responses that were accepted when using the online survey, namely that (i) a response was forgotten by the participant; (ii) a response was thought by the participant to be so understood as to not require bringing up; (iii) the participant did not want to bring up a response; or (iv) it truly was not a dimension of experience. It must therefore be considered that the recorded responses may not be an exact reflection of the participants’ thoughts. As regards point (iv), the aspect of “experience” necessitates specific attention, given the varying levels of expertise of the participants. Final limiting remarks are that the findings may not be generalisable to referees, umpires, or officials in other team sports due to vast cultural differences across sports. Likewise, the participants were only recruited from Germany, so it could not be clarified whether players and coaches from other countries agreed with the assessment of their German colleagues.

In summary, the findings of this study have broadened the understanding of the personality of handball referees. The insights gained also support and complement previous literature on officiating and reveal research areas in handball refereeing. We hope that this paper may encourage more personality-related research and lead to examinations that take up our suggestions for further targeted research, e.g., comparisons across countries, sports, or levels of expertise.