Verbal aggressiveness is the usage of hurtful words and insults, aiming at deconstructing the other person’s dignity and self-image (Infante & Wigley, 1986; Infante & Rancer, 1996) . The consequence is to create negative emotions such as shame, humiliation, despair, depression, and further negative feelings about themselves (Infante, 1987; Infante & Rancer, 1982; Infante & Wigley, 1986; Infante, Riddle, Horvath, & Tumlin, 1992; Infante & Rancer, 1993; Rancer & Avtgis, 2006; Piko & Keresztes, 2006) . Verbal aggressiveness is detrimental to society, both for every individual and as an overall (Hamilton, 2012). In addition, it is one of the most severe causes of physical aggressiveness (Hamilton, Buck, Chory, Beatty, & Patrylak, 2008) . Communication among instructors and students affects substantially the learning process, behavior, thinking and motivation (Bekiari, 2014; Richmond, McCroskey, Kearney, & Plax 1987) . However, verbal aggressiveness is widespread significantly in educational environment (Bekiari, Koustelios, & Sakellariou, 2000; Yaratan & Uludag, 2012; Kikas, Peets, Tropp, & Hinn, 2009) and comprises a feature of destructive communication that erodes human relations (Infante & Rancer, 1996; Infante & Wigley, 1986; Bekiari, Kokaridas, & Sakellariou, 2005; 2006; Bekiari, Digelidis, & Sakellariou, 2006; Bekiari, Patsiaouras, Kokaridas, & Sakellariou, 2006; Johnson, Becker, Wigley, Haigh, & Craig, 2007; Myers, Edwards, Wahl, & Martin, 2007; Bekiari, 2012; 2016; Rancer & Avtgis, 2014; Bekiari, Perkos, & Gerodimos, 2015; Bekiari & Syrmpas, 2015; Bekiari & Manoli, 2016; Bekiari & Pylarinou, 2017; Manoli & Bekiari, 2015) , while a collaborative form of communication which promotes amity, is reduced (Hamilton & Hample, 2011) . Communication form adopted by instructors may lead to students’ anti-social behaviors (Claus, Booth-Butterfield, & Chory, 2012; Hassandra, Bekiari, & Sakellariou, 2007) . Instructors’ verbal aggressiveness seems to negatively affectthe rise of a positive interaction with students (Martin & Myers, 2006) . Verbally aggressive instructors may createmore harsh conditions in their class, leading to less appealing and intimate communication relationships both with students and colleagues (Avtgis & Rancer, 2008; Rancer & Avtgis, 2006) . A defensive climate is developed in the classroom, where the exchange of ideas and opinions is discouraged (Myers & Rocca, 2001) . As a result, students’ desire to interact (Schrodt, 2003; Edwards & Myers, 2007) and their perceptions about the instructors (Myers et al., 2007; Schrodt, 2003; Syrmpas & Bekiari, 2015; Wrench & Punyanunt-Carter, 2005; Bekiari & Tsiana, 2016; Bekiari & Tsaggopoulou, 2016; Bekiari & Petanidis, 2016) are negatively affected, considering them to be less reliable (Mazer & Stowe, 2016; Myers, 2001; Edwards & Myers, 2007; Schrodt, 2003) . These findings indicate that every time instructors renege on students’ aspirations by applying destructive forms of communication, students perceive that as a detachment and relational transgression (Vallade & Myers, 2014) . Studying verbal aggressiveness is considered of utmost importance, since its consequences are harmful for the receivers (Aloia & Solomon, 2016) , especially among children and young people (Donovan & Brassard, 2011) . Consequently, verbal aggressiveness seems not to be conducive to learning and personal progress (Bekiari, 2012; Bekiari & Hasanagas, 2016a, 2016b; Bekiari & Sakellariou, 2003) . Although the use of verbal aggression is considered to lead to negative results in many settings, to certain extent, it is acceptable in sports. Namely, it is likely that a verbally aggressive coach should lead their athletes to be motivated in order to achieve higher performance(e.g. a champion’s level of competition); however, it should also be noticed that verbal aggressiveness make athletes less willing to contact with their coach. Verbal aggressiveness has also been extensively examined with network analysis (Bekiari, Deliligka, & Koustelios, 2017; Bekiari & Hasanagas, 2015, 2016c; Bekiari & Spuropoulou, 2016; Hasanagas & Bekiari, 2015, 2017; Theoharis, Bekiari, & Koustelios, 2017 ). These analyses have revealed deep-rooted structures of aggressiveness behaviour.

The motivational climate can be defined as an environment of social settings (terms and actions of reward or penalties formally or informally) which orient trainees either to learn or performance goals. Motivational climate refers to a goal-oriented psychological environment in achievement settings, which is determined by situational factors (such as instructors) (Ames, 1992) . Instructors’ effect is of crucial importance and multifaceted as they can urge and encourage the students’ active participation both during the educational process as well as after this (Granero-Gallegos, Baena-Extremera, Gómez-López, & Abraldes, 2014) . There have been stated two types of motivational climate, mastery or task-in- volving climate and performance or ego-involving climate, which derive from Achievement Goal Theory (AGT; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980, Nicholls, 1984; 1989 ). Instructors may promote either of the two major motivational climates (Bortoli, Bertollo, Vitali, Filho, & Robazza, 2015) . Mastery climate is encouraged by instructor’s focus on cognitive ability, effort and self-improvement (Ames, 1992; Roberts, Treasure, & Conroy, 2007) . Extensive research has shown the attachment with prosperity, joy, task insistency, adaptability (Ntoumanis & Biddle, 1999; Roberts, 2012; Van De Pol, Kavussanu, & Ring, 2012) , greater efforts, pleasure, decreased anxiety (Cunningham & Xiang, 2008; Kavussanu & Roberts, 2001; Atkins, Johnson, Force, & Petrie, 2015; Smith, Smoll, & Cumming, 2007) , self-evaluation and general satisfaction (Kavussanu & Harnisch, 2000; Le Bars, Gernigon, & Ninot, 2009; Atkins et al., 2015) . In a performance motivational climate instructors encourage social comparison, superficially stimulate students during learning process using on regulative evaluation and recompensing performance results (Ames, 1992; Ames & Archer, 1988; Murcia, Camacho, & Rodríguez, 2008; Keegan, Spray, Harwood, & Lavallee, 2010) , and enhance thereby the competition among students complimenting the most talented students (Cervelló & Santos-Rosa, 2001; Nicholls, 1989; Roberts, 2001) . Performance-re- lated motivational climate induces feelings of anxiety, stress, confusion, boredom and withdrawal, as it prevails lack of motivation (Liukkonen, Barkoukis, Watt, & Jaakkola, 2010; Braithwaite, Spray, & Warburton, 2011; Cumming, Smoll, Smith, & Grossbard, 2007; Nerstad, Roberts, & Richardsen, 2013; Van De Pol et al., 2012; Granero-Gallegos et al., 2014; Ommundsen & KvalØ, 2007) . Research has identified further behaviors and interactions that contribute to motivational climate, such as the influence between peers, based on promoting cooperation, support, affection, competition, disagreement and friendships (Vazou, Ntoumanis, & Duda, 2005; Keegan, Spray, Harwood, & Lavallee, 2009; Keegan, Spray, Harwood, & Lavallee, 2010; Beltman & Volet, 2007; Bengoechea & Strean, 2007; Weiss, Amorose, & Wilko, 2009) .

Aim of the present study is to detect and depict verbal aggressiveness and motivation as relations and, thereby, as structures within a group of students (incl. also instructors) as well as their determinants. All previous analyses have suggested approaches to the effects or determinants, but they have not examined the verbal aggressiveness and the motivation as relations among students or among students and instructors (there are only a few studies on verbal aggressiveness applying network analysis which has been mentioned above). This study tries to reveal deep-rooted structures of verbal aggressiveness and motivation and their determinants. Additionally to the analysis of the structures and their determinants, a typology depicting the combination among these structures is proposed.

In more details, verbal aggressiveness and motivational climate have been operationalized as structures and not only as ego-centric individual perceptions. Furthermore, an inevitable combination of network analysis and conventional statistics is presented. Thus, the innovation is not only theoretical but also methodological.

In Table 1, students with high grade seem to be mostly central (in term of general degree). This can be attributed to the fact that a student who seeks high performance in examinations tends both to be eager for learning by others and also to be much in demand by others who trust his advice. Inversely, such a student utilizes the knowledge of other students and tranfers it to others, increasing therewith his knowledge capacity. On the contrary, those who are interested in becoming distinct professionals in physical education seem rather not to be interested in transferring knowledge relevant to psychology, sociology and pedagogy. This is understandable, as these disciplines are regarded by many students as basic rather than applied.

In Table 2, the total degree in stimulating for learning biology seems to be enhanced by the property of teaching staff. In biological subjects, the instructors are often asked by students as well as by each other, because very specific knowledge is necessary. They also may ask even students during the course in order to understand their way of thinking and to formulate the course content. Being teaching staff appears to play a distinctive role in such a stimulation in contrast to case of pedagogic-psychological field, where to be just a student or an instructor does not play any role in stimulating (the coefficient is insignificant and therefore it is not presented in Table 1 at all). This difference can be understood as a result of the fact that biology is a quite specific and laboratory-based field, in contrast to pedagogy and psychology, which are much closer to the everyday experience and to the personal interests of everyone. This general centrality degree is strengthened with the age and the experience of travelling abroad. This is understandable considering the relevance of accumulating a wide variety of experience. Simultaneously, the interest in just becoming professionally successful in physical education reduces the interest in collecting wider knowledge from the biological field. This can be seen as the classical incompatibility between widening mental horizons and practical achievement, science and market, “basic” and “applied”, “theoretical” and “realistic”. The same applies also to indegree,

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

status and pagerank. The authority in stimulating for learning biology seems to depend on the rural or urban origin and traveling abroad for sport reasons. The students originating from urban places as well as those who have experience of traveling for sport reasons seem to be distinguished in stimulating others in biological issues in term of authority. This can be regarded as a result of presenting a wide range of stimuli and ambitions (e.g. further studying and career). Apparently for similar reasons, students who have also traveled abroad by plane for sport reasons possessed also a distinct authority position in inspiring others interest in learning biology. Similar results have been proposed by previous studies ( Bekiari & Hasanagas, 2015; Bekiari, Deliligka & Koustelios, 2017).

Just as in Table 2, so in Table 3, being teaching staff seems to enhance the general degree (and other indicators such as indegree, status, pagerank) while the mere desire of professional success decreases the general degree as well as the authority. The reasons seem to be similar with these explained in Table 2. As for the indegree (occasional stimulating), male students seem to be more influential than the female ones. This could be regarded as a verification of the assumption that the sport is still perceived as a male-dominated field, where corporal strength is a main determinant. Similar results appear also in deeper structures depicted by status, pagerank and authority. Travel experience related to sport

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

activity strengthens the potential of stimulating others in sport learning at occasional (indegree) and deeper level (status, pagerank, authority), as they have to describe interesting situations and incidents and possibly to represent an attractive value system (championship, international cooperation and distinction in sport etc). Also, students who are stimulated for a study subject only (or mainly) by the subject itself (and not e.g. by the personality of the teaching staff or other parameters), have apparently perceived the subject quite “purely” and insightfully and, thus, they are able to inspire interest also to the others. Finally, students especially interested medicinal subjects are rather unable to stimulate others in sport issues. This can be perceived as a result of the contextual deficit between medicinal and sport subjects. The medicine is demanding in meticulous reading and studying of texts while sport subjects are based on corporal exercise rather than on reading. Thus, students interested in medicinal subjects are normally dedicated to books and cannot stimulate others to deal with sport.

In Table 4, the first finding which should be emphasized is that the property (being student or instructor) does not appear in the parameters of this table because it roved to insignificant for the motivation for improvement. In other words, it is questionable to what extent the formal structure “instructor-student” plays a substantial role in the motivation climate. Thus, at least at the level of

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

social structure analysis, an extension of the motivation research beyond the property of the instructors seems to make sense. The gender seems to influence the motivation climate, as female seem to stimulate for improvement. This could be attributed to the fact that male students are motivated to impress female ones with their high performance. The physical appearance is also of importance for the motivation in physical education, as tall individuals seem to discourage others from being improved. This can be explained by the fact that the not tall students regard as impossible to reach the performance of tall ones in several sports. This is understandable as being tall does not depend on training but only on the individual nature of each student. The over-weighted individuals seem also to discourage others, as they cannot function as an ideal for the others in sports necessitating flexibility and rapidness and, on the other hand, they are unbeatable in sports which require strength. Thus, being over-weighted is in any case discouraging, either as negative archetype or as an unsurpassable advantage. In contrast to the extreme individual nature (tall or over-weighted), high student’s grade seems to encourage others to improve their performance. The high grade depicts a valuing interest and diligence in the study subject which may only positively exemplify others. Simultaneously, high grade is achievable by anyone through personal try and time investment, in contrast to corporal nature. Traveling abroad by plane for sport reasons is often connected with seeking championship. Thus, such students cannot encourage others to improve their performance, because their performance is so high that it looks unreachable. Those who believe that they inspire interest to the others regarding the study subjects, they seem really to achieve that, as they present high degree. This increased degree means that they are also inspired by the others. Thus, such persons contribute to the motivation climate also with their personal example.

In Table 5, it is noticeable that the high education level of the parents (specifically of the mother) make the students not stimulate their mates to surpass performance limits and become more competitive in sports. This can be attributed

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

to the fact that a student who has been brought up by a mother of high education level tends to adopt mental interests and values and not interests related with corporal performance. The high grade is conducive to surpass performance limits for reasons similar to these described in the Table 4. On the contrary, those who often fail in the examinations or are absent in the lectures seem to negatively influence the motivation climate. Simultaneously, those who are often absent in the lectures spend this time in internet surfing. Students who travel abroad for sport reasons (normally seeking championship) also exert a negative impact on the motivation of the others to surpass performance limits for reasons similar to these explained in Table 4. Finally, students interested in the medicinal subjects tend to be stimulated and to stimulate others to surpass performance limits, as they regard this achievement as a challenge to utilize the medicinal knowledge.

In Table 6, the instructors present a noticeable tendency to offend and be offended. This may be attributed to the imperative style needed quite often in sport exercise, especially in organizing and arbitrating team sports. However, they seem to be more offensive than be offended while young students seem to be less offensive, as they still feel not enough self-confident to be involved in offensive actions. The desire to become an eminent professional also seems to discourage offenders, as ambitious students do not approach everyone but they are more selective in companions. Moreover, there seems to exist a certain organization culture at the department which protects such ambitions against offenses. In general, the expressed offensiveness (outdegree) seems to be restricted by the education level of their parents, particularly of the mother. Travelling abroad for sport reasons makes someone more offensive to others, as it enhances his image. Using internet for entertainment makes someone less offensive, as he is relaxed by this. Finally, it is noticeable that students originating from rural areas tend more to become target offenses than students of urban origin. This can be regarded as an evidence of spatial-regional discrimination. These results seem to be in accordance with other studies (Theoharis, Bekiari, & Koustelios, 2017) .

In the Table 7, again for reasons already discussed in Table 6, instructors tend to be target for deriding but they are much more deriding to others. Students from rural areas tend to deride and be derided while students from urban areas seems to keep out in general from deriding (neither deride nor be derided). This could be explained as a response to be offended, as shown in Table 6. When a student of rural origin experiences the regional discrimination mentioned above, then he reacts to this by deriding. Of course, he is, in turn, derided again and the vicious circle goes on. In contrast to this, students of urban areas do not need to enter such a vicious circle, as they do not become a target from the beginning. Subsequently, the offense described in Table 6 seems to precede deriding. In other words, offense appears to be the occasion/starting while the deriding the aftermath. Being a target for deriding seems even to be a cause of

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

being absent in courses. The higher the economic state of the family is, the more deriding one becomes to the others. Thus, materialistic differences seem to be a basis of abusive superiority feeling.

A typology of profiles combining motivation influence and becoming a target of various forms of verbal aggression is presented in Table 8. The first type is the profile of the “invulnerable motivator”. This is a quite influential person in inspiring others the ideal of learning and surpassing others. Both mastery and performance climate seem to be achieved by this profile. Although mastery (related to learning) and performance (related to ego) seem to differ from each other, as deep-rooted skill development and superficial efficiency, and also seem to be induced by completely different motives, they co-exist at this profile. Thereby, a person with such a profile can reasonably be expected: 1) either to inspire

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Extraction Method: Principal component analysis. 2 components extracted.

to others a desire for developing knowledge and skills or 2) a desire to be distinct and dominant. In the case a, the deep-learner also becomes challengeable and challenging in order to utilize the newly developed skills. In the case b, the person who desires dominance is obliged to develop skills. Thus, the “invulnerable motivator” seems both to cultivate a climate of mastery or performance though each other. Such a strong type of motivator can only inspire or crate enthusiasm depriving them of any tangible tendency to aggress him. On the contrary, the profile of the “vulnerable motivator” is someone who encourages others to improve their performance, becoming, however, himself a target of verbal aggressiveness. This can be attributed to that he implies directly or indirectly shortcomings of others which necessitate improvement. Thus, the “vulnerable motivator” is a type provoking rather that inspiring.

In Table 9, two types of general involvement are revealed. The “strong motivator” achieves all possible forms of motivation climate measured in this study. However, he is not so invulnerable as in the Table 8. He becomes a target of deriding and also derides others. This is a natural result, considering the constellation of (mutual) interactions as a whole, and not only the received actions as in the Table 8. The whole of interactions is a more realistic depiction of the reality than the received actions only. In this realistic whole, there can exist a motivator strong but not invulnerable and, of course, not above any aggression. Simultaneously, there also appears the merely “brawler” type. This type is not conducive to the motivation climate at all while his involvement in mutual verbal aggression is his only clearly revealed characteristic. Similar results have been proposed by previous studies (Bekiari & Spyropoulou, 2016; Bekiari & Petanidis, 2016; Hasanagas & Bekiari, 2015, 2017) .