music – Page 2 – The Sport Journal

Anabolic Steroids and Pre-Adolescent Athletes: Prevalence, Knowledge, and Attitudes

Submitted by: Randall R. Wroble, MD, Michael Gray, Ph.D. and Joseph A. Rodrigo, BS

Abstract

The objective of this article is to determine the prevalence, knowledge, and attitudes regarding anabolic steroids among pre-adolescent athletes and to compare our findings with a similar survey done in 1989. To measure these attitudes, the researchers conducted a survey of 1,553 pre-adolescent (10 to 14 year-old) athletes from 34 states. Less than one percent (0.7%) of the study group reported current or previous anabolic steroid usage. Eighty-eight percent had heard of anabolic steroids, but only 64% had had their side effects explained to them. Only 47% stated that a parent, coach, teacher, or athletic trainer was their primary source of information. Results were compared to a 1989 baseline study completed before legislation lead to the scheduling of anabolic steroids. In 1989, 78% had heard of anabolic steroids, 50% had had the side effects explained to them, and 2% admitted to using steroids. These results suggest that anabolic steroids remain a problem among pre-adolescents. Educational programs should be instituted during junior high school to increase the knowledge of anabolic steroids in this group. Information should come from qualified individuals including coaches, teachers, trainers, and especially parents.

KEY WORDS: anabolic steroids, steroids, athletes, pre-adolescent

Introduction

Anabolic steroid usage has been recognized as a serious health and ethical problem in athletes for several decades. Numerous examples of steroid usage rules violations have been highly publicized and have lead to the suspension and stripping of medals from international athletes, as well as many American professional athletes. Elite athletes, however, are not the only population of individuals that use steroids. Recreational athletes also use steroids to enhance performance and to improve personal appearance. Furthermore, evidence indicates that steroid usage often starts during high school. (Anderson, Buckley, Friedl, Streit, Wright &Yesalis, 1988; Bahrke, Kennedy, Kpstein & Yesalis, 1993; Dumitru & WIndsor, 1989)

Several investigators have examined the prevalence of anabolic steroid usage among American adolescent students, ages 12-18 years old. To date, published reports show male prevalence ranging from 1.4% to 12% and female prevalence from 0.5% to 2.9%. (Andwerson, et al, 1988; Bahrke et al, 1993; DuMitru & Windsor, 1989; Komoroski & Rickert, 1992; Escobedo, Heath & DuRaunt, 1995; Chilag, Elliot & Whitehead, 1992; Alongi, Miller & Tanner, 1995; DuRaunt, Emans, Faulkner, MIddleman & Woods, 1995) Two-thirds of the users started by age 17 (Johnson, 1990; Broderick, Pickell &Radakovich, 1993). Sixty-five percent were involved in high school athletics. (Komoroski et al 1992) reported that when users were questioned as to why they were using anabolic steroids, 64% stated to increase their strength; 48% to increase their size; 44% to improve their physical appearance; and 17% because their peers were users. Furthermore, anabolic steroid use has been associated with illicit drug use and high-risk behaviors. (DuRaunt, et al, 1995; Chillag, et al, 1992; DuRaunt, Emans et al, 1995; DuRaunt et al, 1993).

Numerous studies have documented adolescent steroid usage in the high school populationAndwerson, et al, 1988; Bahrke et al, 1993; DuMitru & Windsor, 1989; Komoroski & Rickert, 1992; Escobedo, Heath & DuRaunt, 1995; Chilag, Elliot & Whitehead, 1992; Alongi, Miller & Tanner, 1995; DuRaunt, Emans, Faulkner, MIddleman & Woods, 1995) , but little work has been published on the preadolescent or junior high age population. Yesalis et al did examine a population of adolescents 12 years old and older, and reported that males had higher levels of anabolic steroid use during their lifetime than females (0.9% and 0.1% respectively). (Bahrke et al, 1993) Radakovich et al studied anabolic-androgenic steroid use among students in 7th grade, ages ranging 12 to 15 years old, and reported that 4.7% of males and 3.2% of females used anabolic steroids.10 Minimal work has been done in a population younger than 12 years old.

In a report sponsored by the National Youth Sports Research and Development Center in 1989, a baseline was established for anabolic steroid knowledge, attitudes, and usage for a population of 10-14 year-old youth sports participants. (Gray, 1990) While actual usage of anabolic steroids was only 2%, overall attitudes and knowledge about anabolic steroids, and especially their side effects, was poor. For example, 43% of the athletes felt that steroids would probably not harm them if used carefully, and 55% felt that steroid usage alone would improve muscle size and strength. Furthermore, only 50% had ever had the side effects of steroids explained to them. This study also identified a population at risk. 12% of the athletes stated that they knew where to obtain steroids, and 15% indicated that they might use steroids to enhance performance.

In 1992, a second study was undertaken to examine the changes in attitudes and knowledge of anabolic steroids over time with the increased publicity and educational sources available to youth sports participants. The purpose of this paper is to report on the results of that study and compare responses to those obtained in 1989. This study is unique, as it is the first to present results in athletes this young using a national database.

Materials and Methods

The questionnaire was modified from the one designed and used by Gray (1990) in 1989(Appendix). The twenty-question survey included 15 questions used to determine the age, sex, race, sport, prevalence of anabolic steroid use, knowledge of side effects, attitudes towards steroids, and where to obtain anabolic steroids. Five additional questions focused on the number of years that the athletes were involved in sports, information sources about steroids, and perceptions of how steroids work.

Two research assistants in each of 34 states distributed questionnaires. The states were broken down into four geographical regions, and the results were examined nationally as well as regionally, Table 1.

Table 1. States involved in survey broken down by region.


Northeast	Midwest	South	West

Connecticut Maine New Hampshire New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Rhode Island	Indiana Iowa Kansas Minnesota Missouri Nebraska Ohio S. Dakota Wisconsin	Delaware Florida Georgia Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi N. Carolina Oklahoma S. Carolina Tennessee Texas Virginia	Arizona California Montana Oregon Washington Wyoming

Sixty questionnaires were distributed to each state in two separate groups of 30 each. A total of 2,040 questionnaires were given to youth sports participants, and 1,553 were returned, a response rate of 76%. Figure 1 displays the response rates according to geographical region. Where appropriate, Chi-squared tests were used to determine statistical significance.

Results

Demographics

The characteristics of the 1,553 youth sports participants who completed the survey are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Characteristics of 1,553 youth sports participants completing survey


Age	n	%

10	248	16
11	394	25
12	484	31
13	274	18
14	199	13
15	32	2

Gender

M	1079	70
F	474	30

Males made up 70% of the respondents in this survey. In Gray’s 1989 survey, males accounted for 80% of respondents. Children ages 11 and 12 accounted for over half of the survey participants (56%), with few 15 year-old participants (2%). Table 3 describes the ethnicity of the students in the survey.

Table 3. Ethnicity of youth sports participants


Ethnic group	n	%

Caucasian	1031	66
Black	264	17
Native American	83	5
Hispanic	76	5
Other	75	5
Asian/Pacific	12	1
No Answer	75	5

For all participants, basketball was the most common sport (78% for boys and 65% for girls). Baseball (31%), football (20%), and soccer (18%) followed respectively for the boys. Softball (24%), “other sports” (16%), and swimming (14%) followed for the girls, Table 4.

Table 4. Sport that youth sport participants currently involved in at time of survey

	all athletes		male		female

Sport	n	%	n	%	n	%
Basketball	1147	74	837	78	310	65
Baseball	362	23	337	31	25	5
Soccer	248	16	190	18	58	12
Football	228	15	217	20	11	2
Softball	134	9	22	2	112	24
Swimming	121	8	54	5	67	14
Other	105	7	28	3	77	16
Wrestling	72	5	71	7	1	.2
Tennis	75	5	43	4	32	7
Ice Hockey	22	1	19	2	3	1

The characteristics of the survey participants, including ethnic origin and sport participation did not vary significantly between the regions.
Prevalence of Anabolic Steroid Use

Less than one percent (0.7%) of youth sports participants reported current or previous usage of anabolic steroids. The rate of usage was higher in males (0.9%) than females (0.2%). The Midwest and Northeast regions had the lowest number of admitted users, while the South had the most (p<.05) (Figure 2). Forty-nine (3%) athletes had been offered steroids at some time. Of the 49 athletes that had been offered anabolic steroids, eleven (22%) admitted to using steroids

Of the reported 11 anabolic steroid users, 3 (27%) admitted they used anabolic steroids for athletic performance; 2 (18%) used to improve personal appearance; 2 (18%) used for bodybuilding; 2 (18%) took due to peer pressure; and two did not respond. Twelve percent of all athletes said that they personally know someone who was using or had used steroids.

Two percent of the youth sports participants agreed that they might use anabolic steroids to increase their size or improve their strength, with males three times as likely as females (3% to 1%) (p<.05). 11% admitted to knowing where to obtain steroids if they decided to use them.

Knowledge of Anabolic Steroids

Several questions in the survey were directed towards the youth sports participant’s knowledge of anabolic steroids and their side effects. Most of the survey’s participants (88%) had heard of anabolic steroids. Only 64% however, answered that they had had the side effects of steroids explained to them, with males (68%) significantly more frequently than females (57%) (p<.05). Less than half (47%) of the youth sports participants correctly answered that they did not believe that steroids alone, without proper nutrition and exercise, would improve muscle size and strength. Males were twice as likely as females (17% to 10%) (p<.05) to believe that steroids alone will improve muscle size and strength. Likewise, only 60% of the athletes disagreed with the statement that if used carefully, anabolic steroids would not harm the athlete.

Sixty-six percent of the athletes believed that steroids would not improve performance in their sport, and 90% stated that they did not need to take anabolic steroids to improve their chances for athletic success.

Males twice as commonly believed that anabolic steroids would improve performance in their sport, 17% to 10% for females (p<.05). Three percent of males also believed that they needed to take anabolic steroids to improve chances for athletic success. Only 0.4% of females held this belief (p<.05). When questioned if they believed that Olympic athletes used anabolic steroids to make the team, 30% answered yes, 35% no, and 28% not sure. Likewise, when asked if high school athletes used steroids to make their team, 25% said yes, 40% no, and 34% not sure. 65% of the youth sports participants surveyed stated that they believed that using anabolic steroids is the same as having a drug problem.

Sources of Information

The youth sports participants were given ten choices regarding their primary source of information about anabolic steroids, Table 5.

Table 5. Primary source of information about anabolic steroids.


	No. of youth sports participants (n=1,553)

Source	n	%

Book/Magazine	433	28
Parent	322	21
Coach	267	17
Friend/Teammate	113	7
Gym Personnel	112	7
Athletic Trainer	89	6
Teacher	47	3
Television	29	2
Dealer	17	1
Sibling	15	1

The most common source listed was books and magazines (28%). Parents (21%), coaches (17%), trainers (6%), and teachers (3%) accounted for less than half of all primary sources of information.

Discussion

This study was undertaken to examine the knowledge and attitudes of 10 to 14 year-old youth sports participants toward anabolic steroids. Very little attention has been paid to the pre-adolescent population in comparison to the high school age and older populations. This is the first study to examine this young of a population and thus has initiated questions about the knowledge, or lack thereof, and the educational processes directed towards this age group. This survey is also one of the first to look exclusively at a population of athletes before they enter high school.

The study was conducted in 34 states, and involved 1,553 youth sports participants. Prevalence of anabolic steroid usage was 0.7% in this study, lower than the previous study in 1989 at 2% (NS), and lower than the reported prevalence of usage among the studies that examined high school age students. Consistent with other studies1-8, more males (0.9%) than females (0.2%) took anabolic steroids (NS).

Although males had more commonly had steroid side effects explained to them than females (68% to 57%), they still had incorrect beliefs about steroids. Significantly more males (17%) than females (10%) believed that steroids would enhance performance, but also that steroids alone would improve performance (17% to 10%). Most importantly, however was that significantly more males (3%) than females (.4%) thought that they needed steroids to improve their chances of athletic success and would consider steroid usage (3% to 1%). This appears to show a tendency toward greater risk-taking behaviors in the males in this population.

The decrease in prevalence of anabolic steroid use among this age population may have several explanations. Since 1990, subsequent to the first survey, anabolic steroids have been classified as a Schedule III drug in the United States. This has resulted in decreased legal availability of anabolic steroids to potential users.

Increased educational resources are available to at least certain age groups and are now reaching larger numbers of children. The percentage of pre-adolescent athletes who have heard of steroids has increased significantly from 78% in 1989 to 88% in the current survey (p<.05). In 1989, only 50% of respondents had had steroid side effects explained to them. This significantly increased to 64% in the current study (p<.05). Currently, 60% of respondents felt that steroids, even if used carefully, would still harm the athlete compared to 56% in 1989 (p<.05). Furthermore, 65% currently consider steroid use a drug problem compared to 57% in 1989 (p<.05).

There is still pressure to take steroids and availability is still common. In the current survey, over 2% of athletes felt the need to take steroids to improve performance and would consider taking them. In 1989, 4% of athletes felt that way (p<.05). Furthermore, these athletes stated that they know where to obtain steroids (88% currently versus 87% in 1989). More importantly, athletes are still being offered steroids (3% currently compared to 4% in 1989). Most distressingly of all though is that those who are offered steroids often accept (11/49, 22%).

Unlike other studies where the sample population included athletes and non-athletes, this study involved only athletes. Prevalence of anabolic steroid use has historically been higher in athletes than non-athletes. For example, Tanner et al (1995) reported that 2.9% of athletes and 2.2% of non-athletes used anabolic steroids. Since athletes use steroids more often than non-athletes being exposed to anabolic steroids. A study including both higher risk (athletes) and lower risk (non-athletes) individuals may show prevalence rates lower than described here.

The most common primary source of information about anabolic steroids was printed material (28%). The sources that would seem most appropriate: parents, coaches, teachers, and athletic trainers totaled less than do those persons involved in sports appear to be at high risk for fifty percent of all primary information sources.

Parents, coaches, teachers, and health-care providers need to take a more active role in educating adolescents about the effects of anabolic steroids. Too often adolescents are left to compile information on anabolic steroids from inappropriate sources and so do not fully understand the effects associated with steroids. Children are more likely to experiment with something that they don’t understand as opposed to a subject about which they have sufficient knowledge.

According to published data (DuRaunt et al, 1995; DuRaunt, Emons et al, 1995; Ashworth et al, 1993) adolescents who use anabolic steroids are more likely to exhibit other high-risk behaviors such as multiple illicit drug use, unprotected sex, and illegal behaviors. Educational programs must not include just the direct negative effects of anabolic steroids to an individual, but they must also provide information about behavioral modification strategies, risk avoidance and reduction of peer pressure.

Conclusion

Approximately one percent of 10 to 14 year-old youth sports participants are using or have used anabolic steroids. Even though usage has decreased by over 50% since 1989, steroid use is still a serious problem. Insufficient knowledge and inappropriate attitudes regarding the benefits and risks of using anabolic steroids is also a major concern. Less than two-thirds of the athletes had the effects of anabolic steroids explained to them, and less than half of them have received their knowledge from an adult (parent, coach, teacher, athletic trainer, etc.). Over a quarter of youth sports participants have received their knowledge of anabolic steroids from magazines or books.

Educational programs have shown to be effective against other forms of drug use. New educational and intervention efforts against anabolic steroids likewise should be instituted. These programs should start before junior high and continue through high school. Informational sources about steroids should come from qualified individuals including teachers, coaches, and trainers. Parents should also be involved and educated to help inform their children about anabolic steroids.

Acknowledgement

This study was funded in part by the National Youth Sports Research and Development Center.

APPENDIX

Please answer every question on the appropriate line.

Age: _____
Sex: _____ Male _____ Female
Ethnic Origin:_____ Caucasian _____ Native American _____ Hispanic
_____ Black _____ Asian/Pacific _____ Other
How many years have you played in organized youth league sports?_____
What youth league sport do you now play?_____ Basketball _____ Football _____ Baseball _____ Softball
_____ Soccer _____ Tennis _____ Swimming _____ Ice Hockey

_____ Wrestling _____ Other: ___________________
Have you ever heard of anabolic steroids (a drug taken to increase muscle
size and/or strength)?_____ Yes _____ No
What is your primary source of information about anabolic steroids ?
(one answer only)_____ Coach _____ Athletic Trainer _____Friend/Teammate

_____ Parent _____ Sibling _____ Gym Personnel

_____ Dealer _____Books/Magazines

_____ Teacher _____ Television
Have the side effects of anabolic steroid use ever been explained to you?
_____ Yes _____ No
Do you feel that anabolic steroids without proper nutrition and exercise
will improve muscle size and strength?_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
Would you ever use anabolic steroids to increase your size or improve
your strength?_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
Do you think using anabolic steroids will improve your performance in your sport?_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
Do you feel that you need to take anabolic steroids to improve your chances for athletic
success (college scholarships, world championships, professional contracts, etc.)?_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
Do you feel that Olympic athletes use anabolic steroids to make the team?_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
Do you feel that High School athletes use anabolic steroids to make the team?_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
Do you feel that, if used carefully, anabolic steroids will not harm an athlete?_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
Do you personally know someone who is using or has used anabolic steroids?_____ Yes _____ No
Have you ever been offered anabolic steroids?_____ Yes _____ No
Have you ever used anabolic steroids?
_____ Yes _____ No

If yes, what was the main reason for use? (one answer only)

_____ Personal Appearance _____ Athletic Performance

_____ Body Building _____ Pressure From Others
Do you consider regular anabolic steroid usage the same as having a drug problem? (e.g. cocaine, marijuana, heroin, etc.)_____ Yes _____ No _____ Not Sure
If you decided to use anabolic steroids today, do you know where to obtain them?_____ Yes _____ No

References

Anderson, W.A.; W.E. Buckley K.E. Friedl, A.L. Streit, J.E. Wright, and C.E. Yesalis (1988) Estimated prevalence of anabolic steroid use among high school seniors. Journal of the American Medical Association, 260, 3441-3445

Bahrke, M.S.; N.J. Kennedy, A.N. Kopstein and C.E. Yesalis (1993) Anabolic-androgenic steroid use in the United States. Journal of the American Medical Association, 270, 1217-1221.

Windsor, R. and D. Dumitru (1989) Prevalence of anabolic steroid use by male and female
adolescents. Med Sci Sports Exerc., 270, 494-497.

Dumitru, D.; E.M. Komoroski, V.I. Rickert and R. Windsor (1992). Adolescent body image and attitudes to anabolic steroid use. AJDC, 146, 823-828.

DuRaunt, R.H.; L.G. Escobedo and G.W. Heath. Anabolic-steroid use, strength training, and multiple drug use among adolescents in the United States. Pediatrics, 96, 23-28.

Chillag, S.; D. Elliot and R. Whitehead (1992). Anabolic steroid use among adolescents in a rural state. J Family Practice. 1992; 35, 401-405.

Alongi, C.; D.W. Miller and S.M. Tanner (1995). C. Anabolic steroid use by adolescents: prevalence, motives, and knowledge of risks. Cl J Sports Med., 5, 108-115

DuRaunt, R.H.; S.J. Emans, A.H. Faulkner, A.B. Middleman and E.R. Woods (1995). High-risk
behaviors among high school students in Massachusetts who use anabolic steroids. Pediatrics, 96, 268-272

Johnson, M.D. (1990). Anabolic steroid use in adolescent athletes. Ped Cl North Amer.
,37, 1111-1123.

Broderick, P; G. Pickell & J. Radakovich (1993). Rate of anabolic-androgenic steroid use among students in junior high school. JABFP. 6, 341-345.

Ashworth, C.S.; R.H. DuRaunt, C. Newman, V.Il. Rickert & G. Slavens (1993). Use of multiple
drugs among adolescents who use anabolic steroids. NE J Med. ,328, 922-926

Gray M. (May, 1990) Anabolic Steroid Survey: Study Group – 10 to 14 year-old youth sports participants. Sponsored by NYSCA Nat R & D Center. Presented at American College of Sports Medicine in Salt Lake City, Utah.

U.S. Sports Academy2017-08-07T11:55:10-05:00February 15th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management|Comments Off

The Exploration of the Effect of Taekwondo Training on Personality Traits

Submitted by: Dr. Richard C. Bell, United States Sports Academy and Chia-Ming Chang, Tajen Institute of Technology, Taiwan, Republic of China

Abstract

In
this paper, the authors analyze the effects of Taekwondo training
on personality. The authors found that Taekwondo participants
realize, that in addition to the physical training, Taekwondo
emphasizes concentration, self-control and self-discipline.
Other researchers suggest that Taekwondo training has many
psychological benefits, such as enhanced self-esteem, self-concept,
reduced aggressiveness, decreased anxiety, increase in personal
independence, and ability to take a leadership role. Taekwondo
training might be used as a therapeutic program.

Introduction

Although
the relationship between certain aspects of self-concept and
performance in activities such as aerobic dance, soccer, volleyball,
and handball has been reported (Plummer & Koh, 1987; Harter,
1978; Olszewskal, 1982; Scanlan & Passer, 1979), little
evidence exists regarding the psychological value of the martial
arts. Miller (1989) states that self-concept may be enhanced
through the acquisition or mastery of a new skill. Novices
are most likely to gain self-concept through participation
in physical activities. Finkenberg (1990) studied the effect
of participation in Taekwondo on college women’s self-concept
and found significant differences on total self-concept and
on subscale scores in physical, personal, social identity,
and satisfaction. Therefore, the authors believe that the
Taekwondo training is of great psychological value to participants.

The
Background of Taekwondo

Taekwondo
has been under constant evolution for over several thousand
years. However, it was not until the 1950s that Taekwondo
was standardized and organized by Gen Choi Hong Hi and the
sport was brought outside the Korean borders, at first to
Vietnam and the US, and later to the rest of the world. Today,
Taekwondo is organized in three international federations:
the World Taekwondo Federation (WTF), with headquarters in
Seoul, Korea; the International Taekwondo Federation (ITF),
with headquarters in Austria; and the Global Taekwondo Federation
(GTF) with headquarters in Korea. Taekwondo has recently been
declared an official Olympic sport with the first competitions
held during the Olympic Games in Sydney, Australia, in 2000
(Lucas, 1992).

According
to Skelton (1991), one may benefit from the study of Taekwondo
regardless of age, size, or athletic ability. Taekwondo training
can increase strength and muscle tone, reduce body fat, improve
cardiovascular conditioning and endurance, improve balance
and coordination, reduce stress, improve concentration and
focus, improve performance in one’s job, school, or sports,
provide a structured program of advancement with achievable
goals, and improve self discipline and self confidence.

Effects
of Taekwondo Training on Personality

Finkenberg
(1990) studied the effects of participation in Taekwondo on
college women’s self-concept. The experimental group contained
51 women enrolled in Taekwondo classes, and the control group
contained 49 women enrolled in 4 sections of general health
courses. Pretests and posttests were administered in the first
week of a semester and the last week of the semester. The
Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (Roid and Fitts, 1989) measuring
self-concept was used as the instrument in this study. The
questionnaire was used to assess perceptions of physical self,
moral-ethical self, personal self, family self, social self,
identity, self-satisfaction, and behavior. Roid and Fitts
(1989) support the test’s reliability and validity. An analysis
of Covariance was used to control statistically for initial
differences in self-concept among subjects with the pretest
scores as the covariant. The results indicated that significant
differences were found on total self-concept and on sub-scale
scores in physical, personal, social, identity, and satisfaction.
Insignificant differences were found on moral-ethical, family,
behavior and self-criticism scales. The authors concluded
that the total self-concept and certain sub-scales were influenced
by participation in an 8-weeks course in Taekwondo. This study
supports the findings of Duthie, et al. (1978) who showed
that students of martial arts were more self-confident than
those without training. It also supports the conclusion that
“it could be assumed that one or two months of karate
training is sufficient to improve the typical student’s level
of general self-esteem” (Richman & Rehberg, 1986).

In
a study addressing aggressive behavior as a function of Taekwondo
ranking, Skelton, et al. (1991) investigated the relationship
between aggressive behavior and advancement through the belt
ranks among children in the American Taekwondo Association
(ATA). The sample consisted of 68 children, from the ages
6 to 11 years old, who were enrolled in 10 ATA schools located
in Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, and Illinois. The parents of the
students answered the survey form. One-way Analysis of Variance
indicated a significant inverse relationship between the children’s
belt rank and their aggression. A trend analysis was performed
to help clarify the nature of the relationship between the
two variables (belt rank and aggressive score). Results suggested
that there was a significant trend towards reduced aggression
with advanced ATA group rank. The authors suggested that further
research should include longitudinal reassessments of aggression
of the children beginning at the lower ranks and continuing
as they progress through the higher Taekwondo ranks to confirm
the conclusion.

Kurian
et al. (1994) studied the relationship between personality
factors and ATA Taekwondo training in a sample of younger
students. The subjects were 72 boys attending two ATA schools
in the southwestern United States. Subjects completed the
1973 Form A of the Children’s Personality Questionnaire following
a regular training session. The questionnaire contains 14
bipolar primary factors. Correlation analysis for the test
factors with age, training time, and belt rank of the sample
was conducted. Factor A (reserved versus outgoing) correlated
significantly with age. Training time was significantly related
to Factor N (naive versus socially perceptive), suggesting
that longer times in Taekwondo training are associated with
more socially perceptive behavior. Belt rank was significantly
correlated with Factors D (+), F (+), I (-), and N (+). These
correlations indicate that attainment of higher belt rank
is associated with scores indicating more demanding, enthusiastic
and optimistic, self-reliant, and socially perceptive personality
traits. The author concluded, ” These results suggest
that ATA belt rank is associated with a pattern of enthusiastic
optimism and self-reliance. This personality pattern is socially
positive and suggests that Taekwondo training may be beneficial
for younger male students”.

In
a study on personality characteristics and duration of ATA
Taekwondo training, Kurian et al. (1993) compared personality
characteristics of two groups having participated in Taekwondo
for different lengths of time. The subjects were 30 adults
attending two American Taekwondo Association schools in the
southwestern United States. They averaged 2.6 years of Taekwondo
training (range of 17 to 44 years old). Form C of the 16 Personality
Factor Questionnaire (Cattell, 1980) containing 105 items
distributed across 16 bipolar primary factor scales was used
as the instrument. The groups with shorter time (less than
1.4 years) and longer time (more than 1.5 years) in Taekwondo
training were compared using a t-Test for the mean scores
of Anxiety, Independence and Leadership. The results indicated
that the length of Taekwondo participation was associated
with lower scores on Anxiety and with higher scores on Independence.
The authors suggested that lower scores on Anxiety and higher
scores on Independence often accompany improved mental health,
suggesting that participation in Taekwondo training may be
useful as part of therapeutic programs.

Summary

This
study was expected to contribute to an understanding of the
psychological value of Taekwondo. The study was also expected
to provide more insight into the beneficial effects of Taekwondo
training for both physical educators and Taekwondo trainees.
Research suggests that Taekwondo training may have many psychological
benefits, such as enhanced self-esteem, self-concept (Columbus
& Rice, 1991, cited from Kurian et al., 1993 ; Finkenberg,
1990), and reducing aggressiveness (Skelton, 1991). In the
study of Kurian et al. (1993), it was indicated that Taekwondo
training could decrease scores on anxiety and increase scores
on personal independence and ability to take a leadership
role. Furthermore, Kurian et al. (1993) concluded that participation
of Taekwondo training might be used as a therapeutic program.
Finkenberg (1990) found that Taekwondo training was helpful
for college women to build self-concept.

REFERENCES

Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1980).
Handbook for the 16 PF. Champaign, IL: Institute for
Personality and Ability Testing.

Duthie,
R. B., Hope, L. & Berker D. G. (1978). Selected personality
traits of martial artists as measured by the adjective checklist.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 71-76.

Finkenberg,
M. E. (1990). Effect of participation in Taekwondo on college
women? self-concept. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71,
891-894.

Kurian
M., Caterino L., C., & Kulhavy R. W. (1993). Personality
characteristics and duration of ATA Taekwondo training. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 76, 363-366.

Kurian,
M., Verdi, M. P., Caterino, L. C., & Kulhavy R. W. (1994).
Relating scales on the children personality questionnaire
to training time and belt rank in ATA Taekwondo. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 79, 904-906.

Lucas
J. (1992). Taekwondo, Pelote Basque/jai-alai, and roller hockey-three
unusual Olympic demonstration sports, The Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation & Dance, 63, 80-83.

Miller,
R. (1989). Effects of sports instruction in children self-concept.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 68, 239-242.

Olszewskal,
G. (1982). The relation of self-image, self-estimation and
a tendency to dominate or submit to the effectiveness of team
players. International Journal of Sport Psychology,
13, 107-113.

Plummer,
V. K., & Koh, Y. O. (1987). Effect of erobics” on
self-concepts of college women. Perceptual and Motor Skills,
65, 271-275.

Richman,
C. L., & Rehberg, H. (1986). The development of self-esteem
through the martial arts. International Journal of Sport
Psychology, 17, 234-239.

Roid
, G. H., & Fitts, W. H. (1989). Tennessee Self-concept
Scale, revised manual. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological
Services.

Scanlan,
T. K., & Passer, M. W. (1979). Factors influencing the
competitive performance expectancies of young female athletes.
Journal of Sport Psychology, 1, 212-220.

Skelton,
D. L., Glynn, M., & Berta, S. M. (1991). Aggressive behavior
as a function of Taekwondo ranking. Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 72, 179-182.

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-26T21:30:54-06:00February 15th, 2008|Sports Exercise Science, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

Transformational Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness in Recreational Sports/Fitness Programs

Submitted by: Chin-Hsien Hsu, Dr. Richard C. Bell and Kuei-Mei Cheng

Abstract

The concept of leadership has gained a large amount of attention in recent years. This paper explores the relationships between transformational leadership and organizational effectiveness in the field of recreational sport and leisure. First, it reviews a discussion on the problem of organizational leadership from the perspective of the transactional- transformational model, particularly the arguments of researchers such as Burns and Bass. It examines the components of transformational leadership, and then investigates several approaches to the conceptualization and measurement of organizational effectiveness. Finally, the controversy concerning the impact of transformational leadership upon organizational effectiveness is discussed, and an argument is made that greater transformational leadership seems to be at least indirectly related to a higher degree of organizational effectiveness.

Transformational Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness in Recreational Sports/Fitness Programs

Leadership has drawn great attention from scholars in various fields in recent years. Yukl (1989) wrote that “the study of leadership has been an important and central part of the literature of management and organization behavior for several decades” (p. 251). Paton (1987), too, realized that leadership has become the most popular subject within the field of sports management. Weese (1994) furthermore advised that some 7,500 citations on leadership appear in Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership (1990). In an article on sports management and leadership, Sourcie (1994) noted that quite a few doctoral dissertations focus on “managerial leadership in sport organizations”. Earlier, Sourcie (1982) had estimated that nearly 25 studies on leadership were completed between 1969 and 1979, as reported in Dissertation Abstracts International, while the same source shows that 30 additional doctoral researchers employed leadership as the primary dependent variable of dissertation research between 1979 and 1989 (p. 6).

There is great controversy over the definition of leadership and thus over approaches to studying leadership (Yukl, 1989). The present authors, however, focus exclusively on the transactional-transformational leadership model and the relationship between transformational leadership and organization effectiveness. The paper looks first at definitions of transactional and transformational leadership and the components of transformational leadership. It then reviews discussions of the transactional-transformational leadership model, particularly the differences between and relationships shared by the concepts of transactional and transformational leadership. In addition, it describes the four elements of transformational leadership.

The paper also investigates existing studies of organizational effectiveness and looks at scholars’ varying approaches to organizational effectiveness. Following this, it discusses the relationships between transformational leadership and organizational effectiveness. Finally, through a review of related literature from the field of recreational sports and fitness programs, the authors examine relationships between transformational leadership and organizational effectiveness.

The Transactional-Transformational Leadership Model

Working from Burns’s earlier efforts (1978), Bass (1985) elaborated the transactional-transformational model. As Yukl (1989) wrote, Bass offered a more thoroughly detailed theory of transformational leadership that further differentiated transformational from transactional leadership. Bass viewed transformational leadership from the perspective of leaders’ influence on subordinates. Influenced by transformational leaders, subordinates become motivated to surpass original expectations (Yukl, 1989). Bass argued that transactional leadership and transformational leadership are “distinct dimensions rather than opposite ends of one continuum” (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996) Or, as Yukl (1989) and Weese (1994) wrote, while transactional leadership and transformational leadership are closely related parts of leadership, they remain distinct.

In addition, Bass viewed transformational leadership as an augmentation and extension of transactional leadership. In his understanding, “[A]ll leaders are transactional, to some extent, exchanging rewards for performance, but some leaders are also transformational, going beyond simple leader-subordinate exchange relations” (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996, p. 294). Studies by other researchers support Bass’s argument both empirically and theoretically, according to Doherty and Danylchuk (1996).

In his discussion of transformational leadership among the coaches of sports teams, Armstrong (2001) laid out four main characteristics of transformational leadership: (a) ethical behavior, (b) shared vision and shared goals, (c) performance improvement through charismatic leadership, and (d) leadership by example (p. 44–45). Armstrong’s framework is a simplified version of the components of transformational leadership provided by Bass (1985), who identified those as intellectual stimulation, individual consideration, inspirational leadership, and idealized influence (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996; Weese, 1994). Intellectual stimulation refers to a leader’s capability to stimulate followers to become curious and creative about thinking and problem solving (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996; Weese, 1994). Individual consideration describes the relationship between leader and follower in terms of two dimensions, developmental orientation and individual orientation (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996). A developmental orientation exists when leaders “assign tasks that will enhance an individual’s potential, abilities, and motivation” (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996, p. 295). An individual orientation exists when a leader stresses “mutual understanding and familiarity via one-on-one relations and two-way communication” (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996, p. 295).

Inspirational leadership refers to the transformational leader’s inspiration and encouragement of subordinates, which creates emotional attachment to the leader and greater identification with his or her vision for organizational goals (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996; Weese, 1994). The final element is idealized influence, which is closely related to charisma (Weese, 1994). Doherty and Danylchuk (1996) view idealized influence as “the behavioral counterpart to charisma” (p. 295), with the leader’s traits promoting commitment among followers in order to tap their full potential (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996; Weese, 1994).

Organizational Effectiveness

Effective leadership has a positive impact on behavior within organizations, according to many leadership researchers; transformational leadership’s role in improving many factors of organizations is especially pronounced (Weese, 1994). The effectiveness of behavior within organizations—the effectiveness of their performance—is known as organizational effectiveness.

The concept of effectiveness is of great importance to an understanding of organizational behavior (Chelladurai & Haggerty, 1991). However, organizational effectiveness is a term that is complicated, controversial, and difficult to conceptualize (Chelladurai, 1987). It is little wonder there are several different approaches to measuring and studying organizational effectiveness. As Sourcie (1994) mentioned briefly, Chelladurai and Haggerty (1991) describe four ways to measure organizational effectiveness; these methods are the goal approach, system resource approach, process approach, and multiple constituency approach.

The goal approach is the most widely used, according to Weese (1997). It assesses the effectiveness of an organization in terms of its success in realizing its goals (Pratt & Eitzen, 1989). Regarded as the “most logical approach” to studying organizational effectiveness (Chelladurai and Haggerty, 1991, p. 127), the goal approach nevertheless has its weaknesses. Most obvious is the reality that an organization may have numerous goals that may conflict with one another (Weese, 1997; Pratt & Eitzen, 1989). In addition, an organization’s goals may shift over time, especially its short-term operative goals (Pratt & Eitzen, 1989). Goal shifts may result from an organization’s interactions with its environment, from internal changes, or from external pressures. When an organization’s goals are “unclear, unstable, and conflicting with each other” (Chelladurai & Haggerty, 1991, p. 127), it becomes very difficult to measure organizational effectiveness using the goal approach.

The third approach is the process approach, which focuses on organizational functioning and integration (Chelladurai & Haggerty, 1991). Under this approach, an organization’s effectiveness is viewed in terms of the smoothness and efficiency of its internal processes and general operation (Sourcie, 1994). Weese (1997) pointed out that effective operations of an organization do not necessarily result in “heightened organizational effectiveness,” because the sum of efficient components may not lead to an efficient whole (p. 267). Thus the process approach for measuring organizational effectiveness is also not without limitations.

In light of the limitations and disadvantages associated with these three approaches, a fourth, the multiple-constituency approach, was also proposed (Weese, 1997). Under the multiple-constituency approach, the opinions of the various constituent groups of an organization are considered in determining the effectiveness of the organization (Sourcie, 1994; Weese, 1997). Chelladurai and Haggerty (1991) discussed the differences between the multiple constituency approach and the earlier approaches. They noted that the former incorporates the other three within one model that “envisions the differential evaluation of an organization by different constituents on one or more dimensions of effectiveness. . . . [such as] productivity, resource acquisition, or internal processes.”

Organizational effectiveness is ambiguous in conceptualization and difficult to measure, due to the fact that it involves multiple dimensions, for example goals, processes, and resources (Chelladurai & Haggerty, 1991). To date, the multiple constituency model, in creating a synthesis of the earlier goal approach, process approach, and system resource approach, appears to best represent the multiplicity of organizational effectiveness.

Relation to Organizational Effectiveness

Efforts have been made to study the relationship between leadership (particularly transformational leadership) and organizational effectiveness. There is controversy, however, over whether transformational leadership has a positive impact on organizational effectiveness. For example, Weese’s (1996) study of the relationships among transformational leadership, organizational culture, and organizational effectiveness showed no significant relationship between transformational leadership and organizational effectiveness. Similarly, Weese (1996) and Lim and Cromartie (2001) found transformational leadership not to relate significantly to organizational effectiveness. They suggested that subordinates play an important role in an organization’s effectiveness.

Interestingly, in an earlier article, Weese (1994) pointed out that many who have studied leadership have found “convincing evidence” for leadership’s importance to the “success and survival” of an organization. He noted that transformational leaders, especially, “have a positive impact on employee satisfaction, productivity, and organizational effectiveness” (Weese, 1994, p. 188).

In addition, the studies by Weese (1996) and Lim and Cromartie (2001) recognized that a significant relationship exists between transformational leadership and organizational culture, while rejecting the argument that transformational leadership has an impact on organizational effectiveness. However, both studies also recognized that organizational culture has great influence on organizational effectiveness (Lim and Cromartie, 2001; Weese, 1996). The implication is that transformational leadership and organizational effectiveness do have an indirect relationship.

Conclusion

Leadership is an important but controversial concept in understanding organizational behavior. Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) provided a theoretical framework for two aspects of leadership, the transactional and the transformational leadership paradigms. Organizational effectiveness is no less controversial than leadership, and there are four approaches to measure and study it. The most comprehensive approach developed to date appears to be the integrated multiple constituency approach.

While the existing studies of relationships between transformational leadership and organizational effectiveness are controversial as well, it seems that leadership has at least an indirect impact on organizational effectiveness. Further empirical research and theoretical exploration needs to be conducted in order to gain better understanding of the topic.

References

Armstrong, S. (2001). Are you a “transformational” coach? Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 72(3), 44-47.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research and Managerial Applications. New York: Free Press.

Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Chelladurai, P. (1987). Multidimensionality and multiple perspectives of organizational effectiveness. Journal of Sport Management, 1(1), 37-47.

Chelladurai, P., & Haggerty, T.R. (1991). Measures of organizational effectiveness of Canadian national sport organizations. Canadian Journal of Sport Sciences, 16(2), 126-133.

Doherty, A. J., & Danylchuk, K.E. (1996). Transformational and transactional leadership in interuniversity athletics management. Journal of Sport Management, 10(3), 292-309.

Ghorpade, T. (1970). Study of organizational effectiveness: Two prevailing viewpoints. Pacific Sociological Review, 13, 31-40.

Lim, J. Y., & Cromartie, F. (2001). Transformational leadership, organizational culture and organizational effectiveness in sport organizations. The Sport Journal, 4(2), 111-169.

Paton, G. (1987). Sport management research: What progress has been made? Journal of Sport Management, 1, 25-31.

Pratt, S. R., & Eitzen, D. S. (1989). Contrasting leadership styles and organizational effectiveness: the case of athletic teams. Social Science Quarterly, 70(2), 311-322.

Sourcie, D. (1982). Management Theory and Practice. In E.F. Zeigler (Ed.), Physical Education and Sport: An Introduction. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.

Sourcie, D. (1994). Effective managerial leadership in sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 8(1), 1-13.

Weese, W. J. (1994). A leadership discussion with Dr. Bernard Bass. Journal of Sport Management, 8(3), 176-189.

Weese, W. J. (1996). Do leadership and organizational culture really matter? Journal of Sport Management, 10(2), 197-206.

Weese, W. J. (1997). The development of an instrument to measure effectiveness in campus recreation programs. Journal of Sport Management, 11(3), 263-274.

Yuchtman, E., & Stanley, S.(1967). A systematic resource approach to organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32, 891-903.

Yukl, G. (1989b). Managerial leadership: a review of theory and research. Journal of Management, 15(2), 251-289.

U.S. Sports Academy2017-08-07T11:56:46-05:00February 15th, 2008|Sports Coaching, Sports Management|Comments Off

Marketing the Triathlete

Article is copyright, please reevaluate

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-26T21:35:17-06:00February 15th, 2008|General|Comments Off

Athletes’ Expectations for Success in Athletics Compared to Academic Competition

Submitted by:Jeffrey W. Lucas, The University of Akron and Michael J. Lovaglia, The University of Iowa

INTRODUCTION

In
this paper, we describe a study in which we investigate attitudes
held by student-athletes and non-athlete students towards
academic and athletic success. Athletic success is largely
viewed in the United States as a vehicle for disadvantaged
students to attain higher education. Most colleges and universities
in the U.S. have admittance programs in which a designated
percent of students who do not meet standard admissions criteria
are allowed to enroll. According to the National Collegiate
Athletic Association (1995), about 3% of all students enter
college under these programs. However, more than 20% of college
football and basketball players enter universities under special
admittance programs (Lapchick 1995). Thus, athletic prowess
may allow for an increased opportunity for education.

While
successful high school athletes may have increased educational
opportunities, these students often struggle when they enter
college. College athletes earn fewer bachelor’s degrees than
do students in general, they take longer to do so, their grades
are lower, and their curricula are less demanding (Adelman
1990).

Some
have also argued for the social benefit of sport participating.
Findings indicate that sport involvement is an important activity
that has the potential for reducing at-risk behavior and enhancing
development in adolescents (Agnew and Peterson 1989; Burling,
Seidner, Robbins-Sisco, and Krinsky 1992). However, student-athletes
report greater difficulty than other students in taking leadership
roles, learning from their mistakes, discussing their personal
problems, and articulating their thoughts (Dudley, Johnson,
and Johnson 1997).

One
reason that student-athletes struggle in college may be that
athletes have unrealistic expectations for careers in professional
sports. While a relatively high percentage of university athletes
expect careers in professional sports (Center for the Study
of Athletics 1989; Kennedy and Dimick 1987) a professional
sports career is not an option for any but the most elite
of student athletes (Lapchick 1991).

It
appears that student-athletes are diverted into athletic career
aspirations and away from mainstream opportunities for success,
such as academic achievement. In that student-athletes often
struggle academically and socially in college, it may be that
athletes expect greater costs and fewer benefits to accompany
a university education than do other students. We predict
that student-athletes, in comparison to scholars (not athletes),
will indicate higher expectations for costs and fewer expectations
for benefits to obtain from a successful university education.

Athletes
also often hold unrealistic expectations for professional
sports careers. We predict that student-athletes will expect
lower costs and higher benefits to accompany sport involvement
than will scholars (not athletes). And, because of expectations
for careers in professional sports, we also predict that athletes
will indicate lower motivation toward school performance and
higher motivation toward athletic performance than will scholars.

SURVEY
INSTRUMENTS

We
designed two survey instruments to measure the costs and benefits
that students expect to accompany academic and athletic success,
as well as motivation to perform both athletically and academically.
We designed one instrument, the Student Academic Questionnaire
(SAQ), to measure attitudes towards academic success and the
other instrument, the Student Assessment Survey (SAS),
to measure attitudes towards athletic success.

Each
respondent is assigned one of the two questionnaires. After
answering a number of demographic items, the respondent reads
a brief vignette. The vignette for the SAQ informs students
that the researchers are interested in looking at ways that
individuals feel about academic success. Respondents are asked
to imagine themselves in a scenario in which they are successful
university students. The vignette for the SAS tells students
that the researchers are interested in measuring attitudes
about athletic success. Respondents read a vignette in which
they are successful university athletes.

Imagining
themselves in the given scenario, respondents answer a number
of attitude questions designed to measure the costs, benefits,
and performance motivation they feel towards academic or athletic
achievement. We included three scales (each containing between
8 and 18 items) in the attitude questions, one for academic
or athletic costs, one for academic or athletic benefits,
and one for performance motivation. Questions in each scale
were identical across questionnaires except that we included
information about academic success in questions on the SAQ
and information about athletic success in questions on the
SAS. Respondents answered all questions on 5-point scales
from “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly Disagree.”

PREDICTIONS

We
make the following predictions regarding the costs, benefits,
and motivations that non-athlete scholars and student-athletes
will feel towards academic and athletic success:

Hypothesis
1: Student-athletes, in comparison to scholars (non-athletes)
will

anticipate higher costs accompanying a college education,
anticipate
lower benefits accompanying a college education, and
be
less motivated to perform at a high level academically.

Hypothesis
2: Student-athletes, in comparison to scholars (non-athletes)
will

anticipate lower costs accompanying athletic success,
anticipate
higher benefits accompanying athletic success, and
be
less motivated to perform at a high level athletically.

RESULTS

In
order to test the hypotheses described above, we passed out
the SAQ and the SAS to samples of students at The University
of Akron, The University of Iowa, Kent State University, and
Louisiana State University. Among the demographic items on
the questionnaires, we designed six questions to measure whether
we should classify respondents as scholars, athletes, or both.
We asked respondents their high school academic and sports
involvement, their academic and athletic scholarship status
in college, and whether they viewed themselves primarily as
scholars or athletes.

The
three items we designed to measure athletic status showed
strong correlations with each other-all correlations produced
probability levels less than .001. The same is true for the
items designed to measure academic status. Because correlations
between items were so high, we chose one item, the extent
to which respondents considered themselves scholars or athletes,
as our measure of academic or athletic status.

We
asked respondents two questions to evaluate the extent to
which they considered themselves primarily athletes or scholars,
with 1 indicating “very much” and 9 indicating “not
at all.” If respondents circled 4 or lower on the scholar
scale and greater than 5 on the athletic scale, we considered
them scholars in our analysis. If respondents circled greater
than 5 on the scholar scale and 4 or less on the athletic
scale, we considered them athletes for our analysis. Again,
answers to these questions correlated highly with high school
athletic involvement and with academic or athletic scholarship
status.

SAQ
Findings

The
SAQ measured the costs, benefits, and motivation that students
felt towards academic success. In all, 302 students completed
the SAQ, 135 scholars and 33 athletes. We predicted that student-athletes
would perceive greater costs for academic success than would
scholars. The cost of success scale is an average of the fourteen
items designed to measure the costs of academic success, with
1 indicating low costs of academic success and 6 indicating
high costs. The mean score on the SAQ cost of success scale
for scholars was 1.42 (st. dev. = .47) and for student-athletes
was 1.53 (st. dev. = .52). This difference is in the predicted
direction-athletes perceive higher costs for academic success
than do scholars. A t-test of the difference, however, is
not significant (t = 1.167, one-tailed p = .123).

We
also predicted that student-athletes would perceive fewer
benefits to accompany academic success than would scholars.
The mean score for scholars on the benefits of academic success
scale was 3.10 (st. dev. = .60) and for athletes was 2.80
(st. dev. = .69). This difference indicates that scholars
expect higher benefits for academic success than do athletes.
Further, a t-test of the difference is significant (t = 2.47,
one-tailed p = .008).

We
further predicted that student-athletes would indicate lower
motivation to perform academically than would scholars. The
mean score for scholars on the academic motivation scale was
3.34 (st. dev. = .52) and for student-athletes was 3.02 (st.
dev. = .55). This difference is in the predicted direction,
and a t-test of the difference produces significance (t =
3.16, one-tailed p = .001).

SAS
Findings

The
SAS measured the costs, benefits, and motivation that students
felt towards athletic success. 252 students completed the
SAS, 124 scholar and 23 athletes. We predicted that student-athletes
would perceive fewer costs associated with athletic success
than would scholars. Student-athletes had a mean score on
the costs of athletic success scale of 1.97 (st. dev. = .61),
while scholars had a mean score of 1.88 (st. dev. = .52).
This slight difference is actually in the opposite direction
of that predicted by our hypothesis, but a t-test of the difference
does not produce significance (t = .722, two-tailed p = .472).

We
also predicted that student-athletes would perceive greater
benefits to accompany athletic success than would scholars.
The mean score on the benefits of athletic success scale for
student-athletes was 2.43 (st. dev. = .60) and for scholars
was 2.20 (st. dev. = .93). This difference is in the predicted
direction, but a t-test of the difference is not significant
(t = 1.11, one-tailed p = .135).

We
also predicted higher motivation towards athletic performance
for student-athletes than for scholars. Student-athletes had
a mean score on the athletic motivation scale of 3.52 (st.
dev. = .45), while scholars had a mean of 3.44 (st. dev. =
.57). This difference, while in the predicted direction, is
not significant (t = .628, one-tailed p = .266).

In
sum, two of the six hypotheses we tested (hypotheses on the
benefits of academic success and on motivation to perform
academically) produced significance. Two hypotheses (on the
costs of academic success and on the benefits of athletic
success) approached significance. The hypotheses on the costs
of athletic success and on athletic motivation did not approach
significance.

DISCUSSION

Results
of our data collection provided partial support for our predictions.
Student-athletes, in comparison to scholars, perceived greater
costs and fewer benefits to accompany a university education.
Further, student-athletes were less motivated to perform academically
than were scholars. These findings support our predictions
and are in line with findings that athletes struggle academically.
Findings on the costs and benefits of athletic success received
less support.

Our
findings provide some support for our argument that athletics
serves to channel a disadvantaged minority away from mainstream
opportunities for success in the United States. If this is
true, then expectations about success in athletics and academics
may differ in countries were athletics does not serve this
purpose. It also may be that respondents in countries with
less rigid racial, economic, and ethnic partitions than the
United States will report smaller differences in their expected
costs for academic and athletic success. A valuable direction
for future research would be to shed light on these issues.

REFERENCES

Adelman,
C. (1990). Light and Shadows on College Athletics. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Agnew,
R. and D.M. Peterson (1989). “Leisure and delinquency.”
Social Problems, 36(4), 332-250.

Burling,
T.A., A.L. Seidner, D. Robbins-Sisco, and A. Krinsky (1992).
“Relapse prevention for homeless veteran substance abusers
via softball team participation.” Journal of Substance
Abuse, 4(4), 407-413.

Center
for the Study of Athletics (1989). Report No. 3: The Experiences
of Black Intercollegiate Athletes at NCAA Division I institutions.
Palo Alto, CA: American Institute for Research.

Dudley,
B.S., D.W. Johnson, and R.T. Johnson. (1997). “Using
cooperative learning to enhance the academic and social experiences
of freshman student athletes.” The Journal of Social
Psychology, 137(4), 449-459.

Kennedy,
S.R., and K.M. Dimick. (1987). “Career maturity and professional
sports expectations of college football and basketball players.”
Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, 293-297.

Lapchick,
R. (1991). Five Minutes to Midnight: Race and Sports in the
1990’s. Lanham, MD: Madison Books.

Lapchick,
R.E. (1995). “Race and college sport: A long way to go.”
Race and Class, 36(4), 87-94.

National
Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). (1995). 1995 Division
I Graduation-Rates Report. Overland Park, KS: Author.

Contact
information:

Jeffrey
W. Lucas
Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology
The University of Akron
Akron, OH 44325-1905
(330) 972-6915
jlucas2@uakron.edu

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-26T21:37:01-06:00February 15th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Facilities, Sports Management|Comments Off