Editor’s Note: Don Anthony, a noted Olympic historian from Great Britain and long-time friend of the United States Sports Academy, wrote this article for USSA President Dr. Thomas P. Rosandich. The Sport Journal is publishing this piece as a letter to the editor.
25 years ago Dr. William Renato Jones died. He was a Springfield graduate. Born in Rome and speaking Italian as a first language, he had British nationality, a Swiss mother, a Scottish father, and spent much of his working life in Germany! His first job on leaving Springfield was for the YMCA in Adana, Turkey. Later, for the YMCA, he organized a global congress in Paris which brought him to the attention of Unesco. This UN body appointed him
director of the Unesco Youth Institute in Gauting, near Munich. Concurrently, as a volunteer, he founded and became general secretary, of the world body
for basketball – FIBA. Furthermore, he was the obvious candidate to lead – again as general secretary – Unesco’s consultative body for sport – ICSPE
(the International Council for Sport and Physical Education) in l960. On retirement from his basketball post, he was invited to be honorary life president.
He refused!
“I will accept the title honorary life secretary” he said – and so it was – “anyone in sport knows it is the secretary who is the kingpin.”
Surrounding Jones were other formidable Springfield people such as Frank Hepp from Hungary. There was Ernst Jokl from Kentucky University; and the
President of ICSPEP, Philip Noel-Baker. Philip became unique – an Olympian – silver in the 1500 metres in l920 at Antwerp -and Nobel Peace Prize in
l959 for his work on disarmament. Philip too, had USA roots: he began his academic career in l907 at Haverford – then the major Quaker (Society of Friends) academy in North America. Another polyglot with a Canadian father and a Scottish mother, he spoke well in French, German, Greek and Italian. This last language he learned on the Serbian front in World War I when he worked as a pacifist with the Friends Ambulance Unit. The Italian government awarded him their highest honour for “bravery in battle.” Despite this, no matter how hard I tried, the organizers of the recent Turin Winter Olympic Games ignored my pleas that they should honor his unique qualifications for mention and commemoration! I had the wonderful pleasure of working closely with Jones and Philip for some 20 years from l960 onwards. Every moment with them was “an education and a joy” I once explained to my wife – to excuse my constant absences on duty for global physical education and sport. Strangely enough, the educational energies of the IOC were rather dormant between and 1960.and l980. In this time, Unesco began to lead matters and eventually the World Conference of Ministers of Sport came into being.
I look again at my profession of “physical education” – with its modern roots in the USA. These were summed-up marvellously by John Lucas in his article
in November 2004, for the Journal of the International Society of Olympic Historians (ISOH): “The Great Gathering of Sport Scientists; the l904 St. Louis
Olympic Games Exposition Fair Physical Education Lectures.” I think of that other significant Springfield man Harold Friermood who was “always there” as world P.E. blossomed. Harold even attended the first meeting of the Amateur Volleyball Association of Great Britain, founded in London at the YMCA
headquarters in l955.
As my researches grew in Olympic matters, I discovered Charles Waldstein (Columbia, I think) and then Heidelberg and Cambridge (England) ending up as Slade Professor of Art at Cambridge and concurrently Director of the Fitzwilliam Museum in that city, and Director of the American School of Classical Studies in Athens. A confidant of Coubertin, he arranged meetings with the Royal Princes in Athens in l896. He first met Coubertin during the young Frenchman’s studies of English schools and universities in l886. They met again in l896 when Waldstein pistol-shot for the USA in the Games. Charles (then Walston and a British national) was chairing the Arts Commission of the l924 Paris Olympic Games near the end of his life. His grandson, Oliver, still farming near Cambridge, was persuaded (by me) to donate his grandfather’s archives to the IOC Museum in Lausanne where they still lie. Again I was startled by the Athens American School of Classical Studies attitude in 2004 – when they showed no interest in honouring their previous Director!
In l889, at the famous Boston Conference on Physical Training, Coubertin delivered a paper. On the same platform was the Earl of Meath from England, the man who got PE on to the British education statute books in Parliament. In l89l both were elected members of the Wenlock Olympian Society (WOS) – in Shropshire, England. Brookes, the founder of the WOS was keenly aware of new developments in the USA, and also in Russia, France, Germany and elsewhere. David Young of Florida wrote a major book on this Olympian root in his distinctive l996 book “The modern Olympics – a struggle for survival”.
Coubertin’s major USA friend and colleague was of course William Sloane (Columbia and Princeton). Charles Battle tells me that Atlanta created a sculpting of Sloane for presentation to the IOC. Its whereabouts need research in Lausanne? It was the same with a sculpting of Philip Noel-Baker “Man of Sport- Man of Peace” given in l986 to the IOC as part of the Birmingham (England) bid. This lurked in the cellars at Lausanne until recent years when it was fished out and now graces the entrance of the Sports Court of Arbitration in Lausanne – a fitting place for one who was a master in international law! In the intervening years a copy of the sculpting was purchased by the University of Hiroshima in Japan. Philip attended the atom-bomb memorial meeting in August at Hiroshima whenever he could. At his last attendance, he was given only one minute to speak before the sounding of the peace gong in a square packed with 200,000 people. Pushing away his prepared speech Philip said “Say after me – no more war – no more Hiroshima!” Boom!!! What a man – what a brain – at nearly 90 years of age. At his last major speech, at the IOC Congress in Baden-Baden (l981), he was granted only 3 minutes under any other business. Taking 11 minutes, much to the consternation of the organizers, he got a three minute mass standing ovation for his last words -“If the IOC…can bring sport for all to the whole world – especially the developing world – I will nominate them for the Nobel Peace Prize!” Indeed I have a letter from the Nobel Committee, saying that such a nomination was made prior to his death in l982. I was left his two ice-axes (he was a keen mountaineer). I gave one to the Winter Sports Museum of Sarajevo and the second to the Winter Sports Museum of Pyongchaeng in Korea. I hope the latter might one day help to rebuild the former. Indeed plans are afoot to try to restore the energy of the Inter-University Centre in Dubrovnik which, organized seminars in the l980’s to celebrate Philip’s work for sport, peace, and development – and to look again at the feasibility of the Noel Baker Medals for outstanding examples of sport and international understanding. The first medals were awarded in l984 to the Sarajevo Winter Olympic Games Organizing Committee – and to President of the IOC at that time, Juan Antonio Samaranch.
For a moment, back to Atlanta: Local man George Hirthler, working with the Pierre de Coubertin International Committee (CIPC), managed to fund the erection of a delightful monument to Coubertin in a main square in his city. I wonder if it is still there and whether its purpose is still recognised and celebrated.
Further thoughts about the USA-Olympic links begin to flood back: John Lucas one asked me to investigate the sermon given in St. Paul’s cathedral by the “Bishop of Pennsylvania” (in Coubertin’s memoirs). It turned out that it was indeed a Bishop – but of Central Pennsylvania – one Ethelbert Talbot. It was this sermon which inspired Coubertin’s own description of the true Olympic ethos “The honor is less in winning than in taking part.” How we need to restate, and restate, and restate, this message – in today’s Olympic world consumed as it is by medal mania. The name John Lucas appears everywhere – even as Honorary Consul for Albania! What a wonderful testament for Olympism in the USA, and the world, his life has been – and still is. I thank him for much inspiration and education. It was much to him that the USOC National Olympic Academy flourished. Indeed in the early l980’s we were so taken with this model that we started the British National Olympic Academy (l982 – a one day affair). This is now institutionalised and we regularly have the problem of over-subscription – a long weekend – 120 people maximum. Two regular USA friends have been, and are, Elizabeth Hanley of Penn State and Robert Merchikoff of Seattle.
My own studies in physical education were nourished by USA texts starting in 1946. I remember Thomas Cureton visiting us at Loughborough in the tests – and- measurement days. When we started the British volleyball association we lacked knowledge of the high-level game. Fortuitously, one Victor Tseirov of the USSR Embassy rang me one day to say that “I am scientific attaché at the Embassy – but mainly because my father pushed me; in my heart I am one percent scientific attaché and 99 percent volleyball enthusiast.” At roughly the same time one John Gay (USA national team player) contacted us from the London Ruislip USAF base to offer us his expertise – and facilities! We now look forward to preparing British volleyball teams for the London 2012 Olympic Games. Such are the fortuitous chances of life – serendipity. Let us glory in it and use it more. In my own field, I have long thought that – with USA leadership – we could enrich the recently restored Great Library of Alexandria. The ancient library linked Pergamon with Alexandria. The revived library could be aided to establish a sports section to record the whole area of African sport – and its possible contribution to health and development in that continent – the one of greatest need. I write this thinking of my ancient namesake giving the Pergamon library to Cleopatra (as a love token!).
Out of all this nostalgia springs a thought. That 2007 will be the centenary of Philip Noel-Baker’s entry into academic life at Haverford – USA. Can we not celebrate this in different ways – e.g. a U.S. seminar to record and examine the USA’s past role in Olympic matters – its current status – and its future potential at one of the USOC’s centers?
On the global level to assist Dubrovnik in its recovery – a session at the IUC could be held. An initial 2006 step could be a small planning meeting at the IUC to also embrace the life and work of William Jones – who’s chosen Crown Prince in FIBA. Boris Stankovic – now of Olympic rank – could play an appropriate role.
I often remind audiences that the Olympic idea came out of moves to strengthen physical education; of the first 12 members of the IOC, six were educationists; Coubertin was the foremost comparative physical educationist of his time. Today in the fight against the dumbing-down of sport these values need urgently to be restored and the major world-power, the USA, has a special responsibility to us all.
Submitted by: William F. Stier Jr. & Robert C. Schneider
Abstract
A national survey of selected men’s basketball coaches, at the NCAA Division I level, revealed how essential the respondents felt certain work ethic characteristics were for successful basketball players on their team. The respondents also revealed how important specific skills or talents were for the success of men’s NCAA men’s Division I basketball programs. The survey was completed by means of a 36-item Likert scale questionnaire. This investigation determined to what degree NCAA Division I coaches should seek specific work ethic characteristics and physical skills/talents in their players.
Introduction
College basketball coaches seek athletes with high caliber skills and specific basketball talent as well as a good overall work ethic. Although there is plenty of antidotal information regarding the type of desirable skills and talent desirable in the world of basketball, there has been very little definitive research done in terms of determining exactly what skills, talent and examples of work ethic are highly rated by coaches of men’s basketball at the NCAA Division I level of competition (Stier, 1997).
Successful and effective coaching is a highly complex and multi-dimensional enterprise (Jones, Housner, and Kornspan, 1997). It is very important, according to Owens & Stewart (2003) to be able to understand individual squad members’ physical, emotional, social and cognitive needs if the team is to be successful, that is, win. In a study by Forman (1995), it was determined that college basketball coaches need to make a commitment to each player’s growth and improvement in the sport if the team, as a collective unit, is to emerge victorious in actual competition,
In a study of elite athletes by Mallet & Hanrahan (2004), it was determined that players recognize the need to train hard to be winners. Training hard implies working diligently to improve both individual and team performance in order to produce meaningful results when it counts, in actual competition (Laios and Theodorakis, 2002). This emphasis on both individual and team (collective) training is reinforced by Bursari, (2000).
Elite athletes exhibit significant effort in games as well as in practice and this dedication extends to off-season work habits (Adams, 1996). The ability and willingness to work hard as well as to work harder are important examples of an athlete’s ability that can lead to success on the proverbial playing field, especially if the coach believes in the athlete and is successful in motivating the individual player to work harder (Jowett, 2003).
Literature presented by Stier (1998) included several major factors that distinguish consistent winning teams from teams that consistently lose: (a) better skilled athletes and (b) better conditioned athletes. The importance of adequate strength and conditioning was emphasized by Laios and Theodorakis (2002). Dirks (2000) studied control variables of team performance representing elements of the coach and players’ talent. And, in 1999, Pascarella et al. looked at the topic of physical energy that is required of athletes in actual competition.
Purpose of the Study
The purposes of this study were two-fold. The first purpose was to determine the essentiality of selected work ethic characteristics on behalf of athletes. And, the second was to determine the importance of specific skills or talents of athletes to the success of men’s NCAA men’s Division I basketball programs. In summary, this investigation sought to determine to what degree coaches should seek in their Division I men’s basketball players’ specific work ethic characteristics and physical skills/talents.
Methods
The Questionnaire
A survey instrument was developed from the existing current literature related to work ethic characteristics of players as well as specific athletic skills and talents that might have an effect on the success or failure of NCAA Division I men’s basketball programs. An extensive literature search found basketball related articles in which work ethic characteristics and various athletic skills and talent for athletes engaged in basketball were identified and which served as the foundation for the 36 items included on the Likert scale statements of the questionnaire.
Of the total of 36 Likert scale statements, 15 related to work ethic characteristics while 21 related to athletic skills and talents that might have an impact upon the success or failure of Division I men’s basketball programs. For work ethic characteristics, respondents were instructed to circle the number that corresponded with the degree of essentiality they believed most accurately depicted the impact that selected work ethic characteristics have upon the success [winning games] of their basketball programs and had the following categories of essentiality from which to choose: 5 – Very Essential, 4 – Essential, 3 – Neither Essential nor Unessential, 2 – Unessential, and 1 – Very Unessential. For the second category, specific athletic skills and talents, the coaches had the following Likert scale options which included the following choices of importance from which they were asked to circle the corresponding number: 1 – Very Important, 2 – Important, 3 – Neither Important nor Unimportant, 4 – Unimportant, and 5 – Very Unimportant.
To help address content validity a draft of the survey questionnaire was completed by five Division I head basketball coaches who were determined to be expert coaches for the purpose of gaining feedback regarding the instrument. In order to be deemed an expert coach, the coaches were required to have coached men’s basketball at the Division I level for at least 10 years and won at least 75% of their games during that time. After receiving the feedback from the expert coaches, appropriate suggestions and recommendations were incorporated into the final version of the survey instrument which was then utilized in this national study. The University’s Internal Review Board reviewed the final, revised version of the instrument and gave its approval.
The subjects for this national survey included all 315 men’s NCAA Division I head basketball coaches whose names and addresses were provided by the NCAA national headquarters. Of these, 118 completed and returned usable surveys generating a return rate of 37.5%.
Results
Work Ethic – Training
The category of work ethic contained two general categories, (a) training and (b) effort.
Of the eight characteristics related to training, six pertained directly to players’ training; two pertained to sacrifices made by athletes and the remaining two dealt directly with the athletes’ state of physical conditioning. Training hard was deemed to be the single most essential characteristic for winning, according to the respondents. In fact, 74.6% of the coaches indicated that training hard was very essential to winning while 25.4% classified it as essential.
Strength and conditioning was likewise thought to be very essential by a large percentage of coaches (72.9%), and deemed essential by 25.4%. Individual training was the only other work ethic characteristic thought to be very essential by more than half of the coaches (52.5%), while another sizeable group of coaches (44.1%) also classified this characteristic as essential. Table 1 shows all eight work ethic characteristics and how the respondents classified each in terms of how essential they are to winning basketball games at the Division I level.
Work Ethic – Effort
Of the seven characteristics identified in the survey as being related to effort, three dealt directly with effort, two addressed the conditioning efforts of players, while the remaining two involved how essential were the players’ work habits—in the eyes of the responding coaches. Individual player’s effort, in general, was consistently valued very highly by coaches with five of the seven categories deemed to be very essential by more than sixty percent (64.4%) of the respondents. Only two categories relating to effort were deemed to be very essential by less than half of the coaches, and both related to off-season activities. These were (a) player’s off-season conditioning efforts (45.8%) and (b) player’s off-season work habits. Table 2 illustrates how essential the coaches viewed these seven work ethic characteristics that related to effort.
Athletic Skills and Talents – Performance and Abilities
The section on athletic skills and talents contained two general categories, (a) performance/skills and (b) basketball talent. Of the eight performance skills identified in the investigation, two related directly with performance, two pertained directly to individual and team play while three dealt with abilities of players. The remaining skill is related to the physical energy that a player exudes. Only three performance skills were deemed to be very important by more than half of the coaches responding to the survey: (a) game performance (83.1%), (b) team oriented play (67.8%), and (c) physical energy (66.1%). Table 3 illustrates how the respondents rated each of the eight performance/abilities in terms of their importance or unimportance to winning Division I basketball games.
Athletic Skills and Talents – Basketball Talent
Of the 21 basketball talent categories that the coaches rated in terms of importance, 7 items related to physical talent while the remaining 14 focused on specific basketball skills. Defense, with 57.6% of the coaches, and passing, with 55.5%, were the only talent items that more than half of the respondents rated as very important. Two other talent categories are worth noting in that both (a) overall fundamental base and (b) rebounding were the only two talent categories that all the respondents classified as very important or important. Table 4 shows how the coaches classified all of the categories of basketball talent relative to their importance of unimportance in terms of their impact upon winning.
Conclusions
This national investigation sheds light on how Division I basketball coaches view the essentiality of specific work ethic characteristics and the importance these coaches place on specific skills or talents identified as having impact upon winning in competition. The results have implications for coaches in respect to what qualities, characteristics, skills and talents to look for in terms of potential recruits as well as current team members.
References
Adams, M.J. (1996). The perception of high school players and coaches in regard to individual and team efficacy in basketball. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
Bursari, J.O. (2000). Revisiting analogy as an educational tool – PBL and the game of basketball. Medical Education, 34, 1029-1031.
Dirks, K.T. (2000). Trust in leadership and team performance: evidence from NCAA Basketball. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 1004-1012.
Forman, B. (1995). Factors of hiring head coaches in collegiate athletics. Unpublished master’s thesis, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana.
Jones, D.F., Hosnder, L.D., & Kornspan, A.S. Interactive decision making and behavior of experienced and inexperienced basketball coaches during practice. Journal of
Teaching in Physical Education, 16, 454-468.
Jowett, S. (2003). When the “honeymoon” is over: a case study of a coach-athlete dyad in
crisis. The Sport Psychologist, 17, 444-460.
Laios, A., & Theodorakis, N. (2002). The pre-season training of professional basketball teams in Greece. International Sports Journal, 6(1), 146-152.
Mallet, C.J., & Hanrahan, S.J. (2004). Elite athletes: why does the ‘fire’ burn so brightly?
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5, 183-200.
Owens, L. & Stewart, C. (2003). Understanding athletes’ learning styles. International Society of Biomechancis in Sport, Coach Information Service, http://www.education.ed.ac.uk/cis/index.html.
Pascarella, E.T., Truckenmiller, R., Nora A., Terenzini, P.T., Edision, M., & Hagedorn, L.C. (1999). Cognitive impacts of intercollegiate athletic participation. The Journal of Higher Education, 70, 1-26.
Stier, W. F., Jr. (1997). Coaching modern basketball — Hints, strategies and tactics. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Stier, W. F., Jr. (1998). Coaching concepts and strategies (2nd ed.). Boston: American Press.
Many social critics have suggested that our heavily mediated sports heroes no longer embody the ideal for adoring adolescents. This study attempts to better understand how American adolescents view these star athletes through statistical comparisons between the images of sports heroes and real and ideal self-concepts. Distances between self-concept and images of sports heroes suggest that sports heroes still embody the ideal in most areas, although not in academics and behavioral conduct.
Introduction
Throughout American history, the sports hero has been a frequently discussed, widely adored, and, particularly in recent years, heavily criticized component of society. Thanks to the invasive nature of modern media, American adolescents are now privileged to an unprecedented amount of information about their favorite star athletes. In addition to spectacular play and positive behaviors, sports fans also learn of various negative characteristics of these stars. Because of this, it has been assumed by many cultural critics that sports heroes no longer epitomize the American ideal as they did for previous generations.
Given the potential influence of today’s sports heroes, particularly with adolescents who admire these glamorized sports stars, gaining a clearer understanding of this construct is an important area of study. Therefore, this research project will address the following research questions:
How do American adolescents view their mediated sports heroes?
Do American adolescents view their sports heroes as ideal in certain areas, such as athleticism, and less ideal in others?
Literature Review
The Sports Hero
Sports has become a popular and vital area in which Americans now find their heroes, a trend that has been propelled through media since before the turn of the 20th century (“Heroes of”, 1990; Ryan, 1995; Nixon, 1984; Oriard, 1982; Simons, 1997; “Role models”, 1989; Andrews & Jackson, 2001; Windfield, 2003). One reason for this is that sports remains one area where true greatness and superior beauty can be found in a complex society (Goodman, 1993). A star athlete, unlike other mediated figures, will have rare moments when they appear to surpass mortal limitations through spectacular, seemingly impossible athletic feats (Nixon, 1984; Oriard, 1982).
The rapid growth of sports television in America has continuously increased emphasis on the American sports hero (McPherson, 1989; Davies, 1994; Harris, 1994; Harris, 1994b; Nixon, 1984; Katz, 1996). In addition to publicizing the modern sports hero, sports programs are presented to emphasize heroic actions, emotions, and personalities of star athletes, creating a strong and unique relationship between viewers and individual star athletes. (Kinkema & Harris, 1992; Coakley, 1994; Hargreaves, 1986; Hilliard, 1984; Sabo & Jensen, 1992). Americans now know more about popular sports figures than ever before, including both their on-the-field and off-the-field activities. The popular sports hero has been demystified, and fans now see greatness as well as imperfection, ranging from spousal abuse to drug use to gambling on sports (Hargreaves, 1986; Harris, 1994a; Hoagland, 1974; Coakley, 1994; McPherson et al., 1989; Messner & Solomon, 1994; Long, 1991; Nack & Munson, 1995; Starr & Samuels, 1997; Wilson & Sparks, 1996).
Despite these imperfections, many theorists still believe the modern, mass-mediated sports figure can be a hero. They have identified several characteristics that are commonly associated with this modern sports hero, including supreme athleticism on the field or court, high winning percentages, the potential to win championships, statistical records, greatness throughout a career, flair and charisma, sportsmanship, and confidence in one’s abilities (Nixon, 1984; Harris, 1994a; Harris, 1994b; Crepeau, 1985; Goodman, 1993; Smith, 1973; Porter, 1983; Starr & Samuels, 1997). Financial success and lucrative commercial endorsement deals are commonly identified qualities of the sports hero, particularly to adolescent boys who aspire to reach similar financial heights through professional athletics (“Michael Jordan’s”, 1991; Weisman, 1993; McDonald & Andrews, 2001; Wilson & Sparks, 1996; Simons, 1997). Theorists also have identified several non-performance-related characteristics of the modern hero, including civic and community involvement, academic accomplishment, strong family ties, and avoiding illegal and immoral behaviors (Walden, 1986; Smith, 1973; Harris, 1994a; Harris, 1994b; Hoagland, 1974; Nixon, 1984; Coakley, 1994).
Off-the-court actions of sports stars may have some impact on heroic classification, but on-the-court excellence has been identified as more instrumental. Nixon explained this, writing, “Wayward athletes may be excused by fans. . . in their lifestyle off the field as long as they work hard and produce on the field and. . . their behavior on or off the field does not depart too much from conventional standards” (1984, p. 174). Additionally, Archetti (2001) noted that sporting heroes can embody different qualities based on the contexts of their accomplishments. Therefore, the individualization of heroes is critical in understanding this social construct.
This study does not further attempt to summarize the universal qualities of the American sports hero, as individuals generally choose their own heroes based on personal needs and wants. This study examines whether the modern American sports hero is still viewed by individual American adolescents as meeting their personal ideal, or, as has been suggested by many, if sports heroes no longer meet this criteria. One potential means of addressing such individual characteristics and values of a sports hero to American adolescents in a standardized and measurable method is to examine self-concept, a foundation for this study.
Self-Concept
Although self-concept has been defined with several slight variations, for this study, this construct will be defined as “myself as I see myself” (Loundon & Bitta, 1979, p. 373; Dolich, 1969; Landon, 1974; Delozier & Tillman, 1972).
Two constructs of self-concept are used in this study, as follows:
The Real Self: An individual’s perception of how he/she actually is (Dolich,
1969; Birdwell, 1964; Ross, 1971; Runyon, 1977; Loundon & Bitta, 1979).
The Ideal Self: An individual’s perception of how he/she would like to be
(Delozier & Tillman, 1972; Loundon & Bitta, 1979; Runyon, 1977; Baughman & Welsh, 1962; Ross, 1971).
The construct “self-concept,” whether real or ideal, includes measures of several distinct domains. Susan Harter’s Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents, a self-concept measure for adolescents, assesses the following eight domains: scholastic competence, social acceptance, athletic competence, physical appearance, job competence, romantic appeal, behavioral conduct, and close friendship (Harter, 1988). These domains are used as the subscales of self-concept for this research.
The use of domains for research on self-concept and sports heroes is crucial because star athletes can display contradictory behaviors in different areas of their life (Starr & Samuels, 1997; Farrey, 1997; Malone, 1993; King, 2005). While no known studies have examined self-concept in reference to the selection of a sports hero, several studies have found consumers to choose products consistent with their self-concepts (Landon, 1974; Sirgy, 1983; Loundon & Bitta, 1979; Runyon, 1977; Hattie, 1992; Delozier & Tillman, 1972; Birdwell, 1964; Ross, 1971; Felker, 1974; Dolich, 1969; Krech et al., 1962). Loundon and Bitta (1979) explained, “Products and brands are considered as objects that consumers purchase either to maintain or to enhance their self-images. The choice of which brand to buy depends on how similar (or consistent) the consumer perceives the brand to be with his or her self-image” (p. 376).
Self-Concept and Mass Media Figures
Little research has addressed the selection of mass media figures with respect to self-concept or other related constructs. Caughley (1984) addressed the perceived relationship between a viewer and an admired media figure, writing, “The appeal is often complex, but the admired figure is typically felt to have qualities that the person senses in himself but desires to develop further. The admired figure represents an ideal self-image” (p. 54). Several authors have suggested that fans may choose favorite sports figures based on their perceived similarities between themselves and the athlete (Wilson & Sparks, 1996; Cole, 1996; Kellner, 1996; Harris, 1994a; Simons, 1997; “Role models”, 1989; Browne et al, 2003).
From the review of literature, the following research hypothesis predicts the place of mediated sports heroes in relation to adolescent self-concept.
Hypothesis
Adolescents choose mediated sports heroes that are closer to their ideal self-concept than to their real self-concept in various domains. This is particularly true for domains that are integral to athletic excellence. Therefore, American mediated sports heroes still epitomize the ideal more than the real self.
Methods
Subjects for Study
Subjects for this study were male high school students in grades nine and ten, approximately aged 14-16. This gender restriction prevents gender from being a confounding variable in data analysis. Additionally, researchers have suggested that male adolescents are more likely to look to mass media figures, including athletic heroes, as role models than are their female counterparts (McEvoy & Erikson, 1981).
Of the 172 valid subjects used for data analysis in this study, 120 subjects were students in a suburban private school, all participants in school athletics. The students from this school were predominantly white, with a small percentage of minorities (Asian, Hispanic, African-American). The remaining 52 subjects were participants in a sports tournament in Houston run through a local community center. These subjects, of the same grade and age parameters as the first 120 subjects, also were participants in school athletics. These subjects share similar demographics traits with the first 120 students, and the data collected from the two groups were virtually identical.
One criticism of this study may be that the students do not represent a diverse sample, decreasing external validity. However, like most studies, this study will not claim to be generalizable to all scenarios, nor is it able to address issues of race, socioeconomic status, and family/home environment.
Procedure
For this study, the image of the sports hero is compared to both one’s ideal image of one’s self, measured as ideal self-concept, and one’s real image of one’s self, or real self-concept. This will be measured across eight domains of self-concept. Therefore, three separate measures must be made. First, subjects must rate their own real self-concept (who I am). Second, subject must rate their ideal self-concept (who I want to be). Finally, subjects must rate the image of their own individually selected sports hero.
The proximity between the image of the sports hero and both the real and ideal self-concepts will be calculated, across all domains, and these distances will be examined. Statistical analysis of these distances will determine whether the image of the sports hero is closer to the ideal or to the real self.
For the measurement of real self-concept, the Adolescent Self-Perception Profile, created by Susan Harter (1988), was used. Five questions address each domain of self-concept (40 questions overall). The reliability of Harter’s test of self-concept has been determined through repeated use and examination of this instrument.
Altered versions of Harter’s test were also used to measure ideal self-concept and perceived image of the sports hero. To measure ideal self-concept, the phrase “how I am” was replaced with “how I would like to be.” Similarly, to measure the image of the sports hero, “who I am” was replaced with “what my sports hero is like.” Such a procedure for altering an existing test in this manner is derived from marketing studies that examine self-concept, product image, and purchase intentions (Dolich, 1969; Delozier & Tillman, 1972; Ross, 1971; Landon, 1974).
Test Administration
Tests were administered to small groups of approximately 10-20 students for each session. After an instructional session, subjects were instructed to pick the one athlete they most considered to be their sports hero. The athlete must be or must have been covered heavily by mass media, and the athlete could not be a personal acquaintance of the subject. Subjects were then instructed to use their individual choice of sports hero as replacement for the generic “sports hero” of the questionnaires.
The three tests were given (real self-concept, ideal self-concept, and image of the sports hero) using one questionnaire and one answer packet, in which students would place their answers for each question of real self-concept next to the counterpart answers for the same question on each of the other two constructs (ideal self, sport hero). The sequence of test administration was identical for all subjects.
Data Analysis
The following analysis was completed with the collected data for this study.
Self-Concept, Image of the Sports Hero, and Distance Scores
For each of the three constructs (real self-concept, ideal self-concept, and image of the sports hero), a mean score was calculated in each of the eight domains of self-concept. Next, distance scores were calculated to measure the distance between self-concept, both real and ideal, and the image of the sports hero. These distance scores indicate the similarity between self-concept (real and ideal) and the image of the sports hero. These two separate sets of distance scores were calculated for each of the eight domains. The distance scores between real self-concept and the image of the sports hero (for all eight domains) are referred to as “real distance scores,” while the distance scores between ideal self-concept and the image of the sports hero are referred to as “ideal distance scores.”
The difference squared model, which squares the difference between each paired set of questions and sums these differences, has been used to measure distance scores (Sirgy, 1983; Osgood et al., 1957). The formula is represented as follows:
Qn, Sp Hero = Question n from the test of the image of the sports hero.
Qn, SC = Question n from the test of self-concept.
The lower the distance score for each domain, the closer the particular domain of self-concept is to the image of the sports hero in that domain.
To determine whether the image of the sports hero fell closer to the ideal self than the real self, t-tests were used to look for a significant difference between ideal distance scores and real distance scores in each of the eight domains. These t-tests would determine whether the sports hero fell significantly closer to the ideal self than the real self in each of the eight domains, as hypothesized in this study.
Results
Chosen Sports Heroes
Ninety-nine different athletes were chosen as sports heroes for the 172 subjects, demonstrating a diversity of heroes. Broken down by sport, baseball players were chosen by the largest number of subjects (57), followed by basketball (43) and football (21). Because many of the subjects for this study were participants in a baseball tournament, the large number of subjects selecting baseball players is not surprising. Only one of the 172 male subjects chose a female sports hero, stressing both the importance of perceived similarity and of media coverage in the selection of a sports hero.
The sheer number of different athletes chosen (99) is notable. This suggests a large number of available sports heroes for adolescents and refutes the idea that only a small group of popular athletes are chosen as heroes. This also suggests that adolescents still play an active part in the selection of their sports heroes.
Self-Concept and Image of the Sports Hero
The results for the tests of self-concept, both real and ideal, are detailed in Tables 1 and 2. T-Tests confirmed a significant difference between real and ideal self-concept in each domain.
The results for the tests of the image of the sports hero are detailed in Table 3. For the image of the sports hero, the athletic domain had the highest mean score, followed by job competence, clearly also related to athletics. As with both types of self-concept, the behavior domain received the lowest mean score. Such results suggest a view of sports heroes which place a premium on supreme athletic competence, yet allow for lower levels of competence in non-athletic areas, particularly in the ability to behave in the right way.
The image of the sports hero fell in-between the real and ideal self-concepts for seven of the eight domains. The only domain for which this was not true was the behavior domain, where the mean score of the sports hero fell below both the ideal and the real self-concepts. Therefore, these subjects felt their sports hero typically falls somewhere between who they are and who they would like to be for all areas except for the behavioral domain. Subsequent analysis will determine whether the hero is significantly closer to the ideal self than the real self, as hypothesized.
Distance Scores
The 16 distance scores (eight real and eight ideal) are reported in Table 4. The lower the distance score for each domain, the closer the particular domain of self-concept is to the image of the sports hero in that domain.
Of the 16 distance scores, the six domain scores with the lowest mean scores were ideal distance scores. Additionally, eight of the ten distance scores with the highest mean scores were real distance scores, the exception being Ideal Scholastic Distance, which had the highest mean score of all. In all but one domain, Scholastic Achievement, the ideal distance score was smaller than the real distance score, meaning the sports hero was closer to the ideal self than the real self for that domain. Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients of reliability ranged from .5263 for Real Job Distance to .7655 for Real Friend Distance and from .5753 for Ideal Athletic Distance to .7320 for Ideal Friend Distance. This and average item-to-total correlations greater than .3 except for Real Job Distance (.2966) indicate that these 16 distance scores were reliable measures of the distance between self-concept and the image of the sports hero.
Comparison of Real Distance Scores to Ideal Distance Scores
The hypothesis predicted that the ideal self-concept would be closer than the real self-concept to the image of the sports hero, or that these subjects would perceive their heroes as closer to their ideal than their real self. T-Tests were done with distance scores for each of the eight domains. The results are detailed Table 5.
The hypothesis was supported for six of the eight domains of self-concept. These subjects perceived their sports heroes as closer to their ideal self than their real self in the following six domains: athletic competence, close friendship, job competence, physical appearance, romantic appeal, and social acceptance. The only two domains for which this is not true are the behavior domain and the scholastic domain. In fact, the scholastic domain is the only one of the eight domains where the image of the sports hero is actually closer to the real self-concept than the ideal self-concept, reflecting both a high ideal academic self-concept and a correspondingly low image of the sports hero’s competence in academic areas. For six of the areas of self-concept, however, it can be stated that the sports hero more closely approximates the ideal self, or who these subjects want to be, than the real self, or who these subjects currently perceive themselves to be.
Conclusions
In contrast to the opinions of many cultural theorists, the results from this research indicate that the sports hero does approach our ideal in most areas. Obviously, this might be expected for areas such as athletic competence, job competence, and physical appearance. The subjects in this study also viewed their sports heroes as closer to their ideal self in areas of romantic appeal, friendship, and social acceptance. Therefore, the modern American mediated sports hero, at least from the perspective of these adolescents, approaches the ideal in several areas that are not athletic or physical.
Conversely, in the domains of scholastic competence and behavioral conduct, these adolescents did not significantly find their sports heroes to approximate their ideal self more than their real self. Media coverage of the frequent negative behaviors of star athletes has likely contributed to this result. Further, with an increasing number of star athletes leaving school early and frequent reports of academic scandal involving athletes, adolescents may be increasingly less likely to view their sports heroes as ideal scholars who exhibit ideal behavior.
From these results, several general conclusions can be made. First, these adolescents view the mediated sports hero not a singular construct, but rather a complex entity. Athletes who are stars on the court yet less noteworthy off it can still be viewed as heroic, as fans seem capable of discerning the complexity and incongruity of their characters. Second, individuals have their own individual heroic choices and their own perspectives on what is truly ideal. Because of this, it is less important to examine whether the mediated sports hero measures up to a singular, societal measure of the ideal than it is to examine how individual sports heroes measure up to individual perceptions of the ideal. In a fragmented society with endless media outlets, this design allows for a more accurate assessment of the true social position of this figure.
Third, because mediated sports heroes do not measure up to the ideal in the scholastic and behavioral domains, questions should be raised over the possible influence of American sports heroes. Given the potential for these heroes to serve as role models for adolescents, it would be hoped that sports heroes would serve as ideal role models in these critical areas. While it is expected that the hero would serve as an ideal model in athletic and social areas, it is the scholastic and behavioral domains that provide a critical need for superior role models. For these popular figures to fall short in these two important domains is worrisome. Future research into the area of mediated sports heroes should examine the potential role modeling influence of the modern American sports hero, particularly as it relates to the ideal and less-than-ideal components of this popular figure.
Finally, researchers should pay attention to the function of media to translate meaning about popular sports figures. Clearly, the subjects for this study developed ideas about many areas of their favorite athletes, and these ideas were largely driven by media images and messages. With the increasing availability of information about popular athletes through endless new media technologies, researchers should attempt to understand where adolescents find their information about popular athletes, the types of media they use, and the messages sent through those mediated sources.
Bibliography
Andrews, D & Jackson, S. (2001). Introduction: Sport celebrities, public culture, and private experience. In D. Andews & S. Jackson (Eds.), Sports stars: public culture and the politics of representation (pp. 1-19). London: Routledge.
Archetti, E. (2001). The spectacle of a heroic life: The case of Diego Maradona. In D. Andews & S. Jackson (Eds.), Sports stars: Public culture and the politics of representation (pp. 151-163). London: Routledge.
Baughman, E., & Welsh, G. (1962). Personality: A behavioral science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Birdwell, A. (1968). A study of influence of image congruence on consumer choice. Journal of Business, 41, 76-88.
Brown, W., Basil, M., & Bocarnea, M. (2003). The influence of famous athletes on health beliefs and practices. Journal of Health Communication, 8, 41-57.
Caughley, J. (1984). Imaginary social worlds: A cultural approach. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Coakley, J. (1994). Sport in society. St. Louis: Mossy.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Crepeau, R. (1985). Where have you gone, Frank Merriwell? The decline of the American sports hero. In W. Umphlett (Ed.), American sports culture: The humanistic dimensions (pp. 76-82). Lewisberg, PA: Bucknell University Press.
Davies, R. (1994). America’s obsession: Sports and society since 1945. Forth Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
Delozier, W,. & Tillman, R. (1972). Self image concepts — can they be used to design marketing programs. Southern Journal of Business, 7, 9-15.
Dolich, I. (1969). Congruence relationships between self images and product brands. Journal of Marketing Research, 6, 80-84.
Farrey, T. (1997, September 3). Why athletes go bad. World Wide Web site http://www.ESPNET.SportsZone.com/editors/gen/features/crime/index3
Felker, D. (1974). Building positive self-concepts. Minneapolis: Burgess.
Goodman, M. (1993, May/June). Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? Utne Reader, pp. 103-104.
Hargreaves, J. (1986). Sport, power, and culture: A social and historical analysis of popular sports in Britain. London: St. Martin’s Press.
Harris, J. (1994). Athletes and the American hero dilemma. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Harris, R. (1994). A cognitive psychology of mass communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Harter, S. (1988). Manual for the self-perception profile for adolescents. Denver: University of Denver.
Hattie, J. (1992). Self-concept. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Heroes of young America: 1980-1989. The world almanac and book of facts 1990. Newspaper Enterprise Association.
Hilliard, D. (1984). Media images of male and female professional athletes: An interpretive analysis of magazine articles. Sociology of Sport Journal, 1, 251-262.
Hoagland, E. (1974, March 10). Where have all the heroes gone? New York Times, Section 6, p. 20.
Katz, M. (1996, May 13). Cable networks carve sports niches. Broadcasting & Cable, p. 40.
Kellner, D. (1996). Sports, media culture, and race — some reflections on Michael Jordan. Sociology of Sport Journal, 13, 458-467.
Kinikema, K., & Harris, J. (1992). Sport and the mass media. Exercise and Sport Science Reviews, 20, 127-159.
King, P. (2005, March 7). No rush to invest in a bad act. Sports Illustrated, p. 44.
Krech, D., Cruchfield, R., & Ballachey, E. (1962). Individual in society. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Landon, E. (1974). Self concept, ideal self concept, and consumer purchase intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 44-51.
Long, G. (1991). Social perceptions of sports figures: Dumb jocks, flawed heroes, and superstars. In L. Diamant (Eds.), Psychology of sports, exercise, and fitness (pp. 227-236). New York: Hemisphere.
Loundon, D., & Bitta, A. (1979). Consumer behaviors. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Malone, K. (1993, June 14). One role model to another. Sports Illustrated, p. 84.
McDonald, M. & Andrews, D. (2001). Michael Jordan: Corporate sport and postmodern celebrityhood. In D. Andews & S. Jackson (Eds.), Sports stars: public culture and the politics of representation (pp. 20-35). London: Routledge.
McEvoy A., & Erikson, E. (1981). Heroes and villians: A conceptual strategy for assessing their influence. Sociological Focus, 14, 111-122.
McPherson, B., Curtis, J., & Loy, J. (1989). The social significance of sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Messner, M., & Solomon, W. (1994). Sin & redemption: The Sugar Ray Leonard wife-abuse story. In M. Messner & D. Sabo (Eds.), Sex, violence & power in sports: Rethinking masculinity (pp. 53-65). Freedom, CA: Crossing Press.
Michael Jordan’s magical powers (1991, June 1). The Economist, p. 28.
Nack, W., & Munson, L. (1995, July 31). Sports’ dirty secret. Sports Illustrated, pp. 62-74.
Nixon, H. (1984). Sport and the American dream. New York: Leisure Press.
Oriard, M. (1982). Dreaming of heroes. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Osgood, C., Suci, G., & Tannenbaum, P. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Porter, D. (1983). America’s greatest sports figures. In R. Browne & M. Fishwick (Eds.), The hero in transition (pp. 248-259). Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green University Popular Press.
Role models, sports and youth. (1989). Report from the National School Safety Center, Malibu, CA.
Ross, I. (1971). Self-concept and brand preference. The Journal of Business, 44, 38-50.
Runyon, K. (1977). Consumer behavior and the practice of marketing. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
Ryan, J. (1995, September). Why sports heroes abuse their wives. Redbook, pp. 83-89.
Sabo, D., & Jensen, S. (1992). Images of men in sports media. In S. Craig (Ed.), Men, masculinity, and the media (pp. 169-184). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Simons, J. (1997, March 24). Improbable dreams. U.S. News and World Report, pp. 46-52.
Sirgy, M. (1983). Social cognition and consumer behavior. New York: Praeger.
Smith, G. (1973). The sport hero: An endangered species. Quest, 19, 59-70.
Starr, M., & Samuels, A. (1997, December 15). Hoop nightmare. Newsweek, pp. 26-29.
Walden, D. (1986, January). Where have all our heroes gone? USA Today Magazine, pp. 20-25.
Weisman, J. (1993). Big-buck basketball: Acolytes in the temple of Nike. In D. Eitzen (Ed.), Sport in contemporary society: An anthology (pp. 164-168). New York: St. Martin’s.
Wilson, B., & Sparks, R. (1996). “It’s gotta be the shoes”: Youth, race, and sneaker commercials. Sociology of Sport Journal, 13, 398-427.
Winfield, B. (2003). The press response to the corpse of discovery: The making of heroes in an egalitarian age. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80, 866-883.
