Latest Articles

U.S. Sports Academy2016-10-12T14:47:06-05:00

Incidents of Sexual Harassment in Turkey on Elite Sportswomen

U.S. Sports Academy2016-10-12T14:47:06-05:00March 14th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Coaching, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology, Women and Sports|

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to examine incidents of sexual harassment by trainers, administrators, spectators, etc. directed at elite sportswomen from different branches. The 356 sportswomen participants voluntarily took part in this study. They completed a twenty-item questionnaire that had been tested for validity and reliability. The Alfa reliability coefficient was found to be 0.86. The data collected were analyzed through SPSS program and data relations were examined via a chi-square test. The significance level was p<0.05.

The findings of the study revealed that 200 out of 356 sportswomen stated that they had been sexually harassed. The most frequent time of harassment was found to be after games or training, and the most frequently occurring location of harassment was the sports center. The relationship between branch groups, age, educational background, and the sexual harassment was found to have p<0.05 significance. The relationship between years of experience in sports, marital status, the gender of the trainer, and sexual harassment were found to be insignificant (p>0.05). The overall findings of this study show that elite sportswomen from different branches are exposed to sexual harassment. This supports the related literature.

Introduction:

As a form of sex discrimination, sexual harassment has a variety of definitions in different domains. However, none is universally accepted (Brackendridge et al., 2000). In general terms, sexual harassment is defined as unwelcome sexual attempts (Fedai et al., 2001); in sports, it takes the form of slang words, teasing, covert jokes, negative comments on a sportsperson’s body or performance, and unwelcome physical contact. Whether physical or psychological, it is disturbing to the person, and is given without consent (Brackendridge et al., 2000, Charney et al., 1994; Ian, 2000, Kirby et al., 1997; Lackey, 1990). Research on sexual harassment in sports began in the mid-1980s (Brackendridge, 1997) and was commonly defined as rudeness to women by adult men (Brackendridge, 2000 & Seefelt, 1998).

Sexual harassment is a relatively new area of study in our country, but it has been on the agenda in Western countries for a long time. Though the problem has existed in our country, due to social perceptions, attitude differences, and the socialization process it has not been studied in detail. When considering the damage it causes to a person, to a club, and to the sports community, the significance of the situation becomes obvious. Moreover, sexual harassment has potentially negative influences on performance, economical and social position, self-confidence, mood, and physical health (Brackendridge et al., 2000).

The sub-objectives of the research were to determine whether sportspersons experienced sexual harassment or not. If so, the type of harassment, by whom they were exposed to harassment, the place(s) it happened, the psychological and physical damages, and the rate of reactions needed to be considered. In addition, the relationship between the sportsmen’s branch (team and individual), age, educational background, marital status, active years in sports, and conceptualization of sexual harassment were examined.

Methodology:

The Subjects

Three-hundred and fifty-six elite sportswomen from various branches of athletics: weightlifting (eight), football (thirty-six), taekwondo (fifty-two), basketball (twenty-six), swimming (eighteen), handball (seventy-eight), volleyball (forty-two), table tennis (eighteen) gymnastics (twenty-two), and miscellaneous (fifty-six) voluntarily participated in this study. Before the training, in the changing room, sportswomen from team and individual sports were given information about the study and the questionnaire. Completed questionnaires were returned to the researchers in sealed envelopes by the participants or the coaches.

Data Collection Tool

After a detailed study of the related research, a twenty-item questionnaire was prepared and piloted on fifty students from Ankara University, College of Sports to check validity and reliability. The Alfa reliability coefficient was 0.86. Before asking sportswomen of different branches to fill out the questionnaires, they were given the necessary information and the questionnaires were distributed in closed envelopes. These consisted of twenty questions, the first five of which involved personal information (age, sports branch, training age, educational background, marital status), and the rest of which were multiple choice questions about sexual harassment. The focus of these multiple choice questions concerned the frequency of sexual harassment incidents, the harasser, the affective dimension, actions against harassment, and the location of the incidents.

Statistical Analysis

The data were analyzed by use of SPSS (7, 5) program. The descriptive statistics was referred to in order to identify the relation between data via the chi-square test. For the analysis of personal information and other responses, frequency (f), percentage (%), arithmetical mean (x), and standard deviation (SD) were referred to. By use of the chi-square test, the relationship between the sportsperson’s branch (team and individual), age, educational background, marital status, active years in sports, and relation to sexual harassment were examined. Finally, the level of significance was found to be p<0.05.

Findings:

Table 1: Personal Information about Participating Sportswomen

Variables	Number	Percentage (%)	Total
Age	<19 >20	190 166	53.4 46.6	356
Educational Background	High School College	110 246	69.1 30.9	356
Marital Status	Married Single	18 338	5.1 94.9	356

Table 1 provides personal information about the elite sportswomen. For age, 53.4% of the participants were under the age of 20 whereas 46.6% were above 20. For education, 69.1% were college graduates while 30. 9% were high school graduates. Finally, the marital status rate was 94: 9% were single and 5.1% were married. The branches of participants are displayed in Table 2.

Table 2: Branch Distribution of Sportswomen

Sports Branch	Number	Percentage (%)
Athletics	56	15.7
Weightlifting	8	2.2
Football	36	10.1
Taekwondo	52	14.6
Basketball	26	7.3
Swimming	18	5.1
Handball	78	21.9
Volleyball	42	11.8
Table Tennis	18	5.1
Gymnastics	22	6.2
Total	356	100

In addition, it was found that the sportspersons had four to ten years of active sport experience.

4-6 Years11632.7

Table 3: Experience

Duration of Participation in Sport	Number	Percentage (%)
1-3 Years	26	7.3
7-9 Years	124	34.8
10+ Years	90	25.3
Total	356	100

The results revealed that out of 356 sportswomen, 56.2% declared that they had been exposed to sexual harassment, whereas 43.8% declared the opposite ( see Table 4). The most frequent sexual harassment type was ‘come-ons’ by 26.4%, ‘unwelcome jokes, questions and ‘sexual utterances’ by 25.3%, and ‘unwelcome letters and phone calls’ by 24.2%.

Table 4: Frequency of Exposure to Harassment

Frequency	Number	Percentage (%)
Yes	200	56.2
No	156	43.8
Total	356	100

In addition, the harassers were identified as ‘spectators’ by 40%, ‘teammates’ by 33.1%, and ‘the trainer’ by 24.8% (see Table 5). As to the frequency of exposure to these kinds of problems, once in a sportswomen’s life was 12.4%, once to three times was 30.9%, four to eight times was 7.3%, five to eight times was 5.1% and continuous was 3.9%. Sexual harassment occured during the following times: 21.3% after games, 19.7% after trainings, 9% before or during games, and 6.7% before games. As a reaction to harassment, 29.8% of the participants stated they ignored the harassment. In addition, 18.5% stated, “I told the harasser not to do it” and 16.9% stated, “I stopped the harasser.”

Table 5: Type and Distribution of Harassment

Types of Harassment	Trainer	Manager	Teammate	Spectator	Other	Total
No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%
Come-ons	16	4,5	16	4,5	24	6,7	34	9,6	4	1,1	94	26,4
Unwelcome Jokes, Questions or Sexual Utterances	18	5,1	18	5,1	30	8,4	22	6,2	2	0,6	90	25,3
Unwelcome Asking Out	14	3,9	14	3,9	28	7,9	26	7,3	4	1,1	86	24,2
Unwelcome Letters or Phone Calls	14	3,9	8	2,2	18	5,1	28	7,9	6	1,7	74	20,8
Sexual Exposure of the Body	2	0,6	8	2,2	8	2,2	20	5,6	4	1,1	42	11,8
Light Touching	22	6,2	–	–	6	1,7	10	2,8	4	1,1	42	11,8
Clearly Touching	2	0,6	2	0,6	4	1,1	2	0,6	2	0,6	12	3,4
Rape	–	–	–	–	2	0,6	–	–	2	0,6	4	1,1
Total	88	24,8	68	19,1	118	33,1	142	40	28	7,9

As to location, 45.5% of the sportswomen stated that the gym or game field is the place where sexual harassment primarily occurs (Table 6). A high percentage of sportswomen (69.1%) believed that sport apparel does not promote sexual harassment, while 29.2% accepted that there was a relationshp between the two.

Table 6: Locations of Sexual Harassment

Location	No.	Percentage (%)
Gyms or Game Field	162	45.5
Changing Room	14	3.9
Equipment Room	2	0.6
Other	62	17.6

Whether sexual harassment affects the performances of the sportswomen was a subject of varying opinions. The percentage that answered that it didn’t change performance was 36%, the percentage that felt it created a decrease in performance was 18.5%, and the percentage that felt that it increased performance was 2.2%. The duration of the decrease in the performance was felt by most to last “less than a week”. The most frequent reaction to sexual harassment is ‘anger’ by 20.8 % (see Table 7).

Table 7: Psychological Reactions of Sportswomen after Being Harassed

Reaction	No	Percentage (%)
Anger	74	20.8
Fear	40	11.2
Desperation	20	5.6
Inferiority and Worry	22	6.2
Depression	_	_
Guilt	4	1.1
No Feelings at All	6	1.7
Other	36	9.1

As for the physical/physiological reactions to these kinds of incidents, ‘headache’ was the largest reactant at 37.1 % (see Table 8). The subsequent actions taken by the sportswomen also varied: 53.9% said they “have done nothing”, 1.7% indicated “having seen psychological counselors,” and 1.7% indicated “having taken tranquilizers.’

Table 8: Physical/ Physiological Reactions of Sportswomen after Being Harassed

Physical Reaction	No	Percentage (%)
Headache	74	20.8
Insomnia	40	11.2
Heartburn	20	5.6
Tiredness	22	6.2
Nausea- Vomiting	–	–
Dizziness	4	1.1
Irregular Menstruation	6	1.7
Other	36	10.1

The harasser was identified as ‘a friend’ by 37.2%, as ‘family’ by 9.0%, and as “the trainer” by 5.1%. That sexual harassment is a problem was partially agreed to by 52.2% of the participants; 29.8% saw it as a real problem, and 18% did not see it at all as a problem.

On the other hand, the relationship between the sports branches (especially team sport) and sexual harassment was found to be significant (p 0.05). Likewise, for age (especially 20 or above), educational background (especially college graduates) and sexual harassment, the significance level was found to be p 0.05. Nevertheless, the relationship between the duration of experience, martial status, gender of the trainers, and sexual harassment was not significant (p 0.05).

Discussion:

To reach the optimum level of performance, training and game conditions for sportswomen should be secure (Brackendridge et al., 2000). More importantly, the low number of female trainers in our country makes this topic more critical. The research shows that the number of sportswomen and female trainers is much fewer than that of men (Anonymous, 1991). In our study, 84.3% of the women’s trainers were men, whereas 15.7% were women. The studies conducted in the U.S. also supported this rate (Lackey, 1990). The harassers generally turned out to be sportsmen and male trainers. In addition, as the perceptions of men and women differ, “unwelcome behaviors” may be taken to be less problematic by men. As a result, completely unwanted conduct may be considered acceptable by sportsmen (Brackendridge et al, 2000 & Seefelt, 1998). The studies so far states that the trainers are the ones abusing relationships (Brackendridge et al, 2000).

The fact that spectators are the most frequent harassers underscores the fact that the low education level of Turkey may be reflected by the conduct of spectators. In this study, 56.2% of sportswomen declared that they had been harassed, whereas the study conducted on 301 Israeli and American sportswomen by Fedjin et al. showed a harassment rate of 14% (Fedjin et al., 2001). This study defined harassers in the following manner: 40% were spectators, 33.1% were teammates and 24.8% were trainers. The most frequent type of harassment turned out to be ‘come-ons’ at 26.4% followed by ‘unwelcome jokes, questions, and sexual utterances at 25.3%, which are the highest, according to studies in the U.S. (Lackey, 1990).

Sexual harassment may occur once; on the other hand, unwelcome sexual conduct may take place repeatedly (Anonymous, 2000; Brackendridge, et al, 2000). The first study about sexual harassment on women in Turkey concluded that 56.2% of the sportswomen had been subjected to sexual harassment at least once. In many other countries, findings show that every three to four sportswomen experience sexual harassment before adolescence (Brackendridge, 1997; Brackendridge et al., 2000). More than 90% of the victims of harassment are negatively influenced emotionally (Brackendridge et al., 2000; Ian, 2000). This study acknowledged that having been psychologically affected, sportswomen have feelings of anger, fear, weariness, loss of self confidence, and loneliness.

The findings for the physical/physiological effects of harassment were parallel to those of other studies (Brackendridge et al, 2000; Charney et al., 1994). The location of harassment occurs 45.5% of the time at the gym or sports field and 21.3% of the time after a game; Kirby and Graves (1997) argued that sexual harassment doubled during trips for trainings.

Of the participants, 69.1% did not agree on the relationship between sportswear and harassment; 29.2% did. Furthermore, no clear relation was identified in the related research; it was considered simply a risk factor (Brackendridge et al., 2000).

A significant relationship of p 0.05 between the branches (especially team sports), age groups (especially the group of 20 or above), educational background (especially the college group), and sexual harassment was found. Female athletes in team sports are at higher incidences of harassment than in individual sports in Turkey (GSGM 2006). Indeed, it is highly popular to participate in team sports such as volleyball, basketball, and handball among females in Turkey. Therefore, it can be proposed that sexual harassment in team sports in Turkey is increased due to the increased interest of spectators. The study on the health staff found that young nurses are the most frequently harassed group in Turkey (Kisa et al., 1996). Other studies conducted in Turkey displayed these findings: 14% of working women are harassed (Cumhuriyet Newspaper, 2004; Milliyet Newspaper, 2004). This is widely observed in hospitals (Cumhuriyet Newspaper, 2004). Sportswomen, at the beginning of their professional life, get discouraged if subjected to harassment. They tend to leave the sports club. On the contrary, some of the elite sportsmen declared that, independent of the trainers, they succeeded in becoming members of the groups that helped prevent harassment. However, due to their lack of self-confidence, they relate their successes to other people (trainers, managers, etc.). Therefore, we can conclude that instead of coping with harassment, they tend to leave the profession (Brackendridge et al., 2000). The relation between active sports years, marital status, and harassment was found to be insignificant (p 0.05).

Conclusion:

Out of 356 participant sportswomen, 56.2% declared that they had been exposed to sexual harassment while 43.8% did not. The most frequent sexual harassment was stated to be ‘come-ons’ at 26.4% followed by ‘unwelcome jokes, questions and sexual utterances at 25.3%, and ‘unwelcome letters and phone calls’ at 24.2%.

As regards sources of harassment, 40% claimed that spectators, 33.1% teammates, and 24.8% trainers were guilty of harassment. The rate of sexual harassment varied. Of the participants, 12.4%, declared it occurred only once, 30.9% said that it occurred one to three times, 7.3% said that it occurred four to eight times, 5.1% said that it occurred five to eight times, and 3.9% declared continuous harassment.

As to the timing of the harassment, 21.3% stated it happened after the game, 19.7% after the training, 9.0% before/during the training, and 6.7% before the game. Of the participants, 29.8% said, ‘I ignored the act’, 18.5% said, ‘I told that person not to,’ and 16.9% said, ‘I prevented the behavior.’

The most frequently occurring location for harassment, noted by 45.5%, was the gym or the field. Of the participants, 69.1% did not accept the existence of a relationship between the clothing and harassment, while 29.2% did.

When questioned, 36% stated no change in their performances, whereas 18.5% expressed a decrease in performance in the case of harassment. The duration of the decrease was stated by most as ‘less than a week’. The most common psychological reaction to harassment was found to be ‘anger,’ at 20.8%.

The most frequent physical reaction of sportswomen to harassment was headaches (37.1%). Of the participants, 53.9% declared that they did nothing to overcome the reactions, 1.7% acknowledged that they have seen counselors and 1.7% have taken tranquilizers. In addition, 37.2% have reported the incident to a friend, 9.0% to family, and 5.1% to a trainer. Finally, 52.2% accepted the harassment as a partial problem, 29.8% as a larger problem, and 18% as no problem at all.

Recommendations for Further Study:

Sportswomen are exposed to sexual harassment in Turkey. Therefore, the following recommendations should be considered. Information sessions on ‘sexual harassment’ for sportswomen from different branches should be inititated. Practical rules, security guidelines, and other materials should be prepared to increase the security of sportswomen. Sportswomen should enroll in self-defense training. Harassers should be punished with a preventative and appropriate punishment. Working conditions must improve to discourage harassment. Sports managers should take measures to prevent harassment towards sportswomen (eg. escorting sportswomen, making the gym and sport fields safer). Harassed women must be helped to recover and regain their status and self-confidence.

References:

Anonymous (1991). Official paper from the Prime Ministry General Directorate for Youth and
Sports. Ankara.

Anonymous (2000). Official paper from the National Association for Sports and Physical Education (NASPE), 1-5. Sexual Harassment in Athletic Settings. Retrieved April 4, 2005, from http://www.aahperd.org/naspe/naspe

Brackendridge, CH. (1997). Researching sexual abuse in sport. In Clarke G, Humberstone B.
(Eds.) Researching Women Sports. (pp. 126-141). London: Macmillan.

Brackendridge, CH & Cert Ed. (2000) Harassment, sexual abuse and safety of the female athletes. Clinics in Sports Medicine, 19(2), 187-199. April.

Charney, D. A. and Russell, R.C. (1994), An overview of sexual harassment. Am. J. Psychiatry. 151 (1). 10-17.

Cumhuriyet Newspaper (2004). The Nightmare of the working women. pp. 18 December. Fedai, T. & Teke, K. (2000). Sexual harassment: importance in hospital management. Journal of Health and Society. 10(2). 17-21, April.

Fedjin, N. and Hanegby, R. (2001). Gender and Cultural Bias in Perceptions of Sexual Harassment in Sport, International Review for the Sociology, 36 (4), 459-478.

GSGM (2006), Genclik ve Spor Genel Mudurlugu, http://www.gsgm.gov.tr/sayfalar/istatistik/istatistik_index.htm

Ian Holmes (2001). Policy on Harassment. Retrieved April 4, 2005, from http:/www.australiansoccer.com.au/pdfs/fairplay/800-6-Circular%2024-2001.pdf

Kirby, S. & Graves, L. (1997, July). Foul Play: Sexual Harassment in Sports. Paper Presented at the Pre- Olympic Scientific Congress, Dallas, TX.

Kisa, A. & Dziegielewski, F. S. (1996). Sexual harassment of female nurses in a hospital in
Turkey, Health Service Management Research, 9, 243-253.

Lackey, D. (1990), Sexual harassment in sports. Physical Educator, 47(2), 22-26.

Milliyet Newspaper (2004). They are not complaining about harassment. pp. 16 December.

Seefelt, V. (1998). Understanding Sexual Harassment and Abuse of Power in Athletic Settings, YSI home page, 1-4.

Appendix: The Questionnaire

Dear sportsman,

Sexual harassment, though not a new issue in our country, has been on the agenda of Western countries for a long time. In many of the sport branches, the number of female trainers is low, which makes this issue significant.

The purpose of this study is to examine sexual harassment incidents by trainers, administrators, spectators, etc. toward elite sportswomen from different branches. Your responses to this questionnaire will not be used anywhere else. The success of this study depends on your complete and correct answers. I thank you for your help and cooperation.

The Researchers

1. Age?
2. Sport branch?
3. For how many years have you been actively involved in sports?
a- 1-3    b- 4-6    c- 7-9    d- 10+
4. Educational level?
a- High school    b-University    d-Other:_____________
5. Marital status?
a- Married    b-Single    c- Separated/Divorced    d-Widow/er
6. The following is a definition of sexual harassment: intentional or repeatedly unwelcome words or physical contact. The following are considered to be actions of sexual harassment: come-ons, unwelcome jokes, questions and sexual utterances, sexually explicit hand movements and facial gestures, unwelcome invitations out, unwelcome letters and phone calls, sexual exposure of part of the body, a soft touch to the body, a clear touch to the body (eg. touching breasts), and rape.

7. Based on this definition, have you ever experienced sexual harassment?
a-Yes    b-No
8. Please mark the following that apply to your experience.

‘

	Trainer	Administrator	Teammate	Spectator	Other
Come-ons
Unwelcome jokes, questions and sexual utterances
Unwelcome asking out
Unwelcome letters and phone calls
Sexually exposing any part of the body
A soft touch to the body
A clear touch to the body
Rape -tendency to rape

9. How many times you have experienced this kind of sexual harassment?
a- once    b- 1-3 times    c- 4-8 times    d- 8-15 times    e- continuously

10. When did you experience sexual harassment?
a-before/during training    b-after training    c-before game    d-after game
11. How did you find solutions when you experienced sexual harassment? (may circle more than one choice).

a-I ignored the act.    b-I took it as teasing.    c-I prevented the behavior.
d- I told that person not to.    e-I reported it to my teammates, trainer and administrators.
f-Other, please write _____________________
12. Where did you experience sexual harassment? (may circle more than one choice)
a- Gym    b-Changing room    c-Equipment room    d-Other (please write) _________________
13. Do you believe that there is a relationship between the uniforms on the field and sexual harassment?
a- Yes    b- No
14. How has your performance changed since the incident?

a- My performance increased.    b- There was no change in my performance.
c- My performance decreased.
15. If your performance decreased, how long did that last? (based on the latest incident).
a-Less than a week    b-1 week- 1 month    c-1 month- 3 months    d-Less than 6 months
16. How did you react to this incident? (You may circle more than one choice.)
a- Anger    b- Fear    c- Desperation    d- Inferiority    e- Depression    f- Guilt    g- No feelings
h-Other reactions (please write)______________________________________.
17. Which of these physical complaints did you have after the incident of sexual harassment? (may circle more than one choice)

a- Headaches    b- Insomnia    c- Heartburn    d- Fatigue    e- Nausea-vomiting    f- Dizziness
g- Irregular menstruation    h-Other:________________________________________
18. To overcome the physical complaints, what have you done?

a-I have changed my eating habits.    b-I have taken tranquilizers.
c-I have had psychological guidance or therapy.    d- No actions taken

19. Whom did you talk to about this sexual harassment incident?

a-My spouse    b-My family    c-My sibling    d-One club administrator    e-My friend    f-My trainer
g-Other:_____________________________________________
20. What is the gender of your trainer:
a- Male    b-Female
21. Do you think sexual harassment is a problem in sports?

a- Yes    b- No    c-Partially

U.S. Sports Academy2020-06-02T11:24:35-05:00

The Demise of the WNBA in Florida: A Mixed Method Case Study of Newspaper Coverage about Women’s Professional Basketball

U.S. Sports Academy2020-06-02T11:24:35-05:00March 14th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Management, Women and Sports|

The Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA) is a hot phenomenon on the American sports scene. With its recent popularity, the question has been raised as to whether newspaper coverage of the teams is pivotal to the survival of the fledgling franchises. This study sought to discover if the actual coverage of the Miami Sol and the Orlando Miracle, two now defunct WNBA teams, affected the demise of the franchises.

Our mixed method case study compared a qualitative inquiry (interviews) with an empirical examination of the newspaper coverage. It examined the development of coverage for the two franchises, story placement, the average number of column inches for each story, use of photographs, and story content. It attempted to discover the viewpoints of the beat writers for the two teams at the Miami Herald and the Orlando Sentinel. Additionally, a perspective was shown of how prevalent the Sol and Miracle public relations directors think their teams’ coverage is.

The study examined whether women were depicted as sex objects through commoditization or objectification, whether gender marking was present in the stories, and whether the coverage was written from a female or male perspective.

By examining the newspaper coverage of the most popular women’s sport in our country, conclusions were drawn as to whether the sports media has accepted the popularity of women’s sports, or whether masculine hegemonic practices of sports editors are still in place.

Introduction:

The conceptual genesis of the Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA), and the “We Got Next” campaign, with the approval of the male dominated NBA Board of Governors, was formally approved on April 24, 1996 amidst great fanfare from women’s professional basketball enthusiasts. Shortly thereafter, the new women’s league began its trek toward a June 1997 date for its first official tip-off. Many “firsts” soon followed: the league’s first commissioner, Val Ackerman, was hired; Lisa Leslie became the first woman to sign a contract; broadcast partnerships with NBC, ESPN, and Lifetime Television were inked; and eight fledgling franchises were initiated throughout the United States.

What didn’t follow amidst the hoopla surrounding the new league was extensive media coverage. To examine this phenomenon, a mixed method case study of Florida’s two now defunct WNBA franchises, the Orlando Miracle and the Miami Sol, was conducted to show that not only was limited newspaper coverage by the two major newspapers in the teams’ coverage areas partially to blame for the two franchises’ demise, but there was also a marked deference by sports editors to existing stereotypes regarding media content decisions.

The Orlando Miracle joined the WNBA as an expansion franchise in 1999. The Miami Sol followed its sister Florida team into the league in 2000. The Miracle lasted four seasons, and compiled a 60-68 record with one playoff appearance before the franchise was transferred to the Connecticut Sun in 2003. The Sol was in existence three years and it amassed a record of 48-48 with one playoff appearance before it was disbanded in 2003.

This study will seek to discover if newspaper coverage by the two respective newspapers, the Miami Herald and the Orlando Sentinel, contributed to the short tenure of the two ill-fated WNBA teams in the state of Florida. Newspaper coverage of women’s professional basketball in the United States has been marginal in the markets where the WNBA competes. Boutilier and SanGiovanni (1983) referred to newspaper coverage of women’s sports as ghettoization because sports editors generally treat women’s sporting news as essentially not newsworthy. When coverage exists, it is assigned to non-prominent space (Boutilier & SanGiovanni, 1983). Some experts believe that sports editors act as gatekeepers and, through their purported biased decision-making, erect barriers to coverage, adversely affecting female participation (Matheson and Flatten, 1996). Others hypothesize that hegemonic theory (Gramsci, 1971; Sage, 1998), or the power to sanction the power and privilege over women in sport (Daddario, 1994), is the basis of the discriminatory coverage exerted by sports editors. The symbiotic relationship between mass media and sport reinforces the importance and power of sport that is embedded in our cultural landscape. However, the mass media is also a controlling the institution that creates, reinforces, and perpetuates our society’s existing hegemonic order. Graber (1997) stated that the biased process mass media utilizes to determine what will get into print is directly correlated to the reinforcement of existing cultural norms in American society. Stories chosen for prominent coverage are selected on the basis of enforcing and subsequently intensifying the power of the media to reinforce dominant cultural values determined by the elite.

The purpose of the study is to examine the newspaper coverage of the two WNBA teams in light of the previously mentioned hegemonic practices of the sports editors. We began with a qualitative study where the sports editors, beat writers, and team public relations directors were interviewed (questions are presented in Appendix 1). Based on the predominant themes and issues that were revealed by the interviews, we then conducted a content analysis to examine the findings empirically.

Background:

The significance of sports in the United States is illuminated by recent surveys indicating that 30% of the public says it purchases newspapers primarily for the sports section. In several major market newspapers, nearly 50% of the non-advertising space is devoted to sports, which has five times the readership of any other section (Sage, 1990). It can be presupposed that media coverage of women’s sporting endeavors is a critical issue related to the future development of women’s sport for variety of reasons; the media plays a central role in creating the public profile and image of women’s sport; the media has the power to provide role models for other sportswomen, or women who may take part in sport; and media coverage, particularly television exposure, is often a major factor in securing commercial sponsorship (The Sports Council, 1995).

Historical analysis implies that the relationship between sport and the mass media is one of mutual interdependence and of reciprocal influence. Therefore, if the media has become the lens through which sporting images are portrayed, and is the convex mirror through which everything is reflected, then it can be claimed that sport and the mass media are inextricably linked in a mutually beneficial relationship (Snyder & Spreitzer, 1983).

Lever and Wheeler’s (1984) content analysis of sports pages of the Chicago Tribune from 1900 to 1975 found that women’s sports coverage in 1900 was 1.2% of the total paper. The coverage expanded to 4% between 1925 and 1950, but grew to only 7.1% by 1975. In an analysis of five newspapers, Woolard (1983) found that only 15% of the sports sections contained coverage of women’s sports. A recent content analysis of USA Today, The (Nashville) Tennessean, and the New York Times from 11 March to 7 April 1996 revealed that female athletes received a meager 11% of sport coverage (Huggins, 1996).

A recent study of the New York Times’ coverage of the 1995 women’s and men’s National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) basketball tournaments confirmed that female athletes are receiving less coverage and are being framed as the “other” athletes (Silverstein, 1996). Silverstein conducted a quantitative and qualitative comparison of the newspaper’s coverage of the three-week event, including the number and length of articles, the size of photos and graphics, and the placement in the paper and sports section. The quantitative results indicated that there were three times as many articles, photos, and graphics on the men’s tournament as on the women’s, and there were eighteen features on male players and six on their coaches, compared to two on female players and four on their coaches. Further, the study found that men’s articles appeared on the front page of the sports section thirty-one times compared with four women’s articles. The qualitative findings revealed that the women’s tournament was framed as the “other” tournament, compared with the “real” tournament played by men.

The importance of newspaper photographs is underscored by the fact that photos are among the first news items to catch the reader’s eye. They often help to establish the context or frame of reference from which the reader interprets the accompanying story (Miller, 1975). Numerous content analyses of photographs in newspapers have found female athletes to be under-represented. For example, Miller (1975) conducted a content analysis of the photographs in the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post and found that males dominated the sport sections of both papers. The ratios of photos of men to photos of women were 16:1 (Washington Post) and 9:1 (Los Angles Times). Lee (1992) also discovered disparity when examining the photographs of female/male athletes participating in the 1984 and 1988 Summer Olympic Games. The ratio of photos of Olympic male athletes to those of Olympic female athletes was 2.2:1 in The Global and Mail, compared to 2.6:1 in the New York Times. Newspaper coverage of female athletes is often found in less prominent pages and sections. Bryant (1980) found that the location of articles about women’s sports was either the fourth and fifth or last pages of the sports section.

In summary, despite increasing opportunities and growing social awareness and acceptance for women participating in sport, research on media representation of women in sport in the U.S. has generally found that female athletes are under-reported. Often, the coverage is clouded by traditional, outdated, sexist coverage in electronic and print media.

Methods:

This study utilized a mixed methodology. We developed a list of questions to utilize in interviews with the sports editors and the assigned beat writers from the Orlando Sentinel and the Miami Herald. Additionally, the public relations directors for the Miracle and Sol were queried to determine the attitudes, perceptions, and motivations on media coverage of women’s pro basketball in Florida. Next, we summarized our findings and conducted a comprehensive two-year content analysis of the Orlando Sentinel and the Miami Herald to search for differences in the volume of actual stories and photographs related to the Sunshine State’s two (now former) WNBA franchises.

Sample:

Three distinct sampling decisions were used to conduct a content analysis study (Berelson, 1952). The first decision involves selecting the titles (specific newspapers). For this study, the purposive sampling technique was used. This technique involves the researcher choosing the sample based on the newspapers (titles) having similar characteristics, such as circulation and readership profiles. The second sampling decision relates to the issues or dates of the titles. In this study, the dates of the newspapers to be studied coincide with the dates of the 2000 and 2001 WNBA seasons, including two weeks prior to the beginning of the games and a week after the season concluded (May 1 2000- September 2 2000, and April 30, 2001 – September 2, 2001). The final sampling decision is the content to be coded from the newspapers. For the purpose of this study, the content to be coded included the front page of the newspapers, the front page of the sports section, and the entire sports section in both newspapers.

A sample of the two WNBA franchises in Florida, the Orlando Miracle and the Miami Sol, were selected for the current study to scrutinize trends in media coverage of relatively new teams in well-established sports metropolises. These newspapers were chosen because they are the largest periodicals in the respective cities of the teams. The Miami Herald is the most popular daily newspaper in Miami, with a daily circulation of 326,410, and a Sunday circulation of 441,564. This study investigates its coverage of the Miami Sol in its first two seasons in the WNBA. The Orlando Sentinel is the only daily newspaper in Orlando, with a daily circulation of 256,278, and a Sunday circulation of 378,172. The study investigates its coverage of the Orlando Miracle in its second and third seasons in the WNBA.

Qualitative Analysis:

We first compiled an interview schedule (list of questions), used to format extensive personal interviews with the sports editors and beat writers who collaborate in the decision-making process on the volume of media coverage of the Miami Sol and the Orlando Miracle. The public relations directors of both teams, who by the nature of their job descriptions were responsible for attempting to coax additional column inches for their respective organizations out of the sports editors, were also interviewed.

Qualitative research has several key characteristics that make it a valuable asset in collecting rich personal data directly from subjects. McMillan (2000) notes several key characteristics of qualitative research: 1) data collected in a natural setting, 2) direct data collection, 3) rich narrative descriptions, 4) process orientation (a process through which the data is collected), 5) inductive data analysis (generalizations inducted from synthesizing gathered data), 6) participant perspectives, and 7) emergent research design (entering the study with no preconceived notions about the subjects’ attitudes).

The specific methodology employed in the study is ethnography, or a qualitative research project whose purpose is rich description from an ’emic,’ or insider’s perspective. Rooted in anthropology, ethnography is a process by which the researcher seeks to discover cultural meanings from the data. The ethnographer identifies themes and patterns beyond the mere reporting of events and details, and seeks to provide an explanation of the sporting world in which we live.

Three methods of collecting data are common to ethnographic studies – participant observation, interviews, and analysis of documents (McMillan, 2000). In the study, two of these techniques were used – personal interviews and content analysis. The interviews were conducted with the three primary actors in the professional media context: the newspapers’ sports editors, the beat writers assigned by the papers to cover the teams, and the PR directors employed by the WNBA teams. The content analysis provided empirical data directly from the newspaper stories written about the Miracle and the Sol for the 2000 and 2001 seasons.

To insure the validity of the interviews, a semi-structured format was selected. Using McMillan’s (2000) information on formulating interviews, the researchers established contact with the subjects prior to the interviews to give them a general idea of the basic topics to be covered. The interviewer then let the interview process with all three subjects flow from the responses of the subject. Follow-up questions were asked if the collected information warranted.

The ethnographic approach provided a detailed analysis of the attitudes, perceptions, and motivations related the selection of and attempts to influence media coverage of the two teams. The team’s PR directors (PR area), beat reporters (newspaper staff writers), and sport editors (newspaper management) were the interview sample.

McMillan (2000) states this type of interview is utilized with individuals possessing insight and understanding into the problem. For the study, the key informant interview was used because the six people interviewed were experts on the respective subject areas, as detailed by their positions of employment.

Results:

An initial e-mail was sent to each of the potential interviewees. It included suggested questions, but also requested that they consider their thoughts about media coverage of the team they either worked for or covered as a member of the media. After receiving a confirmatory response from each person with an agreement to participate in the interview, each of the subjects was telephoned.

Following the interviews, data transcription occurred, and a comprehensive examination was performed to determine if thematic patterns could be found. First, an analysis of the responses from the team public relations directors depicted consistent coverage of both the Sol and the Miracle in both markets. Both PR directors concurred that they believed their teams should receive more coverage than was allocated by the respective hometown paper. A “grain of salt” explanation must be referenced because PR people have an understandable bias toward their teams, and would like to see more coverage in the local newspaper. In trying to determine the value of the team in the sport landscape (Is it a legitimate sporting entity, or an alternative sport offering like the X Games?), the PR directors were queried as to the teams’ position in the market. Both firmly believed the WNBA is a legitimate entry into professional sports and has a long-term future.

Both the Sol and Miracle PR directors responded to a question about their relationships with the beat writers and sports editors in a positive manner. In their opinions, both beat writers were genuinely interested in covering the teams, and were not there because they had been assigned to the beat. They reported that their relationships with their respective sports editors were cordial and professional, but mentioned that the editors viewed the WNBA team as just another entry-level sport that should be placed in the second tier of sports coverage. The results from the content analysis of the Miami Herald and the Orlando Sentinel clearly showed that both WNBA teams received extensive coverage in June at the beginning of the season. However, the column inch count from both newspapers showed a significant drop once professional football training camps began in late July.

A highly entrenched tier system of media coverage is one phenomenon that emerged from the research. Interviews with the sports editors revealed that they placed coverage of the ‘Big 4’ pro teams (baseball, basketball, football, and hockey) first before making any other space allocations. The WNBA fell into the second tier, which puts it on a parallel with college sports, minor professional sports, and entities like major league soccer, pro tennis, golf, and other events that occur periodically through the year. Related to the tier system, both editors concurred that when the month of July started and professional football training camps opened, a manifest decline in WNBA coverage occurred. The primary reason the WNBA season is played in the summer is to avoid conflict with three of the four ‘Big 4’ sports. The content analysis results clearly showed that when football pre-season training camp began, the column inch count of the WNBA plummeted. One beat writer bluntly stated, “When the ‘Fins’ begin, the space goes.”

The PR directors also surmised that media coverage was poor in half of the twelve WNBA cities, and that their spaces in the local Florida papers were better than the majority of the league. One PR director noted that the 2001 league champion Los Angeles Sparks received minimal exposure in the Los Angeles Times until they were deep into the league playoffs.

From the PR directors’ perspective, the primary obstacle to more team coverage is the sports editor. If the sports editor takes a personal interest in the team, the coverage increases. If an editor was only marginally interested, the teams would receive the same coverage as a second tier fringe sport. However, the PR people deduced that the mere existence of the league shows that “baby steps” have been taken in the drive to obtain more space in print media for women’s pro basketball.

Second, interviews with the beat writers of the two teams provided crystal clarity into the issue of media coverage of women’s pro basketball. A surprise to the researchers was that both beat writers were hired specifically to cover the WNBA teams. In the past, sports editors assigned the “unwanted” beat to a less-experienced writer. For the Sol and the Miracle, the beat writers had either covered women’s pro basketball in another city or had been major college women’s basketball writers. These factors indicate that the sports editors were taking a professional approach to WNBA coverage and were not relegating it to the third tier of coverage (for example, high schools, outdoors, bowling, or running).

The beat writers both noted that coverage of the team dropped off after the All-Star break (mid-July). This confirms the hypothesis mentioned by the PR directors that the beginning of pro football training camp signals a drop in space allotment for women’s basketball. One writer mentioned that the sports editor sent out an e-mail that said there would be fewer team notebooks (notes columns), less game advances, and shorter team stories. One writer said space would not improve for WNBA coverage under the current sports editor.

Obstacles to better coverage noted by the beat writers were the national economy (fewer ads mean fewer pages, and less available space), newspaper cutbacks for economical reasons, lots of competition for space in the sports world (there are hundreds of sports events going on all over the nation each day), an uphill battle for respectability for women’s professional basketball, and a fight inside the newspaper to make change happen. Solutions to those obstacles noted by the beat writers were: 1) winning – teams must win consistently to force coverage to happen; 2) teams proving themselves to the sports editors through increased attendance, emails/letters to the editor, general public interest; 3) convincing newspaper management that they can sell more papers by attracting new readers; and 4) convincing management that the WNBA is a solid professional sports commodity worthy of more coverage.

Third, the interviews with the sports editors were consistent with the supposition that newspaper readers prefer the ‘Big 4.’ Both sports editors responded that this alleged demand heavily influenced their editorial decisions. The editors of both the Miami Herald and the Orlando Sentinel stated that the start of football season is a defining factor in the coverage of the WNBA. When questioned about their space allocation policy for assigning space for second tier sports, both sports editors said that consistency in coverage was important. They tried to cover the team with a regular beat writer and allotted space for notebooks, advances, and feature stories. However, the content analysis study shows that coverage was consistent until July, but dropped systematically in both cities simultaneously. The sports editors pointed to smaller paper sections in the summer when there are fewer sports actually in season and space is limited. Both papers routinely rotated the Sol or the Miracle to page one of the sports section, but the content analysis showed that coverage in the Miami Herald was superior in its coverage of the WNBA.

Content Analysis:

A content analysis of the selected newspapers was employed to quantitatively examine the coverage of the 2000 and 2001 WNBA seasons. “Content analysis is fundamentally empirical in orientation, exploratory, concerned with real phenomena, and predictive in intent” (Krippendorff, 1980, p. 9). Berelson (1952) lists seventeen uses of content analysis, including three that frame this study: (1) to describe trends in communication content; (2) to construct and apply communication standards; and (3) to reflect attitudes, interests, and values (“cultural patterns”) of population groups.

Content analysis is “a method for examining the message or content of the media, such as newspapers, in order to draw inferences about encoding and decoding practices of the communication system (Rintala & Birrell, 1984, p. 232). Through content analysis, it should be possible to draw inferences about how a printed medium like a newspaper treats female athletes or how the media commits itself to coverage of female subjects (Vincent, 2000).

In content analysis studies, content, or as it is sometimes called, face validity, is normally relied upon. Content validity is usually established through the informed judgment of the researchers. It is often assumed that a measure self-evidently measures what it is supposed to if the categories are rigidly defined and the coding has a high degree of reliability (Vincent, 2000).

The units of analysis in this study for all print and photograph space were square inches and simple number counts. When either an article or a photograph began above the newspaper’s fold and then wrapped to the bottom, it was coded as if it began at the top of the page.

This study utilized one primary coder and one assistant who scanned the newspapers during each day of the two WNBA seasons for both teams. Therefore, there is a risk that the coders introduced bias because the task of imputing documents into the categories of analysis is largely a subjective process. An example of a subtle coder bias would be a coder’s understanding of the categories shifting over time, resulting in inconsistent coding. Another possible bias would occur if the coder prejudged the outcome of the research. To avoid introducing these kinds of bias and thus invalidating the study, a coder and assistant worked in close collaboration. Another method that was used in this study was re-coding of the data after a span of time (intra-observer agreement). This method will identify any problems deriving from inconsistency in coding, but will not identify researcher-induced bias.

Results:

Chi-square tests were used to compare the obtained distributions from the categorical data. Chi-square tests are appropriate when both variables are essentially categorical, making it impossible to carry out usual inferences in terms of means or variances (Hays, 1988). In addition to Chi-square tests, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to describe the differences in the metric dependent variable means among the newspapers.

Frequencies, means, and standard deviations for all variables of the local team coverage in the Miami Herald and the Orlando Sentinel are summarized in Table 1 and Table 2.

The Herald newspaper coverage of the local team was greater than the Sentinel coverage in column inches of stories, column inches of photographs, presence of a story, front-page tease, front page of the sports section, general locations of stories in the sports section, and presence of stories above the fold.

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for the Local Team (Metric Variables)

Standard Deviation in Parentheses

DV	Presence of a team story this day	Front page tease	Sports page 1 highlight	Page no. in sports section	A/B the fold
2000	Miami (125)	90(72%)	4(3.2%)	45(36%)	2-5: 1 (.8%) 6-10: 62 (49.6%) 11-20: 9 (7.2%)	A: 58 (46.4%) B: 32 (25.6%)
Orlando (125)	74(59.2%)	4(3.2%)	30(24%)	2-5: 43 (34.4%) 6-10: 29 (23.2%) 11-20: 1 (.8%)	A: 61 (48.8%) B: 11(8.8%)
X2	X2 (df=1)=4.538 p= .033	X2 (df=1)=.00 p=1.0	X2 (df=1)=4.286 p= .038	X2 (3)= 58.467 p<.001
Total Year (250)	164(65.6%)	8(3.2%)	75(30%)	2-5: 44 (17.6%) 6-10: 91 (36.4%) 11-20: 10 (4%)	A: 119 (47.6%) B: 43 (17.2%)
2001	Miami (125)	95(76%)	7 (5.6%)	57 (45.6%)	2-5: 48 (38.4%) 6-10: 36 (28.8%) 11-20: 11 (8.8%)	A: 66 (52.8%) B: 29 (23.2%)
Orlando (125)	74(59.2%)	1(.8%)	13(10.4%)	2-5: 0 (0%) 6-10: 91 (72.8%) 11-20: 0 (0%)	A: 61 (48.8%) B: 13 (10.4%)
X2	X2 (df=1)=8.054 p= .005	X2 (df=1)=4.469 p=.031	X2 (df=1)=38.413 p<.001	X2 (3)= 83.069 p<.001
Total Year (250)	169(67.6%)	8(3.2%)	70(28%)	2-5: 48 (19.2%) 6-10: 127 (50.8%) 11-20: 11 (4.4%)	A: 127 (50.8%) B: 42 (16.8%)

 

Table 2. Frequencies of the Non-Metric Dependent Variables for the Local Team

Standard Deviation in Parentheses

DV	Column inches of story	Column inches of photos
2000	Miami (125)	19.08	13.72
Orlando (125)	9.42	5.34
2001	Miami (125)	16.24	6.93
Orlando (125)	11.60	6.99
Average Years 00′ + 01′	Miami (250)	14.25	9.54
Orlando (250)	13.92	6.96
Average NP 00′ + 01′	Miami (250)	17.66	10.32
Orlando (250)	10.51	6.18
Average NP*Year	Miami (250)	19.08	13.72
16.24	6.93
Orlando (250)	9.42	5.34
11.61	6.99

Discussion:

At the heart of the qualitative part of this analysis of the two Floridian newspapers, equal coverage of the local team, as well as the WNBA league, were expected. The data indicates that the Miami Herald coverage of the Miami Sol was significantly higher than that of the Orlando Sentinel of the Orlando Miracle. However, the coverage of the WNBA league as a whole was equal in both cities.

The results of the content analysis showed that there was a significant difference in coverage between the Miami Sol and the Orlando Miracle in the two newspapers. The explanation for this difference could be found in interviews with the beat writer and sports editor of the Miami Herald. Both interviewees indicated a firm commitment to covering the team on a wide basis. The beat writer was hired specifically from another newspaper to cover the team, and the space commitment allotted the team by the sports editor was shown to be much greater when compared to that of the Orlando Miracle by the Orlando Sentinel.

The analysis of the interviews with the PR directors, beat writers, and sports editors presented a poignant picture of the status of women’s professional basketball in relation to newspaper coverage in Florida. The stumbling block appears to be the sports editors, who have the difficult task of satisfying the voracious space appetite of the ‘Big 4’ while trying to balance the shifting public attitude toward the acceptance of women’s professional basketball.

Fink (1998) concluded that a sports establishment determined to preserve existing societal norms has long made newspaper coverage decisions. The image of female athletes is “in the hands of the media,” and the media has the power to influence societal thoughts and attitudes. With that in mind, Coakley (1998) stated that the primary dynamic in the filtering of news content is the sports editor. Within this process, preference is deferred to images and messages consistent with the dominant ideologies of society.

Studies have shown that 90% of sports editors in the United States are male (Duncan & Messner, 1998). Combining Fink’s (1998) thought that newspaper coverage preserves societal norms, or rather, the major male professional sports dominate the sports pages, with the fact that newsrooms are markedly male, it is easy ascertain a pattern explaining why coverage of a women’s professional league would fall into the second tier.

The study’s findings showed that only 5% of the sports sections were dedicated to the coverage of the respective WNBA teams during the 2000 and 2001 seasons. The qualitative section of the study showed women’s professional basketball has been relegated to “second tier” status by the sports editors of the papers. These findings are similar to that of Silverstein (1996), who revealed that women’s tournaments were purported to be the “other” tournament, while the men were playing the “real” tournament.

Conclusions:

The critical societal issues addressed in this study are directly related to the hegemonic and biased decision-making of sports editors in determining coverage of women’s professional basketball. Rintala and Birrell (1984) noted that people are strongly influenced by what they ‘hear, see, or read’ in the mass media. The content analysis study of the Miami Herald and the Orlando Sentinel revealed a discernable pattern of media coverage that was directly correlated with the purported tier system of sports assigned by the sports editors. Following the analysis of the actual content from two full seasons of newspaper coverage of the two WNBA teams, interview questions for the sports editors, beat writers, and public relations directors for the two respective teams were formulated. After transcription of the interviews, the data were analyzed and specific patterns of behavior by the sports editors emerged.

The sports editors at both the Herald and the Sentinel confirmed that the primary factor in the decision-making process for space allocation in the sports section is men’s professional sports. They cited “what the readers’ want” as their justification. However, neither editor could provide exact market research to confirm this process. Neither editor specifically stated that women’s pro basketball did not warrant more coverage. Quite the contrary, our content analysis of column inch count, placement of the stories, and the selection and size of photographs from both papers showed that early in the season (June and early July), the Sol and Miracle did receive a fair share of coverage. The percentage was higher during these months than any other entity (with the exception of professional baseball in Miami). However, a clear line of demarcation appeared the same day the Miami Dolphins opened pre-season training camp.

Ultimately, the primary reason for the departure of Florida’s two WNBA was money, or the lack thereof. Official attendance figures (Table 3) for the four seasons of the Miracle and three seasons of the Sol indicate different results. The Sol was consistently in the middle of the WNBA in attendance, with a three-year average of 8,556 (Women’s Basketball Online, 2005). The Miracle, however, was near the bottom of league figures with a four-year average of 7,873. By contrast, the Washington Mystics led the WNBA in attendance three of the four years that the two franchises played, with an average of 15,589. The WNBA does not release official financial results, but media estimates indicate a multi-million dollar loss per season for each franchise.

Table 3. Official WNBA Attendance Figures – 1999-2002, WNBA Attendance, www.womensbasketballonline.com

Year	Team	Games	Attendance	Average	League Rank	League Leader
2002	Miracle	16	113,837	7,115	13 (16)	Wash. Mystics 16,202
Sol	16	141,252	8,828	7 (16)
2001	Miracle	16	118,874	7,430	12 (16)	NY Liberty 15,660
Sol	16	141,717	8,857	6 (16)
2000	Miracle	16	117,810	7,363	11 (16)	Wash. Mystics 15,258
Sol	16	127,721	7,983	9 (16)
1999	Miracle	16	153,366	9,585	6 (16)	Wash. Mystics 15,306

It cannot be definitively concluded that newspaper coverage was the principal factor that led to the demise of Florida’s two WNBA teams. However, the results of the content analysis of the Miami Herald and the Orlando Sentinel, in combination with our qualitative inquiry (interviews), clearly show that the space allocation decisions by the sports editors was a major contributing factor. Can it be surmised that if WNBA coverage was allotted on a tier one basis for the Sol and Miracle, that attendance would have increased, revenues would increase exponentially, and the two squads could still be playing in Florida?

Future research needs to be conducted to substantiate and confirm the hypothesis that sports editors subjugate coverage of women’s professional basketball to a second tier assignment, which in turn directly affects the attendance at games. Other research should center on examining coverage of the WNBA in all league cities to establish if there is a direct connection between WNBA coverage and space allocation.

References:

ABL folds during third season. [online], Available: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sports/abl.htm[1998]

Barnes, M. (1991). Coaching and game reflections, 1940’s to 1980’s.

Bell, M.M. (1973). Women’s basketball. (2nd. ed.). Dubque, IW: Brown Company Publishers.

Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Free Press: New York.

Boutilier, M.A., & SanGiovanni, L. (1983). The sporting women. Champaign: Human Kinetics Pub.

Cahn, S.K. (1990). Coming on strong: Gender and sexuality in twentieth-century women’s sport. New York: Free Press.

Chafe, W.H. (1982). The American women: Her changing social, economic, and political roles, 1920-1970. In Howell, R. (Ed.). Her Story in Sport. West Point: Leisure Press.

Cavalli, G., & Edwards, T. (1998, October 28). 1998-1999 American Basketball League tip-off media teleconference [online]. Available at: http://www.abl.com/newsarchive/909714553.html

Coakley, J. (1990). Sport in society: Issues and controversies. St. Louis: Time Mirror/ Mosby College Pub.

Cohen, B.C. (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Comets win 4th title. [on line], Available: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/sports/leaguesandsports/wnba [2000]

Downs, A. (1972). Up and sown with ecology: The issue-attention cycle. Public Interest, 28, 38-50.

Duncan, M.S., & Hasbrook, C.A. (1988). Denial of power in televised women’s sports. Sociology of Sport Journal, 5. 1-21.

Duncan, M.S., & Hasbrook, C.A. (1998). The media image of sport and gender. In L.A. Wenner (Ed.), mediasport (pp.170-185). New York: Routledge.

Eitzin, D.S., & Sage, G.H. (1982). Sociology of American sport. Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown Publishing Co.

Felshin, J. (1974). The social view. In Gerber, E.W., Felshin, J., Berlin, P., & Wyrick, W. The American Women in Sport. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

Festle, M.J. (1996). Playing nice. Politics and apologies in women’s sports. New York: Columbia University Press.

Fink, J.S. (1998). Female athletes and the media. JOPERD, 69(6), 37-41.

Frymir, A.W. (1928). Basket ball for women. NY: A.S. Barnes & Company.

Gerber, E.W. (1974). Chronicle of participation. In Gerber, E.W., Felshin, J., Berlin, P., & Wyrick, W. The American women in sport. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

Gormley. W.T., Jr. (1975). Newspaper agendas and political elites. Journalism Quarterly, 52, 304-308.

Gutman, B. (1998). Shooting stars: The women of pro basketball. New York: Random House.

Guttmann, A. (1991). Women’s sport: A history. New York: Columbia University Press.

Hays, W.L. (1988). Statistics. Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Heckman, D. (1992). Women & athletics: A twenty year retrospective on Title IX. University of Miami Entertainment & Sport Law Review, 9(1), 1-64.

Hult, J.S. (1991a). Introduction to part I. In Hult, J.S., & Trekell, M. (Eds.). A century of women’s basketball: From frailty to final four. (1991b). The governance of athletics for girls and women: Leadership by women physical educators 1899-1949. Reston: AAHPERD.

Hutchinson, J. (1991). Women’s intercollegiate basketball: AIAW/NCAA. In Hult, J.S., & Trekell, M. (Eds.). A century of women’s basketball: From frailty to final four. Reston: AAHPERD.

Jenkins, S. (1997). News: History of women’s hoops by Jenkins. [online], Available: http://www.wnba.com/news/jenkins_feature.html

Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage, Beverly Hills: CA.

Kosicki, G.M. (1993). Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication, 43 (2), 100-128.

Lannin, J. (2000). A history of basketball for girls and women: From bloomers to big leagues. Minneapolis: Lerner Publications.

Lawrence, H.B., & Fox, G.I. (1954). Basketball for girls and women. NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Lichtenstein, G. (1980, March). Women pro basketball league: The new million-dollar baby. Ms., 8, 70-76.

McCombs, M. (1994). News influence of our pictures of the world. In J. Bryant, & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (pp. 1-16). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

McMillan, J.H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Miller, K.D., & Horky, R.J. (1970). Modern basketball for women. OH: A Bell & Howell Company.

Naismith, J. (1996). Basketball: Its origins and development. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Oertel, S.C. (1995). Professional women athletes: Successful careers on tennis but not in basketball. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa.

Oller, R. (1998, July 3). WNBA has the glitz, but not game to match. The Columbus Dispatch [online]. Available: http://www.dispatch.com/panarchive/1998-6-3/sports/robo03spt.html

Press, D.P. (1994). A multicultural portrait of professional sports. New York: Marshall Cavendish Corp.

Rintala, J., & Birrell, S. (1984). Fair treatment for the active female: A content analysis of Young Athlete magazine. Sociology of Sport Journal, 1, 231-250.

Rogers, E.M., & Dearing, J.W. (1987). Agenda setting research: Where has it been, where is it going? In S.A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 11, 555-594.

Sage, G.H. (1990). Power and ideology in America sport. Champaign: Human Kinetics Books.

Schroeder, S.E. (1999). Hoop meanings: The media, professional U.S. women’s basketball, and the evolving discourse of femininity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Indiana.

Shaw, D.L. (1977). The agenda-setting hypothesis reconsidered: Interpersonal factors. Gazette, 23, 230-240.

Snyder, E.E., & Spretzer, E. (1989). Social aspects of sport. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Staffo, D. (1998). The history of women’s professional basketball in the United States with an emphasis on the old WBL and the new ABL and WNBA. The Physical Educator, 55(4), 187-198.

Trekell, M. (Eds.). A century of women’s basketball: From frailty to final four. Reston: AAHPERD.

Trekell, M., & Gershon, R.M. (1991). Title IX, AIAW, and beyond-a time for celebration. In Hult, J.S., & Trekell, M. (Eds.). A century of women’s basketball: From frailty to final four. Reston: AAHPERD.

Twin, S.L. (1979). Out of the bleachers: Writings on women and sport. New York: The McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Vincent, J. (2000). Cross national comparisons of print media coverage of female/male athletes in the Centennial Olympic Games in Atlanta 1996. unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee.

Women’s Basketball Online, WNBA attendance, retrieved from http://www.womensbasketballonline.com/wnba/wnbattendance.html

Appendix 1:
Interview Questions for Team PR Directors:

1. What is the sports editor’s philosophy of women’s professional basketball coverage?
2. What importance does the newspaper staff put on the WNBA team?
3. How are space allocation decisions done in relation to other sports entities (Big 4, tier two, and tier three sports)?
4. What is your relationship with the beat writer and the sports editor?
5. What is your interest level of the beat writer (high, medium, low, or just another beat)?
6. What is the level of freedom of beat writers to pitch story ideas?
7. What is your interaction with newspaper management?
8. What is your background in PR and experience with women’s basketball?
9. What are your perceptions of the WNBA, management, team, players, and the future for the league?
10. What is your attitude toward controversial issues facing the WNBA?
11. How are the majority of stories on the team generated (press releases, contact with beat writers/sports editors, other?
12. Do you believe a paradigm shift in the coverage of women’s basketball is occurring in this country?

Interview Questions for Beat Writers:

1. What is your philosophy on the coverage of women’s professional basketball?
2. What is your professional background in sports writing?
3. How are the space allocations established for women’s pro basketball at your paper?
4. Is this a coveted beat for you?
5. How/why did you get this beat?
6. Do you have the freedom to freelance on story ideas?
7. What is your interaction with the PR person from the team?
8. What is your interaction with team management, coaches, and players?
9. What is the emphasis of the WNBA within the sports staff at the paper?
10. Does the sports staff at the paper recognize the value of the WNBA as a sports entity worthy of coverage?
11. Do you enjoy covering the team?
12. What are your perceptions of the WNBA, the team, and management?
13. What is your attitude toward the controversial issues surrounding the WNBA?
14. What are your predictions/perceptions of what the future holds for media coverage of the WNBA?

Interview Questions for Sports Editors:

1. What is upper management’s philosophy of coverage of women’s professional basketball?
2. Is the WNBA considered a second tier sport in the paper’s coverage philosophy?
3. What is your personal philosophy in the coverage of women’s pro basketball?
4. Is there a difference in the coverage of other second tier sports and women’s pro basketball?
5. What is your professional background in journalism?
6. What factors must be considered when deciding space allocation for coverage of the local WNBA team?
7. How were the beat writers assigned to the teams?
8. Will the beat writers be able to submit story ideas and notebook content without the prior approval of the sports editor?
9. What is the interest level of the beat writer in the team?
10. What is your relationship with the team PR person, team management, coaches, and players?
11. How many WNBA games did you attend last season?
12. What is your overall perception of the WNBA as a whole? Was it professionally organized, is there a significant interest in continuing the league, and have you had contact with the league office in New York?
13. What is your attitude toward the controversial issues connected with the WNBA?
14. What are your perceptions of the future of the WNBA and women’s professional basketball?
15. Do you think there is a gradual shift in the coverage of women’s pro basketball in this country?

U.S. Sports Academy2015-10-30T13:26:27-05:00

Book Review: 2006 Sports Market Place Directory

U.S. Sports Academy2015-10-30T13:26:27-05:00March 14th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Management|

The sports industry is a multifaceted, multibillion dollar industry. It encompasses a wide range of business segments, from sporting goods to stadium and arena construction. The 2006 Sports Market Place Directory brings a multiplicity of sports industry sectors together into the most comprehensive index of sport business resources available. Divided into ten sections, it contains thousands of listings on single, multi, and college sports, sporting events, meetings and trade shows, the sports related media, sports sponsors, professional sports services, sports facilities, and sports manufactures and retailers.

In addition, the 2006 Sports Market Place Directory contains a chapter with valuable statistical data on sports participation, sports consumer purchases, and attendance to collegiate sporting events. The sections are separately indexed for ease of use. The 2006 Sports Market Place Directory is a valuable resource for the sports business professional, and should be considered indispensable in academic and public libraries.

Book Review: 2006 Sports Market Place Directory
Edited by Richard Gottlieb.
Published in 2006 by Grey House Publishing: Millerton, NY
(1,888 pages, ISBN 1-59237-139-6).

U.S. Sports Academy2015-02-12T11:41:49-06:00

Book Review: Early Exits: The Premature Endings of Baseball Careers

U.S. Sports Academy2015-02-12T11:41:49-06:00March 14th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Management|

Early Exits: The Premature Endings of Baseball Careers examines the many obstacles that have confronted men and women in the world of professional baseball. The book highlights several career-ending incidents and supplies excerpts from those individuals affected by them. These incidents range from gambling and drug abuse to pursuit of careers in politics or other professional leagues. The range of discussion is vast, including criminals, presidents, music artists, and NBA and NFL hall-of-famers.

The author, Brian McKenna, set out to document the premature exits of those working in professional baseball. His exhaustive research provides entries from the 19th century through the new millennium. McKenna’s research covers several professional leagues, some domestic and some from abroad, including the major leagues, Negro leagues, women’s leagues and those from Asia and Latin America. His research includes events that even the most knowledgeable baseball historian may have overlooked.

Players from every generation are discussed, as well as the events surrounding their early departures. Baseball greats such as Kirby Puckett and his career-ending eye injury, Pete Rose and his lifetime ban from Major League Baseball for gambling, Josh Gibson and his battles with alcohol, and Roberto Clemente and Thurman Munson and their untimely deaths from airplane accidents are examined. These are just a few examples of the hundreds of individuals in the book. Historical events such as the Chicago Black Sox scandal and World Wars I and II are also discussed in terms of their effects on many players.

Although the range of information in this book is unmatched, the depth of each entry is lacking. The title of the book may lead one to infer that the entries are about those whose careers were shortened without choice. However, many of the entries do not align with this title. Many players who chose other sports or career opportunities are given the same consideration as those who have fallen victim to injury or accidental death. Thus, many of the names mentioned in the book seem out of place. However, it does provide information on an array of people connected to professional baseball.

Early Exits: The Premature Endings of Baseball Careers
Author: Brian McKenna
Published in 2007 by the Scarecrow Press, Inc. (ISBN: 0-8108-5858-4).

U.S. Sports Academy2016-10-19T09:54:23-05:00

A New Method for Ranking Total Driving Performance on the PGA Tour

U.S. Sports Academy2016-10-19T09:54:23-05:00March 14th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|

Abstract

The Professional Golf Association Tour (PGA Tour) currently ranks its players according to their overall Total Driving performance by adding together individual ranks for their average driving distance and for their driving accuracy percentage. However, this widely used and reported measure is inappropriate because it is based upon the addition of two ordinal-scaled measures in which the underlying differences between successive ranks are not equal. In this paper, we propose a new method for ranking golfers in terms of their overall driving performance. The method eliminates the drawbacks of previously reported measures, including the one used by the PGA Tour. Using the new methodology, we re-rank all PGA Tour golfers for the 2005 season and compare these ranks to the “official” ranks reported by the PGA Tour. In some cases, large differences in players’ rankings existed. The reasons for these differences are then discussed.

Introduction

In recent years, numerous statistical analyses have been conducted in an attempt to assess the relative importance of various shot-making skills on overall performance on the PGA Tour and among amateur golfers (Shmanske, 2000; Dorsel and Rotunda, 2001; Engelhardt, 1997 and 2002; Callan and Thomas, 2004 and 2006; and Wiseman and Chatterjee, 2006). While most of the measures that have been used in these analyses have been well-defined and widely accepted, there is one performance statistic, “Total Driving,” that has not been well-defined. This particular statistic, which combines a golfer’s (i) average driving distance and his/her (ii) driving accuracy percentage, has been operationally defined in numerous ways, but no methodologically sound measure has emerged to date. This includes the measure now being used by the PGA Tour.

In this paper, the authors propose a new statistical measure based upon standardized z-scores for ranking golfers according to Total Driving performance. This new measure eliminates the methodological drawbacks of previously developed measures by re-ranking PGA Tour golfers on their Total Driving performance during the 2005 season and comparing these rankings to the “official” PGA Tour rankings for that season.

The evolving nature of the relationship that has existed between driving distance and driving accuracy on the PGA Tour over the last sixteen years (1990-2005) was examined. Then, alternative ranking methods that have been proposed and the necessity of and the rationale for a new composite measure of Total Driving performance were discussed. Following this, the new measure can be applied to the 2005 PGA Tour season. These new rankings dramatically alter the previous ranking of many golfers on the tour. The reasons for the differences in rankings will be explored.

Distance and Accuracy on the PGA Tour: 1990-2005

The average driving distances and the driving accuracy percentages have changed significantly since 1990, with the largest changes taking place in recent years. This is shown in Table 1. The average driving distances have increased every year since 1993 and these increases have been relatively steady on a year-by-year basis, except in 2001 and 2003, when the increases were significantly higher. We surmise that technological improvements in golf balls and equipment are likely to have played a part in these two years.

A similar trend did not exist for the driving accuracy percentage. Here, the accuracy percentage steadily increased from 1990 to 1995, and then remained relatively stable over the next six-year period, only to decline dramatically in the last few years. This dramatic decline occurred at the same time that the average driving distance substantially increased. In fact, during the 2005 PGA Tour season, the average driving distance was at its sixteen year high of 288.6 yards and the driving accuracy percentage was at its sixteen year low at 62.8%.

The negative relationship between a golfer’s average driving distance and driving accuracy percentage increased in strength over this sixteen year period. As indicated in Table 1, the strength of the relationship has grown in recent years and it reached its highest level in 2005, when the correlation between the two measures was -.679.

Current Measures of Total Driving Performance

Ranking golfers on each of the two driving measures presents no problems. Driving distance is simply defined as the average number of yards per measured drive. For each golfer, these drives are measured on two holes per round. Driving accuracy is the percentage of all drives that come to rest in the fairway. However, the PGA Tour and others (for example, Engelhardt, 1997) have indicated the need for a single measure that takes into account both the driving accuracy percentage and the average driving distance. Numerous researchers have attempted to obtain such a measure; unfortunately all of the measures that have been proposed have had methodological flaws associated with them.

The most widely used measure is the one used by the PGA Tour. It is obtained by adding together the individual ranks of a golfer on each of the two measures and then obtaining a final overall ranking based upon the total score. That is, for example, a golfer who was ranked 32nd in driving distance and 42nd in driving accuracy percentage would have a total score of 32+42=74. The PGA Tour would rank such a golfer higher than another golfer who ranked, for example, 25th in average driving distance and 60th in driving accuracy percentage, since the former summated score of 74 is lower than the latter summated score of 85.

Such an approach is flawed despite its widespread use and acceptance. The major flaw is that the level of measurement of each of these two rankings (driving distance and driving accuracy) is at the ordinal level and, as such, it does not take into account the underlying differences in distances or in driving accuracy percentages. Stated differently, while the differences in successive ranks remain the same, the corresponding differences in distance and accuracy are not equal. Thus, it is not possible to add the distance and accuracy ranks directly, without loss or distortion of the underlying information.

Davidson and Templin (1986) suggested a somewhat different approach. They proposed a measure which first divided all PGA Tour players into three groups based upon their average driving distance. They then made a similar classification based upon the driving accuracy percentage. The three groups were coded as 1 (top one-third), 2 (middle one-third), and 3 (bottom one-third). To arrive at a measure of Total Driving performance, the researchers multiplied the individual coded scores of each golfer. The larger the score, which ranged from 1 to 9, the better the performance. The authors used this new measure in a multiple regression analysis in an attempt to isolate the effects of driving on overall scoring performance.

This measure was questioned by Belkin et al. (1994) because no evidence was provided to support the construct validity of the measure and because of the multiplication of the individual codes at the ordinal level of measurement.

More recently, Wiseman and Chatterjee (2006) proposed a multiplicative measure of Total Driving which ranked golfers according to the product of their average driving distances and their driving accuracy percentages. Essentially, this measure reduced golfers’ average driving distances by the proportion of times their drives did not land on the fairway. Thus, a golfer who had an average driving distance of 300 yards and an accuracy percentage of 60% would be ranked lower than another golfer who had an average driving distance of 280 yards and an accuracy percentage of 70%, since 300(.60) =180 < 280(.70)=196. This measure was found to be highly correlated with the PGA Tour measure, but subsequent analyses revealed that it was also flawed because it gave far greater weight to driving accuracy than it did to driving distance. However, unlike the two previously discussed measures, it was operationally sound in that it was appropriate to multiply the two quantities together.

In summary, different measures for Total Driving performance that have been used are all flawed, and it is difficult to justify any of them as an appropriate measure. In the next section of this paper, a new method for ranking golfers that have none of the drawbacks of the previously discussed measures will be explained.

A New Measure for Ranking Total Driving Performance

Both average driving distance and the driving accuracy percentage are ratio-scaled data. To combine these two measures into a single overall measure of Total Driving performance, the measure we propose is based upon two statistically independent standardized z-scores, one for driving distance, and the other for driving accuracy given driving distance.

In proposing such a measure, if the distance and accuracy measures are statistically independent and they are viewed as being of equal importance in driving performance, then it would be reasonable to compute the standardized z-score of each measure, and then to add these z-scores to arrive at an overall score. However, this approach does not seem reasonable in the present situation because (i) there is a strong negative correlation between driving distance and driving accuracy, and (ii) driving distance is the primary factor in determining accuracy, rather than the other way around (driving distance is primarily a function of a player’s physical strength and athletic ability). With this reasoning, we propose the following as a composite score of Total Driving:

Z_sum = Z_DD + Z_DA|DD

where:

Z_DD = Standardized z-score of
driving distance, and

Z_DA|DD = Standardized z-score
of driving accuracy given driving distance.

To compute Z_DD for a player, we subtract the average driving distance for all players, µ_DD, from the given player’s average driving distance, DD, and divide the result by the standard deviation of average driving distances, σ_DD. This is expressed as:

ZDD=	DD-µDD
σDA|DD

Computation of Z_DA|DD is a somewhat more involved procedure. We need to determine the mean or expected accuracy percentage of all golfers who drove the ball a specified average distance, DD, as well as the standard deviation of the driving accuracy percentages given the specified average distance, DD. The formulas for these are:

µ_DA|DD = ρσ_DA((DD-µ_DD)/σ_DD),
and σ_DA|DD = √((1-ρ²)σ_DA²

where ρ is the correlation coefficient between distance and accuracy.
The conditional standardized z-score of driving accuracy given driving
distance is then computed using the following formula:

Z_DA|DD = (DA – µ_DA|DD) / √((1-ρ²)σ_DA².

Statistical theory about bivariate normal distributions tells us that z-scores for distance and accuracy, Z_DD and Z_DA|DD, both have a mean of 0.0 and a standard deviation of 1.0. Further, the conditional z-score for accuracy given distance, Z_DA|DD, is statistically independent of the z-score for driving distance, Z_DD.

Because the two standardized z-score measures are statistically independent, and because Z_DA|DD is an indicator of accuracy after taking distance into account, they can be added together to obtain an overall summated z-score for overall driving performance. The higher the overall value of Z_sum = Z_DD + Z_DA|DD, the better the overall performance.

The authors will discuss in greater detail the application of this approach for ranking golfers based upon their Total Driving performance in the 2005 PGA Tour season.

Application to the 2005 PGA Tour Season

In 2005, there were 202 golfers on the PGA Tour. Detailed statistical data for these players can be found on the PGA Tour’s website (www.pgatour.com). Anderson Darling’s (AD) test was used to determine if driving distance has a normal distribution. With this test, we reject the null hypothesis that the data came from a normal distribution if the AD statistic is very large, or equivalently, if the p-value is smaller than a chosen level of significance (usually 0.05 or 5% level of significance). Our data show that the AD statistic was 0.367, which is small, and the p-value is 0.429, which is larger than the 5% level of significance. Therefore, we do not reject the hypothesis that the data came from a normal distribution.

Similarly, we used the AD statistic to test whether the driving accuracy percentage variable was Normally distributed. The AD test produced a test statistic of 0.350 with a p-value of 0.471. As a result, we do not reject the hypothesis that the driving accuracy percentages are Normally distributed. Given these results, we concluded that the joint distribution of driving accuracy and driving distance can be represented by a bivariate Normal distribution, with a correlation coefficient of ρ = -.679 between the two variables.

Next, the authors computed the values of Z_sum as the Total Driving scores, and ranked these values in descending order. The scores for the top forty players in the resulting ordering, together with the corresponding PGA Tour ranks, are shown in Table 2.

As it is seen in Table 2, Tiger Woods was the number one ranked golfer in terms of Total Driving under the proposed method, which stands in sharp contrast to his rank of 83^rd in the PGA Tour rankings. In terms of average driving distance, Woods was ranked 2^nd in 2005 among 202 Tour players with an average driving distance of DD = 316.1 yards. The top ranked player was Scott Hend, who had an average driving distance of 318.9 yards. Woods’ average driving accuracy percentage of DA = 54.6% gave him a PGA Tour ranking of 188^th on this measure. The top ranked player was Jeff Hart with a driving accuracy percentage of 76.0%. Woods’ two ranks of 2^nd and 188^th led to his overall ranking of 83^rd for Total Driving based upon the PGA Tour method.

To illustrate the computation of Z_DD , Z_DA|DD , and Z_sum for Tiger Woods, in 2005, the average driving distance among all players was 288.6 yards with a standard deviation of 9.32 yards. The average for the driving accuracy percentage was 62.8% with a standard deviation of 5.32%. As noted previously, the correlation between driving accuracy and driving distance was -.679. Then, the standardized driving distance z-score for Tiger Woods is:

Z_DD = (316.1 – 288.6) / 9.32 = 2.95.

The conditional mean driving accuracy percentage given the average driving distance of 316.1 yards is:

µ_DA|DD = 62.8% + (-.679)(5.32%)(2.95)
= 52.1%.

That is, Tiger Woods or any golfer who has an average driving distance of 316.1 yards would be expected to have a driving accuracy percentage of 52.1%. Since Woods’ actual driving accuracy percentage for 2005 was 54.6%, his conditional z-score would be equal to:

Z_DA|DD = (54.6 – 52.1) / √((1-(-.679)²)(5.32)²)
= .63

By adding the two z-scores for Tiger Woods, an overall Z_sum score of 3.58 is obtained, which is the highest of any of the PGA Tour
players in 2005.

The rationale for Woods’ jump in the rankings can be seen by a closer examination of the z-scores. His average driving distance of 316.2 yards far outdistanced all other golfers (except one). His z-score value of 2.95 reflects this large differentiation, whereas previously his ranking of 2^nd did not because it assumed that the distances between ranks were equal when they were not. Further, his conditional z-score for driving accuracy is now positive where before it was negative. The reason for this is because his relatively low driving accuracy percentage of 54.6% did not reflect at all how far Woods drove the ball. Actually, for those who drive the ball this far, a driving accuracy percentage approximately two percentage points lower could be expected. These two factors taken together accounted for his top ranking.

The Spearman rank correlation between the PGA Tour rankings and the new rankings was computed to be r_s = .90 (p < .001). This shows that there was a large degree of similarity between the two rankings. On the other hand, and as illustrated by the case of Tiger Woods, there were also dramatic differences in some cases. To get a better feel for the differences, consider the scatterplot of the rankings under the two methods, which is shown in Figure 1. It is seen that the rankings under the two methods are generally similar, particularly in the middle range of rankings, but discernibly less so near the top or the bottom ranges. Divergence of the rankings at the extremes in this way emphasizes the effect of the ranking method on the results, which in turn brings the virtues and flaws of the ranking methods into focus.

Golfers whose rank improved included V. J. Singh, from 38^th to 13^th, Davis Love III, from 59^th to 11^th, and Brett Wetterich, from 73^rd to 4^th. Those going in the opposite direction included Marc Calcavecchia, from 21^st to 45^th, Jonathan Kaye, from 23^rd to 44^th, and Justin Rose, from 13^th to 33^rd. Typically, the reason for a golfer improving rank is because one of the measures was quite good and the standardized z-scores now reflect this, while the previous ranking system did not. For those golfers falling in rank, their old ranks tended to be clustered around many other golfers and their actual differences in rank did not reflect this closeness. For example, Justin Rose had a driving accuracy percentage of 63.7%, which gave him a ranking of 81^st among all golfers on this measure. However, fellow competitor Marc Hensby had a driving accuracy percentage of 62.7%, just one percentage point less, yet Hensby’s rank of 102^nd was 21 ranks below that of the rank given to Justin Rose.

Summary

The proposed method for ranking golfers according to their Total Driving skill takes into account the magnitude of the differences that exist between players on each of the two driving dimensions. The current PGA Tour method does not. The proposed method also takes into account the strong negative relationship that exists between driving accuracy and driving distance. This negative relationship is reflected in the new conditional standardized z-score. As a result, this new method gives a better overall reflection of the true Total Driving performance of PGA Tour golfers than does the current ranking system. Computationally, the proposed method is slightly more involved than other existing methods, but this is not a significant factor today.

It should be noted that this methodology can be applied in other areas in which an overall ranking is desired based on two correlated factors, which have different units of measurement and thus need to be combined in some way to provide an overall ranking.

References

Belkin, D.S., Gansneder, B., Pickens, M., Rotella, R. J., & Striegel, D. (1994) “Predictability and stability of Professional Golf Association tour statistics.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 1275-1280.

Callan, S. J. & Thomas, J. M. (2004) “Determinants of success among amateur golfers: An examination of NCAA Division I male golfers.” The Sports Journal 7, 3 at http://www.thesportjournal.org/2004Journal/Vol7-No3/CallanThomas.asp.

Callan, S. J. & Thomas, J. M. (2006) “Gender, skill and performance in amateur golf: An examination of NCAA Division I golfers.” The Sports Journal 8, 2 at http://www.thesportjournal.org/2006Journal/Vol9-No3/Callan.asp.

Dorsel, T.N., & Rotunda, R. J. (2001) “Low scores, Top 10 finishes and big money: An analysis of Professional Golf Association Tour statistics and how these relate to overall performance.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 92, 575-585.

Engelhardt, G. M. (1997) “Differences in shot-making skills among high and low money winners on the PGA Tour.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 1314.

Engelhardt, G. M. (2002) “Driving distance and driving accuracy equals total driving:Reply to Dorsel and Rotunda.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 95, 423-424.

Shmanske, S. (2000) “Gender, skill and earnings in Professional Golf.” Journal of Sports Economics 1(4), 385-400.

Wiseman, F. and Chatterjee, S. (2006) “A comprehensive analysis of golf performance on the PGA Tour: 1990-2004.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 102, 109-117.

 

TABLE 1
Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy: 1990-2005

Year	Average Driving distance (yds.)	Driving accuracy percentage	Correlation between distance and accuracy
1990	262.7	65.3%	-.359
1991	261.4	67.1%	-.306
1992	260.4	68.6%	-.416
1993	260.2	68.8%	-.417
1994	261.9	69.2%	-.346
1995	263.4	69.5%	-.457
1996	266.4	68.3%	-.469
1997	267.6	68.6%	-.448
1998	270.5	69.5%	-.469
1999	272.5	68.4%	-.471
2000	273.2	68.3%	-.379
2001	279.4	68.4%	-.346
2002	279.8	67.7%	-.474
2003	286.6	66.1%	-.612
2004	287.2	64.1%	-.606
2005	288.6	62.8%	-.679

 

Table 2
Revised 2005 PGA Tour Rankings for Total Driving (Top 40 players)

Player	Driving Distance (yards)	Driving Accuracy (%)	Expected Driving Accuracy (%)	ZDD	ZDA|DD	ZSUM	Rank	PGA Rank
Woods	316.1	54.6	52.1	2.95	0.63	3.58	1	83
Perry	304.7	63.4	56.6	1.73	1.75	3.48	2	2
Gutschewski	310.5	57.9	54.3	2.35	0.92	3.27	3	54
Wetterich	311.7	56.6	53.8	2.48	0.70	3.18	4	73
Hearn	295.2	68.5	60.2	0.71	2.11	2.82	5	1
Gronberg	301.4	63.2	57.8	1.37	1.37	2.74	6	6
Frazar	301.0	63.5	58.0	1.33	1.41	2.74	7	3
Warren	299.2	64.2	58.7	1.14	1.41	2.55	8	3
Glover	302.2	60.7	57.5	1.46	0.81	2.27	9	26
MacKenzie	300.2	62.1	58.3	1.24	0.97	2.22	10	11
Love III	305.4	57.9	56.3	1.80	0.41	2.21	11	59
Garcia	303.5	59.4	57.0	1.60	0.61	2.21	12	38
Durant	289.2	70.9	62.6	0.06	2.13	2.20	13	5
O’Hair	300.1	61.4	58.3	1.23	0.78	2.02	14	26
Singh	301.1	60.2	58.0	1.34	0.57	1.92	15	38
Long	298.3	62.4	59.0	1.04	0.86	1.90	16	13
Smith	300.8	60.2	58.1	1.31	0.54	1.85	17	44
Hend	318.9	45.4	51.1	3.25	-1.45	1.890	18	107
Hughes	291.3	67.5	61.8	0.29	1.47	1.76	19	7
Stadler	300.1	60.4	58.3	1.23	0.53	1.76	20	50
Allenby	297.7	62.3	59.3	0.98	0.77	1.75	21	20
Mayfair	288.2	69.8	63.0	-0.04	1.75	1.71	22	9
Appleby	300.6	59.3	58.1	1.29	0.29	1.58	23	61
Snyder III	291.8	66.3	61.6	0.34	1.21	1.56	24	8
Purdy	295.2	63.4	60.2	0.71	0.81	1.52	25	15
Brigman	295.5	63.1	60.1	0.74	0.76	1.50	26	18
Bryant	283.2	73.0	64.9	-0.58	2.07	1.49	27	30
Rollins	294.4	63.7	60.6	0.62	0.81	1.43	28	10
Jobe	302.3	57.3	57.5	1.47	-0.05	1.42	29	82
Brehaut	286.6	69.9	63.6	-0.21	1.62	1.40	30	17
Ogilvy	298.0	60.7	59.2	1.01	0.39	1.40	31	54
Henry	297.6	61.0	59.3	0.97	0.43	1.40	32	44
Rose	294.1	63.7	60.7	0.59	0.78	1.37	33	13
Westwood	296.8	61.5	59.6	0.88	0.48	1.36	34	43
Johnson	290.0	66.9	62.3	0.15	1.19	1.34	35	15
Senden	291.0	66.0	61.9	0.26	1.06	1.31	36	11
Mickelson	300.0	58.7	58.4	1.22	0.08	1.30	37	77
Watney	298.9	59.4	58.8	1.11	0.15	1.26	38	68
Trahan	295.8	61.8	60.0	0.77	0.46	1.23	39	33
Pappas	309.4	50.6	54.7	2.23	-1.06	1.17	40	109

Figure 1.
Scatterplot of Revised Rankings Versus PGA Tour Rankings