Views Of Violence In American Sports: A Study Of College Students
Larry M. Lance
This study was conducted to investigate perceptions of violence in sport in general and perceptions of violence in intramural sports for university participants in intramural sports. Social learning theory and social exchange theory were incorporated to account for factors contributing to the presence of violence in sports. A four page group administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 200 university intramural sports participants. Based upon an analysis of the data support was found for social learning theory and social exchange theory. Strong support was expressed for the perception that “weak” officials who do not take complete control of player violation contribute to violence in sports for both intramural sports and sports in general. There was also strong support for the perception that violence in sport is likely to result in personal injury.
Since sport is, in part, a mirror of society, and since violence is increasing in society (Smith, 1986), there should be more violence in sport. Research has suggested that the causes of sport violence perceived by students are provocation, encouragement by coaches (Reilly, 1995; O”Brien and Wolff, 1996), peer pressure, wanting to win, because it is an implicit part of the game (Scher, 1993; Weinstein, et al., 1995; Pilz, 1996), revenge and retaliation, and as the result of role models (Pooley and Golding, 1987). Stress on winning at any cost has brought about increased acceptance of violence as a means to achieve that end. Violence has a high probability of taking place when its use constitutes the difference between winning and losing, as well as when there is weak officiating, sanctions are not severe, coaches are not willing or able to control their players, or even encourage them to break laws (Clark, 1981). In addition, among males, some are influenced by the macho image in society (Messner, 1992; Messner and Sabo, 1992; Coakley, 1998). An elbow thrown requires an equally physical reaction; many fail to accept that not to retaliate is the most courageous response. Competitors also increasingly provide what fans like — a situation that is exacerbated by media influences. To summarize, player violence takes place within as well as outside the roles. Pressure to win appears to be the major factor for sports violence (Pooley, 1987).
Theory
Social Learning Theory
According to social learning theory (Bandura and Walters, 1963; Bandura, 1973), the foundation of socialization is grounded in the dual processes of reinforcement and modeling. This theoretical perspective accounts for the social learning of behaviors in three ways. First, social learning results from direct instruction featuring rewards for approved behavior and punishment for disapproved behavior. Second, social learning takes place by repetitive construction of relations between certain circumstances and the behavior that is expected in those circumstances. Third, social learning involves the use of role modeling.
Reinforcement may be either positive, through explicit or implicit approval and/or material reward, or negative, by means of disapproval, criticism or punishment. In sport, reinforcements for violent acts come from several sources. One source is the immediate reference group of the athlete, such as coaches, teammates, and family. Another source is the structure of sport and the implementation of rules by governing bodies and officials. Still another source is the attitude of fans, media, and society.
Coaches, based on their position of control over athletes, provide a strong influence on their team members with respect to the types of violent behavior considered acceptable in sport. One study found that 52% of hockey players between 18-21 perceive their coaches as high approvers of violent behavior (Smith, 1979). Another study by Smith (1977) found that the more coaches support violence, the more their players will engage in violent behavior.
Compared to coaches, the impact of teammates may even be greater. In a study of hockey players ages 12-13, 54% perceived their teammates as high approvers of hockey violence (Smith, 1979). Among hockey players ages 18-21, 78% perceived their teammates as high approvers of hockey violence. A great deal of pressure exists within peer groups to adhere to normative expectations, and if normative behavior in a sport is highly aggressive, it is inevitable that a violent ethic will be internalized. Research indicates that the internalization of violence as normative behavior often takes place in hockey (Vaz, 1979).
Another aspect of social learning theory is modeling, the imitation of behavior, particularly that behavior perceived as successful. Since sport, especially professional sport, is given considerable media coverage, it is not unexpected for young athletes to initiate the behavior of their professional heroes. Research indicates that imitative behavior includes the emulation of violence. In one study, 56% of the junior hockey players claimed they had learned techniques for extra-legal aggression from observing professional hockey, and had then included them in their own playing style (Smith, 1977).
Social Exchange Theory
Government reports on sport violence (House of Representatives, 1977, 1980) have emphasized structural factors within sports as influencing violence. These reports cover the intense competition and the resultant stress on winning. Moreover, these reports cover rule structures which do not effectively prevent violence. Rule books frequently list penalties that are not strict enough to prevent violations. In terms of social exchange theory (Homans, 1974), this is extremely important.
With respect to sports, social exchange theory is based on the premise that athletes consider the advantages and disadvantages of interaction. In sport involvement an athlete will try to maximize the rewards while minimizing the costs. For example, an athlete will weigh the punishment pertaining to a rule violation against the potential benefits to be obtained by violating the rules. Thus, if a hockey player can keep an opponent from scoring a goal by using extra-legal aggression, and is given only a 2-minute penalty for punishment, then the reward outweighs the punishment and the extra-legal aggression is positively rewarded. In this case the only forces that may keep the athlete from violent behavior are the expectations of negative reinforcement from the coach and teammates on the impact of the athlete’s strong personal convictions (Terry and Jackson, 1985).
A factor that magnifies the problem of lenient rules is substandard and inconsistent officiating. When officials do not penalize extra-legal aggression, the aggression is given positive reinforcement which increases the probability of its reoccurrence. Neron (1978) estimated that only 8% of the hockey rule infractions are penalized by the referee.
Methods
Objectives
This study was conducted to investigate intramural sport participants’ perceptions of factors that influence violence in sport in general. In addition, intramural sport participants’ perceptions of factors that influence violence in intramural sports were studied.
Expectations/Hypotheses
Based on social learning theory it was expected that encouragement by coaches to be violent and encouragement by fellow players to be violent would’ be perceived as contributing factors of violence in sports. Also, based upon social learning theory, it was expected that if your sports rule models practice violence you will likely practice violence. Further, if violence in sports is condoned by the media, it would be perceived that sport violence would be likely to occur. Based on social exchange theory, it was expected that it would be perceived that wanting to win leads to violence. Also based on social exchange theory, it was expected that it would be perceived that “weak” officials who do not take complete control of player violations contribute to violence in sports and that violence will likely occur in sports if severe sanctions are not present to control violence. It was hypothesized that perceptions of violence in sports in general would be similar to perceptions of violence in intramural sports. However it was hypothesized that factors impacting on violence in sport in general would be perceived as more important than factors impacting on violence in intramural sports.
Sampling
Data were gathered from 200 intramural sport participants using a group administered questionnaire. Students at a southeastern metropolitan university were selected for this study.
Instrument
A four page questionnaire consisting of four parts was used to gather the data. Part One contained items dealing with the backgrounds of the respondents. Part Two consisted of 16 items pertaining to perceptions of the respondents about violence in sports in general. Respondents were asked to strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with each of the items. In Part Three the respondents were asked to give their perceptions to the same 16 items with respect to violence in intramural sports. For perceptions of the items in Parts Two and Three violence was defined as referring to all acts of physical aggression. In other words, violence is a type of physical assault based on an intent to injure another individual or destroy property of others. Examples of the items in Parts Two and Three are: Encouragement by coaches to be violent seldom results in violence, and Encouragement by fellow players to be violent often results in violence. Part Four contained four open-ended questions pertaining to the participation of respondents in intramural sports.
Data Analysis
Out of the 200 student intramural sport participants who voluntarily participated in this study, 176 or 88% were males and 24 or 12% were females. In terms of age, about 84.5% of the intramural sport participants were between 18-22, or in the traditional college student age range, and about 15.5% of the intramural sport participants were over 22, or what is commonly considered as the non-traditional category. In terms of race, 143 or 71.5% of the research participants were white, compared to 57 or 28.5% who were non-white.
With respect to the general perception of violence today in the U.S., about 63% of the respondents felt violence was widely present in society, 34% of the respondents felt violence was somewhat present in society, and only about 3% of the respondents felt violence was not present. In terms of the general perception of violence today in U.S. sports, about 23% of the respondents felt violence was widely present in U.S. sports, about 56% of the respondents felt violence was somewhat present, and 21% of the respondents felt violence was not present.
Taking into account perceptions of student participants in intramural sports about violence in sports in general, about 79% of the respondents felt “weak” officials who do not take complete control of player violations contribute to violence in sports (See Table 1). About 77.5% of the respondents felt that if severe sanctions are not present to control violence in sports, violence will likely occur. In terms of other strongly supported perceptions, over 70% of the respondents felt that encouragement by fellow players to be violent often results in violence and over 66% of the respondents felt that encouragement by coaches to be violent would tend to lead to violence. Seventy one percent of the respondents felt that if violence in sports is condoned by the media, it is likely to occur. Violence was also perceived as being likely to occur by 82% of the respondents if it is recognized as an implicit part of the game. About 80% of the respondents felt that violence in sport is likely to result in personal injury and over 64% of the respondents felt it was okay to suspend someone from a game for engaging in violent behavior.
Table 1 Perceptions About Violence in Sports in General for Southeastern Metropolitan University Student Participants in Intramural sports, (N=200)%
Item SA A D
Encouragement by fellow players to be
violent often results in violence. 15.7 55.1 24.2
Violence is likely to occur if it is
recognized as an implicit part of the game. 21.5 60.5 12.5
“Weak” officials who do not take complete
control of player violations contribute
to violence in sports. 23.6 55.3 20.1
If severe sanctions are not present to
control violence in sports, violence will
likely occur. 16.0 61.5 18.6
If violence in sports is condoned by
the media, it is likely to occur. 9.5 61.5 25.0
Violence in sport is likely to result
in personal injury. 25.5 54.0 14.5
Being suspended from a game for
violent behavior is OK. 27.6 36.7 25.1
Item SD N
Encouragement by fellow players to be
violent often results in violence. 5.1 198
Violence is likely to occur if it is
recognized as an implicit part of the game. 3.5 196
“Weak” officials who do not take complete
control of player violations contribute
to violence in sports. 1.0 199
If severe sanctions are not present to
control violence in sports, violence will
likely occur. 3.5 199
If violence in sports is condoned by
the media, it is likely to occur. 4.0 200
Violence in sport is likely to result
in personal injury. 6.0 200
Being suspended from a game for
violent behavior is OK. 10.6 199
With regard to the perceptions of participants in intramural sports about violence in intramural sports, over 80% of the respondents felt that “weak” officials who do not take complete control of player violations contribute to violence in sports (See Table 2). Over 72% of the respondents felt that if severe sanctions are not present to control violence in sports, violence will likely occur. In terms of other strongly supported perceptions, over 71% of the intramural sport participants felt that encouragement by fellow players to be violent often results in violence and over 64% of these participants felt that encouragement by coaches to be violent would tend to result in violence. About 69% of the respondents felt that if violence in sports is condoned by the media, it is likely to occur. Violence was perceived as likely to occur by almost 79% of the respondents if it is recognized as an implicit part of the game. About 83% of the respondents felt that violence in sport is likely to result in personal injury and over 65% of the respondents felt that being suspended from a game for violent behavior is okay.
Table 2 Perceptions About Violence in Intramural Sports for Southeastern Metropolitan University Student Participants in Intramural sports, (N=200) %s
Item SA A D
Encouragement by coaches to be violent
seldom results in violence. 5.6 30.3 54.9
Encouragement by fellow players to be
violent often results in violence. 12.9 58.2 24.2
Wanting to win seldom leads to violence. 7.3 44.5 40.3
Violence is likely to occur if it is
recognized as an implicit part of the game. 20.5 57.9 18.9
“Weak” officials who do not take complete
control of player violations contribute
to violence in sports. 24.5 56.3 19.3
If severe sanctions are not present to
control violence in sports, violence will
likely occur. 17.2 55.2 21.4
If violence in sports is condoned by
the media, it is likely to occur. 10.5 57.4 25.3
Violence in sport is likely to result
in personal injury. 21.9 60.9 14.1
Being suspended from a game for violent
behavior is OK. 23.0 42.4 24.1
Item SD N
Encouragement by coaches to be violent
seldom results in violence. 9.2 195
Encouragement by fellow players to be
violent often results in violence. 4.6 194
Wanting to win seldom leads to violence. 7.9 191
Violence is likely to occur if it is
recognized as an implicit part of the game. 2.6 190
“Weak” officials who do not take complete
control of player violations contribute
to violence in sports. 0 192
If severe sanctions are not present to
control violence in sports, violence will
likely occur. 6.3 192
If violence in sports is condoned by
the media, it is likely to occur. 6.8 190
Violence in sport is likely to result
in personal injury. 3.1 192
Being suspended from a game for violent
behavior is OK. 10.5 191
Relationships between perceptions about violence in sports in general and perceptions about violence in intramural sports was investigated. All of the associations were very strong and significant beyond the .001 level. The strongest association, with a Gamma of +.91, was with “weak” officials who do not take complete control of player violations contribute to violence in sports. Extremely strong associations were also determined for violence in sports produces fewer recruits and being suspended from a game for violent behavior is okay. Other strong associations about perceptions of violence in sports in general and perception of violence in intramural sports were found for provocation from players on the opposing team is unlikely to result in violence; if your sports role models practice violence, you will likely practice violence; and the desire for revenge and retaliation rarely contributes to violence.
Discussion and Suggestions
Support was found in this study for social learning theory (Bandura and Walters, 1963; Bandura, 1973), which focuses on socialization based on reinforcement and modeling. In intramural sports, the participants perceived reinforcements for violent acts coming from several sources. One source is the immediate reference group of the athlete, in this case the teammates and coaches. Encouragement by fellow players and coaches to be violent was perceived as often resulting in violence. As suggested in the study by Smith (1979), the impact of teammates was perceived to be greater than the impact of coaches.
Another source of violence, based on social learning theory, deals with reinforcement from the structure of sport and the implementation of rules by governing bodies and officials. In this study strong support was determined for the perception that “weak” officials who do not take complete control of player violations contribute to violence in sports. Support was also found for the perception that violence will likely occur if severe sanctions are not present to control sports violence and for the perception that violence is likely to occur if it is recognized as an implicit part of the game. In addition to reinforcement of violence through the structure of sport and the implementation of the rules, social learning theory also proposes the media as a source of reinforcement. In this study support was found for the reinforcement of violence through the media by the perception of the intramural participants that sport violence is likely to occur if violence in sports is condoned by the media.
Another component of social learning theory is modeling, the imitation of behavior. Since sport is given extensive media coverage, it is expected that young athletes would imitate the behavior of their professional heroes. Previous research has suggested that imitative behavior includes the emulation of violence (Smith, 1977). In this study support was found for this notion, since over 50% of the intramural sports participants perceived the likelihood of practicing violence if your sports models practice violence (See Tables 1 and 2).
Support in this research was also found for social exchange theory (Homans, 1974), which suggests that athletes consider the advantages and disadvantages of interaction. In sport participation, according to social exchange theory, an athlete will attempt to maximize the rewards while minimizing the costs. An athlete, for instance, will weigh the punishment pertaining to a rule violation against the potential benefits to be gained by violating the rules. When officials do not penalize extra-legal aggression, the aggression is given positive reinforcement which increases the probability of its reoccurrence. Support for social exchange theory was found in the strong support for the perception that “weak” officials who do not take complete control of player violations contribute to violence in sports.
Winning is highly valued in the American culture. Therefore it is expected that pressure to win has been proposed as the major factor for sports violence (Pooley, 1987). While this study determined that about 50% of the intramural athletes perceived wanting to win as leading to violence (See Tables 1 and 2), this factor was not, in and of itself, as strongly supported as other factors.
Future research needs to address differences in the perceptions of sports participants at different levels of competition. Would, for example, sports participants involved with university or professional competition perceive engaging in violence to win differently than intramural sports participants? In addition, further studies need to compare the perceptions of violence of female athletes to male athletes at different levels of competition. Since sport has traditionally been perceived as a masculine activity, are there different perceptions of violence of female intramural sports participants compared to male intramural sports participants? Do these gender differences in the perception of violence with regard to intramural sports also exist at the level of university competition?
References
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. and Walters, R.H. (1963). Social Learning and personality Development.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Clark, P. (1981). An anatomy of high school hockey riot. The Hockey news. 24(24) pp. 7-8.
Coakley, J.J. (1998). Sport in Society. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Homans, G.C. (1974). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
House of Representatives. (1977). Inquiry into Professional Sports. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government printing Office.
House of Representatives. (1980). Excessive Violence in Professional Sports. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government printing Office.
Messner, M.A. (1992). Power at play. Boston: Beacon Press.
Messner, M.A. and Sabo, D.F. (1992). Sport, men and the gender order. Champaign, Ill.: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Neron, G. (1978). Violence in Hockey: Final Report of the Study Committee on Violence in Amateur Hockey in Quebec. Quebec City: Government of Quebec.
O’Brien, R. and Wolff, A. (1996). The wethead is dead. Sports Illustrated. (August 19): 32.
Pilz, G.A. (1996). Social factors influencing sport and violence: On the “problem” of football hooliganism in Germany. International Review for Sociology of Sport 31, 1: 49-68.
Pooley, John C. (1987). Player Violence in Sport: Consequences for Youth Cross Nationally (Part 2). Presented at Joint ICHPER/CAHPER ’87 Conference in Vancouver (June).
Pooley, J.C. and Golding, S. (1987). Junior and Senior High School Students’ perceptions of sports violence: A preliminary investigation. Empirical Study. Dalhousie University.
Reilly, R. (1995). Order on the court. Sports Illustrated. 83, 21:136.
Scher, J. (1993). Mr. Dirty. Sports Illustrated. 78, 8: 40-42.
Smith, M.D. (1977). Hockey Violence: Interring Some Myths. In W. Straub, Sport Psychology: An Analysis of Athlete Behavior, Ithaca, N.Y.: Mouvement.
Smith, M.D. (1979). Social Determinants of Violence in Hockey: A Review. Canadian Journal of Applied Sports Sciences, 4(1): 76-82.
Smith, M.D. (1986). Sports Violence: A Definition, in Richard E. Capchick (ed.) Fractured Focus: Sport as a Reflection of Society. Toronto: Lexington Books, pp. 221-227.
Terry, P.C. and Jackson, J.J. (1985). The Determinants and Control of Violence in Sport. Quest, 37, 27-37.
Vaz, E.W. (1979). Institutionalized Rule Violation and Control in Organized Minor League Hockey. Canadian Journal of Applied Sports Sciences, 4 (1): 83-90.
Weinstein, M.D., Smith, M.D., and Wisenthal, D.L. (1995). Masculinity and hockey violence. Sex Roles 33, 11/12: 831-47.
LARRY M. LANCE Department of Sociology
CHARLYNN E. ROSS University Learning Center The University of North Carolina at Charlotte
COPYRIGHT 2000 Project Innovation (Alabama)
COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group
