Abstract

Strength of religious faith of athletes and nonathletes attending (a) a religiously practicing institution (RPI) and (b) a non–religiously practicing (NRPI) institution in NCAA’s Division III was studied using the Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire. A 2 × 2 × 2 ANOVA sought differences in strength of faith of RPI students (n = 201) versus NRPI students (n = 174). Results show RPI students displayed stronger faith than NRPI students, F(1, 367) = 25.44, p < .01. A significant interaction showed RPI nonathletes more faithful than RPI athletes, F(1, 367) = 6.73, p < .05; NRPI athletes did not differ significantly from NRPI nonathletes. Women’s faith was stronger than men’s, F(1, 367) = 12.99, p < .01.

Strength of Religious Faith of Athletes and Nonathletes at Two NCAA Division III Institutions

An increase in research examining the purpose of religion in the lives of intercollegiate athletes has occurred in recent years (Balague, 1999; Storch & Storch, 2002a; Storch & Storch, 2002b; Storch, Storch, & Adams, 2002; Storch, Storch, Kovacs, Okun, & Welsh, 2003). Religion can be an important aspect in athletes’ lives and may serve a protective function against psychological distress and maladaptive behaviors such as substance use or aggression (Storch, Roberti, Bravata, & Storch, 2004). Viewers of sporting events can frequently observe athletes pointing to the sky, engaging in team prayer on the court or field, and glorifying God following athletic competitions.

Numerous studies report athletes to be more religious than nonathletes (Fischer, 1997; Storch, Kolsky, Silvestri, & Storch, 2001; Storch et al., 2004). According to Storch, Kolsky, Silvestri, and Storch (2001), four reasons may explain why religion interacts with athletic performance. First, athletes may identify with religious beliefs for direction and humility. Second, athletes may turn to religion to gain a sense of optimism and security, benefiting from such beliefs following a disappointing athletic performance. Third, religion can be used for emotional and psychological support in stressful circumstances like the uncertainty of athletic competition, which can cause athletes an overwhelming amount of anxiety. Religious beliefs can offer the internal strength to persevere through the stress. Fourth, religion “provides a cognitive framework conducive to the relief of anxiety associated with competition” (Storch et al., 2001, p. 347). This framework allows relief from fear and anxiety on the basis of the athlete’s understanding (i.e., belief) that a supreme being is in complete control of the situation. For example, athletes may rely on religious faith to place a poor athletic performance in perspective.

Although research investigating the impact of religion within sports has recently increased, an abundance of such literature does not yet exist. Studies that are currently available of religion’s impact on the lives of students, in particular, have focused on athletes and nonathletes at National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I institutions (Fischer, 1997; Storch et al., 2001; Storch et al., 2004). There is a significant shortage of literature assessing religiosity in athletes in other collegiate settings, for example at institutions in the NCAA Division II, NCAA Division III, National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA), or National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA). An athlete’s experience in any of these unique university environments may have a significant effect on his or her athletic, academic, and social development. In examining students at NCAA Division III institutions, the present study addressed this shortage. In addition, it is the first published investigation comparing the level of religious faith of athletes and nonathletes attending a religiously practicing institution (RPI). Given religion’s importance to the lives of many athletes (Balague, 1999), a need existed to investigate the impact of religion on students attending an NCAA Division III RPI and an NCAA Division III non–religiously practicing institution (NRPI).

The study’s purpose was to assess and compare the strength of religious faith characterizing athletes and nonathletes at an institution of each type. Acknowledging the impact of religious faith may help coaches understand athletes and may help clinicians and sports consultants develop appropriate interventions for athletes who are religious. For example, psychological interventions designed for sports, for example relaxation and visualization techniques, may make some religious athletes uncomfortable, if such psychological methods create a feeling of dissonance with the athletes’ religious creeds. Furthermore, knowledge of the role of religion in an athlete’s life can enhance the athlete-sports consultant relationship, as well as facilitate communication between the athlete and coach (Storch & Farber, 2002; Storch et al., 2001).

The following research questions guided this study:

• Were there significant differences in strength of religious faith between students attending an NCAA Division III RPI and students attending an NCAA Division III NRPI?
• Were there significant differences in strength of religious faith between athletes and nonathletes attending an NCAA Division III RPI?
• Were there significant differences in strength of religious faith between athletes and nonathletes attending an NCAA Division III NRPI?
• Were there significant gender differences in strength of religious faith of athletes and nonathletes attending the NCAA Division III RPI and the NCAA Division III NRPI?

Methods

Participants

The population for this study was undergraduate students enrolled at two institutions in the Midwest that have intercollegiate athletic programs competing at the NCAA Division III level. One institution was deemed an RPI, for purposes of the study, because of its membership in the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) and the mandatory chapel/worship services and religion courses students must attend. The other institution was deemed an NRPI, because it was not a member of CCCU and had not established religious requirements for its students. The RPI and NRPI codes used in the present investigation were developed by the primary researcher.

Of the study participants, 53.60% attended the RPI (n = 201), while 46.40% attended the NRPI (n = 174). Compiled demographics for the RPI and NRPI participants showed their average age to be 20.19 years (SD = 2.60). The youngest participant age was 18 years, the oldest 41 years; 53.60% of the participants were female (n = 201), and 46.40% were male (n = 174). Participants reported their ethnicity as follows: white/Caucasian (89.30%), African American (6.10%), Asian American (0.08%), Hispanic American (0.05%), Native American (0.03%), and other (2.90%). Freshman and sophomore students contributed 62.40% of the participant pool (see Table 1). The distribution of the participants in terms of their academic status or year at the institution was an accurate reflection of institution-wide distribution by academic status at each institution. Concerning current athletic participation, 53.30% of the participants did not currently participate in intercollegiate sports (n = 200), while 46.70% of the students did currently compete in intercollegiate sports (n = 175). The four sports in which the athletes in the sample most commonly participated were football, multiple sports, track and field, and basketball (see Table 2). Most participants indicated their religious affiliation was either Protestant (n = 111) or nondenominational (n = 110) (see Table 3).

Table 1

Frequencies and Percentages by Year at the Institution (i.e., Academic Status), Athletes and Nonathletes

Table 2

Frequencies and Percentages by Sport(s) Played, Athletes Only

Table 3

Frequencies and Percentages by Individual Religious Affiliation, Athletes and Nonathletes

Measures

The present study used the Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire (SCSRFQ), developed by Plante and Boccaccini (1997). Additionally, a demographic assessment created by the primary researcher was used to collect information on age, gender, ethnicity, institution attended, year at institution (i.e., academic status), current participation in intercollegiate athletics, sport(s) played, and religious affiliation.

The SCSRFQ is a 10-item inventory assessing strength of religious faith regardless of religion or denomination, using statements such as “My religious faith is important to me” and “I look to my faith as a source of comfort.” Items are scored with a 4-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree), and higher scores indicate greater strength of religious faith. A cumulative score for the strength of religious faith is determined by summing the individual scores for each item. Cumulative scores may range from 10 (low strength of religious faith) to 40 (high strength of religious faith). Analyses have determined that the SCSRFQ has well-established psychometric properties. Its internal reliability is high (Cronbach’s alpha = .95) as is its split-half reliability (r = .92) (Plante & Boccaccini, 1997). In addition, an investigation by Plante, Yancey, Sherman, Guertin, and Pardini (1999) found the SCSRFQ to be significantly correlated with various measures of religiosity, including the Duke Religion Index (Koenig, Parkerson, & Meador, 1997), which assesses religious involvement; the Age Universal Religious Orientation Scale (Gorsuch & Venable, 1983), which examines both intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness; and the Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale (Hoge, 1972), which measures religious motivation.

Procedures

Participants were recruited in selected psychology classes and from selected intercollegiate athletic teams at the two institutions. Both introductory psychology classes and more advanced psychology classes were included, creating a more balanced representation (by both age and academic major) of the participating institutions. The subsample of athletes was obtained by surveying selected male and female intercollegiate athletic teams at each institution; data from athletes whose teams had not been selected but who participated in the study through a selected psychology class were also included in the data analysis for athletes. All participants completed a packet comprising a demographic assessment and the SCSRFQ.

Results

Prior to addressing the research questions, descriptive statistics were calculated for the three independent variables of interest, which were gender, current athletic participation, and institution attended (see Table 4). Following these analyses, a 2 × 2 × 2 ANOVA (Gender × Current Athletic Participation × Institution Attended) was utilized to explore significant differences between various participants’ strength of religious faith (see Table 5). The 2 × 2 × 2 ANOVA addressed each research question, the first of which asked whether significant differences in strength of religious faith distinguished students attending an NCAA Division III RPI from those attending an NCAA Division III NRPI. The results showed a significant main effect for institution attended, F(1, 367) = 25.44, p < .01. Students attending the RPI and those attending the NRPI differed in terms of the strength of their religious faith. Specifically, participants attending the RPI (M = 32.99, SD = 6.65) reported stronger religious faith than participants attending the NRPI (M = 29.09, SD = 7.02).

The second research question inquired whether significant differences in strength of religious faith differentiated athletes attending the NCAA Division III RPI from nonathletes at the same institution. The results showed a significant interaction for Athlete × Institution Attended, F(1, 367) = 6.73, p < .05. Athletes at the RPI differed significantly from nonathletes there, in terms of the strength of their religious faith. Specifically, the RPI nonathletes (M = 34.43, SD = 5.25) reported stronger religious faith than the RPI athletes (M = 30.76, SD = 7.89).

The third research question asked whether the strength of religious faith of athletes attending the NCAA Division III NRPI differed significantly from the strength of religious faith of nonathletes attending that NRPI. As already noted, the data analysis showed a significant Athlete × Institution Attended interaction, F(1, 367) = 6.73, p < .05. However, the strength of religious faith reported in this study by athletes attending the NRPI did not differ significantly from that of the nonathletes at that NRPI. Specifically, the NRPI athletes (M = 29.09, SD = 6.63) reported the strength of their religious faith to be at a level similar to that of the NRPI nonathletes (M = 29.08, SD = 7.52).

The fourth research question concerned whether significant gender differences in strength of religious faith existed among students attending the NCAA Division III RPI and NRPI. The results indicated a significant main effect for gender, F(1, 367) = 12.99, p < .01. Female and male participants differed significantly in terms of the strength of their religious faith. Specifically, females (M = 32.77, SD = 6.41) reported stronger religious faith than males (M = 29.33, SD = 7.39). Despite this finding, however, no significant interactions were found for Gender × Athlete, F(1, 367) = 2.94, p > .05, or Gender × Institution Attended, F(1, 367) = 0.16, p > .05.

Table 4

Descriptive Statistics for Gender, Institution Attended, and Current Athletic Participation

Table 5

2 × 2 × 2 ANOVA for Gender, Institution Attended, and Current Athletic Participation

Note. InAt = institution attended.

*p < .05. **p < .01.

Discussion

In terms of the first research question, analyses showed that students attending the RPI reported stronger religious faith than students attending the NRPI. Religious institutions tend to appeal to students, whether athletes or nonathletes, who adhere to the religious beliefs and ideals the institutions promote. For example, a high school senior who values his or her Christian beliefs may apply to a college expected to provide a venue for strengthening those beliefs. In this study, then, the strength of the religious faith of students attending the RPI may be greater than that of students at the NRPI because Christian universities tend to attract and recruit highly religious individuals. In addition, according to the findings of Arnett and Jensen (as cited in Barry & Nelson, 2005), “emerging adulthood may be best characterized as a time during which young people: (a) question the beliefs in which they are raised, (b) place greater emphasis on individual spirituality and affiliation with a religious institution, and (c) pick and choose the aspects of religion that suit them best” (p. 246). At an NRPI, students may be exposed to secular viewpoints and perspectives during their academic experience. Professors at non–religiously practicing institutions often do not promote a certain religion, and they may deliberately keep their classrooms free of discussion on religion and spirituality. In contrast, students attending the RPI involved in this study were required by the institution to attend weekly religious services and to enroll in religion courses, which constitute part of the institution’s core curriculum. In addition, professors at Christian institutions tend to intertwine religion and academics by seeking the “integration of Christian faith with the living and learning experiences” (Schroeder & Scribner, 2006, p. 40). These reasons help explain the finding that students attending the RPI reported stronger religious faith than students attending the NRPI.

Concerning the second research question, analyses showed that the nonathletes attending the RPI reported stronger religious faith than the athletes at that RPI. Prior to the present research, most studies comparing the religiosity of athletes and nonathletes had been conducted at NCAA Division I public institutions and had suggested that athletes were more religious than nonathletes (Fischer, 1997; Storch et al., 2001; Storch et al., 2004). The results of the present study appear to contradict the published literature, although the contradiction may be substantially explained by society’s glorification of winning in athletics. That is, even at religiously practicing institutions, coaches feel pressure to win. Coaches at Christian institutions may tend to incorporate prayer in athletic practices and competitions, to make decisions based on Christian ideals, and to strive to be Christian role models (Schroeder & Scribner, 2006). In a context of athletics, they may work to teach such Christian values as self-discipline, hard work, perseverance, humility, and graciousness. But athletic success, even at Christian institutions, stems directly from the number of victories accumulated by a team. A victorious athletic program can be used as a “platform to market the college and encourage people in the community to have a connection with the institution, through sports” (Schroeder & Scribner, 2006, p. 49). Resulting pressure to win may lead even coaches at religious institutions to recruit athletes based on athletic ability rather than commitment to Christian beliefs. The adequacy of this explanation offers a topic for subsequent investigation focusing on recruiting practices of coaches at religiously practicing institutions versus those of coaches at non–religiously practicing institutions.

The present statistical analyses generated no significant results related to the third research question, in that athletes at the NRPI involved in this study reported the strength of their religious faith to be at a level similar to that reported by nonathletes at the NRPI. This result does not support previously published findings for athletes and nonathletes at NCAA Division I institutions (Fischer, 1997; Storch et al., 2001; Storch et al., 2004). It may, then, indicate a role for institutional environment. The NCAA Division III NRPI involved in the present study was located in the Midwest, a region in which residents typically adhere to conservative ideals and values. The cited investigations at NCAA Division I institutions were conducted in other regions of the United States, where moral standards may differ from those in the Midwest. Furthermore, it may be true that, in general, an NRPI in NCAA’s Division III may offer an institutional environment that more closely resembles the institutional environment of an NCAA Division I institution than that of an RPI in Division III.

As for the fourth research question, the present analyses showed that females reported stronger religious faith than males, a result supporting the majority of the previous research. Specifically, studies have found females to obtain higher intrinsic spirituality scores (Knox, Langehough, Walters, & Rowley, 1998), to pray more frequently, and to attend church more often than males (Francis, 1997b). In addition, a study of athletes and nonathletes by Storch et al. (2001) found that female athletes and female nonathletes (as well as male athletes) reported a higher degree of religiousness than male nonathletes did. Another study suggested that females may derive greater spiritual benefits than males from a Christian college experience (Ma, 2003). Perhaps such results can be explained by socialization factors. According to previous research, in general females have been taught to be relatively submissive, passive, obedient, nurturing, and gentle, as compared to males (Miller & Hoffmann, 1995; Thompson, 1991). Expressive personality characteristics like these are associated with higher levels of religiosity (Miller & Hoffmann, 1995) and have been categorized as a feminine gender orientation (Thompson, 1991). In other words, females (and males) who exhibit these personality characteristics tend to be more religious than females (and males) who do not exhibit them (Francis, 1997a). Perhaps, then, researchers should begin examining differences in religiosity not by gender but by specific gender role orientation (i.e., masculine gender orientation, feminine gender orientation) within each gender.

Conclusion

In this study, students attending the RPI reported stronger religious faith than students attending the NRPI. Institutional environment and relative overall appeal of RPIs and NRPIs may play a significant role in explaining this finding. In addition, nonathletes attending the RPI reported stronger religious faith than athletes attending the RPI. Societal pressure—even on the coaching staffs of religiously practicing institutions—to recruit athletes based on athletic ability rather than character may help explain this result.

Athletes attending the NRPI in this study did not differ significantly from nonathletes at the institution, in respect to strength of religious faith. This result does not support previous studies, which had revealed a significant difference in religiosity between athletes and nonathletes. This finding may be attributable to the institutional environment at the NRPI. Finally, in this study, females reported stronger religious faith than males, a result that may potentially be attributable to gender role orientation and socialization factors in our culture.

Findings from the present study provide direction for future research. First, levels of spirituality should be assessed, along with religious faith. Although many people equate religion and spirituality, the two are distinct concepts that can be addressed separately as well as collectively. Second, future studies should incorporate unstructured opportunities (i.e., interviews) allowing participants to express their religious beliefs. The SCSRFQ is a self-report scale not accommodating qualitative accounts of the role of religion as perceived by participants. Thus, both quantitative and qualitative methods should be utilized. Third, future investigators ought to study institutions at the NCAA Division II, National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics, and National Junior College Athletic Association levels. While the majority of existing research was conducted among NCAA Division I athletes, insight into the importance of religion at a variety of athletic levels is needed. Fourth, future studies should examine levels of religious faith by type of sports. They might ask, for instance, whether athletes in individual sports are more religious than athletes in team sports or whether athletes in contact sports display stronger religious faith than athletes in noncontact sports. Fifth, future investigations should evaluate levels of religious faith by individual religious affiliation, exploring, for example, whether Catholics report higher levels of religious faith than Protestants. Finally, further research must be conducted on the role of religions other than Christianity—Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism—in sports and in the lives of athletes.

References

Balague, G. (1999). Understanding identity, value, and meaning when working with elite athletes. The Sport Psychologist, 13, 89–98.

Barry, C. M., & Nelson, L. J. (2005). The role of religion in the transition to adulthood for
young emerging adults. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(3), 245–255.

Fischer, G. J. (1997). Abstention from sex and other pre-game rituals used by college
male varsity athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20(2), 176–184.

Francis, L. J. (1997a). The psychology of gender differences in religion: A review of
empirical research. Religion, 27, 81–96.

Francis, L. J. (1997b). Personality, prayer, and church attendance among undergraduate
students. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 7(2), 127–132.

Gorsuch, R. I., & Venable, G. G. (1983). Development of an “age universal” I-E revised
scale. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 22, 181–187.

Hoge, D. R. (1972). A validated intrinsic religious motivation scale. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 11, 369–376.

Knox, D., Langehough, S. O., Walters, C., & Rowley, M. (1998). Religiosity and
spirituality among college students. College Student Journal, 32(3), 430–432.

Koenig, H. G., Parkerson, G. R., & Meador, K. G. (1997). Religion index for psychiatric research. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 885–886.

Ma, S. Y. (2003). The Christian college experience and the development of spirituality
among students. Christian Higher Education, 2, 221–239.

Miller, A. S., & Hoffmann, J. P. (1995). Risk and religion: An explanation of gender
differences in religiosity. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 34(1), 63–75.

Plante, T. G., & Boccaccini, M. T. (1997). The Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith
Questionnaire. Pastoral Psychology, 45(5), 375–387.

Plante, T. G., Yancey, S., Sherman, A., Guertin, M., & Pardini, D. (1999). Further validation for the Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire. Pastoral Psychology, 48(1), 11–21.

Schroeder, P. J., & Scribner, J. P. (2006). “To honor and glorify God”: The role of religion
in one intercollegiate athletics culture. Sport, Education, and Society, 11(1), 39–54.

Storch, E. A., & Farber, B. A. (2002). Psychotherapy with the religious athlete. Annals of
the American Psychotherapy Association, 3(6), 15–17.

Storch, E. A., Kolsky, A. R., Silvestri, S. M., & Storch, J. B. (2001). Religiosity of elite
college athletes. The Sport Psychologist, 13, 346–351.

Storch, E. A., Roberti, J. W., Bravata, E. A., & Storch, J. B. (2004). Strength of religious faith: A comparison of intercollegiate athletes and non-athletes. Pastoral Psychology, 52(6), 485 489.

Storch, E. A., & Storch, J. B. (2002a). Correlations for organizational, nonorganizational, and intrinsic religiosity with social support among intercollegiate athletes. Psychological Reports, 91, 333–334.

Storch, E. A., & Storch, J. B. (2002b). Intrinsic religiosity and aggression in a sample of intercollegiate athletes. Psychological Reports, 91, 1041–1042.

Storch, E. A., Storch, J. B., & Adams, B. G. (2002). Intrinsic religiosity and social anxiety of intercollegiate athletes. Psychological Reports, 91, 186.

Storch, E. A., Storch, J. B., Kovacs, A. H., Okun, A., & Welsh, E. (2003). Intrinsic religiosity and substance use in intercollegiate athletes. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 25, 248–252.

Thompson, E. H. (1991). Beneath the status characteristic: Gender variations in
religiousness. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30(4), 381–394.

Author Note

Nathan T. Bell, School of Physical Education, Sport, and Exercise
Science, Ball State University; Scott R. Johnson, School of Physical
Education, Sport, and Exercise Science, Ball State University; and
Jeffrey C. Petersen, School of Physical Education, Sport, and Exercise
Science, Ball State University.

Nathan T. Bell is now with the American Sport Education Program at
Human Kinetics publishing.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Nathan
T. Bell, Associate Acquisitions Editor, ASEP–Human Kinetics, 1607 N.
Market St.,Champaign, IL 61820.

Abstract

Major U.S. sporting events constitute potential terrorist targets (Lipton, 2005). Since 9/11, more money has been spent on security at events (Hall, 2006). This study investigated spectators’ perceptions of security at a NASCAR event, via a survey administered by the Center for Spectator Sports Security Management collaborating with Turnkey Sports and Entertainment. Of 1,642 spectators participating in the study, 52% said they had not been concerned with security while planning to attend the event. Further, only 47% knew where and how to seek emergency care while attending the event, and 47% deemed emergency evacuation procedures and signs to be clear and easy to follow. Overall, 64% indicated an opinion that professional sporting events are a likely target of terrorist attacks.

Spectator Perceptions of Security Management
at a NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) Event

High-profile sporting events in the United States have been identified by the federal Department of Homeland Security as potential terrorist targets (Office of Homeland Security, 2002, p. 86). According to Goss, Jubenville, and MacBeth (n.d.), an act of sports-related terrorism is inevitable, a matter of when and where, not if—and of how the act will change the sporting world forever. Philpott (2007) explained that effective security management is imperative at large sporting events with many spectators, because there is potential for mass casualties as well as for catastrophic social and economic impacts.

Noted sports-related terrorism in the past includes incidents at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany, and at the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games, as well as several other recent events in the United States. In October 2005, an Oklahoma University student prematurely detonated a bomb strapped to his body outside an 85,000-seat stadium filled to capacity (Hagmann, 2005). In October 2006, the National Football League received a radiological bomb threat against several of its stadiums (Homeland Security: NFL Stadiums Threat Not Credible, 2006). The terrorist group Al-Qaeda prepared a “manual of Afghan jihad” in which football stadiums are proposed as sites of possible attacks, and in July 2002 the FBI warned that terrorist groups were downloading stadium images” (Estell, 2002, p. 8).

The present study intended to investigate the security-related perceptions of spectators at a high-profile NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) event conducted in the southeastern region of the United States. Knowledge was sought of whether fans are concerned about security at sporting events they attend, whether and how strongly they believe their safety is adequately assured by security measures and personnel, and whether they believe sporting events are a likely target for future attacks.

Background

The University of Southern Mississippi Center for Spectator Sports Security Management was established in 2005 through a Department of Homeland Security grant. The center is the first of its kind in the United States. Through research, education, and outreach efforts, it works to build the capabilities of those responsible for managing security practices at sporting events. The center promotes, supports, and enhances academic research, technology development, and education and training in the domain of sports event security management. Its mission is to provide an interdisciplinary environment for building security awareness, improving sports-related security policies and procedures, and enhancing emergency response, evacuation, and recovery operations that follow acts of terrorism or natural disasters (Center for Spectator Sports Security Management, n.d.).

The Center for Spectator Sports Security Management was approached by the NASCAR organization to conduct research on NASCAR’s security management systems at one racing venue. Faculty, staff, and graduate students affiliated with the center collaborated with Turnkey Sports and Entertainment, LLC, to complete the proposed project. Turnkey Sports and Entertainment is a sports marketing firm that helps its clients develop insights into their audiences and marketplaces, gathering demographic information, collecting sales leads, and measuring sponsorships with custom market tools (Turnkey Sports and Entertainment, n.d.). Clients of Turnkey Sports and Entertainment include more than 80 leagues, properties, agencies, and brands (Turnkey Clients and Partners, n.d.).

Methods

Participants

The population for this study was limited to spectators at a NASCAR event in the southeastern region of the United States (N = 1,642). Potential participants were approached inside and outside the racing venue by members of a team of 11 graduate students and 5 faculty members from the Center for Spectator Sports Security Management. Team members collected data utilizing personal digital assistants (PDAs). No incentive was offered for participation, and participants were assured of their anonymity. Institutional review board approval was obtained prior to the study.

Instrument

The survey instrument was developed by the Center for Spectator Sports Security Management in partnership with Turnkey Sports and Entertainment. A panel of experts also assisted in developing the instrument and included the head of security for the national organization that controls the sport; event security managers; marketing staff; and administrative personnel. The survey instrument consisted of two parts. The first part of the questionnaire obtained demographic data measuring gender, age, education, and income. The second part comprised items about the management of security during the NASCAR event. This section of the instrument employed a 5-point Likert scale for participants’ responses (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree).

Data Analysis

Survey data from the research team’s PDAs were uploaded to the FanTrak Surveyor system established by Turnkey Sports and Entertainment and were analyzed using SPSS (version 11.0). Descriptive statistics and frequencies were used to investigate spectator security concerns. Means for each survey item question were reported. Likert scale responses measured how strongly participants agreed or disagreed with survey items; as part of the data analysis, the researchers categorized the respondents’ Likert scale responses as either disagree (1–2), neutral (3), or agree (4–5).

Results

A total of 1,642 spectators participated in this study. According to the results, a spectator attends, on average, 2.07 NASCAR events during the NASCAR season. Demographic data describing participants in the study (see Table 1) were consistent with the general demographic profile of spectators at similar events, as compiled by NASCAR’s central office. For example, men outnumbered women in the study sample (1,117 or 68% vs. 525 or 32%), and the majority of study participants had completed at least some community college. The income bracket into which most of the study participants fell was the $54,999–$74,000 bracket.

Table 1

Demographic Profile of Study Participants (N = 1,642), From Instrument Part 1

The second part of the survey instrument questioned participants about whether security was a concern for them as spectators at a large sporting event; whether they felt safe attending the event; whether they perceived emergency care available at the event to be managed effectively; and whether they perceived crowd control at the event to be managed effectively. Participants also indicated whether security measures implemented for the event were an impediment to their enjoyment of the event and whether they believed professional sporting events are a likely target of future terrorist attacks. Mean Likert scores for each item from the second part of the survey instrument were calculated, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), and participants’ responses were also categorized as disagree, neutral, or agree (see Table 2).

Table 2

Participants’ Perceptions Concerning NASCAR Event Security, From Instrument Part 2

The results suggest that security was not a concern for the surveyed spectators at this NASCAR venue. Overall, they agreed that security checkpoints were adequate (M = 4.22), as were item searches (M = 4.05) and security staff presence (M = 4.54). In addition, 84% of the study participants agreed they were fully aware of items banned or prohibited within the venue (M = 4.22). This indicates that the organization effectively communicates its entry policies. However, participants tended to indicate that they were unaware of where and how to seek emergency care at the venue and that they found its emergency evacuation procedures neither clear nor easy to follow (M = 2.91).

Most study participants—87%—disagreed fairly strongly with the item stating “Overall security measures in place take away from the enjoyment of this event”; the mean Likert scale score for this item was 1.42. The respondents also indicated a perception that crowd control was effectively managed (M = 3.8). In addition, the majority of the surveyed spectators (64%) felt that professional sporting events are a likely target for future terrorist activity.

Summary and Implications

Findings from the present study suggest that venue and event operators must ensure that emergency services and security staff are visible and accessible to patrons. Adequate training and placement of key personnel are critical to ensure effective responses to incidents. Over half of the participants (52%) indicated that security was not a concern for them as they made plans to attend the event; an even larger percentage, however, (72%) said they were vigilant concerning unusual packages and people at the event, a notion reinforced by the finding that 64% of participants consider professional sporting events to be likely future terrorist targets.

One important implication of these findings is that sports spectators seem to have an awareness concerning potential incidents. Another is that sports organizations need to implement effective strategies for communicating with event attendees about critical security information: entry and exit policies, items not allowed at the venue, parking regulations, and so on. Many sports organizations do provide such information for spectators, sometimes in fan guides and sometimes through websites designed for spectators’ review prior to attending events.

For many sports organizations, attaining balance between effective security management and a pleasant experience for the sports consumer is an important issue. Overwhelming spectators with security measures may deter their attendance, posing economic consequences for the sports organization; yet an effective security operation may prevent or alleviate incidents that would also bring financial losses.

In conclusion, various sporting organizations should consider conducting self-evaluations similar to the present study, in order to assess their security systems and identify any problems in the operations of those systems or with the consumers’ experience of events. Such knowledge can enhance the effectiveness of security systems and, ultimately, the safety of sports spectators.

References

Center for Spectator Sports Security Management. (n.d.). Retrieved April 8, 2008, from University of Southern Mississippi, Center for Spectator Sports Security Management website: http://www.sporteventsecurity.com/

Estell, L. (2002). A banner year for stadiums? Security concerns could put an end to stadium fly-overs. Incentive, 176(12), 8. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from the EBSCOhost database.

Goss, B. D., Jubenville, C. B., & MacBeth, J. L. (n.d.). Primary principles of post-9/11 stadium security in the United States: Transatlantic implications from British practices. Retrieved October 3, 2005, from http://www.iaam.org/CVMS/Post%20911%20Stadium%20Security.doc

Hagmann, D. J. (2005). Black hole in America’s heartland. In Articles: The Bombing at the University of Oklahoma (¶ 9). Retrieved July 20, 2006, from http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/site/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16

Hall, S. (2006). Effective security management of university sport venues. The Sport Journal, 9(4). Retrieved August 10, 2008, from http://thesportjournal.org/article/effective-security-management-university-sport-venues

Homeland security: NFL stadiums threat not credible. (2006). Retrieved July 28, 2007, from http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2631048

Lipton, E. (2005, March 16). U.S. report lists possibilities for terrorist attacks and likely toll. New York Times, p. A1.

Office of Homeland Security. (2002). National strategy for homeland security. Retrieved September 22, 2005, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/book/nat_strat_hls.pdf

Philpott, D. (2007). How your facility can avert a terrorist attack. Journal of Homeland Defense: Special Report. Retrieved , from http://www.homelanddefensejournal.com/hdl/TerroristAttack.htm

Turnkey Clients and Partners. (n.d.). Retrieved February 27, 2008, from http://www.turnkeyse.com/clients.html

Turnkey Sports and Entertainment. (n.d.). Retrieved February 27, 2008, from http://www.turnkeyse.com

Author Note

Stacey Hall, Center for Spectator Sports Security Management,
University of Southern Mississippi; Lou Marciani, Center for Spectator Sports Security Management, University of Southern Mississippi; Dennis Phillips, Center for Spectator Sports Security Management, University of Southern Mississippi; Trey Cunningham Center for Spectator Sports Security Management, University of Southern Mississippi.

Trey Cunningham is now at Northwestern State University of Louisiana.

This research effort was supported by Turnkey Sports and Entertainment, LLC.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Stacey Hall, Center for Spectator Sports Security Management, University of Southern Mississippi, 118 College Dr. #10013, Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001. E-mail: Stacey.A.Hall@usm.edu.