ISSN: 1543-9518|Vol. 24

Threads of Psychoneuroimmunology in Sport

Submitted by:

Abstract

In view of the fact that a century of medical and drug warfare has not liberated us from disease, progressive practitioners have put a growing emphasis on wellness and prevention as a health strategy, recognizing that maintaining a state of physical, mental and emotional good health is the best way to avoid illness. At the same time, new discoveries in the science of psychoneuroimmunology (PNI) have provided evidence that a healthy mental state is a prime contributor of wellness, especially for the athlete. Many athletes today are surprised when they get sick. But athletes as well as the general population should be aware of the importance of the wholeness of the body when it comes to discussing health of the human organism.

Threads of Psychoneuroimmunology in Sport

What Western science is now confirming, that mind and body are not separate and that thought and emotion influence physical health, is ancient history in Asian health care systems. Our minds possess the power to heal pain and create joy, wrote Tulku Thondup Ruspoche, a Buddhist scholar, in his book The Healing Mind (Shambhalu, 1996).

While it is true that a number of diseases seemed to have been all but eliminated in the 1950s and 1960s, widespread overuse of insecticides, fertilizers, antibiotics, and other drugs has resulted in new, mutant strains of insects, viruses, bacteria, and fungi, and many diseases are making a comeback. Increased mobility of the populace now guarantees the rapid spread of new viruses, exposing people to exotic pathogens from which they had formerly been isolated. Despite the progress that has been made, the human immune system is still subjected to a wide variety of infectious diseases, and it is unlikely the situation will change any time soon (Campbell, 1996).

Over the past decade, a number of integrated preventive diet and exercise plans have been created to promote general physical well-being, and they have proven quite effective (Bucci, 1995; MacKinnon, 1994). At the same time, new discoveries in the science of psychoneurimmunology have provided conclusive evidence that healthy mental states are also prime contributors to wellness (Ader, Cohen, & Felten, 1995; Lowe, 1979).

How Immunity Works

To fully appreciate the evolutionary twists and turns taken by the immune system over hundreds of millions of years, it is necessary to understand how immune response works. The most basic requirement for any immune system is the ability to distinguish the cells, tissues, and organs that belong to the host body from the foreign nonself that might also be present. The immune system’s role then is to eliminate nonself invaders, which are often dangerous bacteria or viruses. In addition, the immune system recognizes and usually eliminates nonself as well as altered-self cells or tissues, those changed by injury or disease such as cancer or hemolytic anemia. Immunologists agree that the immune systems of mammals including humans have the most sophisticated mechanisms both for recognizing and eliminating invaders (Levy, 1990).

Consider what happens when a track athlete running at full speed happens to trip and fall, lacerating the hands and knees. Within minutes, immediately after blood stops flowing normally through the injured area, the immune system begins to eliminate undesirable microbes introduced at the wound. Already on the scene (or quick to arrive) are phagocytic white blood cells known as macrophages. These cells not only engulf and destroy any invading microbes but also release proteins that activate other parts of the immune system and alert other phagocytes that may be needed.

This fast cellular response is sometimes called natural or innate immunity, because the cells that execute it are already active in the body. Innate immunity usually suffices to destroy invading microbes. If it does not, humans as well as other vertebrates rely on another response: acquired immunity. The soldiers of acquired immunity are specialized white blood cells called lymphocytes that function together as an army. Moving through the blood and lymph glands, lymphocytes are normally inactive; they become active, and begin to multiply, if they encounter specific molecules called antigens that are associated with foreign organisms. While it is highly effective, acquired immunity takes days to mobilize, because the response is very complex. An invading microbe must come into contact with the correct T or B lymphocytes; macrophages must be activated for assistance; the activated lymphocytes must divide; all the involved white blood cells must synthesize and release proteins that amplify the response; and B cells must manufacture and release antibodies (Booth, 1990).

But acquired immunity also has a hallmark trait, immunologic memory, arising from DNA-based mechanisms that allow lymphocytes collectively to recognize a great diversity of antigens, even though a single lymphocyte recognizes only one type of antigen. The second time a lymphocyte cell encounters a particular invader, it uses a sort of blueprint, enabling the response to occur more quickly and powerfully than it did the first time (Moye et al., 1995). The track athlete who fell in time will forget the resulting lacerations, but his or her immune system will not.

Mind and the Immune System

The mind’s impact on the immune system may not be as obvious as that of tranquillity and rest (sleep), but it is equally important. In recent studies (Bauer, 1994; Everson et al., 1996) cancer- and virus-fighting killer cells were taken from groups of depressed and non-depressed subjects. When the killer cells were placed in contact with cancer cells, those from the non-depressed subjects surrounded and destroyed the cancer cells, while those from the depressed subjects did nothing. Immune functions, one concludes, can be turned on and off by the emotions of the patient (Bauer, 1994). In a study by Medalie and Goldbourt (1976), a spouse’s love and support comprise an important balancing factor apparently reducing risk of angina pectoris, even in the presence of risk factors. The implications of such findings for pathophysiology and prevention of angina are stressed. A study by Everson (1996) found that bereaved spouses had 10 times less T cell (immune helper cell) function than did non-bereaved individuals. Another study by Ballieux (1994) found that natural killer cell activity was significantly decreased in “stressed-out” college students. Studies like these were featured in Bill Moyers’s recent investigative report, The Healing Mind (1994).

A number of hormones and neurotransmitters have been identified belonging to the process of immune system modulation, but each one of these is, to a significant extent, subservient to the emotions and beliefs of the mind (Harrington, 1995). Will the immune system respond in a diminished way if an athlete’s perception of his or her ability to react in a situation is threatened? The brain and the immune system continuously signal each other, often along the same pathways, which may explain how state of mind influences health (Mariano & Workman, 1991).

Conclusion

According to a study published in 1998 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (Eisenberg et al.), Americans made more visits to complementary and alternative practitioners than to conventional physicians that year. The trend appears to be persisting. Americans are ready for the theories and explanations of psychoneuroimmunology.

In the new millenium, scientists, teachers, coaches, and sports medicine specialists must catch up with consumer needs and demands. Athletes throughout the world should not continue to suffer because of a fundamental lack of reliable, readily available information on the subject of psychoneuroimmunology. There is a need to broaden the data in this important area, so everyone can learn which treatments are useful, which are not, and why. Consumer choice has made it clear in the last decade: Psychoneuroimmunology is here to stay. Now it is our responsibility to ensure that every athlete has access to the latest information on this promising new methodology.

References

Ader, R., Cohen, N., & Felten, D. (1995, January 14). Psychoneuroimmunology: Interactions between the nervous system and the immune system. The Lancet, 345, 99-100

Baker, B. (1997, July/August). The mind-body connection. AARP Bulletin, 38, 7-8

Ballieux, R. E. (1994). The mind and the immune system. Theoretical Medicine, 15, 387-395

Bauer, S. M. (1994). Psychoneuroimmunology and cancer: An integrated review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, 1114-1120

Bergsma, J. (1994). Illness, the mind, and the body: Cancer and Immunology: An introduction. Theoretical Medicine, 15, 337-347

Booth, R. J. (1990, July). The psychoneuroimmune network: Expanding our understanding of immunity and disease. New Zealand Medical Journal, 314-316

Bucci, L. (1995). Pain Free. Ft. Worth, TX: The Summit Group.

Campbell, D. (1996, October). Energy, mood, stress and the healthy immune system. Total Health,18(5), 24-26

Eisenberg, D. M., Kessler, R. C., Foster, C., Norlock, F. E., Calkins, D. R., & Delbanco, T. L. (1993). Unconventional medicine in the United States. New England Journal of Medicine, 246.

Everson, S. A., Goldberg, D. E., Kaplan, G. A., Cohen, R. D., Pukkala, E., Tuomilehto, J., & Salonen, J. T. (1996). Hopelessness and risk of mortality and incidence of myocardial infarction and cancer. Psychosomatic Medicine, 58, 113-121

Harrington, A. (1995, September/October). Probing the secrets of placebos. Alternative and Complementary Therapies, 299-304.

LaPerriere, A., Ironson, G., Antoni, M. H., Schneiderman, N., Klimas, N., & Fletcher, M.A. (1994). Exercise and psychoneuroimmunology. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 26(2), 182-190

 

2013-11-26T21:22:04-06:00February 15th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off on Threads of Psychoneuroimmunology in Sport
Read More

Special Edition: Refuting IOC’s Plan to End Modern Pentathlon Competition

The recent decision of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to drop the modern pentathlon from the Olympic Games has prompted Dr. Thomas P. Rosandich, president of the United States Sports Academy, and the editors of The Sport Journal to publish a special edition bringing attention to this grave matter. We join the call that has gone out from various quarters to retain the modern pentathlon. It is a vital component of the Olympic Games and an important historic tradition. The special edition features the opinions of several IOC members, reproduced from four sources.

The first source is an abridged version of a letter from Klaus Schormann, president of the Union Internationale de Pentathlon Moderne (UIPM), to IOC President Jacques Rogge:

Monaco, 5 November 2002

According to our discussion during our last meeting in Lausanne [Switzerland], the UIPM is sending a summary of its arguments and response to the Program Commission report which it feels appropriate to be considered for the sport of modern pentathlon to remain in the Olympic program. These arguments, which cover a larger spectrum than those developed by the Program Commission, should be given to the IOC executive board prior to their last meeting in November, and to the IOC members in case the matter would be voted during the session in Mexico.

I. Answer to the arguments of the Program Commission

—Lack of global participation by nations and individual athletes
Ninety-four nations from five continents are now affiliated with the UIPM (more are coming, as they are in establishment procedure), while the Olympic Charter requires 75 nations in four continents. The sport meets the criteria of the Olympic Charter. We want to remind that Pierre de Coubertin founded the sport in 1912 from scratch, on the model of the ancient pentathlon, the symbolic and complete sport of the Ancient Games, which means that this sport has never stopped growing since its creation.

—Significant expense of practicing the sport, with resulting difficulties in major development
Modern pentathlon is not more significantly expensive than most of the other Olympic sports or than those willing to enter the Olympic program. The change of its format to the one-day in 1992 and the new shooting system (air pistols instead of guns) have reduced the costs for organizing and training. Facilities already used by other sports are also for modern pentathlon, inside and outside of Olympic Games, for competing, training, and studying. The new compactness of venues in many cities gives new possibilities for modern pentathlon. The reduction of the costs for sport equipment (including horse riding) brings new possibilities. It is to be noted that pentathletes do not need to have a horse of their own, are not charged for that in competitions, and that the use of local horses does not require any guarantee.

—High operational complexity
Experience with organization of UIPM events on all continents and in the previous Olympic Games shows that all organizers were able easily to offer facilities for the five disciplines of modern pentathlon (shooting, fencing, swimming, riding, running) within walking distance. It is to be noted that no specific venue is required for the modern pentathlon, and that UIPM has developed a policy of polyvalent international technical officials. Modern pentathlon helps to a more efficient use of venues used at Games time. The official report of the XXVII Olympiad made by SOCOG makes a clear statement on this.

—Relatively low broadcast and press coverage
The relatively low broadcast stated by the Program Commission does not fit the statistics established by the UIPM, which can easily be checked. . . . All major UIPM events on all five continents were covered by international TV during the last seven years. Due to its TV coverage, the UIPM has developed a successful marketing program . . . which is in very good standing in comparison with other Olympic sports.

II. Arguments which should be taken into consideration by the IOC to keep modern pentathlon in the Olympic program

—Modern pentathlon is the only sport that has ever been created in its entirety by Pierre de Coubertin and the IOC, as the Ancient sports were created by the Ancient Greeks, and therefore [has] a symbolic value within the Olympic Games.
It was especially designed on the model of the ancient pentathlon in order to show all possible skills developed, through five sport events, in one single athlete, and not for a massive number of participants. It is important for the sake of the Olympic tradition.

—Modern pentathlon, from the skills it develops, has an educational value.
[It is] a complete sport: On the physical side, swimming, running are the basic disciplines; on the mental side, shooting requires stress control and a precise technique; on the intellectual side, fencing requires adaptability and intelligence; riding an unknown horse requires a mix of adaptability, self-control, and courage.

—Modern pentathlon has an entertainment function at the Olympic Games.
Since the Atlanta Olympic Games and the introduction of the one-day format, the interest of spectators at Games time has grown dramatically, which can be easily shown by statistics on the number of spectators at the Sydney Games (full venue and 15,000 spectators per session) and by an independent survey published in the Olympic Review.

—An Olympic sport with reasonable number of athletes and with a high representation of NOCs.
Only 32 women and 32 men, a total of 64 athletes (in fact around 0.5% of the total athletes number), competing for only two days (six medals), which means that modern pentathlon, as one of the 28 sports of the Olympic program, has a very limited impact on the overall number of athletes in the Games. Remarks: The average number of athletes for the other sports is (10500 – 64) /27 = 386/ At the same time, modern pentathlon gives to many NOCs the possibility to take part in the Olympic Games. In Sydney 48 pentathletes competed while 24 NOCs were represented. This means 50% of the quota was dedicated to NOCs’ representation, which is the highest value of all Olympic sports.

—A drug-free sport.
Since the one-day format has been created and due to the permanent efforts of the UIPM, modern pentathlon has become a drug-free sport. The one-day format has discouraged prohibited behaviors, as there is no interest in using drugs for shooting when fencing comes right after it. Anabolic substances are not useful in a sport that does not place the success of the winner only on his physical skills, but in his overall physical and intellectual harmony.

—UIPM, a flexible organization.
In addition to the changes in the modern pentathlon’s format, the UIPM has created an ad hoc commission looking at the optimal evolution of the sport for the future. The purpose is to keep to symbolic construction of modern pentathlon in placing its complete skills first, but looking, at the same time, at its events in order to fit with the evolution of sport practice in general. This commission already collaborates with the International Pierre de Coubertin Committee and intends to do the same with the other international federations and the IOC.

—Modern pentathlon is a symbolic sport for the Olympic Movement.
Modern pentathlon is a true representation of the Olympic Movement. The five Olympic rings are reflected in modern pentathlon’s five events and participation from all five continents. It is a true sport of the Olympic Games, created by the founder of the Modern Games, Pierre de Coubertin, and reflecting the ideals embodied by the Olympic Movement. It has to remain an indefatigable part of it.

The concept and the philosophy of the pentathlon are 2,710 years old, as described by Aristotle: “The most perfect sportsmen are the pentathletes, because in their bodies strength and speed are combined in beautiful harmony.” Created by the Greeks and renovated by the founder of the [Modern] Games, it shows the symbolic complete athlete in his body, will, and mind as stated and described in Fundamental Principle 2 of the Olympic Charter. Let’s keep this part of the soul of the Olympics, let’s keep it on the field of play, let’s see it on the stadium, and not only in the Olympic Museum in the future!

Table 1

The 28 Sports of the Olympic Program, Participating NOCs, and Disqualification Quotas

  Total Participating NOCs Total Disqualification Quotas Percentage
Acquatics—Diving 42 158 27%
Acquatics—Swimming 150 983 15%
Acquatics—Synchro Swim 24 104 23%
Acquatics—Water Polo 13 234   6%
Archery 46 128 36%
Athletics 194 2468 8%
Badminton 28 172 16%
Baseball 8 192 4%
Basketball 18 288 6%
Boxing 75 312 24%
Canoe—Slalom 21 83 25%
Canoe—Sprint 43 265 16%
Cycling—Mountain Bike 33 80 41%
Cycling—Road 44 216 20%
Cycling—Track 38 190 20%
Equestrian 37 204 18%
Fencing 40 200 20%
Football 20 432 5%
Gymnastics—Artistic 43 195 22%
Gymnastics—Rythmic 20 84 24%
Handball 19 329 6%
Hockey 15 352 4%
Judo 90 400 23%
Modern Pentathlon 24 48 50%
Rowing 51 549 9%
Sailing 69 404 17%
Shooting 103 411 25%
Softball 8 120 7%
Taekwondo 51 103 50%
Table Tennis 48 172 28%
Tennis 52 192 27%
Triathlon 34 100 34%
Volleyball—Beach 23 96 24%
Volleyball 17 288 6%
Weightlifting 76 264 29%
Wrestling 55 319 17%

The second source reproduced in this special edition is HSH Prince Albert Monaco’s address to the IOC in Switzerland on behalf of the cause of the modern pentathlon:

HSH Prince Albert reaffirms Modern Pentathlon as soul of Olympic Movement, to be maintained for the sake of olympic tradition & values

I’m here not only because I am the honorary president of the UIPM, nor because Monaco is host to the headquarters of the UIPM. I’m here above all as an IOC member who is fearful that some very important part of the values and the philosophy of the Olympic Movement handed down to us by Baron Pierre de Coubertin might be lost forever if modem pentathlon should disappear from the program. The cultural dimension of this sport, its ancient roots and the educational value of its different components, are an important legacy for the IOC, for the Olympic Movement. This dimension is more important than the sport itself; the consequences of its demise larger than any one of us in this room.

Some people will argue that tradition and values are not the only elements that should guide us. If you look around you, watch TV, or read a newspaper article, you will find quite a few people saying the opposite: that a society has lost points of reference, that values have diminished. Why not continue to provide our youth with the kind of values and symbol that this sport possesses, and that they obviously are looking for? Why challenge a sport that celebrates and showcases the versatile, complete athlete? According to the latest figures from the Sydney Olympic Games, more people than ever seem interested in watching athletes test their abilities in combined events.

Is it right to deny the development of a sport that is growing in popularity and has sustained youth programs? There is a quotation from a young Cuban athlete in your brochure, “I want to compete in modem pentathlon at the Beijing Olympic Games.” Is it right to deny Jose Fernandez and his friends the opportunity to realize his dreams in an existing Olympic sport?

Having said all this, we are not stifled in tradition, we are not dinosaurs, we are willing to be open to change, if it is for the better.

The American philosopher and author Tom Wolfe once wrote, in his book The Search for Excellence,  “We must learn to accept change, as much as we hated to in the past.” I’m sure he meant changes in our society, changes in behavior, changes in economics, etc., not changes in our values.

The values of education and culture, and understanding through sport, are everlasting and something we in the Olympic Movement should hold sacred.

The third source reproduced in the special edition is a further communication written by Klaus Schormann, UIPM president:

I am just back in my home after a lot of traveling. . . . In Busan during the Asian Games (modern pentathlon was included, with the whole competition-program: individual women/men and relay women/men and team-medal. I could speak with a lot of IOC members, NOC presidents, and media people. As you can see [Table 2], my schedule for the next weeks is very busy; therefore, I think we should meet in Colorado Springs at the GAISF meeting (20 to 24.11.2002). I send you some documents about the “IOC Program Commission” and our actions now, for your information. UIPM needs from all institutions of international-sport-scene support: Public statements . . . for modern pentathlon are needed.

Table 2

UIPM President Klaus Schormann’s Schedule, September to December 2002

06. – 08.09.2002 Biathle World Championships Cagliari – ITA
09. – 10.09. Executive Board UIPM Cagliari ITA
11.09. working-meeting NOC-Germany
– only Presidents –		 Frankfurt/M – GER
12.09. meeting DOG-Darmstadt Darmstadt – GER
13.09. Freiburger Kreis SEMINAR
– Clubs / Federations –
statement DSB President M.v. RichtMofen		 Darmstadt – GER
14.09. meeting with business-people Stuttgart GER
18. – 21.09. meetings in Beijing-BOCOG
– Olympic Games 2008
meetings with IOC Members		 Beijing CHN
23. – 30.09. Junior World Championships
and meetings with IOC Members		 Sydney AUS
04.10. meeting with IOC President Rogge Lausanne SUI
08. – 15.10. Asian Games in Busan
and meetings with IOC Members		 Busan KOR
17.10. Council LSB Hessen
– Federations		 Frankfurt/M – GER
18. – 20.10. 40th anniversary MP Bavaria
– Gala and competition –		 Munich GER
24. – 27.10. Pan American Championships
– Qualification Pan American Games 2003 –		 Rio de Janeiro BRA
31.10. meeting in Rome WCH-2003-Pesaro Rome ITA
02. – 03.11. General Assembly NOC Germany NUrnberg GER
08. – 09.11. General Assembly MP-Germany/DVMF Darmstadt GER
15.11. 100th anniversary German Tennis Fedr Berlin Berlin GER
21. – 24.11. GAISF General Assembly
ASOIF Extraordinary GS go 11 USA		 Colorado Springs USA
26. – 29.11. IOC-EB and Extraordinary Session Mexico-City MEX
04. – 07.12. DSB-Congress and General Assembly Bonn GER
07. – 15.12. EB-UIPM and General Assembly UIPM Cairo EGY

The fourth source reproduced in the special edition is an abridged version of a UIPM press release dated 8 October 2002:

UIPM Delegation Visits IOC Regarding the Olympic Program; HSH Prince Albert Reaffirms Modern Pentathlon as the Soul of the Olympic Movement, to be Maintained for the Sake of Olympic Tradition and Values; International Pierre De Coubertin Committee and DeCoubertin’s Family Call for Pentathlon’s Respect and Promotion

On 4 October, a UIPM delegation composed of President Klaus Schormann, Honorary President HSH Prince Albert of Monaco, First Vice President Juan Antonio Samaranch, and Secretary General Joel Bouzou was welcomed at the IOC headquarters by IOC President Jacques Rogge, accompanied by Sport Director Gilbert Felli and his new assistant, Olivier Lenglet.

The purpose of the meeting was to answer to the Program Commission’s recommendation to the IOC executive board and to present additional arguments to be considered by the IOC executive board before their final decision during their meeting in Mexico City, 26 and 27 November.

After the opening by IOC President Rogge, UIPM President Klaus Schormann referred to the letter sent to the IOC that answered the points raised by the technical report of the Program Commission. [As Schormann noted,] “We now have more than 95 countries in the five continents. . . . De Coubertin started the sport from scratch in 1912, and the media coverage of our events has dramatically increased since the adoption of the one-day format. Our sport is only using existing venues during the Games and therefore is not expensive, as stated in the report. Equally, compact venues in modern cities allow more and more pentathletes to practice the sport and combine it with studies.

President Schormann also mentioned the surveys made during the last Olympic Games by an independent observer, Prof. Dr. Mfiller from the research group of the Gutenberg University in Mainz, and by SOCOG, which both support the UIPM counter-arguments. Dr Rogge confirmed that he took into account the point made by President Schormann concerning the flexibility of UIPM in terms of the sports evolution.

UIPM Secretary General Bouzou recalled that modem pentathlon does not need any specific venue for the Games; that most modem cities have multisport complexes adapted to the organization of modem pentathlon; that nine modem pentathlon major competitions are seen on international TV in the five continents; that, as stated by SOCOG (in a post-Games report), “[T]he quality of competition and sports presentation, combined with the most comprehensive television coverage ever of modem pentathlon in Olympic Games history, ensured first-class viewing for live spectators and global television audiences.” He also acknowledged the fact that modem pentathlon is not, and will never be, practiced by millions of athletes throughout the world. However, it was never designed for this by the founder of the Games, Pierre de Coubertin, but to be used as a living symbol of all values within a single sport. This was the reason why exceptional personalities like General Patton or Chevalier Raoul Mollet chose this sport in their respective athletic times.

UIPM Vice President Samaranch reminded that 15,000 spectators attended each of the two days of modem pentathlon at the Sydney Olympic Games, in sold-out venues, and that there are only 64 athletes competing in modem pentathlon, which represents only 0.5% of the overall number, and, therefore, that taking the sport out of the program would not affect the reality in terms of cost.

IOC President Rogge, following the presentation of all the arguments, informed the UIPM delegation that he would ensure they would all be duly reported on to the IOC executive board.

Professor Dr. Norbert Muller, president of the International Pierre de Coubertin Committee, wrote a letter to the IOC president saying that he had been “informed with great regrets about the proposal of the program commission,” adding that, “this sport represents the real legacy of Pierre de Coubertin, which he elaborated personally when he wanted to showcase the Perfect Olympic Man or Woman.” [Muller] transmitted an appeal from the committee, saying, “[T]he personal legacy of Pierre de Coubertin should be respected and modem pentathlon permanently included.”

Mr. Geoffroy de Navacelle de Coubertin, the great-nephew of Pierre de Coubertin, also wrote to the IOC president, saying, “Let me tell you my astonishment and my emotion. I have always decided not to interfere with the IOC business. I am simply concerned in making sure that the achievements and the philosophy of Pierre de Coubertin will be respected. This sport is the most symbolic one in showing the perfect athlete. Should you not promote and support it in order to make it grow, instead of only promoting ‘specialists’ which media like so much?” De Coubertin had contacted Schormann . . . in order to create a permanent Pierre de Coubertin Commission within UIPM, that he would lead, the role of which will be to promote the philosophy of the founder “on the ground,” particularly through modem pentathlon events, in close cooperation with the International Pierre de Coubertin Committee, throughout the entire world. The Pierre de Coubertin Commission was established 1 October 2002, comprising the following members: de Coubertin, Schormann, Muller, Bouzou, and modern pentathlon Olympic champions Dr. Stephanie Cook [of Great Britain] and Janus Peciak [of Poland].

Author’s Note:

Correspondence regarding this articLEwhould go to:

Union Internationale de Pentathlon Moderne (UIPM)
Tel. +377,9777 8555 Fax.+377 9777 8550
E-mail: pentathlon@monaco.mc
For more on Pentathlon, visit the website: http://www.pentathlon.org
08.10.2002/ JB

 

 

2016-10-12T11:49:38-05:00February 15th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports History, Sports Management|Comments Off on Special Edition: Refuting IOC’s Plan to End Modern Pentathlon Competition
Read More

Economic Values of Professional Sport Franchises in the United States

Submitted by: Soonhwan Lee, D.S.M. and Hyosung Chun, M.S.S. Graduate Student United States Sports Academy

Abstract

In professional sport, the value of media rights, fees, and luxury suites is enormous. As a result of increasing revenues in professional sport, the economic value of teams has risen, and it will continue to rise to unpredictable levels. The purpose of this study was to examine the economic value of media rights, luxury suites, and club seats in North American professional football, baseball, basketball, and hockey franchises. Secondary data from league offices and networks were used to describe the significance to professional sport franchises of revenues deriving from media rights and luxury seat sales, and their symbiotic relationships.

Value of Professional Sport Franchises in the United States

Unlike industrial or financial business, which is generally valued on cash flow and assets, sport franchises are valued on their revenues. There are two reasons for this. First, in the long term, the operating expenses within each league are about the same for every team. Second, revenues most closely measure the quality of a team’s venue, and they also track athletic performance, ultimately the two most critical elements of team evaluation (Ozanian, 1994). The value of professional sport teams has risen over the past decade and is expected to rise to unpredictable levels during the next few years. The reason for the rise is revenues from the leagues, including gate receipts, broadcast rights fees, luxury boxes, club seats, concessions, advertising, and membership fees.

Professional sport leagues and network television have enjoyed significant growth for more than 30 years. Needless to say, many people participate in and enjoy the games of major professional sport. For example, 62% of Americans call themselves “Major League Baseball fans,” according to a 1997 ESPN/Chilton sports poll (John, 1998). Spectators consume sport indirectly, through television, to a far greater extent than they do directly, through personal attendance at events. More than 2,100 hours of televised sport are programmed per year by the four major networks, and cable televisionprovides an additional 6,000 hours. Professional sport and the media, especially television, are mutually dependent institutions, and extremely popular forms of entertainment. Although each has independent origins, their relationship now makes it hard to imagine one without the other. In total, 98% of all American homes have television sets, which are on for an average 7 hr 51 min a day (Sage, 1998). ESPN, which reaches 70% of American homes with televisions, broadcasts more than 8,000 hours of sport each year. Regional sport cable networks and direct satellite sport broadcasts are growing rapidly, and these generate countless thousands of hours of sport each year (Sage, 1998).

Revenue Streams

Broadcast Rights

To understand professional team sport, it is important to recognize that sport is not just games, it is business. The overall logic of professional sport is grounded in the principles of buying and selling goods, services, and labor. In the major professional sport leagues, revenues are divided among league members in varying percentages. National Football League (NFL) teams split ticket sales, or gate receipts; 60% goes to the home team, 40% to the visiting team. In Major League Baseball (MLB), the split is approximately 80–90% to the home team and 10–20% to the visiting team. The basketball and hockey leagues permit the home team to keep all gate receipts. Depending on the individual contract, a stadium or arena’s owner or an outside contractor may keep the revenues, or there may be a split with the franchise-tenant.

Revenue from national broadcast rights is shared equally among the teams that constitute the football, basketball, baseball, and hockey leagues (Shropshire, 1995). By the end of 1961, the U.S. Congress had passed the Sport Broadcasting Act permitting the professional sport franchises to negotiate the sale of national broadcast rights as a single economic unit. These antitrust exemptions applied to professional baseball, hockey, and basketball as well as to football. In 1962, CBS purchased the exclusive rights to broadcast the NFL, with a package worth $4.6 million a year. Two years later, assisted by 50% growth in ratings and therefore even fiercer bidding by all three networks, CBS agreed to a 300% increase and a package of $14 million for each of the following two years. This contract, incidentally, ensured the survival of the Green Bay Packers, who proceeded to dominate the league for years afterwards (Barnett, 1990). Thirty-six years later, the price tag for television rights for the NFL have increased dramatically. In 1998, the rights to televise NFL games, as well as the Super Bowl, for eight years were sold to several networks for $17.6 billion.

All NFL television money is split evenly among the teams, for an average $73.3 million per team per year. The rate is thus much higher than what MLB teams derive from that league’s network TV deal, which is not quite $11 million for each club. About 65% of all revenues of NFL teams comes from the sale of television rights (Sage, 1998).

Luxury Seating

Luxury suites and clubs seats are becoming one of the most lucrative of revenue sources for professional leagues. The revenue-generating potential of such luxury seats is tremendous, and luxury seating represents the leagues’ fastest growing revenue source (Hoffman & Greenberg, 1989). For most stadium construction projects, luxury seating has become a critical strategy to maximize cash flow per seat (Howard & Crompton, 1995). This potential revenue stream, for instance, has been instrumental in securing financing for Oakland-Alameda’s $121 million arena and Detroit’s $235 million Tiger Stadium. Realizing the tremendous potential revenue, many stadium and team owners are now trying to renovate and repair seats to make luxury boxes.

Pay-Per-View Networks

In addition, professional sport franchises are adding to their revenues through contracts with local pay-per-view television networks. Current trends show increasing revenues for pay-per-view over the next few years. The $435 million pay-per-view revenues of 1991 grew to total revenues of $1.1 billion in 1996 and of nearly $3 billion in 2000. The National Basketball Association’s Dallas Mavericks, Houston Rockets, Portland Trail Blazers, and San Antonio Spurs are involved in pay-per-view (Worsnop, 1991). It is possible that in the near future the World Series and Super Bowl may be televised in a pay-per-view format. Professional sport franchises see pay-per-view as a new source of revenue, beyond what they take in from the broadcast networks. It may help them to keep pace with escalating players’ salaries (see Table 1).

Table 1. Average Salary Climbs of MLB Players

Year
Average Salary
Increased Rate*
Decreased Rate*
1977 $76,066 47.70% N/A
1979 $113,558 13.70% N/A
1982 $241,497 30.08% N/A
1985 $371,571 12.80% N/A
1987 $412,454 N/A -0.02 %
1990 $597,537 20.17% N/A
1992 $1,028,667 20.81% N/A
1995 $1,110,766 N/A -4.92 %
1997 $1,336,609 19.34% N/A
1998 $1,398,831 4.65% N/A
1999 $1,611,166 15.18% N/A
2000 $1,895,630 17.65% N/A
2001 $2,138,896 12.83% N/A
2002 $2,384,779 11.50% N/A
* Means as compared to the previous year (source: USA Today)

Table 2. 1999–2000 Season Values and Revenues of Top Five NBA and NHL Teams (in Millions), with League Averages

Teams Values Revenues* One-Year Change in Value
NY Knicks
 $395 $152 18 % ^
LA Lakers
 $360 $133.2 28 % ^
Chicago Bulls
 $314 $112.2 2 % ^
Portland Blazers
 $272 $97.3 6 % ^
Phoenix Suns
 $252 $96.8 5 % ^
NBA Average
 $207 $79.9 15 % ^
NY Rangers
 $263 $97.6 12 % ^
Philadelphia Flyers
 $240 $88.9 14 % ^
Detroit Red Wings
 $218 $80.7 12 % ^
Boston Bruins
 $217 $77.6 10 % ^
Toronto Maple Leafs
 $203 $84.4 35 % ^
NHL Average
 $148 $60.6 10 % ^
* Revenues include media revenues, gate receipts, and stadium revenues (source: Forbes)

Media Revenues in Professional Sport

Television contributed to the nationalization of sport by making the prosperity of professional sport dependent on the creation of a broad-based national constituency. When NBC provided the first live network coverage of the World Series in 1949, fewer than 12% of U.S. households had television sets. By 1953, 15 of the 16 baseball clubs had local television contracts, and ABC introduced the first network game-of-the-week format. The share of U.S. households with televisions grew rapidly through the 1950s, reaching 67% of households (34.9 million homes) in 1955 and 87% of households (45.8 million homes) in 1960 (Zimbalist, 1992; Gorman, Calhoun, & Rozen, 1994). During the 1950s, none of the networks considered sport programming critical to their overall success. They put far more of their resources and effort into comedies, Westerns, and popular dramas.

But in the early 1960s, ABC broke with this pattern. ABC gambled that increased sport programming would give its network greater visibility, bring in new local television stations as affiliates, and improve the audience ratings for all shows. Sport telecasts contributed substantively to ABC’s rise from third place in prime-time audience ratings in the 1950s to the top in the 1970s (Rader, 1999). Today, up to 40 hours of professional team sport are beamed to home television sets each week by the major networks, and hundreds of additional hours are provided by cable networks spread across the country.

According to Zimbalist (1992), when the Yankees signed their first media contract, in 1946, radio and television together contributed only 3% of MLB’s revenues. That figure rose to 16.8% by 1956 and continued to increase through the years until, in the 1990s, television money represented more than half of baseball’s yearly earnings. In the case of football and basketball, broadcasting monies also amount to about one half of overall revenues; only hockey, whose history with national television can only be described as spotty, has thus far been left out of the formula. For example, MLB was in the middle of four-year pacts with ESPN and CBS that earned $400 million and $1.06 billion, respectively. Four-year NBA contracts with NBC and Turner, expiring in 1994, totaled $875 million. Hockey was not left out completely, however; the NHL’s five-year contract with ABC and ESPN, signed in 1992, was worth nearly $80 million (Gorman et al., 1994).

In addition to revenue from national broadcasting contracts, the leagues negotiated with over-the-air and cable networks to further increase their revenues. Deals cut between individual teams and local stations are crucial in sport and weigh heavily in a team’s financial success or failure. In the case of MLB, local television, radio, and cable generated more than $350 million for the 28 teams in 1993. For the NBA, revenues from local radio, cable, and over-the-air television come to over $100 million each year.

Table 3. Values and Revenues of MLB Teams (in Millions), 1998–2001

Team Values
1998		 2001 Increased Rate Revenues*
1998		 2001 Increased Rate
NY
Yankees
 $491 $730 48.68 % ^ $175.5 $215 22.51 % ^
Cleveland Indians
 $359 $360 0.27 % ^ $149.7 $150 0.87 % ^
Atlanta Braves
 $357 $424 18.77 % ^ $142.7 $160 12.12 % ^
Baltimore Orioles
 $305 $319 4.60 % ^ $130.5 $133 1.91 % ^
Colorado Rockies
 $311 $347 11.58 % ^ $124.6 $129 3.53 % ^
Arizona
D’Backs
 $256 $280 9.38 % ^ $116.3 $127 9.2 % ^
Texas Rangers
 $281 $356 26.69 % ^ $108.1 $134 23.96 % ^
LA
Dodgers
 $270 $435 61.11 % ^ $107.9 $143 32.53 % ^
Boston
Red Sox
 $256 $426 66.40 % ^ $106.9 $152 42.19 % ^
NY
Mets
 $249 $482 93.57 % ^ $99.7 $169 69.51 % ^
* Revenues include media revenues, gate receipts, and stadium revenues (source from the Forbes)

Sport and television coexist in a high-priced equation. The leagues in the major sports sell the rights to broadcast their games, making millions of dollars each season. The networks in turn sell advertising by the half-minute to sponsors on national, regional, and local levels. The sponsors, confident that sport reaches the right customers for their products, pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for their flashes of exposure.

The Baseball Network (TBN) is an example of creativity in advertising. TBN, in partnership with MLB, NBC, and ABC, was scheduled to run for six years beginning in 1994. As a media entity, TBN was charged with generating revenue for MLB by selling advertising time and promotional rights. Rather than take a projected 55% cut in rights fees and receive a typical rights fee from the networks, MLB agreed to accept 88% of the net revenue generated by TBN from sale of advertising and corporate sponsorship. Consequently, MLB shared the financial risk with the networks. It was thought that, if its advertising rates were reasonable, TBN would help the networks, MLB, corporate sponsors, and players market in sport. The networks stood to benefit because they reduced the risk associated with purchasing broadcast rights outright. (For example, in 1993, the year before the TBN deal, CBS had lost approximately $500 million on its four-year, $1.06 billion contract, due to its high bid and a shortfall in advertising revenue.) MLB and its players liked the new arrangement because the recently expanded play-off format would further line their already bulging pockets. Finally, the advertisers were excited about the arrangement with TBN because the new package included several changes intended to boost ratings, especially among younger viewers. Since this type of partnership appeared to please all parties involved, many thought other major sport leagues and their affiliated networks would eventually adopt it, thus furthering the growth of sport sponsorship and advertising (Carter, 1996).

Table 4. TV Sports: Broadcast Rights Fees

Network
 Years Covered Avg. Cost Per Year Total Cost
MLB
CBS
 1990 – 1993 $265 million $1.06 billion
ESPN
 1990 – 1993 $100 million $400 million
ABC/NBC
 1994 – 1999 $0-revenue sharing $0-revenue sharing
ESPN
 1994 – 1999 $42.5 million $255 million
Voided after 1995 season
FOX
 1996 – 2000 $115 million $575 million
NBC
 1996 – 2000 $80 million $400 million
ESPN
 1996 – 2000 $87 million $435 million
FOX Cable
 1997 – 2000 $40.5 million $162 million
FOX
 2001 – 2006 $417 million $2.5 billion
ESPN
 2000 – 2005 $141.8 million $851 million
NBA
NBC
 1990/91 – 1993/94 $150 million $600 million
TBS/TNT
 1990/91 – 1993/94 $68.75 million $275 million
NBC
 1994/95 – 1997/98 $187.5 million $750 million
TBS/TNT
 1994/95 – 1997/98 $87.5 million $350 million
NBC
 1998/99 – 2001/02 $437.5 million $1.75 billion
TBS/TNT
 1998/99 – 2001/02 $222.5 million $890 million
ABC/ESPN
 2002/03 – 2007/08 $400 million $2.4 billion
AOL Time Warner
 2002/03 – 2007/08 $366.5 million $2.2 billion
NFL
ABC (Mon. Night)
 1990 – 1993 $225 million $900 million
CBS (NFC)
 1990 – 1993 $265 million $1.06 billion
NBC (AFC) 1990 – 1993 $188 million $752 million
ESPN (Sun. Night) 1990 – 1993 $111.25 million $445 million
TNT (Sun. Night) 1990 – 1993 $111.25 million $445 million
NBC (Superbowl) 1994 $40 million $40 million
ABC (Mon. Night) 1994 – 1997 $230 million $920 million
FOX (NFC) 1994 – 1997 $395 million $1.58 million
NBC (AFC) 1994 – 1997 $217 million $868 million
ESPN (Sun. Night) 1994 – 1997 $131 million $524 million
TNT (Sun. Night) 1994 – 1997 $124 million $496 million
ABC (Mon. Night) 1998 – 2005 $550 million $4.4 billion
FOX (NFC) 1998 – 2005 $550 million $4.4 billion
CBS (AFC) 1998 – 2005 $500 million $4.0 billion
ESPN (Sun. Night) 1998 – 2005 $600 million $4.8 billion
NHL
SportsChannel 1989 – 1991 $17 million $51 million
ESPN 1992 – 1996 $16 million $80 million
FOX 1994 – 1998 $31 million $155 million
ESPN
(ABC & ESPN2)		 1999 – 2003 $120 million $600 million
(source: Forbes)

Sport Venues’ Golden Seats

Revenues from luxury suites—alternatively called sky boxes, luxury boxes, or executive suites—have become important to the professional franchises for maximizing cash flow per seat (Howard & Crompton, 1995; Funk, 1997). Luxury boxes are fancy rooms inside stadiums and arenas, in which corporations and some private individuals entertain clients and friends while also watching sport events. They are always up high, often near press-box level, and they are usually equipped with closed-circuit television for close-ups of the action. Every facility built within the last 20 years has luxury suites, and most of the older ones have been retooled to include them (Gorman & Calhoun, 1994). Wrigley Field in Chicago, for example, added 67 sky boxes for the 1989 season, each accommodating 12–15 people. Most of them rent for $45,000 to $65,000 a year. The revenue-generating potential of these luxury boxes would go untapped through the late 1980s. However, by the early 1990s, luxury suites had emerged as the most coveted and profitable of the venue-based revenue sources, contributing to unprecedented growth in sport venue construction. Club seats, sometimes called premium seats, are another source of increased revenue. Even when club seats lack a private entertainment or reception area adjoining the seats, they are usually more comfortable than seats found elsewhere in the stadium or arena (Rosentraub, 1997).

Luxury suites in stadiums hosting NFL franchises range in number from 47 in Seattle’s Kingdome to 370 in Irving’s Texas Stadium. MLB facilities have suites numbering from 19 in New York’s Yankee Stadium up to 161 in Toronto’s Sky Dome. The number of luxury suites in arenas used by the NBA range from 12 in Charlotte’s Coliseum to 360 in Detroit’s Palace at Auburn Hills. NHL teams play in facilities that have suites numbering from 16 in Florida’s Miami Arena to 135 in Montreal’s Molson Center. Table 5 shows the number of luxury suites and club seats in professional sport venues.

Table 5. Luxury Suites and Club Seats in Professional Sport Venues

Team/League Luxury Suites Club Seats Total Capacity
Florida Marlins 215 6,750 47,662
Cleveland Indians 129 2,058 42,400
Texas Rangers 120 4,099 49,292
MLB Total 1,841 40,500 N/A
Atlanta Falcons 203 6,300 71,280
Carolina Panthers 135 10,800 72,300
St. Louis Rams 120 6,200 65,300
NFL Total 3,091 60,978 N/A
Chicago Bulls 216 3,000 21,500
Detroit Pistons 180 3,000 21,454
Cleveland Cavaliers 92 3,000 20,562
NBA Total 2,057 32,780 N/A
NHL Total 1,860 28,978 N/A
(source: USA Today)

The revenue-generating capability of luxury suites and premium seats is enormous. Luxury suites at Jack Murphy Stadium in San Diego rented for $29,000 to $49,000 a season; at Candlestick Park in San Francisco, for $24,000 to $60,000 for the baseball season and $40,000 to $80,000 for the football season; and at Houston’s Astrodome, for $25,000 per baseball season and $15,000 to $45,000 per football season (Gorman & Calhoun, 1994). Taking the Dallas Cowboys as a specific example, use of luxury suites is the primary reason stadium revenue is such a significant portion of a franchise’s total revenue. The Cowboys have approximately 360 luxury suites that represent more than $23 million annually in potential revenue. Table 6 indicates the economic value of the Cowboys’ luxury suites.

Table 6. Economic Values of the Cowboys’ Luxury Suites

Suites Category # of Suites Average Price Potential Revenue
Circle 180 $31,000 $5,580,000
Crown 172 $57,000 $9,804,000
Platinum 8 $1,000,000 $8,000,000
Total 360 $23,384,000
(22.8% of Total Team Revenue)
The data in this table are from Financing Sport, by D. Howard and J. Crompton, 1995, Morgantown, W.V.: Fitness Information Technology. Reprinted with permission

The economic power of sales of luxury boxes and sales of club seats contributing to gross revenue has the potential to reach over $625.8 million and $329.9 million, respectively. As these dollar figures indicate, luxury seats and premium seats illustrate how a number of factors affect the amount of revenue a team realizes from sales of special seating. Currently, there are 8,090 luxury suites and 151,451 club seats for sale in professional sport venues, at a total amount of $955.7 million (as detailed in Table 5 and Table 7). The potential revenue from the sale of luxury suites and club seats by professional leagues is seen in Table 7.

Table 7. Potential Gross Revenue from Luxury Boxes and Premium Seats

League Luxury Boxes Premium Seats Potential Revenue
NFL $204,119,771 $56,231,120 $260,350,891
MLB $130,270,819 $84,115,293 $214,386,112
NBA $149,975,179 $115,627,254 $265,602,433
NHL $141,446,090 $73,982,339 $215,428,429
Total $625,811,859 $329,956,006 $955,767,865
* Adjusted for facilities housing more than one team (source: Forbes)

Conclusion

The development of the professional sport industry during past decades has been phenomenal. Prior to 1960, there were only a few independent sport leagues whose members could legitimately claim “major” status. Today, however, the situation is dramatically different. As professional sports have grown in recent decades, they have gained recognition as a vital part of the burgeoning mass-entertainment industry (Worsnop, 1995). The teams in the NBA, NHL, MLB, and NFL are worth, combined, more than $12 billion. Furthermore, over the next decade, the value of professional sport teams is going to rise to unpredictable levels.

Traditionally, revenues earned by professional team sport were a combination of media revenues, game receipts, and especially luxury boxes and club seats. In the coming 10 years, media revenues, particularly, will increase, attaining what currently seems an unthinkable position. The main reason will be the consolidation of media and entertainment companies and the voracious appetite these companies will have for sport programming. Also, among the various private sources of revenue for sport franchises (stadiums’ and arenas’ proceeds from parking fees, concessions, advertising, corporate naming rights, and special seating), luxury boxes and club seats have become one of the most valuable. The revenue-generating potential that luxury boxes and club seats offer to professional sport franchises is second only to the potential for media revenue. In conclusion, professional sport franchises now see the importance of attracting fans to their stadiums and arenas in order to increase their private revenues. Sport, especially professional team sport, can earn money in more ways than one.

References

Badenhausen, K. (2000). Name games. Forbes, 166(15), 132-135.

Badenhausen, K., Fluke, C., Kump, L., & Ozanian, M. K. (2002). Double play. Forbes, 169(9), 92-94.

Badenhausen, K., & Sicheri, W. (1999). Baseball games: Revenue sharking has struck out. So why does Bud Selig want another inning? Forbes, 163(11), 112-117.

Barnett, S. (1990). Games and sets: The changing face of sport on television. London: BFI Publishing.

Bodley, H. (1998). Disparity in team payrolls is alarming: Fans know without high priced talent, hopes for title are slim. USA Today, Friday November 20, 1998.

Carter, D. M. (1996). Heeping score: An inside look at sports marketing. Grants Pass, OR: The Oasis Press.

Funk, D. C. (1997). Economics of professional sport franchises: Luxury seating’s impact on construction and renovation of sport venues in North America. Paper presented at the 12th Annual North American Society for Sport Management Conference, San Antonio, TX.

Gorman, J., Calhoun, K., & Rozin, S. (1994). The name of the game: The business of sports. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Hoffma, D., & Greenberg, M. (1989). Sportsbiz: An irreverent look at big business in pro sport. Champaign, IL: Leisure Press.

Howard, D., & Crompton, J. (1995). Financing sport. Morgantown, WV: Fitness
Information Technology.

John, A. S. (1998, October). Baseball’s billion-dollar question: Who’s on deck?
American Demographics, 20(10), 60-69.

Ozanian, M. K. (1994). The $11 billion pastime: Why sports franchise values are soaring even as team profits fall. Financial World May, 1994.

Rader, B. G. (1999). American sports: From the age of folk games to the age of televised sports (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Rosentraub, M. S. (1997). Major league losers: The real cost of sports and who’s paying for it. New York: A Division of Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.

Sage, G. H. (1998). Power and ideology in American sport: A critical perspective (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.

Shropshire, K. L. (1995). The sports franchise game: Cities in pursuit of sports franchise, events, stadiums, and arenas. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Worsnop, R. L. (1991). Pay-per-view. CQ Researcher, 1(21), 731-751.

Worsnop, R. L. (1995). The business of sports: Are greedy owners and players hurting pro leagues? CQ Researcher, 5(6), 121-144.

Zimbalist, A. (1992). Baseball and billions. New York: Basic Books.

2015-11-08T07:41:03-06:00February 15th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Facilities, Sports Management|Comments Off on Economic Values of Professional Sport Franchises in the United States
Read More

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

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

Abstract

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

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

Materials and Methods

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

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

Table 1. States involved in survey broken down by region.
Northeast Midwest South West
Connecticut
Maine
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island		 Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
Ohio
S. Dakota
Wisconsin		 Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Louisiana
Mississippi
N. Carolina
Oklahoma
S. Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia		 Arizona
California
Montana
Oregon
Washington
Wyoming

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

Results

Demographics

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

 

Table 2. Characteristics of 1,553 youth sports participants completing survey
Age n %
10 248 16
11 394 25
12 484 31
13 274 18
14 199 13
15 32 2
Gender
M 1079 70
F 474 30

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

 

Table 3. Ethnicity of youth sports participants
Ethnic group
 n %
Caucasian
 1031 66
Black
 264 17
Native American
 83 5
Hispanic
 76 5
Other
 75 5
Asian/Pacific
 12 1
No Answer
 75 5

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

Knowledge of Anabolic Steroids

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

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

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

Sources of Information

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

Table 5. Primary source of information about anabolic steroids.
No. of youth sports
participants (n=1,553)
Source n %
Book/Magazine 433 28
Parent 322 21
Coach 267 17
Friend/Teammate 113 7
Gym Personnel 112 7
Athletic Trainer 89 6
Teacher 47 3
Television 29 2
Dealer 17 1
Sibling 15 1

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

Discussion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

Acknowledgement

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

APPENDIX

Please answer every question on the appropriate line.

  1. Age: _____
  2. Sex: _____ Male _____ Female
  3. Ethnic Origin:_____ Caucasian _____ Native American _____ Hispanic

    _____ Black _____ Asian/Pacific _____ Other

  4. How many years have you played in organized youth league sports?_____
  5. What youth league sport do you now play?_____ Basketball _____ Football _____ Baseball _____ Softball

    _____ Soccer _____ Tennis _____ Swimming _____ Ice Hockey

    _____ Wrestling _____ Other: ___________________

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

    _____ Parent _____ Sibling _____ Gym Personnel

    _____ Dealer _____Books/Magazines

    _____ Teacher _____ Television

  8. Have the side effects of anabolic steroid use ever been explained to you?

    _____ Yes _____ No

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

    _____ Yes _____ No

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

    _____ Personal Appearance _____ Athletic Performance

    _____ Body Building _____ Pressure From Others

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

2017-08-07T11:55:10-05:00February 15th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management|Comments Off on Anabolic Steroids and Pre-Adolescent Athletes: Prevalence, Knowledge, and Attitudes
Read More

Athletes’ Expectations for Success in Athletics Compared to Academic Competition

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

INTRODUCTION

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

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

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

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

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

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

SURVEY
INSTRUMENTS

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

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

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

PREDICTIONS

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

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

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

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

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

RESULTS

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

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

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

SAQ
Findings

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

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

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

SAS
Findings

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

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

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

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

DISCUSSION

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

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

REFERENCES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contact
information:

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

2013-11-26T21:37:01-06:00February 15th, 2008|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Facilities, Sports Management|Comments Off on Athletes’ Expectations for Success in Athletics Compared to Academic Competition
Read More
The Sport Jounral

A peer-reviewed journal of sports,
published by the United States Sports Academy

ISSN: 1543-9518
Established 1998
The Sport Digest
Check our daily blog of sports related news!
Go to Top