The central objective of this investigation was to examine within game penalties that were levied against football programs from historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in the United States. Previous scholarship that sets an appropriate background on sports science and culture has revealed that referee bias has occurred in many European sports. It was in the methods section of this scholarship that statistical analyses were discussed in terms of game day penalties that occurred within the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) from the 2006 through the 2015 season. The results illustrated that referees penalized football teams from historically black college and universities (HBCUs) significantly more than football teams from predominantly white institutions (PWIs). An interpretation of this quantitative data was subsequently completed and Expectancy Violations Theory (EVT) was appropriately spotlighted in the discussion section of this study in an effort to assign meaning to the analytics of interest.
The current study analyzed source credibility in a sports related context. A review of previous literature was undertaken in order to highlight the central findings focused on the dimensions of competence, goodwill, and trustworthiness. Quantitative methods were then utilized as a means to empirically test whether unconfirmed reports of performance-enhancing drug use could negatively impact perceptions of athlete ethos. Findings revealed that athletes who were inconclusively linked to performance-enhancers were evaluated less favorably in terms of their overall competence, goodwill, and trustworthiness. The implications from this study indicate that clean athletes who are wrongfully accused should proactively communicate their innocence to the general public. Athletes who are not clean should employ various face and image restoration strategies in order to effectively manage their public credibility. Study limitations and directions for future research were appropriately addressed within the present scholarship.
This study focused on historically Black colleges and universities in men’s college basketball. A review of previous literature revealed that referee bias was a recurring phenomenon, while whiteness studies served as the theoretical frame. The data for this analysis centered on a 16-year period of time. The referees called a statistically significant number of personal fouls per game against men’s college basketball teams from historically Black colleges and universities relative to the number of personal fouls per game that referees called against men’s college basketball teams from predominantly White institutions. These findings suggest that men’s college basketball players were judged differently depending on whether the student-athlete played for a historically Black college and university or a predominantly White institution. The implications for critical and social theories were noted in the study discussion.
The purpose of this investigation was to examine the personal fouls that were called against a historically black college and university (HBCU) that athletically participates in a conference which is comprised of predominantly white institutions (PWIs). The study introduction provided an overview of Tennessee State University (TSU) as it relates to their involvement in the Ohio Valley Conference (OVC). The cultural approach to organizations served as the communication-centric theoretical frame while the previous literature on referee bias was reviewed. The criterion of personal fouls per game (PFPG) was examined . Z-score analyses revealed that referees called more PFPG against the HBCU of TSU in men’s college basketball relative to the number of PFPG that were called against the PWI conference teams in the OVC. A similar effect was observed in women’s college basketball. Theoretical implications for the cultural approach to organizations were noted in the study discussion as were practical implications for TSU and other HBCUs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.