Organizational wrongdoing is frequently exposed by whistle-blowers, individuals who disclose unethical behavior to parties they believe can take corrective action. This study aimed to illuminate whistle-blowers’ experiences with particular attention to how their industry and organizational contexts affected their cases. We analyzed personal accounts of thirteen whistle-blowers in the collegiate sports industry. Results revealed three themes that significantly affected whistle-blowing accounts: the existence and influence of tightly coupled stakeholders, including the athletic governing body and news media; the hypermasculine character of collegiate sports; and the presence of highly identified fans as agents of retaliation. Implications of the study include the recognition and consequences of nonorganizational members as agents of retaliation and the importance of analyzing context when considering whistle-blowing experiences both inside and outside of collegiate sport.

In English and in other languages, the agency for viral transmission can be grammatically assigned to people (e.g., Thousands may contract H1N1) or to the virus itself (e.g., H1N1 may infect thousands). These assignment options shape different conceptions of transmission as attributable either to social contact within one's control or to pursuit of an active predator. The authors tested the effect of agency assignment and agentic images on young adults' (N = 246) reactions to educational materials about H1N1 influenza. The authors hypothesized that assigning agency to the virus would heighten perceived severity and personal susceptibility relative to human agency assignment. Results were consistent with this hypothesis, indicating that virus agency increased perceptions of severity, personal susceptibility, and reported intentions to seek vaccination relative to human agency. The image manipulation did not directly affect these factors. The findings suggest that strategic agency assignment can improve the effectiveness of educational materials about influenza and other health threats.

The way we describe health threats affects perceptions of severity and preferred solutions to reduce risk. Most people agree obesity is a problem, but differ in how they attribute responsibility for development and decline of the disease. We explored effects of message framing on attributions of responsibility and support for public obesity policies using a 3 × 2 factorial design. Participants read one of six versions of a health message describing the negative effects of obesity. Message frames influenced respondent attributions and their support for policies to reduce obesity. Those who read a message that assigned agency to the disease (e.g., Obesity causes health problems) endorsed genetics as the cause to a greater degree than those who read a semantically equivalent message that instead assigned agency to people (e.g., Obese people develop health problems). In contrast, assigning agency to people rather than to the disease prompted higher attributions of individual responsibility and support for public policies. Explicit message frames that directly connected responsibility for obesity to either individual or societal factors had no effect on respondent perceptions. Findings suggest explicit arguments may be less effective in shifting perceptions of health threats than arguments embedded in agentic message frames. The results demonstrate specific message features that influence how people attribute responsibility for the onset and solution of obesity.

Parents of middle school–aged children face a true dilemma as they consider whether to allow their children to play tackle football. The sport is cited as one that fosters a number of intangible benefits but is increasingly mentioned as dangerous for youth participants. This study employed a sensemaking theory framework to explore the family, community, and media dynamics that influence how parents made sense of their football decisions. We interviewed 12 married couples about their decisions allowing their child to play middle school football. Results indicate parents were affected by family identities, community and social influences, and information sources in their football decisions. We developed a typology describing three parental approaches to the football decision: the football-first family, the safety-first family, and the laissez-faire family. We drew connections between family type, decision agency, and risk assessment for the pro-football decision. To conclude, we offer theoretical and practical implications related to this key parental decision.

No abstract

Concussions in youth sports are a rising health concern. Between 1.7- and 3-million concussions occur each year in youth sport and recreation settings. This qualitative study investigated how parents assess the physical and social risks of allowing their children to participate in tackle football. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 sets of parents ( N = 24) who had permitted their middle school aged children to play on tackle football teams. Guided by the theory of planned behavior, findings illustrate the complex risk decisions parents must make regarding football participation. Although parents in our study acknowledged the risk of concussions, they identified cognitive and social benefits of football participation that shaped positive attitudes toward football outcomes. Participants also noted social factors that limited control over their children’s football participation, including community pressures. The findings indicate key factors that motivate football enrollment, as parents must consider competing goals for their child of protection and development. Future research directions, theoretical implications, and practical applications are discussed.

This research examines the content, timing, and spread of COVID-19 misinformation and subsequent debunking efforts for two COVID-19 myths. COVID-19 misinformation tweets included more non-specific authority references (e.g., “Taiwanese experts”, “a doctor friend”), while debunking tweets included more specific and verifiable authority references (e.g., the CDC, the World Health Organization, Snopes). Findings illustrate a delayed debunking response to COVID-19 misinformation, as it took seven days for debunking tweets to match the quantity of misinformation tweets. The use of non-specific authority references in tweets was associated with decreased tweet engagement, suggesting the importance of citing specific sources when refuting health misinformation.

No abstract