The faculty Flutie factor: Does football performance affect a university's US News and World Report peer assessment score?

Mulholland, Sean E.; Tomic, Aleksandar; Sholander, Samuel

doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.09.006

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite popular notions of the spillover benefits universities accrue through highly successful athletic programs, research is inconclusive (e.g. Baade and Sundberg, 1996;Gaski and Etzel, 1984;Mulholland et al, 2012;Sigelman and Carter, 1979;Trenkamp, 2009;Turner et al, 2001). Spillovers, in terms of monetary donations (Grimes and Chressanthis, 1994), positive public perceptions (Lovaglia and Lucas, 2005;Trenkamp, 2009), public goodwill (Toma, 1999), and enrollment applications (Trenkamp, 2009) have typically been assessed using undergraduate programs.…”

Section: 9mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring cognitive bias: expert ratings of business schools

Pleggenkuhle-Miles

Khoury

Deeds

et al. 2013

Management Decision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -This study aims to explore the objectivity in third-party ratings. Third-party ratings are often based on some form of aggregation of various experts' opinions with the assumption that the potential judgment biases of the experts cancel each other out. While psychology research has suggested that experts can be unintentionally biased, management literature has not considered the effect of expert bias on the objectivity of third-party ratings. Thus, this study seeks to address this issue. Design/methodology/approach -Ranking data from the US News and World Report between 1993 and 2008, institution-related variables and, to represent sports prominence, NCAA football and basketball performance variables are leveraged in testing our hypotheses. A mediating-model is tested using regression with panel-corrected standard errors. Findings -This study finds that the judgments of academicians and recruiters, concerning the quality of universities, have been biased by the prominence of a university's sports teams and that the bias introduced to these experts mediates the aggregated bias in the resultant rankings of MBA programs. Moreover, it finds that experts may inflate rankings by up to two positions. Practical implications -This study is particularly relevant for university officials as it uncovers how universities can tangibly manipulate the relative perception of quality through sports team prominence. For third-party rating systems, the reliability of ratings based on aggregated expert judgments is called into question. Originality/value -This study addresses a significant gap in the literature by examining how a rating system may be unintentionally biased through the aggregation of experts' judgments. Given the heavy reliance on third-party rating systems by both academics and the general population, addressing the objectivity of such ratings is crucial.

show abstract

Section: 9mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring cognitive bias: expert ratings of business schools

Pleggenkuhle-Miles

Khoury

Deeds

et al. 2013

Management Decision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have determined a winning intercollegiate athletic program increases student admission applications (e.g., Anderson, 2017;Pope & Pope, 2009 and financial donations (Anderson, 2017;Humphreys & Mondello, 2007). Athletic success has also been shown to improve an institution's U.S. News & World Report college ranking (Mulholland, Tomic, & Sholander, 2014). As a result, winning has become the priority, particularly for National College Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I membership institutions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student-Athlete Development and Winning Success

Stokowski

Paule-Koba

Rudd

et al. 2020

sij

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The success of an athletic program is often defined by wins and losses. According to the sporting success framework (De Bosscher et al., 2006) as well as the athlete development literacy (ADL) model (Livengood et al., 2015), athlete development contributes to athletic achievement. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between athlete development personnel resources and winning success at NCAA Division I institutions. A total of 150 universities were included in this study. Utilizing the ADL model (Livengood et al. 2015) of personal and player development literacies, athletic department personnel selected for this study included: academic advisors, athletic trainers, doctors, learning specialists, nutritionists, mental health professionals, physical therapists, sport psychologists, as well as strength and conditioning coaches. Winning success was measured using the final 2017-18 Learfield IMG Directors’ Cup standings (Directors’ Cup, 2019). The results suggest that athletic trainers, learning specialists, and sport psychologists significantly contribute to winning success. As such, athletic departments should appropriately invest in athlete development specialists.

show abstract

“…Prior academic studies suggest that athletic successes can have a positive influence on post-secondary institutions in a number of ways: increased quantity and quality of applicants (Chung, 2013;McCormick & Tinsley, 1987;Pope & Pope, 2009), better facilities for both athletes and non-athletes (Maloney & McCormick, 1993), increased alumni giving (Rhoads & Gerking, 2000;Tucker, 2004), and improved position in published rankings based on peer assessments (Mulholland et al, 2014). Unfortunately, athletics have the potential for negative impacts as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The “Cinderella Effect”: The Value of Unexpected March Madness Runs as Advertising for the Schools

Collier

Haskell

Rotthoff

et al. 2020

Journal of Sports Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study looks at the impact of a university making a surprise (“Cinderella”) run in the men’s NCAA basketball tournament. Our results suggest that surprise success in the tournament has little to no impact on the quantity of applications in subsequent years. However, we find that freshmen enrollments increase for private schools two academic years after a Cinderella run (with mixed results on the quality of freshmen—although not worse). Given an average private school, with 1,253 freshmen and paid tuition of $24,428 (each year) plus room and board, a Cinderella run is worth approximately $7.3 million in 2012-dollars.

show abstract

The faculty Flutie factor: Does football performance affect a university's US News and World Report peer assessment score?

Cited by 23 publications

References 28 publications

Exploring cognitive bias: expert ratings of business schools

Exploring cognitive bias: expert ratings of business schools

Student-Athlete Development and Winning Success

The “Cinderella Effect”: The Value of Unexpected March Madness Runs as Advertising for the Schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About