Previous research on sport ethics has covered a various types of cheating, gambling, bribes, and unsportsmanlike conduct of coaches, administrators, parents and fans. The purpose of this study was to examine (a) ethical decision-making standards of current collegiate athletes and (b) who most influenced their decision-making in sports.
Method:
Two hundred and twenty-four student-athletes at a NCAA D-I university completed the Sports Decision Making Survey (Sandlin, Keathley & Sandlin, 2013). The survey includes demographic information, 15 sport-related scenarios, 10 true/false statements on personal characteristics, and one question on identifying which individual(s) influenced their decision-making in sports. Athletes responded the scenarios as clearly ethical (1), somewhat ethical (2), somewhat unethical (3), and clearly unethical (4) with 15 minimal (questionable ethical standard) and 60 maximum (exceptional ethical standard) scores.
Analysis/Results:
Regarding the sport-related scenarios, statistical analyses revealed significant differences by gender, t(220) = 5.730, p = .000, by category, t(222) = 3.074, p = .002, and by team, F(10, 213) = 3.907, p = .000. Female athletes had a significantly higher ethical decision-making score (M = 42.48, SD = 7.831) than males (M = 36.61, SD = 7.388). Athletes participating in individual sports scored significantly higher (M = 42.05, SD = 8.850) than those in team sports (M = 38.36, SD = 7.668). Post-hoc analyses revealed that the volleyball team had a significantly higher score (M = 45.83, SD = 6.351) than the football team (M = 36.54, SD = 7.882), the baseball team (M = 36.45, SD = 7.268), and the men’s basketball team (M = 33.67, SD = 7.127). In addition, the track team scored significantly higher (M = 42.10, SD= 9.888) than the football and men’s basketball team. Significant differences were not found by age, ethnicity and classification. As for statements on personal characteristics, none of the independent variables were significant. Family members (53.7%) appeared to be the most influential individuals, followed by professional athletes (19.6%), coaches (17.8%), and others (8.9%).
Conclusions:
Moral education and ethical training should be addressed to all athletes, and extra effort could be made to the particular groups of athletes who displayed somewhat questionable ethical standards in the present study. Family members, professional athletes and coaches should be aware of their great influence on those young athletes and act as positive role models for them.