FHA . 3.. . ‘

. : 1’. 2,. T.

- ﬂush... ! } .
5.. 2...;

aﬂhwwmwmﬁ 4».
.19. . .. ‘ a .
rpmemcw. .5”. 32% 2%;
:11“ :5...

.2! .. .u’ r...-
u..‘ur1~.. m3. Ky;

31.

ﬂyiﬁi

.~ 3 9|!
.. t.
-

 

”'13....

1}, . 3.

if. A t‘
1.3.. .‘L
: k .1

5'

It

$.13!
.

.w

.0341...

, it! P I
i III-«L

:ﬂdnum

On) :1.
~95:
“4):?“

J.
.1: .231... q
4... In...)

anilihﬂaﬂ

.Lvn'f.." ‘A-v

.— ....U.1il_ a W.na,wi..rhu

 

 

 

 

LIBRARY

I: 3 5m Michigan State
100?, f University

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

Socio-cultural constructions of traditional masculinity and
relationships to sport/physical activity values and behaviors

presented by

Jeong-Dae Lee

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

Doctoral degree in Kinesiology

 

 

ham

0 Major Professor’s Signature
V/j/o?

Date

MSU is an affinnative—action, equal-opportunity employer

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 Kjlproj/AccspreleIRC/DateDue indd

 

SOCIO-CULTURAL CONSTRUCTIONS OF TRADITIONAL MASCULINITY AND
RELATIONSHIPS TO SPORT/PHYSICAL ACTIVITY VALUES AND BEHAVIORS

By

Jeong-Dae Lee

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Kinesiology

2008

ABSTRACT

SOCIO-CULTURAL CONSTRUCTIONS OF TRADITIONAL MASCULINITY AND
RELATIONSHIPS TO SPORT/PHYSICAL ACTIVITY VALUES AND BEHAVIORS

By

Jeong-Dae Lee

This study documented the ways in which some men in contemporary society learn
their attitudes and beliefs toward traditional masculinity. Furthermore, this study attempted to
create awareness that traditional masculinity may also inﬂuence men’s values and behaviors
concerning their sport/physical activity experiences. The main purpose of this study was to
investigate traditional masculinity reﬂecting socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms
among college-aged male students and its relationship to sport/physical activity behaviors
and values. Using collaborative approaches with both quantitative and qualitative methods,
this study was designed to examine relationships among diverse social meanings and socio-
cultural structures of traditional gender norms, traditional masculinity attitudes,
sport/physical activity values, and masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity. Structural
equation modeling (SEM) was conducted for quantitative aspects of the study and contents
analyses of in-depth interviews were conducted for qualitative aspects of the study. The ﬁnal
sample used for the data analyses was 293 for quantitative analyses and 24 for qualitative
analyses. As a result of the quantitative approach, a strengthened research model (Model 5)
was developed through structural equation modeling. It was also found that there was a
signiﬁcant inﬂuence between traditional socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms

(TSCIGN) and traditional masculinity attitudes (TMA). There was also a signiﬁcant

relationship between traditional masculinity attitudes (TMA) and masculine behaviors and
sport/physical activity values (MBS). Additionally, sport/physical activity values (SV) in the
ﬁnal model appear to be dichotomized and gendered where males are more likely to value
catharsis, vertigo, and ascetic experiences as opposed to social, aesthetic, and health and
ﬁtness experiences in sport/physical activity. From the qualitative approach, the researcher
found many different aspects of traditional masculinity in different societies and cultures. It
can be suggested that gender and traditional masculinity were socially and culturally
constructed within American society as well as different sub-cultures within and outside the
dominant culture. It was also found that certain separate collective aspects of traditional
masculinity in sport/physical activity reﬂected the dominant ideology of traditional
masculinity. Many college males in the present study were socialized toward traditional
masculinity such that many boys and men were taught to be dominant and controlling over
weaker males and women. This gendered research focus should be continued in order to
more fully understand different masculinities among boys and men that may help them to
enjoy the full social, psychological, and physical beneﬁts of sport/physical activity values.
The socially and culturally constructed ideologies of traditional masculinity were found to
impact selected, biased, and exclusive choices of males regarding their sport/physical activity

participation.

Dedicated to
My father, Yoon—Jae Lee, the greatest teacher and supporter before I came here to study in
the US. He would the happiest person in the world if he were alive and could hear this good

news of my dissertation completion and success.

My mother, Choon-Oak Jung, the most loving, kind, and caring person I know who raised

me and taught me to be good person. She is always proud and happy for me as her ﬁrst son.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to acknowledge many people for helping me during my doctoral work.
My success could have never been accoplished without their support and encouragement. I
am especially grateful to my advisor, Dr. Yevonne Smith, for her dedicated time, academic,
ﬁnancial, and social support, and commitment to my doctoral work. Throughout my doctoral
work she encouraged me to be an independent scholar with her countless lessons. I would
also like to thank my exceptional doctoral committee, Dr. Marty Ewing, Dr. Crystal Branta,
and Dr. Steve Gold for their continual willingness to support my dissertation with great
encouragement.

I am grateful to the Chair of the Kinesiology Department, Dr. Deborah F eltz for
allowing me to think I am always an important asset to the department. I am also very
grateful to the KIN secretaries, Ms. Jan Davenport, Verna Lyon, Jo Ann Janes, and Patricia
Hampton for their constant encouragement and administrative support. I give special thanks
to Ms. Jan Davenport for her emotional and spiritual sympathy and prayers for some of my
pains and struggles during my years at Michigan State University as an international student
from Seoul, Korea.

I would like to thank those who helped me to keep up my hard work; Dr. Bong Yi, Dr.
Eugene Brown, Dr. Sangyeon Woo, Dr. Jeong-Keun Park, Dr. Kyungshil Park, Dr. Bongseok
Oh, and Dr. Mansick Choi. Also, I give special thanks to Seunghyun Hwang, KIN Ph.D.
student, who supported my work by committing a great amount of time and energy.

I am very grateful for the assistance, generosity, and advice I received from Mr. Jay

Kim, former MSU KIN specialist, since I came here to the US. His support made the

initiation of my study possible here in East Lansing, MI. I owe a special note of gratitude to
him for his constant encouragement.

I extend many thanks to my best friend, Mr. Ron Southvvick, a MSU faculty member
and Taekwondo master, for his tremendous encouragement. He has been like a real brother to
me. Also thanks to KIN doctoral colleagues, Mr. Rudy Hughe and Ms. Marita Gilbert. They
also helped me a lot, and I also enjoyed sharing very critical and scholastic thoughts and
ideas with them all the time.

Thanks to my church family of New Hope Baptist Church; Pastor Youngho Cho and
Mrs. Cho, the deacons, and the Men’s and Women’s Ministry members. They always shared
spiritual strengths, life lessons, and prayers that guided me.

Very respectfully, I'd like to thank my family. I am deeply grateful to my wife,
Young-Mee, more than any one else. She always sacriﬁced herself for the family and me
with her whole heart. She has been my great wife and the best friend to me. Thanks to my
parents-in-law, Mr. Jung Kim and Mrs. Jaeyoon Yim; I could not have completed my
doctoral work without their assistance. Especially, their ﬁnancial and emotional support was
huge for me to survive in this land of America. Also, thanks to my brother, Jeong-Sang and
sisters, Mee-Jeong and Soo-Jeong. They always showed their constant supports with love and
words of chear. I would also like to thank my children, Chae-Lyn and Justin. They have been
so wonderful and good kids to me. They have been so healthy and lovely so that I could
concentrate on my work.

Finally, thanks to God in Heaven. You are almighty and I received all the strengths
from you, Dear Lord. The years I have gone through gave me many tough lessons in my life,

but these lessons strengthened me. Sometimes I thought it was too challenging when things

vi

did not go as I had hoped, but I feel that I am now the most pleased winner for having
succeeded in learning lessons of persistence, hard work, and “trusting the process”, as my
advisor, Dr. Smith delivered. Other than that, I am glad that I believe these lessons made me
closer to you. My life will start over again with the completion of my Ph.D. program and a
new job. I believe you will always be with me, my family, and the people who love and

support me. I say thank you for your many blessings in the name of Jesus.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................. V
TABLE OF CONTENTS - - - -- - ......... ...... -- VIII
LIST OF TABLES - -- ...... - - - - -- XI
LIST OF FIGURES -- - - -- -- ............... ....... XIII
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1
Statement of the Problems ................................................................................................. 1
Backgrounds of the Study .................................................................................................. 5
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 8
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 8
Hypotheses ...................................................................................................................... 10
Rationales for Hypotheses ........................................................................................... 12
Signiﬁcance of the Study ................................................................................................. 13
Deﬁnitions of Terms ....................................................................................................... 15
Limitations of the Study .................................................................................................. 20
CHAPTER H. LITERATURE REIVIEW ....................................................................... 23
Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms ................................................................... 23
Social Constructions of Gender and Masculinity ............................................................. 28
Traditional Masculinity in Society ................................................................................... 30
Masculinity in Sport/Physical Activity ............................................................................ 34
Sport/Physical Activity Values and Masculinity .............................................................. 37
Social Theories Used in the Study ................................................................................... 46
Structural functionalism theory .................................................................................... 47
Symbolic interaction theory ......................................................................................... 49
Critical theory .............................................................................................................. 52
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODS ....................................................................... 55
Research Design .............................................................................................................. 55
Major variables ............................................................................................................ 56
Relationships between the major variables in the research design ................................ 59
Survey Instrumentation ................................................................................................... 62
Feedback from the Pilot Study ..................................................................................... 63
Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms Instrument (SCIGN) ............................... 65
Traditional Masculinity Attitudes Instrument (TMA) ................................................... 68
Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity Instrument (MBS) ............................. 70
Sport/Physical Activity Values Instrument (SV) .......................................................... 73
Interview Questionnaire .................................................................................................. 76

viii

Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................. 78

 

 

 

Study Participants ........................................................................................................ 78
Sampling ..................................................................................................................... 79
Data collection ............................................................................................................ 80
Conﬁdentiality and anonymity ..................................................................................... 83
Data Analyses ................................................................................................................. 84
Quantitative analyses ................................................................................................... 84
Qualitative analyses ..................................................................................................... 86
CHAPTER IV. QUANTITATIVE RESULTS--- -- - 88
Demographic Statistics for the Sample ............................................................................ 88
Results and Analyses ....................................................................................................... 93
Descriptive statistics for the variables .............................................................................. 94
Preliminary Analyses ...................................................................................................... 95
Reliabilities ..................................................................................................................... 97
Correlation Analyses ....................................................................................................... 98
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Tests ..................................................................... 99
Model 1 (Exploratory research model) ....................................................................... 100
Model 2 (Explanatory research model) ...................................................................... 104
Model 3 (In-depth aspects of the model A) ................................................................ 109
Model 4 (In-depth aspects of the model B) ................................................................ 112
Model 5 (The ﬁnal model) ......................................................................................... 119
Hypotheses Testing ................................................................................................... 124
Additional Findings to the Study Hypotheses ............................................................. 129
Summary of the quantitative results ............................................................................... 129
CHAPTER V. QUALITATIVE RESULTS ................. - -- - - -_ ..... 131
Qualitative results and analyses ..................................................................................... 132
Additional Findings: Explorations on Culture, Masculinity, and Sport/Physical Activity
...................................................................................................................................... 169
Qualitative Summary (Categories and Themes) ............................................................. 177
CHAPTER VI ...................... - - - - - - _ - - -183
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... 183
Summary of Results ...................................................................................................... 183
Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 1 85
Socio-cultural inﬂuences on traditional gender norms ................................................ 185
Traditional masculinity attitudes ................................................................................ 187
Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity ........................................................... 188
Sport/physical activity values .................................................................................... 189
Exploratory ﬁndings; cultures of gender, masculinity, and sport/physical activity ...... 191
Social theoretical retrospective discussion ................................................................. 192
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 195
Recommendations ......................................................................................................... l 98
Recommendations for further research ....................................................................... 198
Recommendations to improve social practices ........................................................... 200

ix

APPENDIX A. CORRELATIONS FROM THE PILOT STUDY -- 203

 

 

 

APPENDIX B. THEORY AND REFERENCE BASED INSTRUMENTS ................... 205
APPENDIX C. RELIABILITIES FROM THE PILOT STUDY ...... - - - - 210
APPENDIX D. INFORMED CONSENT FORMS - - 213
APPENDIX E. SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE _ - 217
APENDIX F. FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE -- 238

 

REFERENCES... ...................... -- 245

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Study variables in the research design paradigm .......................................... 56

Table 2. Reliability summary of the original instrument and the Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on
Traditional Gender Norm (SCITGN) instrument in the pilot study ............................... 68

Table 3. Reliability summary of the original instrument and the Traditional Masculinity
Attitudes (TMA) instrument in the pilot study and after the modiﬁcation by deleting items
............................................................................................................... 70

Table 4. Reliability summary of the Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS)
instrument in the pilot study and the modiﬁcation .................................................. 73

Table 5. Reliability summary of the original instrument and the Sport/Physical Activity
Values (SV) instrument in the pilot study and after the modiﬁcation by deleting items .......76

Table 6. Race/ethnicity distribution of the survey samples ........................................ 89
Table 7. Age distribution of the survey samples ..................................................... 89
Table 8. School year distribution of the survey samples ............................................ 90
Table 9. Fathers’ educational levels distribution of the survey samples .......................... 91

Table 10. Mothers’ educational levels distribution of the survey samples ....................... 91
Table 11. Male college students’ income distribution of the survey samples .................... 92
Table 12. Parents’ income distribution of the survey samples ..................................... 92
Table 13. Descriptive statistics of major variables .................................................. 94
Table 14. Internal consistency reliabilities of the variables ........................................ 98

Table 15. Correlations among the variables ........................................................... 99
Table 16. Goodness of ﬁt indexes summary of Model I .......................................... 102
Table 17. Parameter summary of Model 1 ........................................................... 103

Table 18. Relationships of Traditional Socio—Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms on study
variables .................................................................................................. 106

xi

Table 19. Goodness of ﬁt indexes summary of Model 2 .......................................... 108
Table 20. Parameter summary of Model 2 ........................................................... 108
Table 21. Goodness of ﬁt indexes summary of Model 3 .......................................... 111
Table 22. Parameter summary of Model 3 ........................................................... 112
Table 23. Correlations among the sub-Sport/Physical Activity Values (sub-SVs) ........... 113
Table 24. Correlation residuals among the sub-Sport/Physical Activity Values (sub-SVs) 114
Table 25. Goodness of ﬁt indexes summary of Model 4 .......................................... 118
Table 26. Parameter summary of model 4 ........................................................... 119
Table 27. Goodness of ﬁt indexes summary of Model 5 .......................................... 122
Table 28. Parameter summary of Model 5 ........................................................... 123
Table 29. Interview participants in the study ........................................................ 131
Table 30. Themes and categories from the qualitative data ﬁndings ............................ 179
Table 31. Correlations between the major variables (n=3 6) ....................................... 204
Table 32. Correlations between Traditional Masculinity Attitudes and Sport/Physical Activity
Values (n=36) ........................................................................................... 204
Table 33. Detailed reliabilities on the original instrument and the Socio—Cultural Inﬂuences
on Gender Norm instrument in the pilot study ..................................................... 211
Table 34. Detailed reliabilities on the original instrument and the Traditional Masculinity
Attitudes Instrument in the pilot study .............................................................. 211
Table 35. Detailed reliabilities on the original instrument and the Sport/Physical Activity
Values instrument in the pilot study ................................................................. 212
Table 36. Detailed reliabilities on the masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity
instrument in the pilot study and on the modiﬁcation ............................................. 212

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Basic research design ........................................................................ 59
Figure 2. The research model for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) ......................... 61
Figure 3. The diagram of Model 1 (Exploratory research model) ............................... 101
Figure 4. TSCIGN and NTSCIGN and their relationships to TMA in Model 1 ............... 105
Figure 5. The diagram of Model 2 (Explanatory research model) ................................ 107
Figure 6. The diagram of Model 3 (In-depth aspect of the model A) ........................... 110
Figure 7. The diagram of Model 4 (In-depth aspects of the model B) ........................... 114
Figure 8. The diagram of Model 5 (The ﬁnal model) ............................................. 120

xiii

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problems

In traditional gender norms, dichotomous discourses are often applied solely to
one gender or another. Society often maintains stereotypes and traditional gender norms
for men and women, which state that traditional men must be dominant, self-reliant,
competitive, tough, decisive, leaders, and independent; but women must be warm, social,
and passive care-givers (Clasen, 2001; Cox & Thompson, 2000; Greendorfter, 1993;
MacQueen, 2003; McCabe & Ricciardelli, 2003; Messner & Sabo, 1990; Worell, 2001).
Of course, such assumptions are considered to be traditional biases, ideologies, or
stereotypes of gender that have begun to change in contemporary society. In fact, many
people are raised in an environment in which traditional gender role norms are clearly in
conﬂict with contemporary perceptions. However, it could be argued that traditional
gender norms are still undergoing a social change while they are stagnantly embraced as
a socially dominant ideology in this decade (Baca Zinn & Dill, 1994). Many men and
women succumb to the dominant ideology without question (Hall 1996). Sociological
gender ideals are, in fact, disciplined as though the ideologies of men and women are
never reconciled by socialization. Through socialization, men and women in society are
often taught to be receptive to the socially constructed gender images and ideologies
within the traditional gender norms. In terms of the gender socialization, socially and
culturally inﬂuential agents such as parents, siblings, friends, the visual and print media,
educational organizations, and/or sport/physical activity may inﬂuence them to

accommodate traditional gender norms. These agents often function as predetermined

socio-cultural agencies that inﬂuence traditional gender norms. They teach youth and
young adults to play cultural roles based on dominantly collective traditions and beliefs
about sociological ideals of gender (Greendorfter, 1993). While gendered expectations
are embedded in society, traditional gender norms are also ﬁrmly secured within
proximal socio-cultural agents in the socialization process (Donnelly & Young, 2001). In
this way, any negation of those norms may be discouraged in the socialization through
selective social rewards or punishments.

Within the context of the traditional gender norms, masculinity is distinctively
characterized in opposition to femininity. Many studies suggest that masculinity is
(re)enhanced to maintain traditional gender norms and social questions of male
dominated power relations. Masculinity is considered a traditional norm, connecting
socially structured beliefs, attitudes, and ideologies associated with what it means to be a
male in a particular society or culture (Connell, 2000; Hall, 1996). Those who accept the
idea of masculinity conform to society and learn to be aggressive, tough, non-feminine,
heterosexual, apathetic, breadwinners, superior in status, self-reliant, and many times
violent (Birrell & Cole, 1994). Gender is polarized within contexts of femininity and
masculinity (Casper & Moore, 1995; Clasen, 2001), and as a result of this polarity, a
dichotomous gendered social imagination tends to ‘superiorize’ masculinity and
‘inferiorize’ femininity (Hasbrook & Harris, 1999). This type of polar ideology belittles
anyone who is considered non-masculine; not only are women isolated as inferior, but
also some men who seem to have deviated from the socially imagined norms of
traditional maleness. In this way, non-masculinized men can also be isolated from the

dominant ideology of masculinity. Therefore, those males who do not match the

traditional characteristics favored by the socially and culturally constructed legitimization
of gender norms are, often, excluded from the ‘superiorized’ traditional masculine group
(Hasbrook & Harris, 1999). This aspect of traditional masculinity is consistent with
hegemonic systems in which there is always a power struggle, and in which dominant
men overpower others while displaying and practicing masculinity.

Many aspects of masculinity are often intricately adopted as a collective form of
traditional masculinity throughout a whole society (D. M. Miller, 1992). However, this
collective masculinity is more aggressively learned and agreed upon in sport/physical
activity (Messner & Sabo, 1990). As sport/physical activity displays many masculine
features characterized by performances of aggression, toughness, violence, intimidation,
competitiveness, restrictive emotionality, and homophobia, it is obvious that masculinity
is regarded as an inevitable feature of sport/physical activity, (Connell, 2000; Kidd, 1987;
Laberge & Albert, 1999; Levant & Fischer, 1998). Reﬂecting upon these aspects of
masculinity in sports/physical activity, this study documented the ways in which some
men in contemporary society learn their attitudes and beliefs toward traditional
masculinity. Furthermore, this study attempted to create awareness that traditional
masculinity may also inﬂuence men’s values and behaviors concerning their
sport/physical activity experiences.

Levent and Kopechy (1995) suggested that men involved in sport/physical
activity are more likely to enjoy competitive activities with physical and verbal
aggression, while they do not, on the other hand, tend to express intimacy. From a
structural-ﬁrnctional theoretical perspective, sport/physical activity of this decade is often

imbued with a great deal of social, psychological, and physical values. Sport/physical

activity has traditionally been considered to be socially, psychologically, and physically
beneﬁcial, and therefore valued as such by individuals and groups. However, in a critical
theoretical view, aspects of traditional masculinity may undermine the notion of the
beneﬁcial values of sport/physical activity such as aesthetic or health values. For
example, when traditional masculinity is enacted in conjunction with dichotomous and
hierarchical gender relations, a dominant relationship among men may occur and
inﬂuence their intention to develop positive social relationships with other men (Connell,
2000; Laberge & Albert, 1999; Levant & Kopecky, 1995). This suggested social
relationship values in sport/physical activity experiences could be skewed or limited
among some men with the traditional masculinity in/out of the sport/physical activity
terrain. For another example, many male athletes demonstrating traditional masculinity
may have higher rates of injury in the course of involvement in their sporting activities
because of their traditional masculine orientations. Players’ and coaches’ tacit agreement
to use traditional masculinity in sport/physical activity and games encourages
aggressiveness, toughness, and often violence that may cause players to display a
willingness to take more risks which may cause further physical problems. Evoking
masculinity before, during, or after games may bring players an intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation to increase ‘bravery’, or ‘conﬁdence’ and physical display of aggression for
better performance (Brown, 2004). Therefore, a negative association between traditional
masculine attitudes and certain health values in sport/physical activity may be
demonstrated. Consequentially, it is clear that evoking masculinity could also raise
negative attitudes and behaviors which impair the development of many beneﬁcial values

of sport/physical activity.

Backgrounds of the Study

The initial background surrounding and contextualizing this study was not limited
to its inquiry about relationships between masculinity and sport/physical activity. A need
for various methodological approaches was evoked as the background of the study.
Masculinity was often termed as socially constructive and collective within the dominant
gender ideology (Connell, 2000). This ideology suggested that studies would have
examined many constructive and collective aspects of masculinity and sport/physical
activity using various methods. However, a majority of studies focused on examining
complexities, varieties, and contradictions of masculinity regarding sport/physical
activity, using limited methodological approaches (i.e. qualitative study).

Undeniably, masculinity was very complex within diverse cultural aspects of
society. Because of this, most of the masculinity studies in sociology of sport were
practically focused on ethnographic approaches to the complexity at the micro level.
However, they focused heavily only on individual meanings and perceptions about
masculinity respectively, and provide straight depictions of investigated individual
experiences. It would be beneﬁcial, when these micro perspectives about traditional
masculinity were examined within invisible everyday lives, to gain a particular
understanding of detailed individual practices, and immediate social and cultural events
in a local setting (Erickson, 1986). At a micro level, individual attitudes, identities, social
meanings, values, and interactions with others could considerably be emphasized in this
context. These individual details could provide a focus on more interpretive descriptions
based on discourse with sport/physical activity. In this way, a closer look at society,

social relations, or cultural aspects with regard to relationships between masculinity and

sport/physical activity could be explored. However, macro frameworks were also needed
for the issue of masculinity and sport/physical activity as a social and cultural study. In a
macro level analysis, society was viewed as a way of incorporating structure, function,
organization, and relationship into a social system. According to a classical structural
functionalist theory, society at the macro level was identiﬁed as a place in which societal
inﬂuence was pervasively transmitted via the production of social practices and the
construction of interactive social terrains (Parsons, 1965). A broad picture of a whole
social environment was depicted in this approach. Along with this, predictive
perspectives about the constructive relations within the societal contexts of masculinity
and sport/physical activity could be provided.

Therefore, both micro and macro perspectives about masculinity and
sport/physical activity were needed so that unaddressed questions about the intricate
aspects of masculinity socialization and sport/physical activity values could be examined
from an in-depth and broader standpoint. To fulﬁll this need, it was suggested that macro
level and micro level frameworks for analyzing socio-cultural perspectives and aspects
had to be considered essential. It would be beneﬁcial when both macro and micro
approaches were employed in order to formulate a complete picture of existing social
complexities, dynamics of social structures, and social relationships. In order to
incorporate both the macro and micro approaches, various methodological approaches,
such as qualitative and quantitative methods, would be needed. Towards the study of
masculinity, it would be highly beneﬁcial for sport sociologists to have a critical attitude,
because that would force them to use various sociological lenses to examine such

complex, but many times collective, social phenomena, both at a macro and a micro level.

That is, various ‘methodological’ lenses should be required. While qualitative methods
provided critical and symbolic analyses, quantitative methods practically offered
structural and functional results in the study. These methods provided an extensive
initiative base for postulated critical discussions that addressed transmitted complex
socio-cultural ideologies and practices (Gudykunst, 2001).

A pilot study was conducted to see how the collaborative approaches could
address the complicated socio-cultural aspects within the study subjects. Using
quantitative and qualitative methods in the pilot study, it practically demonstrated that

various methodological approaches could be beneﬁcial. Quantitative analyses revealed

many results with correlationsl (See Appendix A for the pilot study ﬁndings). In the
qualitative analyses, some ﬁndings were different from the quantitative analyses.
Qualitative approaches analyzed data in-depth, while quantitative approaches discuss or
identify objective and statistical data. Single-method approaches might limit data
analyses and in-depth understandings, but mixed method approaches were more
advantageous as they allowed quantitative and qualitative methods to support each other.
It allocated for a more comprehensive examination of the study variables and social

issues.

 

According to the results, positive statistical signiﬁcances between (a) ‘socio-cultural inﬂuences on
gender norms’ and ‘sport/physical activity values’, (b) ‘traditional masculinity attitudes’ and ‘traditional
masculinity behaviors in sport/physical activity’ and (c) ‘sport/physical activity values’ and ‘masculine
behaviors in sport/physical activity’; n = 36, r = .425 (p < .01), .666 (p < .01), and .406 (p < .05)
respectively. In terms of correlations between ‘traditional masculinity attitudes’ and ‘sub-sport/physical
activity values’, health and ﬁtness, catharsis, and asceticism values had positively significant relationships
with traditional masculinity attitudes; r = .339 (p < .05), .566 (p < .01), and .487 (p < .01) respectively. In
addition, aesthetic value had a negatively signiﬁcant relationship with traditional masculinity attitudes; r = -
.374 (p < .05). Finding these correlations was helpful to ﬁnd a rough sense of the relationships among the
study variables for the basic research model.

This study ultimately intended to complete a theoretical examination and a
triangulation with quantitative and qualitative approaches focused on the relationships of
traditional masculinity on study participants sport/physical activity values and behaviors.
These methodological approaches promoted and supported each other to establish a more

critical and constructive analysis in the study.

Purpose of the Study

The main purpose of this study was to investigate traditional masculinity
reﬂecting socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms among college-aged male students
and its relationship to sport/physical activity behaviors and values. This study
investigated the ways in which traditional masculinity norms were formed, and
relationships impacted sport behaviors and attitudinal values in sport/physical activity.
For that purpose, this study ﬁrst attempted to ﬁnd whether college-aged males living in
contemporary society learned their masculinity attitudes and behaviors through the
socialization process, and a collection of socio-cultural norms that were learned and
conﬁrmed by socializing agents as a part of that process. Along with this process of
socialization, this study’s focus was to see whether the socio-cultural inﬂuences on
gender norms, particularly by such socializing agents as parents, siblings, friends, sport
programs, and the media, were determinants of attitudes towards traditional masculinity,
sport behaviors, and sport/physical activity values (Harris & Clayton, 2002).
Research Questions

Under the research purpose stated above, this study raised several speciﬁc

research questions regarding traditional masculinity, sport/physical activity values, and

sport behaviors among college males in order to explore their socio-cultural constructions.
Along with these research questions, the following research questions were extensively
examined through an in-depth literature review and mainly by qualitative approaches in

the study. The proposed research questions are as follows:

1. What are the socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms?

2. How are socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms related to traditional

masculinity attitudes?

3. Who are the signiﬁcant socializing agents in the development of college age
males’ masculinity norms, attitudes, values, and behaviors and what are their

speciﬁc and unique experiential inﬂuences?

4. How have the socializing agents inﬂuenced college males to believe and value
traditional masculinity norms, attitudes, and behaviors? What are the traditional
masculinity attitudes that socializing agents encourage, speciﬁcally, in college

males?

5. What are considered to be traditional masculine behaviors in sport/physical

activity?

6. What is the relationship of traditional masculinity attitudes to sport/physical

activity behaviors?

7. What are the college male students’ values for participating in sport/physical

activity?

8. How are their traditional masculinity attitudes related to sport/physical activity

values?

Hypotheses
Based on the research questions and research design, this study probed socio-
cultural inﬂuences on gender norms, traditional masculinity attitudes, sport/physical

activity values, and masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity as follows:

Hypothesis 1: Socio-cultural inﬂuences (socializing agents’ inﬂuences) on

traditional gender norms are positively related to traditional masculinity attitudes

in the study population.

Hypothesis 2: Traditional masculinity attitudes positively are related to

masculine behaviors of men in sport/physical activity in the study population.

Hypothesis 3: Traditional masculinity attitudes positively or negatively relate to

certain speciﬁc sport/physical activity values of men in the study population.

10

Traditional masculinity will relate negatively to health and ﬁtness, social
relations, and aesthetic experience values towards sport/physical activity.

Masculinity attitudes will relate positively to a pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and

ascetic experience values towards sport/physical activity2 in the study population.

H 3-1. There is a negative relationship between traditional masculinity and

values of social relations in sport/physical activity.

H 3-2. There is a negative relationship between traditional masculinity and

aesthetic values in sport/physical activity.

H 3-3. There is a negative relationship between traditional masculinity and

health and ﬁtness values in sport/physical activity.

H 34. There is a positive relationship between traditional masculinity and

a pursuit of vertigo values in sport/physical activity.

H 3-5. There is a positive relationship between traditional masculinity and

catharsis values in sport/physical activity.

H 3-6. There is a positive relationship between traditional masculinity and

ascetic experience values in sport/physical activity.

 

Here sport/physical activity values are adapted from Gerald G. Kenyon’s Attitudes Toward Physical
Activity (1968). Details about these variables will be discussed later in the literature review.

11

Rationales for Hypotheses
The examination of these given research hypotheses were conducted mainly

through a quantitative approach and structural equation modeling. The rationales for the
hypotheses were based on review of previous studies and theories. Hypothesis 1, ‘socio-
cultural inﬂuences (socializing agents inﬂuences) on gender norms are positively related
to traditional masculinity,’ was based on suggestions from Harris and Clayton (2002),
Laberge and Albert (1999), and Messner and Sabo (1990), urging that traditional
ideology produced and enhanced traditional masculinity.

Hypothesis 2, ‘traditional masculinity attitudes are positively be related to
masculine behaviors of men in sport/physical activity,’ was derived from several studies
which suggested that masculine features such as toughness, aggression, intimidation, and
competitiveness were essential behaviors in sport/physical activity among male players
(Connell, 2000; Folery, 1990; Kidd, 1987; Messner, 2000).

Hypothesis 3, traditional masculinity attitudes are positively and negatively
related to certain speciﬁc sport/physical activity values of men,’ was derived from
Coakley (2004); Foley (1999); Papas, Mackenry, and Catlett (2004), who stated that
traditional sport/physical activity had a long history of providing an occasion to celebrate
men’s masculinity as a ritual and culture of men. In this regard, Caillois (1961) and
Connell (2000) suggested that men were socialized to be masculine without much social
negation and play, sport, and physical activity were cultural sites to display their
masculinity.

Each speciﬁc sport/physical activity value in this hypothesis was intended to
investigate the negative and positive relationships with masculinity. The speciﬁc values

toward sport/physical activity isolated in this study were: social experiences, health and

12

ﬁtness, aesthetic experiences, a pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and acetic experiences. All
of this study’s inquiries addressing these values were exploratory, because no speciﬁc
studies dealing with their relationship to traditional masculinity had been previously
conducted. Even though this was true, there were studies reviewed that made suggestions
concerning these relationships. In place of masculinity, several gender studies speciﬁcally
dealt with gender differences regarding values toward sport/physical activity (Acord,
1977; Dotson & Stanley, 1972; Harvey, 1989; Hendry, 1975; Mize, 1979; Mullins, 1969),

and they were, therefore, reﬂected in the hypotheses as theory bases.

Signiﬁcance of the Study

Socio-cultural inﬂuences, attitudes, behaviors, and values are often revealed in a
collective mode, but they also become complex social phenomena at the same time. The
complexity tends to be situated in a certain locale, and is subjectively facilitated in the
interpretation of studies about social relations. In sports, traditional aspects of culture and
masculinity are obvious because people interact and share their beliefs, values and
symbols in places where they are playing and watching games. Sports require people to
engage and interact with socially constituent members. Therefore, individual meanings
and interactions are regarded as important premises to explore cultural status quo in
sports. In this study, the cultural backdrop was a key element in the investigation of
meanings, values, attitudes, and behaviors regarding gender, masculinity, and
sport/physical activity values. Because social meanings and values are very closely
related as facilitators in revealing attitudes and behaviors, culture provided the necessary

framework within which to study gender, masculinity, and sport/physical activity values

13

in society. Therefore, this study provided predictive insights into socio-cultural meanings
of individuals and constructions of societal systems.

Although this study was focused upon sport/physical activity, it is suggested that
exploring masculinity in sport/physical activity would have a great beneﬁt for re-
identifying socio-cultural aspects of gendered constructions in society, because
sport/physical activity represent a major socio-cultural production that interests people in
American society (Miller, Sabo, Farrell, Barnes, & Mehiick, 1999). Masculinity in
sport/physical activity extensively interplays with complex social structures and cultural
practices (Wiegers, 1998). This occurs when sport/physical activity repeatedly displays
masculinity as one of the main features and people accept in their socialization. It has
particularly empowered certain men over others in a hegemonic social system and in
sport/physical activity arenas.

Understanding and extending knowledge bases about social phenomena are the
ﬁrst steps to empowered social changes, in that it provides strength for a critical voice
and a more logical implementation. As this following translated script of Michel
Foucault’s idea about ‘knowledge and power’ suggests, examining human relations in
light of new knowledge can be an agent for empowerment. Critical analyses of the
traditional masculinity ideology may provide one piece of the knowledge required for
many people to be free from social and cultural dominance so that they become
empowered to change society for the better.

No body of knowledge can be formed without a system of communications,
records, accumulation and displacement which is in itself a form of power
and which is linked, in its existence and functioning, to the other forms of
power. Conversely, no power can be exercised without the extraction,

appropriation, distribution or retention of knowledge. On this level, there is
not knowledge on the one side and society on the other, or science and the

14

state, but only the fundamental forms of knowledge/power. .. (Sheridan,
p.131,1980).

Along with the understanding of knowledge and power, this study would be a
sociological endeavor which provides an understanding of the social construction of
traditional masculinity and how it relates to values and behaviors in sport/physical
activity. It does this in hopes of empowering people to move away from ideological
dominance as a hierarchical and oppressive form of human relations.

Further, by confronting some aspects of traditional masculinity, the study would
suggest that selected, biased, and exclusive choices of sport/physical activity participation
based upon socially and culturally constructed ideas of masculinity might prevent
participants from enjoying the full social, psychological, and physical beneﬁts of

sport/physical activity values.

Deﬁnitions of Terms

Several terms were operationally deﬁned for better understanding of this study.

1. Culture: A shared, learned, and symbolic system of values, beliefs and attitudes
that shapes and inﬂuences perception and behavior (Hall, 1990). Culture is
identiﬁed as a set of invented ways of thoughts, beliefs, behaviors, and
communications (Coakley, 2004). Lock (1997) stated that culture is a series of
thoroughly deﬁned processes of meaning. According to Gudykunst (2001) culture
is produced, transformed, and changed through communication. Culture is

extensively and collectively transmitted under the domain of social life,

15

combining structural factors that make a distinction of one social sphere from

another (Snow & Oliver, 1994b).

. Masculinity: A traditional belief, attitude, value, and behavior associated with
what it means to be male in a society. Masculinity is based on biological,
physical, psychological, and social-cultural characteristics of maleness, but, in
this study, it was deﬁned as a traditional belief, attitude, or behavior about the
meaning of maleness that is historically, socially, and culturally constructed

(Connell, 2000; Messner & Sabo, 1990).

Masculinities: A distinctive term opposed to a singular form of ‘masculinity,’ as
it is based on diversiﬁed-conceptual perceptions about masculinity. Masculinities .
are diverted from many characteristics of traditional masculinity, reﬂecting
complicated socio-cultural aspects, and applying different social and cultural
acceptances. Levant and Kopecky (1995) isolated masculinities in a traditional
manner of avoiding femininity, rejection of homosexuality, self-reliance,
aggression, achievement/status, attitudes toward sex, and restrictive emotionality.
However, in a more contemporary context, ‘masculinities’ refers to diversity,
including ranges of behaviors so that traditional and non-traditional males can

demonstrate different attitudes, values, and behaviors as men.

. Traditional masculinity: A long-established ideology about what it means

historically and conservatively to be a man. Despite the diverse, inconsistent, and

16

contradictory masculinities over different societies, cultures, and history,
traditional masculinity is deﬁned as a socially constructed and dichotomous
constellation and expectation of stereotypical masculinity such as being strong,
aggressive, dominant, competitive, in charge, the head, authoritative leader, high
risk taking, achievement-oriented, demonstrating agency, etc. Hegemonic
constructs of dominance and power are included within the concept of traditional

masculinity.

. Socio-cultural influences (SCI): Socially and culturally inﬂuential agents
include father, mother, brother, sister, friend, coach, education, sport, the media,
etc. These social agents play a proximal role to socialize one to believe and accept
social norms and ideologies (Donnelly & Young, 2001; McCabe & Ricciardelli,

2003)

. Traditional gender norms (TGN): A long-established ideology about gender
norms. It is deﬁned as a socially constructed constellation and expectation of what
society deﬁnes and differentiates as ‘traditional’ for males and ‘traditional’ for
females. For instance, traditional males in American culture have been socialized
to be breadwinners and tough, but traditional women earlier may have been
socialized to be submissive, dependent, and warm (Cox & Thompson, 2000;

Greendorfter, l 993; Worell, 2001 ).

l7

7. Masculine behaviors in sports/physical activity (MBS): Traditional manners
and actions associated with norms of maleness. Behaviors that demonstrate
competitiveness, toughness, aggression, intimidation, risk- or injury-taking, verbal
accusation, drug, tobacco or alcohol use, etc., are deﬁned as traditionally
masculine behaviors in sport/physical activities (Connell, 1990; Hasbrook &

Harris, 1999; Kidd, 1987; Pappas, MaKenry, & Catlett, 2004).

8. Sport/physical activity: Sport is formally organized and competitive activity,
using rules, leagues, schedules, scoring, record keeping, and timing. Physical
activity is any vigorous body movement such as exercise, ﬁtness aerobics and
jogging, and dance (Coakley, 2004). The term sport/physical activity in this study
employs comprehensive notions of activities from sport and exercise.

9. Values: It is deﬁned as a worth accepted by an individual or a group of people.
Values are changed and transmitted as different societies and cultures coexist with
people (Hofstede, 1979). Within the socio-cultural diversity of a complex society,

values of people enhance beliefs, communications, and behaviors.

10. Sport/physical activity values (SV): One’s view of the worth of sport/physical
activity. Kenyon (1968) isolated speciﬁc sport/physical activity values of social
experience, health and ﬁtness, a pursuit of vertigo, aesthetic experience, catharsis,

and ascetic experience.

11. Sub-sport/physical activity values (SVs)

18

12.

b)

d)

Sport/physical activity value of social experience (SV Social): A social
integration value to obtain a social membership through sport/physical activity
Sport/physical activity value of health and fitness (SV Health): A value of
as physical wellness for people to engage in sport/physical activity to maintain
their body’s health and ﬁtness

Sport/physical activity value of a pursuit of vertigo (SV Vertigo): A value
of taking a risk, thrilling dynamic and speedy actions, or challenging a
dangerous situation in sport/physical activity

Sport/physical activity value of aesthetic experience (SV Aesthetic): A
value of observing or performing beautiful or artistic movements in
sport/physical activity

Sport/physical activity values of catharsis (SV Catharsis): A value of an
experience of relaxing and releasing stress and pent-up emotions through
sport/physical activity

Sport/physical activity values of ascetic experience (SV Ascetic): A value
of disciplined debasement or sacriﬁce of the body through sport/physical
activity, putting off delights for difﬁcult competitions and painfully arduous

training.

Structural equation modeling (SEM): A statistical test for evaluation of “overall

measures of goodness-of-ﬁt (Vinokur, 2005, p.801)” of a model. SEM includes

combined estimations of factor analysis, path analysis, and regression using a

correlation or covariance matrix.

19

Limitations of the Study

This study was limited to college male subjects aged 18 to 25 at a Midwestern
university and their perceptions of traditional masculinity inﬂuences, ideologies,
behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions. Focusing closely on ﬁnding a constructive model of
masculinity attitudes within a single gender, this study purposefully selected only men
with a premise that gendered relations could occur within a single gender with many
social cultural aspects. It was anticipated, however, that this study was an auspicious
initial examination of traditional masculinity and its relationships to sport/physical
activity values.

There were limitations of the study based on methodological concerns because the

study was basically conducted with survey and interview methods (House, 2004).

1. There might be possible omissions of distinctive population members from
the sampling frame, such as non-Michigan college-aged men, excluding the
ability of survey and interview statistics to describe the full population of
college men in the US. In this study, college/university male students in
Michigan were sampled and recruited, so the study might not be able to
generalize masculinity to all US. male populations. Male college students
in Michigan might have different socio-cultural inﬂuences and different
perceptions of masculinity, sporting experience attitudes toward
sport/physical activity. Also selected groups of males at different colleges

were not selected to participate in the study.

20

2. There might be possible omissions of some sampled persons/units from the
respondent pool (e.g., because of their refusal to participate in the survey
and interview process). To reduce the non-response rates in the survey,
initial emails were sent to male college students at a Midwest university. In
addition, replacement emails with survey questions were sent three times at
about 2 weeks intervals. However, the limitations of sampling could be one
of the concerns, and could make it difﬁcult to generalize the data and the

results to all college men.

3. There might be selective perceptions of respondents due to mismatches
between the underlying construct and the measures, variation with how
questions in the survey and interview were comprehended, failure to reveal
embarrassing personal attributes, and the inﬂuence of interviewers,
questionnaires, and mode of data collection on respondent behavior.
Meanwhile, measurement concerns could appear, due to the degree of
respondents’ commitment and willingness, which inﬂuenced the response
rate and the accuracy of answers (Grooves & Singer, 2004). Their
completion of the survey and interview might be inﬂuenced by their
individual schoolwork, which could cause a distraction, or loss of
commitment to the survey. Therefore, the investigator was not guaranteed
that all students would complete the survey and interview without
distraction. As a result, the consistency of the responses in the survey and

interview might vary.

21

4.

In this study, the inﬂuence of hypothesized variables on socio-cultural
inﬂuences on traditional masculinity that were based on theories was tested
for a ﬁt-test. However, possibly underestimated or overestimated socio-
cultural inﬂuence variables might be found because of respondents’ ability

to reﬂect on society and culture’s complexities.

It could be possible that a researcher’s status adversely affects respondents’
answers in interviews. There might be a cautious or guarded manner of
respondents, which could be characterized as ‘impression management
(Goffman, 1990).’ Also, subjects’ answers might reﬂect their political
awareness to social agreements on sensitive issues such as race, gender, and

socio-economic status (Howe & Eisenhart, 1990).

22

CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REIVIEW

Masculinity has been an appealing subject in sport sociology within the context of
gender in recent years. Many sociological studies of masculinity were focused upon the
context of sport/physical activity particularly associated with traditional masculinity
(Drummond, 2002; Hall, 1990). Consequently, sport/physical activity was largely
suggested as a very realistic site that embraces and practices traditional masculinity. The
literature review in this study focused on the socio-cultural contexts of masculinity and
the relationships of traditional masculinity to sport/physical activity behaviors and values.
Literature reviewed would provide an understanding of the importance of problems and
major issues related to this study. Social theories used for the study would also be
discussed. Topics to be addressed in this literature review are (a) Socio-Cultural
Inﬂuences on Gender Norms, (b) Social Constructions of Gender and Masculinity, (c)
Traditional Masculinity in Society, ((1) Masculinity in Sport/Physical Activity, (e)
Sport/Physical Activity Values and Masculinity, and (f) Social Theories Used in the

Study.

Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms

Society is composed of people who interact, communicate, share, and exchange
material or immaterial social products such as capital, beliefs, attitudes, social meanings,
cultural ideologies, and relationships so that the main characteristics of social structures
are complexity, power, and interconnection. Meanwhile, social events are identiﬁed as a

result of people engaged continuously in adjusting their behaviors to ﬁt in with the

23

attitudes and values from signiﬁcant others (Becker & McCall, 1990). In response to
earlier actions, people interact and establish the manner of their lives and social relations
through processes of socialization and enculturation (Donnelly & Young, 2001).
Furthermore, personal-psychological, social, cultural, or political levels of interactions
are also often symbolized (Rubin, 1994).

Under these social aspects, culture is identiﬁed as a set of invented ways of
thoughts, beliefs, behaviors, and communications (Coakley, 2004). In society, social
experiences often proceed with cultural intercourse. According to Benton and Craib
(2001), social experiences are affected by different cultural values. However, culture is
sometimes presented as a metaphoric discourse in social scopes due to its frequent mutual
transition over different places and times (Lippe, 2002a). On the other hand, Lock (1997)
stated that culture is a series of thoroughly deﬁned processes of meaning. According to
Gudykunst (2001), culture is produced, transformed, and changed through
communication. Culture is extensively and collectively transmitted under the domain of
social life, combining structural factors that make a distinction of one social sphere from
another (Snow & Oliver, 1994b).

Under social and cultural scopes, collectivistic acceptance of norms and values of
men and women in society are oﬁen determined to compliment dominant agreements
which are implicitly or explicitly accepted among social constituent members (Williams,
1980). This may speak to the power of the dominant social contexts of norms and values.
In accordance with this social practice, culture is transmitted and changed through a
general agreement on accepted traditional-social rules among people with different social

locations and status (Gudykunst, 2001). The present study has paid particular attention to

24

the inﬂuences of these socio-cultural inﬂuences as they are reﬂected on constituted
gendered social and cultural contexts.

A perceptible trace of socio-cultural interaction and its reactive behaviors could
be found in various settings. Family, friends, teachers, coaches, education, and the media
are considered major sources of inﬂuence and transmission of socio-cultural messages for
communications, interactions, and behaviors (McCabe & Ricciardelli, 2003). These
socio-cultural agencies are bound up in proximally located communities while people
live with similar and different social values and share their ideas and thoughts regarding
society and culture within their own community, race/ethnicity, class structure,
educational level, religion, and ideology. Therefore, traditional belief systems within their
proximal and intergenerational socio-cultural locations are often readily conferred upon
men and women, who are disciplined to believe as their inﬂuential socio-cultural
agencies readily suggest.

Manhood is a socially constructed process and has culturally reinforced
characteristics of gender even though it is also a biological and psychological process
(Connell, 2000). Therefore, it will be important to understand how socializing agents play
a role and what interactions take place for young men to believe and practice traditional
masculinity ideologies. In light of evidence that masculinity is (re)enhanced as a socially
constructed presupposition of the quality of men, which is by and large opposed to
femininity and homosexuality, the process of accepting, denying, conﬁrming, or ignoring
the socially constructed practice of masculinity should be examined. In that process,
socializing agents such as parents, coaches, and friends play a key role helping males

reach an understanding of traditional masculinity. Most of all, proximity of social and

25

cultural locations of the socializing agents affect the important impact on acceptance of
gender and masculinity ideologies and perceptions in the socialization process. As the
socializing agents interact with a person, sharing similar socio-cultural meanings and
values of gender and masculinity within their own backgrounds of race/ethnicity, socio-
economic status, religions, and cultural ideologies, socialized traditions are more likely to
be readily accepted. The present study has examined the perceptions of antecedent
socializing and pre-socializing agents’ inﬂuences on traditional masculine gender
ideologies and attitudes of college men. As suggested, social agents such as family,
siblings, peers, and the media inﬂuence one’s social learning and socialization (Donnelly
& Young, 2001). Family is often considered the ﬁrst socio-cultural institution to
inﬂuence perceptions, attitudes, values, and behaviors. This is due to the close social
distance, continuity of social interactions, and the extended and prolonged period of
shared space between members of a family (Carron, Hausenblas, & Mack, 1996; McCabe
& Ricciardelli, 2003; Mullis, 1999; Shin & Nam, 2004). Primary members interact to
teach and socialize through systems of communication, power, and social support, while
they accept, deny, or negotiate a socio-cultural ambiguity. As many people during this
modern time are experiencing rapid social changes in their ways of life, there might be a
large or small social gap between one generation and the next depending on the culture or
family social organization. Therefore, the later generations may have to decide whether
or not to agree or disagree, or ﬁnd a middle ground with their parents’ ideas.

Meanwhile, selected friends are also regarded as important inﬂuential social
agents that deliver and inform socio-cultural practices (McCabe & Ricciardelli, 2003;

Mullis, 1999). They also have a very close social distance. Even though the social

26

distance is not considered as permanent as family relationships, it generates a new
family-like kinship. Inﬂuences from friends affect socio-cultural interaction, perceptions,
and behaviors in the same way as the inﬂuences of the family.

The media is also an important socio-cultural structure, inﬂuencing traditional
gender norms and masculinity. The media present and re-present social phenomena in a
limited space; therefore, they generally transmit powerful messages or prominent images
of society and culture. The viewers who are being inﬂuenced by the media often form a
distorted imaginative view, or are forced to look at societies and cultures from a certain
re-presentation of messages from a dominant perspective (Birrell & Cole, 1994; Sabo,
Jansen, Tate, Duncan, & Leggett, 1996; Trujillio, 2001; Weiss, 1996).

Cognitive social psychology also suggested that ‘oneselt’ is also an important
factor for gender and masculinity socialization. Male and female children learn their
gender identity and then try to be consistent with that identity. It is a cognitively
perceptual and active social learning process that begins in early childhood. It is a starting
medium for males and females to help determine their own social identity and behaviors
(Billings & Eastman, 2000; Menneson, 2000). Therefore, the process of viewing the self
as a certain type of person is constructed cognitively and socially. In order to produce
change or reinforce existing perceptions, self-identities and social meanings serve as
antecedents for behaviors and social interactions. In other words, a male child has to learn
to identify himself as a male, and then he will actively construct male social meanings
and masculine behaviors (Newkirk, 2002). Therefore, in exploring traditional
masculinity, socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms also include the self as well as

other socializing agents such as the family members, coaches, teachers, and friends. The

27

inﬂuence of these socializing agents on traditional masculinity attitudes has been

explored in this study.

Social Constructions of Gender and Masculinity

There are multiple constructions of gender and masculinity in society. Some of
these social constructions are based on traditional gender ideologies. Some are based on
sexuality, while others are based on power relationships and dominance.

By and large, socializing agents, including the self, under various socio-cultural
contexts, socialize a person. However, traditional gender ideologies may be accepted or
denied through a process of gendered social construction either with or without the
person’s intention (Donnelly & Young, 2001). Furthermore, ignorance of denying or
accepting the traditional gender ideologies in the socialization process also ocCurs. This is
due to an absence of a clear understanding of distinctive gender classiﬁcation that leads
to more vague and metaphoric gender ideologies.

To avoid acceptance, negation, or ignorance, negotiated gender perspectives can
also be generated, but they create more complexity and contradictions with the traditional
gender ideologies behind socio-culturally constructed dominant gender ideologies (Baca
Zinn & Dill, 1994). Social construction of traditional gender ideologies can occur when
the negotiation of gender perspectives is disciplined by social dominance without one’s
own consciousness (Grant, 1993). This argument is supported by the following statement;

In truth, ideology has very little to do with consciousness, even supposing
this term to have an unambiguous meaning. It is profoundly unconscious.
Ideology is indeed a system of representations, but in the majority of cases

usually images and occasionally concepts, but it is about all as structures that

they impose on the vast majority of men, not via their consciousness (Grant,
1993,p.161)

28

This statement illuminates the subconscious ways in which males and females are
imprinted with structured gender ideologies. Reﬂecting on these gender aspects, Hall
(1990) suggested that gender plays an important role in apprehending social relations and
systems, (Hall, 1990). The relationships between men and women are often regarded as
an indicative element of social phenomena because men and women must confront their
differences in order to preserve the survival of the species. Particularly in this study, it is
suggested that men and masculinity are a very useful implement to comprehend the social
sphere as they create a compelling interest in arguments about gender ideologies as a
social dominance. In fact, men and masculinity are frequently considered as an inevitable
social status quo in the social gender process.

Many studies focused on gender suggested that masculinity is (re)enhanced within
a traditional gender ideology (Harris & Clayton, 2002; Laberge & Albert, 1999; Messner
& Sabo, 1990). In the traditional gender ideology about men, there is much discourse
which indicates that men should be active, self-reliant, competitive, tough, and
independent (Worell, 2001). In this contemporary society, the attribution of these
characteristics solely to one gender is politely regarded as a gender stereotype, since
society has traditionally and recently recognized them in both genders (Drummond,
2002)

Nonetheless, the traditional gender ideologies about men still noticeably indicate
a necessary resistance to social change, as they are so stagnantly embraced to be a
socially dominant ideology. With regard to gender boundaries, men have been depicted to
be more transgressive as if they are ‘normal’ while women have strictly been bound up

within sexual and reproductive body images, as if they are ‘others.’ Casper and Moore

29

(1995) supported this idea by arguing that the socially structured heterosexual paradigm
has impacted gender ideologies to reﬂect masculinity as normal and femininity as not
normal. They also argued that an interest of colonization — men over women — could
potentially be produced within the heterosexual scheme under the dominant gender
ideologies.

In this context, a dichotomous gendered social imagination that tends to
‘superiorize’ masculinity and ‘inferiorize’ femininity was created (Clasen, 2001;
Hasbrook & Harris, 1999). All in all, as gender is socially disciplined as though the
ideologies of men and women are never reconciled, the dichotomized genders have
become more isolated from one another in traditional masculinity contexts. Furthermore,
it is taken for granted that homosexuality is more alienated from traditional gender norms

and masculinity divisions (Wedgwood, 2004).

Traditional Masculinity in Society

Traditional masculinity is established historically from the past to the present, but
often in a way that is intertwined in a complex socio-cultural environment. Over the past
few decades, scholars began to document the issues of traditional masculinity within
social and cultural scopes in contemporary society and found that masculinity might be
studied from multiple perspectives including psychological and sociological dimensions.

Gudykust (2001) argued that masculinity employs ‘traditional’ societal gender
norms in its context. His argument suggested that men are supposed to be tough,
ambitious, and material-success oriented, while women are supposed to be warm, tender,

modest, and quality-of-life oriented. In Casper’s (1995) study dealing with discussions of

30

bodies, sex, and gender, it was suggested that masculinity is a traditionally distinctive
hierarchical stratum that is dominant over femininity, and that male bodies are socially
and culturally bracketed as a norm in a heterosexual and dualistic paradigm. Haenﬂer
(2004) stated that masculinity plays a role in legitimating traditional characteristics of
heterosexual and dualistic masculinity within the social hierarchical view. It is obvious
that, in many places, social and cultural norms of masculine dominance over femininity
have still traditionally been used to legitimate masculinity as a socio-cultural gender
norm in contemporary society. That is, masculinity is a traditional-social agenda within
selected cultures used to rationalize socially constructed gender ideologies. Given the
notion of traditional masculinity, Connel (2000) suggested that masculinity could have
complex discontinuous and contradictory interactions in the context of traditional socio-
cultural norms. Not only does traditional masculinity pertain to the scope of complex
social relations, but it is also formed as complicated and diverse cultural idealization. An
empirical study by Hofstede (1979) found that traditional masculinity is one of the
signiﬁcant cultural dimensions that shape an intricate cultural status quo. Attributes of
traditional masculinity often vary in different places and situations as a type of
multiplicity, hierarchy, discipline, and contradiction (Connell, 1990, 2000; Haenﬂer,
2004). Many studies argued that it has been hard to grasp its single deﬁnition of
masculinity, and to understand the traditional masculinity within complicated societies
and cultures.

Traditional masculinity can be considered a socially constructed constellation and
collective expectations of masculinity exist despite the diverse, inconsistent, and

contradictory views of masculinity in different societies, cultures, and history. The

31

characteristics of traditional masculinity are collectively isolated in several traits.
Therefore, common norms of traditional masculinity are employed. These norms of
traditional masculinity can be very intricate and have countless characteristics because of
the complex nature of societies and cultures. In fact, traditional masculinity is often
different from its plural term, ‘masculinities’ in that this latter term focuses on a range of
ﬂexible constructions of masculinity. Traditional masculinity is based on constructed-
conceptual perceptions from various normative qualities of masculinity, reﬂecting
complexity of conformity to cultural norms. Levant and Kopecky (1995) made a
constellation of the complex social-psychological characteristics of traditional
masculinity and isolated the following key characteristics: avoiding femininity, rejection
of homosexuality, self-reliance, aggression, achievement/status, attitudes toward sex, and
restrictive emotionality.

Traditional masculinity also includes hegemonic masculinity, which focuses on
males being dominant over others in society, families, and other social institutions in
society. Traditional masculinity is maintained and enhanced with hegemonic features of
masculinity that are deeply rooted in traditional masculinity. Social members are deﬁned
as disciplined objects in this power relation, because that power is practiced in controlling
and socializing people (Foucault, 1977). Power relations are also identiﬁed as relations of
hegemony and resistance, and contested power relations are (re)produced as dialectic
embracement (Crosset & Beal, 1997). Foucault (1977) discussed the nature and practice
of power within traditional masculinity in his book, Discipline and Punish: the Birth of
the Prison, suggesting that traditionally people in society are disciplined by a power

relationship. He suggested that people with power and their desires regiment many

32

aspects of society. The people with power in large part play a signiﬁcant role in shaping
social systems in order to rationalize their own social status and privileges (Chen, 1999;
Mills, 1959). In these shaped social systems, it can be seen that people behave, interact,
and are inﬂuenced through social structures to believe as dominant people would wish
them to do. Regarding gender, male dominance is a key element to understanding societal
power reﬂections. As a matter of fact, society has long been structured and maintained
with male dominance in both the social and cultural domains. It should be noted that
many traditional gender norms and ideologies have very pervasively been learned as
undeniable social ideologies throughout many social systems under male dominance.
Regardless of gender, both men and women receive and respond to the gender norms and
ideologies constituent with hegemonic masculinity. In this decade, many feminists and
independent women’s movements have made steps to change the traditional gender
norms and ideologies in the wake of the Civil Rights Movement, Women’s Movements,
and Title IX (Smith, 2000), however, one always wonders to what extent people have
changed their dominant ideologies about traditional gender norms.

Traditional masculinity employs hegemonic constructions and features of power
relationships of subordination of others internally within gender and externally across
gender on the basis of masculinity and a matrix of domination (Baimer, 1999; Carlson,
1995; Collins, 1991; Connell, 2000; Haenﬂer, 2004; Hasbrook & Harris, 1999).
Dominant hegemonic relations can be taken into account as a more fundamental concept
of traditional masculinity, and frequently appear to be taken for granted as a social aspect
in a collective mode (Carlson, 1995). Hasbrook and Harris’ (1999) study evidenced

hegemonic features of traditional masculinity by depicting young wrestlers’ perceptions

33

about masculinity. In that study, masculinity was expressed as a means to display
physical prowess and dominance. Particularly, subjects behaving to marginalize others
who had less physicality were examined as a hegemonic feature of traditional
masculinity. As a result, the characteristics of traditional masculinity were imprinted with
hegemonic dominance to show prowess or a desired superiority amongst men and boys

over others.

Masculinity in Sport/Physical Activity

Sport/physical activity is considered a reﬂection of society, but it can also be
argued vice versa that society often is a reﬂection of sport/physical activity. For instance,
society is also regarded as a reﬂection of sport/physical activity because many aspects of
sport/physical activity are displayed in society, reﬂecting cultural repercussions such as
wearing sports attire in everyday life or having most men engaging in sport talk.
Sport/physical activity is also channeled as an important agency of cultural production, so
people reﬂect the features of sport/physical activity in other areas of their lives (Baimer,
1999; Coakley, 2004).

Structural functional theory describes skills development, social integration,
relaxation, education, and self-efﬁcacy as major features of sport/physical activity
(Coakey, 2004). Yet, as sport/physical activity has been professionalized,
commercialized, and industrialized, masculine features such as aggression, toughness,
and homophobia have become more prominent (Lippe, 2002; Trujillio, 2001). One of the
main aspects of sport/physical activity is masculinity (Miller et al., 1999). According to

Miller et a1. (1999), "Sport had traditionally been a training ground for manhood. Indeed,

34

athletic participation for boys prioritizes trademark masculine traits" (Miller et al., 1999,
p.370). They particularly pointed out that sport in American culture has been practiced to
signify masculinity within its cultural values such as promoting vigorousness, hardship,
competition, aggressiveness, toughness, dominance, and physicality.

In many studies of sport sociology, researchers found that many of these
traditional masculinity characteristics are socially and culturally learned and accepted in
sport/physical activity. The promotion and encouragement of masculinity is taken for
granted. In fact, sport/physical activity has historically been developed as an essential
element geared toward socializing boys and men in society to eXamine and strengthen
their masculinity or maleness (Coakley, 2004). In accordance with this, many studies
argued that sport/physical activity is practiced to commemorate and celebrate masculinity
(Connell, 2000; Foley, 1990; Kidd, 1987; Messner, 2001).

Even though sport/physical activity values often promote health, ﬁtness, and
social beneﬁts for broad populations including women, children, seniors, and people with
disabilities, sport/physical activity has undeniably been celebrated and developed in the
past as a venue for boys and men to be socialized away from women and exhibit their
masculinity. Historical sport/physical activities such as the Olympic games in ancient
Greece, gladiatorial bouts in Rome, knightly tournaments in the Middle ages, scholar
athletes in the Renaissance era, peasant festive physical activities and games in the
Enlightenment era, laborer recreational activities in the Industrialization period, and
many professional sport/physical activities in the modern era have been-engaged in

predominantly by men (Coakley, 2004). This historical aspect of sport/physical activity

35

remains in the consciousness and cultural ideology of modern people, who still cannot
deny that sport/physical activity is used to socialize boys and men into masculinity.

Sport/physical activity is inevitably represented as an opportunity for men to
practice masculinity. Papas, MacKenry, and Catlett’s (2004) study of male ice hockey
players suggested that sport traditionally offers masculine features such as aggression,
toughness, or risk-taking as cultural traditions among the male players, so that sport
exists in conjunction with masculinity. In Foley’s (1999) study, which depicted football
games as a socio-cultural ritual in a local setting, masculinity is evident in a major display
of the gendered practice called ‘machoism’. In another study, which is about England
soccer games, it was found that aggression and violence are sanctioned and promoted
from spectators as though they are all bonded with players to battle as men in a war
(Baimer, 1999). This study suggested that masculinity associated with warriorship is tied
to traditional hegemonic masculinity.

As suggested throughout these studies, sport/physical activity has been a venue in
which the ideologies of traditional masculinity are heavily practiced and featured. Its
characteristics are overtly and covertly accepted within its competitive contexts even
though they may be elsewhere considered deviant and violent in contemporary society —
against the rules of social conformity (Coakley, 2004). In fact, masculinity permeates the
whole society throughout its structures or ideologies (D. M. Miller, 1992). It is even more
aggressively legitimated and sanctioned in sport arenas than in society in general
(Messner & Sabo, 1990).

Many studies suggested sport/physical activity has gone far to celebrate

masculinity with a display of and a focus on features of toughness, aggression,

36

intimidation, and competitiveness, which are considered traditionally essential for better
performances (Connell, 2000; Foley, 1990; Kidd, 1987; Messner, 2001). To that extent,
sport/physical activity and traditional masculinity are undeniably related. Historically and
culturally, sport/physical activity has developed in society, however, it should be noted
that masculinity has been an inevitable feature of these activities. It is important to
understand how and why sport/physical activity was promoted with masculinity. People
come to sport/physical activity arenas to watch and play games, but the tough, aggressive,
and competitive spectacles are overtly or covertly expected, experienced, learned, and

accepted.

Sport/Physical Activity Values and Masculinity

In the study, ‘Men, Play and Games,’ a French intellectual, Caillois (1961)
theorized that play and games are a production of cultural transformation and social
derivation in which people experience competitiveness (agon), chance (alea), simulation
(mimicry), and vertigo (ilinkx). In this theory, play and games are viewed as a place that
people, particularly men, practice and display what men are ‘supposed to be’ in a society
and in a culture. His theory suggested that sport/physical activity, as ‘the’ play and games,
are played for purposes of demonstrating men’s own superiority and for simulating
gender social orders through such uncertain tough scrimmages and bouts. Because one
may feel unsteady in tough, aggressive, and intimidating competitions, such scenarios of
play and games provide a simulation in which men’s superiority can be tested.

However, different attitudes and values towards sport/physical activity were

determined as women and men, elders, youths, and people with disabilities generated

37

diverse perspectives. Sport/physical activity has been changing in recent decades as an
increased variety of people have had more opportunities to participate and pursue very
diverse beneﬁts and values beyond engaging in masculinity-related competition.
Sport/physical activities are now played regardless of gender, age, culture, and physical
capability; however, sport/physical activity still continues to be a major gender
socialization structure for boys and men.

Kenyon (1968) isolated attitudes towards physical activity to look at various
values of sport/physical activity. He attempted to examine social psychological
perceptions and attitudes towards'sport/physical activity values. Examining these
attitudes, his study investigated attitudes and meanings people found in sport/physical
activity. From his investigation, which was empirically conducted, attitudes towards the
beneﬁts and values of sport/physical activity were categorized as (a) a social experience,
(b) health and ﬁtness, (c) an aesthetic experience, (d) a pursuit of vertigo, (e) catharsis,
and (i) an ascetic experience. His theory was largely taken from Caillois’ (1961) who
deﬁned qualities previously discussed in this chapter as competitiveness (ago'n), chance
(alea), simulation (mimicry), and vertigo (ilinlcx) exepriences.

A number of studies dealing with gender and its relationship to sport/physical
activity values were conducted. Most of the studies found that women are more likely to
have more positive values on social experience, health and ﬁtness, and aesthetic
experience as opposed to those on a pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and ascetic experience
as men would have (Acord, 1977; Dotson & Stanley, 1972; Harvey, 1989; Hendry, 1975;

Mize, 1979; Mullins, 1969). Reﬂecting on the results of those studies, the present study

38

attempted to investigate whether men with traditional masculinity would perceive
differentiated values on sport/physical activity.

Kenyon (1968)’s ﬁrst suggestion of ‘social experience’ as one of the values was
relevant to a social integration value: obtaining a social membership through
sport/physical activity. However, the chances of developing social relationships in
sport/physical activity may be devalued among men. Traditional hegemonic masculinity
employs practicing behaviors using power and strength over others rather than
developing social relationships through sport. Of course, it could be argued that men
favor developing ﬁiendships with male peers through sport participations, but usually by
going through adversarial training and competitions together. Coakley (2004) pointed out
that men usually try to avoid expressions of caring for others in sports. Instead, he argued
that they tend to favor teasing, ‘one-upsmanship’, or mocking others. His point implied
that the beneﬁts of a social experience through sport/physical activity could be limited
within the bounds of competition and conﬁrmation of masculinity experiences with other
males.

Levant and Kopecky (1995) pointed out that social relationships among men are
different from those among women. They mentioned,

Male friends are loyal to each other. They stand by each other. They come
through for each other, when one needs the other, the other is there - no
question asked. . .The point is that they tend to do that extending in the
traditional masculine way, which is by swinging into action on a ﬁ'iend’s
behalf. What men tend to be less good at is extending themselves to a ﬁiend
in the more traditional feminine way, which is by “being there” on a purely
emotional level - by making clear that they’re available and ready to listen
anytime the friend wants to talk over a problem...That’s often the missing
piece in male friendships (Levant & Kopecky, 1995, p.268).

Along with this argument, they suggested that social relationships among men appear to

be different from those among women. Therefore, this study assumed that men would

39

devalue social experience within the traditional meanings implied in sport/physical
activity as men have greater values for traditional masculinity. Also, the study assumed
that men might value sport competitive interactions, but might not value the emotional-
social aspects of social relationships traditionally valued by women.

Secondly, the ‘health and ﬁtness value’ was conceived as a facet of physical
wellness. With this value, people engaged in sport/physical activity to maintain their
body’s health. The value of ‘health and ﬁtness’ may also be argued to be devalued when
applying the ideal to traditional masculinity. Women’s participation in sport/physical
activity in this modern era has been rapidly increased because of Title X and the health
and ﬁtness movements and women’s growing interest in promoting health beneﬁts and
wellness through sport/physical activity (Coakley, 2004; Conniff, 1996). Yet, relating to
masculinity and health and ﬁtness, several studies suggested that masculinity causes
many health problems for men through violence, injury, drug use, and risk taking
behaviors (Brown, 2004; Eitzen, 1999; Frey, 1991; Keller, 2005; Pappas, MaKenry, &
Catlett, 2004; Robertson, 2003; Sowti, 2004).

According to Frey (1991), risk-taking should be viewed as a problem because
sport and physical activities often include players who participate when in pain, engage in
violence, or use drugs. However, this problem has often been ignored as many male
“athletes are expected to tough it out” (Brown, 2004, p.218). Such deviated features of
sport/physical activity are often tacitly coerced as socialization and acculturation in sport
arenas (Pappas, MaKenry, & Catlett, 2004). Interest in health among men is also often
de-centralized due to an uncritical preference for masculinity (Robertson, 2003). In a

study about men’s health by Sowti (2004), men’s health condition declined because of

40

their distorted imagination of maleness and a male appearance, causing excessive over-
workout, development of eating disorders, and use of steroids as a part of a masculinity
culture.

There was also another case regarding men’s health problems in the
representative male sport of football (Keller, 2005). In a local newspaper, football players’
health problems were reported as follows:

Of course, there is the danger that just comes with playing game. Five
players died of football-related injuries last year at the youth league, high
school, collegiate, and professional levels. As players get bigger, collisions
between them become more powerful and, as a result, more dangerous.
There’s also risk that comes from being a large person doing strenuous
physical activity in oppressive conditions. Another nine players died last
year from heat stroke, dehydration or heart failure while playing... Lugging
extra weight around all the time increases the risk of diabetes, high blood
pressure and other cardiovascular disease later in life. Heavy players are also
at higher risk for sleep apnea, which interrupts breathing during sleep and
can produce an irregular heartbeat and other cardiovascular problems
(Keller, 2005, 1] 3).
This article showed that, in recent years, players were getting bigger and bulkier so
that many health problems appeared. Therefore, this study also attempted to
examine a negative relationship between traditional masculinity and health and
ﬁtness values.

‘Aesthetic experience’ was thirdly suggested as one of the sport/physical activity
values. It reﬂected one’s attitude toward values of observing or performing beautiful or
artistic movements in sport/physical activity. This value suggests that people pay more
attention to how beautiful and aesthetically pleasing bodily movements look instead of
just how powerfully and dynamically the body movement is performed. It could be

assumed that this ‘aesthetic experience’ value in sport/physical activity could also be

valued more for femininity and devalued according to traditionally masculine men in

41

sport/physical activity as more females do engage in aerobic dance, ballet, ﬁgure skating,
rhythmic gymnastics, and synchronized swimming. Such activities are traditionally
acculturated in and performed by women for an aesthetic purpose in performance
(Coakley, 2004; Duquin, 1989; National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2004; National
Sport Goods Association, 2004). For example, according to ‘2002-2003 NCAA Gender-
Equity Report’ by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (2004), there are few, if
any male participants in certain sports such as rhythmic gymnastics and synchronized
swimming which has been culturally structured for the aesthetics and competition of girls
and women. Lower percentages of males in several sport/physical activities were reported
in these sports according to ‘2004 Women’s Participation -— Ranked by Median Age —
Male — Female’ by the National Sporting Goods Association (2004). These activities in
which men were unlikely to have high participation rates included aerobic dance (26.2%
male and 73.8% female) and ﬁgure skating (36% male and 64 % female). These activities
mainly focus on aesthetics such as beauty of body movements and artistic performances.
Of course, it could also be argued that many illustrated pictures of men’s sport/physical
activity, such as football and baseball provide aesthetic ﬁgures such as dynamic jumps,
strides, and beautiful throws. However, many of these movements are socially and
culturally constructed to look ‘cool’ or masculine but are not performed, judged, or
deﬁned purposefully for social constructions of aesthetics in male sports. That is,
beautiﬁil and artistic movements are illustrated but are not purposely valued, performed,
or considered symbolically aesthetic as main features of men’s sport/physical activity

participation.

42

Fourth, ‘a pursuit of vertigo’ refers to taking a risk, thrilling dynamic and speedy
actions, or challenging a dangerous situation in sport/physical activity. This could be
related to the term, ‘vertigo’; a state of out of body thrill and adventure or dizzying
experience that could result from an amusement park ride such as a roller coaster.
However, Kenyon (1968) pointed out that the vertigo from an amusement park ride could
not be controlled by riders. Sport/physical activity, on the other band, could be somewhat
controlled by players in that they could give up or stop performing whenever they want.
This type of vertigo could also be experienced in sporting events such as various types of
outdoor challenge or adventure sports such as skiing, rollerblading, snowboarding, or sky
diving. He also argued that the notion of pursuit of vertigo is attenuated within an
element of sport/physical activity as in the following statement:

Physical activity as the pursuit of vertigo is considered to be those physical

experiences providing, at some risk to the participant, an element of thrill

through the medium of speed, acceleration, sudden change of direction, or
exposure to dangerous situations, with the participant usually remaining in

control (Kenyon, 1968, p.100).

The context of vertigo in sport/physical activity was, in fact, suggested to be a way of
creating a challenge, and separating physical ability from the real world. It can provide a
sensation of freedom from the limitations of time, space, and physicality. In the present
study, it was assumed that masculinity had a positive relationship with the pursuit of
vertigo values in sport/physical activity because sport/physical activity participants often
experienced the challenges of speed, acceleration, rapidly changing direction, and risky
performance within a limited time, space, and physical ability (Henderson, 1999).

The fifth value, ‘catharsis,’ was claimed to be an experience of using sports to

release tension or to get out aggression and frustration, then relaxing and releasing the

43

aggression, stress, and pent-up emotions through sport/physical activity. In terms of
‘catharsis’ Kenyon (1968) pointed out the following:

.. .by narrowing the conception to physical activity perceived as providing a

release of tension precipitated by frustration through some vicarious means.

The notion that a reduction in tension is achieved by expressing hostility and

aggression, either directly, by attacking the instigator of the frustration, or

more commonly, through venting one’s hostilities through some equivalent

form of aggression behavior, is the catharsis hypothesis (Kenyon, 1968,

p.101).
According to this statement, sport/physical activity could be performed to release
frustration and tension through a desire for toughness and aggression that are rarely
allowed legitimately elsewhere in society (K. E. Miller, Sabo, Farrell, Barnes, & Melnick,
1999; Pappas, MaKenry, & Catlett, 2004; Robertson, 2003). This value is more
psychological and sociological, but it is important to see if men are encouraged to value
sport/physical activity because they are seeking a way of releasing their socially and
culturally inspired masculine aggression. Therefore, the present study hypothesized that
there would be a positive relationship between masculinity and the catharsis value in
sport/physical activity.

Lastly, ‘ascetic experience’ was deﬁned within a context of disciplined
debasement or sacriﬁce of the body3. According to Kenyon (1968), this deﬁnition of
asceticism could be associated with a notion of ‘punishment of the body’ (Kenyon, 1968,
p.101) in sport/physical activity because certain activities often demand a hardship;
putting off delights for difﬁcult competitions and painfully arduous training. There is a

motto that many athletes and coaches use to encourage themselves; ‘no pain, no gain.’

Although it is often regarded as an old-fashioned saying, this phrase implies

 

“People who are ascetic have a way of life that is simple and strict with no luxuries or physical pleasures,
usually because of their religious beliefs” (Collins COBUILD English language dictionary, 1987, p.72).

44

sport/physical activity participants must engage in hard work to win. For the sake of the
hardship, the participants often sacriﬁce themselves away from pleasures and easy lives
to achieve success in competition. This could be a context of the religious notion of
asceticism (Kenyon, 1968). This notion of ascetic experience in sport/physical activity
becomes more apparent when a characteristic of competitiveness in sport/physical
activity comes into play. Fundamentally, competitions in sport/physical activity socially
determine which player is athletically superior to the other, and almost every
sport/physical activity adopts this characteristic of competitiveness. Therefore,
participants strive to be stronger and faster, to jump higher, to have more agility, and
more endurance than other competitors. Even in non-competitive sport/physical activity,
a goal of ‘healthier and ﬁtter’ than others is pursed as a type of self-competition feature.
That is, people in sport/physical activity desire superiority to others and often desire to
have strict training regimens. In this individualistic competitive feature of sport/physical
activity, people may believe that ascetic attitudes are necessary.

According to Caillois (1961), ‘desired superiority’ is the main aspect of the
competitiveness value. He stated that competitiveness, which is termed ago'n, is one of
the fundamental classiﬁcations of play and games. Furthermore, Caillois (1961) asserts
that play and games simulate social role norms, and men and boys play and practice those
with competitiveness. Given this argument, Kenyon (1968) claimed that the value of
asceticism in sport/physical activity relates to the value of competitiveness in
sport/physical activity. He also stated that people value sport/physical activity because it
provides a place where people can seek their desired superiority over others or their

current self-status by playing and practicing hard. As traditional society often socializes

45

men and boys to be tougher, stronger, and more competitively aggressive to overcome
adversarial situations as a traditionally masculine man, the ascetic value of
competitiveness (ago'n) is certainly emphasized in sport/physical activity (Drummond,
2002). Therefore, it was suggested that traditional masculinity also had a positive
relationship to ascetic values in this study.

All in all, as a critical point of View, this study assumed that masculinity might be
socialized and attributed to limited traditional attitudes about the values of sport/physical
activity participation. Therefore, it was suggested that masculinity attitudes could relate
selectively to different attitudes and values of traditionally masculine men about
sport/physical activity (Drummond, 2002). In this context, it is assumed that masculinity
as a gendered ideology for men could affect selected men to be more stereotypically and
traditionally masculine so that they also have differently perceived values and attitudes
towards their sport/physical activity participation (Daddario, 1997; Harris & Clayton,
2002; Lippe, 2002a; Wedgwood, 2004).

Given differential gendered socialization towards masculinity and selected
sport/physical activity values and attitudes, the present study also examines the
relationship of traditional masculinity and traditionally masculine behaviors in
sport/physical activity to gain an understanding of men’s prioritized values in

sport/physical activity.

Social Theories Used in the Study

This study, as a sport sociological investigation, used several sociological theories

for the construction of the research design, implementation, and discussion of

46

triangulated data. The social theories used were structural functionalism theory, symbolic
interaction theory, and critical theory. Each theory was applied within the study to
determine which issues were to be examined, how the study was to be designed, what
study analyses were to be conducted, and how those analyses were culturally discussed.
The application of these social theories was give an opportunity to use different lenses to
view various societal perspectives of traditional masculinity socialization and to suggest a

mixed methodological approach.

Structural functionalism theory
Structural functionalism theory assumes that a sociological study can be achieved

to discover social truths about how societies operate and then develop into a social
system of laws that control and maintain society (Coakley, 2004). Structural
functionalism theorizes that the social order will be kept and positively processed if
social systems such as the family, education, and sport maintain and socialize people to
agree with social and cultural traditions or norms. As the social connections between
people are promoted and strengthened, the systems are protected and maintained.

One of the classic structural functionalism theorists, Talcott Parsons (1971),
suggested social actions comply with the ‘behavioral organism’ in social structure and
systems. According to Parsons:

The behavioral organism is conceived as the adaptive subsystems, the

locus of the primary human facilities which underlie the other systems. It

embodies sets of conditions to which action must adapt and comprises the

primary mechanism of interrelation with the physical environment,

especially through the input and processing of information in the central

nervous system and through motor activity in coping with existence of the
physical environment” (Parsons, 1971, p.6).

47

This theory suggested that social structures have to be constructed, applying an organic
view that society is controlled within itself in order to maintain its basic functions.
Talcott Parsons also suggested that social structures are maintained with inter-functional
systems of socialized personality, institutionalized society, and regulated cultural norms
and beliefs (Parsons, 1971; Waters, 1994). From earlier work in functionalism, this
theory was supported by Emile Durkheim (Turner & Turner, 1998) who argued that four
basic types of structural mechanisms are taken into account for understanding the
structural society: (a) collective conscience and collective representations as a cultural
mechanism, (b) structural interdependencies and subgroup formation as a structural
mechanism, (c) ritual and the ensuing sense of effervescence and social solidarity as an
inter-personal mechanism, and (d) classiﬁcation and modes of symbolization as a
cognitive mechanism (Turner & Turner, 1998). As can be seen in this theory, the ftmction
of the social structures can be explained in society.

On the other hand, it was suggested that the essence of this theory focuses on the
examination of social arrangements reﬂecting their contribution to the whole society in
structure (Sharrock, Hughes, & Martin, 2003). Regarding this argument, the structural
functionalism theory begs the question in terms of sport/physical activity: how does
sport/physical activity match with social life, contributing stability and progress in social
relationships? It suggests that structural functionalism theory leads people to encourage
sport/physical activity to accentuate what people perceive to be traditional ideals in social
and cultural circumstance. Along with this, structural functionalism theory focuses on
revealing many positive effects of social actions, behaviors, and attitudes. In

sport/physical activity, character building, skill development, health and ﬁtness, etc., are

48

considered positive effects, reﬂecting structural functionalism theory. In this study, the
presence of masculinity in sport/physical activity was examined using quantitative
approaches. Many structural functional perspectives suggested that interrelated aspects of
personal socialization, social structures, and cultural regulation positively construct social
norms, values, and strata (Andersen & Kaspersen, 2000; Waters, 1994). Therefore, this
study attempted to ﬁrst see if there was a positive societal inﬂuence and relationship with
traditional gender norms, masculinity, and sport/physical activity as constructive social
relations. This resulted in a structural model; so structural functionalism was used for the
quantitative design of the research model. Results and analyses in this theoretical
application were sought to deﬁne quantiﬁable factors and effects of the social structures

and functions in this matter.

Symbolic interaction theory
Symbolic interaction theory assumes that our interactions with other social

members create social norms, roles, relationships, and structures (Blumer, 1962).
Symbolic interaction theory focuses on identity that is individual, social, or cultural
senses of who I am in the social world. This theory studies people as choice makers and
creators of meaning, identity, and relationships. Herbert Blumer (1962), one of the

eminent symbolic interactionists, addressed symbolic interaction theory as the following.

The terms ‘symbolic interaction’ refers, of course, to the peculiar and
distinctive character of interaction as it takes place between human beings.
The peculiarity consists in the fact than human beings interpret or ‘deﬁne’
each other’s actions instead of merely reacting to each other’s actions.
Their ‘response’ is not made directly to the actions of another but instead
is based on the meaning which they attach to such actions. Thus, human
interaction is mediated by the use of symbols, by interpretation, or by
ascertaining the meaning of one another’s actions. This mediation is
equivalent to inserting a process of interpretation between stimulus and
response in the case of human behavior (Blumer, 1962, p. 180).

49

According to this statement, symbolic interaction analyses focus on not only individual
identities and relationships among/with others but also the inﬂuence of environment and
interactive meanings of information.

In accordance with these traits of symbolic interaction theory, Goffman’s (1990)
‘drarnaturgical impression management’ could also be utilized to examine traditional
masculinity through understanding how people interact and behave with others. Before
the discussion, it should be noted that Goffman did not regard himself as a symbolic
interaction theorist. Rather, he considered himself an anthropologist (Waters, 1994).
However, as he was very inﬂuential to the modern symbolic interaction theory, this study
discusses his work in this chapter. For instance, his work was largely discussed on micro-
sociological analyses and qualitative component parts of the interactive social processes
(Sharrock, Hughes, & Martin, 2003). Turning to the discussion of Goffman’s theory,
‘dramaturgical impression management,’ it could be seen that this theory argued that
people changed their actions and behaviors depending on where they were located and
with whom they were interacting, just as actors or singers showed different attitudes and
behaviors on and behind the stage and outside the theater. Thinking of socially
constructed dominant ideologies as a big theater, this theory argued that people acted and
behaved in a certain collective way, apart ﬁom their own wills, personalities, or even
their desired manner of behavior. Facing the dominant ideologies as a theater with
crowded audiences, peOple might be afraid or concerned about how they had to act,
behave, and learn. In a paradigm of symbolic interaction theory reﬂecting the
dramaturgical impression theory, the concept of collective masculinity presented a

condition in which men were socialized to adhere to symbolized dominant concepts of

50

masculinity without ever knowing their own real, unique, individual ‘self.’ Some merely
counted themselves as men among other men in society. A traditionally masculine man
could try to identify himself as just a heterosexual man who must be aggressive or tough
in accepting masculinity, rather than one’s own individual self (Birrell & Cole, 1994). In
this context, symbolic interaction theory could be utilized to understand masculinity
meaning and identity issues and interactive experiences in sports (Coakley, 2004). It gave
an idea that social reality could be in the minds and social relations with people who
participated in sport/physical activity in a social setting. This study could repeatedly
argue that socializing agents such as parents, siblings, either male or female peers, and
coaches could be major providers of social relationships that enhanced social realities,
identities, and socially and culturally symbolized ideologies in society and within sport.
However, it could also be the male himself who actively socializes himself based on his
self-identity, social meanings, and social reality. In fact sport was recognized as a major
site for the construction and demonstration of traditional masculinity ideology (Messner,
2001)

In the present study symbolic interaction perspectives were used to design the
interview and to examine in-depth social meanings of traditional masculinity and
relationships through semi-structured interviews for the qualitative aspects of the study.
A theoretical application of symbolic interaction was used for the qualitative methods of
analyses of interview data. It allowed the study to analyze respondents’ socio-cultural
sense of who they were and how they interacted, learned, accepted, or denied social
realities and relations with ‘others’ in an interaction and symbolic sense. Along with this

attempt, the study provides views of more interactive and in—depth relationships with

51

others in social and cultural practices regarding inﬂuences on traditional masculinity

(Becker & McCall, 1990).

Critical theory

Critical theory emphasizes the need for social changes and the need to understand
complex societal relationships and phenomena in history, in contemporary times, or in
the future. Socio-cultural transitions from the past to the contemporary containing the
complexities of diversiﬁed cultures based on nationality, race/ethnicity, gender norms,
socio-economic class, etc., inﬂuence social ideologies, including the ideology of
masculinity (Smith, 2000).

This theory has the advantage of considering various and contradictory social
viewpoints in questioning and revealing complex social issues. It critiques dominant
social structures, power relations, and socio-cultural practices (Andersen & Kaspersen,
2000; Habermas, 1975). Therefore, it can be a valuable tool for understanding because
this theory sophisticatedly focuses on speciﬁc social issues and problems and considers
the elimination of oppression and exploitation, while promoting equalitarianism, equality,
and openness. In addition, critical theory is many times utilized to serve as stimulation for
people to recognize contradictory social problems with complex societal constructions of
power and money (Turner & Turner, 1998).

With regard to sport/physical activity, critical theory addresses the various ways
to examine and critique complex social issues in sport/physical activity with speciﬁc
social and cultural aspects at a certain time and place in history. It often focuses on
challenging the existence of dominant norms and values in society and sport. Critical

theory attempts to empower some marginalized and disadvantaged individuals or group

52

of people who have been oppressed. The critical theory leads to a discourse of social
structures, oppression, power relations, and social change within structured dominant
ideologies, attitudes, and values. It also discusses the operations, shifts, and changes of
power in society. Therefore, self-reﬂection and in-depth cultural analysis are encouraged
as they can be empowering processes and intermediary steps to emancipation (Andersen,
2000)

As one of the critical theories, feminism theory suggests that women have been
devalued and exploited in societies under the dominant ideologies. In this theory, a
question arose about how sports were involved in creating and changing gendered social
relations and culture. Regarding sport/physical activity, feminist theory considers
sport/physical activity as gendered activities to reproduce the attributes related to
traditional gender norms and masculinity in society. Therefore, feminist theory as an
example of critical theory raises many issues about the expression of gender,
heterosexism, and homophobia in sport/physical activity.

Thus, this study utilized an overall critical theory analysis for discussion and
analyses of traditional gender norms that were signiﬁcant elements which contribute to
the enhancement of traditional masculinity. Ramsay (2000) deﬁned critical theory as “a
theory that at the same time is both critical of society and critical of theories concerning
this society and scientiﬁc methods to approach it” (Ramsay, 2000, p.143). This study
used a critical standpoint in terms of analysis of methods and results. That is, this study
did not use only a single method, adhering to either a quantitative method or a
quantitative method; instead this study pursued various methods because societies and

cultures are complex and contradictory. For instance, people are often oppressed by

53

dominant ideologies. Therefore, the result of this study was examined from the multiple
perspectives. Thus, a triangulation of literature, quantitative, and qualitative approaches
from a critical standpoint was used to discuss and analyze in-depth socio-cultural

realities.

54

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODS

The research methods chapter will give an overview of the research design,
survey and interview, instrumentation, data collection procedures, and data analyses used
in the study. A mixed methods approach was used in this study using quantitative and
qualitative methods. Using mixed methodological approaches, this study investigated
traditional masculinity and sport/physical values and behaviors that could explain (a)
social processes of collected behaviors and attitudes that provide a predictive insight into
structural socialization at a macro and (b) in-depth social meanings, symbols, and

interactions that provide individual perceptions and interpretations at a micro level.

Research Design

Using collaborative approaches with both quantitative and qualitative methods as
suggested, this study was designed to examine relationships among diverse social
meanings and socio-cultural structures of traditional gender norms, traditional
masculinity attitudes, sport/physical activity values, and masculine behaviors in
sport/physical activity. In the study design, major variables were examined to determine
their relationships and strength of association with one another. For the quantitative
method portion of this study, ‘survey’ methods were utilized and structural equation
modeling was adapted to analyze speciﬁcally detailed relationships between individual
variables and the larger structured relationships among all the variables as a single model.
For the qualitative methods portion, semi-structured ‘interview’ methods were used to get
a more in—depth and close look at personal, social, and cultural meanings and

experiences. Through these mixed methods, this study attempted both a positivistic and a

55

critical examination of traditional masculinity constructions and relationships to

sport/physical activity values and behaviors.

Major variables

The study design used four major variables and was based on social theories and

research from related studies in sociology, psychology, and kinesiology. Table 1 presents

the basic research paradigm with the major study variables, analysis dimensions,

descriptive measures, and sources of instruments.

Table 1. Study variables in the research paradigm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sources of
Variables Analysis Methods of Instruments
4 . . Measures .
(abbr. ) Dimensmns Securing Data (also see
Appendix B)
Socio-Cultural Socio-cultural Antecedent a. Survey: rating MaCabe &
Inﬂuences on aspects of Socio-cultural scale Ricciardelli
Gender Norms family, friends, Inﬂuences of b. Interview: (2003), Worrell
(SCIGN) education, and Social Agents semi-structured (2001), etc.
sport/physical
activity
Traditional Social-personal Traditional a. Survey: rating Brannon (I985),
Masculinity aspects Masculinity scale Levant & Fischer
Attitudes Attitudes b. Interview: (1998), Sargent
(TMA) semi-structured (1985), etc.
Masculine Sport/Physical Sport/PA a. Survey: rating Connell (2000),
Behaviors in Activity Behaviors/ scale Kidd (I987),
Sport/Physical Outcomes Acceptance b. Interview: McKay, et al.
Activity semi-structured (2000), etc.
(MBS)
Sport/Physical Sport/Physical Sport/PA a. Survey: rating Caillois (1961),
Activity Values Activity Attitudes and scale Kenyon (1968),
(SV) Outcomes Values b. Interview: etc.
semi-structured

 

 

 

4

Abbreviations of SCIGN, TMA, MBS, and SV in the table will be shown from now on in the paper, but
their full names will also be displayed together in this chapter. It is for the readers to get accustomed with
the abbreviations. However, the next chapter will use only the abbreviations most of the time.

56

The ﬁrst major variable category was Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
(SCIGN). This variable examined socio-cultural antecedent socializing agents that were
assumed to inﬂuence traditional masculinity attitudes in males (McCabe & Ricciardelli,
2001; MacQueen, 2003, Worrel 2001). By surveying with the questionnaire, the extent of
socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms was measured. In the study, social inﬂuences
from family, friends, coaches, sport teammates, school physical education classmates,
and school physical education class teachers were rated on a limited Likert scale to reveal
how much they inﬂuenced the college males’ perceptions about traditional gender norms.
This scale indicated the degree to which traditional gender norms are inﬂuenced by these
socializing agents, who may encourage a person to accept traditional gender norms. At
the same time, through interviews during the qualitative phase of the study, the more in-
depth aspects of these experiences were investigated.

The second major variable was Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA). It
examined and measured the extent of attitudes held by study participants towards
traditional masculinity concepts through the use of Likert rating scales within the survey.
The traditional masculinity attitudes variable was based on a social construction of
masculinity that involves attitudes associated with the contexts of male power and
dominance, avoidance of femininity, restricted emotions, self-reliance,
achievement/status, aggression, rejection of homosexuality, and attitudes toward sex. The
variable of Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA) was measured and used to
investigate its relationships to the Socio-cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (SCIGN),

Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV), and Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity

57

(MBS) measures. Traditional masculinity attitudes were also examined through
interviews for the qualitative aspects of the study.

As the third variable, Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS)
were measured and studied as the second outcome dimension. This variable was based on
the behavioral contexts of masculinity that take place in sport/physical activity. These
include behavioral demonstrations of dominance, competitiveness, toughness/aggression,
self-reliance, restricted emotions, avoidance of feminine behaviors, competing without
regard for risk and injury taking, verbal accusations, and drug, alcohol, and tobacco use.
Representation of the Masculinity Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity variable was
made by measuring to what extent a person demonstrated, experienced, or behaved in a
traditionally masculine manner in sport/physical activity. A Likert scale measured the
extent of masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity and its relationships to
Traditional Masculinity Attitudes. Interviews were also conducted to study masculine
behaviors and experiences for the qualitative phase of the research.

The last variable was Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV). It was considered as
an outcomes dimension in the analysis. This variable was constructed using the 6 sub-
domain values in sport (Kenyon, 1968): Social Experience (SV Social), Health and
Fitness (SV Health), Aesthetic Experience (SV Aesthetic), A Pursuit of Vertigo (SV
Vertigo), Catharsis (SV Catharsis), and Ascetic Experience (SV Ascetic). Therefore,
sport/physical activity values were represented with the combination of these 6 sub-
domains, measuring how much a person valued each of the observed variables. This

variable was designed to look at the sport/physical activity values a person might hold.

58

For this variable, both survey and interview methods were used to obtain measures and

descriptions for in-depth data analyses.

Relationships between the major variables in the research design
With the four major variables, the following ﬁgure presents the basic research

design model displaying relationships between the major variables in the study. This
basic research design simpliﬁed the overall relationships among the major variables,
suggesting that socio-cultural aspects and social-personal aspects of masculinity would be

related to sport/physical activity values and behavioral outcomes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Socio-Cultural Aspects Social-Personal Aspects Outcomes
Traditional Sport/
Masculinity Attitudes PA Values

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Socio-Cultural
Inﬂuences on Traditional
Gender Norms Sport/PA

Masculine Behaviors in

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Basic research design

This ﬁgure displays an initial research design model with relationships among the four

basic major variables. The arrows in the ﬁgure represent relationships between the

variables. This is a recursive model that has unidirectional relationships; there are no

59

feedback loops between variables in the model. The directions of these relationships were
determined based on the previous studies and literature (Bagozzi & Yi, 1989; Knoke,
2005; Vinokur, 2005).

Along with the recursive relationships, Socio-cultural Inﬂuences on Gender
Norms (SCIGN) was ﬁrst considered as an initial independent variable that has an impact
on Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA). This variable was presented as a socio-
cultural aspects dimension because this study assumes traditional gender norms are likely
to be formed a result of socialization among the family, friends, education, and sport
structures in the macro society. Secondly, the Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA)
variable was suggested as a mediator variable that had impacts on Masculine Behaviors
in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS) and Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV) while it was
affected by Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (SCIGN) at the same time. In the
design, The Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA) variable was considered to be both
social and personal attitudes. This is because traditional masculinity attitudes could not
only be determined by a personal acceptance and belief but also by socio-cultural
inﬂuences and experiences. Next, Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS)
was placed as one of the dependent variables and consequential outcome dimension
impacted by Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA). In the research design, the
measure of Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity was a social outcome because
behaviors were inﬂuenced by others and interactions of the self with others at the same
time (Connell 2000: Hasbrook & Harris, 1999). Therefore, the assessment of Masculine
Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity in this study was examined as an outcomes measure

in analyses. Finally, Sport/ Physical Activity Values (SV) was placed as another

60

dependent variable inﬂuenced by the Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA). This

variable was also suggested on a consequential outcome dimension in the model design.

After the initial research design, there was an in-depth examination of the design

for structural equation modeling. Because this study further attempted to investigate

different directional inﬂuences on different sub-domains (sub-SVs) of Sport/Physical

Activity Values (SV), this structural modeling investigation was considered the main

process of the examination. Therefore, for the purpose of the structural equation

modeling, the following structural equation modeling was proposed.

Socio-Cultural

Aspects Aspects

Social-Personal

Outcomes

 

 
    

Traditional

  

Masculinity Attitudes

 

 

 

Socio-Cultural
Inﬂuences on
Traditional
Gender Norms

  

 

 

 

Masculine Behaviors

  

Sport/
PA Values

 
 
 

in Sport/PA

 

  
 
      
 

 
   
   

   
 

Health & Fitness

 

Figure 2. The research model for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

In the research model for structural equation modeling (SEM), Sport/Physical Activity

Values (SV) is represented along with six sub-domains of values (sub-SVs) as a social

61

experience (SV Social), health and ﬁtness (SV Health), an aesthetic experience (SV
Aesthetic), a pursuit of vertigo (SV Vertigo), catharsis (SV Catharsis), and an ascetic
experience (SV Ascetic). This model displays the study’s examination of the manner in
which Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA) have different inﬂuences on each sub-
domain of Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV). This structural equation modeling (SEM)
design was reﬂected in the research questions and hypotheses.

Other main variables such as Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
(SCIGN), Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (T MA), and Masculine Behaviors in
Sport/Physical Activity (MBS) used a combined mean score for each variable for
purposes of statistically analyzing relationships among variables. These variables were
ﬁrst examined without consideration of the sport/physical activity value sub-domain
scores based on committee recommendations to avoid too much complexity in the data
analyses. However, Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV) analyses used sub-domain
scores to determine unique relationships of speciﬁc values to traditional masculine
attitudes. This more focused in-depth analysis followed the introduction of the basic

research design.

Survey Instrumentation

The instrumentation for the quantitative aspect in this study employed survey
methods. The quantitative study instrument was designed as a self-administered survey.
The survey was composed of ﬁve major categories using the Personal Background
Questions, Socio-cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (MaCabe & Ricciardelli, 2001;

Worell, 2001), Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (Levant & Fischer, 1998),

62

Sport/Physical Activity Values (Kenyon, 1968), and Masculine Behaviors in
Sport/Physical Activity (Connell, 2000; Kidd, 1987; Messner, 2001; Pappas, MaKenry,
& Catlett, 2004) inventories. These measures investigated complex social-constructions

of these study subjects.

Feedback from the Pilot Study

A pilot study had been conducted in order to reﬁne and develop instruments (n =
36). Instruments for the pilot study were modiﬁed slightly from previously developed
measurements (Kenyon, 1968; Levant & Fischer, 1998; McCabe & Ricciardelli, 2001).
All the instruments were tested for reliability and validity (see Appendix C). These
methodological processes were conducted in the interest of improved validity and
reliability and to increase rates of response by modifying the questionnaire and
decreasing the length for the dissertation study. In addition, there was a need in the pilot
study to revise the wording of a question that focused on more than one concept. There
were many compound questions that would cause a respondent’s failure to produce
correct and consistent results. Thus, some questions were revised to avoid addressing
more than one concept in a question. Vague questions with multi-concepts cause
respondents to have unclear interpretations (Clark & Schober, 1992). To address these
problems, the researcher revised some questions to make them more exact and
straightforward. Therefore, an attempt was made to reduce the number of survey items,
mainly to shorten the instruments and prevent problems of boredom and fatigue in
responding while maintaining the consistency of the instrument (John & Benet-Martinez,

2000)

63

The total questionnaire items in the pilot study were 198; (a) Personal
Background Questions: 37, (b) Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms: 12, (c)
Traditional Masculinity Attitudes: 57, and (d) Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical
Activity: 33, and (e) Sport/Physical Activity Values: 59. Factor analysis was conducted to
reduce the number of the items. Through this procedure, items were incorporated or
deleted, given extracted initial factors that included highly correlated items in factor
loading (D. C. Miller & Salkind, 2002). This factor analysis was also used to reconstruct
measurements. In the end, the modiﬁcations reduced the total number of the question
items from 198 to 100 (See Appendix B. Theory and Reference Based Instruments).

The researcher based on the advice from social science experts decided to use
forced-choice Likert scales, which used even numbers of scales such as 4 or 6 instead of
odd numbers of scales such as 3 or 5. Lacy and Hastad (2003) stated that even numbers
of Likert scales are more advantageous than odd numbers of scales, which employ a
‘Neutral’, ‘Undecided’ or ‘Don’t Know’ option in self-administrative surveys. Therefore,
the forced-choice Likert scales could induce respondents’ opinions out of a neutral
position (DeVellis, 2003). This reinforced the use of even numbers for response choices
in the present study. The Personal Background Questions inventory employed various
methods to answers such as short answer and single or multiple choices, but it used
forced-choice scale in case of Likert scale questions. The previously developed
instrument for Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms instrument (McCabe &
Ricciardelli, 2001) had used 5 Likert scales, but it used 4 Likert scales in the main stage
of this study. Instruments for the Traditional Masculinity (Levant & Fischer, 1998) and

Sport/Physical Activity Values (Kenyon, 1968) has used 7 points Likert scale each, but

64

the study used 6 point forced-choice Likert scales for both in the main stages of
investigation based on the recommendations of Lacy and Hastad (2003) and DeVellis
(2003)

To verify the surveys’ reliability and validity, internal consistency and face
validity, statistical analyses, and experts’ conﬁrmation were conducted. Experts in areas
of sport sociology, sport psychology, kinesiology, physical education, and sociology

participated in the face validity veriﬁcation.
Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms Instrument (SCIGN)

In the Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms instrument (SCIGN),
respondents answered to what degree they believed that socializing agents such as their
parents, siblings, friends, and sport programs encouraged and inﬂuenced the formulation
of their perceptions about traditional gender norms. That is, corresponding to survey
items, the respondents answered how much they perceived that speciﬁc socializing agents
encouraged them to accept non-traditional or traditional gender norms (e.g., ‘men should
be more emotional than women’; ‘women should be more emotional than men’).
Therefore, the instrument measured the degree to which respondents accepted the
inﬂuence of speciﬁc socio—cultural inﬂuences.

In developing this instrument during the pilot study, consideration was given to
the Perceived Socioculutral Inﬂuences on Body Image and Body Change questionnaire by
McCabe and Ricciardelli (2001). Their instrument was mainly used for the basic
construction of the survey questionnaire’s socializing agents and measurement scales for

this study, but the content in their instrument was not adapted for this study because it

65

was mainly about body images and changes. The content about socio—cultural inﬂuences
on gender norms was adapted from works such as ‘Gender Stereotypic Characteristics
Associated with Women and Men’ by Worell (2001), ‘Boys and Girls’ by MacQueen
(2003), and ‘Gender Role Stereotypes and Early Childhood Socialization’ by Greendorfer
(1993). These studies’ instrument items and question topics were reviewed and adapted
when their content addressed traditional characteristics of gender norms.

It would be noted that McCabe and Ricciardelli (2003)’s instrument used parents,
siblings, peers, and the media as major socio-cultural inﬂuences, but the present study
deleted the broad category of media as recommended by the dissertation committee and
added personal-social and sport/physical activity speciﬁc social inﬂuences such as
‘myself,’ ‘coach(es),’ ‘sport teammate(s),’ and ‘school physical education classmates,’
and ‘school physical education teachers’ in addition to parents, siblings, and friends.
Deletion of ‘the media’ was due to lack of speciﬁcity of the term with complex
interpretations about different forms of the media. The 'myself’ variable was used to
express the extent to which one was active in one’s own socialization and decisions in
terms of relating cooperative identity to acceptance of socio-cultural gender norms
(Eccles, 2005). The 'coach(es),' 'sport teammate(s),' 'school physical education
classmates,’ and ‘school physical education teachers’ factors were employed to indicate
the extent of socio-cultural inﬂuences from sport/ physical activity structures.

The resulting instrument had 12 items for analyses. However, the respondents
answered how each socio-cultural agent inﬂuences their perceptions of each speciﬁed

non-traditional and traditional gender norm item. Therefore, the actual total number of

66

items were 122: 11 social agents x 12 traditional gender norm items = 122 items (See
Appendix E). This instrument used a 4 point Likert scale with no neutral position: ‘Not
at all,’ ‘Very little,’ ‘Somewhat,’ and ‘Usually.’ ‘Usually’ was scored as a 4, and
‘Somewhat’ as a 3. Then ‘Very little’ was scored as a 2 and ‘Not at all’ as a 1. For the
non-traditional gender items, scores were reversed. Then, overall scores were averaged and
the mean scores were used for analyses.

The original work for this inventory by McCabe and Ricciardelli (2000) veriﬁed
content validity with other contextually similar instruments. In addition, they veriﬁed
reliability with overall internal consistency, (1 =84 (n = 780). In a pilot study for this
instrument, reliability for internal consistency was re-veriﬁed with a Cronbach Alpha, a
= .94 (n = 36) over all. In the study, convergent and discriminant validity was tested for
the construction validity in the pilot study. Looking at correlations and explorative factor
analyses, almost every item was statistically correlated with other items under the same
factor, but many of these items were also highly correlated with other items underlying

different factors. The present study did not have the concern with construct validity of
items within sub-categories because its over all score was used for analyses. However,
the attempt for the construct validity was made to see whether the research could possibly
use the sub-domains of Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (e. g. father, mother,
siblings, etc.) as part of structural equation modeling. As a result, the sub-factors could
not be divided statistically. Therefore, the researcher decided to parcel all the sub-factors
as a single factor. This parceling of all sub-factors for SCIGN was presented in the basic

research design. In the basic research model, the sub-categories were avoided to simplify

67

the model for a process of structural equation modeling. However, face validity was also
conducted to validate the contents of the instrument. During the face validity process, the
survey questions in this instrument were modiﬁed with experts in sport sociology, sport
psychology, and physical education by rewriting, adding, or deleting questions for the
purpose of reducing compound literal meanings and concepts and confusing words.

Table 2. Reliability summary of the original instrument and the Socio—Cultural Inﬂuences
on Traditional Gender Norm instrument in the pilot study (SCIGN)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original Instruments Pilot Study
Sub-Domain
Items Reliability Items Reliability
Myself None 12
Father 13 12
, Mother 13 12
80cm-
Cultural Brother None 1 2
Inﬂuences Sister None r > 34 12 a = 94
on Gender , ‘ ‘
Norms Male Friend 13 12
(SCIGN) Female 13 12
Fnend
The Media 10 12
Total 62 96

 

 

 

 

Traditional Masculinity Attitudes Instrument (TMA)
The Traditional Masculinity Attitudes instrument (TMA) was used to examine

attitudes toward traditional masculinity ideologies. It consisted of several sub-content
attitudes: avoidance of femininity, rejection of homosexuals, self-reliance, aggression,
achievement/status, attitudes towards sex, and restrictive emotionality. Respondents
answered how much they believed or accepted traditional masculinities (i.e., ‘Men should

be detached in emotionally charged situations’). In this instrument, 6 point Likert scales

 

5
Perceived Socioculutral Inﬂuences on Body Image and Body Change Questionnaire, McCabe and
Ricciardelli (2001)

68

were used: ‘Strongly agree,’ ‘Agree,’ ‘Slightly agree,’ ‘Slightly disagree,’ ‘Disagree,’
and ‘Strongly disagree.’ They were scored ﬁom 6 to 1 respectively. This instrument also
had no neutral position. Over all scores were averaged and the average scores were used
for analyses.

The Traditional Masculinity Attitudes assessment (TMA) was modiﬁed from
Levent and Fischer (1998)’s original inventory, ‘Male Role Norm Inventory.’ Their
inventory had been veriﬁed for reliability and construct validity. Cronbach Alphas for
reliability ranged from a = .84 and .88 in two examinations (n = 691 and 793).
Correlation coefﬁcients with other associated measurements were examined for content
validity. The pilot study with the original inventory tested internal consistency for
reliability and resulted in a = .91 (n = 36). There were originally 57 items in the previous
study, but the items were reduced throughout explorative correlation and factor analyses.
In the correlation and factor analyses, the researcher attempted to ﬁnd items that were
correlated with other items under the same category of traditional masculinity attitudes,
but the researcher found many of these items were also highly correlated with other items
underlying different categories. This attempt was also to see whether the research
modeling could possibly use the sub-factors of Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA).
However, the researcher decided to parcel all the sub-factors as a single factor as it was
found that sub-factors could not be divided statistically. This parceling was also
practically presented in the basic research design. Therefore, in the study, all the sub-
categories were averaged under a sole mean score to represent the variable of Traditional
Masculinity Attitudes (TMA). Instead of construct validity by correlations and factor

analyses, face validity was again veriﬁed with experts in sport sociology, sport

69

psychology, and physical education. Given their suggestions, the instrument was
modiﬁed. The ﬁnal number of items in the main stage of this study was twenty-one (See
Appendix E). After modiﬁcation by deleting items, the Cronbach Alpha was still .91
overall (See Table 3).

Table 3. Reliability summary of the original instrument and the Traditional Masculinity

Attitudes (TMA) instrument in the pilot study and after the modiﬁcation by deleting
items

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original Pil tSt d M d'f ation
o o c
Sub: Instrument6 u y H
Domain _ . . . . . . . .
Items Reliability Items Reliability Items Reliability
Avoidance 7 7 3
Femmrmty
Rejection of
Homo- 4 4 3
sexuality
Self-Reliance 7 7 3
Traditional Aggressron 5 5 3
Masculinity Achievement a1= .84
7 7 = . 3 = .
Attitudes / Status (1; = .88 a. 91 a 91
(TMA) Attitudes
8 8 3
toward Sex
Restricted 7 7 3
emotions
Non-
traditional 12 12 None
attitudes
Total 57 57 21

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity Instrument (MBS)
The Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity instrument (MBS) was

intended to investigate the extent of traditionally masculine behaviors in sport/physical

activity. In response to instrument items, the respondents answered how much they

 

6
Male Role Norms Inventory, Levent and Fischer (1998)

70

tended to exhibit masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity. They also answered how
much they ‘would’ accept/ accepted these masculine behaviors in a few cases because
some of the masculine behaviors, such as tobacco, drug, or alcohol consumption might
never be experienced due to ages, religions, or some other social or cultural circumstances.

In this instrument, 6 point Likert scales were used: ‘Strongly agree,’ ‘Agree,’
‘Slightly agree,’ ‘Slightly disagree,’ ‘Disagree,’ and ‘Strongly disagree.’ They were scored
from 6 to 1 respectively. This instrument also had no neutral position. Scores were
summed and averaged. Then the average scores were used in the analysis.

To develop the Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Phy scial Activity (MBS)
instrument, the pilot study was conducted, employing contexts about traditionally
deﬁned masculine behaviors in sport/ physical activity. (See Appendix B, Theories and
References Based Instruments). The content was adapted from Bremner’s (2002)
‘Construction of Masculinity in Sporting Culture,’ Connell’s (2000) and Hasbrook and
Harris’ (1999) ‘Hegemonic Masculinity in Sports,’ Gill’s (2002) ‘Gender and Sport
Behavior,’ Kidd’s (1987 ) ‘Patriarchal and Hierarchal Masculinity in Sports,’ Pappas, et.
al.’s (2004)s ‘Masculinity Culture Among Male Athletes’, and Robertson’s (2003)
‘Contradictory Masculinity in Sports,’ etc. Using this content, there were 33 items
suggested in the pilot study.

As a result, internal consistency tests produced satisfactory Cronbach Alpha, a =
.91 over all items. At the same time, a factor analysis was also conducted as a process of
constructing a new inventory. There was an expectation that the sub-domains would

come out with 5 or more. However, the factor analysis produced only three rotated

71

components matrix by factor loadings with an eigen-value of ‘1’. Thus, the number of
factors in extracting was controlled in an alternative way, and the results were referred to
dividing items into 8 sub-domains. Although the researcher failed to get 5 or more sub-
domains through the explorative factor analysis as expected, the alterative way was
manually conducted to strengthen the construct of the measure for the Masculine
Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS). This process was to maximize the
likelihood of goodness ﬁt in the structural equation modeling. Upon these considerations,
the researcher set up 8 sub-factors in this alternative factor analyses with priory
assumptions based literature. This might be considered a conﬁrmatory factor analysis.
Using all the internal consistency tests, factor analyses, and correlation tests, the
instrument was ﬁnally determined with 25 items under 8 behavior sub-domains; (a)
Competitiveness, (b) Toughness/Aggressiveness, (c) Self-Reliance, (d) Restricted
Emotions, (f) Avoidance of Femininity, (g) Risk/Injury taking, (h) Verbal Accusation, and
(i) Drug/Alcohol/Tobacco use. Each sub-domain possesses 3 or 4 items (See Table 5 and
Appendix E). In this development and modiﬁcation stage for the instrument, face validity
was also sought using experts in sport sociology, sport psychology, and physical
education to review each item. Their suggestions were applied to modify the instrument.
However, this instrument did not emphasize respondents' psychological perceptions, but
rather, their social, experiential, attitudinal, and behavioral occurrences. So this instrument
measures more than behaviors. The instrtunent was modiﬁed by deducting items of the
initial instrument. All the sub-factors were all combined as a single factor, and internal

consistency was re-tested and it yielded .87 of overall Cronbach Alphas.

72

Table 4. Reliability summary of the Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity
(MBS) instrument in the pilot study and the modiﬁcation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pilot Study Modification
Sub-Domain
Items Reliability Items Reliability
Competitiveness 3
Toughness/
. 4
Aggressrveness
Self-Reliance 3
Masculine Avoidance 3
Behaviors Femrnrnrty
in Sport/ Res‘rlcnve 33 a = .91 3 a = .87
Physical 500‘st
Activity R‘Slf/ Injury 3
Taking
Verbal 3
Accusation
Drug/ Alcohol/ 3
Tobacco
Total 25

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sport/Physical Activity Values Instrument (SV)
The Sport/Physical Activity Values instrument (SV) was used to measure

individual meanings and values about physical activities. The instrument consisted of six
sub-domains of variables: social experience, health and ﬁtness, aesthetic experience, a
pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and ascetic experience, and respondents were asked to
identify their values in sport/physical activity. This inventory used a 6 point Likert scale
and there was no neutral option. The scale responses were ‘Strongly agree,’ ‘Agree,’
‘Slightly agree,’ ‘Slightly disagree,’ ‘Disagree,’ and ‘Strongly disagree.’ They were
scored from 6 to 1 respectively. The original inventory had 59 items. The correlation and
factor analyses in the pilot study were conducted to reduce the reduced number of items.

Then, the modiﬁed inventory that was used in the main stage had 18 items.

73

The Sport/Physical Activity Values measurement (SV) had been developed and
researched by Kenyon (1968); Attitudes Towards Physical Activity Inventory. It was
previously veriﬁed for reliability with Hoyt r—scores from .72 to .89. There are a number
of studies which researched attitudes toward sport and physical activity (Acord, 1977;
Duan, 1985; McPherson & Yuhasz, 1968; Mize, 1979; Mullins, 1969; Neale, Sonstroem,
& Metz, 1969; O'Bryan & O'Bryan, 1969; Vincent, 1967; Wilkins, 1974). However, a
few of the previous studies examined the relationships between traditional masculinity
attitudes and sport/physical activity values and behaviors focusing on the socio-cultural
relations. In addition, few studies using the Attitudes Towards Physical Activity were
conducted in recent years; the inventory was used mostly in the 1970’s and 1980’s.
However, its contribution to conceptualization of socio-cultural inﬂuences on individual
values in sport/physical activity (Duan, 1985) inspired its use in the study.

A pilot study with the original inventory was also conducted to verify reliability
and construct validity of the Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV). In this pilot study,
particular reliabilities on each sub-domain were carefully examined. This was because
each sub-domain under the Sport/Physical Activity Value (SV) factor was individually
tested to examine different directional relationships with the Traditional Masculine
Attitudes (TMA) variable. In this consideration, reliabilities were veriﬁed with internal
consistencies on each sub-domain with Cronbach Alphas ranging from a = .76 to .91 (n =
36). Along with this, correlation and factor analysis was also conducted to reduce items
and reliabilities were re-veriﬁed. These examinations were also to maximize the
likelihood of goodness of ﬁt in structural equation modeling, so absolute veriﬁcation for

the construct of the measure was not required. As a result, the Cronbach Alphas of each

74

sub-scale still met the acceptable ranges from .61 to .84 with the reduced number of items
(John & Benet-Martinez, 2000). See Table 4. The number of items in the ﬁnal scale for
SV ranged from 2 to 3. Two items under the sub-factors of SV (Social Experience and
Ascetic Value) might be considered as a small number in general, but they were adopted
based on recommendations from several scale development studies (DeVellis, 2003;
Jacoby & Matell, 1971; Lunney, 1970; Peabody, 1962).

In this inventory, construct validity was carefully assessed because sub-domains
(sub-SVs) under the Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV) factor in structure were to be
applied in the analysis. Every item was highly correlated with other items within the
same sub-domain, and also moderately correlated with other items underlying different
other sub-domains. This type of construction ensured that the Sport/Physical Activity
Values (SV) factor was determined with a sub-domain structure. Though there were
small samples in the pilot study, the veriﬁcation of this construct validity was important
because the study hypotheses speciﬁed ‘each’ speciﬁc sub-scale (sub-SVs) of
Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV) to examine its relationship with Traditional
Masculinity Attitudes (TMA).

Even though the construct validity was veriﬁed, face validity examinations also
were conducted with experts in sport sociology, sport psychology, and physical
education. Given their suggestions, the instrument has been modiﬁed slightly,
particularly in the wording. In the main stage, larger samples were obviously collected

and the construction validity were re-examined by conﬁrmatory factor analyses.

75

Table 5. Reliability summary of the original instrument and the Sport/Physical Activity
Values (SV) instrument in the pilot study and after the modiﬁcation by deleting items

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sub- Orrgrnal 7 Pilot Study Modiﬁcation
Domain Instrument

(sub-SVs) Items Reliability Items Reliability Items Reliability

Social Hoyt r = = =
Experience 10 .68 - .72 10 or. '91 2 or '61

Health & Hoyt r = = =
Fitness 10 .79 - .83 10 a ‘79 3 a ’84
Sport! Aes‘hi‘i" 10 Hoyt r = 10 a = .83 3 a = .74

Physical Expenence .82 - .87

Activity A Pursuit of Hoyt r = = =
Values Vertigo 10 .86 _ .89 10 or .81 3 a .67

(SV) . Hoyt r = = =
Catharsrs 9 '77 _ .79 9 a .76 3 or .75

Ascetic Hoyt r = _ =
Experience 10 .74 - .81 10 or _ '80 2 or '66
Total 59 N/A 59 a = .84 18 a = .69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interview Questionnaire

The quantitative survey yielded statistical objective data but a quantitative method
could not produce introspective, ‘rich,’ verbatim data regarding more open-ended aspects
of the respondents’ everyday lives, experiences, or immediate events at locally different
social and cultural settings (Crapanzano, 1986; Erickson & Gutierrez, 2002; Peshkin,
1982). According to Crapanzano (1986), societies and cultures have to be interpreted like
languages through translations of socio—cultural practices. The qualitative approach was,
therefore, designed to use open-ended interview methods. Respondents identiﬁed their
own experiences with regard to their traditional masculinity and values and behaviors in
sport/physical activity. The interview was divided into ﬁve major sections; (a) Socio-

Cultural Backgrounds and Sport/Physical Activity Participation, (b) Socio-Cultural

 

7
Attitudes Toward Physical Activity, Kenyon (I968)

76

Inﬂuences on Gender Norms, (c) Traditional Masculinity Attitudes, (d) Masculine
Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity, and (e) Sport/Physical Activity Values. There will
be semi-structured and open-ended questions (See Appendix F).

To develop this interview questionnaire, pilot interviews had also been conducted
and several panels of sport sociologists participated in a review, and the instrument was
altered to reﬂect their comments. The interview was semi-structured so the questions
could be modiﬁed with probes during the interview. During interviews, the researcher
wrote down major points from the respondents’ answers, and the interviews were
digitally voice-recorded at the same time. The recording was conducted only after
permission was given by the respondents. In the study, there was nobody who did not
want to be recorded. Meanwhile, the interview contents were read back at the end of the
interview to conﬁrm and verify what was said and to add more comments. This helped

increase the accuracy or validity of the interview data.

The data from interviews were mainly used to interpret personal and social
meanings, practices, and circumstances. Interview methods and qualitative analyses in
this method provided understandings based on the major variables to yield more various
individual and cultural perspectives, explanations, and contents; this method supported
the quantitative aspects of the study and was another form of empirical data (Geertz,
1975); (Kvale, 1994); (Lather, 2002). These procedures would be helpful to avoid bias
and researcher’s subjectivity or political intervention that might cause misinterpretations

of the overall results of the study.

77

Data Collection Procedures

Based on this study’s research methodology and design, quantitative and
qualitative approaches had different procedures of sampling, instrumentations, data
collection, and analyses. Discussions about these procedures will be shown in the

following sections.

Study Participants

With the emphasis on examining college males’ socio-cultural perceptions,
attitudes, behaviors, and values, the researcher collected data from college age men who
identiﬁed themselves as willing to participate in the study. These study participants were
considered as a particular universe in this study (Sjoberg & Nett, 1968). The speciﬁc
targeted population for the study was a sample of university male students ages 18 to 25
at a Midwest university who had previously or currently participated in sport/physical
activity at various levels. As a target population, the university male students were
considered to be a good sample to illuminate dominant socialization trends within
American society (House, 2004). Even though they might be often referred to as a
convenient sample, the environments of universities continue to expose students to
seasonal sports competition events, many intramural sport/physical activity programs,
and easily accessible facilities. This was a considerable reason to choose the university
students as the population of the study sample (Sjoberg & Nett, 1968). Besides this, many
college-aged male student respondents actively showed their interests in the study subject
of traditional masculinity and sport/physical activity because of their own male identities.
The study used this advantage of gender identity and norms assimilation effects

(Tourangeu, 1999).

78

From the study population pool, the ﬂame of the study p0pulation was delimited
to a Midwest university. This university was a public institution so that diversity of socio-
economic status, race/ethnicity, gender, geographic region/local community, or religion
exists in the population. Therefore, the researcher expected the diversity and
representativeness within this college as a typical university to reﬂect the Midwest and
possibly be somewhat representative of other large American universities. Two hundred
ninety three students participated as a result. Reﬂecting the complexity of the study
design, these numbers were considered to secure statistical effects and power. The
number of qualitative interview participants were twenty four. This was a reasonable
number from which to gather rich and experiential data and to generalize the study
ﬁndings from the qualitative aspects of the study (Arcury & Quandt, 1999). Details of the
study participants will be described later in the results chapter.

Sampling

To obtain study participants, a convenient sampling method was used. However, a
combination of purposive sampling and cluster sampling was also considered for the
purpose of the study examination (McTavish & Loether, 2002). Researchers purposefully
went to intramural sports facilities, regular sport/physical activity classes, and regular
academic lecture classes at the university to recruit participants. The reason why this
study sampled from the intramural sport facilities and sport/physical activity courses was
to recruit those who have currently participated in sport/physical activities. Because there
were various types of sport/physical activity in the intramural sport programs and in the

physical activity courses, it was expected to have students who participate or have

79

participated in diverse sport/physical activities so they could respond to the survey and
interview with their various sport/physical activity experiences.

In the meantime, this study looked for male students in regular academic lecture
classes because of a desire to avoid samples merely from those who currently participate
in sport/physical activity but to access those students who previously participated. There
were only three samples who did not currently participated in sport/physical activity, but
the years of sport/physical activity experiences were diverse from one month to twenty-
ﬁve years. If there were only current sport/physical activity participants with many years,
the results of the study might not be able to include general college-aged students who
might or might not currently participate in sport/physical activity, or those who merely
had past sport/physical activity participation experiences. In addition, if the researcher
only visited sports facilities, this study might also miss other general male college
students’ socio-cultural perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors about traditional masculinity
and sport/physical activity values. Obtaining the variety of sport/physical activity
participation experiences of the college age males from various places in the school was

to avoid the skewness of the sample for the study.

Data collection
The data collection methods employed both on-line and paper surveys for the

convenience of the participant sample. An on-line survey was suggested because college-
aged males were assumed to be fairly accustomed to using computer techniques.
Therefore, some might have been motivated to participate in an on-Iine survey because
this has become a common practice. The survey had been developed previously and

piloted, and there were no problems found in completing surveys using either the paper

80

or the online method. Another advantage of using the Internet was using a professional
company that used a feature of passwords to address security concerns and protection
from repeated survey completion by a single respondent. With these strategies in
collecting data, researchers contacted students personally and used advertisements to
obtain their participation in both on-line and paper surveys.

For purposes of collecting data from the intramural sports facilities, researchers
met with directors or assistant/associate directors to get permission to collect data using
surveys and interviews. After obtaining permission, researchers contacted students who
used the intramural sports facilities before, during, or after their sport/physical activities.
An introduction to the study was made, and the students were asked to complete the
survey and interview. A consent form with the study purpose and descriptions,
investigators, informed consent with conﬁdentiality statements, rewards, time, risks,
beneﬁts, and contact information was provided during this contact in order to help
students understand the nature and content of the study (See Appendix D). Those wishing
to participate in the study at that time had to agree with the consent form before being
given the survey.

In order to collect data from classrooms of both physical activity and academic
lecture courses, instructors in the classrooms were contacted and asked to announce the
researchers request for participation in the study or they were asked to give permission
for researchers to visit their classrooms. Once an approval was obtained, the researcher
visited their classrooms and information sheets about the study were distributed to
students in the classrooms. In case some of the students might try to respond to the

survey twice or more later on, a password was given for them to get only one access to

81

the Internet survey. Paper surveys were also given if students preferred a paper version.
For these students, researchers asked students to ﬁll out the informed consent form and
the survey after their classes. Only one survey was collected from each student as the
researcher reminded them that they could complete only one survey for the study. To
assure this, they were asked to sign out with their school email addresses when the
researcher collected the surveys.

To maximize the number of participants, the researcher also put advertisements
on the approved bulletin boards, walls, and other sites around the intramural facilities and
classrooms that were easily visible to students. In the advertisement, there were also brief
descriptions of the study, investigators, rewards, contact information, and procedures for
getting involved in the study. In the advertisement, those who were interested in
participating in the study were able to tear off a slip of paper with the researcher’s email
address to access the Internet survey or make a contact to complete a paper survey.

A monetary reward was given to increase the participation rate. In the study, one
participant was selected in rafﬂes to receive $150, and those who agreed to participate in
follow-up interviews received $20 at the completion of the interviews -survey
participants were asked to be involved in a follow-up interview for the qualitative
methods at the end of their surveys. A revisiting process to the intramural sport facilities
and different classrooms as well as email reminders was utilized until the minimum
number was met. The re-visitation plan occmred up to three times. Increasing rewards or
visiting other departments and colleges was considered. Besides these strategies, dates for
data collection were carefully planned to avoid mid-term, ﬁnal, or other busy weeks

during academic terms. Using this careful approach, researchers expected that non-

82

response rates arising from the respondents’ being busy could be minimized (Brehm,

1993). The response rate was about thirty percents. Finally, the data from the completed
surveys and interviews were collected and stored in a locked ﬁle cabinet and personal

computer.

Conﬁdentiality and anonymity

Subject rights of conﬁdentiality were guaranteed by the protection accorded them
under the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval of the study (See Appendix D).
Both the survey and the interview ensured voluntary participation, withdrawal from the
study at any time without penalty, and strict conﬁdentiality. Speciﬁc individual
information such as identiﬁcation numbers or social security numbers was not included in
the survey. No names were used on the survey instruments and the participants were
asked not to give any names of private social relations. In the interview as a qualitative
method, conﬁdentiality was more carefully assured during the face-to-face interviews.
Any name given was changed by the use of pseudonyms for analyses and reporting in
order to minimize potential risks and to maintain conﬁdentiality. In deference to
conﬁdentiality, the interview was conducted individually in a room alone or in an area
away from others. However, totally isolated private places were avoided. The
interviewees were asked to give permission for recording of the interview. A voice
recorder in interviews digitally recorded the contents of the interview based on
permission given by the interviewees, and the researcher stored the data in a locked

cabinet and personal computer. To protect individuals’ privacy, the data would be

 

It was hard to estimate the exact response rate because the research also used bulletin boards to recruit
samples.

83

discarded after the research reports are ﬁnalized. All data were validated for accuracy of

transcriptions.

Data Analyses

Quantitative analyses
The study analyses for quantitative methods involved four stages; (a) descriptive

statistics, (b) correlations and regressions of variables, and (c) structural equation
modeling (SEM), and (d) hypotheses testing summation.

The descriptive statistics described simple frequency distributions of the
characteristics of the samples and the responses on the major variables; (a) Socio-Cultural
Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (SCIGN), (b) Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA), (c)
Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS), and (d) Sport/Physical Activity
Values (SV). Secondly, the correlations coefficient tests were conducted to see
relationships between the demographic data with the major variables. The demographic
data include gender identity, race/ethnicity, age, major, socio-economic status, current
and previous sport/physical activity participation, geographic residence area, family
structure, and educational levels. These demographic data were not included for the study
of structural equation modeling (SEM). They were simply used to describe general
characteristics of the samples.

A recursive structural equation modeling (SEM) on the third stage represented a
graphic depiction of the effects of the variables on the outcome measures and predictive
inferences related to the strength of the effects of all the variables. Vinokur (2005)

deﬁned this method as follows.

84

The results of SEM [structural equation modeling] analysis include both overall
measures of goodness-of-ﬁt that permit the evaluation of how well the model ﬁt
the data. They also include the estimated values for the correlations, the
directional paths of inﬂuence on factors and indicators (i.e., factor loadings), and
the estimated variance accounted for in the dependent variables and factors
(Vinokur, 2005, p.801).

This test included; (a) confrrmative factor analyses for each measurement, (b) causal
modeling for a path analysis, (c) regression model for correlation coefﬁcients, and (d)
correlation and covariate structure analysis using matrix. In these SEM procedures, all the
analyses were performed at the same time and they allowed for interpreting relationships
among the set of variables that present a prior causal ordering. In that analysis, the test
rendered strengths of relationships between the diverse variables providing correlation
coefﬁcient values by utilizing an ordinary-least-squares regression test with a correlation
matrix. The matrix yielded estimates of the standard error of the observed sample
correlation. The estimates generally allowed judging if the predicted population
correlations could have generated the observed sample correlation. Throughout this
procedure, the structural equation modeling (SEM) tested the hypotheses to see if all the

variables ﬁt as a whole model. The goodness of ﬁt indexes from the test to be reported
are: (a) the Model Chi-Square ( Xi, , also known as the Likelihood Ratio Chi-Square), (b)

the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), (c) the Comparative Fit Index

(CPI), (d) the Bentler-Bonett Normed Fit Index (N FI), and (e) the Non-Normed Fit Index

(NNFI)9. To obtain these indexes, one of the structural equation modeling (SEM)

 

9 Goodness of ﬁt indexes;

(a) Model Chi-Square ( Xi! ): Overall test values of ﬁt in SEM. Assessing the magnitude of discrepancy
between the sample and the ﬁtted covariance matrices. Interpretation of the signiﬁcance varies, based
on the sample sizes.

(b) Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Overall test values of ﬁt in SEM. Less
affected by sample size than model chi-square. Perfect ﬁt when RMSEA = 0; Close ﬁt when < .05
to .08; fair ﬁt when < .08 to .10; poor ﬁt when >.lO.

85

analysis softwares, EQS 6.0, was utilized. This method was useful to provide a great deal
of information at a time that generally comes in complex socio-cultural studies. The
hypothesized model was strongly based on theories and previous studies (Kline, 1998).
This study had already used many theories and previous study reviews while reviewing a

great deal of literature, therefore, the requirement for the theory base was satisﬁed.

Qualitative analyses
For analyses in qualitative methods, interview contents were coded according to

variations to facilitate the examination of theories, studies, assumptions, and research
questions by writing on the margins of the interview notes. Then, they were organized by
categories, themes, variations, and quotes (Berg, 2001; Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995) .
The variations to be examined were based on the participants’ ideas, social meanings,
experiences, and perceptions of socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms, traditional
masculinity attitudes, sport/physical activity values, and masculine behaviors in
sport/physical activity. The variations then were analyzed through the process of
reduction derived from textual analyses and of qualitative data display based on the
themes and the categories of the study interests as the interview-generated data were used
to substantiate quantitative data or more in-depth discussing personal and socio-cultural
experiences in the family, community, schools, and sport/physical activity, and to

generate ﬁnal conclusions and discussions.

 

(c) Comparative Fit Index (CFl): An incremental ﬁt index. Assessing a model with a null model where all
relationships are nested in the model. Useful for when the sample size is relatively small. Acceptable
when NFI >.900.

(d) Bentler-Bonett Named Fit Index (NFI): An incremental ﬁt index. Assessing by comparing a model
with a null model where all observed variables are assumed to be uncorrelated. Acceptable when NFI
>.900.

(e) Non-Normed Fit Index (NN F I): An alternative ﬁt index to NFI. Including the chi-squared and degrees
of freedom ratio. Acceptable when NNFI > .900.

86

Lastly, the qualitative results and conclusions of the study were compared with
quantitative data analyses and literature during the triangulation phase of the research

which was formed in the discussion chapter (Berg, 2001).

87

CHAPTER IV. QUANTITATIVE RESULTS
This chapter will focus on the quantitative data analysis from the surveys. The
demographic statistics are ﬁrst reported, and then the research model and the research

hypotheses are examined, using the survey data.

Demographic Statistics for the Sample

There were a total number of 323 male college students age 18 to 25 who
participated in the quantitative study using survey methods. For the survey data, there
were 141 participants from online surveys and 182 participants from paper surveys.
However, there were 30 exclusions for the ﬁnal analyses because 2 respondents (one each
from the online and paper survey) did not meet the age criteria and 28 respondents (23
from the online and 5 from the paper survey) who did not complete their surveys.
Therefore, the ﬁnal number used for the data analyses was 293.

In the usable surveys, online respondents were 114 (39 %) and paper survey
respondents were 179 (61%). Two hundred eighty (96%) of the sample identiﬁed
themselves as male heterosexuals, eight (3%) identiﬁed themselves as non-heterosexuals
(homosexual or bi-sexual), and four (1%) did not respond in terms of his sexual identity.
Races/ethnicities consisted of majority white/Caucasians (n = 234, 80%), African
Americans (11 = 21, 7%), Asian Americans (11 = 20, 6.8%), Hispanics (n = 7, 2.4%),
American Indian (n = 1, 0.3%), and others (bi-racial or mixed race; n = 3, 1.0%). See the

following table for the race/ethnicity distribution.

88

Table 6. Race/ethnicity distribution of the survey samples

 

 

 

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
White/Caucasian 234 79.9 79.9 79.9
African American 21 7.2 7.2 87.0
Chicano 3 1.0 1.0 88.1
Hispanic 7 2.4 2.4 90.4
American Indian/Alaskan l 0.3 0.3 90.8
Native
Asian American 20 6.8 6.8 97.6
Asian Heritage/Non-American 3 1.0 1.0 98.6
African Herrtage/Non- 1 0.3 0.3 99.0
Amerrcan
Other 3 1 .0 1 .0 100.0
Total 293 100.0 100.0

 

Age distributions consisted of 18 year-olds (n = 33, 11.3%), 19 year-olds (n = 70,
23.9%), 20 year-olds (n = 46, 15.7%), 21 year-olds (n = 56, 19.1%), 22 year-olds (n = 58,

19.8%), 23 year-olds (n = 20, 6.8%), 24 year-olds (n = 3, 1.0%), and 25 year-olds (n = 7,

 

 

 

2.4%).
Table 7. Age distribution of the survey samples

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Ctérgrtilgttlrtve
18 33 11.3 11.3 11.3
19 70 23.9 23.9 35.2
20 46 15.7 15.7 50.9
21 56 19.1 19.1 70.0
22 58 19.8 19.8 89.8
23 20 6.8 6.8 96.6
24 3 1.0 1.0 97.6
25 7 2.4 2.4 100.0
Total 293 100.0 100.0

 

89

The school years consisted of lst year (n = 77, 26.3%), 2nd year (n = 61, 20.8%),
3rd year (n = 57, 19.5%), 4th year (n = 76, 25.9%), 5th year (n = 19, 6.5%), and 6th or
more (11 = 3, 1.0%). See the following tables for the age and school year distributions.

Table 8. School year distribution of the survey samples

 

 

 

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Citrclzlive

lst year 77 26.3 26.3 26.3
2nd year 61 20.8 20.8 47.1
3rd year 57 19.5 19.5 66.6
4th year 76 25.9 25.9 92.5
5th year 19 6.5 6.5 99.0
6th year or more 3 1.0 1.0 100.0
Total 293 100.0 100.0

 

The numbers of parents by educational levels completed consisted of High School

Diploma or lower was (11 Father = 44, 15.5%; n Mother = 56, 19.5%), Bachelor’s Degree,
Attended College, or Associate Degree (11 mm; 157, 55.3%; n Mother= 175, 60.9%),
Master’s Degree or higher (11 Father = 73, 28.4%; nMou1er = 56, 19.5%), and No-Response

(n Father = 9, 3.1%; n Mother = 2, 2.0%). Therefore, the educational levels of parents were

typically average to high with most having attended or graduated from college with a

Bachelor and Master’s degree. See the following table for the parents’ educational levels.

90

Table 9. Fathers’ educational levels distribution of the survey samples

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Less than HS 4 1.4 1.4 1.4
Attended HS 4 1.4 1.4 2.8
HS/GED 36 12.3 12.7 15.5
Attended College 34 1 1.6 12.0 27.5
Associate Degree 21 7.2 7.4 34.9
Bachelor’s Degree 102 34.8 35.9 70.8
Master's Degree 57 19.5 20.1 90.8
Doctorate 26 8.9 9.2 100.0
Response Total 284 96.9 100.0
Missing 9 3.1
Total 293 100.0
Table 10. Mothers’ educational levels distribution of the survey samples
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Less than HS 2 .7 .7 .7
Attended HS 2 .7 .7 1.4
HS/GED 52 17.7 18.1 19.5
Attended College 41 14.0 14.3 33.8
Associate Degree 36 12.3 12.5 46.3
Bachelor’s Degree 98 33.4 34.1 80.5
Master's Degree 48 16.4 16.7 97.2
Doctorate 8 2.7 2 .8 100.0
Response Total 287 98.0 100.0
Missing 6 2.0
Total 293 100.0

 

The income levels of most male college student participants consisted of less
than $10,000 (n = 235, 80.8%), $10,000 to $24,999 (n = 51, 17.5%), and $25,000 to
$44,999 (n = 5, 1.7%), No-Response (n = 2, 0.7%). The income levels of their parents
were distributed through a range with most described as middle to upper-middle class.
The distribution by income consisted of $44,999 or less (n = 39, 15.5%), $50,000 to

$99,999 (n = 78, 31%), $100,000 to $199,999 (n = 94, 37.5%), and $200,000 or more (n

91

= 40, 13.7%), and No-Response (n = 42, 14.3%). See the following table for complete
details.

Table 11. Male college students’ income distribution of the survey samples

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequency Percent Valid Percent (3:332:36
Less than $10,000 235 80.2 80.8 80.8
$10,000-14,999 37 12.6 12.7 93.5
$15,000-24,999 14 4.8 4.8 98.3
$25,000-34,999 4 1.4 1.4 99.7
$35,000-44,999 1 .3 .3 100.0
Response Total 291 99.3 100.0
Missing 2 .7
Total 293 100.0
Table 12. Parents’ income distribution of the survey samples

Frequency Percent Valid Percent ngruclgrtiitve
Less than 10,000 6 2.0 2.4 2.4
$15,000-24,999 8 2.7 3 .2 5.6
$25,000-34,999 6 2.0 2.4 8.0
$35,000-44,999 19 6.5 7.6 15.5
$50,000-74,999 36 12.3 14.3 29.9
$75,000-99,999 42 14.3 16.7 46.6
$100,000-149,999 63 21.5 25.1 71.7
$150,000-199,999 31 10.6 12.4 84.1
$200,000 or more 40 13.7 15.9 100.0
Response Total 251 85.7 100.0
Missing 42 14.3
Total 293 100.0

 

In all, most of the respondents identiﬁed as White/Caucasian heterosexual males.
In terms of the age, most of the respondents were 18 to 23 years old with a range in age
of 18 to 25. The school years of participants were almost evenly distributed between lst

year to 4th year. Their parents’ education levels were distributed more on Bachelor and

92

Master’s degree. However, over 65 percent of fathers had a Bachelor’s to Doctoral
degree. Over 50 percentage of mothers had a Bachelor’s to Doctoral degree. This
indicates that students’ parents were well educated. The income levels of the respondents
were less than $10,000, which was not surprising given that the respondents were all
college age males. Parent’s income levels were somewhat evenly distributed on every
income level from $50,000 to over $100,000, but they had typically middle to upper-
middle class incomes (70% of parents’ income ranged between $ 50,000 and $100,000).
Finally, respondents’ majors were not distributed across all majors but they were

distributed across a variety of majors in the university.

Results and Analyses

This chapter focuses on analyzing the data collected from the quantitative survey
and presents the findings. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, means, standard
deviations, and correlations were used. A further statistical procedure used for an in-
depth analysis in the study was Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Therefore, this
chapter also provides preliminary data analyses to test whether the data were appropriate
for SEM. Afterward, reliabilities and correlation analyses are reported to determine the
signiﬁcance of relationships between the study variables. Finally, the SEM procedures to
examine the study model are presented. Then, the study hypotheses will be discussed

based on the study model.

93

Descriptive statistics for the variables

Descriptive statistics were examined before the preliminary data analyses to
explore the basic characteristics of the data. The following table reports the numbers of
the cases, minimum and maximum values, means, and standard deviations that were used

for analyses in the study.

Table 13. Descriptive statistics of major variables

Variables Abbr::1atlo N Min. Max. Mean SD

 

Soc1o-Cultural Inﬂuences on SC [ON 293 2.46 4.00 3.04 1,34

 

 

 

Gender Norms

Traditional Masculinity Attitudes TMA 293 1.52 5.10 3.57 1.67

Masculine Behaviors in

Sport/Physical Activity MBS 293 1.88 6.00 3.22 1.60
value.” a 50““ SV. 293 1.00 6.00 3.45 1.98
Expenence Sacral

Value as an Aesthetic SV 293 1.00 6.00 3.15 199

Experience Aesthetic
SP0?“ Values as Health and SV 293 1.67 6.00 4.24 1.92
p A Fitness Health
Values . SV
(Abbr.: SV) Values as Cathars1s Catharsis 293 1.33 6.00 3.83 1.90
Values as S V

a Pursuit of Vertigo Vertigo 293 1.00 6.00 4.12 1.08

Value as an Ascetic SV

. . 293 1.00 6.00 4.13 1.08
Expenence Ascetic

 

These descriptive statistics showed that there were 4 major variables examined in the
study; Socio-Cultural Inﬂuence on Gender Norms (SCIGN), Traditional Masculinity
Attitudes (TMA), Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS), and
Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV) along with its sub-factors (sub-SVs: SV Social,
Aesthetic, Health, Catharsis, Vertigo, and Ascetic - see subsequent columns related to SV

in the table). Two hundred ninety-three cases and the variables’ means ranging from 3.04

94

to 4.24 and standard deviations ranging from 1.34 to 1.08 were observed. In the
descriptive statistics, the means of SCIGN, TMA, and MBS presented the grand means
for each variable, and those of sub-SVs indicated the means of each sub-factors for

Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV).

Preliminary Analyses

After the brief observation of the descriptive statistics, multivariate normality and
homogeneity, univariate normality, transformations, outliers, and missing data were
examined as main preliminary data analyses. This procedure was required to screen data
for SEM (Kline, 1998). First of all, the multivariate normality and homogeneity
examined scatter-plots to see the univariate distributions among the variables. As a result,
all the univariate and joint distributions appeared between the variables to be normal and
every scatter plot was observed to be linear and homogeneous. These assumptions of
multivariate normality and homogeneity were also examined via assessing a curve ﬁt on
every joint of relationships between every individual’s dependent and independent
variables. The researcher then found the ﬁt to be linear.

Following the data screening for multivariate normality, univariate normality was
examined to assess whether every variable ﬁts into a normal distribution. From the
examination, it was found that all the values of skewness on every variable fell between
-2.0 and 2.0 and those of kurtosis on every variable were between -8.0 and 8.0. These
values suggested that the variables in the study satisﬁed the acceptable range on the
univariate normality assumption; therefore, no transformation was required. Yet, the

researcher examined the skewness and kurtosis with transformed data in case there might

95

be some changes in the normal distribution. In this process, the raw data were
transformed to z—scores and centered-scores. However, no changes were found.
Therefore, the researcher determined that no transformation procedure was needed. In the
meantime, outliers were also searched with several assessments such as standardized
residuals (good if lower than 3), Cook’s distance (good if lower than 1), Mahalanobis
(good if lower than 15), and DFBeta (good if lower than 1) (Cohen & Cohen, 2003).
According to the results, a few outliers were found in the relationship between SCIGN
and TMA. However, the researcher decided to retain these outliers. It was because that
these outliers might still affect some other variables such as Masculine Behaviors in
Sport/Physical Activity (MBS), Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV), or the sub-SVs in
relationship at the same time.

In terms of missing data, the researcher found some missing data on SCIGN while
other variables had very few. This missing data were primarily due to the acknowleged
absences of one’s family members, friends, coaches, etc. In detail, the missing data for
father, mother, brother, sister, male friend, female friend, coach, teammate, physical
education teacher, physical education classmates, and oneself (myself) were respectively
3, 4, 64, 62, 4, 7, 21, 17, 18, 19, and 3 out of the total of 293. Due to some missing data
for each participant, the researcher used the mean scores for each category of socializing
agents (Aiken, West, & Pitts, 2003; Venter & Maxwell, 2000). For example, missing data
for ‘father’ were replaced with the average of the scores on ‘father’. According to Kline
(2005), this method may tend “to distort the underlying distribution of the data, reducing
variability and making distributions more peaked at the mean” (Pp.54). However, it was

conﬁrmed that using this method of mean substitution of each item did not change the

96

overall distribution of the data and variable means before and after the substitution of the
mean. Finally, multicollinearity was assessed to see whether there were relative variances
among the variables. However, no signiﬁcant problem was found as the values of
Variance Inﬂuence Factor (V IF) close to 1.0 and Tolerance close to zero was found
among all the variables.

All in all, the preliminary data analyses indicated that most of the assumptions
were satisﬁed for SEM analyses. With the few concerns such as outliers and some

missing data, decision procedures were utilized for treatment.

Reliabilities

Before SEM, reliability tests were conducted in order to see if variables were
steadfast in the use of SEM analyses. For the reliability test, Crobach’s coefﬁcient alphas
(a) were estimated in the study. This test was to verify internal consistency reliabilities.
The reliability test reported the values of a ranged from .61 to .88. With no values
below.60, these values suggested that reliabilities on each variable were acceptable in
reliability (John & Benet-Martinez, 2000). See the following tables for the internal

consistency reliabilities.

97

Table 14. Internal consistency reliabilities of the variables

 

 

Variables Cronbach’s Alphas N of Items
SITGN .84 10
TMA .88 21
MBS .86 26

SV Social .61 2

SV Aesthetic .84 3

SV Health .74 3
SVs

SV Catharsis .67 3

SV Vertigo .75 3

SV Ascetic .66 2

 

 

Correlation Analyses

Along with the reliability tests, correlations among the variables were assessed. In
the test, the relationships between (a) Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
(SCIGN) and Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA), (b) TMA and Masculinity
Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS), and (c) TMA and sub-Sport/Physical
Activity Values (sub-SVs: SV Social, SV Aesthetic, SV Health, SV Catharsis, SV
Vertigo, and SV Ascetic) were examined as these associations were to be used in SEM.
According to the results, SCIGN and TMA were not signiﬁcantly correlated with each
other (r = -.012, p =.834) in the ﬁrst model, but TMA and MBS were signiﬁcantly
correlated (r = .571, p <.01). In terms of the relationships between TMA and sub-SVs,
TMA was signiﬁcantly correlated with 5 of the sub-SVs. The ﬁndings on these
correlation tests presented signiﬁcantly positive correlations between TMA and SV

Social (r = .165,p < .01); SV Vertigo (r = .228,p < .01); SV Catharsis (r = .125,p <

98

.05.); and SV Ascetic (r = .387, p < .01). From the ﬁndings, it was also found a negative
correlation between TMA and SV Aesthetic (r = -.158, p < .01). However, the researcher

did not ﬁnd a signiﬁcant correlation between TMA and SV Health (r = .058, p = .320).

The following table shows the correlations.

Table 15. Correlations among the variables

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9
1.SCIGN 1

2. TMA -.01 1

3. MBS -.14* .57** 1

4. sv Social -.20** .17** .03 1

5.SVAesthetic -.15* -.16** -.13* .15" 1

6. sv Health -.07 .06 .05 .16** .20** 1

7.SVCatharsis -.O6 .23** .23** .17** -.04 .18** 1

8.SVVertigo -05 .13* .29** -.01 -.01 .14* .13* 1
9.SVAscetic -.18** .39** .50** .15** -.07 .00 .32** .17** 1
my?“ .34 .67 .60 .98 1.00 .95 .90 1.10 1.10
Deviatton

 

* Correlation statistically signiﬁcant at the p—value of .05 (p < .05, two-tailed).
** Correlation statistically signiﬁcant at the p—value of .01 (p < .01, two-tailed).

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Tests

Using the given correlations among the variables presented in the previous section,
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was executed. In the SEM test, SCIGN, TMA, and
MBA were deﬁned as ‘manifest’ variables. Then, SV was termed as a ‘construct
variable’ because it was structured with the sub-categories of SV. In the structure, the six
sub-categories were called sub-factors in the study and applied as ‘indicators’ in the SEM
analysis. At the same time, characters of variables in relation were also determined with

the terms, ‘exogenous’ and ‘endogenous’. In the study, SCIGN was employed as an

99

‘exogenous’ variable because it was used as equivalent to an independent variable. At the
same time, TMA, MBS, and SV were deﬁned as endogenous variables because they were
used as equivalent to dependent variables. In the SEM test of the study, SCIGN were
treated as exogenous variables that affect TMA, MBS, and SV as ‘endogenous’ variables.
Using these variables, a SEM test was initially conducted for the hypothesized model
suggested after the literature review.

According to the result, the initial SEM test failed to ﬁnd the ﬁrst hypothesized
model as a ﬁt model. Therefore, modiﬁcations were suggested, and the best-ﬁtted model
was ﬁnally completed throughout several modiﬁcations. The following section presents

the research models that were tested.

Model 1 (Exploratory research model)
Using EQS 6.1 (Structural Equation Modeling software), the research

hypothesized model was examined for a SEM test. The model tested in this stage was
named Model 1. This model test entered an exogenous variable (SCIGN) and endogenous
variables (TMA, MBS, and SV) into the analysis. The relationships between the variables
in the model were; (a) SCIGN -* TMA, (b) TMA —> MBS, and (c) TMA -—> SV. See the
diagram in Figure 3. In the diagram, correlation coefﬁcients were reported to demonstrate

strengths of the relationships between the variables in Model I .

100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Social
260*
Aesthetic
-.100
-012 663* '134 Health
SCIGN > TMA ‘ SV
.481"
240* Catharsis
.571* '
*
'662 Vertigo
MBS Ascetic
Legend

- SCIGN : Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
- TMA: Traditional Masculinity Attitudes

- MBS: Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity
- SV: Sport/Physical Activity Values

* Statistically signiﬁcant, p<.05

Figure 3. The diagram of Model I (Exploratory research model)

According to the diagram of Model 1, there was no statistical signiﬁcance found between
SCIGN and TMA (13 = -.012), but the researcher found a statistical signiﬁcance between
TMA and MBS (B = .571) and between TMA and SV ([3 = 563). In the meantime, the
sub-factors of SV also resulted in several statistical signiﬁcances (p < .05). They were

displayed between TMA and SV Social (B = .260); SV Catharsis (B = .481); SV Vertigo

101

(B = .240); and SV Ascetic (B = .662). However, no statistical signiﬁcances were found
between TMA and SV Aesthetic (B = -.100) and SV Health (0 = .134).

Along with the relationships between variables in Model 1, the SEM test reported
the goodness of ﬁt indexes to demonstrate whether the model ﬁtted or not. In the SEM
test at this stage, it was suggested that the total model failed as a ﬁt model. According to
the results, Model 1 could not obtain all acceptable values of the ﬁt indexes; the goodness

of ﬁt indexes summary indicated that none of the indexes met the recommended ﬁt

2
criteria“); XM = 145.215 (df= 27,p <. 01), NFI = .610, NNFI = .531, CFI = .648,
RMSEA = .122. The recommendation for the cut-off value of NFI, NNFI, and CFI was

above .9 and RMSEA was below .5 (Kline, 2005). The following table shows the

goodness of ﬁt indexes for Model I .

Table 16. Goodness of ﬁt indexes summary of Model 1
262 Df xz/df NFI NNFI CFI RMSEA

145.215 27 5.378 .610 .531 .648 .122

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goodness of ﬁt indexes;

(a) Model Chi-Square (Xi, ): Overall test values of ﬁt in SEM. Assessing the magnitude of discrepancy
between the sample and the ﬁtted covariance matrices. Interpretation of the signiﬁcance varies, based
on the sample sizes.

(b) Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Overall test values of ﬁt in SEM. Less
affected by sample size than model chi-square. Perfect ﬁt when RMSEA = 0; Close ﬁt when < .05
to .08; fair ﬁt when < .08 to .10; poor ﬁt when >.10.

(c) Comparative Fit Index (CFI): An incremental ﬁt index. Assessing a model with a null model where all
relationships are nested in the model. Useful for when the sample size is relatively small. Acceptable
when NFI >.900.

(d) Bentler-Bonett Normed Fit Index (NFI): An incremental ﬁt index. Assessing by comparing a model
with a null model where all observed variables are assumed to be uncorrelated. Acceptable when NFI
>.900.

(e) Non-Normed Fit Index (NNFI): An alternative ﬁt index to NFI. Including the chi-squared and degrees
of freedom ratio. Acceptable when NNFI > .900.

102

In the meantime, the following table summarized parameters, estimates, and

standard errors that were used for the Model I test.

Table 17. Parameter summary of Model 1
Estimate

 

 

 

 

 

Parameter * SE Parameter Estimate SE

Direct Effects Measurement Error ﬁriances &

Dlsturbance

SCIGN (V1) -* TMA (V2) -.012 .06 Ev] 1.000 .08
T MA (V2) -> MBS (V3) .571 .05 lav2 1.000 .08
TMA (V2) -’ SV (F1) .563 .05 En, .821 .06
SV Indicators E04 .966 .08
SV (F1) -> SV Social (V4) .260 - 13V5 .995 .08
SV (F1) -> SV Aesthetic (V5) -.100 .30 Ev, .991 .08
SV (F1) -> SV Health (V6) .134 .32 Ev7 .877 .08
SV (F1) -> SV Catharsis (V7) .481 .58 Evg .971 .08
SV (F1) -* SV Vertigo (V8) .240 .38 Ev9 .750 .09
SV (F1) -> SV Ascetic (V9) .662 .78 DP. .826 .03

 

* Refers to standardized solutions

In this table, parameter indicates the relationships between the variables, and ‘estimate’

demonstrates the correlation coefﬁcients. In addition, ‘SE’ represents the standard errors
of the variables. Noticing these values, it is also important to remark that the correlation

coefﬁcients of sub-SVs (V4, V5, V6, V7, V8, and V9) represent their relationships with
TMA.

Overall, it was suggested that the hypothesized model as Model 1 failed to reach
all the satisfactory goodness of ﬁt index criteria. Therefore, a modiﬁcation was
recommended. In the modiﬁcation, reassessment of correlations among major variables
was suggested. It was particularly needed because one of the major variables, SCIGN, did
not show a signiﬁcant association with other major variables. This variable of socio-

cultural inﬂuences on gender norms had both traditional and non-traditional directional

103

inﬂuences which neutralized the variable’s relationships to other variables in the model.

Therefore, a modiﬁcation in the variable was needed.

Model 2 (Explanatory research model)
For Model 2, a modiﬁcation took Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms

(SCIGN) into consideration to be carefully inspected as mentioned. However, Traditional
Masculinity Attitudes (TMA) was not considered for the inspection because it sustained

fairly signiﬁcant relationships with other variables. The inspection was conducted mainly
for the association of SCIGN with TMA (recall that this relationship was entered into the
hypothesized research model). In the inspection, it was found that the items in the SCIGN

scale could be divided into two different characteristics. In fact, when the measurement
for SCIGN was developed for the study, questions on ‘traditional gender norms”’ and

‘non—traditional gender normslz’ were combined. Therefore, the researcher divided it into
the two speciﬁc categories and examined each of the relationships through correlations to
TMA.

When separating SCIGN into ‘Non-Traditional Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on
Gender Norms (NTSCIGN)’ and ‘Traditional Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender
Norms (TSCIGN)’, it was shown that the scores on NTSCIGN showed a statistically
negative signiﬁcance in relation with TMA (r = -.302, p < .01) and TSCIGN presented a
statistically positive signiﬁcance (r = .289, p < .01). In addition, it was found that the
scores on NTSCIGN and TSCIGN had a negative relationship at a statistically signiﬁcant

level, too (r = -.151, p < .05). These inspections suggested NTSCIGN offset the positive

 

l 1
For example, ‘women should be passive’.

12
For example, ‘Men should be passive’.

104

effects of TSCIGN to TMA so that the original complex variable of SCIGN could not

have the expected association with TMA. Therefore, there was a decision that the items

for NTSCIGN were excluded from the model, and the items for TSCIGN in the scale

were appropriately applied to the second ﬁt model test procedure. See the diagram below

to see the relationships between TSCIGN and NTSCIGN and how they were associated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

with TMA.
, ’ ' — - - - Social
I
I
I
I, Aesthetic
: -012
\ SCIGN Health
\
‘ x \ Catharsis
\ ~ —I- - ‘
I
1' Vertigo
I
I
I}:— _ - _ - Ascetic
I z ’ Legend
1’ X - SCIGN: Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on
I \ Gender Norms
W TSCIGN =. ‘ . .
l ’ = ‘-‘5" r 289 l - TSCIGN:Tradit10nalSoc10-Cultural
\ TMA I Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
\ \ NTSCIGN '= 7302‘ y - NTSCIGN: Non-Traditional Socio-
\ \ r Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
\ I

 

 

 

- TMA: Traditional Masculinity Attitudes

- MBS: Masculine Behaviors in
Sport/Physical Activity

- SV: Sport/Physical Activity Values

* Statistically signiﬁcant, p<.05

Figure 4. TSCIGN and NTSCIGN and their relationships to TMA in Model 1

Consequently, the new modiﬁed variable, Traditional Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences

on Gender Norms (TSCIGN), was used instead of the original variable, Socio-Cultural

105

Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (SCIGN). Then, data screening was re-executed for
TSCIGN. As a result, there was no considerable problems and no outliers were found in
the relationship between the modiﬁed variable, TSCIGN, and TMA (this problem had
been considered in relation between the original variable, SCIGN, and TMA in the
previous stage). Along with the new variable of TSCIGN, the variable and data were now
more consistent than previously applied. Using TSCIGN, correlations were also re-

analyzed. The following table demonstrated the re-analyzed correlations.

Table 18. Relationships of Traditional Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms on
study variables

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1.TSCIGN 1.00

2. TMA .2_9** 1.00

3.MBS .15* .57** 1.00

4. SV Social .10 .17* .03 1.00

5.8V Aesthetic -.O6 -.l6** -.13* .15" 1.00

6. sv Health —.03 .06 .05 .16** .20** 1.00

7. SVCatharsis .04 .23** .23“ .17** -.04 .18" 1.00

8.SVVertigo .06 .]3* .29* -.01 -.01 .14* .13* 1.00
9.SVAscetic .03 .39** .50M .15** -.08 .00 .32" .17M 1.00
S‘“".““."’ .52 .67 .60 .98 1.00 .95 .90 1.08 1.08
Dewatton

 

* Correlation statistically signiﬁcant at the p-value of .05 (p < .05, two-tailed).
** Correlation statistically signiﬁcant at the p—value of .01 (p < .01, two-tailed).

As mentioned before, the table with TSCIGN reported the signiﬁcant relationship
between TSCIGN and TMA. For the second model test, this correlation was used, but
there was no change in the ﬁgure of the relationships among the endogenous and
exogenous variables. Replacement of TSCIGN with SCIGN was the only modiﬁcation in

the Model 2 test. See the following diagram for Model 2.

106

 

F-—-

 

 

 

 

 

I I .289* 563*
TSCIGN > TMA
I I
.571 *
MBS

 

Social

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.260"
Aesthetic
-. 100
'134 Health
SV
.481 "'
Catharsis
.240“
.662* Vertigo
Ascetic

Legend

- SCIGN: Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
- TMA: Traditional Masculinity Attitudes

- MBS: Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity
- SV: Sport/Physical Activity Values

* Statistically signiﬁcant, p<.05

Figure 5. The diagram of Model 2 (Explanatory research model)

The diagram in Figure 5 presented demonstrates a signiﬁcant correlation coefficients

between SCIGN and TMA (B = .289) while the correlation coefﬁcients between (a) TMA

and MBS (13 = .571), (b) TMA and SV (13 = .563), and (c) the sub-factors of SV remained

the same as the previous model.

The second model test also reported goodness of ﬁt indexes. According to the

2
results, Model 2 produced a better ﬁt indexes than Model 1 ; XM = 119.991 (df= 27, p

107

 

 

<.01 ), NFI = .678, NNFI = .632, CFI = .724, RMSEA = .102. However, it still did not
meet satisfactory ﬁt criteria. . The model was considered a better model than Model I but
was not yet considered to be the most acceptable model. The following table

demonstrates comparisons of Model 2 to Model 1 .

Table 19. Goodness of ﬁt indexes summarxof Model 2

 

 

 

X2 Df xz/df NFI NNFI CFI RMSi
Model 2 119.991 27 4.444 .678 .632 .724 .109
Model 1 145.215 27 5.378 .610 .531 .648 .122

 

 

The correlation coefﬁcients were summarized with estimates and standard errors
in the following table. There was no signiﬁcant change except the correlation coefﬁcient

between TSCIGN and TMA as discussed.

Table 20. Parameter summary of Model 2
Parameter Estimate* SE Parameter Estimate SE

 

Direct Effects Measurement Error Venances &

 

W

TSCIGN (V1) —-> TMA (V2) .289 .06 Ev, 1.000 .08
TMA (V2) —> MBS (V3) .571 .05 By; .957 .08
TMA (V2) —> SV (F1) .563 .05 EB .821 .06

SV Indicators Eva .966 .08
SV(F1) -> SV Social (V4) .260 - Evs .995 .08
SV (F1) —’ SV Aesthetic (V5) -.100 .30 Ew, .991 .08
SV (F 1) —> SV Health (V6) .134 .32 EN .877 .08
SV (F1) —o SV Catharsis (V7) .481 .58 Eva .971 .08
SV (F 1) —o SV Vertigo (V8) .240 .38 Eve .750 .09
SV (F 1) -* SV Ascetic (V9) .662 .78 DH .826 .03

 

"‘ Refers to standardized solutions

108

For Model 2, a Lagrange Multiplier test suggested that the model could have a
better ﬁt if a relationship between MBS and SV was added in the model. Taking this into
consideration, the researcher accepted the suggestion due to the fact that a signiﬁcant
correlationship between the two variables was found in an earlier correlation test (r =
.288, p < .01). However, this relationship was added as a correlation (r, e in the ﬁgure).
The reason to use a correlation instead of a regressive correlation coefﬁcient (B, —> in the
ﬁgure) was that it was determined that a correlational relationship was more applicable
between these two variables. In other words, ‘masculine behaviors in sport/physical
activity’ and ‘sport/physical activity values’ were correlational rather than predictive
from one to the other. Therefore, the researcher proceeded to the Model 3 test with the

modiﬁcation by adding the correlational relationship between MBS and SV.

Model 3 (In-depth aspects of the model A)

As suggested in the previous model stage, a new relationship between Masculine
Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS) and Sport/Physical Activity Values (SV)
was added in Model 3. See the diagram. The diagram for Model 2 reported that the
correlation coefﬁcient between MBS and SV appeared statistically signiﬁcant, B = .541
(p < .05). Along with this additional relationship, slight changes were made on most of
the correlation coefﬁcients between the major variables in the model; B = .289 between
Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (SCIGN) and Traditional Masculinity
Attitudes (TMA), B = .571 between TMA and MBS, and B = .550 between TMA and SV.
Furthermore, statistical signiﬁcances between TMA and sub-SVs also remained similar
to Model 2 with Slight changes in value; TMA and SV Social (B = .170), SV Catharsis (B

= .419), SV Vertigo (B = .299), and SV Ascetic (B = .715) Then, non-statistical

109

signiﬁcances of TMA with SV Aesthetic (B = -.100) and SV Health (B = .134) were also

reported with slight changes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.170*
-.125
.121
.289* 550*
TSCIGN ’ TMA >
419*
t
.571, \ .299
\
l
.5414: l .715*
“ ’
MBS

 

Figure 6. The diagram of Model 3 (In-depth aspect of the model A)

Social

 

 

Aesthetic

 

 

 

Health

 

 

 

Catharsis

 

Vertigo

 

Ascetic

Model 3 reported goodness of ﬁt indexes13 and it was found that Model 3 made

2
considerable improvement; XM = 77.467 (df= 26, p <.01 ), NFI = .792, NNFI = .788,

CFI = .847, RMSEA = .082. Despite the improvement, the model still did not meet all

recommended ﬁt criteria. In fact, none of the ﬁt indexes reached the value of .900, and

RMSEA also was still higher than .05. However, it was suggested that Model 3 was

signiﬁcantly different from Model 2; Ax2 = 42.524 (df= 1, p < 0.01). Looking at another

 

3
Goodness of ﬁt indexes: Model Chi-Square ( X34 ), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
(RMSEA), Comparative Fit Index (CF 1), Bentler-Bonett Normed Fit Index (NFI), and Non-Normed

Fit Index (NNFI)

110

 

 

 

 

 

 

comparison criteria — Alkaike Information Criterion (AIC)]4, Model 3 was better than
Model 2 as its value of AIC was lower than that of the Model 2 (25.467 > 65.991) The
following table demonstrates the summary of Model 3 and comparisons to the previous

Model 3.

Table 21. Goodness of Fit Indexes Summg of Model 3

 

 

 

 

x2 df XZ/df NFI NNFI CFI RMSEA sz AIC
Model 3 77.467 26 2.980 .792 .788 .847 .082 42152" 25.467
(M2 - M3)
Model 2 119.991 27 4.444 .678 .632 .724 .109 — 65.991
Model 1 145.215 27 5.378 .610 .531 .648 .122 — 91.215

 

 

The correlation coefﬁcients and correlations were summarized with standard
errors in Table 22. There were additional relationships in the model and several minor

changes in the correlation coefﬁcients among variables as discussed above.

 

Alkaike Information Criterion (AIC). This measure is used to select the best model among a number of
candidate models. The smallest value of AIC is considered the best.

111

Table 22. Parameter Summary of Model 3

 

 

 

 

 

Parameter Estimate* SE Parameter Estimate SE
Direct Effects Measuremngtﬁrgzrlzleariences &
TSCIGN (V1) —> TMA (V2) .289 .06 Ev. 1.000 .08
TMA (V2) -> MBS (V3) .571 .05 Ev; .957 .08
TMA (V2) —> SV (F1) .550 .04 BB .821 .06
SV Indicators EM .985 .08
SV (F1) —’ SV Social (V4) .170 - Evs .992 .08
SV (F1) —> SV Aesthetic (V5) -.125 .50 EV6 .996 .08
SV (F1) —> SV Health (V6) .093 .47 En .908 .08
SV (F 1) —* SV Catharsis (V7) .419 1.07 Evg .954 .08
SV(F1) —> SV Vertigo (V8) .299 .82 Eve .699 .09
SV (F1) —o SV Ascetic (V9) .715 1.76 DH .835 .04
Correlation
Ev3 “’ DP] .541 .03

 

* Refers to standardized solutions

Overall, Model 3 improved the goodness of ﬁt indexes and was a better model
than the previous models with slight changes in the relationships among variables.
However, a modiﬁcation was also required for acceptable ﬁt indexes. In terms of the
modiﬁcation, another possibility to improve the model was found as the researcher found
more speciﬁcally signiﬁcant relationships between MBS and sub-SVS and among the sub-
S Vs. Therefore, these relationships were carefully inspected and entered into the model

tests.

Model 4 (In-depth aspects of the model B)

In the modiﬁcation process, the researcher inspected signiﬁcant correlations
among sub-SVS in reference to the correlation matrix (Table 17). However, a certain
pattern was found that was divided into two categories. In fact, it was reﬂective of the

context of gendered and dichotomous sport/physical activity values that the literature

112

suggested; male and female-preferred. The literature argued on dichotomized
sport/physical activity values by gender; (a) women were more likely to have positive
attitudes toward the values of sport/physical activity as a social, aesthetic, and health &
ﬁtness experience; (b) men were more likely to have positive attitudes toward
sport/physical activity as a catharsis, vertigo, and acetic experience (Acord, 1977; Dotson
& Stanley, 1972; Harvey, 1989; Hendry, 1975; Mize, 1979; Mullins, 1969). Therefore,
through careful inspection of the correlations among the sub-Sport/Physical Activity
Values (sub-SVS), the dichotomous tendencies suggested by the literature could be
conﬁrmed in that the ﬁrst three sub-SVs (SV Social, SV Aesthetic, and SV Health) were
all signiﬁcantly correlated within each other and so were the last three sub-SVS (SV

Catharsis, Vertigo, and Ascetic). See Table 23 for the correlations.

Table 23. Correlations among the sub-Sport/Physical Activity Values (sub-SVS)

 

 

 

Sub-SVs 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. SV Social —

2. SV Aesthetic .15 ' —

3. sv Health .16' .20 ' —

4. SV Catharsis .17 -.04 .18 —

5. sv Vertigo —.01 -.01 .14 .13 " —

6. sv Ascetic .15 -.08 .00 .32 " .17 " —

 

 

 

 

a. The bolded correlations with “a” are statistically signiﬁcant correlations among SV
Social, SV Aesthetic, and SV.

b. The bolded correlations with “b” are statistically signiﬁcant correlations among SV
Catharsis, SV Vertigo, and SV Ascetic.

In reference to the gendered Sport/physical activity values, I found another

rationale to divide sub-SVS dichotomously was suggested from the correlations.

113

Investigating correlation residuals, it was observed that the residuals among the ﬁrst three
sub-Sport/Physical Activity Value (sub-SVS) presented values smaller than the grand
mean of sub-SVs residuals, which was .027, when they were entered into analysis within
themselves. The similar pattern was observed among and within the last sub-SVs. In the
following table, the underlined residuals demonstrated the small residuals indicating that
they were convergent within themselves; the ﬁrst three and the last three sub-SVS.
Furthermore, the correlation residuals reported that most of the ﬁrst three sub-SVs
(Social, Aesthetic, and Health) had larger correlation residuals than the grand mean of the
residuals when they were entered into analysis with the last three sub-SVS (Catharsis,
Vertigo, and Ascetic). The large correlation residuals indicated that the ﬁrst three
variables were divergent from the last three sub-SVS in relation. Therefore, this
correlation residuals test supported the dichotomously gendered sub-SVs that the ﬁrst and
the last three sub-SVs were treated as different characters from one another in relation.

See the bolded residuals in Table 24.

Table 24. Correlation residuals among the sub-Sport/Physical Activity Values (sub-SVs)
Sub-SVS l 2 3 4 5 6

 

 

1. SV as Social —

 

2. SV as Aesthetic M —

3. SV as Health M M —

4. SV as Catharsis .032 .024 .126 —

5. SV as Vertigo -.075 .022 .110 .()_14 —

6. SV as Ascetic -.033 .008 -.076 013 .014 —

 

 

 

 

a. The mean of the correlation residuals is .027.

b. The bolded residuals are above the mean of the correlation residuals in their absolute
values.

0. The underlined residuals are below the mean of the correlation residuals in their
absolute values.

114

Along with the dichotomous relationships between the ﬁrst and last three
sport/physical activity values, the researcher attempted to ﬁnd some other potential
relationships that improved the goodness of ﬁt indexes. Throughout the earlier stage of
correlation assessment, it was found that the last three sub-SVS were signiﬁcantly
correlated with MBS while the ﬁrst three sub-SVS were not related to MBS (See the
correlation matrix). This did not suggest that Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical
Activity (MBS) wholly dichotomized the sub-Sport/Physical Activity Values (sub-SVs),
but it was sill supportive of the dichotomous division of them in this context. In the
meantime, there was another signiﬁcant correlation between Traditional Socio-Cultural
Inﬂuences on Gender Norms (TSCIGN) and Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical
Activity (MBS), but the Lagrange Multiplier test did not suggest this relationship could
improve the model, so it was not added.

All in all, because of (a) the dichotomous relationships between the ﬁrst three
sub-SVS (SV Social, SV Health, and SV Aesthetic) and the last three sub-SVS (SV
Vertigo, SV Catharsis, and SV Ascetic), (b) the correlations among the ﬁrst three sub-

SVS and those among the last sub-SVs, and (c) the correlations between the last three
sub-SVs and MBS, new relationships were added; rs between (a) SV Social and SV
Aesthetic, (b) SV Social and SV Health, (c) SV Health and SV Aesthetic, (d) SV
Catharsis and SV Vertigo, (e) SV Catharsis and SV Ascetic, (t) SV Vertigo and SV
Ascetic, (g) MBS and SV Catharsis, (h) MBS and SV Vertigo, (i) MBS and SV Ascetic.

See the following modiﬁed model with the newly added relationships among the

variables. The dotted lines in the diagram indicated the new expanded relationships.

115

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
 

 

 

Social ‘. _ - . _
289* ‘ ‘C ‘ X
215* j \
‘ \
- _,-” .136“ |
_. 168 Aesthetic r- _ _ ‘ ‘ '1
.222* ‘~ ,'
I; ’1’
.289* 674* '106 Health H" ’
TSCIGN _ TMA ,
.377“
Catharsis
.173 *" ~=::.‘
\ .\ s
068 , , ,
I’ 148 ‘ \‘
558* - -r’ l \
‘~*\\ I \
‘ s \
I end 086 ‘, ‘x’ ‘,
Ascetic {:"“""’ ’ ’ \‘2 7 0* i
- SCIGN: Socio—Cultural Inﬂuences on ~ ~ - ~ " :
Gender Norms . . . \'412* : '1
- TMA: Tradltlonal Mascullnlty Attltudes ’1 't l
- MBS: Masculine Behaviors in ’7 ’1 ,'
Sport/Physical Activity ’ ,t 3’ ,’
- SV: Sport/Physical Activity Values ’’’’’’’’’’’’ ’ ’ I I’
* Statistically signiﬁcant, p<.05 MBS £122: - - - ::: _________

 

 

 

Figure 7. The diagram of Model 4 (In-depth aspects of the model B)

In Model 4, there were changes on some correlation coefﬁcients from the previous model
due to the new relationships among sport/physical values (SVs) and those with masculine
behaviors in sport/physical activity (MBS). Statistically signiﬁcant correlation
coefﬁcients (p > .05) were observed between (a) TSCIGN and TMA, B = .289, (b) TMA
and MBS, B = .568, (c) TMA and SV, B = .674, (d) TMA and SV Social, B = .289, (e)
TMA and SV Catharsis, B = .377, and (f) TMA and SV Ascetic, B = .558. On the other
hand, no signiﬁcance was found between (a) TMA and SV Aesthetic, B = -.168, (b) TMA

and SV Health, B = .106, and (c) TMA and SV Vertigo, B = .173. The statistically

116

signiﬁcant correlations (p > .05) in the 4th model were (a) MBS and SV Catharsis, r =
.135, (b) MBS and SV Vertigo, r = .270, (c) MBS and SV Ascetic, r = .412, (d) SV
Social and SV Aesthetic, r = .215, (e) SV Social and SV Health, r = .136, and SV Health
and SV Aesthetic, r = .222.

Non-signiﬁcant correlations were found between (a) SV Catharsis and SV
Vertigo, r = .075, (b) SV Catharsis and SV Ascetic, r = .174, and (c) SV Vertigo and SV
Ascetic, r = .095. These relationships had been statistically signiﬁcant in a correlation test
(see Table 21), but the signiﬁcances do not appear in this model. The researcher
speculated that the non-signiﬁcances could be because of the indirect and attenuation
effects of MBS to sub-SVS (Kline, 2005). It suggested that these sub-SVs could establish
redundant residuals because too many relationships had taken place within themselves
and from MBS simultaneously.

However, the researcher found dramatic improvement in the model ﬁt, along with

the new relationships added for Model 4, According to the results, the goodness of ﬁt

indexes15 were; X134 = 28.262 (df= 18, p = .06), NFI = .924, NNFI = .936, CFI = .970,
RMSEA = .044. All the indexes met the ﬁt criteria that NFI, NNFI, and CFI were above
.900 and RMSEA was below .05. Having Model 4 satisﬁed all the ﬁt index criteria for
SEM, the researcher compared Chi-square and AIC (Akaike Information Criterion)

values to the previous models. In comparison to Model 2, it was suggested that Model 4

was Signiﬁcantly different from the model; Ax2= 91.730 (df= 9, p < 0.01. In the

meantime, the researcher examined the AIC differences to determine which model was

 

15
Goodness of ﬁt indexes: Model Chi-Square ( xi, ), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

(RMSEA), Comparative Fit Index (CPI), Bentler-Bonett Normed Fit Index (NFI), and Non-Normed
Fit Index (NNFI)

117

the best among the four models. Then it was found that Model 4 was the best model from

the previous models as its AIC value was the lowest (-7.73 8). See Table 25 for the ﬁt

indexes and comparisons to the previous models.

Table 25. Goodness of Fit Indexes Summary of Model 4

 

 

 

 

 

x2 Df Xz/df NFI NNFI CFI RMSEA sz AIC
91.730
M (1 l4 28.262 18 1.570 .924 .936 .970 .044 -7.738
° ‘ (M43 M3)
Model 3 77.467 26 2.980 .792 .788 .847 .082 4252“ 25.467
(M31 M2)
Model 2 119.991 27 4.444 .678 .632 .724 .109 — 65.991
Model 1 145.215 27 5.378 .610 .531 .648 .122 — 91.215

 

 

Table 26 reported the parameters, estimates, and standard errors used in Model 4.

In the table, additional relationships (r) in the model and some changes on the correlation

coefﬁcients among variables were presented.

118

Table 26. Parameter Summary of Model 4

 

 

 

 

 

Parameter it? SE Parameter Estimate SE
Direct Effects Measuremgrilitiragzleariances &
TSCIGN (V1) -> TMA (V2) .289 .07 Ev] 1.000 .02
TMA (V2) —> MBS (V3) .568 .04 By; .957 .03
TMA (V2) —> SV (F1) .674 .08 BB .823 .02
SV Indicators EM .966 .08
SV (F1) -+ SV Social (V4) .289 - Evs .984 .08
SV (F1) —> SV Aesthetic (V5) -.l68 .33 EV6 .995 .07
SV (F1) —* SV Health (V6) .106 .25 Ev7 .938 .07
SV (F1) —> SV Catharsis (V7) .377 .41 Evg .987 .10
SV (F1) -e SV Vertigo (V8) .173 .36 Eve .850 .12
SV (F1) -e SV Ascetic (V9) .558 .64 DH .659 .03
Correlations

Eu 0 Ev7 .135 .03 Evs <-> EV6 .222 .06

EB <-> Evg .270 .03 Ew <—> Eva .068 .06

BB 6 Evo .412 .03 EH 9 Evo .148 .07

Eva <—> Evs .215 .06 Evs 9 Evo .086 .07

BM 9 Ew, .136 .05

 

* Refers to standardized solutions

Finally, this model was successful in that all the ﬁt index criteria were met. Yet,
the researcher was still concerned with the model because the model did not present
convergent relationships among the last three sub-SVS (SV Catharsis, SV Vertigo, and
SV Ascetic) and the relationships between TMA and SV Vertigo — the relationships
among the last three sub-SVs and between TMA and SV Vertigo were presented as
statistically signiﬁcant in the previous model and correlation tests. Therefore, another

modiﬁcation was suggested for a better ﬁt.

Model 5 (The ﬁnal model)

As mentioned before, Model 4 did not demonstrate signiﬁcant correlations (r)

among the last three sub-SVs; SV Catharsis, SV Vertigo, and SV Ascetic and a

119

signiﬁcant correlation coeﬁicient (B) between TMA and SV Vertigo. Therefore, in the
modiﬁcation process for Model 5, there was an attempt to exclude these relationships to
avoid the complexity of the model. However, it was still considered that the dichotomous
sub-SVS had to remain; (a) convergent each within the ﬁrst three sub-SVS and within the
last three sub-SVs and (b) divergent between the ﬁrst three sub-SVs and the last three
sub-SVS. Therefore, the non-signiﬁcant correlations among the last three sub-SVs
presented in Model 4 were deleted. However, the relationships between the last three sub-
SVs and MBS were still kept in the model to demonstrate their convergence as they were
still related to each other while all of them were all relating to MBS. This suggested that
the last sub-Sport/Physical Activity Values (sub-SVS) came together as they were all
related to Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity (MBS). Figure 8 displayed the

modiﬁed model, which is Model 5.

    
   
    
 

  
  

.285'

 

 

.289*
TSCIGN ~ TMA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.574‘

 

 

 

 

Figure 8. The diagram of Model 5 (The ﬁnal model)

120

Presented in the Model 5 diagram, the signiﬁcances for the correlation coefﬁcients (p

< .05) were almost the same with slight changes; (a) TSCIGN and TMA, B = .289, (b)
TMA and MBS, B = .574, (c) TMA and SV, B = .576, (d) TMA and SV Social, B = .285,
(e) TMA and SV Catharsis, B = .477, (f) TMA and SV Vertigo, B = .234, (g) TMA and
SV Ascetic, B = .650. The non-signiﬁcances for correlation coefﬁcients also remained
almost the same with small changes, (a) TMA and SV Aesthetic, B = -. 125, and (b) TMA
and SV Health, B = .121. The remaining correlations among the ﬁrst sub-SVS still
presented their signiﬁcances (p < .05) with minor changes; (a) SV Social and SV
Aesthetic, r = .200, (b) SV Aesthetic and SV Health, r = .219, (c) SV Health and SV
Social, r = .132, (d) MBS and SV Catharsis, r = .127, (e) MBS and SV Vertigo, r = .263,
and (i) MBS and SV Ascetic, r = .439. At this point, the researcher found that the
signiﬁcant correlation coefﬁcient between Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA) and
Sport/Physical Activity Value as a Pursuit of Vertigo (SV Vertigo) reappeared . In terms
of relationships among sub-SVs within themselves and to Masculine Behaviors in
Sport/Physical Activity (MBS) in the model, the dichotomous division of sub-SVs
become inevitable in that; (a) the ﬁrst three sub-SVs were signiﬁcantly related to each
other; and (b) the last three were signiﬁcantly related to MBS at the same time.

In the goodness of ﬁt indexes test, it was still found that there were fairly

2
acceptable values‘6;XM = 30.530 (df= 21, p = .08), NFI = .918, NNFI = .951, CFI =

.972, RMSEA = .039. Some small changes were made on each index, but the overall ﬁt

 

l6
Goodness of ﬁt indexes: Model Chi-Square ( X; ), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

(RMSEA), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Bentler-Bonett Normed Fit Index (NFI), and Non-Normed
Fit Index (NNFI)

121

was still satisﬁed like Model 4. In comparison to Model 4, it was found that Model 5 did

not differ from Model 4 signiﬁcantly (Ax2 = 2.263, df= 3, p = 0.52). Meanwhile, the

researcher also compared the AIC of Model 5 to that of Model 4. Then, it was found that
Model 5 was better as its AIC value was lower than the other previous model (-35.l49 > -
7.738). Both of the two models, Model 4 and 5, have suggested that the dichotomously
gendered sport/physical values can be established as a constructive model with the
relationships with traditional gender norms, one’s masculinity attitudes, and masculine
behavior experiences in sport/physical activity, but Model 5 is suggested as a better ﬁt
than Model 4. See Table 27 to view the goodness of ﬁt indexes and comparisons to the

previous models.

Table 27. Goodness of Fit Indexes Summary of Model 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

x2 df XZ/df NFI NNFI CFI RMSEA sz AIC
Model 89.461 (M5: M2)
5 30.530 21 1.454 .918 .951 .972 .039 2263 (M5: M4) 35.149
Model4 28.262 18 1.570 .924 .936 .970 .044 91730 -7.738
(M41M2)
42.524
Model3 77.467 26 2.980 .792 .788 .847 .082 . 25.467
(M3- M2)
Mode12 119.991 27 4.444 .678 .632 .724 .109 — 65.991
Modell 145.215 27 5.378 .610 .531 .648 .122 — 91.215

 

 

In Table 28, the correlation coefﬁcients and correlations were summarized with
the parameters, estimates, and standard errors used in Model 5. There were several small
changes in the correlation coefﬁcients and correlations among the variables as discusses

before.

122

Table 28. Parameter Summary of Model 5

 

 

 

 

 

Parameter Estimate* SE Parameter Estimate SE
Direct Effects MeasuremEthElr'chrnzgariances &
TSCIGN (V1) 9 TMA (V2) .289 .06 Ev] 1.000 .08
TMA (V2) 9 MBS (V3) .574 .05 Evz .957 .08
TMA (V2) 9 SV (F1) .576 .05 EB .817 .06
SV Indicators EM .956 .08
SV (F 1) 9 SV Social (V4) .285 - Evs .992 .08
SV (F1) 9 SV Aesthetic (V5) -.125 .30 EVG .993 .08
SV (F1) 9 SV Health (V6) .121 .26 En .879 .08
SV(F1) -> SV Catharsis (V7) .477 .48 Eva .972 .08
SV (F1) 9 SV Vertigo (V8) .234 .33 Eve .760 .09
SV (F1) 9 SV Ascetic (V9) .650 .64 DH .817 .03
Correlations

EM 9 Evs .200 .06 Ev} 9 Ew .127 .04

Eva 9 Evs .132 .06 Ev; 9 Eva .263 .05

Ev5 9 Ew, .219 .06 EB 9 Evo .439 .05

 

* Refers to standardized solutions

Reﬂecting on all the results from Model 5, no further modiﬁcation was
recommended as the model satisﬁed every goodness of ﬁt index. Thus, the model was
determined as the ﬁnal research model, as the researcher found a better look in ﬁgure and
a better AIC than Model 4.

In conclusion, the researcher found the several research models in the earlier
stages could be strengthened as they failed the ﬁt criteria, but every model was improved
by modiﬁcation processes. Inspections of correlations, correlation residuals, correlation
coefﬁcients, and model differences in Chi-square and AIC were reﬂected for the
modiﬁcations. Then, the modiﬁcation stages ended up with the ﬁfth model as the ﬁnal
model. However, the initial improvement was made when the scores only from the items
of traditional gender norm inﬂuences were applied while those on non-traditional gender

norm inﬂuences were excluded. Lastly, the 5th model was established as the ﬁnal

123

research study model by an application of more speciﬁc relationships among sub-SVs
and with MBS. Therefore, as supposed by literature (Acord, 1977; Dotson & Stanley,
1972; Harvey, 1989; Hendry, 1975; Mize, 1979; Mullins, 1969), it can be suggested that
sport/physical activity values can be dichotomously gendered as reﬂected quantitative
analyses of socio-cultural inﬂuences on traditional gender norms, traditional masculinity

attitudes, and experiences of masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity.

Hypotheses Testing
The researcher examined the study hypotheses after the procedure of SEM tests.

The ﬁnal study model, Model 5, decided from the SEM tests, was used for the hypotheses
testing. According to the result, most of the hypotheses were consistent with the literature
review and the previous research studies (Acord, 1977; Dotson & Stanley, 1972; Foley,
1999; Harrison & Clayton, 2002; Harvey, 1989; Laberge & Albert, 1999; Messner and
Sabo, 1999). At the same time, some additional ﬁndings to the hypothesized relationships
were also observed. They were generated through the SEM tests in the study. These

additional ﬁndings will be reported after the hypotheses test in this section.

Hypothesis 1: Socio-cultural inﬂuences (socializing agents’ inﬂuences) on gender norms
are positively related to traditional masculinity attitudes in the study population.

After the items for the contexts of non-traditional gender norms were excluded, it
was found that the correlation coefﬁcient between Traditional Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences
on Gender Norms (TSCIGN) and Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA) was
signiﬁcant in the study model (B = .289, p < .05). It was suggested that application of

only the contexts of traditional gender norms was the most valid to Show one’s socio-

124

cultural inﬂuences on gender norms in the context of traditional gender norms. Therefore,
the hypothesis was supported. This acceptance of the hypothesis suggested that
traditional socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms by socializing agents such as
parents, siblings, friends, and sport/physical activity could inﬂuence and are related to
one’s attitudes toward traditional masculinity. Of those socializing agents, the
relationships of father, mother, brother, male and female friends, physical education
teachers and classmates to Traditional Masculinity Attitudes (TMA) were statistically
signiﬁcant. Even though some of the individual socializing agents such as sister(s),
coaches, and teammates did not Show the statistical signiﬁcance to TMA in the
quantitative analyses, the total scores on TSCIGN demonstrated the statistical
signiﬁcance of family members, male and female friends, and sport/physical activity

settings in schools.

Hypothesis 2: Traditional masculinity attitudes are positively related to masculine
behaviors of men in sport/physical activity in the study population.

This hypothesis was also supported because the correlation coefﬁcient between
TMA and MBS was statistically signiﬁcant in the model (B = .574, p < .05). This
suggested that men were more likely to have masculine behaviors in sports/physical
activity or positive attitudes toward those masculine behaviors as they had more positive
attitudes toward traditional masculinity. The contexts for masculine behaviors in
sport/physical activity in the study included competitiveness, toughness, aggressiveness,
self-reliance, restricted emotions, avoidance of femininity, risk/injury-taking behaviors,

verbal accusations, and usage of drugs, alcohol and tobacco (Connell, 2000; Foley, 1990,

125

Kidd, 1987; Messner, 2001; Messner & Sabo, 1990; Papas et. al., 2004). Therefore,
traditional masculinity attitudes were related to speciﬁc social behaviors in sport/physical

activity.

Hypothesis 3: Traditional masculinity attitudes are positively or negatively related to
sport/physical activity values of men in the study population.

The relationship between TMA and SV was signiﬁcantly related as the correlation
coefﬁcient between was signiﬁcant in the model (B = .576, p < .05). This result could
suggest that one’s traditional masculinity attitudes had a positive relationship with his
sport/physical activity values. The values in the test included sport/physical activity
values as social, aesthetic, health and ﬁtness, catharsis, a pursuit of vertigo, and ascetic
experience. Relationships of TMA to each speciﬁc value for hypothesis 3-1 to 3-6 are

discussed in the following sections.

Hypothesis 3-1: There is a negative relationship between traditional masculinity and
values of social relations in sport/physical activity.

The hypothesis 3-1 was rejected. The study assumed that one’s attitudes toward
traditional masculinity would have a negative relationship to his social experience value
in sport/physical activity. However, the correlation coefﬁcient between TMA and SV
Social resulted in a positive relationship in the model (B = .285, p < .05). This ﬁnding is
further discussed with qualitative study ﬁndings in that many respondents in the
qualitative study agreed that men valued sport/physical activity as a social experience to

make a friendship but, many times, for male-bonding relationships. This ﬁnding was not

126

evidenced consistently in previous study on gendered values in Sport (Coakley, 2004;

Levant & Kopecky, 1995)

Hypothesis 3-2: There is a negative between traditional masculinity and aesthetic values
in sport/physical activity.

The hypothesis 3-2 was also rejected. The researcher found the relationship was
negative, but a statistical signiﬁcance was not observed (B = -.125, p > .05). Yet, it should
be noted that the statistical signiﬁcance was found in the correlation test (r = -. 158, p <
.01, See Table 14 or 17). Therefore, it could be suggested that the negative relationship
hypothesized could be sustained when the relationships were to be proved as relational,
but not as predictive. This ﬁnding supported the literature review stating that traditional
masculinity attitudes had a negative relationship to the value of aestheticism in

sport/physical activity.

Hypothesis 3-3: There is a negative relationship between traditional masculinity and
health and ﬁtness values in sport/physical activity.

This hypothesis was not supported because the correlation coefﬁcient between
TMA and SV Health was not only positive but also non-signiﬁcant (B = .121, p > .05).
Literature stated that many men did not take care of their health and ﬁtness as they tended
to take risks and have injuries. Often, overwhelmingly, men sought muscular images of
athletic men so that they might be at risk of injuring themselves or having other major
health issues. Corresponding to that argument, the quantitative study results suggested

that men did not signiﬁcantly value health and ﬁtness beneﬁts from sport/physical

127

activity, but those who were with lower TMA appeared to value health and ﬁtness. This

ﬁnding was consistent with the literature.

Hypothesis 3-4: There is a positive relationship between traditional masculinity and
catharsis values in sport/physical activity.

There was a signiﬁcant correlation coefﬁcient between TMA and SV Catharsis (B
= .477, p < .05) in the model. Therefore, the hypothesis was supported. This result
suggested that men with traditional masculinity attitudes in the study tended to value the
expression of themselves as men releasing tension, aggression, and stress through

sport/physical activity. This ﬁnding is consistent to the discussion in the literature review.

Hypothesis 3-5: There is a positive relationship between traditional masculinity and a
pursuit of vertigo values in sport/physical activity.

Another statistically signiﬁcant correlation coefﬁcient was found between TMA
and SV Vertigo (B = .234, p < .05 ) in the model; thus, this hypothesis was also supported.
This was consistent with the literature review, arguing that men valued the pursuit of
vertigo in (adventure and challenge) sport/physical activity because they sought many

dynamic and challenging situations.

Hypothesis 3-6: There is be a positive relationship between traditional masculinity and
ascetic experience values in sport/physical activity.
Finally, the hypothesis 3-6 was supported because a statistical signiﬁcance was

found between TMA and SV Ascetic in the model (B = .65 0, p < .05). It was suggested

128

that traditional masculinity attitudes could relate to men’s value on sport/physical activity
as an ascetic experience. This ﬁnding was consistent with the literature review arguing
that men were encouraged to be ascetic by working hard and sacriﬁcing their bodies and

themselves for higher spiritual or athletic pleasures.

Additional Findings to the Study Hypotheses
The study hypotheses were examined from the ﬁnal study research model.

However, the extended SEM modeling process and several stages of modiﬁcations
presented a few more additional relationships besides the hypothesized relationships. The
ﬁndings reported that the gendered values were associated with each other
dichotomously. According to the Sport/Physical Activity Value results, SV Social, SV
Aesthetic, and SV Health were signiﬁcantly related to each other at p < .05; SV Social
and Aesthetic, r = .200: SV Social and Health, r = 132: and SV Aesthetic and Health, r
=.219. The researcher found SV Catharsis, SV Vertigo, and SV Ascetic were also
associated with each other, by connecting to Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical
Activity (MBS); SV Catharsis related to MBS, r = .127: SV Vertigo related to MBS, r =
.263: related to SV Ascetic related to MBS, r = .439. The relationships between the ﬁrst
three sub-SVs and the last three sub-SVs were divergent into two gendered categories
while the ﬁrst three and the last three sub-SVS were not related each other. These

relationships were also supported with correlation residuals.

Summary of the quantitative results

Overall, a strengthened research model (Model 5) was developed through

structural equation modeling. Hypothesis testing revealed signiﬁcant relationships

129

between the study variables. It was focused that there was a signiﬁcant inﬂuence between
traditional socio-cultural inﬂuences of parents, brothers, male and female friends, and
physical activity school setting and traditional masculinity attitudes. There was also a
signiﬁcant and positive relationship between traditional masculinity attitudes and
masculine behaviors and sport/physical activity values. Additionally, some sport/physical
activity values in the ﬁnal model appear to be dichotomized and gendered where males
are more likely to value catharsis, vertigo, and ascetic experiences as opposed to social,

aesthetic, and health and ﬁtness experiences in sport/physical activity.

130

CHAPTER V. QUALITATIVE RESULTS

This chapter will focus on the qualitative data analyses that were based on the
data collected from in-depth interviews. Reﬂecting the research questions, the in-depth
interviews were conducted as a follow-up interview to the quantitative survey. All the
participants were recruited from those participating in the quantitative aspects of the
study. Twenty-four of the survey participants agreed to be involved for the qualitative
portion of the study. All the interview participants had already met all the study’s
participation criteria of being college males between 18 to 25 years old. They all
successfully completed their interviews, which lasted from 31 minutes to 1 hour and 18
minutes. In the qualitative data analysis and reporting of data, the names of the
participants will all be pseudonyms. The following table shows the interview

participants’ cultural and academic afﬁliations.

Table 29. Interview participants in the study

 

 

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
White/Caucasian 14 58.3 58.3
African American 4 16.7 75.0
Latino 3 12.5 87.5
Asian American 3 12.5 100.0
Total 21 100.0

 

Majors * (Number of participants) : Music (1), Food Science (2), Pre-Med (2), Spanish (2),
Criminology (1), Psychology (1), Kinesiology (2), Accounting (2), Education (1)
International Relationship (1), Packaging (1), Nursing (2), Physical Science (1), Economics
(2), Business (1), Advertising (2), Pre-Law (1), and Civil Engineering (1)

* Notes: There were some double majors

 

131

Qualitative results and analyses

The ﬁndings from the qualitative aspects of the study provided more immediate
and proximate socio-cultural perspectives on traditional masculinity and sport/physical
activity values within the participants’ everyday lives and sport/physical experiences. The
researcher found that the qualitative results and analyses were mostly consistent with the
literature. Furthermore, the qualitative ﬁndings supported the quantitative data analyses.
When the results are reported following each research question throughout the chapter,
quotes will be used to help answer the research questions. And ﬁnally, themes that
emerged from the data related to the research questions will be discussed (Berg, 2001;

Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995).

Research Question 1: What are the study participants’ socio-cultural inﬂuences on
traditional gender norms?

Corresponding to Research Question 1, it was found that socio-cultural inﬂuences
on traditional gender attitudes were grounded in the socio-cultural experiences that were
associated with social institutions in society such as the family, community, education,
and sports. For the purpose of the study, the interviewees were asked to identify who
played a signiﬁcant role in forming their perspectives about traditional gender norms.

From the interviews, the researcher found that many of the respondents replied
that parents, siblings, friends or peers in school, physical education classes (teachers and
classmates), coaches, and sport teammates played a role in inﬂuencing their views of
traditional gender norms at different levels and in various ways. In this section, one

example of each socializing agents’ inﬂuence on gender norms will be given to highlight

132

the study participants’ gender experiences. This work will be an introductory process to
explore the study issues. The details about how these socializing agents play roles for
traditional gender norms will be elaborated more in the next section of research questions.
One of the interviewees, Kyle (Business administration and pre-law major, Junior) stated
that both of his parents were involved in his socialization toward traditional gender norms.

As far as a traditional gender norms I got them from my mother...you
know...she told me how to be a gentleman, also [she] taught me how to
be a man. And it’s the same thing my father did. He’d also take time to
Show me...you don’t be rough to the girl, as a kid because...you
know...when you grow up you will start liking girls and things like that,
so you know...of course guys aren’t playing with Barbie dolls cause that
is a little girls’ toy. I mean...you know... just normal stuff as growing up
as a kid and I guess you know in a way growing up at school. So if guys
express for their mother its ﬁne and dandy cause that’s his mother...you
know...so if he expresses to his father, he wouldn’t do it the same way as
he would do it to his mother. In a way he would say I love you, but it
wouldn’t be the same way. You know, I don’t hug my father and
everything like that, she is not the same way. You kiss your mom...you
know...you give a tight hug...you know... your dad you shake his hand.

Besides mother’s and father’s inﬂuence on traditional gender norms, it was found that
sisters and peers also played a role in inﬂuencing the gender norm. Aaron (Food science
major, Freshman) stated his experiences with his sister.

My sister she tries to, ever since I was really little. She’s always helped
me with style and stuff like that, just trying to help me look and act
popular and stuff like that...However, she does believe that you should
have that manly atmosphere like macho type person. I agree that you
should have that... (Aaron, Food science major, Freshman)

In terms of peer’s inﬂuences on traditional gender norms, he also demonstrated that his
peers could be another socializing agent regarding femininity and masculinity ideology.
When I was in high school, there was a guy. He walked...he seemed
feminine. They made fun of him like “what are your girls like...you’re a
girl, or you...you’re weak and sissy!” I can even remember seeing guys at

high school like, if in a gym class, we saw a guy who couldn’t throw a
ball normally. Guys made fun of him “you throw like a girl!” I mean

133

there are things you would say that you would associate it with men as
women like you call them basically a woman if he couldn’t do things like
a man could (Aaron, Food science major, Freshman).

From his statement, it was found that peers play a role in inﬂuencing gender norms
through name calling and categorizing some males as less masculine. However, typically
negativity is associated with the opponent’s sex in the context of heterogeneity of gender.
In addition, the researcher also found that social interactions among students and teachers
in physical education and among coaches were other socializing inﬂuences for the
traditional gender norms. Jeffrey (Music major, Senior) and Devin (Civil engineering
major, Senior) commented about physical education classes and coaches in regards to
gender differences in sports.

For most of my high school years, women played volleyball and men

played basketball in physical education class. However, the men’s

basketball would get the better time and volleyball would have to work in

sometime after that. It would give us precedence that just the way it was.

Things were like girls weren’t expected to be good or get the best

treatment (Jeffrey, Music major, Senior).

Yeah...they [coaches] say things like that of course they mention

comments like that, “why are you guys playing like a bunch of little girls

out there”, “why are you guys playing like women?” or “what’s wrong

with you guys?” So...at that age when you’re growing up you emulate

what you see around you so you see other people behaving that way. You

think that’s the norm... 17:50 (Devin, Civil engineering major, Senior).
Besides parents, siblings, physical education classes, and coaches, it was found that
teammates also played a role as a socializing agent for the traditional gender norms.

I think they [teammates] say like, “I can never be like a girl. I can’t talk

to a sissy boy. I do not listen to a certain type of soft music that appeals

more to girls”. And...um...l think that’s a good explanation of gender

norms. A lot of my teammates say this. I’m sure they are not open”
(Justin, Pre-med major, Junior).

134

In addition, some respondents in the study commented that the media played a role as a
socio-cultural inﬂuence on traditional gender norms (Birell & Cole, 1994; Lippe, 2002;
Sabo, Jansen, Tate, Duncan, & Leggett; Trujillio, 2001; Weiss, 1996). Nathan (Packaging
major, Freshman) and Samuel (Physical science major, Senior);

Media affects especially younger men...about what you think...what you

gonna do. I did watch a lot of TV shows as a kid. And, I probably got a

lot of gender images such as muscular guys or tiny little girls from that

(Nathan, Packaging major, Freshman).

I think a lot of time they’ve shown only men in a lot of commercials like

men who are working out. They only show men working, they don’t

always show women working out when women do in fact work out. So I

think it’s the absence of women that is the issue. They don’t actively say

men are better than women, but they imply it deﬁnitely in their

commercials (Samuel, Physical science major, Senior).

All the examples introduced in this section supported the literature and suggested
that socio-cultural inﬂuences on traditional gender norms by the socializing agents played
roles in college males’ early socialization and acculturation as perceived by the

respondents (Benton & Craib, 2001; Donnelly & Young, 2001; McCabe & Ricciardelli,

2003; Lippe, 2002).

Research Question 2: How are socio-cultural inﬂuences on gender norms related to
traditional masculinity attitudes?

In this section, the researcher uncovered more speciﬁc ﬁndings on how men were
inﬂuenced to form their perceptions about traditional masculinity by their socializing
agents. The ﬁndings suggested that one’s perceptions about traditional gender norms that
were inﬂuenced by socializing agents are related to sex and gender stereotyping as well

as traditional masculinity attitudes. Particularly, traditional features of male norms on

135

physical traits, characteristics, role norms, sexuality, avoidance of femininity, and
homosexuality were often used in the process of socializing traditional masculinity
attitudes. Here is the ﬁrst example. It shows discourse about different physicality and
physical traits of men and women.

I sort of consider...um...just the physical aspects of males and female.
And, it’s just to me...a sort of...obvious that there are certain things guys
do that...physically...girls aren’t able to, just...maybe because they are
smaller body size or something like that. I think that the main thing I
could think of would be different sports. There are certain sports
available to guys and different sports for girls such as...where the guys
had a football team and girls had a cheerleading team. That was just a
sort of how it was. There is no one really saying that girls couldn’t play
football and guys couldn’t do cheerleading. But, that was just a sort of
how it was (Jeffrey, Music major, Senior).

This statement demonstrated perceived physical differences in terms of what men and
women could or would not be able to do. Especially, types of sports were dichotomized
as either men’s or women’s sports; football versus cheerleading. There was seemingly no
understanding that people created this social construction of difference.

One of the interviewees also mentioned women’s differences in sports by
imagining if he were a woman. He was saying that stereotypically he would not be
competitive because women were considered less attractive when athletic and
competitive.

Um...if I were a girl, I don’t think that...kind of in our society...I probably

wouldn’t be very competitive in sports because I think a lot of times guys

kind of ﬁnd girls that have an athletic build not really...as attractive. Girls

who are like really good at a sport like softball or basketball; guys don’t

really look at as attractive where as they ﬁnd the kind like skinny, ‘I

don’t do athletics’ girl more attractive. They ﬁnd more really competitive

athletic girls as less attractive than just moderately athletic girls, so I

think I’d probably go into the moderately athletic competitive mode
(Carlos, Economic major, Junior).

136

Meanwhile, the researcher found that college age men perceived that some other

stereotypical characteristics of men and women could be associated with one’S traditional

masculinity attitudes. Devin (Civil engineering major, Senior) and Brandon (Spanish

major, Sophomore) stated the following about traditional gender norms, using certain

characteristics of men and women. They said that characteristics of indecisiveness and

emotionality in females and anger as emotional behavior in males were perceived as less

expected gender characteristics. In addition, girls were stereotyped as less rational and

thoughtful than guys.

Being a man you get to, I feel like you don’t have to deal with a lot of
indecisiveness. Girls, indecisiveness, well a lot of times I feel like girls
are a lot moodier and so guys I think are more stable emotionally
sometimes, and they’re able to act more rationally sometimes. I know it’s
a horrible thing to say but a lot of times I feel like when I hang around
with girls its like how can you think, just their thought process is totally
completely different than mine, so I think the rationality is more towards
the guys (Devin, Civil engineering major, Senior).

I think another thing that comes from my farmly is that is rooted in my
grandpa and my dad’s side is anger. I think often anger is associated with
men that are active and that are very physical. They want to use their
strength because they don’t have that aspect of emotionalness. They will
yell and they use their strength in their voice to try to make sure they’re
heard. And that people hear them as they’re who they are. I think one
aspect of men that really I hate and I don’t want to be around is just that
aspect of anger or yelling or just being loud all the time because I think
it’s good to be able to have that if it’s needed (Brandon, Spanish major,
Sophomore).

In the next case, traditional male ‘role norms’ were indicated in interviews. The

male role norms were frequently portrayed as a context of social dominance in the social

hierarchy so that male status and achievement were implicated as an important

quality/property for men to have. Also men’s responsibilities were perceived as more

important than women’s in the society.

137

He [father] told me that a man is supposed to make the money and a man
is supposed to be the dominant ﬁgure in the household. He is
supposed...you know...to provide everything...um...and then my mom,
she altered his inﬂuence and put her two cents in and told me that a man
is supposed to, well, be all those things if that is what he is (James,
Criminology and psychology major, Freshman)

There’s more pressure on the guy to be able to support a girl if or when
he marries. I feel like sometimes a lot of the girls I know have an easier
life in terms of they wouldn’t have to deal with having to be the primary
wage earner for the family so it seems like it’s a little bit easier in that
sense but I think there’s more responsibility in the man’s part to do that
kind of stuff at least that’s the way I feel about it. That could be a plus or
a minus too. I feel there’s a lot of pressure because you know you’re
going to have to do that as a guy. I feel like I know I’m going to have to
get a good job. I feel pressured to be able to earn a good living when I’m
out of college. The men are, most women a lot of times don’t work; they
take care of the home and everything. Yeah it’s totally a guy thing, the
work place is almost always dominated by the males (Devin, Civil
engineering major, Senior).

The quotes presented above suggests that there has not been a lot of social changes in
gendered role norms Since the seventies and eighties by some men (Maccoby & Jacklin,
1978)

Lastly, sexuality was also described as associated with another feature of
traditional masculinity. In the following statement, a sexual activity was mentioned as
necessary for a typically traditional man in society. In that context, women were
described as sexual objects.

A lot of guys brag about what they did with girls. This is what I did...they
would make themselves look better. They would promote what they did.
They feel more masculine if they had sex with a girl. If they made out
with a girl, they kissed a girl. They did something with the girl, felt up a
girl. If a guy had a girl friend, they would hook up. They would either
have sex or they’d make out or do something with a girl. And then, when
they were talking to other guys, they would brag like “what did you do
with this girl last night. “Oh! You know I did this and this and this... oh!
what’d you do at that party last night with, whoever....” They’d get
excited about what guys would do with girls. Guys do it. (Brandon,
Spanish major, Sophomore)

138

All in all, the ﬁndings on Research Question 2 showed that many of the
traditional masculinity features were often continuously taught, modeled, and encouraged
by sexist expectations and heterosexist attitudes. They were consistent with the literature

and the quantitative data ﬁndings (Laberge & Albert, 1999)

Research Question 3: Who are the signiﬁcant socializing agents in the development of
college age males’ masculinity norms, attitudes, and behaviors and what are their speciﬁc
and unique experiential inﬂuences?

Inquiring about signiﬁcant socializing agents in the development of traditional
masculinity in Research Question 3, it has been shown that the prominent inﬂuential
socializing agents for the male respondents to form their traditional masculinity attitudes
were fathers, mothers, friends, and coaches. The following examples demonstrate how

fathers taught their boys traditional masculinity.

I grew up and my father... he taught me that, well, he didn’t really teach
me that from an example but he told me a man is supposed to make the
money and a man is supposed to be the dominant ﬁgure in the household.
He is supposed...you know...to provide everything (James, Criminology
and psychology major, Freshman).

It wasn’t even verbalized. But, I think, through actions, he deﬁnitely
pushes that. I can remember my dad wanted me to be active. He would do
things with me. We’d go outside and would take bike rides. He would
play soccer with me in the backyard. And, I remembered my dad wanted
me to be involved in at least one sport...I think just through his
encouragement of being involved in sports. As for gender roles like being
strong...it might have been by an example. I mean...my dad does provide.
He is a head of household. He makes a lot of decisions. He has authority,
kind of rules. I kind of saw that it was a norm, but I think more than
anything like school and movies, like going to school...um...kids talk
about that you have to be the man, you have to stand...you can look at a

139

 

woman being controlled. They said them as jokes. But...you know...they
learned that from their father. (Brandon, Spanish major, Sophomore).

From these statements, it was found that masculinity socialization could be accounted for
as a cultural process in that culture expresses itself as a way of life about what is
important to men in the society regarding family responsibility, physical activity, and
sports. As ideology is socially constructed, shared, and normalized among social and
cultural others, the experiential aspects of traditional masculinity stated above were
displayed in the families through social interactions of many respondents as a cultural
process reﬂecting societal meanings, values, and dominant masculine ideology.

Devin (Civil engineering major, Senior), a former football player, stated that
friends played a role in his traditional masculinity socialization which focused on
avoidance of femininity and emotional expression and over exaggeration of machoism.
This statement displayed how friends interacted with him.

Some people throw that word around: metro for a guy who dresses nicely.
There are a lot of things you make jokes to other guys, wearing a pink Shirt
or something. If your friends are wearing these. . .I can remember my
friend...he works with computers and so he’s always talking about computers
and everything...He dresses well...so it kind of feeds into that. He’s
heterosexual, but my friends and I make him gay, that word gets thrown
around a lot. That word gay, “why are you being gay?”. Whenever
someone’s doing something silly or something. It’s friendly, butI can
understand if someone else is homosexual, not with us, but around us and
heard that he might be offended. It seems like...yeah... homosexuality
probably... gets demonized a lot between the friends and everything...so,
anything that you’re not supposed to do, or if you look as if you’re dressing
too nicely. Maybe “what’s wrong with you, gay or something? What are you
doing or whatever?” “Why are you not talking to the girls today, you gay or
something?” Restricted emotionally...amongst guy friends, emotion seems
like the girls. They get emotional and sometimes they cry, but the guys...I’ve
never seen any of my friends cry that much very, rarely...The guys don’t
really show that much emotion as much as the girls do.
Aggression...toughness...machoism... Guys...you want to be able to drink
more than the other guy...to make you seem more macho if you...the other
guy gets drunk before you do so you have these little...always it’s always a

140

 

competition. It seems like between the guys to see who’s more macho. We’ll
go to the bars to see the other guys. Some people are saying ...get buzzed
already...so I don’t know...my friends would do stupid things at the bar too.
Like if the other guy isn’t looking tough...they’ll punch him in the stomach
just for a joke. We just act goofy. I guess more macho tendencies come out
when we’re at the bar (Devin, Civil engineering major, Senior).
This statement demonstrates that friends are socializing agents to encourage masculinity
through toughness, machoism, drinking, and competition. However, it was found that the
encouragement of masculinity usually came with message supporting avoidance of
homosexuality and toughness.
In addition, Devin (Civil engineering major, Senior) talked about his
football coach, and his coach appeared to be another socializing agent
inﬂuencing traditional masculinity attitudes. In his statement, he remembered
that the coach expressed his thoughts about coaching boys and girls by stating
how he would treat them if he coached them.
Yeah I guess of course there’s always a perception that you want to be
tough and everything. And there’s a thing that my coaches would tell me
that sometimes...they’d coach the girls too...so they’d tell us things that
they wouldn’t tell the girls certain things...how to play and how to be
aggressive in certain ways and everything. I think there’s a difference the
way they treated the boys and the girls obviously and there’s more of an
emphasis to be more aggressive and more physical and more competitive
with the boys (Devin, Civil engineering major, Senior).
In this case, the coach expected the boys to be more physical, aggressive, and competitive
than girls. This apparently suggested the coach’s masculine attitudes included the
message of encouragement for toughness, physicality, and aggressiveness. Of course,
treating men and women differently may be discouraged in the contemporary American

society since the women’s movement and Title IX, but it is still often found in sport

based on coaches messages as stated above. According to literature, sport is a venue

141

 

where ideologies of traditional masculinity are practiced, and traditional masculinity in
male sports is often aggressively legitimated (Coakley, 2004; Messner & Sabo, 1990). In
sports, coaches play a signiﬁcant role in affecting males’ masculinity perspectives as they
lead the teams using these legitimated traditional masculinity attitudes.

The results of Research Question 3 are highly suggestive that family members,
friends, and sports coaches were the signiﬁcant inﬂuences on college males’ attitudes
toward traditional masculinity. Fathers, close male friends, and team sport coaches
particularly played a role in the socialization of masculinity attitudes and expectations. It
was found that they were the primary socializing agents for these men to develop their
traditional masculinity attitudes under the culturally sanctioned constructions of

dichotomous femininity and masculinity (Clasen, 2001; Hasbrook & Harrision, 1999).

Research Question 4: How have the socializing agents inﬂuenced males to believe and
value traditional masculinity norms, attitudes, and behaviors? What are the traditional
masculinity attitudes they encouraged, speciﬁcally, in college males?

In analyzing Research Question 4, the researcher found some perceived images of
traditional male role norms that boys and men usually observed from their socializing
agents. The following quotes demonstrate examples of how a father encouraged
traditional masculinity and what images of men the respondents of college males have
usually perceived.

Particularly with father, I mean my mom was much more open on both of

us [my sister and I]. We...to be more emotional...I mean we both learned

how to cook. We both had a kind of, little bit of both stereotypical men

and necessarily typical women role. My father was a little bit more

conservative with this usually. I mean I said my sister is always the
princess who...you know...playing with the dolls and this thing and the

142

other thing, and I was the boy who is expected to be playing sports...you

know...that whole mainly you’re a boy...you’re supposed to do this and

this...you’re a girl...you’re supposed to be this way and this way (Justin,

Pre-med major, Junior).

The general image that I grew up with is that a man needs to be

physically strong...um...a man needs to be the main provider,

breadwinner, and that a man just needs to be a hard worker...and mostly

because as I saw it in my dad and in other people around me. That was a

sort of image that was in my community, schools, even in TV or the

media...(Jeffrey, Music major, Senior)

In these statements, male and female traditional norms and behaviors are displayed
comparing what boys’ roles and play in sports, with what girls play with; males were
described from the perspective of a father image as being the hard-working strong
provider.

Another image of traditional masculinity was often associated with playing sports,
being physically active, and having a competitive athletic image. However, the following
statement further demonstrates the ideal desire to be a ‘renaissance men’: an
accomplished athlete and scholar and to be good looking and attractive to women.

If I had to...you know...if I was a guy like I picked...you know...what I

want to look like...you know...I’d be 6’2” 205 pounds. Just rock

solid... great athlete and smart at the same time.... Something like sports,

cartoons and TV shows, you have your real solid athletes, like great

looking, with their blond hair hard combed, who could go and meet over

all the women around (Aaron, Food science major, Freshman).

From interviews, it was also found that socio-cultural inﬂuences encouraged
traditional masculinity through peer pressure. Many of the interviewees also agreed that
their male and female peers’ perceptions often pressured them toward traditional
masculinity attitudes. See the following statement.

From what I recall. . .there was a sort of peer pressure...there was a sort of

peer pressure to perform well in gym class whatever...you know.... I think
when boys are together, you wanted to sort of display your masculinity

143

when girls were around you. You didn’t want to appear to be... you
know... the weaker guy or any thing like that. You kind of felt
embarrassed a little bit because sort of you wanted to do better and show
up that I can do this. Then you didn’t meet your own expectations and
you sort of think to yourself, other people think that I’m not as good now,
so you sort of feel a little self-conscious and embarrassed about it
(Jeffrey, Music major, Senior).

In the same vein, Caleb (Education major, Freshman) stated his peers often forced him to
feel competitive in the context of traditional masculinity.

What makes me competitive is probably a number of things. But, one

would be a peer pressure to ﬁt in...and be competitive. If you’re a guy

who is not competitive, you’re looked at...as kind of weird. If you’re not

a competitive person...I mean if you’re outwith a group of people...the

competitive people are going to win over the compliant people (Caleb,

Education major, Freshman).

In the interviews, it was found that traditional masculinity was also encouraged
through a denouncing attitude of femininity. An interesting story from James
(Criminology and psychology major, Freshman) recalls an association from the
masculinity literature deﬁned as ‘avoidance of femininity’. James (Criminology and
psychology major) said he had a hard time with peers because of his light voice and
feminine attribute; he denied he was homosexual. His experiences demonstrated his
peers’ discouragement and rejection of him due to his absence of a traditional deep
masculine voice. So, physical traits were often sexualized and categorized by gender with
negative social consequences.

I had a light voice; I was really skinny...I had a really high-pitched voice

when I was younger. And, due to that, I was ridiculed by being called a

‘faggot’...‘sissy’ and stuff like that. They were pretty harsh with it so... I

was only physically active for like 3 years and then I stopped. And then,

after that, I was in my house and read books. I felt really bad. . .I got my

ﬁrst girlfriend and. . .you know. . .life was good...Um... girls in my school

never really ridiculed me except for those girls in high school were like
the girlfriends of the really cool guys. Other than that...I never really had

144

problems with the girls...you know... But, they started teasing my girl
friend like “you’re going with a gay boy” or something like that because I
had a light voice in middle school. It was really light, so she wrote a letter
to me breaking up with me because of that. . .That was a really harsh way
of just breaking up with somebody (James, Criminology and psychology
major).

In this case, the incidence of rejection for his assumed lack of traditional masculinity was

clearly demonstrated by both male and female peers. He had another case for the same

reason, but this case took place with his farme members. He stated that his siblings never

supported him when he encountered a problematic situation due to his perceived lack of

physical masculinity. Therefore, being taunted with gendered insults in physical activity

and games took place among peers and siblings and; it socialized this man away from

sports.

They...my brothers and sisters...teased a little; they joined in a little bit
with the teasing, but it was mainly my twin brother and my older brother
who were the large part of it. They’d join in with the other boys teasing
me during the games or they would...you know...stand by and let it
happen...you know...they never...they never ever actually fought for me
or tried to defend me in anyway. It was always on me. Um...they...Ok, I’ll
just give you an example. We were playing basketball in our back yard
one day, and we were playing a game called...elimination. You touch
balls and you shoot them at the hoop and the ﬁrst one who makes it wins.
Um...I touched balls with this guy named Timothy. He lived down the
street from us and he was one of the cool guys on the block. Yeah, cool
guys on the block...you...know he was like physically ﬁt and all that. We
shot at the same time my ball hit his and his ball got knocked away and
mine went in. And then, he got mad and he started getting the other guys
to call me a “gay” and a “faggot” and a “sissy” and all the other stuff.
And so...I really didn’t start saying anything to them and I just looked at
my brother and my twin brother for some type of support and I received
none. And they just stood there and just let it happen. And that was the
last game. I stopped playing games for good.

In this situation, there was social isolation, name calling, disrespect, and jealousy targeted

from the more dominant, physically ﬁt, and powerful boy. However, the situation of

being teased and having no social support from his siblings was also experienced as his

145

siblings’ social rejection and conformity to peer pressure and societal attitudes toward
traditional masculinity took place. Based on the power of traditional masculinity ideas
and constructs, the respondent was rejected and socially isolated in this sporting and
family situation.

With Research Question 4, what the researcher found, overall, was that many
traditional images of males were still being encouraged from many socializing agents
such as parents, siblings, and peers. Traditional masculinity attitudes and behaviors were
encouraged from family members by rejecting perceived femininity characteristics in
boys. The college males studied were also encouraged to be a traditional father and

family provider and to be athletic, tough and aggressive.

Research Questions 5 and 6: What are considered to be traditional masculine behaviors
in sport/physical activity? What are the relationships between traditional masculinity
‘attitudes’ and masculine ‘behaviors’ in sport/physical activity?

Findings on Research Questions 5 and 6 were combined since the ﬁndings from
both of the research questions were related contextually with each other. From the
interviews, I found that many masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity were linked
with aggression, competitiveness, intimidation, injury taking, verbal accusation, drugs
and alcohol as the literature suggested (Pappas et. al., 2004). Regarding the masculine
behaviors in Sport/physical activity, I found a Signiﬁcant relationship between ‘traditional
masculinity attitudes’ and ‘masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity’ in the
quantitative aspects of the study. In this qualitative portion of the study, I, additionally,

found the masculine behaviors in sport did not take place within a vacuum, but they were

146

more complicated and interrelated with socio-cultural and stereotypical masculine
attitudes and selected sport values. Most of the behaviors found in this qualitative study
were consistent with the gendered literature suggesting that more traditional males are
involved in high risk taking behaviors, playing while injured, being violent, tough, and
highly competitive, using obscene language and gestures, and abusing chemicals such as
alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs. Traditional masculinity behavior was also constructed
based on perceived male-female sexaul relations frequency, on being a leader and being
strong.

Andy (Advertising major, Sophomore) described many traditionally masculine
behaviors related to his sport/physical activity experiences.

A lot of guys....they measure masculinity about how many people you
beat up or how many girls you have sex with. .. or how many bones you
break while you’re playing sports. When I play sports... the sports I’m not
familiar with...I’m not much of a risk taker...but...I’ll take a risk in a
certain sport. I think I can run pretty fast so...I’ve stayed in injured
before...um...the important thing is not to tell the coach...sometimes like
you got injured further to just stay in...but if we end up winning the game
then...it’s worth it. I do use verbal accusations....um...more vulgar
language than ‘sissy’ and more...more vulgar than that. Can I say it?
‘Fucker’...’shit head’...’cheater’...‘Cheater’ is a big one... no one likes it
in sports. If someone calls you cheater, then he usually resorts to violence
so...[it happens] when my team is not winning. They do the same thing or
hand gestures like the middle ﬁnger. That’s how you show your
emotions. It works...the team would work better when there is a selective
leader. But there is like consensus; everybody knows who the leader is
although he is not elected. People...urn...ball hogs...the guy that is gonna
keep the basketball the whole time. He just shoots it every time. He gets
the ball...he never passes...um...I don’t like people like that. I know a
lot of people would use that drugs...do use that stuff. But... some of...most
of the ones I’ve experienced them using were illegal. Some people take
like that...the creatinine stuff that’s not legal. But it’s not you either. I
mean you can’t...you don’t get a sense of accomplishment like...um...like
you would winning just by like practicing hard and training hard and
like...I mean if you can’t. They use it a lot in weight lifting if you can’t
lift as much as you want. You take creatinine. You’re gonna end up
hurting yourself. If you’re really athletic, you can do it without drugs or

147

 

anything. AS far as alcohol and cigarettes, that’s gonna slow you down
anyway. For celebration...yes...a lot of guys drink. Sometimes drink too
much (Andy, Advertising major, Sophomore).
Inquiring into these masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity, I received another
statement that was about one’s development of masculine behaviors in sport/physical
activity and how highly males were inﬂuenced by coaches. Many of the interviewees
agreed that coaches often played signiﬁcant roles for these displays of traditional
masculinity behaviors in sports. The following quotes demonstrate how coaches
inﬂuenced their male athletes to be more manly, competitive, and aggressive.
He taught all that toughness and violence. I liked him doing that...as
long as they are controlled, not to just go crazy. This is...how to be
controlled here; but like just in a sport you need to be violent. (Myles,
Nursing major, Freshman).
Yeah it’s more acceptable I think when you’re playing. You know the
coach if you’re being too sensitive in a basketball game, the coach
would ask, “What’s wrong with you?” You have to be aggressive and
you have to be...you have to give everything...you have to give your
full effort. You have to sacriﬁce your body and do things you normally
wouldn’t do. Typically you won’t do that in the school day. Sometimes
you have to be more selﬁsh too if you’re a good player and those are
the things that aren’t as acceptable when you’re off of the court (Devin,
Civil engineering major, Senior).
In line with these stories, interview data showed that coaches treated very self-conﬁdent
and ‘cocky’ athletes better than those who were not. Jose (Kinesiology major,
Sophomore) said, “My football coach...he...um...he favored the kids that were really
‘cocky’ the ones that played all the time, so he’d always treated them better so I didn’t
like that as much”.
I heard that some interviewees agreed that masculine Sport behaviors were

associated with competitiveness. With regard to competitiveness, the majority of the

interview participants agreed with the statement, “I think a lot of it, for me at this point in

148

my life, is just trying to keep myself kind of competitive. I think it’s manly”. In terms of
competitiveness, Devin (Civil engineering major, Senior) also said that “A lot of kids that
play sports. . .they’re very. . .they’re too competitive. I think when they’re
playing. . .they’re trying to win and do whatever they can do to win”. From these
statements, it was apparent that there was a connection between competitiveness in the
context of traditional masculinity and masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity. The
following example shows one of the masculine behaviors driven by competitiveness.

In front of other teams, everyone had to show up and look more

masculine. . .you know. . .puffed up, chest out a little bit; everybody had to

be. . .you know. . .bigger than the other one. It was just kind of silly. You

know. . .looking back on it. You had to be a certain way. You had to listen

to angry music and you sat around. It was all about beating the other guy

(Justin, Pre-med major, Junior).
This statement was related to competitiveness, beating out the other guys, and being
bigger than others, but it also showed a behavior of intimidation by coaches at a certain
level. With regard to intimidation, many interviewees stated that intimidation with
aggressive expressions was often used not only within one’s team but also against
opponents, because it made the opposite team’s players uncomfortable, so that their
performances might be disturbed in the games.

Intimidation played a big part especially with wrestling. . .you know. You

had to be like/look mad. If you could shoot a laser beam from your eyes

and start the other guy on ﬁre, you’d try... Someone was...you

know. . .really intense and trying to like just be angry with me

sometimes...Yeah. . .it was always like you already had a big angry manly

face toward it. Eventually I just came to the conclusion that...if you don’t,

you are anything but intimidating; often times I’d like make them angrier
(Justin, Pre-Med, Junior).

149

Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity often occurred with an attitude
germane to adopting a behavior of ‘universal conﬁdence’ and power by not letting one’s
guard down. See the following example.

My attitude in sports was I’m gonna walk in with my head high like I’ve
conquered the world; walking in every wrestling match, every race, every
soccer event. I’m gonna walk in with my head high, like I’m gonna do
good. And it didn’t matter who the person was. I’m gonna walk in that
way...and I see how that’s the same ways socially, when I walk into a
place where I don’t know anyone. I walk in with my head high like I’m
“Brandon”. You want to get to know me. Come and get to know me. But
I also see that once I get to know someone...I let my guard down. It’s
kind of athletic jock attitude coming into it (Brandon, Spanish major,
Sophomore).

 

Even though this behavior of universal confidence was not discussed in the literature
review, it could be suggested as an exaggerated masculine behavior in sport/physical
activity. Previous literature on gender differences discussed that boys and men are often
associated with a competence or masculinity cluster which includes competitiveness,
toughness, aggressiveness, or withholding emotionality by showing ‘universal
conﬁdence’ for male socialization (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1978). The ﬁndings in this study
show that the male participants acknowledged their continuing and developing
masculinity socialization in sports.

Next, injury or risk-taking behaviors were also found as one of the major
masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity as it was related to toughness in the context
of traditional masculinity. Risk-taking was associated with an ascetic sport value of
debasing the body for a higher goal like winning or mental toughness.

If I would ask to sit out...he’s like, “Brandon! You can either sit out or

you can keep wrestling and you can only get stronger. And like my coach

never believed people when they were hurt in wrestling because he

realized that wrestling is one of the hardest sports. So he thinks that...if
you’re gonna play this hard sport, you gotta get hardened mentally. You

150

gotta get strong. So he, that first year, pushed me to keep wrestling, and
so I began to keep wrestling. I’d just...I took some pain medicine after I
wrestled, then, hopefully it would heal. But it didn’t heal for the whole
season that lasted ﬁve more weeks. I just wrestled through it. It hurt a lot.
I kept wrestling until that season was done and then healed. But that was
more like...if I try like, for example, during practice. If I get up for my
wrestling, I sat on the side just to give myself a break. He would say
“Brandon, get back in there! Keep wrestling!” I hated him for it because
it hurt so much, but he made me keep wrestling. If I sit back, it hurts me
because it’s allowing you to be weak mentally ‘cause you’ve stepped out,
you’re saying to yourself when it hurts I can step out. But the thing is
during a match, if it hurts you, you can’t step out. You can just lose
basically. You’d rather see that pain, ﬁght through that pain and that way
you go towards winning rather than toward losing (Brandon, Spanish
major, Sophomore).

In this occasion, the coach forced him to keep playing while injured. However, there
was an acceptance of it at the same time, for the purpose of winning in a competition.
In addition to the coaches’ inﬂuences on playing through pain, I found that fathers
could also play a role to encourage boys and men to keep playing with injuries. The
following case showed how a father reacted when Aaron (Food science major,
Freshman) was injured and did not want to play.
I can remember the time when I was injured and wanted to sit on a
bench...and dad wanted...he would say...he was like... “Don’t be a wimp!
You’re not really that hurt! That’s not that bad! You should be tough!
Don’t be a wimp,” that sort of thing (Aaron, Food science major,
Freshman).
In a similar context, the injury or risk—taking masculine sport behavior could be
associated with toughness. The following example showed how one could ﬁnd
someone’s tough injury-taking behavior to be impressive.
I met him on the basketball court actually. This guy is really athletic so I
think there is something I can learn from him physically and mentally
because he’s like a super genius and just ﬁgures stuff out really. . .really

quick. I play basketball with him and he was injured but he didn’t Show
how injured he was. On a scale from 1 to 10 on being painful 10 being

151

 

the most pain. He was about a 7 with his knees. He still kept on playing

basketball no matter what happened... I could tell how tough he was. He

didn’t show how hurt he was throughout the whole basketball game. I

didn’t ﬁgure that out until he started telling me stories. (Lucas, Political

science major, Senior)

Besides the aggressiveness and toughness associated with masculine attitudes and
behaviors, verbal accusations were also mentioned. In the interview with Kevin
(Accounting major, Senior), it was revealed that many boys and men were socialized to
“insult the other team just to make them feel like they have a mental edge over the
opponent’s team”. From many other interviews, various derogatory terms were used in
sport/physical activity. For example, Justin (Pre-Med, Junior) said that when their
teammates performed poorly, the coach as well as players often said to them, “Don’t be a
skull!.” Here, ‘slcull’ means ‘girl’ he said. In many cases, the verbal remarks were
heterosexist. In some cases, the verbal accusations were conducted with some aggressive
actions like yelling and screaming.

I’ve gotten in yelling and ﬁghts with my ﬁ'iends and ...if somebody tries

to say something to me, I would get mad about it, and I would scream

back at him, instead of talking more. Sometimes like...somebody starts

saying stuff to me. They are like talking normal...but they are upsetting

me. I might scream at them or something (Samuel, Physical science

major, Senior).

In the case of the male cheerleader I interviewed, I heard that some stereotypical
heterosexist verbal activity came in the form of derogatory terms against him. He stated
that he often received verbal abuse while performing cheerleading in sporting events. I
found that these terms were closely connected to the context of males’ ‘avoidance of
femininity’ or even misogyny in traditional masculinity. See the following statement.

Some guys do give me a hard time. It seems like a lot of people are

strongly one way or the other about it. Some people either are just ready
to throw all kinds of curses at you or people are really supportive of

152

it...you know...that thing is cool. I have been yelled at a couple of times
during the games. Somebody, you know, just decides to lay into you, or
whatever... “cheerleading fag” or “get out of my way asshole”...things
like that. It just seems a little ridiculous to me how that one thing
apparently is such a big deal. Sport has so much sexuality tied into it,
between people either attacking it or assuming. I’ve heard on numerous
occasions people think that because I’m a cheerleader, I’m a excellent
lover or something...you know...which is for some reason...people
correlate it to that. There’s sexuality in cheerleading (Justin, Pre-Med,
Junior)

The ‘avoidance of femininity’ attitude was also stated within a selected physical
activity that was often regarded by some men as a feminine Sport/physical activity. Also,
some men feel that working out must be very physical, and it must hurt or burn as
Brandon said (Spanish major).

I would be just stupid. Here is a good example in wrestling. My junior
year in high school, I remember a girl came in and we did kick boxing,
not kick boxing... but like Taebo...Taebo is often associated as what
women do to stay in shape sometimes, so I looked at it ﬁ'om the start and
laughed. I was like “are you serious?” The whole time I thought, “Am I
really doing this?”. . .I think yoga might be the same thing. If I was simply
involved in yoga, I would be thinking that I’m not being active. I would
feel like I’m stretching. And I feel like stretching is a before or after event
to sports. I want to feel it. I want to hurt. I want to feel the burn and I
would be sore the next day (Brandon, Spanish major, Sophomore).

With regard to the rigidity of traditional masculinity ideology in the case of homophobia
and avoidance of femininity, another case demonstrates how one could be discouraged
from participating in sport/physical activity due to perceived appearances or
misperceived characteristics that were in conﬂict with traditional masculinity. James
(Criminology and psychology major) stated,

When I was younger, I was never picked even though I was

physically ﬁt. . .when we were racing around the playground or

basketball. I was never bad at basketball when I was younger. . .I was

never the worst but I was always the last to get picked because
of...ah. . .I had a light voice. . .I wasn’t...as you see...my voice wasn’t

153

 

deep like all the other kids so you. . .you know. . .it played a factor
(James, Criminology and psychology major, Freshman).

Even though many younger males’ voices have not yet changed to a deeper voice, this
young man was singled out and ostracized. This again relates to gendered societal
stereotypes. In addition, it shows avoidance of femininity and heterosexism.

The researcher also found cases where males used drugs and alcohol to self-
medicate to negatively improve health and ﬁtness. Preston (Pre-med major, Freshman)
stated, “I think they wish that they were better athletes. I think that is why we get the
drugs and steroids, they’re performance enhancing.” He stated that male athletes used
drugs for enhancing performances, but he also mentioned that drugs and alcohol were
problematic ‘chemicals’ among his teammates. These problems were also identiﬁed as
being used during prolonged celebrations of his team’s win in a big championship.

My senior year... of football... we had a lot of problems; off-ﬁeld

issues...um... I think kind of like the mentality that we celebrated...we

were the best, but we didn’t have to work as hard; we kind of kicked in

and I think a lot of guys kind of got into more partying and drugs and

alcohol. It kind of took a forefront instead of working hard and playing

hard, we didn’t even make the playoffs. I think that was upsetting; the

fact that we couldn’t even defend the title we had won 3 years in a row

(Preston, Pre-med major, Freshman).

So, some masculine behaviors associated with sports are dysfunctional to success in
sports and improvement of health and ﬁtness. In line with the drinking issue, Brandon
(Spanish major, Sophomore) said that his teammates smoked. He denied smoking
cigarettes as a totally bad behavior, but that some aspects of tobacco were stupid. Another
fact that the researcher found from his statement was that smoking and drinking came

along with the celebration of winning a competition among his male teammates.

My teammates drank in high school. Everyone in my wrestling team
chewed tobacco. They had a dip in their mouths and they’d spit in the

154

shower after wrestling practice and I thought it was disgusting. I think it’s
stupid. If you’re involved in a sport, smoking and drinking and doing
tobacco a lot, it’s terrible for your lungs. It’s dumb. I smoke cigars and I
smoke a pipe, but I don’t inhale. If I do it, I just pull smoke in my mouth
for the taste, to spend time with other guys. It’s a recreation thing, it’s not
to get that buzz. A lot of guys on my team even smoked or they would go
drink, and they go party afterwards. You usually smoke cigarettes when
you drink alcohol...and so...they’d do that as a celebration after they won
a big match or after an event (Brandon, Spanish major, Sophomore).

So far, some of the traditional masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity when
men play with other men were demonstrated. Many of these behaviors are associated
with trying to be tough, aggressive, highly achieving, and celebrating with male
teammates after winning a competition. However, it was also found that the traditional
masculinity attitudes and behaviors were different when men played sports with girls and
women. Now the emphasis switched to having fun, not hurting the ‘weaker’ gender and
impressing the girls.

It’s tough. I guess...urn...the social experience with the teammates and
everything obviously it changes in the sports, too. If it’s an individual
sport there might not be as much of that. Depends, I don’t know which
ones more important but if I’m weight lifting it’s purely probably just to
make myself look better. It’s not the enjoyment because if I wanted to
enjoy I’d play a sport instead of weight lifting. So, I don’t know I guess
for me the most important is when I play sports, team sports so I guess
the challenge of it and the social experience of being with your friends
and having fun. Yeah, just guys. I’ve never, I played IM sports co-ed
team with the girls but that’s just for fun. That’s just a social experience
because my friends invited me to play. With girls, I try not to be as rough.
I’m not going to slide tackle into a girl when I’m playing soccer. Yeah, I
try to be more careful and not be as. . .yeah, if you’re playing with guys
you get more of that, you try harder and you’re not as worried about the
other guy as much as you don’t want to hurt a girl. You don’t want to
injure someone that you feel is weaker than you. Yeah, I guess playing in
front the girls you have a tendency to Show off more I think so that’s a
difference because you want to impress the girls too sometimes. So it
depends. Playing with girls is totally different than playing with guys in
that sense (Devin, Civil engineering major, Senior).

155

In conclusion, the social experiences of men playing sports found in the study
suggested that many different types of traditionally masculine behaviors were apparently
displayed in sport/physical activity. The quantitative data analysis and literature were
consistent with the qualitative ﬁndings that related traditional masculinity attitudes to
sport/physical activity behaviors. Socio-cultural agents such as peers, teammates, siblings,
parents, and coaches particularly inﬂuenced traditional masculine attitudes. Masculine
behaviors in sport/physical activity were associated with team sports competitiveness,
aggression, toughness, avoidance of femininity attitudes, risk and/or injury-taking, verbal

accusations, drug, alcohol, and tobacco use and abuse.

Research Question 7: What are the college male students’ values for participating in
sport/physical activity?

With regard to Research Question 6, the researcher found different men’s values
on sport/ physical activity. In this section, their perceived values focused on
sport/physical activity that related to traditional masculinity will be reported.

First of all, ﬁndings showed that social values were often stated as one of the most
agreed-upon sport/physical activity values for these college males. Devin (Civil
engineering major, Senior) stated, “I play sports because when I ﬁrst started playing them
when I was little, um...I played sports with friends and it was pretty enjoyable.” In
addition to this, the following examples demonstrate the social values that are associated,
particularly with one’s desire to be with friends in sport/physical activity as much of the
sociological and social psychological literature state (Coakley, 2004; Horn, 2002; Motl,

Dishman, Saunders, Dowda, & Pate, 2004).

156

More than anything, I think it was friends that convinced me, too, to play
sports. “Hey you should come out to play soccer and you should join the
track team. Usually male friends would convince me to do that, or I
would be friends with the group of people and not have any sports
afﬁliation with them...but, then see how much enjoyment they got out of
a certain sport. It would convince me that I should join them and try to do
that (Aaron, Food Science major, Freshman).

I met a lot of my friends through basketball. . .I was about to make friends

with all the other kids that played sports, too. A lot of ﬁiends that I met in
high school were through basketball...playing on the basketball team with

them or playing pick up games at the park... The main purpose was to

play basketball, but indirectly I would make friends and then my friends

that I had always were ones that I played sports with. I like the

camaraderie and playing sports with friends. (Devin, Civil engineering

major, Senior).

In addition, there was a ﬁnding about the relationship of health and ﬁtness values
to sport/physical activity. Jeffrey (Music major, Senior) mentioned that he was often
motivated toward sport/physical activity as a healthy activity.

I think one of the biggest positive things about being able to go out

jogging is that I feel better. . .you know. . .I feel healthier and. . .uh. .. it’s

because good to be able to go out and run for a little while and I think

in general it just makes me feel good (Jeffrey, Music major, Senior).

In terms of health and ﬁtness values, only a few respondents made a comment on it, so I
could not collect much data on health and ﬁtness values. It might be as some of the
literature suggests that males tend to focus on other values for sport/physical activity
rather than health and ﬁtness values in sport/physical activity (Conﬁtt, 1996; Brown,
2004; Frey, 1991; Keller 2005 ; Robertson, 2003; Sowti, 2004).

In terms of aesthetic values in sport/physical activity, it was found that most of
the interviewees did not value sport/physical activity as an aesthetic experience; that is,

they did not refer to beauty and grace of movement as a value. This tends to support the

literature (Coakley, 2004; Duquin, 1989). However, there was one respondent who

157

described the sport of cheerleading, unlike most male sports as having aesthetic value.
This was revealed from a current male cheerleader at the college level.

For the other sports like that aesthetic one, it’s such a big deal... a lot
more is placed on functionality. Like in wrestling, nobody cares if you’re
graceful as you hit your moves. . .whatever. .. Like in football, no body
cares. . .you know. Cheerleading though, aesthetics are huge. You not
only have to do what you’re supposed to do, but you’re supposed to do it
on time and cleanly. Things that I wouldn’t even think of are often times
stressed as far as like if a girl [should be] pointing their toes or if you’re
expected to smile. I mean that was completely new to me. This aesthetic
value there is so much more like we sit and talk about which uniforms are
best for the games, like I’ve never had to worry about that before (Justin,
Pre-med major, Junior).

 

Next, I found that some responses were associated with the value of catharsis in
sport/physical activity. Jeffrey (Music major, Senior) and Devin (Civil engineering
major, Senior) stated that relieving emotional stress and pressure was an important
purpose in sport/physical activity.

If I’m feeling particularly stressed about something, maybe school work
or I just need to take a break from whatever I’m doing. It’s nice to... you
know. . . put on some tennis shoes and just go out and it helps to clear your
mind. And you stop worrying for a little while and things... a sort of a
physical activity just helps you to physically relax and that’s a sort of a
good way to do that (Jeffrey, Music major, Senior).

There was something I was mad about...I was able to play sports, which
helped me a lot to reduce the madness. If it weren’t for basketball...
playing through high school and everything...that helped relieve a lot of
my pressure and take my mind off of things in life that were bothering
me. Those were the things...basketball... playing any sports helps you
take your mind off of things and take out your ﬁ'ustration
too...Basketball, deﬁnitely for me, did that (Devin, Civil engineering
major, Senior).

There were additional values found in interviews. From the interview with Austin
(International relationship major, Junior), I found that sport/physical activities were

valued by some as an experience of enjoyment and goal achievement for psychological

158

well-being. This relates to sport being associated with emotional health and psychosocial
development.

I play Sports because when I ﬁrst started playing them when I was little...

Um...I played sports with friends and it was pretty enjoyable...Now I do it

for the enjoyment. The exercise...but also...for me...develops self-esteem

and self-conﬁdence. When I know that I’m capable of a certain physical

level, it’s kind of like achieving a goal (Kevin, Accounting major,

Senior).
The value of enjoyment was also evident in the interview with Jose (Kinesiology major,
Sophomore). His statement about the value of enjoyment was explained by his desire to
exercise and have fun. Having fun has been documented as one of the highest beneﬁts of
participations in sport (Petlichkoff, 1992; Scanlan & Lewthwaite, 1986).

Just actively getting out there having fun and getting exercise at the same

time. Just go out there have fun and get exercise. It’s the best way to get

exercise, have fun doing something active. I think grades come ﬁrst and

stuff like that, but if you can do well in school and play a sport...you want

to play a sport...hey! More power to you. Go ahead. That’s great. (Jose,

Kinesiology major, Sophomore)
Relating the value of sport/physical activity toward achievement of social status, Andy
(Advertising major, Sophomore) mentioned a similar desire. He said that he valued
sport/physical activity as an experience that brought with it an elevation of social status
especially with the ‘opposite sex’.

I would say sports...um...for me...I played sports for my whole life... and I

would see sports deﬁnitely as...um...if you win a game...you get that

sense of achievement. That’s what I play for. . .um...your social status

would go up especially with opposite sex. I mean the guys those who

play sports get the girls, or unless you’re a really nice guy (Andy,

Advertising major, Sophomore).

In relation to the context of achievement of social status and power, Austin

(International relationship major, Junior) also extended the sport/physical activity values

encouraged by his parents. According to him, his parents encouraged him to play golf

159

 

more than other sports or physical activities because they believed that playing golf
would help him, as an Asian American man to have more social opportunities and to
make connections to people with money and power.

For my parents...my parents especially my father really obsessed with
trying to get me into golf because...um...he was telling me its not much of
a physical activity that it offers you. More like its about the socialization
with socializing with other high class people or those people who like...I
think he has this prejudice that whoever plays golf is very wealthy and
talented well...not talented not necessarily talented but more of a ...like
very right people to. . .this is very awkward but...uh...so...he really truly
encouraged me to play golf, and I do agree with him that it’s not much
about athletics [just playing sports but meeting with higher status people].
I mean you can see all those senior American Caucasians. They don’t
play basketball...they...everyone plays golf. Everyone has 2 or 3 clubs
and a cart. Not necessarily upper classes. I mean upper-class people have
like nice golden clubs, but like middle class has like I mean at least plays
those kind of things and my father also pointed out that this would be its
very good and a good source to get you into this American society cause
he treats lots of American clients for his business, and he gets lots of

it. . .and my father isn’t exactly a speaker but when he plays golf its like,
“oh impressive and we’ll order 30,000 dollar clubs. My mother also says
“golf is cool”. It’s all about getting into this high society
and...um...so...um...a couple of my other teachers also taught me that
three things you have to know are golf, real-estate, and social life
networking (Austin, International relationship major, Junior).

In conclusion, the researcher found respondents related to various values on
sport/physical activity. Some of the ﬁndings were consistent with the literature review,
but there were additional values to those found in the literature such as increased

enjoyment, gendered social status with females, and upward social mobility in the society.

Research Question 8: How are traditional masculinity attitudes related to sport/physical

activity values?

160

In addition to the values of sport/physical activity for college men discussed in the
previous section, I will discuss some other aspects of sport/physical activity values that
were associated with traditional masculinity in this section.

First of all, many interviewees stated that they valued sport/physical activity as a
social experience as they could make male friends. In this case, the social values were
more related to a pursuit of making friendships with other men by sharing pain and sweat
through sporting experiences, which are relatively associated with a desire to experience
masculinity, closeness with other male friends, and ‘male-bonding’. Justin (Pre-med
major, Junior), Caleb (Education major, Freshman), and Brandon (Criminology and
psychology major, Freshman) pointed this out through their experiences.

That just came from like. . .honestly. . .I think it came from hard practices
where you’re sitting there. You’re sweating and you hurt everywhere and
you know. . .everyone else does, too. But, you keep going. . .you
know...between the sweat and the blood. You just became close with
people. I mean some of my wrestling friends. I mean I may not even talk
to them that often or having known them that well. You sweat with this
person which is essential. You’re just kind of ﬁghting. You’ve got to
know someone [throughout sports] to make him a lot closer (Justin, Pre-
med, Junior).

I do strengthen my relationships with the friends I’m playing with. I think
it’s good, that’s a kind of masculinity thing to do: play sports and bond
over it cause I think that’s really how guys can get...to get friends is by
playing sports well. You know... you can pick on your friends if they
make a bad shot in tennis or something...or support them when they do
really well...just kind of strengthening your relationships in that respect
(Caleb, Education major, Freshman).

A lot of men in sport don’t want to touch another man. It’s like you don’t
want to be seen like you’re gay. But in wrestling, you’re grabbing
everyone all the time in the Sport. So it doesn’t matter; no one thinks that.
And so, in the sport I think a lot of time, you’re seen as almost brothers...
You just start wrestling with them just kind of having fun and joke
around... I think you just have to be close to them because when you
wrestle with them, you wrestle with them all the time like...um...you’re so
close. I mean, yeah, you’re grabbing each other. You’re holding each

161

 

other basically as you wrestle. I think also what makes you close is the

team sport. It’s such a team sport, but it’s such an individual sport at the

same time because even though there is only one person out there. How

the team supports him determines how that guy is gonna do. If it’s a close

match...if two guys are on opposing teams that are really close, and if

your team gets up yells as loud as you can. That’s gonna make all

wrestlers wrestle harder because they’re supporting you. It makes you a

lot closer as a team. I think we sometimes intimidate the opposing team if

you’re so loud and if you’re yelling (Brandon, Spanish major,

Sophomore).
Brandon (Spanish major, Sophomore), in the statement above, discussed male touching,
which was acceptable in some sports such as wrestling, and the development of social
relationships with his teammates which he considered male-bonding. Recalling that the
social value had shown a Signiﬁcant relationship with traditional masculinity attitudes, .
the researcher suggested the ﬁndings from this qualitative study were consistent with the
quantitative study ﬁndings. These ﬁndings countered some gendered focused, sex role
stereotyped sports science literature, and one’s study hypothesis that there would be a
negative relationship between men’s social values in sport and traditional masculinity
attitudes. The qualitative data show that categorical variables of gender, traditional
masculinity, and social values often need to be studied in greater detail through
qualitative research to be more freely understood (Hall, 1990; Hall & Smith, 1998; Smith,
1992)

However, the researcher also found a case in which the social values could be
more complicated in sport. In other words, there were times when one had to avoid
making friends, particularly with opponents. This case demonstrated that social

relationships, especially with opponents, were undesirable and needed to be avoided to

maintain competitiveness.

162

I didn’t know my opponent. I never want to know how good they are,
what their record was, where they came from, and who they
wrestled...because if they get inside your head; you get to think about
them...you’re not going to give 100% for the sport...So I always thought
it was better if I didn’t know who my opponents were until the end
because that way I’m gonna give it a 100% regardless of what happens.
And I can remember...one of my years we made wrestling ﬁnals and I got
to the ﬁnal match, championship match, and I had beaten him once
before in the year. He had beaten me twice. So I knew that I can beat him
but also knew that I could lose to him. We were kind of ﬁ'iends... I saw
afterwards that the second I began to talk to him and became friends with
him I lost, that’s why I would lose because he was a friend. He wasn’t an
opponent. Once you make the connection as a friend, you support him.
You can’t face him like an opponent. He isn’t an opponent. He is a
friend. And it’s almost...[as if] there is a same team. So I think if it’s in
competition, you and I are on either one team or the other team. There’s
no middle ground because you have to go out there to win. You’re not
going up there to make friends. (Brandon, Spanish major, Sophomore).

 

From the statement above, I found that competitiveness in the context of traditional
masculinity caused negativity and undesirable social relationships with opponents in
Sport/physical activity. In fact, this ﬁnding is consistent with the literature review and the
study hypothesis. In line with this topic, negative social behaviors and attitudes were
diverted toward opponents, weaklings, and girly guys in sport/physical activity. Devin
(Civil engineering major, Senior) stated that this was particularly true for those who were
non-athletes and were less aggressive.

My friends played on the football team. Sometimes I could tell they hang
together and there’s a very big sense of masculinity around them and the
way they act towards girls and everything. . ..they liked to fool around
with the girls and be meaner towards the other guys and try to

establish. . .yeah...you can tell that they’re there...like the way kids...the
bullies in school...the ones that typically they’re good at sports and
maybe they carry over some of their aggression towards...their behavior
in the classroom or in school...and so the kids that don’t practice sports
are usually the ones that take more of the harassment. I don’t

know. . .just...you know...whenever they see them. They just give them a
little bump or something or just the friends that they kept were always the
guys that played basketball and then they wouldn’t really talk to the kids
that didn’t play sports very much. I don’t know....They compete, maybe,

163

arm wrestling in class, and they’d say the other kids are weak. They were
weaklings or fruity which implies maybe the girly guys something like
that...More in terms of just ignoring the other people...then, in terms of
interacting with them negatively...that’s what I felt more from the
athletes. I used to hang around with...it’s more of an ignoring of the other
kids (Devin, Civil engineering major, Senior).

From this statement, it is suggested that traditional masculinity attitudes could be related

to negative social relationships based on achieving higher athletic status among some

 

men as well as ignoring outsiders and weaklings. Athletic status allowed some to practice
ignoring or treating others with aggression and harassment. So, there appeared to be a
more positive association with sports insiders and more negative social relationships with
men who were sports outsiders.

Devalued aesthetic aspects of sport/physical activity were also stated. In the
previous section, the researcher reported an interview with a male cheerleader who stated
that a man could value an aesthetic experience in sport/physical activity, speciﬁcally in
cheerleading. However, most of the interviewees stated that they devalued sport/physical
activity as an aesthetic experience since this was not a socially constructive characteristic
of their own sports. Here are some examples that demonstrated college men’s adverse
attitudes toward perceived feminine sport/physical activities such as dance and ﬁgure
skating that usually values graceful movements and rhythmic motor skills.

Dance? That’s one thing, I don’t know. I hate how...I think its cool...but,

if a guy...if someone can dance...but if you’re a guy generally in today’s

society, you’re considered like a ﬂamer if you like take dancing classes.

It’s weird (Jose, Kinesiology major, Senior).

I’ve watched them [ﬁgure skating] before like I’d still consider them as a

sport. But I’m not interested in it. I usually like watching the team sports

I like and try to watch them win. I want them to win and I get into the
game (Myles, Nursing major, Freshman).

164

In the statements above, it was found that these males would not be interested in such
sports as dance and ﬁgure Skating that focused toward aesthetics in sport/physical
activity. Similarly, a political science major, Lucas, stated that he felt awkward when he
saw that a man’s performance happened to be both graceful and tough in sport/physical
activity. Both statements demonstrated an uncomfortableness with aesthetic sports and
‘avoidance of femininity’ in the context of team sports and traditional masculinity.

I remember this one kid...he looked feminine...because just liked how he

moved his legs. He’ll do...like...the 800m or the 400m dash and I swear

after a certain point where he had to pace himself, he looks like a cheetah.

You know how cheetahs move gracefully; that’s how he looked and I

thought that was weird and creepy at the same time. It’s funny because I

admire tough people...but it creeps me out when someone is really tough

and really graceful at the same time. I just can’t put that together in my

brain, tough and feminine at the same time unless it was...like...a woman

(Lucas, Political science major, Senior).

The statements shown above were consistent with the literature review (Coakely, 2004;
Duquin, 1989) and the quantitative ﬁnding about a negative ‘correlation’ between
‘aesthetic value’ and ‘traditional masculinity attitudes’ — particularly in the context of
avoiding femininity would be found among many traditional males.

With regard to the health and ﬁtness values in sport/physical activity, it was found
that some interviewees valued sport/physical activity as a health and ﬁtness experience.
However, many of them also stated they were forced by male coaches to take risks and
endure injuries that might displace the health and ﬁtness value of sport/physical activity
(Brown, 2004; Frey, 1991; Keller 2005; Robertson, 2003; Sowti, 2004).

I played line [in football]...like...my job was there to hit the guy in front

of me. It wasn’t about being. . .you know. . .I guess we do well for power,

but I didn’t think that’s what healthiness comes down, too. . .They’re

powerful, but not healthy. With wrestling, I thought it was a good
muscular work out, the endurance was built up. That was good. I mean

165

barring some sort of serious traumatic injuries like a broken bone or
something, maybe sprained your ankle or something. Coaches are gonna
tell you to “keep going!” I mean it hurts and whatever else, but you don’t
want to be the guy who’s all ‘This hurts! I can’t do it!’ So there is that
drive to be manly so if you keep going even if coaches never explicitly
said that. But there is always a kind of undertone we knew you didn’t
want to be the kid who’s hurt or something. . .especially in practice. I
mean once or twice I tried and I hated it, just sitting on a side line during
practice and cause you hurt or whatever you just feel like. . .you

know. . .you wanted to get back in practice. You just felt sad, just don’t
value yourself over there (sidelines) and just a kind of. . .you know. . .like
taken out of the group like you weren’t a part of it anymore, just being
there (Justin, Pre-med, Junior).

 

From this statement, traditional masculinity attitudes could affect injuries that were
related to health and social disconnection from the team. Often implicit and explicit
pressure from coaches cause many male athletes to put too much pressure on themselves
to continue to play after injury. In addition, it was certain that a coach’s aggressive
persuasion could marginalize athletes through the fear of forfeiting one’s status on the
team.

Many interviewees stated that they liked sport/physical activity because they liked
challenge and competition. It was related to the pursuit of vertigo values, challenge and
excitement as Kenyon (1968) suggested. In the quantitative data analyses, traditional
masculinity attitudes also showed a statistically signiﬁcant relationship to the pursuit of
vertigo value in sport/physical activity. Therefore, it was suggested that most of the
qualitative ﬁndings were consistent with the previous quantitative analysis ﬁndings.

I like challenging sports...um...I mean I really enjoy playing in the game

where the opposite team just couldn’t defend themselves. You get more

of a rise if you defeated the team that is very challenging. Your sense of

accomplishment is higher. And then if you’re real like...say Michigan

State isplaying HGU or something like 65 and zero...it depends on

who’re playing against. Make sure your teams are even. I’d like to do that
(Andy, Advertisement, Sophomore)

166

I was on defense. My job usually was as a tackle on a body who came

around outside. I like football and miss it. I just want to just go outside

and...you know...hit some people and run scores...compete and then...you

know there is adrenaline rush. . .and I get everything. I don’t know I just

like going out there. I kind of miss it (Myles, Nursing, Freshman).

From these statements, the researcher found challenge, adrenaline rush, aggression, and
achievement to be positively associated with men who play sports and their traditional
masculinity attitudes. These were related to one’s sense of challenge and suspense in the
pursuit of vertigo value in sport/physical activity.

The next example demonstrates a context for catharsis values in sport/physical
activity. Catharsis means puriﬁcation, releasing negative emotions, or gaining spiritual
healing through physical activity and sport participation. However, valuing catharsis in
sport was not fully reported in the study. The following statement shows a limited
approach to catharsis by one respondent releasing stress through fun‘and exercise.

Just actively getting out there, having fun and getting exercise at the same

time. It’s the best way to reduce emotional stress through getting exercise

and having fun...and doing something active. I think, in school, grades

come ﬁrst...but if you can play and do well in a sport as a guy...more

power to you...that’s great (Nathan, Packaging major, Freshman).

According to the respondent, ‘power’ was mentioned as a ‘social status’ over others in
his school. In fact, this statement implies somewhat about releasing the traditional
masculinity desire of achievement/status (Levant & Kopecky, 1995) and hegemonic
masculinity in line with the catharsis value (Baimer, 1999; Carlson, 1995; Collins, 1991;
Connell, 2000; Haenﬂer, 2004; Hasbrook & Harris, 1999).

Lastly, I found sport/physical activity values included values related to asceticism.

In this case, study participants usually worked hard through pain and sacriﬁced

themselves or their bodies in sports because they were perceived it would help the team.

167

 

This context was associated with ‘achievement’, ‘sacriﬁce for the team’, and ‘proving

themselves’ according to traditional masculinity.

I think maybe when I see someone on the football ﬁeld... a sort of putting
themselves at risks of being hurt himself. I think you can’t help but sort
of feel like...proud of them because they are on your own team.
Obviously they are giving 100%. They’re trying to do well for your
score. You’re sort of supportive even though you may not be. If you see
someone out in the football ﬁeld, you would do something that might
hurt their bodies but it’s helping the football team. Everyone in the stand,
they get up and start cheering because they like that. Even though it may
be or may not be the best for their bodies, people still like to see that
because it appears they’re trying harder than anyone else (Jeffrey, Music
major, Senior).

The next case would also show an aspect of the asceticism value. In this case, the
respondent played sports to prove himself as a tough man to himself and his coach.
Debasing one’s body to prove how strong he is would be the main contextual factors that

inﬂuenced his attitude toward the ascetic value in sport/physical activity.

I think, during 7th and 8th grade years, that’s when I began to see how
guys are developing. You’re going through puberty and so men are
beginning to get stronger and their voices begin to deepen and all these
things are happening and so what men want to do is they want to begin to
prove himself. I think through high school my freshman and sophomore
year, probably my 7th grade until my sophomore year in high school, it
was a kind of like a proving time. You wanted to prove yourself as a man
as strong as someone that could stand up and challenge that they can
compete. I think I remember my freshman year in wrestling. I had a hard
time, like I broke a rib of that year to kind of prove myself. I wanted to
keep wrestling and I wanted to prove to my coach that I was strong. I
wanted to prove to teammates that I was strong and I can do it. I wanted
to prove it to myself, and to my dad. I wanted to prove to people that I
was strong enough to keep going and to be an athlete. And I liked that
challenge and I think from there I really enjoyed the challenge of sports.
And even now as I look back on it, I enjoyed the challenge and I enjoy
competition. I mean...I enjoy running races. I ran a marathon. I like doing
time trials when I run. I just like to run around the track and do that
(Brandon, Spanish major, Sophomore).

168

Ascetic values are taught early through boys’ sport socialization. For example, coaches
may teach boys to devalue their bodies and sacriﬁce themselves to prove that they are
strong and manly. In the context, males may even risk major injuries, by giving up or
sacriﬁcing their body. This is as important as being brave or proving just how tough or
manly one is.

In conclusion for Research Question 8, the researcher found traditional
masculinity inﬂuenced some college men’s sport/physical activity social values related to
an interaction, pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and asceticism. Most of these values were
related to traditional masculinity attitudes such as avoidance of femininity, high
achievement/status, aggression, and toughness (Levant & Kopechy, 1995) which were
found to be related to college men’s sport/physical activity behaviors. Social messages
about being tough, not being a sissy, and sacriﬁcing one’s body for the team by the coach
created circumstances inﬂuencing males’ loss of health and risk of injury in

sport/physical activity in the study.

Additional Findings: Explorations on Culture, Masculinity, and Sport/PA

There were additional exploratory study ﬁndings focused on culture, masculinity
and sport. The analyses from the interviewees often provided experiences and perceptions
on cultural traditional masculinity, and sport/physical activity within college males’ own
unique social and cultural perspectives. These different aspects discussed by the study
participants demonstrated that society and culture affected college age males’ unique

perspectives and experiences of gender, masculinity, and sport/physical activity as socio-

169

cultural constructions. Therefore, in this section of the qualitative results, the cultural
perspectives relating to the interviewees’ data will be interpreted.

It was found that many interviewees such as Americans of different sub-cultures
and ethnicities agreed that they had experienced a traditionally masculine and gendered
socialization within their families. This next case showed that there was generally a
collective acceptance of a perceived separation of the genders with exclusionary
behaviors for males and females around holidays and sporting experiences found in
American society.

We have...if we have family coming in town for like Thanksgiving

whatever...um...l noticed that all the women and my sisters....and

that...they would stay in the kitchen...and socialize, and we [men] would

watch a Detroit football game. (Andy, Advertising major, Sophomore)

In the statement above, Andy (Advertising major, Sophomore) suggested that cultural
holidays often bring about some of this gendered behavior in social institutions like the
family and sport.

In line with the study focus, many of the study participants indicated that their
perceptions about socio-cultural gender inﬂuences, traditional masculinity attitudes,
sport/physical activity values, and sporting behaviors were often in agreement with other
college males’ social and cultural perspectives. In other words, many were concerned
with what others (males and females) thought about them as men. However, Aaron (Food
science major, Freshman) stated, “I think a lot of men today are worried about what other
men think of them more”. The following statement showed that males not only worry
about what men think, but also about what women think about them.

Um...well, deﬁning masculinity in American culture in our society...I’m

trying to deﬁne the region between my personal idea of masculinity and
American culture’s idea of masculinity and try to ﬁnd a space between

170

them...A lot of guys have problems with that as far as being too worried
about what other people think and how girls perceive them at the same
time. I still have to be aware of what women think about me anyhow
(Aaron, Food science major, Freshman).

This case could be demonstrated as the conﬂict between a personal choice and
conformity to the American dominant culture. However, it was also displayed as a
socially constructed perspective led by the perception of others’ views in the family, peer
groups, and in society. This implied that man’s behaviors and attitudes are constructed
and shaped based on dominant socio-cultural ideology, patterns, and expectations of both
men and women in American society.

In terms of cultural beneﬁts in society based on gender and ethnicity, both African
American males and Caucasian males agreed that Caucasian males have an advantage in
society. An African American participant provided a statement about American society as
a society where Caucasian men predominantly dominate the society. Particularly, his
statement showed one college- aged African American male’s perspectives about men in
the United States.

I may sound crazy here, but I recognize it; you see it in everything you
do. There’s automatically a standard, a male standard that has to be met
in whatever you’re doing. . .Um. . .you can go and do anything. . .ah. . .even
applying for a job. The average person or what they call white privileged,
everybody is. . .um. . .measured up against. . .you know. . .the average
American, which is a 25 or 35 year old, white protestant male and if
you’re. . .a white protestant male. . .they’re Christian and they’re a white
male. Other than that, if you’re not that, then you’re considered,
classiﬁed as a minority so and. . .you know. . .being a minority you
automatically have strikes against you. . .I see that there is a standard out
there that you have to meet. The United States. . .at an earlier time, it was
male dominated, and the power was in religion, the preachers. . .And then,
later on the politicians came into rule and they were male protestants.
And now even today, almost every single profession is dominated by
males and if they’re not dominated by males, the highest paid people in
those professions are males [even in professions] such as nurses. There’s
more female nurses than men, but the highest paid nurses are male.

171

 

And. . .you know. . .it’s that in itself tells you what the United States’
culture is (James, Criminology and psychology major, Freshman).

From the statement above, it was found that he regarded white males as those who were
powerful and dominant in American society and he insisted that white males set a societal
ideology and image for all men in America. This dominant social hierarchy has historical
roots, he suggests. From an interview with a Caucasian man, the researcher found that
Caucasian men agreed and also felt that as a cultural group, they had more advantages as
whites. Brandon (Spanish major, Sophomore) saw himself and Caucasian men as
respected leaders and protectors in society with economic power.

I think in the US. deﬁnitely I have an advantage as I’m a [white] male.

People look to me. People look to men for answers, they look to them for

respect, and they look to them for leadership, for money, for protection

(Brandon, Spanish major, Sophomore).

Therefore, both men agreed on the supremacy of the male gender in society and upon the
supremacy of race as a primary construct for rewards in American culture.

On the other hand, it was found that African American men could have different
experiences in sport/physical activity based on ethnicity, because they might have a
highly perceived or ascribed social status more than others in sport/physical activity, even
if they do not play sports well. James (Criminology and psychology major, Freshman)
talked about his experience, and how others stereotypically described him as being
skilled, athletic, and aggressive in sport/physical activity as an Aﬁican American man
without really knowing him.

They think that you’re automatically athletic. Uh...I got an example of

that...we had physical training or you know, like exercise time. And, they

decided to play basketball. It was...it was all white males. . .Then, I was

the ﬁrst one picked. But I can’t play basketball well. You know. . .they

pick me, thinking, “we’re going to win, we’re going to win”. And then,
once they saw that I couldn’t play it, everybody had this shocked

172

expression on their face, and I was like oh yeah, FYI... I can’t play
basketball...you know? They was [sic] like oh. . .! You know...Iooking at
me like I’m crazy or something’s wrong with me. You know? It was
really funny and I laughed for a while, but that was like one of the
stereotypes that I’ve actually had personal experience with. As a black
man, they automatically think you’re aggressive. They think you are
really aggressive and they’ll watch what they say to you (James,
Criminology and psychology major, Freshman).

From this statement, it was found that a number of African American males were
generally regarded and stereotyped as those who had better athletic ability, which may
initially increase their social status in sport/physical activity and their likelihood of being
selected early to play. This demonstrated a race ideology and prejudice toward Aﬁican
American males in selected sports. Along with this, the researcher interviewed an Asian
American man. He described his assumption about himself as being less masculine than
other races and ethnicities such as Caucasian or African American.

When I see like Caucasian guys or African American guys, there’s an

advantage. . .they usually have more. . .um. . .they’re more masculine.

What it makes you. . . just kind of get into a daydreaming phase. Um. . .in

terms of race and sports. . .well in terms of assessing my own

masculinity...sometimes I ﬁnd myself thinking that, if I were Caucasian

or African American, it would be easier to obtain a higher physical level.

Like...for example, myself...I put a lot of effort into getting into

shape. . .but I think perhaps if I had. . .um. . .I were of a different race

perhaps...that same level of effort would have yielded different results. I

don’t know anything about genetics...you know. I don’t know anything

about that so I wonder sometimes (Austin, International relationship

major, Junior).
This statement demonstrated distinctive cultural perceptions about different races,
sporting abilities, and physical levels, and masculinity. It was found that Austin
(International relationship major, Junior) was discouraged from being active in

sport/physical activity as a cultural practice so that he did not perceive that his efforts

would yield positive results with many physical activities. According to his statement, his

173

 

parents encouraged his academic performance based on cultural values while
discouraging sports/physical activities at the same time. He wished he had been
encouraged to be more active in Sport/physical activity consistent with American cultural
and sport/physical activity values. This is an example of sub-cultural socialization within
the larger American society since many Americans usually socialize boys to be athletic
and academically competent at the same time.

In my case I wish that they [my parents] discouraged me from activities
like video gaming or those kinds of things. They just traded the video
games for a reward for high academic achievement. So, in fact, I wish
that they had discouraged me from those kind of things like computers.
Rather I wish they would buy me a baseball bat, or golf balls and stuff
like that and encourage me more to play sports cause as you see I’m a
very skinny guy and sometimes I kind of wish that I was a little bigger
and just more like manly...I think most of the Asian societies are like that;
they expect good grades. Even though externally they will say like “Dad,
I won! I got the black belt now.” And then, he’d say “Oh, that’s great...”
They would say that but they’re not as impressed as when you say “Hey!
I got 4.0’s.” So...um...in that case, compared to that in American society,
you can see like they see... just good grades and successful academic
achievement (Austin, International relationship major, Junior).

Related to the statement above, one can observe the impact of speciﬁc cultural values on
sport/physical activity socialization and values. Similarly, an interview with one who
served in the United States army in South Korea shared different cultural aspects of
masculinity he observed in the foreign country, compared to the United States.

The culture in Korea, it’s totally a male dominant society. When you
compare the sexes, the females they’re timid; they won’t be the ﬁrst to
speak but the men are. They [Korean men] were always the ﬁrst ones to
speak. Even if you were speaking directly to a female, the men would
answer. Here is another example. I was talking to a female college
student. I was just talking to her because I like to ﬂirt and I was just
talking. There was a group of guys, it was two guys...it was two girls. A
girl and her sister and this group of guys came up and uh, they said you
don’t talk to her you don’t. . .they just got loud. We were trained to if
someone was to confront you, we had to turn around and walked away
while they were yelling and everything. You know it was strange but it

174

 

was again showing just a little side of the male dominated society (James,
Criminology and psychology major, Freshman).

This story demonstrated an Asian male’s dominant attitudes and behaviors; men are
expected to be active, aggressive, and intentionally protective of women.

The next example shows some aspects of Arabian masculinity. Abdul (Computer
engineering, Junior), whose father was Arabian, described Arab men regarding traditional
masculinity.

In the Arab world we think women are housewives. Men go out and go to
school, do their work and get the money. The mom stays at home, looks
after the kids, and makes the dinner...and does all the house stuff. If
you’re a guy, you’re in good shape because over there it’s very hard for
women to achieve equality in business and culture. I think if that’s the
way you want to be as a man, you might as well go to the Arab culture
because the Middle East women are suppressed unfortunately. In the
Arab culture, men always marry girls like 15 years younger. Okay...
Funny story is that my dad is one of 6 kids, 2 sisters and 3 brothers. Like
I said, in the Arab culture men are always marrying young. My dad is the
odd ball. My mom is actually 3 years older than my father. His brothers
are 15, 20 years older than their wives, so you see a difference?
Oddball...something special about my dad. My grandfather...he is a
man...he won’t take his medications because he feels like, “Oh! I don’t
need this. I’m ﬁne.” We try to tell him...you know...my dad says, “dad,
come on! You got to take the blood thinner.” His blood pressure is so
high. “Take your medication.” You know...and he’ll keep eating fat when
he knows he’s not supposed to and he does it. I mean, he’s stubborn...you
know (Abdul, Computer engineering major, Junior).

This story shows images of very traditional males in society and in the home. Men’s
power over women was acculturated based on traditions of economics, power, and age.
This also gives a glimpse of some perceived masculine characteristics. The interpretation
provides no evidence that recent generations continue to accept these features of
traditional masculinity, however, chances are still there for men in various cultures to
follow these traditions. Another interviewee commented about Arab men. James

(Criminology and psychology major, Freshman) described the continuing cultural

175

 

 

gendered aspects he witnessed when he traveled in an Arab country, Iraq, for his military
service.

The men? Oh! They’re aggressive. Just, they’re just aggressive. You
talk to them...they talk back...uh...and not only do they talk back...they
ask questions...you know...you have the riﬂe in your hands but they’re
still asking questions. Some of them can be like really jolly. They can
be friendly just like...they’re friends with you. They’ll treat you as an
equal. But if there’s a female they treat that female like she’s your
servant...in some way...even though she may outrank you, they don’t
treat her like they treat the men. And so they expect you to treat them
the same. They expect women to treat them on their society’s terms, so
that if you’re female and you’re talking to them...they expect you to
treat them like a superior. They are quite aggressive. In Iraq...the
females are submissive. They are supposed to be. Um...the females
can’t show you their hair. They can’t be touched by you. They can’t
talk to you. You can only talk to the guy, the male of the family and
that’s it. Um...she has no say in anything. A guy can have 2 or 3 wives
and a girl can only have one man, one husband (James, Criminology
and psychology major, Freshman).

This story demonstrated a different socio-cultural aspect of male dominance over females
in various cultures. The next case also described some other aspects of traditional
masculinity from a Latin American cultural perspective.

In terms of masculinity I think I guess in the US there’s been more of a
movement towards gender equality, but masculinity is a little
differently deﬁned in Latin America...well...at least in Brazil. It seems
like...in Latin America...they can show maybe more emotion...But, I
think, in terms of activities that girls and boys can do, I think it’s much
more masculine there [Latin America]... girls are still more looked down
upon if they are participating in sports. Then, if they are here [the US],
it’s very common for girls to participate in sports. Latin America...I feel
like it’s Latin culture... Girls are supposed to learn certain feminine
tasks so it’s a little different in that sense. People don’t look towards
women as leaders as much I think. It varies a little, but yeah...you can
be emotional. I meet my uncle and everything. If I go to Brazil I’ll kiss
him on the cheeks. Here if they did that, guys don’t do that here. My
cousins, too. My boy cousins...I go to Brazil and meet them. I give
them a big hug and kiss them on the cheeks so it’s a little bit different
(Devin, Civil engineering major, Senior).

176

 

Cultural expressions of emotionality of Latin males were described in the statement
above as a unique masculine characteristic. Therefore, culture was shown by the
interviewees to impact masculine attitudes, perceptions, values, and behaviors of
different men within American, Latino, Asian, and Arab societies. These cultural
constructions of masculinity impact physical activity participations attitudes and sport
values and behaviors.

In conclusion, the researcher found many different aspects of traditional
masculinity in different societies and cultures. It can be suggested that gender and
traditional masculinity were socially and culturally constructed within different societies
and various social structures. It was also found that certain separate collective aspects of
traditional masculinity in Sport/physical activity reﬂected the dominant ideology of
traditional masculinity. Many college males in the present study were socialized toward
traditional masculinity such that many boys and men were taught to be dominant and
controlling over weaker males and women. However, there was collective evidence that
some men, regardless of different racial/ethnic backgrounds in America, valued
sport/physical activity. That is, it is suggested that boys and college men from different
racial and ethnic groups have been encouraged or discouraged to accept certain cultural
masculinity ideology and sport/physical activity values through the process of

socialization and acculturation.
Qualitative Summary (Categories and Themes)

Qualitative data ﬁndings suggest many practical aspects of traditional gender

norms, masculinity attitudes, and values and behaviors in sport/physical activity

177

 

regarding traditional masculinity mostly in accordance with the quantitative ﬁndings. The
ﬁndings are reported with emerged themes related to the study foci categories. The

following table summarizes the qualitative ﬁndings with the emerging themes.

178

 

Table 30. Themes and categories from the qualitative data ﬁndings
_

Categories Qualitative Themes

 

. 1. Direct and indirect social and cultural inﬂuences were found.
SOClo-Cultural

Inﬂuences on 2. Family members (parents and siblings) played a signiﬁcant role in
Traditional inﬂuencing gender norms; Fathers were the most signiﬁcant.

Gender Norms 3. Friends and peers in the community, school and physical education

classes, coaches, and sport teammates were inﬂuential socializing
agents.

4. Sports were also reported as a major socializing agent inﬂuencing
traditional gender norms.

 

l. Fathers, peers, and male coaches impact masculinity values of

 

3:: c1332: toughness, aggression, homophobia, and heterosexuality as a culture of
Attitudes y masculinity.

2. The heterosexist and homophobic attitudes stated by peers and male

coaches were often used in negatively judging selected males.
Masculine 1. Men practice masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity such as
Behaviors in playing tough, aggressive, intimidating others, playing injured, using
Sport/Phy si cal vulgar languages, and chemical abuse (drugs, alcohol, and tobacco).
ACtiVit)’ 2- Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity were expected and

taken for granted as normative and traditional.

 

. 1. Social values emerged as an important value for males in
Sport/Phy81cal . . . . . .
sports/physrcal actlvrty. Socral experlences were used for male bonding
with other boys; some negative social experiences take place with
intimidation, verbal accusation, or emotional abuse toward others.

Activity Values

2. Males valued competitiveness in sport/physical activity.
3. Preferences of catharsis and ascetic values were found.

4. Vertigo values were also agreed with their desire of challenging
experience in sport/physical activity.

 

1. Men in different American sub-cultures (Caucasian, African

13:12:31:sz American, Latino,“ Arab, and Asian) felt they were socialized toward
Cultures of tradltlonal mascullnlty.

Gender, 2. In observing other cultures, men observed differences between
Masculinity, American culture and other societies. Other cultures were viewed as
Sport/Physical more traditional.

Activity

3. Most men were expected to be dominant in society and within their
families.

4. Relationships of attitudes and values of masculinity culture to
sport/physical activity were additionally found. Culturally most men

were socialized to value sports/physical activity, but not all men.

 

179

 

Looking at the table above, it can be seen that the researcher found that socializing agents
played roles in inﬂuencing traditional gender norms. Their inﬂuences often came with
direct and indirect verbal and behavioral actions. Among the socializing agents in the
family, it was found that fathers were the most signiﬁcant ﬁgures in inﬂuencing the
adoption of traditional gender norms. Many of the respondents prioritized their gendered
experiences with their fathers in their family structure and sport settings. In terms of
traditional masculinity attitudes, the researcher also could extend other socializing
agents’ inﬂuences on traditional gender norms. The socializing agents in addition to
fathers were peers, and coaches. They, too, often played socializing roles for boys and
men to form their traditional masculinity attitudes by mainly claiming the values of
toughness, aggression, homophobia, and avoidance of femininity. Heterosexual and
homophobic attitudes were also often used negatively and selectively to give power to
some males who would be considered ‘real men’.

In the contexts of traditional gender norms and masculinity attitudes, cultural
aspects could be seen in that the respondents’ discourses about gender were revealed as a
way of life. They thought it was normal, acceptable, inherited, and important among
others (both men and women) within the society. Moreover, it would also be important to
note that sporting experiences with socializing agents were signiﬁcant experiences for
their gender norm perspectives and traditional masculinity attitudes. Most participants
stated meanings and values of masculinity they received in sports/physical activity. In
fact, many respondents agreed that they practiced or experienced traditional masculinity
in their sporting behaviors such as being tough, less emotional, aggressive, and highly

competitive. Along with these attitudes and behaviors, they also stated that they took

180

 

risks, used many offensive terms, put themselves at risk for injury in Sport, and
sometimes got involved in chemical abuse with teammates. These masculine behaviors in
sport/physical activity that many respondents agreed with were rarely denied and avoided
because these behaviors were habitually expected and taken for granted as normative in
sport/physical activity. Therefore, males who did not display traditional masculine
characteristics were often ostracized, harassed, and degraded.

The study also found that sport/physical activity values were selective. Most of
the male respondents in interviews showed their preferences of social, catharsis, and
ascetic values. Along with these, a pursuit of vertigo value was also agreed upon as it is
related to their desire for challenge experiences in sport/physical activity. These ﬁndings
were consistent with the quantitative data ﬁndings. Of the sport/physical activity values,
the respondents showed negative and positive attitudes toward social values in
sport/physical activity. Some respondents did not value certain social relationships
through sport/physical activity, particularly because of some negative interactions with
their opponents. Negative experiences with their teammates or other athletes who
misbehaved in their schools, teams, and communities were also stated with heterosexist
intimidation, verbal accusations, or emotional abuse toward others. However, many
respondents agreed that there were positive social values in sport/physical activity.
According to them, male-bonding with other men would be associated with their
important social experience in sport/physical activity.

Finally, qualitative data found that there were cultures of traditional masculinity
in different sub-cultures within American society. Traditional masculinity is still

expected to be dominant although changing in American society and sport/physical

181

 

activity. The researcher particularly found that these college age males were assumed to
have been socialized as the dominant ﬁgure within their future families from the
qualitative study data. However, different values and meanings for sport/physical activity

relating to traditional masculinity within American culture were also revealed.

182

 

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study yielded a constructive model presenting relationships among socio-
cultural inﬂuences on traditional gender norms, traditional masculinity attitudes,
sport/physical activity values and behaviors. The study explored a conﬂuence of these
relationships into a single model. As a result, an acceptable structural research model was
yielded throughout a statistical examination procedure. However, this statistical
procedure was not the only facet to present ﬁndings, but in-depth ﬁndings from the
qualitative data analyses were the other complementary aspect of the study. The
qualitative approach yielded rich data to support the quantitative ﬁndings. In this chapter,
the ﬁndings obtained both from the quantitative and qualitative approaches will be
discussed with literature to triangulate, summarize, and discuss the results. Following the
discussion, the conclusions will be made and several recommendations for further studies

will be given.

Summary of Results

The results can be summarized according to the research categories.

Socio-culture inﬂuences on traditional gender norms
° Parents, siblings, peers, coachers, teammates in sports, physical education classes,
and sport experiences are signiﬁcant socializing agents on traditional gender
norms.
° Traditional gender norms exist that positively and negatively inﬂuence men.
' There are positive relationships between traditional gender norms and traditional

masculinity attitudes.

183

 

Traditional masculinig attitudes

Traditional masculinity attitudes are statistically associated with socio-cultural
inﬂuences on traditional gender norms.

Fathers, peers, and male coaches play signiﬁcant roles to affect men’s traditional
masculinity attitudes.

Traditional masculinity attitudes are socialized for boys and men, but they also
impact the boys and men’s behavior with girls and women.

Traditional masculinity attitudes are associated with heterosexism and

homophobia in a sport and a cultural context

Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activig

Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity are statistically and positively
associated with traditional masculinity attitudes and values in sport.

Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity focus on physicality and are
practiced by playing tough and aggressive, intimidating others, taking risks and
injuries in sports, using vulgar languages, and using chemical products such as
drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes.

Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity are expected and learned as

normal. They are taught by coaches, fathers, and sport teammates.

Sport/physical activity values

Sport/physical activity values are selectively associated with traditional
masculinity attitudes and masculine behaviors in Sport/physical activity.
Statistical evidence shows.
- Positive relationships between (a) Social, (b) A pursuit of vertigo, (c)
Catharsis, and (d) Asceticism values and Traditional Masculinity Attitudes
- Positive relationships between (a) A pursuit of vertigo, (b) Catharsis, and
(c) Ascetic values and Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity.

184

 

 

° In qualitative aspects of the study, the social value in sport/physical activity is
stated with both positive (male bonding) and negative experiences (intimidation,
verbal accusation, and emotional abuse).

° In a few cases, health/ﬁtness and aesthetic values in sport/physical activity were
also reported with positive experiences.

' Almost all of the men participated in sports to have fun, competitiveness and
challenge.

Additional exploratorLﬁndinge
° Men in different sub-cultures in America have different and similar ideological
aspects of traditional masculinity.
° The traditional masculinity in different cultures beyond America was stated as
more traditional.
' Most of the men in the different sub-cultures are socialized to value sport/physical

activity.

Discussion

Socio-cultural inﬂuences on traditional gender norms
Literature suggested that traditional gender norms were socially and culturally

inﬂuenced by socializing agents such as the family, peers, schools, coaches, and sport
teammates through communication, interactions, Sharing, learning, and teaching (Carron,
Hausenblas, & Mack, 1996; Donnelly & Young, 2001; Gudykunst, 2001; McCabe &
Ricciardelli, 2003; Mullis, 1999; Shin & Nam, 2004). This argument was supported from
the qualitative data analyses. According to the qualitative ﬁndings, parents, siblings,
peers, sport coaches, and physical education classes were the prominent socializing
agents inﬂuencing traditional gender norms. However, it Should be noted that many

socialization experiences were constructed based on a dominant cultural ideology

185

 

regardless of the gender of the socializing agents. This qualitative data showed that not

 

only men inﬂuenced boys and men, but girls and women such as mothers, sisters, and girl
friends also affected men’s traditional gender perspectives and behaviors based on their
perceived expectations of what females wanted them to do.

Traditional masculinity socialization still occurred during these recent times in

 

spite of the Women’s Movement, the Civil Rights Movement, and gender social changes.
In addition, the study samples were educated college students so that one wondered if
they were possibly more or less open to traditional gender norms than past generations.
Therefore, the researcher assumed that this younger generation was continuing to be
socialized with traditional values although there was increased awareness of gender
issues through their experiences. Many cases in the study showed the discourses on
traditional gender norms and the college males’ decisions to accept them were often
made early in their lives and later negotiated. The study gave evidence that traditional
gender norms were encouraged in everyday life at various ages and levels by signiﬁcant
socializing agents.

As the researcher opened conversations on this issue, it was found that the study
subjects often became more aware of socio-cultural imaginations of men and women
throughout their lives. In fact, many of them often did not seriously think about the
traditional gender norms as they are socially and culturally constructed. All in all, it is
suggested that the socializing agents played signiﬁcant roles in inﬂuencing traditional

gender norms directly and forcefully as well as indirectly in everyday life.

186

Traditional masculinity attitudes
The ﬁndings about socializing agents’ socio-cultural inﬂuences on traditional

gender norms were extensively explained with the relationship to traditional masculinity

attitudes in the study. According to the literature, it was argued that traditional gender

 

norms are enhanced by masculinity ideologies (Harris & Clayton, 2002; Laberge &
Albert, 1999; M. A. Messner & Sabo, 1990; Worell, 2001). Supporting this argument, the
quantitative aspects of the study showed that the socio-cultural inﬂuences on traditional
gender were associated with traditional masculinity attitudes based on a statistically
signiﬁcant relationship between these variables. This ﬁnding is also shown in the
qualitative aspects of the study.

According to the qualitative ﬁndings, parents, siblings, coaches, peers, and sports
play signiﬁcant roles to affect one’S traditional masculinity attitude as they were often
dealt with stereotypically based on physical characteristic traits of men and women,
gender role norms, sexuality, and homophobic attitudes. From the ﬁndings, it was also
found that some socializing agents such as teammates, fathers, and coaches often
encouraged, taught, and provided negative derogatory feedback.

As literature suggested that gender socialization takes place as a process of
learning (Donnelly & Young, 2001), the ﬁndings also revealed that men possessed a
growing awareness that they had learned and accepted the traditional masculinity
attitudes and behaviors as socially and culturally taken for granted. Because of adult
men’s power in their lives, they always considered what others would think about them
as men. In this context, socializing agents as others gave awareness, power, and threat to

the boys and young men to accept the traditional masculinity (Connell, 2000; Eitzen,

187

1999; Kidd, 1987; Messner, 2001; Messner & Sabo, 1990; Pappas, MaKenry, & Catlett,

2004; Robertson, 2003).

Masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity
In terms of masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity, the literature argued

that Sport/physical activity has been constructed and played largely by boys and men to
celebrate their manhood, while masculine behaviors such as playing tough and aggressive,
displaying excessive competitiveness, homophobic name calling, and physical dominance
are culturally promoted (Lippe, 2002; Miller et al., 1999; Trujillio, 2001). From the
quantitative data results, the researcher found that these masculinity behaviors were
signiﬁcantly associated with traditional masculinity attitudes. This ﬁnding suggests there
was a web of traditionally masculine ideologies promoted through the social processes
with family, friends, education, and sports. In this process, collective forms of masculine
expressions tended to socialize behaviors in Sport/physical activity for boys and men to
claim their male identities or be ostracized by other males and females.

In the qualitative aspects of the study, it was found that many study participants in
interviews stated that their masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity took place
while playing sport/physical activity in the community and in school. Some men even
accepted play while injures, using offensive languages, and alcohol and chemical abuse
as consistent with how men do sport/physical activity. The majority of masculine
behaviors in sport/physical activity were stated in a cultural context displaying speciﬁc
expressions, attitudes, and behaviors that were shared with, learned from, and transmitted
from other men in families and in sports. These masculine behaviors practically were

often collectively learned and experienced as a shared culture without question. Also,

188

 

there were dominant male networks of hierarchical power from fathers, coaches, and
team leaders to lower status males. All were to be interactive and interdependent to
maintain and demonstrate the status quo. Those dominant masculine behaviors were often
rationalized as normal.
Sport/physical activity values

Sport/physical activity values were described with social, health and ﬁtness,
aesthetics, a pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and ascetic values (Caillois, 1961; Kenyon,
1968). The literature suggested that men could have selective sport/physical activity
values distinctively different from women (Acord, 1977; Dotson & Stanley, 1972;
Harvey, 1989; Hendry, 1975; Mize, 1979; Mullins, 1969). According to the literature,
men would devalue the social, health and ﬁtness, and aesthetic experiences in
sport/physical activity while valuing a pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and ascetic
experiences because of men’s traditional masculinity attitudes (Brown, 2004; Coakley,
2004; Daddario, 1997; Duquin, 1989; Eitzen, 1999; Frey, 1991; Harris & Clayton, 2002;
Henderson, 1999; Keller, 2005; Pappas et al., 2004; Levant & Kopecky, 1995; Lippe,
2002; Robertson, 2003; Sowti, 2004; Wedgewood, 2004). Most of the men’s valued and
devalued sport/physical activity experiences suggested by the literature were supported
from the quantitative data and qualitative analyses. In the quantitative aspect of the study,
several signiﬁcant associations between traditional masculinity attitudes and each
sport/physical activity value were found in the ﬁnal model. In detail, traditional
masculinity attitudes showed non-signiﬁcant or negative relationships to health and
ﬁtness and aesthetic sport/physical activity values and positive relationships to a pursuit

of vertigo, catharsis, and ascetic values. The quantitative aspects of the study especially

189

 

could not support the hypothesis about the relationship of masculinity attitudes to the
social value. It was hypothesized to have a negative relationship to traditional masculinity
attitudes, but the study data showed that it had a positive relationship for this sample of
men. Meanwhile, the values of a pursuit of vertigo, catharsis, and asceticism were
associated with masculinity behaviors in sport/physical activity. These results present
sport/physical activity values that are gendered and related to traditional masculinity and
masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity.

The qualitative aspects of the study also supported these quantitative aspects of
the study. In terms of the social value, most men in the study agreed and some disagreed
with the social value experienced through sport/physical activity. The agreement was
stated speciﬁcally by most men when there was a desire for a male bond with other men
through sports. The disagreement, on the other hand, was often stated with masculinity-
associated behaviors such as intimation, restricted emotion, and derogatory terms to
others. From these ﬁndings, it was suggested that there could be both negative and
positive social aspects of sport/physical activity that inﬂuenced men’s participations
positively and negatively.

The qualitative ﬁndings especially supported the literature and suggested that the
values were associated with the features of competitiveness and challenges in
sport/physical activity. The gendered sport/physical activity values can be interpreted
with a critical point of view in that the sport/physical activity values historically can be
associated with men’s symbolic meanings to socially and culturally be with their male
friends, to obtain and maintain their power status among other men through competition,

winning, and challenge (Messner, 2001).

190

 

Exploratory ﬁndings; cultures of gender, masculinity, and
sport/physical activity

There were additional exploratory ﬁndings that were related to cultural
differences of masculinity. These ﬁndings simply demonstrated that aspects of traditional
masculinity could be culturally constructed in similar and different ways within different
sub-cultures and societies. This argument could not be supported from the quantitative
aspects of the study, which looked at the sample of male college students as a whole, but
the qualitative aspects of the study looked more deeply at male experiences. The data
presented that male positioning and power were prominent in many different societies
and sub-cultures mentioned in the context of masculinity. However, it could be also
argued that there was a collective ideology concerning traditional masculinity attitudes
and behaviors in different cultures and societies. Most men studied believed in male-
dominated-societal power relations with women and non-traditional men (Andersen &
Kaspersen, 2000). Given a critical point of view, it could be argued that different cultures
had cited a dominant practice of masculinity collectively germane to the sub-cultures and
American society. This dominant ideology meant that some men perceived as more
feminine or less skillful were not accepted in sports, and others perceived as self-
conﬁdent and competitive leaders were seen very positively.

Overall, the study found that the literature, and the quantitative and qualitative
aspects of the study were supportive of each other in ﬁnding the socio-cultural
constructions of traditional masculinity attitudes and sport/physical activity values and
behaviors. In the study gendered aspects are clearly found in line with traditional
masculinity while the values of sport/physical activity are associated with traditional

masculinity attitudes and masculine behaviors in sport/physical activity. All of the study

191

 

constructs were found to be associated with traditional socio-cultural inﬂuences and
social meanings taught early to young boys and men, which were continuously reinforced,

rewarded, or modeled for most of the respondents based on these constructions.

Social theoretical retrospective discussion
The study employed several sociological theories; (a) structural functionalism, (b)

symbolic interaction, and (c) critical theory. These theories led this study to sociological
analyses of the issues on traditional masculinity and its relationships to sport/physical
activity values and behaviors. There will be brief theoretical retrospective discussions
based on the study ﬁndings.

For the research design of the study, structural functionalism theory was used to
explore relationships between the variables. Using this sociological theory, the researcher
examined the structural aspects of traditional masculinity (gender norms and attitudes)
and sport/physical activity values and behaviors, and a constructive model was drawn
from a statistical examination of structural equation modeling. This statistical
presentation displays constructive social norms, attitudes, and behaviors with regard to
perceived and experienced socio-cultural traditional masculinity and its relationships to
sport/physical activity values (Sharrock, Hughes, & Martin, 2003). Within a functional
context of a social system, it is also suggested that family, ﬁiend/peers, sports, and
physical education teachers/classes, etc., are societal agents who play Signiﬁcant roles in
establishing the social constructions of gender and masculinity. These social agents are
considered as signiﬁcant others who teach social norms, values, attitudes, and behaviors
while maintaining the constructions of traditional masculinity within sport/physical

activity (Andersen & Kaspersen, 2000; Parsons, 1971; Turner & Turner, 1998; Waters,

192

 

1994). In the study, it is suggested that these social agents socialize boys and men to meet
constructed socio-cultural norms associated with being a traditional man as normative
(Coakley, 2004).

Secondly, symbolic interaction theory was also used to construct the interviews
and to examine respondents’ interactive social meanings and realities of traditional
masculinity and sport/physical activity. In the qualitative aspects of the study, college age
men’s social meanings and realities of masculinity were explored by examining symbolic
meanings of various men’s experiences in society and sport/physical activity. College
men, during their youth, were inﬂuenced by traditional male images advanced by social
others such as parents, friends, teammates, or coaches. One of the signiﬁcant social
settings for the interactive social meanings, realities, and identities for being a man in
society was often symbolically discoursed with sport/physical activity. Male socialization
through Sport carries many imaginary features of male identity through social interactions
that advance traditional forms of masculinity (Messner, 2001). These interactive and
symbolic aspects of traditional masculinity were observed within the dominant American
culture, but they were also often found within the sub-cultures of the respondents in
different ways. Many interactive aspects in sports/physical activity were also found as
men were often prompted to share dominant cultural attitudes and behaviors. These
shared attitudes and behaviors in sport/physical activity took place with a symbolic
construction of unconscious traditional masculinity. In terms of self-identities, it was
found that men often depicted themselves along the line with socially approved and

symbolically perceived images of men’s traditional roles and behaviors in the family,

193

 

sport, and society (Birrell & Cole, 1994). Masculinity socialization in this context
becomes a shared reality of unconscious manhood.

Lastly, the study applied a critical theoretical analysis to the study ﬁndings.
Employing this critical theory, it was suggested that there were complex social relations
of power among various social structures such as the family, schools, community, and
sports (Habermas, 1975; Turner & Turner, 1998). Along with this, the acceptance of
power relations was evident between traditionally masculine men, other men, and women.
The study found that ‘gender norm inﬂuences’ and ‘traditional masculinity attitudes’ are
still continuing today, yet undergoing social changes (Baca Zinn & Dill, 1994). In fact, it
was found that traditional and hegemonic masculinity ideology continues to exist, and it
causes some men to continue to be dominant and privileged in society and sport while
others are disadvantaged. Some aspects of marginalizing and disempowering selected
men were observed among the experiences of the respondents within the context of
dominant and traditional masculinity ideology. Critical theory advances this focus on
masculinity power and domination not only among men but also among relationships
between men and women. All in all, it is suggested that traditional masculinity plays a

role with socio-cultural acceptance of a dominant cultural ideology for boys and men; (a)
to make standards to judge all men, (b) to agree with “objective intentionl7 (Bourdieu,
2001, p.26)” against ‘other’ men (i.e., less masculine men) and women, and (c) to created

a legitimate pride for boys and men to be masculine men. The study also found that most

 

The objective intention of denying the female part of the male...of serving attachments to the
mother...Countless acts aims to separate the boy from his mother — using objects made with ﬁre and
tending to symbolize cutting (and male sexuality): knife, dagger, ploughshare, etc.

194

 

 

of the college men perceived similarly gendered and exclusive values and behaviors in
Sport/physical activity.

Combining all the sociological theories this study used, the researcher has
disclosed critical aspects of relationships and comprehensive understandings of social and
cultural structures of traditional masculinity that affect sport/physical activity values and

behaviors.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the data from both quantitative and qualitative aspects of the study
indicate that there is a signiﬁcant association between socio-cultural inﬂuences on
traditional gender norms, traditional masculinity attitudes, masculine behaviors in
sport/physical activity, and sport/physical activity values as they are shown to be socially
and culturally constructed. While the social construction was found and supported
through a quantitative statistical examination, personnel, social, and cultural senses of
traditional gender norms, traditional masculinity attitudes, and sport/physical activity
experiences were documented through the qualitative aspects of the study. It can be
argued that contextualization of traditional gender and masculinity occurred in socializing
boys and men to think and behave a certain way in formulating actions and thoughts
reﬂecting acceptable culturally perceived interests, values, and actions advocated and
supported by signiﬁcant social others. There is reciprocity between socializing agents,
collective groups of men and women, and those being socialized. However, many social
institutions such as the family, education, sport, and determinants develop and maintain

dominant ideologies much of the time. Many of these social institutions communicate,

195

 

teach, and reward traditional values and behaviors through selected experiences,

 

particularly associated with gender and traditional masculinity ideologies as a socio-
cultural construction. Fathers, male coaches, friends, and teammates were actively
involved in this masculinity socialization process of the college male respondents in the
study.

Along with traditional masculinity in our culture, everyday lives, and
Sport/physical activity, stereotypically heterosexual domains of gender were considered a
major factor which inﬂuenced important qualities for men to pursue. In the development
of traditional masculinity attitudes based upon the inﬂuences on traditional gender norms,
it cannot be denied that the traditional masculinity and other social constructions were
used as a basis for individual and collective male development and achievements.
However, some problems occurred during the developing process of traditional
masculinity attitudes with different social interactions, learning, modeling, and sharing
feedback with others. The study ﬁndings suggested that comparisons, judgments, or
labeling of some men was a part of hegemonic and traditional masculinity social relations
where dominant males carried out their desires to make themselves superior to or
dominant over other men (Connell, 2000). This was achieved through aggressive, name
calling, and other acts of intimidation, and it occurred when selected men in the study
sample were criticized in sport as being weak, gay, or less athletic. The sport/physical
activity socialization process for many males was constructed based on traditional
masculinity ideology and dominant hegemonic relationships. A few college men
suggested that they observed idealized images of masculinity in the media in addition to

being socialized into traditional masculinity by their families, education, and

196

sport/physical activity. The following quote by Glassner (1990) suggested that idealized
images of people are often reinforced through the media.

There were countless images of idealized bodies people see every day in
television, magazine, and billboard advertising have become dominant
symbols, thanks to their pivotal position in structures of social exchange.
They channel capital and serve as a common resource for judging the
adequacy of self and others.

From the statement above, we could see that the traditional masculinity could often be
assessed as a symbolic conduit for many men to be in touch with or in control of the
social self and others. Cases in the study showed that some men suffered from social
isolation whereas others were socially connected. It was found that self or others’
perceptions about one’s self or themselves due to the constructed social imagination of
‘average’ men in society often caused social isolation for men of different masculinities.
In the literature, it was shown that some boys and men were often isolated within the
socio-cultural imagination of traditionally masculine men in society, when they were
subjected to power relations of dominance, discrimination, oppression, or marginalization
(Baimer, 1999; Carlson, 1995; Collins, 1991; Connell, 2000; Haenﬂer, 2004; Hasbrook
& Harris, 1999).

In terms of sport/physical activity values, the study suggested that traditional
masculinity socialization led some men to determine their behaviors in and values on
sport/physical activity as the literature had suggested. Several values such as social
(male-bonding), catharsis, a pursuit of vertigo, asceticism in sport/physical activity were
related to masculine sport behaviors and traditional masculinity attitudes. Attitudes

toward sport/physical activity of college men with traditional masculinity attitudes were

197

often isolated into binary gender categories along with their masculine behaviors in
sport/physical activity. In the context of traditional masculinity, heterosexism was
conveyed through sport/physical activity. Masculinity values (masculine versus less
masculine or masculinity versus femininity values) were evident in play, games, and

sports as well as society.

Recommendations

Recommendations will be given for ﬁrture research and social practices in
sport/physical activity.
Recommendations for further research

There are several recommendations for further studies. Most of all, I would
suggest that future research would have a larger sample from diverse geographic areas
and several universities. In this study, the population of the sample was delimited to one
university in the Midwest. Future sample frames would possibly be broader so that the
ﬁndings could be more generalizable and diversiﬁed to larger groups of men from
different social and cultural groups. Various age and sub-cultural groups, national origins,
and sexual orientations could also be studied. In order to study ‘masculinities’ in
sport/physical activity, it is important to get larger and more diverse sample frames to
continue this line of research. Given the importance of the study focus on traditional
masculinity, this research area should become more integrated into gender studies in
sport sociology and sociology where it well be important to investigate different

masculinities in society and sport/physical activity.

198

In addition, the researcher also recommends that more interdisciplinary research
be conducted between faculty in the areas of kinesiology, physical education, education,
sociology, communication, politics, and economics since the integration and intersection
of disciplines will allow for more depth of study in the area. The perceptions, beliefs,
values, behaviors, communications, and social decisions of men are established or studied
based upon more than one factor, academic discipline, or social institution in society. It
would be helpful to employ more comprehensive socio-cultural understandings from
multiple perspectives. The researcher cannot deny, however, that it may be very difﬁcult
in dealing with scholars across disciplines. The study might become more complex with
countless outcomes when it employed considerably numerous perspectives from different
disciplines. However, if well-designed and organized, masculinity gendered studies
Should create more sophisticated research foci, in-depth analyses, outcomes and theories
that could inform study participants and researchers across ﬁelds.

In addition, future studies could employ different kinds of women’s perspectives
on the issues of masculinities. Their knowledge bases could be different, but be another
very important factor, as men in the present study conﬁrmed that women’s perspectives
inﬂuenced their masculine attitudes and behaviors. These women’s general perspectives
about men in society could be very helpful for the study of masculinity to be more critical.
It would enable us to discuss issues on traditional masculinity more profoundly Since
there would be an opportunity to see subjective and objective from gendered positions. At
the beginning of the study, it was argued that ‘masculinity’ could never strictly be a

men’s issue that all men may not practice. Therefore, as long as masculinities are

199

 

discoursed as a gender issue, women’s perspectives on men and masculinities would be a
very important topic to research to deliver critical messages about men.

It is also recommended to employ various time settings and methodologies to the
study of masculinities as this study has done. These are needed to understand the social
and cultural complexities and their social changes in contemporary society. Employing
various time settings and methodologies would be very helpful to interpret the current
trends in society and culture and to possibly predict more openness to diverse
masculinities in the future. This may provide us with an understanding of how socio-
cultural dynamics from place to place and time to time impact masculinity attitudes,

behaviors, and values in sport/physical activity.

Recommendations to improve social practices
Drawing on the journey for explorations of a socio-cultural construction of

traditional masculinity and its relationships to sport/physical activity value and behaviors,
this study gives attention to gender relations which are one of the critical dimensions in
determining one’s traditional masculinity attitudes and his values toward and behaviors in
sports/physical activity.

The way people deﬁne sport/physical activity is not based solely on physical
development, skills, psychological cognitions, or biological domains. However, it would
be true that men are rarely free to choose their sport/physical activity ideologies, values
and meaning. How they behave and act relates to how they will be accepted, praised, or
privileged individually in sports with a group of men. In this case, more competitive,
organized, and commercialized settings in sport/physical activity such as some youth

sports, high school and college sports may be seriously situated in this matter. For these

200

 

reasons, this study itself would strongly be recommended for parents, coaches, and sport
leaders to re-explore socio-cultural constructions of masculinity and human relationships,
experiences and interactions in sport/physical activity. Accepting this recommendation
for gender understanding and education of parents and sport leaders would create more

opportunities for people including different boys and men to have more open minds for

 

better social relationships with others in, through, and out of sport/physical activity.

Society is always in a state of social change; it is incumbent upon sport/physical
activity to change with an understanding of complex gender dynamics in society. Parents,
coaches, and sport leaders have social power to try and make changes to keep the society
healthy. This study may be able to make a contribution to those empowered to make
changes in social institutions such as the family, education, and sport/physical activity.
However, this is because social change may be challenging the dominant social practice
of traditional masculinity where some of the dominant social ﬁgures in structures do not
want to or see the need to make changes, which causes dominant ideology to be
maintained. The ﬁndings from this study would be recommended to re-educate parents
and professionals in sport teams, sport organizations, and physical education, hoping that
the study draws social attention to the construction of traditional gender norms and
masculinity attitudes in order to make social changes. This study may reinforce structures
of gender socialization as well as help in the reorientation of boys and men, coaches,
parents, educators, and administrators to an understanding of the impact of socialization
for different masculinities in sport/physical activity.

This study’s results are not focused on the improvement of performances and

skills, but the main reason that I proposed this study is to increase our understanding of

201

 

gender and masculinity in society and sport/physical activity values, and to have a
sociology of sport that matters (Nixon, 1991). Young male and female athletes need to
ﬁnd their full opportunities and beneﬁts from sports away from an oppressed traditional
masculinity ideology for the pursuit of winning all at cost and male dominance in sports.
Men as well as women need to have more Opportunities and more ﬂexible options with

pure purposes of playing games and having fun. In addition, the players who are not

 

traditionally privileged through gender would ﬁnd better and fuller meanings in
sport/physical activity, so that they would begin to value and enjoy these experiences and
play healthier and longer. Therefore, the researcher recommend that parents and sport
leaders have youth sport workshops discussing gender and its relationship to sports,
social meanings, and self-esteem. This would facilitate the social re-construction of
sport/physical activity as a more educational institution. Critically educated leaders and
professionals in sport/physical activity would reconstruct social relationships of gender
and create healthier cultures among people, especially boys and men regarding
masculinities. Sport/physical activity is not merely for highly skilled athletes and highly
developed competitions, but for everybody regardless of who they are. If understandings
from this study are employed, sport/physical activity would no longer heavily focus on a
few selected privileged males, and the future of sport/physical activity would be more

optimistic for ‘everybody’.

202

APPENDIX A. CORRELATIONS FROM THE PILOT STUDY

203

 

Table 31. Correlations between the major variables (n=36)

 

 

SCIGN TMA SV MBS
SCIGN l
TMA .223 l
SV **.425 .309 1
MBS .302 ”.666 *.406 l

 

SCIGN: Socio-cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
TMA: Traditional Masculinity Attitudes

SV: Sport/Physical Activity Values
MBS: Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity

* Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
** Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 32. Correlations between Traditional Masculinity Attitudes and Sport/Physical

 

 

Activity Values E36)
TMA SV_ SV_ SV_ SV_ SV_ SV_
Social Health Aesthetic Vertigo Catharsis Ascetic
TMA 1
SV_Social "160 1
:1:
SV_Health '3 3 9 '105 1
*- -
SV_ Aesthetic '374 -133 -021 1
SV_Vertigo .123 -.072 .012 .253 1
** *4- _ _
SV_Catharsis .566 .252 .682 .257 .005 1
**.487 .071 .233 -.259 “.513 “.446 1

SV_Ascetic

 

 

SCIGN: Socio-cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms
TMA: Traditional Masculinity Attitudes

SV: Sport/Physical Activity Values
MBS: Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity

* Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
** Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

204

 

APPENDIX B. THEORY AND REFERENCE BASED INSTRUMENTS

205

 

THEORY AND REFERENCE BASED INSTRUMENTS

Personal Background Questions (24 items”)

Child Development Laboratory Parent Survey, Michigan State University (2004). A
Sample Survey Questionnaire.

Clark, H., & Schober, M. (1992). Asking questions and inﬂuencing answers. In J. M.
Tanur & Social Science Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Cognition.

(Eds), Questions about questions .' inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys
(pp. 15-43). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Consumer Product Survey of America (2004). A Sample Survey Questionnaire.

Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and intemet surveys : the tailored design method (2nd ed.).
New York: J. Wiley.

House, J. S. (2004). The development and contribution of survey research as a scientiﬁc
instrument and social institution. In J. S. House (Ed.), A telescope on society:
survey research and social science at the University of Michigan and beyond (pp.
1-20). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Institute of Social Research at University of Michigan (2005). The University of
Michigan Ofﬁce of Evaluation & Examinations Teaching Questions,
Spring/Summer 2005.

James A (1993). General Social Surveys, 1972—1993, CT: The Roper Center for Public
Opinion Research

Kinesiology Socio-Cultural Research Group (2005). Survey Instruments for A Health
Dimensions of People of Color Study.

McCabe, M. P., & Ricciardelli, L. A. (2003). Sociocultural inﬂuences on body image and
body changes among adolescent boys and girls. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 143(1), 5-26.

Sparrow Southside Pediatrics Medical Survey, Sparrow Health System, (2004). A
Sample Survey Questionnaire.

 

8
Original Items - 28

206

Socio-Cultural Influences on Gender Norms (12 Items”)

Clasen, P. (2001). The female athlete: dualism and paradox in practice. Women and
Language, 24(2), 36-41.

Cox, B., & Thompson, S. (2000). Multiple bodies: sportswomen, soccer, and sexuality.
International Review for Sociology of Sport, 35(1), 5-20.

Greendorfer, S. L. (1993). Gender role stereotypes and early child socialization. In G. L.
Cohen (Ed.), Women in sport .' issues and controversies (2nd ed., pp. 3-14).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

McCabe, M. P., & Ricciardelli, L. A. (2003). Sociocultural inﬂuences on body image and
body changes among adolescent boys and girls. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 143(1), 5-26.

MacQueen, K. (2003). Boy vs. Girl. Macleans, 116(21), 26-32.

Menneson, C. (2000). 'Hard' women and 'Soft' women: the social construction of
identities among female boxers. International Review for the Sociology of Sport,

35(1), 21-33.

Shin, E. H., & Nam, E. A. (2004). Culture, gender roles, and sport: the case of Korean
players on the LPGA Tour. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 28(3), 223-244.

Worell, J. (2001). Encyclopedia of women and gender .° sex similarities and diﬂerences
and the impact of society on gender. San Diego, Calif. London: Academic.

Male Role Norms (Masculinities) (21 Items“)

Brannon, R. (1985). A scale for measuring attitudes about masculinity. In A. G. Sargent
(Ed.), Beyond sex roles (2nd ed., pp. 110-116). St. Paul: West Pub. Co.

Connell, R. W. (2000). The men and the boys. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kidd, B. (1987). Sports and masculinity. In M. Kaufman (Ed.), Beyond patriarchy (pp.
250-261). Toronto: Oxford UP.

 

9
Original Items - 12

Original Items - 57

207

Levant, R. F., & Fischer, J. (1998). The male role norm inventory. In C. M. Davis (Ed.),
Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 469-472). Thousand Oaks, Calif.:
Sage Publications.

Sargent, A. G. (1985). Beyond sex roles (2nd ed.). St. Paul: West Pub. Co.

Townsend, R. (1985). The texture of men's lives. In A. G. Sargent (Ed.), Beyond sex roles
(2nd ed., pp. 340-351). St. Paul: West Pub. Co.

Attitudes Toward Sport Activities (18 Items“)

Caillois, R. (1961). Man, play, and games. [New York]: Free Press of Glencoe.

Kenyon, G. S. (1968). A conceptual model of characterizing physical activity. Research
Quarterly, 39(1), 96-105.

Acord, D. M. (1977). Attitudes toward physical activity in coeducational and non-
educational physical education programs. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
Southern Illinois University, Carbonedale.

Duan, C. (1985). A study of attitudes towards physical activity among secondary school
students in Beijing, China. International Review for Sociology of Sport, 20(4).

Mueller, D. J. (1986). Measuring social attitudes .' a handbook for researchers and
practitioners. New York: Teachers College Press.

Ryan, S., Fleming, D., & Maina, M. (2003). Attitudes of middle school students toward
their physical education teachers and classes. The Physical Educator, 60(2).

Masculine Behaviors in Sport Activities (25 Itemszz)
Bremner, K. (2002). Gender, sexuality and sport. Canadian Woman Studies, 21(3), 6-11.
Connell, R. W. (2000). The men and the boys. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Gill, D. L. (2002). Gender and sport behavior. In T. Horn (Ed.), Advances in sport
psychology (pp. 355-3 75). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.

 

1
Original Items - 59

Original Items - 33

208

 

Hasbrook, C. A., & Harris, O. (1999). Wrestling with gender: physicality and
masculinities among inner-city ﬁrst and second graders. Men and Masculinity,
1(3), 302-318.

Kidd, B. (1987). Sports and masculinity. In M. Kaufman (Ed.), Beyond partriarchy (pp.
250-261). Toronto: Oxford UP.

McKay, J., Messner, M. A., & Sabo, D. F. (2000).' Masculinities, gender relations, and
sport. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Messner, M. A., & Sabo, D. F. (1990). Sport, men, and the gender order: critical
feminist perspectives. Champaign, IL.: Human Kinetics Books.

Pappas, N. T., MaKenry, P. C., & Catlett, B. S. (2004). Athlete aggression on the rink

and off the ice: athlete violence and aggression in hockey and interpersonal
relationships. Men and Masculinities, 6(3), 291-312.

209

 

 

APPENDIX C. RELIABILITIES FROM THE PILOT STUDY

210

 

Table 33. Detailed Reliabilities on the Original Instrument and the Socio-Cultural
Inﬂuences on Gender Norm Instrument in the Pilot Study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Original Instrument Pilot Study
Sub-Domaln
Items Reliability Items Reliability
Myself None 12 or = .81
Father 13 12 a = .83
Mother 13 12 or = .76
SOCIO' Brother None 12 or = .92
Cultural
Inﬂuences on Sister None r>.84 12 or = .93
Gender Male Friend 13 12 a = .80
Norms Female
Friend 13 12 a = .85
The Media 10 12 a = .91
Total 62 96 a = .94

 

 

Table 34. Detailed Reliabilities on the Original Instrument and the Traditional
Masculinity Attitudes Instrument in the Pilot Study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ong'm” Pilot Study Modiﬁcation
. Instrument
Sub-Domain
Items Re- Items Re- Items Re-
liability liability liability
Avoidance 01 = .77 - _ =
Femininity 7 .82 7 or - '91 3 a '82
Rejection of or = .54 - = =
Homosexuality 4 .58 4 or '70 3 or '69
. or = .54 - _ _
Self-Rellance 7 51 7 or — .85 3 a — .60
Aggression 5 or = 5:5- 5 or = .61 3 or = .64
Traditional Ach'ev ment/ or = 67 -
Masculinity Statl s e 7 ' 69 7 a = .86 3 or = .81
Attitudes Att'fl d 6.9
1 u es or =. - _ =
toward Sex 8 .81 8 or _ '78 3 a '72
Restricted 7 or = .75 - 7 or = . 67 3 or = .74
emotlons .81
Non-traditional or = .57 - _
attitudes 12 .56 12 or .85 None None
Total 57 °‘ = .84”; 57 a = .91 21 a = .91

 

 

211

 

 

Table 35. Detailed Reliabilities on the Original Instrument and the Sport/Physical
Activity Values Instrument in the Pilot Study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SW “3:131:12; Pilot Study Modiﬁcation
Domain Items Reliability Items Reliability Items Reliability
2223?." w 2339.: w 3
3...... 2:18:23. .0 2331;: w 3
28.2.3: its; .. 323.32.: w 3
Values Catharsis 9 23y} 1;; 9 a = .76 3 or = .70
23:22:... 10 313:2: .. 3
Total 59 None 59 a = .84 18 a = ~66

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 36. Detailed Reliabilities on the Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity
Instrument in the Pilot Study and on the Modiﬁcation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pilot Study Modiﬁcation
Sub-Domain
Items Reliability Items Reliability
Competitiveness 3 or = .80
Toughness/ 4 or ___ .72
Aggressweness
Self-Reliance 3 or = .65
, Avoidance =
giaEcullne Femininity 3 or '58
e av10rs - -
, Restrlctlve _ =
1n Sport/ Emotions 33 or — .91 3 a .60
Physical Risk/ Injury 73
Actrvrty Taking 3 or — .
verbal . 3 a = .74
Accusation
Drug/ Alcohol/ 3 or = - 68
Tobacco _
Tota 25 a = .87

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

212

APPENDIX D. INFORMED CONSENT FORMS

213

Informed Consent Form23

Socio-Cultural Constructions of Traditional Masculinity and Sport/Physical Activity Values

You are invited to participate in a survey. The purpose of the survey is to examine socio-
cultural inﬂuences on traditional gender norms, masculinity roles and sport/physical
activity values. The results will add to the body of knowledge about ways that gender
may inﬂuence the beneﬁts of sport/physical activity. This study is conducted by JD Lee,
a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Kinesiology at Michigan State University.

This study has an age restriction. If you are under 18, you are not eligible to participate in
the interview. Your participation will require approximately 30-45 minutes to complete a
questionnaire. You will be asked to: (a) indicate your beliefs of socio-cultural inﬂuences
on traditional gender norms, masculinity, sports in general, and your sports participation;
(b) assign agreement ratings to those beliefs; and (c) provide some demographic
information.

But, your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There are no foreseeable
risks associated with this project. However, if you feel uncomfortable answering any of
the questions, you can withdraw from the survey at any point. Your survey responses will
be strictly conﬁdential and data from this research will be reported only in the aggregate.

Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. Speciﬁc
conﬁdentiality provisions include: (a) You are instructed not to type your name or any
other private information such as identiﬁcation numbers on the survey questionnaire.
Thus, no one will have a record of who participated in this survey. (b) The survey
questions do not probe possibly sensitive areas; and you have the right to skip any
questions you do not wish to answer. (c) Completed survey will be kept in a computer
ﬁle with a secured password and in a locked ﬁle cabinet. ((1) Only the main investigators
will have access to the completed survey.

It is very important for us to learn your opinions. The likely beneﬁt is that your
participation will help professionals to develop and promote social relationships in many
sport/physical activity programs. As a way of thanking you for your participation, your
name will be entered in a drawing to win $150.

At the end of this survey, you will be asked for a follow-up interview. If you would like
to participate in the interview, please contact JD Lee at leejeon7@msu.edu. For your
participation in the follow-up interview, you will be paid $20 at the conclusion of the
interview as a way of thanking you for your participate in the interview.

If you understand this informed consent form, now you can begin this survey. You will
indicate your voluntary agreement to participate in this study by completing the survey. If
you have any questions regarding this survey, please contact JD Lee at 517) 432-7121

 

This consent form will be used for the online and paper survey.

214

[leejeon7@msu.edu] or Yevonne Smith, Ph.D., at 517-353-3262 [smithy@msu.edu]. If
you have any further questions or concerns regarding your rights as a study participant, or
are dissatisﬁed at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact - anonymously,
if you wish - Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Director of Human Research Protections by phone:
(517) 432-4503, fax: (517) 432-4503, email: irb@rnsu.edu, or regular mail: 202 Olds
Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824-1047.

Thank you for your time and cooperation.

Sincerely,

JDLe

215

Informed Consent Form24

Socio-Cultural Constructions of Traditional Masculinity and Sport/Physical Activity Values

You are invited to participate in an interview. I ﬁrst would like to say thank you for your
participation in this follow-up interview. Your participation in the on-line/paper survey was very
helpful, and this interview should also be very helpful. The information you provide is very
important to investigate a social construction of gender and masculinities and their relationships
to sport/physical activities. This study is conducted by JD Lee, a Ph.D. candidate in the
Department of Kinesiology at Michigan State University.

The purpose of this interview is to ﬁnd out what socio-cultural aspects of masculinity and
sport/PA values people have. Therefore, You will be asked to talk about your beliefs of socio-
cultural inﬂuences on traditional gender norms, masculinity, sports in general, and your sports
participation. This study has an age restriction. If you are under 18, you are not eligible to
participate in the interview.

Your participation will require approximately 40-60 minutes to complete this interview. Your
participation in this study is completely voluntary. There are no foreseeable risks associated with
this project. However, if you feel uncomfortable answering any of the questions, you can
withdraw from the interview at any point. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent
allowable by law. Speciﬁc conﬁdentiality provisions include: (A) You are instructed not to
identify private information. (B) The interview questions do not probe possibly sensitive areas;
and you have the right to skip any questions you do not wish to answer. (C) Completed interview
contents will be kept in a computer ﬁle with a secured password and in a locked ﬁle cabinet. (D)
Only the main investigators will have access to the completed interview contents.

It is very important for us to learn your opinions. The likely beneﬁt is that your participation will
help professionals to develop and promote social relationships in many sport/physical activity
programs. As a way of thanking you for your participation, you will be paid $20 at the conclusion
of the interview.

If you understand this informed consent form, now you can begin this interview. You will
indicate your voluntary agreement to participate in this study by completing the interview. If you
have any questions regarding this survey, please contact JD Lee at 517) 432-7121
[1eejeon7@msu.edu] or Yevonne Smith, Ph.D., at 517-353-3262 [smithy@msu.edu]. If you have
any further questions or concerns regarding your rights as a study participant, or are dissatisﬁed at
any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact - anonymously, if you wish - Peter
Vasilenko, Ph.D., Director of Human Research Protections by phone: (517) 432-4503, fax: (517)
432-4503, email: irb@msu.edu, or regular mail: 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824-1047.

Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Sincerely,

JD Lee

 

This consent form will be used for the follow-up interview.

216

APPENDIX E. SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

217

Instructions and Sample Questions (Practice Questions)

In this section, you will be provided with several sample questions. Completion of this section
will be helpful for you as you progress through the survey.

[Sample question 1] What is your favorite color? [Instruction] To answer this question, simply
type your answer in the box provided.

I l

 

[Sample question 2] What is your favorite city in the US? [Instruction] To answer this
question, simply check one of the cities that corresponds to your choice. In case you have some
other answer, describe it on the line below.

1. New York
2. Chicago

3. Los Angeles
4. Las Vegas
5. Other

 

[Sample question 3] What are your favorite foods? [Instruction] To answer this question,
simply check on the food item you desire. You can select as many as you want.
1. Hamburger

2. Tacos
3. Pizza
4. Pasta
5. Steak
6. Hot dogs
7. Other

[Sample question 4] How much do/did you like the following classes? [Instruction] There are
rows (English, Math, Gym, and Art) and columns (Not at all, Very little, Somewhat, and All the
time) in the question. To answer this matrix-type question, check on how much you like each
class.

 

Not at all Very little Somewhat All the time

 

English

 

 

Phys I cal Education/(3y m .....................

 

Art ........................................................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good work! I think you are ready to go now.

218

Personal Background Questions

This section requests your personal background information including sport activity experiences.
Please respond to the following questions by checking on your answer choice or writing in the
space provided.

1. What is your gender?
a. Male
b. Female

2. Do you identify yourself as;
a. Heterosexual
b. Homosexual
c. Bisexual
d. Don’t want to answer

3. What is your race/ethnicity?
White/Caucasian American, Non-Hispanic
Black/African American, Non-Hispanic
Chicano/Mexican American
Hispanic/Latino

American Indian/Alaskan Native
Hawaiian/Paciﬁc Islander

Asian American

Asian Heritage/Non-American

African Heritage/Non-American
European Heritage/Non-American
Other

FT'T'P‘QQWPP-PP‘?’

 

4. Are you a U.S. citizen?
a. Yes
b. No

c. I don’t know

5. How old are you?
19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 or older

P‘QO r339 9-9 9:133

219

6. What is your school year in the degree program?

woe-$357.93

lst year
2nd year
3rd year
4th year
5th year
6th or more

7. What is your major/ area of study?

8. Indicate the type of community you have lived in the longest until now?

oo—oo‘e

Small town
Urban area
Rural
Suburban area
Other

 

9. What type of family were you raised in?

”PP-99‘!”

Patriarchal (father-centered)

Somewhat patriarchal

Matriarchal (mother-centered)

Somewhat matriarchal

Neither patriarchal nor matriarchal (equal relationships between parents)
Other

 

10. Has your father been a major part of your life as you grew up?

a.
b.

Yes
No --- answer to the next question

10-1. If your father has NOT been a major part of your life or you do not have your father,
who else has been the most inﬂuential male adult in your life in place of your father?

11. Has your mother been a major part of your life as you grew up?

a.
b.

Yes
No --- Answer to the next question

220

ll-l. If your mother has NOT been a major part of your life or you do not have your
mother, who has been the most inﬂuential female adult in your life in place of your mother?

12. What is the educational level completed by your father? (or by the person [male adult],
you indicated in the previous question 11-1, who has been inﬂuential in your life in place of
your father).

‘r'r'P'oerooo-oo‘o

Less than high school
Attended high school
High school diploma/GED
Attended college
Associates degree
Bachelor degree

Masters degree

Doctorate

Don’t know

Other

 

13. What is the educational level completed by your mother? (or the person [female adult],
you indicated in the previous question 12-1, who has been inﬂuential in your life in place of
your mother).

‘r'r'P‘qe rooting!»

Less than high school
Attended high school
High school diploma/GED
Attended college
Associates degree
Bachelor degree

Masters degree

Doctorate

Don’t know

Other

14. What was your own estimated personal annual income last year before taxes?

+1:qu roo .49 9‘83

Less than $10,000
&10,000 - 14,999
$15,000 - 24,999
$25,000 - 34,999
$35,000 - 49,999
$50,000 - 74,999
$75,000 - 99,999
$100,000 - 149,999
$150,000 - 199,999
$200,000 or more

221

15. What is your parent’s estimated annual income last year before taxes?
Less than $10,000
&10,000 - 14,999
$15,000 - 24,999
$25,000 - 34,999
$35,000 - 49,999
$50,000 - 74,999
$75,000 - 99,999
$100,000 - 149,999
$150,000-199,999
$200,000 or more
Don’t know

r‘r'r'e‘oe r3353 .33-.9 $7.33

16. Are you ﬁnancially independent of your parents?
a. Yes
b. No --- Answer to the next question

16-1. If you are NOT ﬁnancially independent of your parents, how much do they support
you annually?

17. How frequently do you participate in sport/physical activities? ex.) 3 times a week for
40 minutes each session

a. Times a week

b. Minutes on average each session

18. Please list the top three sport/physical activities that you have done most frequently.
Then, indicate the time period, type/level, and reason to participate in.

 

 

 

 

Activity Time Period Type/Level Reason
(ex. jogging, (ex. 1998 - 2000, (ex. recreational, (ex. for ﬁtness, social,
basketball, soccer, 2004 - now, etc.) intramural, var sity. extracurricular, etc.)
judo, etc.) etc.)
a
b
c

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

222

19. Did the following persons actively participate in sport and physical activities “when you
were growing up”? (At least three days a week and 30 minutes each session) Please answer
by checking for each of the following person. If you do not have any of the following persons
such as brothers or sisters, check on Not Applicable.

 

Not

Never Seldom Somewhat Usually Always Applicable

 

Father (or other inﬂuential
male adult in your life)

 

Mother (or other inﬂuential
female adult in your life)

 

Brother(s)

 

Sister(s)
The Best Male Friend(s)
The Best Female F riend(s)
Myself

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21. Do the following persons actively participate in sport activities “currently”? (At least
three days a week and 30 minutes each session) Please answer by checking for each of the
following person. If you do not have any of the following persons such as brothers or sisters,
check on Not Applicable.

 

Not

Never Seldom Somewhat Usually Always Applicable

 

Father (or other inﬂuential
male adult in your life)

 

Mother (or other inﬂuential
female adult in your life)

 

Brother(s)

 

Sister(s)
The Best Male Friend(s)
The Best Female Friend(s)
Myself

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

223

Questionnaire A 25

Please read each statement carefully and indicate how much you agree or disagree with the
statement by checking one that best describes you. Please note that there are no right or wrong

 

answers.
Strongly Dis- Sllghtly Slightly Strongly
. Dls- Agree
Dlsagree agree agree Agree Agree

 

l. The most effective way to relieve severe
emotional strain is through some form of
sport/physical activity.

 

2. Among desirable forms of physical
activity are those that Show the beauty and
form of human movement, such as modern
dance and synchronized swim.

 

3. I prefer those sports which require very
hard training and involve intense competition
such as interscholastic and intercollegiate
athletics.

 

4. Developing physical ﬁtness and health
would be my most important purpose for
participating in sport/physical activities.

 

5. There are better ways of relieving the
pressure of today’s living than having to
engage in sport/physical activity.

 

6. I am given great pleasure when I see the
form and beauty of human motion.

 

7. There are better ways of getting to know
people than through sport/physical activities.

 

8. The least desirable sport/physical activities
are those providing a sense of danger and
risk of injury such as skiing on steep slopes,
mountain climbing, or parachute jumping.

 

9. I enjoy sport/physical activities mostly
because they give me a chance to meet new
people.

 

10. Practically the only way to relieve
frustrations and pent-up emotion is through
some form of sport/physical activities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5
Sport/Physical Activity Values Assessment

224

 

 

Strongly
Disagree

Dis-
agree

Shghﬂy
Dis-
agree

Sﬁghﬂy
Agree

Agree

Strongly
Agree

 

11. Of all the types of sport/physical
activities, I most prefer those requiring a
lot of socializing.

 

12. One ofthe things I like most in
sport/physical activities is the great variety
of ways human movement can be shown to
be beautiful.

 

13. Of all sport/physical activities, my ﬁrst
choice would be those whose purpose is
primarily to develop and maintain
physical ﬁtness and health.

 

14. If I had to choose between still-water
canoeing and rapid canoeing, still-water
canoeing would be better alternative.

 

15. Sport/physical activities having a
strong element of daring or requiring one
to take chances are highly desirable.

 

 

16. The fun is sometimes taken out of
games in sport/physical activities when
they become too highly organized, overly
competitive, and too demanding of the
participants.

 

17. My main purpose to participate in
vigorous sport/physical activities is to
maintain my general ﬁtness and health.

 

18. Since competition is fundamental to
sports, athletes need to be much more
demanding and competitive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

225

 

Questionnaire B 26

This section explores your meaning of certain concepts of norms of maleness. Please read each
sentence carefully and indicate how much it is like you and your belief by checking one that best
describes you. Please note that there are no right or wrong answers.

Strongly Dis- 5'3?" Slightly

Dlsagree agree agree Agree

 

Strongly

Agree Agree

 

l. A man must be able to make his own
way in the world.

 

2. A man should make the ﬁnal decision
involving money.

 

3. A man should prefer football over
needle craft.

 

4. A man should not continue a friendship
with another man if he ﬁnds out that the
man is homosexual.

 

5. It is important for a man to be good in
bed.

 

6. Boys should be encouraged to ﬁnd a
means of demonstrating physical
aggression and prowess.

 

7. A man should try to win at any sport he
participates in.

 

8. A man who takes a long time and has
difﬁculty making decisions will usually
NOT be respected.

 

9. It is disappointing to learn that a famous
athlete is gay.

 

10. When the going gets tough, men
should get tough.

 

11. Boys should prefer to play with trucks
rather than dolls.

 

12. Men should always take the initiative
when it comes to sex.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Traditional Masculinity Attitudes Assessment

226

 

Snongb'
Disagree

Dis-
agree

Shghﬂy
Dis-
agree

Shghﬂy
Agree

Agree

Strongly
Agree

 

13. Fathers should teach their sons to
mask fear.

 

14. Being a little down in the dumps is not
a good reason for a man to act depressed.

 

15. A man should always be ready for sex.

 

16. A man who has no taste for adventure
is not very appealing.

 

17. A man should always be the major
provider in his family.

 

18. Men should be detached in
emotionally charged situations.

 

19. A man should not count on someone
to get the job done.

 

20. It is too feminine for a man to use
clear nail polish on his ﬁngernails.

 

 

21. Being called a derogative term such as
gay is one of the worst insults to a man.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

227

 

Questionnaire C 27

This section examines behaviors in sport/physical activities. Please read each sentence carefully
and indicate “how much would be like you (even if you haven’t experienced, like drinking
alcohol for some reason)” by circling or checking one that best describes you. Please note that

there are no right or wrong answers.

 

Strongly
Disagree

Dis-
agree

Shghﬂy
Dis-
agree

Shghﬂy
Agree

Agree

Strongly
Agree

 

l. I work hard to be the best, most
successful competitor.

 

2. I play hard because I want to prove I’m
tough.

 

3. I run faster, lift more, and workout longer
if somebody is doing a same thing around
me.

 

4. I play aggressively to intimidate my
opponents in sport.

 

5. I use violent illegal actions intentionally
while playing sports.

 

6. I’m very ambitious in the pursuit of
winning in sports.

 

7. I do whatever I have to in order to work
towards winning.

 

8. Even at the risk of a long-term injury or
a certain health problem, I usually stay in
the game.

 

9. I exercise to build bulky muscles rather
than a slim body shape.

 

10. I use drugs or supplements to build up
muscles or to enhance muscle strengths.

 

11. I usually do not smile orjoke around
while playing games.

 

 

12. I do not show any fear or hesitation
when confronted with a sports/ﬁtness
chaHenge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Masculine Behaviors in Sport/Physical Activity Assessment

228

 

 

Strongly
Disagree

Dis-
agree

Slightly
Dis-
agree

Sﬁghﬂy
Agree

Agree

Strongly
Agree

 

13. When I want to improve my
performance, I never ask others to help me

get up.

 

14. I often enjoy playing dangerously in
sports that may cause an injury.

 

15. Even when I have an injury that might
be dangerous to play with, I will stay in
the game.

 

16. I do not listen to others who tell me
what to do in sport games except coaches.

 

17. I often exchange derogatory comments
with my opponents.

 

18. I do not show friendship towards my
opponents when playing sports.

 

19. I do not usually discuss my feelings
and emotions with others while playing
sports.

 

20. I have teased other players by calling
them sissy when they perform poorly.

 

21. I usually tell others what they have to
do instead of taking advice from them.

 

22. I advocate promiscuity and discuss it
with my teammates in and out of sports
activity.

 

23. Given the opportunity, I would
participate in a yoga class.

 

24. Given the opportunity, I would
participate in an aerobic dance class.

 

25. I have used (would use) alcohol as a
means for celebration after a game.

 

 

25. I have smoked or used (smokeless)
tobacco products in a game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

229

 

Questionnaire D 28

Please read this instruction carefully. This section examines how much people like parents,
siblings, or friends have "encouraged you to believe" gender norms.

For example, if your father "Usually" encouraged you to believe that "boys shouldn't cry", you
will check on "Usually" in the "Father" row. Then, you will repeat this process for the
following persons (mother, sisters, brothers, friends, etc., listed).

*If you do not have any one of the following persons such as brothers or sisters, check on 'Not
Applicable.‘

1. Women should be warm and caring.

 

Not

Not at all Very little Somewhat Usually Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................

(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

S i ster(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Gender Norms Assessment

230

2. Men should be warm and caring.

 

Not at all

Very little

Somewhat

Usually

Not
Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Women should be more emotional than men.

 

Not at all

Very little

Somewhat

Usually

Not
Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................

(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

C03Ch(eS) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

231

 

 

4. Men should be more emotional than women.

 

Not

Not at all Very little Somewhat Usually Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5. Women should be passive.

 

Not

Not at all Very little Somewhat Usually Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) . .. .................................................

 

Sport Teamm 3113(5) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

232

6. Men should he passive.

 

Not at all

Very little

Somewhat Usually

Not
Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7. Women should be active.

 

Not at all

Very little

Somewhat Usually

Not
Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

B rother( S ) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

233

 

 

8. Men should be active.

 

Not

Not at all Very little Somewhat Usually Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................

(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) .......................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9. Women should be competitive and tough.

 

Not

Not at all Very little Somewhat Usually Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................

(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

B rother( S) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

234

10. Men should be competitive and tough.

 

Not at all

Very little

Somewhat

Usually

Not
Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

11. Women should be breadwinners.

 

Not at all

Very little

Somewhat

Usually

Not
Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

Mother .........................................................

(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Sister(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach(es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

235

 

 

12. Men should be breadwinners.

 

Not

Not at all Very little Somewhat Usually Applicable

 

Father ..........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (male) in your life)

 

7 Mother .........................................................
(or other inﬂuential person (female) in your life)

 

Brother(s) ......................................................

 

Si ster(s) ........................................................

 

The Best Male Friend(s) ..............................

 

The Best Female Friend(s) ...........................

 

My Self .......................................................

 

Coach<es) ....................................................

 

Sport Teammate(s) ....................................

 

School Physical Education Class Teachers

 

School Physical Education Classmates ------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

236

Follow-up Interview

This study is a very important research project that will help us understand how men are
socialized in and out of sport/physical activities based on traditional masculinity. Therefore, this
study would need more in-depth interviews as a follow-up. It would take about 45 to an hour. If
you participate in it, you’ll be paid $20 instantly at the conclusion of the interview. If you are
interested in, please indicate whether you want to participate in it. You will be contacted upon
selection.

a. Yes, I want to participate in the follow-up interview.
b. No, I do not want to participate in the follow-up interview.

Thank you so much for taking time to complete the survey. You are the man! If you have any
comments or suggestions for improvement on this survey, please provide them in the box.

 

 

 

 

237

APENDIX F. FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

238

Interview Questionnaire

Socio-Cultural Baclgrounds and Sports/PA Participations and Values

1. Could you tell me about yourself and who you are without giving your name?

rho

53-937.”

Age:

Gender identity:

Race/Ethnicity identity:

Place where you grew up: Urban___ Rural_ Suburban__ Small
town___ Big city—

School (Year, major, degree, etc.):

Nationality:

Anything else that describes who you are:

2. Can you tell me about your past and present living circumstances and
relationships with family and community in terms of sport/physical activity
participation? How important were speciﬁc family members, friends, school, and
community leaders to your involvement in sport/physical activity? (Probes)

a. Family

b. Friends

c.School

(1. Work (if you have any)
e. Community

3. Can you tell me about your sport/physical activity participation (Categories, types
of activities, reason for participation, levels, years you played)? (Probes)

 

Categories

Levels (Local, state,
Reason national, international,
JV, recreational, etc.)

Period
(yrS)

Types of
Activities

 

[] Youth Sports

 

[] High School

 

[] College

 

[] Adult

 

 

[] Other

 

 

 

 

 

 

239

4. Can you tell me about 2 or 3 experiences in sport/physical activity that may be
positive or negative (social, cultural, psychological, physical, etc.)? [Use an
answer for this question at the sport/physical activity values section later in this
interview. ]

(Probes in general)
a. Positive experiences:

b. Negative experiences:

(Speciﬁc probes relating to the study issues) Can you share with me several
speciﬁc experiences in sport/physical activity that relate to your values in
sport/physical activity, for examples:

it Social experiences (Working and relating with others)

cl: Health & ﬁtness experiences (Injuries, over-workout, inappropriate
ﬁtness levels)

Challenge or adventure experiences
Aesthetic experiences (Artistic, beautiful, or graceful movement)

A pursuit of vertigo (Challenge or adventure)

est-i-

Catharsis (Using sport for reasoning aggressions and tensions and then
being relaxed or being mentally or spiritually renewed)

i.

Ascetic experiences (Self-denial/debasement of the body (WT, food
starvation, play through pains, or over train)

Socio-Cultural Inﬂuences on Traditional Masculinity and Femininity Gender

Norms

5. There are traditional gender norms such as ‘women should be more emotional,
passive, care giving, etc., and men and boys be strong (boys shouldn’t cry in
public). What do you think about these gendered societal stereotypes? Do you
agree or disagree with these ideas? What characteristics make a man a man and a
woman a woman?

6. Did any member of your family of persons around you in sports encourage you to
accept or dismiss traditional gender norms? How did they encourage and teach
you to accept these views as you grew up? Can you give me any speciﬁc
experiences or examples of how this happened with you inside the family, with
friends, coaches or teachers, or in sport/physical activity situations?

a. Father (or other inﬂuential male in your life)
b. Mother (or other inﬂuential female in your life)
c. Brother

240

7.

d. Sister

e. Male friend

f. Female friend
g. Coach

h. Sport teammate

School physical education teacher

H.
a

School physical education classmate
k. Your self

Bl

Would you mind if you identify your own sexuality? You may answer or not want
to answer. Let me know if you prefer not to answer this question.

Prefer not to answer _Heterosexual Homosexual _Bi-
sexual Others

Reﬂecting on your race/ethnicity, community, or national background, are there
any particularly cultural circumstances inﬂuencing your beliefs or attitudes
towards traditional gender norms

Traditional Masculinity Attitudes

9.

10.

11.

If you agree that there are some traditional male role norms in society and sport
such as being strong and tough, do you think you accept and follow them as social
and cultural norms? Can you give me an example of how you do this?

Who are among the most inﬂuential persons in your life encouraged traditional
male norms and behaviors? Can you tell me how they encouraged the traditional
male norms and whether you agreed with them?

Reﬂecting on your own race/ethnicity, religions, community, national
background, are there any particular cultural values that have affected your beliefs
or attitudes towards traditional male role norms, and masculinity? Can you
identify some of these and how they have affected you?

Traditional Masculine Behaviors in Sport

12.

Are there certain “manly” or masculine behaviors that you have seen or
demonstrated in sport/physical activity?

a. Can you give examples of these?

241

b. What masculine behaviors were taught to you and reinforced through

sport/physical activity?

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

c. How did sport/physical activity affect your masculine behaviors?

Do you usually play sports aggressively? (Yes No ) If you say yes, can
you give me an example?

Do you (did you ever) have violent or illegal actions intentionally while playing
games? (Yes No ) If you say yes, can you give me an example?

Do you exercise to build bulky muscles rather than a slim body shape? (Yes
No ) If you say yes, can you give me an example?

Have you ever tried or would you try using steroid drugs to build up muscles?
(Yes No ) If you say yes, can you give me an example of an
experience?

 

Do you smile or behave in a certain way for a good relationship with teammates
or opponents during sport/physical activity? (Yes_ No ) If you say yes,
can you give me an example of the social behavior you might display? Why do
you do this?

Do you enjoy a risk taking behavior or a dangerous performance that may cause
an injury? (Yes No ) If you say yes, can you give me an example and
describe how it makes you feel?

Do you often exchange intimidating or derogatory comments with your
opponents? (Yes No ) If you say yes, can you give me an example?

Do you praise or promote promiscuity and discuss it with teammates in and out of
sport/physical activity? (Yes No ) If you say yes, can you give me an
example or an experience when this has occurred?

20-1. Have you seen or witnessed other athletes doing this? (Yes
No ) What has been your reaction to this situation?

Have you ever participated or would you try to participate in aerobic dance or
yoga classes? (Yes No ) If you say yes, can you give me an example?
Tell me when and how you responded to this activity.

242

22. Have you ever used (would) you use alcohol or tobacco as a means for celebration

behaviors after a game? (Yes No ) If you say yes, can you give me an
example? Tell me when and how did you and/or other teammates behave in that
situation?

23. Reﬂecting on your own race/ethnicity, community, nationality background, are
there any particular cultural circumstances inﬂuencing your behaviors in
sport/physical activity? Do you tend to act different in sport from other cultural
groups? Can you describe your group behaviors?

Sport/Physical Activity Values As a Man
24. What are your values for participating in sport/PA?

25. What are some of the most valuable beneﬁts for all people when they participate
in sport/PA? Why are these values important?

25-1. Can you list and rank order the most important beneﬁts or values in
sport/PA for you?

25-2. Why are these important values for you?

26. Then, what do you think is most valuable for A MAN (YOU AS A MAN) to
achieve or value about participation in sport/physical activity? Can you tell me

why? (Probes)

a. Social experiences

b. Health & ﬁtness

c. Aesthetic experiences (i.e. displaying a beauty of movement of MEN; You
may want to relate it to muscular images, strength, and power of men)

(1. A pursuit of vertigo (challenge and adventure as a man)

e. Catharsis (i.e. a place to relax by exposing/revealing your aggression and
toughness as a man that you may not want to show in public)

f. Ascetic experience (i.e. a place to prove yourself as a man who works so

hard or even sacriﬁce yourself; in sport/physical activity, no pain no gain
concepts)

27. Reﬂecting on your own race/ethnicity or community background, are there any
particular cultural circumstances inﬂuencing your beliefs or attitudes towards
sport/physical activity?

243

28. Are there any additional comments in terms of people who inﬂuenced your
gender norms and traditional masculinity attitudes, and values and behaviors in
sport/physical activity that you would like to share?

Thank you so much for sharing your perspectives with me.

244

REFERENCES

245

REFERENCES

Acord, D. M. (1977). Attitudes toward physical activity in coeducational and non-
educational physical education programs. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
Southern Illinois University, Carbonedale.

Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Pitts, S. C. (2003). Multiple linear regression. In I. B. Weiner,
D. K. Freedheim, J. A. Schinka, W. F. Velicer & D. R. Ilgen (Eds), Handbook of
psychology (pp. 483-506). New York: Wiley.

Andersen, H. (2000). Jtirgen Habermas. In H. Andersen & L. B. Kaspersen (Eds),
Classical and modern social theory (pp. 326-343). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell
Publishers.

Andersen, H., & Kaspersen, L. B. (2000). Classical and modern social theory. Malden,
Mass: Blackwell Publishers.

Arcury, T., & Quandt, S. (1999). Participant recruitment for qualitative research: a site-
based approach to community research in complex societies. Human
Organization, 58(2), 128-13 3.

Baca Zinn, M., & Dill, B. T. (1994). Women of color in U.S. society. Philadelphia:
Temple University.

Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1989). On the use of structural equation models in experimental
designs. Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 271—284.

Baimer, A. (1 999). Soccer, masculinity, and violence in Northern Ireland. Men and
Masculinities, 1(3), 284-301.

Becker, H. S., & McCall, M. M. (1990). Symbolic interaction and cultural studies.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Benton, T., & Craib, I. (2001). Feminism, knowledge and society. In T. Benton & I.
Craib (Eds), Philosophy of social science: the philosophical foundations of social
thought (pp. 140-159). New York: Palgrave.

Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (4th ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Billings, A. C., & Eastman, S. T. (2000). Selective representation of gender, ethnicity,

and nationality in American television coverage of the 2000 Summer Olympics.
International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 3 7(3-4), 351-370.

246

Birrell, S., & Cole, C. L. (1994). Women, sport, and culture. Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics.

Blumer, H. (1962). Society as symbolic interaction. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human
behavior and social processes; an interactionist approach (pp. xv, 680 p.).
Boston,: Houghton Mifﬂin.

Bourdieu, P. (2001). Masculine Domination (R. Nice, Trans). Stanford, California:
Stanford University Press.

Brown, C. (2004). Injuries: The Psychology of Recovery and Rehab. In S. Murphy (Ed.),
The sport psych handbook. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Caillois, R. (1961). Man, play, and games. [New York]: Free Press of Glencoe.

Carlson, T. B. (1995). We hate gym: Student alienation from physical education. Journal
of Teaching in Physical Education, 14, 467-477.

Carron, A. V., Hausenblas, H. A., & Mack, D. (1996). Social inﬂuence and exercise: a
meta-analysis. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 18, 1-16.

Casper, M. J ., & Moore, L. J. (1995). Inscribing bodies, inscribing the future: gender, sex,
and reproduction in outer space. Sociological Perspectives, 38(2), 11-33.

Chen, A. S. (1999). Lives at the center of the periphery, lives at the periphery of the
center: Chinese American masculinities and bargaining with hegemony. . Gender
and Society, 13(5), 584-607.

Clark, H., & Schober, M. (1992). Asking questions and inﬂuencing answers. In J. M.
Tanur & Social Science Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Cognition. (Eds),
Questions about questions .' inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 15-
43). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Clasen, P. (2001). The female athlete: dualism and paradox in practice. Women and
Language, 24(2), 36-41.

Coakley, J. J. (2004). Sports in society : issues and controversies (8th ed.). Boston:
McGraw-Hill.

COBUILD (Information retrieval system), University of Birmingham. Dept. of English,
& Collins Publishers. (1987). Collins COBUILD (Collins Birmingham University
International Language Database) English language dictionary. London: Collins.

Cohen, J ., & Cohen, J. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the
behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

247

Collins, P. H. (1991). Black feminist thought .' knowledge, consciousness, and the politics
of empowerment. New York: Routledge.

Connell, R. W. (1990). An iron man: the body and some contradictions of hegemonic
masculinity. In M. A. Messner & D. F. Sabo (Eds), Sport, men, and the gender
order: critical feminist perspectives. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Connell, R. W. (2000). The men and the boys. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Conniff, R (1996). A new day for women's sports. The Progressive, 60(9), 11.

Cox, 3., & Thompson, S. (2000). Multiple bodies: sportswomen, soccer, and sexuality.
International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 35(1), 5-20.

Crapanzano, V. (1986). Hermes' dilemma: the masking of subversion in ethnographic
description. In J. Clifford & G. E. Marcus (Eds), Writing culture: the poetics and
politics of ethnography (pp. 51-76). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Crosset, T., & Beal, B. (1997). The use of "subculture" and "subworld" in ethnographic
works on sport: a discussion of deﬁnitional distinctions. Sociology of Sport
Journal, 14, 73-85.

Daddario, G. (1997). Gendered sports programming: 1992 summer Olympic coverage
and the feminine narrative form. Sociology of Sport Journal, 14, 103-120.

DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development .' theory and applications (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, Inc.

Donnelly, P., & Young, K. (2001). The construction and conﬁrmation of identity in sport
subcultures. In A. Yiannakis & M. J. Melnick (Eds), Contemporary issues in
sociology of sport (pp. 399-411). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Dotson, C. 0., & Stanley, W. J. (1972). Values of physical activity perceived by male
university students. Research Quarterly, 43, 14 8-156.

Drummond, M. J. N. (2002). Sport and images of masculinity: the meaning of
relationships in the life course of "elite" male athletes. Journal of Men’s Studies,
I 0(2), 129-142. .

Duan, C. (1985). A study of attitudes towards physical activity among secondary school
students in Beijing, China. International Review for Sociology of Sport, 20(4).

Duquin, M. E. (1989). Fashion and ﬁtness: images in women's magazine Advertisements.
Arena Review, 13(2), 97-109.

248

Eccles, J. S. (2005). Family socialization, gender, and sport motivation and involvement.
Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 27(1), 3-31.

Eitzen, D. S. (1999). Fair and foul: beyond the myths and paradoxes of sport. Lanham,
Md.: Rowman & Littleﬁeld Publishers.

Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic ﬁeldnotes.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock &
American Educational Research Association. (Eds), Handbook of research on
teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-122). New York: Macmillan.

Erickson, F ., & Gutierrez, K. (2002). Culture, rigor, and science in educational research.
Educational Researcher, 31 (8), 21-23 .

Foley, D. E. (1990). The great American football ritual: reproducing race, class, and
gender inequality. Sociology of Sport Journal, 7, 1 1 1 - 1 3 5.

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish : the birth of the prison (lst American ed.).
New York: Pantheon Books.

Frey, J. H. (1991). Social risk and the meaning of sport. Sociology of Sport Journal, 8,
1 3 1 - 1 4 5.

Geertz, C. (1975). Thick description: toward an interpretive theory of culture. In C.
Geertz (Ed.), The interpretation of cultures (pp. 5- 10). New York: Basic Books.

Goffman, E. (1990). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York [N.Y.]:
Doubleday.

Grant, J. (1993). Fundamental feminism : contesting the core concepts of feminist theory.
New York: Routledge.

Greendorfter, S. L. (1993). Gender role stereotypes and early child socialization. In G. L.
Cohen (Ed.), Women in sport .' issues and controversies (2nd ed., pp. 3-14).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Grooves, R. M., & Singer, E. (2004). Survey methodology. In J. S. House (Ed.), A
telescope on society .' survey research and social science at the University of

Michigan and beyond (pp. 21-64). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Gudykunst, W. B. (2001). Asian American ethnicity and communication. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publication.

Habermas, J. (1975). Legitimation crisis. Boston: Beacon Press.

249

Haenﬂer, R. (2004). Manhood in contradiction: the two faces of straight edge. Men and
Masculinities, 7(1), 77-99.

Hall, M. A. (1990). How should we theorize gender in sport? In M. A. Messner & D. F.
Sabo (Eds), Sport, men, and the gender order : critical feminist perspectives (pp.
223-239). Champaign, 111.: Human Kinetics Books.

Hall, M. A. (1996). Feminism and sporting bodies : essays on theory and practice.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Hall, M. A., & Smith, Y. R. (1998, Winter). Homophobia and racism in NASSS. The
North American Society for Sociology of Sport Newsletter, 7-9.

Harris, J ., & Clayton, B. (2002). Femininity, masculinity, physicality and the English
tabloid press: the case of Anna Kournikova. International Review for the
Sociology of Sport, 3 7(3-4), 397-413.

Harvey, D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity .' an enquiry into the origins of
cultural change. [Oxford, England ; New York, NY, USA]: Blackwell.

Hasbrook, C. A., & Harris, 0. (1999). Wrestling with gender: physicality and
masculinities among inner-city ﬁrst and second graders. Men and Masculinity,
1(3), 302-318.

Henderson, M. (1999). Some tales of two mags: sports magazines as glossy Reservoirs of
male fantasy. Journal of A ustralian Studies, 62, 64-75.

Hendry, L. B. (1975). Personality and movement: a university study. Journal of Human
Movement Studies, I, 19-23.

Hofstede, G. (1979). Value systems in forty countries. In International Association for
Cross-Cultural Psychology, L. H. Eckensberger, W. J. Lonner & Y. Poortinga
(Eds), Cross-cultural contributions to psychology .' selected papers from the
fourth International Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural
Psychology, held at Munich, Federal Republic of Germany, July 28-A ugust 5,
I978. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Horn, T. S. (2002). Advances in sport psychology. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Publishers.

House, J. S. (2004). Survey research and social science: retrospect and prospect. In J. S.
House (Ed.), A telescope on society .' survey research and social science at the
University of Michigan and beyond (pp. 439-454). Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press.

250

 

Howe, K., & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: a
prolegomenon. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2-9.

Jacoby, J., & Matell, M. S. (1971). Three-point scale are good enough. Journal of
Marketing Research, 8, 495-500.

John, O. R., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2000). Measurement: reliability, construct validation,
and scale construction. In H. Reiss & C. Judd (Eds), Handbook of research
methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 339-369). New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Keller, T. (2005). Linemen size continues to grow despite added health problems. The
State News.

Kenyon, G. S. (1968). A conceptual model for characterizing physical activity. The
Research Quarterly, 39(1), 96-105.

Kidd, B. (1987). Sports and masculinity. In M. Kaufman (Ed.), Beyond partriarchy (pp.
250-261). Toronto: Oxford UP.

Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York:
Guilford Press.

Knoke, D. (2005). Structural equation models. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia
of social measurement (V 01. 3, pp. 689-695). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

Kvale, S. (1994). Ten standard objections to qualitative research interviews. Journal of
Phenomenological Psychology, 25(2), 147-173.

Laberge, G., & Albert, M. (1999). Conceptions of masculinity and gender transgressions
in sport among adolescent boys: hegemony, contestation, and the social dynamic.
In M. A. McKay, M. A. Messner & D. F. Sabo (Eds), Masculinities, gender
relations, and sport. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage Publications.

Lather, P. (2002). Validity as an incitement to discourse: qualitative research and the
crisis of legitimation. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching
(pp. 241-258). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Levant, R. F., & Fischer, J. (1998). The male role norm inventory. In C. M. Davis, W. L.
Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer & S. L. Davis (Eds), Handbook of sexuality-
related measures (pp. 469-472). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Levant, R. F., & Kopecky, G. (1995). Masculinity reconstructed .° changing the rules of
manhood- at work, in relationships and in family life. New York N.Y.: Dutton.

251

Lippe, G. v. d. (2002a). Media image: sport, gender and national identities in ﬁve
European countries. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 3 7(3-4),
371-395.

Lippe, G. v. d. (2002b). Media image: sport, gender and national identities in ﬁve
European countries. International Review for Sociology of Sport, 3 7(3-4), 371-
395.

Lock, M. (1997). Decentering the natural body: making difference matter. Configurations,
5(2), 267-292.

Lunney, G. H. (1970). Using analysis of variance with a dichotomous dependent variable:
an empirical study. Journal of Education Measurement, 7, 263-269.

Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1978). The psychology of sex diﬂerences. Stanford,
Calif: Stanford University Press.

MacQueen, K. (2003). Boy vs. Girl. Macleans, 116(21), 26-32.

McCabe, M. P., & Ricciardelli, L. A. (2003). Sociocultural inﬂuences on body image and

body changes among adolescent boys and girls. The Journal of Social Psychology,
143(1), 5-26.

McPherson, B. D., & Yuhasz, M. S. (1968). An inventory for assessing men's attitudes
toward exercise and physical activity. The Research Quarterly, 39(1), 218-220.

Menneson, C. (2000). 'Hard' women and 'Soft' women: the social construction of

identities among female boxers. International Review for the Sociology of Sport,
35(1), 21-33.

Messner, M. A. (2001). Power at play: sports and the problem of masculinity. Boston:
Beacon.

Messner, M. A., & Sabo, D. F. (1990). Sport, men, and the gender order: critical
feminist perspectives. Champaign, IL.: Human Kinetics Books.

Miller, D. C., & Salkind, N. J. (2002). Handbook of research design & social
measurement (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Miller, D. M. (1992). Female-selective abortion in Asia: patterns, politics, and debates.
American Anthropologist, 103(4), 1830-1095.

Miller, K. E., Sabo, D. F ., Farrell, M. P., Barnes, G. M., & Melnick, M. J. (1999). Sport,
sexual behavior, contraceptive use, Pregnancy among female and male high

school students: testing cultural resource theory. Sociology of Sport Journal, I 6,
366-387.

252

Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York,: Oxford University Press.

Mize, M. (1979). Attitude toward physical activity as function of sex role orientation.
Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Southern Illinois University.

Motl, R. W., Dishman, R. K., Saunders, R. P., Dowda, M., & Pate, R. R. (2004).
Measuring social provisions for physical activity among adelescent black and
white girls. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(4), 682-706.

Mullins, M. (1969). Attitude toward multidimensional physical activity as a function of
race, sex, and socio-economic level. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Florida
State University.

Mullis, R. L. (1999). Attachment and social support among adolescents. The Journal of
Genetic Psychology, 160(4), 500-502.

National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2004). 2002-2003 NCAA gender-equity report
Indianapolis, IN: The National College Athletic Association.

National Sport Goods Association. (2004). 2004 women's particiapation - ranked by
median age - male & female. The National Sport Goods Association, from
http://www.nsga.org/public/pages/index.cfm?pageid=864

Neale, D. C., Sonstroem, R. J ., & Metz, K. F. (1969). Physical ﬁtness, self-esteem, and
attitudes toward physical activity. The Research Quarterly, 40(4), 743-749.

Newkirk, T. (2002). Misreading masculinity .' boys, literacy, and popular culture.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Nixon, H. L., 11. (1991). Sport sociology that matters: imperatives and challengers for the
1990s Sociology of Sport Journal, 8, 2 8 1 -2 94.

O'Bryan, M. H., & O'Bryan, K. G. (1969). Attitudes of males toward selected aspects of
physical education. The Research Quarterly, 40(2), 343-352.

Pappas, N. T., MaKenry, P. C., & Catlett, B. S. (2004). Athlete aggression on the rink
and off the ice: athlete violence and aggression in hockey and interpersonal

relationships. Men and Masculinities, 6(3), 291-312.

Parsons, T. (1965). Theories of society; foundations of modern sociological theory. New
York,: Free Press.

Parsons, T. (1971). The system of modern societies. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,: Prentice-
Hall.

253

 

Peabody, D. (1962). Two components in bipolar scales: direction and extremeness.
Psychological Review, 69, 65-73.

Peshkin, A. (1982). The researcher and subjectivity: reﬂections on an ethnography of
school and community. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Doing the ethnography of schooling:
educational anthropology in action (pp. 48-67). New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.

Petlichkoff, L. M. (1992). Youth sport participation and withdrawal: it it simply a matter
of fun? . Pediatric Exercise Science, 4(2), 105-110.

Ramsay, A. (2000). The Frankfurt School. In H. Andersen & L. B. Kaspersen (Eds),
Classical and modern social theory (pp. 142-159). Malden, Mass: Blackwell
Publishers.

Robertson, S. (2003). 'If I let a goal in, I'll get beat up': contradictions in masculinity,
sport and health. Health Education Research, 18(6), 706-716.

Rubin, L. B. (1994). Families on the fault line .' America 's working class speaks about the
family, the economy, race, and ethnicity (1 st ed.). New York: Harper Collins.

Sabo, D., Jansen, S. C., Tate, D., Duncan, M. C., & Leggett, S. (1996). Televising
international sport: race, ethnicity, and nationalistic bias. Journal of Sport and
Social Issues, 21 , 7-21.

Scanlan, T. K., & Lewthwaite, R. (1986). Social psychological aspects of competition for
male youth sport participant: IV. Predictictors of enjoyment. Journal of Sport &
Exercise Psychology, 8(1), 25-35.

Sharrock, W. W., Hughes, J. A., & Martin, P. J. (2003). Understanding modern sociology.
London: SAGE.

Sheridan, A. (1980). Michel Foucault .' the will to truth. London ; New York: Tavistock
Publications.

Shin, E. H., & Nam, E. A. (2004). Culture, gender roles, and sport: the case of Korean
players on the LPGA Tour. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 28(3), 223-244.

Sjoberg, G., & Nett, R (1968). Selection of units and sources of data. In G. Sjoberg & R.
Nett (Eds), A methodology for social research (pp. 129-147). New York,: Harper
& Row.

Smith, Y. R. (1992). Women of color in society and sport. Quest, 44(2), 228-250.

Smith, Y. R (2000). Sociohistorical inﬂuences on Aﬁican American elite sportswomen.
In D. D. Brooks & R. C. Althouse (Eds), Racism in college athletics : the African

254

American athlete 's experience (2nd ed., pp. 173—197). Morgantown, WV: Fitness
Information Technology.

Snow, D. A., & Oliver, P. E. (1994a). Social movements and collective behavior: social
psychological dimensions and considerations. In K. Cook, G. Fire & J. House
(Eds), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 571-599). Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.

Snow, D. A., & Oliver, P. E. (1994b). Social movements and collective behavior: social
psychological dimensions and considerations. In K. Cook, G. Fire & J. House
(Eds), Sociological perspectives on social pychology (pp. 571-599). Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.

Sowti, N. (2004). Distorted male image. Retrieved 03/15/2005, 2005, from
http://www.ucfnews.com/news/2004/ 1 1/1 l/News/Distoned.Male.Image-
801593.5html

Tourangeu, R (1999). Context effects on answers to attitude questions. In M. Sirken, D. J.
Hemnann, S. Schechter, N. Schwarz, J. M. Tanur & R. Tourangeu (Eds),
Cognition and survey research (pp. 111-131): John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Trujillio, N. (2001). Machines, missiles, and men: images of the male body on ABC's
Monday Night Football. In A. Yiannakis & J. Merrill (Eds), Contemporary issues
in sociology of sport (pp. 219-222). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Turner, J. H., & Turner, P. R. (1998). The structure of sociological theory (6th ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub. Co.

Venter, A., & Maxwell, 8. E. (2000). Issues in the use and application of multiple
regression analysis. In H. E. A. Tinsley & S. D. Brown (Eds), Handbook of
application of multiple regression analysis (pp. 151-182). San Diego: Academic
Press.

Vincent, M. F. (1967). Attitudes toward physical education. The Research Quarterly,
38(1), 126-131.

Vinokur, A. D. (2005). Structural equation modeling (SEM). In S. J. Best & B. Radcliff
(Eds), Polling America .° an encyclopedia of public opinion (pp. 2 v. (xxi, 927
p.)). Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.

Waters, M. (1994). Modern sociological theory. London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage
Publications.

Wedgwood, N. (2004). Kicking like a boy: schoolgirl Australian Rules football and bi-
gendered female embodiment. Sociology of Sport Journal, 21, 140- 162.

255

 

Weiss, 0. (1996). Media sports as a social substitution pseudosocial relations with sports
ﬁgures. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 31(1), 109-118.

Wilkins, L. D. (1974). Attitudes of Smith College women toward physical activity related
to their level of participation in competitive sports. Unpublished a master degree
thesis, Smith College.

Williams, R. (1980). Ideas of nature. In Problems in materialism and culture .° selected
essays (pp. 67-85). London: Verso.

Worell, J. (2001). Encyclopedia of women and gender : sex similarities and diﬂerences
and the impact of society on gender. San Diego, Calif. London: Academic.

256

(Robertson, 2003; Sheridan, 1980) (cai'lois’ 1961;K°"y°"’1968;S°Mi-‘ 2004) (Becker&

McCall, 1990; Benton & Craib, 2001; Billings & Eastman, 2000; Bourdieu, 2001;
Brown, 2004; Carron, Hausenblas, & Mack, 1996; Crosset & Beal, 1997; Foucault,
1977; Gudykunst, 2001; Lock, 1997; Menneson, 2000; Mullis, 1999; Rubin, 1994;
Sabo, Jansen, Tate, Duncan, & Leggett, 1996; Shin & Nam, 2004; Snow & Oliver,
1994a; Weiss, 1996; Williams, 1980) (COBUILD (lnformation retrieval system).

University ofBirmingham. Dept. of English, & Collins Publishers. 1987, p. 72).“(Grooves
& Singer. 2004; Ramsay, 2000)

257

   

aljlniijiijjljiiiii