Sport and Sacred Umbrellas On Campus

THESIS: There is no organic connection between religion and sport in modern society, but college athletes who are
members of groups that theologically and organizationally support a connection between athletic competition and religious life will have the highest levels of religiosity and spirituality among college students.
Sport and Sacred Umbrellas on Campus: The Religiosity and Spirituality of College Athletes
avid !amane Teresa "la#e $a#e %orest &niversity
ABSTRACT espite the visible public connection between religion and sport, surprisingly few researchers have investigated the social patterning of the relationship between athletic participation and religiosity. 'fter outlining a series of arguments that suggest a connection between religion and sport, we test relevant hypotheses using nationally representative data on 'merican college students. 's e(pected, we find no positive relationship between participation in college athletics and either personal religiosity or spirituality. In fact, in the full models there is a slight negative relationship, suggesting that athletic participation among college students may be a secular competitor to religious participation. Significantly, one group The implications of these findings are discussed in terms of future wor# on the connection between religion and sport, as well as broader issues in the sociology of religion such as secularization, subcultural identity theory, and voluntarism.
THESIS: There is no organic connection between religion and sport in modern society, but college athletes who are members of groups that theologically and organizationally support a connection between athletic competition and religious life will have the highest levels of religiosity and spirituality among college students.
The connection between religion and sport is regularly and prominently displayed in 'merican society. E(amples abound, particularly on college campuses. uring almost every post*game interview, the &niversity of %lorida+s star ,uarterbac# Tim Tebow than#s -my .ord and savior /esus 0hrist for everything he+s done for me1 23einin# 45567. Having won the 4556 Heisman Trophy as a sophomore, he declined to be considered for 8layboy magazine+s 4559 preseason 'll*'merican team due to his devout "aptist beliefs 2:urphy 45597. Tebow is ;ust one of many college athletes who openly display their religious beliefs both on and off the field. 'cross the country, you can see a baseball player ma#ing the sign of the cross before stepping into the batter+s bo(, a bas#etball player pointing toward Heaven after sin#ing a three pointer, a field hoc#ey player #neeling in silent prayer before the push bac#, and so on. <ff the field, college athletes offer their witness at local churches, team chaplains organize "ible studies and prayer groups for players, sports*based campus ministries sponsor meetings of 0hristian athletes, and so on. espite the prominence of these demonstrations, the intersection of religion and sport has not received much attention from either sociologists of religion or sociologists of sport. Those that have studied religion and sport offer some e(planations for a connection between the two realms. <ne line of thin#ing connects the values of modern sports = such as success, self* discipline, and hard wor# = to religious values, in particular the 8rotestant Ethic 2:athisen 455>7. The -elective affinity1 :a( $eber 2)?@97 saw between the 8rotestant Ethic and the spirit of modern capitalism can be seen between religion and sport as well. <verman 2)??67, for e(ample, sees the ethos of modern sports as being the secular legacy of the 8rotestant ethic. ' second approach to understanding the connection between religion and sports focuses on the ameliorative or supportive role religion plays in the lives of athletes. %or e(ample, some 4
studies suggest that it is common for athletes to see# comfort in a supreme being when facing challenges presented to them by their sport, especially in;ury 2Hoffman )??4A Storch and %arber 45547. 3eligion can also be used by athletes to cope with or reduce the uncertainty inherent in sporting competition. "y relating their sporting activities to their ultimate conditions of e(istence, athletes can also give higher meaning to competition or reduce the significance of sporting outcomes by seeing them in a broader conte(t 20oa#ley 45567. ' third line of thin#ing e(amines sport itself as a form of spirituality 2Hoffman )??47. 3ather than cultivating conventional religious beliefs and practices, some athletes see their athletic endeavors as spiritual practice which can lead to profound e(periences of transcendence. This is e(pressed in the -runner+s high1 or the distance runner+s e(perience of -tipping1 or other athletes claiming to be -in the zone.1 $arren Bay 245567, an avid runner and chair of the department of religious and theological studies at :errimac# 0ollege has written a boo# on the spirituality of running. Sanford 245567 has argued that whitewater #aya#ing is a form of religious e(perience seen by participants through the lens of Hindu devotionalism. Even if they do not see athletic performance in itself as spiritual, however, the pea# or -flow1 e(periences some athletes have while participating in sports 2/ac#son C 0si#szentmihalyi )???7 may sensitize them to the spiritual dimension of life in general. Each of these three approaches to the study of religion and sport offer plausible e(planations for high profile religious displays in the contemporary sporting scene, including Tim Tebow+s. "ut for the most part, the connections between religion and sport in these previous wor#s have only been asserted and not empirically established, at least not using strong samples. In one of the only systematic studies of this topic to date, Storch, et al. 2455D7 compared @6 intercollegiate athletes and )>? non*athlete undergraduates at the &niversity of %lorida. &sing E
the Santa 0lara Strength of 3eligious %aith Short %orm, they found that athletes had higher levels of religious faith. The ,uestions in this instrument, however, are slightly biased toward conventional religiosity, such as -I pray daily1 and -I consider myself active in my faith or church.1 This study is important because it demonstrates the strength of religious beliefs among college athletes compared to other college students, albeit on a small scale 2see also Belley, et al. )??57. The findings beg for more systematic empirical investigation on a larger, more generalizable sample. In this paper, we analyze nationally representative data on college students to address several ,uestions. Is there an organic connection between religion and sport that leads to these displaysF 're college athletes in general more religious than college students in generalF <r are there more specific connections being forged between particular types of student athletes and religious beliefs and behaviorsF $e argue that there is no organic connection between religion and sport today, but find that college athletes who are members of groups that theologically and organizationally support a connection between athletic competition and religious life will have the highest levels of religiosity and spirituality among college students.
FROM SACR ! CA"O#$ S TO SACR ! UMBR %%AS The vast amount of religious activity we see in and around sports today can obscure from view the long term trend toward the secularization of sport. "ut, in fact, secularism is a #ey characteristic that distinguishes modern sports from ancient athletics 2Guttmann )?697. Secularism particularly concerns the changing purpose of modern sports. %rom the beginning of time, humans aimed at pleasing the gods through ceremonies, dancing, and athletic activity. <riginally athletic competitions were fundamentally religious enterprises, meant to show special D
talents to the gods, e(press than#s to gods, or implore the gods to certain beneficent actions such as assuring the earth+s fertility 2Guttmann )?69:)97. In the western world, athletics began to ta#e a more secular approach with the 3omans. Entertainment became their principal purpose, not religious e(pression. 3oman athletes focused on fighting, such as in gladiator contests, and often pitted the lower classes against each other as entertainment for the elites. Hictory usually allowed the competitor to survive, and was therefore emphasized over simply participating 2Guttmann )?697. :odern sports, although not as e(treme, have ta#en a more 3oman approach in their secularism. 'ccording to Bliever 2455):DE7, this movement parallels the general pattern of societal*level secularization under which religion -has lost effective control over vast areas of cultural life that were once conducted under its watchful eye.1 's with other institutional spheres li#e science and the arts, politics and economics, health care and social welfare, sport -operates under its own rules and pursues its own ends1 2Bliever 455):DE7. In other words, the -sacred canopy,1 about which 8eter "erger 2)?>67 has famously written, no longer creates a common world of meaning binding on all members of a society and therefore does not fulfill its historic tas# of integration and legitimation of all sectors of society and culture. It follows from this that there is no organic connection between participation in sports and religiosity. To the contrary, there are ways in which sport is a ma;or secular competitor with religion in contemporary society. The obvious parallels between -the 8rotestant ethic1 and the ethos of modern sports discussed above notwithstanding, there are also important differences between traditional religious values and the values of modern sports. 's Hoffman 2)???7 has argued, the religious emphasis on humility, cooperation, and concern for the other is ,uite in conflict with the fre,uent emphasis in sports on self*aggrandizement, winning, individual @
records, and the li#e. %or e(ample, especially where -big time1 college athletics are concerned, 'dler and 'dler 2)??)7 have documented the development of what they call a -gloried self1 among athletes, which is a far cry from the asceticism that characterized the early 8rotestant ethic. So too is the reality that the culture of random se(ual -hoo# ups,1 drin#ing, and partying e(ists strongly in the athlete subculture at many universities 20herry, et al. 455): 4?7. Thus, although modern values li#e those of sports may have their roots in religious values, once established they come to e(ist independently, and once independent they can often turn against the values from which they grew.) Sport is not only a secular competitor to religion at the level of values, but at a practical level, as well. 8eople have a limited amount of time and energy, so devotion to wor# or religion or family or sports can be a zero*sum game: the more that is invested in one, the less that can be invested in another. In their study of 'merican teenagers, Smith and enton 2455@:)E57 found that religion was not part of the structure of most &.S. adolescents+ daily lives, the bul# of which is given over to school, homewor#, clubs, friends, and sports. This is particularly true of athletes at higher levels of competition. 8ilot interviews we have conducted with student*athletes at an I0'' ivision I university suggest that a common point at which they became disengaged with religion was when their athletic competitions re,uired them to travel and compete on wee#ends.
)
The spirit of modern sports, then, is a#in to the spirit of modern capitalism that $eber lamented. $eber 2)?@9:)957 noted that -the essential elements of the attitude which was there called the spirit of capitalism are the same as what we have ;ust shown to be the content of the 8uritan worldly asceticism, only without the religious basis, which . . . had died away.1 The conse,uence of this loss of its religious basis was, for $eber 2)?@9:)9)7, profound: The 8uritan wanted to wor# in a callingA we are forced to do so. %or when asceticism was carried out of monastic cells into everyday life, and began to dominate worldly morality, it did its part in building the tremendous cosmos of the modern economic order. This order is now bound to the technical and economic conditions of machine production which to*day determine the lives of all the individuals who are born into its mechanism, not only those directly concerned with economic ac,uisition, with irresistible force. 8erhaps it will so determine them until the last ton of fossilized coal is burnt. In "a(ter+s view the care for e(ternal goods should only lie on the shoulders of the -saint li#e a light cloa#, which can be thrown aside at any moment.1 "ut fate decreed that the cloa# should become an iron cage.
>
$hen student*athletes arrive at college, the re,uired level of commitment to sport is even greater. "ecause athletes spend hours at practice, conditioning, traveling to games, and studying, they do not have free time to dedicate to religion and spirituality 20herry, et al. 455)7. %or college athletes, sport is more a#in to wor# than leisure, and therefore along with their classes it is part of their -mandatory1 world. In contrast, religion is seen as -voluntary1 and hence, when push comes to shove, optional. The modernization of sports, therefore, entails a certain degree of institutional secularization and creates a situation in which sport becomes a secular competitor with religion in terms of values and resources. That said, the disintegration of a sacred canopy and this secular competition does not mean that religion itself has died or will die in the course of societal modernization 20asanova )??D7. Indeed, many scholars are turning away from the idea that -acids of modernity1 dissolve religion, toward a view that there are -multiple modernities1 with differing implications for religion, both between and within societies. 'mong sociologists of religion, 0hristian Smith 24559:)@6)7: has articulated this view most clearly: -The essential idea behind the multiple modernities thesis is that Jmodernity+ and its features and forces can actually be received, developed, and e(pressed in significantly different ways . . . by different communities living in single societies.1 This suggests that, even in the absence of an institutional connection between religion and sport, there may be specific groups of people in 'merican who do integrate religion and sport. In attempting to identify the groups for whom a connection may be cultivated, we turn to Smith+s subcultural identity theory of religious strength. This theory suggests that, -3eligion survives and can thrive in pluralistic, modern society by embedding itself in subcultures that offer satisfying morally orienting collective identities which provide adherents with meaning and 6
belonging1 2Smith, et al. )??9:))97. Therefore, under certain circumstances, some religious groups can construct -sacred umbrellas1 to shield members from the forces of secularization and promote religiosity:
In the pluralistic, modern world, people don+t need macro*encompassing sacred cosmoses to maintain their religious beliefs. They only need -sacred umbrellas,1 small, portable, accessible relational worlds = religious reference groups = -under1 which their beliefs can ma#e complete sense. 2Smith, et al. )??9:)5>7
Smith argues that evangelical 8rotestants have been most successful in contemporary 'merican society in constructing sacred umbrellas because they cultivate a sense of embattlement which strengthens their identification with religious tradition. Historically at least, 3oman 0atholics have also had a highly distinctive subcultural identity in 'merica. In the following sections, therefore, we will e(amine evangelical 8rotestants+ sacred umbrellas in relation to sport and consider whether the -0atholic imagination1 can serve as a sacred umbrella for 3oman 0atholics in the same way. Ie(t, we pose several hypotheses about the relationship between participation in athletics and religiosityKspirituality based on the e(isting literature and Smith+s subcultural identity theory, and test those hypotheses using nationally representative data on 'merican college students.
MUSCU%AR C&R$ST$A"$T' A"! (A") %$CA% SACR ! UMBR %%AS The idea of -muscular 0hristianity,1 a 0hristian commitment to health and manliness, can be found in sections of the Iew Testament, but the term was not coined until the mid*)955s. 9
Indeed, many 8uritans were suspicious of sports for moral reasons. .i#e dancing, playing games was considered sinful, as idle wastes of time that could be better spent wor#ing or worshipping. Eventually, even these 8rotestant sects came to embrace sports, in part through the ideology of :uscular 0hristianity. 3eligious leaders that supported connecting religion and sport promoted the idea of the -body as a temple,1 in which a sound mind and body became essential in worship. The term -:uscular 0hristianity1 was coined by the press to describe the wor# of authors 0harles Bingsley and Thomas Hughes. Their -adventure novels replete with high principles and manly 0hristian heroes,1 spar#ed a discovery of the social benefits of athleticism, -chief among these was its ability to ameliorate English class differences1 28utney 455):)4,)E7. :uscular 0hristianity placed an emphasis on fellowship, honor, and service while teaching -English boys that one can be the best loo#ing, best playing, and most popular, and still be humble1 2$illiam :cBeever, ,uoted in 8utney 455):)@7. Its main focus was to address the concerns of boys directly, not abstractly, so that they could apply religion to their lives. The idea did not catch on ,uic#ly in 'merica, but over time has become one of the most notable tools employed in evangelical 8rotestant outreach ministries. "uilding on the idea of muscular 0hristianity, evangelical 8rotestantism is most publicly visible on college campuses today through intercollegiate athletics, and particularly the student ministries that e(ist specifically for athletes 20herry et al. 455):467. The %ellowship of 0hristian 'thletes 2%0'7 opened its doors in Iovember )?@D in Iorman, <#lahoma 2.add and :athisen )???:)E57. It began as a student*athlete 0hristian ministry and grew into an organization of summer camps and retreats to promote 0hristian ideals among high school and collegiate athletes. Similar to %0', 0ampus 0rusades began in )?@) on the campus of &0.'. Its founder, "ill "right, envisioned a more evangelical 0hristian ministry that he hoped would travel the ?
world and preach the gospel through sports. 0ampus 0rusades+ mission of fielding teams to preach the gospel around the world became the focal point of their offspring group, 'thletes in 'ction 2'I'7, founded in )?>>. Today, 'I' has a ministry presence in 9@ countries, on nearly )55 &.S. college campuses, and on E@ &.S. professional sports teams.4 They field summer teams in baseball, bas#etball, soccer, tennis, volleyball, wrestling, trac# and field, power lifting, and sports medicine to bring the 0hristian Gospel message and personal testimonies of 0hristian athletes all around the world. The theology of muscular 0hristianity, realized in part through student ministries targeted directly to student*athletes, should create a sacred umbrella for evangelical 8rotestant student* athletes, shielding them from the forces of secularization that affect sport generally and fostering for them a connection between their athletic endeavors and their religious and spiritual lives.
A CAT&O%$C SACR ! UMBR %%A FOR S#ORTS* 't first blush, 3oman 0atholics in 'merica would seem to have many ,ualities that would ma#e them similar to evangelical 8rotestants in terms of cultivating -sacred umbrellas1 and lin#ing religion and sport. 0atholics are historically an embattled minority in the &nited States, with a distinctive theological outloo#, and separate institutional structures created to shelter and promote the faith and the faithful. Historically, 0atholics have been an embattled religious minority in the &nited States, facing a range of anti*0atholic sentiments, from simple pre;udice to violent discrimination 2:assa 455EA /en#ins 455E7. This was reinforced by 0atholics+ social isolation, particularly with
4
About athletes in action. 3etrieved 45 <ctober 4556. Lwww.aia.comKaboutM.
)5
the massive waves of immigration from 0atholic countries in Europe li#e Ireland, Italy, and 8oland. 's Smith+s subcultural identity theory would predict, this sense of hostility from the wider society promoted a strong sense of in*group identification among 0atholics. )%or many, the decade following the end of the Second $orld $ar is remembered as the -Golden 'ge1 of 'merican 0atholicism. The 0hurch was institutionally strong and 0atholics were culturally confident. ' large and growing corps of priests 2some DE,5557 and religious sisters 2nearly )@5,5557 served increasing numbers of parishes, parochial grade schools, high schools, and colleges. evotional societies, lay fraternities and sororities, 0atholic !outh <rganization sports, and the li#e made parishes centers of activity in every neighborhood. $hat 'ndrew Greeley 245557 has called the -0atholic imagination1 animated these institutions. The 0atholic 2or analogical, following theologian avid Tracy N)?9)O7 imagination is an orientation which views God as being a real and positive force enchanting the world, including seemingly mundane ob;ects and activities. Thus, although muscular 0hristianity is not part of the 3oman 0atholic theological le(icon, the 0atholic -0atholic imagination1 could suggest a similarly positive attitude toward athletic competition. To wit: ;ust prior to his death, 8ope /ohn 8aul II called for 0atholics to evangelize the world of sports and formed The Hatican+s <ffice of 0hurch and Sport to support this endeavor 2Glatz 455D7. .i#e evangelical 8rotestants, 3oman 0atholics have also developed specific institutions that are meant to foster the connection between religion and sport. The 0atholic !outh <rganization is historically the largest and most significant 2cf. /ulie "yrne+s wor#7. :ore recently, 0atholic 'thletes for 0hrist 20'07 = a clear analog to the evangelical 8rotestant
))
'thletes in 'ction = was founded. 'ccording to its mission statement, 0'0 -serves 0atholic athletes in the practice of their faith and shares the Gospel in and through sports.1E These historical and contemporary facts notwithstanding, there are reasons to believe that the connection between religion and sport among lay 0atholics will not be as strong as for evangelical 8rotestants. :ost importantly, the 0atholic subculture which thrived in the &nited States, and arguably pea#ed in the )?@5s, has all but disappeared. In the past half*century, 0atholics have made inroads into the mainstream of 'merican society, evolving from poverty to prosperity economically, from the margins to the middle socially, and from segregation to integration institutionally 2 +'ntonio, et al. 455)7. This resulted in the fraying of the 0atholic sacred umbrella. Thus, although potential e(ists for a 0atholic sacred umbrella for sports, this potential is not realized in contemporary 'merican society.
&'#OT& S S These arguments about the possible relationship between athletic participation and religiosityKspirituality among different groups of people suggest several specific hypotheses to be tested. Sport is a secular competitor to religion, in terms of time and energyA therefore,
H): There will be no positive relationship between participation in college athletics and religiosity. If anything, there will be a negative relationship.
0atholic 'thletes for 0hrist, -'bout &s.1 3etrieved D Iovember 455? Lhttp:KKwww.catholicathletesforchrist.comKaboutus.htmM.
E
)4
<f course, in the contemporary &nited States, it is important to distinguish between religion and spirituality 20imino C .attin 45547. $hereas religion is often associated with inherited tradition and dogmatic beliefs, spirituality is seen as a ,uality of an individual, particularly as relates to his or her personal e(perience. Spirituality is a more primary and pure relationship to the divine than religion 2!amane )??97. Hence, the increasingly common refrain, -I+m spiritual, not religious1 2%uller 455)7. .i#e many young 'mericans, college athletes may re;ect religion and embrace spirituality. Therefore,
H4: If college athletes are going to e(ceed other college students in any way, it will be in terms of spirituality.
The ma;or e(ception will be college athletes who are members of groups that theologically and organizationally support a connection 2i.e., create sacred umbrellas7 between religion and sport:
HE: Evangelical 8rotestant college athletes will have the highest levels of religiosity and spirituality among college students.
'lthough 0atholics historical are in certain way similar to evangelical 8rotestants, the dissolution of a strong 0atholic subculture ma#es them less distinct from the general populationA therefore,
HD: 0atholic college athletes will not differ significantly from college students generally in their levels of religiosity and spirituality. )E
These four hypotheses will be tested with nationally representative data on 'merican college students which allow us to distinguish between those that participate in intercollegiate athletics and those that do not.
!ATA A"! M T&O!O%O)' The data source used for this analysis is the 455E 8ilot of the 0ollege Students+ "eliefs and Halues Survey 20S"H7, conducted by the Higher Education 3esearch Institute at the &niversity of 0alifornia, .os 'ngeles. The 0S"H was given to a subset of students who participated in the 4555 0ooperative Institutional 3esearch 8rogram 20I387 %reshman Survey, which was administered to first*year students at DED colleges and universities. The annual 0I38 %reshman Survey collects data on the beliefs, e(pectations, and attitudes among many other measures of college freshmen, while the 0S"H focused on the spirituality, beliefs, values, and purpose of those same students during their ;unior year of college. The 0S"H pilot survey was administered to students during their third year of college, yielding a sample of E,>95 students from D> colleges and universities across the country. The data was weighted in order to correct for non*response bias and to ma#e the sample representative of all third year students at the D> colleges and universities. The weight also increased the sample size to E?,D@5, the total number of first*time freshmen from the fall of 4555 that were still enrolled at the sample colleges and universities. ' new weight was then applied to
)D
the data and the sample size was maintained by incorporating a deflation factor e,ual to the ration between E,>95 and E?,D@5.D 'fter the weighting was applied, the sample contained students from a diverse assortment of academic institutions, including public and private D*year colleges and universities, religious schools, and institutions that ranged from low to high selectivity. The sample was @E percent female and 9D percent $hiteK0aucasian. The remainder of the racialKethnic brea#down was the following: @ percent "lac#, D percent 'sian, D percent .atino, 4 percent 'merican Indian, and 4 percent other. The current religious preference of the students is: E) percent 0atholic, 4> percent evangelical 8rotestant, 44 percent mainline 8rotestant, 6 percent other religions, and )D percent indicated that they have no religious preference. It is also important to note that 4> percent of the sample indicated that they participated in intercollegiate sports. ' subset of )54 variables fitting the needs of this study was analyzed from the )6@*item survey. These variables were limited mostly to those relating directly to spirituality or religiosity. These spirituality and religiosity variables were combined into indices to use as dependent variables in ordinary least s,uares 2<.S7 regression models. %our indices were created: 2)7 Spirituality, 247 3eligious 0ommitment, 2E7 Salience of 3eligiousKSpiritual "eliefs, and 2D7 SpiritualK3eligious 0hange. These indices were created by scaling together between three and nine related items depending on the specific dependent variable. The validity of each inde( was tested by 0ronbach+s alpha coefficient of reliability, which is the following for each variable: . 9D@ for Spirituality, .9?5 for 3eligious 0ommitment, .?>D for Salience of 3eligiousKSpiritual "eliefs, and .99) for SpiritualK3eligious Growth. The items that went into each scale were
D
Information regarding the weighting and methodology comes from the 0ollege Students+ "eliefs and Halues 8ilot Survey :ethodology 3eport found on the Spirituality in Higher Education website 2http:KKspirituality.ucla.eduKresultsKinde(.html7.
)@
ordinal, and therefore each possible response was given a number representative of the level of commitment, agreement, or change. These values were then scaled together such that higher values on the inde( represent higher levels of spirituality or religiosity. 2See 'ppendi( for specific components of the inde(es.7 <.S regression models were run for each of the four dependent variables. The first model for each regression consisted of the independent variable for college athletes. The second model added some control variables including gender, race, father+s education, mother+s education, and attendance of a religious college or university. The gender variable was recoded so that females had a value of one and everybody else was zero. The dummy variable for race was recoded so that respondents who self*identified as -blac#1 were given the value of one and all others were recoded to be zero. 'frican 'mericans were compared to every other race in this instance because they were the largest minority in the study and in order to maintain simplicity in the recoding of other racesKethnicities. %ather+s education and mother+s education were coded into ordinal variables with eight different levels of education, the higher the number the greater the level of education. %inally, respondents who went to a religiously affiliated college or university were compared to those who did not. The third model included dummy variables for current religious preference, bro#en down into evangelical 8rotestants, 0atholics, other religion, and no religion 2mainline 8rotestant is the reference group7. These categories were created by grouping together specific religions given in the survey with similar belief systems or ideologies. The fourth and final model incorporated a variable for the interaction of participating in intercollegiate athletics and being an evangelical 8rotestant. escriptions of all the independent variables used in the analyses are given in Table ).
)>
**Table ) Goes Here**
R SU%TS Table 4 lists the mean levels of spirituality and religiosity for all students, for intercollegiate athletes, and for non*athletes. Each dependent variable is listed with the range of the inde(, and the means demonstrate the preliminary differences between groups. It is clear from loo#ing at the table that college athletes have lower means for every dependent variable than other college students, with the difference in means being statistically significant for three of the four variables: Spirituality, 3eligious 0ommitment, and Salience of 3eligiousKSpiritual "eliefs. These statistics demonstrate that there is a difference in the overall means for college athletes and other college students, but in a direction opposite of that which many predict. "efore concluding that college athletes are less spiritual and religious than other college students, it is important to further e(plore these relationships through multiple regression, which tells us if the relationships still e(ist when other independent variables are introduced.
**Table 4 Goes Here**
The <.S regression for the first dependent variable, Spirituality, is found in Table E. The first model in this and all of the other analyses contains only one dummy variable, which is set e,ual to ) if the student is a college athlete. This model demonstrates a significant negative relationship between being a college athlete and spirituality. The ad;usted 34 for this model is . 554, meaning that only 5.4 percent of the variation in spirituality is e(plained by the model. This )6
calls for further analysis and the introduction of dummy variables representing certain demographics that are featured in :odel 4. The second model adds dummy variables for being female, being blac#, attending a religious college or university, and father+s and mother+s education e(plains a bit more of the variation in the spirituality inde(, with an ad;usted 34 of . 5D6. This model shows that being female, being blac#, and attending a religiously*affiliated college or university all have positive relationships with spirituality. 0ontrolling for these variables, however, does not change the magnitude or direction of the relationship between participation in intercollegiate athletics and spirituality. The third model incorporates the respondent+s religious preference. :odel E shows that being an evangelical 8rotestant has a significant positive effect on spirituality, whereas being 0atholic has a negative impact, as compared to being a mainline 8rotestant. 8redictably, having no religious preference also has a negative effect. The ad;usted 34 for this model is .496, signifying that a much larger amount of variation in the spirituality inde( can be e(plained by this model than any of the previous models. In :odel E, I note that the coefficient for college athlete remains negative but the magnitude of the effect decreases 2from *5.D9 to *5.E67 when religious preference is introduced into the regression. To further investigate the connection between religious preference, participation in intercollegiate athletics, and spirituality, the fourth and final model run e(plores the relationship between being an evangelical 8rotestant college athlete and spirituality. This interaction variable was included because of the fact that there are multiple student groups on college campuses specifically for athletes who are evangelical 8rotestants. This pi,ued the interest in the possibility of a positive relationship between the two. Such groups do not e(ist for athletes of other religions, therefore this was the only interaction variable included. The results )9
are interesting, the effect being significant and positive, indicating the evangelical 8rotestant college athletes are even more spiritual than other evangelical college students. $hen these students are accounted for in the model, the negative effect of being a college athlete on spirituality is at its highest level of any of the four models 2*5.>57. This shows that college athletes who are evangelical 8rotestants are significantly more spiritual than other students, and college athletes who are not evangelical 8rotestants are even less spiritual than previously shown. The ad;usted 34 for this e,uation is .49?, so the e(planatory power of :odel D is not higher than :odel E, but it does reveal interesting and previously unseen relationships.
**Table E Goes Here**
The second <.S regression e(plores the relationship between the 3eligious 0ommitment inde( and being a college athlete 2see Table D7. This regression contained all of the same models as the previously discussed analysis of Spirituality. The first model shows that being a college athlete has a statistically significant, negative effect on religious commitment. 's with the previous dependent variable, the e(planatory power of this model is wea#, with an ad;usted 34 of ;ust .554. The second model, with demographic dummy variables, shows again that being female, 'frican 'merican, and attending a religiously*affiliated college or university has a statistically significant, positive effect on religious commitment. 's with the spirituality inde(, when controlling for the influence of these variables on religious commitment, the negative effect of participating in intercollegiate athletics is even more pronounced. 'dding measures of religious preference in :odel E shows that being an evangelical 8rotestant has a large positive impact on religious commitment, whereas being 0atholic and <ther 3eligion is negatively )?
correlated, with no religious preference having the greatest negative effect, relative to being a mainline 8rotestant. The coefficient for college athlete in this model remains negative, though is smaller than in :odel 4, suggesting that not accounting for religious preference artificially inflated the estimate. This model has an ad;usted 34 of .ED@, demonstrating a large increase in the amount of variation in religious commitment that can be e(plained by accounting for religious preference. The fourth model again introduces the interaction of college athlete and evangelical 8rotestant. "eing an evangelical 8rotestant college athlete is a significant, positive predictor of religious commitment, and including this interaction variable in the model also made the effect of being a college athlete on religious commitment even more negative and highly significant statistically.
**Table D Goes Here**
' third set of <.S regression models with Salience of 3eligiousKSpiritual "eliefs as the dependent variable is found in Table @. The first model shows a negative relationship between being a college athlete and salience of religious or spiritual beliefs. This coefficient is statistically significant at the .5) level, but the ad;usted 34 for this model is .55), meaning that almost none of the variation within the dependent variable is e(plained ;ust by loo#ing at whether or not a student participates in intercollegiate athletics. ' bit more of the variation in religiousKspiritual salience is e(plained by :odel 4, which adds demographic variables and has an ad;usted 34 of .5@4. 's has been the pattern with other dependent variables, being female, being blac#, and attending a religious college or university all have positive effects on salience on religiousKspiritual beliefs. In :odel E, adding religious preference again greatly increases the 45
e(planatory power of the model 2from an 34 of .5@4 to an 34 of .EE47, and shows once again that evangelical 8rotestants are the only group for which religiousKspiritual beliefs are more salient relative to mainline 8rotestants. :odel D e(plores the effect that being an evangelical 8rotestant college athlete has on the salience of religiousKspiritual beliefs. The coefficient for this interaction variable is statistically significant and positive, demonstrating that evangelical 8rotestant college athletes distinguish themselves from other college students in the salience of religiousKspiritual beliefs to them, and in controlling for this relationship the negative effect of being a college athlete generally on salience is the highest of the four models.
**Table @ Goes Here**
!$SCUSS$O" It was originally thought that intercollegiate athletes were a group of students that were highly spiritual andKor religious, or that they were at least more so than other college students. ' comparison of the means of college athletes and non*athletes demonstrates that athletes scaled lower in all four of the indices created for this study. The multivariate analysis sought to e(plain the differences spiritual and religious beliefs and commitments by introducing a series of control variablesA however, the differences between athletes and non*athletes did not disappear when the control variables were introduced. The college athletes participating in the 455E 8ilot of the 0S"H were significantly less spiritual than students who were not athletes. They also demonstrated significantly lower levels of religious commitment and salience of spiritualKreligious beliefs. These findings are surprising because previous research has suggested that religionKspirituality and sport may have connections. 4)
The Storch et al. 2455D7 study that found college athletes at the &niversity of %lorida to be more religious than students who were not athletes served as a framewor# for the analyses in this paper. The different results from these two studies is li#ely due to the fact that Storch et al. used a small, non*random sample from a single university. The survey was given to students in seven undergraduate classes, meaning that not everybody had a random chance at being selected for the study and it is ,uite possible that the sample is not representative of the undergraduate population at the &niversity of %lorida. The study did not control for religious preference of the student, therefore it is also possible that the athletes who too# the survey were more religiously inclined than the average athlete. There also could have been an overrepresentation of athletes who were evangelical 8rotestants at the university, since it is located in the southeastern &nited States, where evangelical 8rotestants are overrepresented in the population relative to the country as a whole. The present study employs a more representative sample of students from 'merican colleges and universities and finds that college athletes who are evangelical 8rotestants are more spiritual and or religious than their non*athlete counterpartsA therefore, an overrepresentation of these athletes in the sample could be the reason for the higher religiosity of college athletes in Storch et al.
0herry+s e(planations of sport being a secular competitor to religion seem to be born out.
The most important finding from this study concerns the strong, positive relationship between religiosity and spirituality and being an evangelical 8rotestant college athlete. it ma#es perfect sense that evangelical 8rotestant college athletes would be more spiritual and religious not only than other college athletes but other evangelical 8rotestant college students as well. The 44
e(planation for this centers on the idea of -muscular 0hristianity1 and the activity of evangelical 8rotestant sports ministries on college and university campuses. S'03E &:"3E..'
CO"C%US$O"
Given the theology of muscular 0hristianity and concrete organizations to realize it, it is not surprising that evangelical 8rotestant college athletes are so spiritual and religious. Ionetheless, further research needs to be done to understand the specific mechanisms that allow evangelicals to integrate their religious and spiritual identities and practices into their athletic lives better than other college athletes. <ne mechanism that begs for further study is the evangelical 0hristian sports ministries li#e %0' and 'I'. espite their age and prominence, neither sociologists of religion nor sociologists of sport have studied them. The levels of spirituality and religiosity of intercollegiate athletes have not been studied to a great e(tent despite the highly visible nature of the relationship. The present study has ta#en a diverse sample of college ;uniors and compared the spirituality, religious commitment, and salience of religiousKspiritual beliefs of intercollegiate athletes and non*athletes. The findings are that despite previous studies and media representations depicting strong connections between these variables and college athletes, there is actually a negative correlation. $hile intercollegiate athletes scaled significantly lower than students who were not athletes on these three scales, evangelical 8rotestant athletes had significantly higher scores than non*athletes. This contrast in beliefs and behaviors between evangelical 8rotestant college athletes and non*evangelical intercollegiate athletes calls for further research and e(ploration. %uture studies need to address the idea that a certain group of college athletes may be responsible for the belief that all athletes 4E
are more spiritual and religious than other students. It is also important that the findings that intercollegiate athletes in general are less spiritual and religiously committed be replicated in multiple studies and with other datasets since this is the first #nown study with these results. The findings of this study challenge previous beliefs about intercollegiate athletes and provo#e new framewor#s and hypotheses for future research.
4D
References 'dler, 8atricia, and 8eter 'dler. )??). Backboards and Blackboards: College Athletes and Role Engulfment. Iew !or#: 0olumbia &niversity 8ress. "erger, 8eter. )?>6. The acred Canop!. Garden 0ity, I!: oubleday. "uch#o, Bathleen /. 455D. -3eligious "eliefs and 8ractices of 0ollege $omen as 0ompared to 0ollege :en.1 "ournal of College tudent #e$elopment D@: 9?*?9. 0herry, 0onrad, "etty '. e"erg, and 'manda 8orterfield. 455). Religion on Campus. 0hapel Hill, I0: The &niversity of Iorth 0arolina 8ress. 0imino, 3ichard, and on .attin. 4554. hopping for %aith: American Religion in the &ew 'illennium. San %rancisco: /ossey*"ass. $illiam +'ntonio, /ames avidson, ean Hoge, and Batherine :eyer, American Catholics: (ender) (eneration) and Commitment 2$alnut 0ree#, 0': 'lta:ira 8ress, 455)7, Eitzen, . Stanley, and George Sage. 455E. ociolog! of &orth American port, 6th edition, Iew !or#: :cGraw*Hill. %uller, 3obert. 455). piritual but not Religious: *nderstanding *nchurched America. Iew !or#: <(ford &niversity 8ress. Glatz, 0arol. 455D. -<ff and 3unning: Iew Hatican <ffice 'ims to 8romote 0ulture of Sport.1 0atholic Iews Service, > 'ugust. Hoffman, Shirl /. )??4. -Sport in 3eligion.1 8p. )46*)D) in port and Religion, edited by Shirl /. Hoffman. 0hampaign, I.: Human Binetics "oo#s. /ac#son, Shirley, and :ihaly 0si#szentmihalyi. )???. %low in ports. 0hampaign, I.: Human Binetics "oo#s.
4@
/en#ins, 8hilip. 455E. The &ew Anti+Catholicism: The ,ast Acceptable -re.udice. Iew !or#: <(ford &niversity 8ress. Bay, $arren '. 4556. Running + The acred Art: -reparing to -ractice. $oodstoc#, HT: S#y.ight 8aths. Belley, "etty, Shirl Hoffman, and iane Gill. )??5. -The 3elationship "etween 0ompetitive <rientation and 3eligious <rientation.1 "ournal of port Beha$ior )E: )D@*@>. .add, Tony, and /ames :athisen. )???. 'uscular Christianit!: E$angelical -rotestants and the #e$elopment of American port. Grand 3apids, :I: "a#er "oo#s. :assa, :ar#. 455E. Anti+Catholicism in America: The ,ast Acceptable -re.udice. Iew !or#: 0rossroad 8ublishing. :athisen, /ames. 455>. -Sport.1 8p. 49@*E5E in /andbook of Religion and ocial 0nstitutions, edited by Helen 3ose Ebaugh. Iew !or#: Springer. :iller, 'llan S. and /ohn 8. Hoffmann. )??@. -3is# and 3eligion: 'n E(planation of Gender ifferences in 3eligiosity.1 "ournal for the cientific tud! for Religion ED:>E*6@. :urphy, Tim. 4559. - evout Heisman $inner eclines Spot in P8layboyP .ineup,1 * A Toda!, /uly E5. <verman, Steven /. )??6. The 0nfluence of the -rotestant Ethic on port and Recreation. "roo#field, HT: 'verbury. 8rice, /oseph .. 455@. -'n 'merican 'potheosis.1 8p.)?@*4)4 in Religion and -opular Culture in America, edited by "ruce . %orbes and /effrey H. :ahan. "er#eley, 0': &niversity of 0alifornia 8ress. 8utney, 0lifford. 455). 'uscular Christianit!: 'anhood and ports in -rotestant America 1223+1453. 0ambridge, :': Harvard &niversity 8ress. 4>
3einin#, 'my. 4556. -' 8ass and a 8rayer.1 The (aines$ille un, September 44. Sanford, '. $hitney. 4556. -8inned on Barma 3oc#: $hitewater Baya#ing as 3eligious E(perience.1 "ournal of the American Academ! of Religion 6@:96@*?@. Smith, 0hristian. 4559. -%uture irections in the Sociology of 3eligion.1 ocial %orces 9>:)@>)* 9?. Smith, 0hristian, with :elinda .und,uist enton. 455@. oul earching: The Religion and piritual ,i$es of American Teenagers. Iew !or#: <(ford &niversity 8ress. Smith, 0hristian, with :ichael Emerson, Sally Gallagher, 8aul Bennedy, and avid Si##in#. )??9. American E$angelicalism: Embattled and Thri$ing. 0hicago: &niversity of 0hicago 8ress. Storch, Eric '., and ".'. %arber. 4554. -8sychotherapy with the 3eligious 'thlete.1 Annals of the American -s!chotherap! Association. E. Star#, 3odney, and $illiam Sims "ainbridge. )?96. A Theor! of Religion. Iew "runswic#, I/: 3utgers &niversity 8ress. Storch, Eric, /onathan 3oberti, Erica "ravata, and /ason Storch. 455D. -Strength of 3eligious %aith: ' 0omparison of Intercollegiate 'thletes and Ion*'thletes.1 -astoral -s!cholog! @4:D9@*?4. $eber, :a(. )?@9. The -rotestant Ethic and the pirit of Capitalism. Iew !or#: Scribner+s. !amane, avid. )??9. -Spirituality.1 8. D?4 in Enc!clopedia of Religion and ociet!, edited by $.H. Swatos, /r. $alnut 0ree#, 0': 'lta:ira 8ress.
46
A## "!$+ $nde, !escriptions
Each dependent variable inde( was created from multiple items in the 455E 8ilot of the 0S"H. The items were scaled together to create an inde( that was tested for reliability using 0ronbach+s 'lpha. The items used in each inde( are described, along with the scale used to measure each item.
Spirituality 2QR.9D@7 is measured by seven items: ). 8lease indicate the importance to you personally of: Integrating spirituality into my life 2Essential, Hery Important, Somewhat Important, Iot Important7 4. 8lease indicate your agreement with the following statement: $e are all spiritual beings 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 E. 8lease indicate your agreement with the following statement: 8eople can reach a higher spiritual plane of consciousness through meditation or prayer 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 D. 8lease indicate the e(tent to which the following describes you: Having an interest in spirituality 2To a Great E(tent, To Some E(tent, Iot at 'll7 @. 8lease indicate the importance to you personally of the following: See#ing out opportunities to help me grow spiritually 2Essential, Hery Important, Somewhat Important, Iot Important7 >. The ultimate spiritual ,uest for me is: a7 to discover who I really am, b7 to #now what God re,uires of me, c7 to become a better person, d7 to #now my purpose in life, e7 to 49
ma#e the world a better place, f7 other SSSSSSSS, g7 I do not consider myself to be on a spiritual ,uest 6. 3ate yourself on the following trait as compared with the average person your age: spirituality 2Highest )5T, 'bove 'verage, 'verage, "elow 'verage, .owest )5T7
Religious Commitment 2QR.9?57 is measured by nine items: ). How often do you engage in the following activity: 3eligious singingKchanting 2 aily, Several TimesK$ee#, <nceK$ee#, :onthly, .ess than :onthly, Iot at 'll7 4. How often do you engage in the following activity: 3eading sacred te(ts 2 aily, Several TimesK$ee#, <nceK$ee#, :onthly, .ess than :onthly, Iot at 'll7 E. Since entering college have you: /oined a religious organization on campusF D. 8lease indicate how often you engaged in the following activity since entering college: 'ttended a religious service 2%re,uently, <ccasionally, Iot at 'll7 @. Since entering college, please indicate how often you have: Helped at local houses of worship 2%re,uently, <ccasionally, Iot at 'll7 >. Since entering college, please indicate how often you have: %ound new meaning in the rituals and practices of my religion 2%re,uently, <ccasionally, Iot at 'll7 6. 8lease indicate your agreement with the following statement: I find religion to be personally helpful 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 9. 3ate yourself on the following trait as compared with the average person your age: 3eligiousnessKreligiosity 2Highest )5T, 'bove 'verage, 'verage, "elow 'verage, .owest )5T7 4?
?. 8lease indicate the e(tent to which the following describes you: See#ing to follow religious teachings in my everyday life 2 To a Great E(tent, To Some E(tent, Iot at 'll7
Salience of Religious-Spiritual Beliefs 2QR.?>D7 is measured by si( items: ). :y spiritualKreligious beliefs: Have helped me develop my identity 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 4. :y spiritualKreligious beliefs: 're one of the most important things in my life 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 E. :y spiritualKreligious beliefs: Give meaningKpurpose to my life 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 D. :y spiritualKreligious beliefs: Help define the goals I set for myself 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 @. :y spiritualKreligious beliefs: 8rovide me with strength, support, and guidance 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7 >. :y spiritualKreligious beliefs: .ie behind my whole approach to life 2'gree Strongly, 'gree Somewhat, isagree Somewhat, isagree Strongly7
Spiritual-Religious )ro.th 2QR.99)7 is measured by three items: ). 0ompared with when you first started college, how would you now describe your: 3eligious beliefs and convictions 2:uch Stronger, Stronger, Io 0hange, $ea#er, :uch $ea#er7 4. 0ompared with when you first started college, how would you now describe your: Spirituality 2:uch Stronger, Stronger, Io 0hange, $ea#er, :uch $ea#er7 E5
E. 0ompared with when you first started college, how would you now describe your: 3eligiousness 2 :uch Stronger, Stronger, Io 0hange, $ea#er, :uch $ea#er7
E)
E4

Sport and Sacred Umbrellas On Campus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Sport and Sacred Umbrellas On Campus

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sport and Sacred Umbrellas On Campus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THESIS: There is no organic connection between religion and sport in modern society, but college athletes who are

avid !amane Teresa "la#e $a#e %orest &niversity

About athletes in action. 3etrieved 45 <ctober 4556. Lwww.aia.comKaboutM.

Table ) Goes Here

Table 4 Goes Here

Table E Goes Here

Table D Goes Here

Table @ Goes Here

A## "!$+ $nde, !escriptions

You might also like