Encouraging Good Sportsmanship: A Behavior Modification Too roved by East

ina University Participants Dave Hall

Intramural sport programs can large- ly justify their existence on the basis of the many positive experiences which can be associated with a recrea- tional environment. Development of participant coordination and athletic skill, fitness improvement, potential stress relief, and the enhancement of one's ability to interact positively with a group are well documented benefits of a competitive sport setting (Fox, 1983; Fox & Mathews, 1981 ; Ardell & Tager, 1 982).

Along with these positives, however, recreation professionals must acknow- ledge the existence of certain human elements which can negatively in- fluence any competitive setting. Com- petition often leads to aggressive behavior. This behavior, when inten- sified to a point where it is no longer a positive contribution within the spirit of the game, ultimately can become unsportsmanlike. Whether in the form of physical action or verbal expression, unsportsmanlike behavior most cer- tainly detracts from the structure of a positive recreational environment. Even limited displays of negative behavior can seriously infringe upon the recreative experience of the majori- ty. For these and other reasons, good sportsmanship should be positively reinforced whenever possible. It is the intent of this article to present a behavior modification tool, in the form of a sportsmanship rating system (SRS), with a primary focus on acknowledging superior sportsman- ship, and a secondary purpose of iden- tifying and controlling poor sportsmanship.

The SRS to be discussed in this ar- ticle was originally developed by Beau Rugg, Bruce Maurer, and John Fisher at The Ohio State University. East Carolina University adopted this system, added a philosophy of behavior modification, and introduced

it on a trial basis in intramural flag foot- ball and five-on-five basketball.

Philosophy The philosophy behind the use of a

SRS in intramural sports programs draws from the basic precepts of Skin- ner's (1976) behavior modification model. Skinner developed the concept of eliciting positive behavior change through a process of identifying a negative behavior and recording its current characteristics, defining desired change, and developing a strategy designed to elicit this change, then implementing the plan, evaluating the results, and modifying the original strategy to encompass any new behav- iors (Skinner, 1976). Like Skinner's model, the strategy behind this SRS is multiphasic in nature.

Goals There are two main goals associated

with this SRS. The system should be promoted as a tool designed to acknowledge participants who con- sistently display superior sports- manlike characteristics. To this end, positive reinforcement shouM be pro- vided to those teams achieving good SRS ratings throughout a particular sport season. Possible examples in- clude articles highlighting specific teams in the department newsletter and campus newspaper, poster pro- moting current sportsmanship leaders on intramural bulletin boards, and pro- motional materials displayed throughout activity areas. East Carolina University has also developed a "Spirit of Sport" award which is given annually to the team or organiza- tion that best exemplifies sportsman- ship, enthusiasm, and participation. Sportsmanship ratings from the team sports help determine the winner of this award.

A secondary purpose of the SRS is to identify those teams or individuals

established for intramural team sports with the intent of effecting positive change. The SRS is an effective tool for this purpose, allowing participants a certain amount of freedom of expres- sion, while clearly drawing the line con- cerning the limits of negative behaviors.

The Tool The sportsmanlike rating tool (see

Table 1) consists of a simple Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. A rating of 1 constitutes poor sportsmanship while a 5 designates those teams that display characteristics of excellent sportsmanship. The scale uses only whole numbers. Each numerical level has been labelled and is accompanied by the criteria necessary for that level of achievement on the rating form.

The Rating Process The rules regarding achievement

standards within the SRS should be explained in detail at the team cap- tain's meeting for each activity. The ac- tual rating process is conducted as follows. Teams are rated at each game by the student officials and scorekeeper. The entire crew is ex- pected to reach a consensus concer- ning each team. If they decide to award a rating of 2 or 1, the officials are required to document the behavior which justifies that rating. The specific ratings for individual games from the evening before are reviewed each morning by the intramural sport manager in charge of that activity. If an inappropriately low rating was given, the sport manager contacts the of- ficials involved and together they upgrade it to a more realistic level. The final ratings are then posted on team sports bulletin boards along with the score of the game and an updated win- loss record.

continued on next page

FALL 1990 NlRSA JOURNAL not conforming to the standards

Hall ,,, Each team receiving a 2 or 1 rating game, looking for improvement over

is informed of its (rating) situation the the last evaluation, characteristics of next working day after their game. The good sportsmanship, and positive use team captain is then responsible for of the behavior change strategies as scheduling a meeting with the sport outlined in the counseling session. manager before their next game. If this process fails to elicit positive

Table 1

Sportsmanship Rating Form

TEAM TEAM

Excellent 5 pts. Excellent 5 pts

Above Average 4 pts Above Average 4 pts.

Average 3 pts. Average 3 pts.

Below Average 2 pts. Below Average 2 pts.

Poor 1 pt. Poor 1 pt.

Excellent: 5 points - Will be awarded to a team which demonstrates good sportsmanship and maintains an attitude of complete cooperation.

Above Average: 4 points - Will be awarded to a team if there is no incident of poor sportsmanship.

Average: 3 points - Will be awarded to a team when unsportsmanlike conduct is not present in the game except for rare minor infractions.

Below Average: 2 points -Will be awarded to a team: --If players other than the captain, persist in questioning the officals'

decisions; and/or they repeatedly argue with the officials. --For frequent use of profane and/or vulgar language. --If spectators, clearly related to the team, fail to cooperate with the

officials.

Poor: 1 point - Will be awarded to a team: --When a player is ejected for abusive remarks. --If players disregard warning of unnecessary roughness, unsportsmanlike con- duct, abusive lanuage or action, etc.

--If the team refuses to attempt to control their fans after a request to do so from the activity supervisor.

Table 2 Sportsmanship Rating Results for East Carolina

University Five-on-Five Basketball, 1989

Men Women Total

Teams 132 16 148

Teams achieving perfect SRS Ratings through the regular season 6 9 15

Teams achieving less than 2.5 average 1 0 1

Overall average team rating 3.5 4.0 3.8

Ratings that were upgraded by I.M. staff 4 0 4

These meetings function as group counseling sessions involving the en- tire team. The format is one of free ex- change of ideas and concerns. At the end of each session, the participants and sport manager collectively design specific strategies to help modify the team's/individual's negative attitude or behavior. An intramural staff member will evaluate that team at their next

change, the behavior must be negatively reinforced. Any team receiv- ing two consecutive ratings of 2 or 1 (one by student support staff, one by full-time staff), is restricted from further competition. Additionally, each team is required to achieve a minimum of a 2.5 average rating through their regular season to qualify for post-season competition.

1989 SRS Results Table 2 lists the SRS results for the

1989 intramural five-on-five basketball season.

Sunsey Prior to the start of basketball playoff

competition, a questionnaire was developed (see Questionnaire) to assess participant opinion concerning the effectiveness and future use of the SRS. At this time, participants had competed in two team sports using the SRS.

Method The SRS questionnaire was

presented to each team captain prior to their first-round playoff game. Only respective team captains were allow- ed to submit a response to these ques- tions. In an attempt to avoid in- vestigator bias, student support staff administering the instrument were in- structed to avoid giving feedback con- cerning the nature of individual ques- tions, or the intended use of the results. The author surveyed those teams that did not qualify for playoff competition by telephone. In this man- ner, a 100% response rate was obtained. Results

The results of this survey (see Table 3) indicate a most favorable response to the use of this SRS at East Carolina University. Eighty-nine percent of the basketball team captains felt that us- ing the SRS positively influences overall team sportsmanship. Ninety- three percent of the team captains felt that this SRS should be used in future intramural team sport activities. Positive opinions ranged from "Great idea" to "It's about time you did something to curb the abuse directed at student basketball officials." It is somewhat disheartening, however, to learn that 16% of the team captains were not aware that the SRS was in place during the 1989 season. (It should be noted that nine of these 24 teams were waiting list teams and did not attend the team captains' meeting.) Perhaps this indicated that staff must continue to educate par- ticipants concerning the philosophy and use of this system.

Recommendation As a system designed to recognize

continued on next page

FALL 1990 NlRSA JOURNAL 9

H a l l continued

Sportsmanship Rating Questionnaire

1. Were you aware that a sportsmanship rating system was being used during the 1989 intramural basketball season?

Yes N o

2. Do you feel that the sportsmanship rating system used during the 1989 intramural basketball season positively influenced overall team sportsmanship?

Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree

Agree Disagree

3. Did'the sportsmanship rating system influence your personal on-court attitudes and behavior?

Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree

Agree Disagree

4. Did your team actively pursue a high sportsmanship rating at each game?

Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree

Agree Disagree

5. Would you recommend the use of the sportsmanship rating system for future intramural sports?

Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree

Agree Disagree

6. Opinion:

Table 3

Sportsmanship Rating Questionnaire Results

Strongly Strongly Yes No Agree Agree Disagree Disagree

Question 1 124 24

Question 2 33 99 13 3

Question 3 28 77 35 8

Question 4 45 84 18 2

Question 5 75 63 8 2

both positive and negative behavior, this SRS has excellent potential. However, it is not without weaknesses.

The obvious weakness of this sys- tem lies within the potential for rater subjectivity to influence a team's sportsmanship standings. While this potential certainly exists, it can be controlled with proper education of stu- dent support staff and administrative attention to detail.

Both the philosophy and goals of the SRS should be addressed at training clinics and officials' association meetings. The need to recognize

10 FALL 1990 MIRSA JOURNAL

positive behavior as opposed to using the sportsmanship rating as a punish- ment device must constantly be stress- ed. Also, the achievement levels within the system should be discussed in detail to ensure that student support staff are aware of the expectations of the sport manager.

As a final step in the educational process, feedback from all intramural employees is encouraged throughout the season. The following list of recom- mendations was compiled by student officials during the basketball season: 1. Eliminate the 5 rating level. It

adds more confusion than clarification to the system and is

often associated with perfection rather than excellence. Many stu- dent officials feel that a 5 is relatively unattainable, while a 4 translates into an " A grade. Students feel more comfortable with a four point scale.

2. Move in the direction of a com- plete behavior modification ap- proach. At the end of each team counseling session, formulate a participantlintramural depart- ment contract specifying the par- ticular behaviors that each team is attempting to change and the methods they will employ to facilitate these changes.

3. Allow the participants to rate their game officials using a similar for- mat as the SRS.

4. Require officials to address the SRS in all pregame captain's meetings.

Conclusion The positive effects of a sportsman-

ship rating form are substantial. At East Carolina University, it significantly contributed to the smooth manage- ment of two major team sports, while furthering department goals of enhan- cing participant lifetime wellness behavior through competitive team sport activities. Similar results could occur on any campus with similar com- petitive sport opportunities. Recreation professionals must encourage those participants consistently displaying poor sportsmanlike characteristics to take responsibility for their actions. The rights of the majority demand that negative behavior be rehabilitated or restricted. The SRS promoted in this article is one method of assuring that positive behavior in team sports is recognized and rewarded.

Mr. Hall is an Instructor in the Department of Leisure Studies at The University of Iowa.

References

Ardell, D.B. & Tager, M.J. (1982). Planning for wellness. Dubuque: KendalllHunt Pub- lishing.

Fox, E.L. (1983). Sports physiology. Phil- adelphia, PA: Saunders College Publishing.

Fox, E.L. & Mathews, D.K. (1981). The phy- siological basis of physical education and athletes. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders College Publishing.

Skinner, B.F. (1976). About behaviorism. NY: Vintage Books.