Download Chapter 2

Chapter 2
Literature Review
The purpose of this observational study is to examine sport officials preseason
and post game perception of spectator influence on judgment calls, and to assess the
hostility of their work environment in a collegiate intramural basketball program.
In basketball and other sports, officials are faced with the difficult task of making
objective decisions in an environment that can be both hostile and pressure packed.
Fans at sporting events are becoming more vocal about referee performance, and on
many occasions are trying to use this voice to influence the referee’s decision making
ability. Fans at every major stadium instantly see the replays of split second decisions
that a referee makes on the jumbo television screens. Tapp (1987) interviewed Gene
Calhoun, a former supervisor of officials in the Big Ten, who when asked about instant
replay said “It adds a whole new dimension. With the replay there is one more look,
one more angle. Calls are more closely scrutinized.” (p. 32). The interview with
Calhoun was in 1987 and he was an experienced referee and a supervisor of officials
who worried about replay. The level, quality, and shear number of replays now dwarf
the amount in 1987. Instances of physical abuse of referees by fans and athletes have
been highly televised stories (Still, 2002). The National Basketball Association and the
National Football League have both installed systems of instant replay to ensure that
referees are making the correct call at critical times. Never, in the history of sport, has
there been a time when referees have been more scrutinized and criticized for trying to
enforce the rules of the game. While there has been some research conducted on this
subject, it still has yet to be determined if sport spectators actually influence game calls
that referees make.
Sport Officials
Mano (1978) questioned referees to examine why they would want to do this
thankless task. The results of the survey indicated that referees did not do the job for
the money, but instead do so to stay involved in the game and to hang around younger
people. Mano (1978) notes that personality studies have shown that officials show a
larger degree of dominance than the general population and that they like to be in
charge. Burke (1991), in his review, found that officials have high leadership qualities,
self confidence, and interest in working with others. In a study that examined the same
topic but found a different result, Quain and Purdy (1988) developed a survey
examining how sports officials perceived themselves. The researchers surveyed 38
male high school football referees before the season asking them questions about how
they viewed themselves and their own perceived level of self actualization. The
research was done based on the assumption that because of the nature of their
profession referees would have high levels of self efficacy and self actualization when
compared to the normal population. Researchers actually discovered that the
participants were less self actualized than the control population. The relatively small
sample size may have had an effect on the results, but the trend in this study was
contrary to what the researchers perceived officials thought about themselves.
Purdy and Snyder (1986) used a survey of 689 high school basketball officials to
examine why they became sports officials. The top four reasons in order were: “1)
interest and enthusiasm for the sport, 2) the challenge and excitement offered by
officiating, 3) the extra money provided by officiating, and 4) the feeling of power and
being in control generated by officiating” (p. 54). Throughout the literature there are
different social profiles examining what type of people become sports officials.
Regardless, people who want to become officials are a very unique group.
Spectator Influence
Askins (1978) conducted an observational study of more than 20 officials’
organizations in basketball and baseball. Early theories by Askins (1978) hypothesized
why officials were influenced by crowds. Many game situations make it difficult to
discern if a violation has been made. The referees have to use all of their respective
experience and senses to identify violations that they may not clearly see. In some
instances a referee may have to gain clues from the environment to discover what
actually happened, and environment includes the sport spectators and their reactions.
As much as referees would like to think that they can tune out the crowd they are
usually mistaken. The crowd is as much of the game environment as the players,
coaches, and referees are. Askins (1978) also stated that even though the rules for the
game are well defined, making the calls on the court is not automatic. If every violation
was called, the games would not flow well and would take an inordinate amount of time.
Therefore, the referee makes a subjective decision on whether to call a violation in
particular situations. How the call is made is influenced by the time at which the
potential violation happens during the game, how the violation affects the game, if the
violation is against the spirit of the rules of the game, and a number of other factors.
Most referees state that they could call a foul on every play, but their job is to decide
which fouls should be called and which fouls are overlooked.
Askins (1979) also stated that crowds do influence officials, and in many
situations officials do fear crowds. He listed four factors which determine how much
influence a crowd may have on an official: 1) size of the crowd, 2) volume of noise
made, 3) proximity, and 4) reputation of the crowd. Of the four previously mentioned
factors Askins (1979) felt that proximity was the most influential factor. If a crowd is
close to the court and large in size the noise can be overwhelming and can in turn
intimidate the official. On the other hand, a small crowd that is located close to the court
can intimidate referees by making direct, well heard remarks, which the officials cannot
tune out. Although, no empirical evidence exists to refute or accept Askins hypothesis,
it definitely lays the ground work for future research on the subject. Snyder and Purdy
(1987) conducted survey research on 689 officials and discovered that the hostility of
the crowd does change the way referees make calls. Forty one percent of the officials
surveyed indicated they are more expressive with hand signals and making calls when
in front of perceived hostile crowds. The researchers also found that 36% of the
officials surveyed are aware of the fans reaction to calls they make contrary to the
thoughts of the fans. The previous study shows that officials are aware of the
responses fans have and officials do change the way they officiate when encountering
hostile crowds.
One of the few studies looking at the effect of sport spectators on basketball
officiating was done by Lehman and Reifman in 1987. Archival data from the 19841985 Los Angeles Lakers of the National Basketball Association was examined to see if
star players playing home court games would have fewer fouls called on them due to
fan influence. Players were labeled as stars or non stars based on whether they were
selected to the league all star game that season. The final sample included 213 players
made up of 42 players designated as stars and 171 players designated as non stars
(Lehman and Reifman, 1987). Each player was required to have played a minimum of
500 minutes that season to be considered for the study. The site, at which the players
played, and the number of fouls committed were examined using a two way analysis of
variance. The results were statistically significant showing that star players were called
for fewer fouls when playing in front of their home crowd compared to playing on the
road. Reifman and Lehman (1987) theorized that the desire of the home crowd to have
the home team win influenced the officials to call fewer fouls on the home stars thus
giving the home team the best chance to win. In a related study, Seligman (2000)
examined data from the four major pro sports looking at the phenomenon of home field
advantage. Teams playing at home in all of the sports had a higher average winning
percentage than teams playing on the road. The author hypothesized the higher
winning percentage could be attributed to a number of factors including stadium design,
crowd influence, and referee bias toward the home team.
Anshel (1989) conducted a series of interviews with players, coaches, and sports
administrators over a six year period to develop a top ten list of rules for effective official
communication to help deal with the stress of basketball officiating (Anshel, 1989). The
rules are as follows: keep calm, treat participants with respect, use positive nonverbal
cues, listen actively, explain decisions about infractions, do not embarrass a coach or
athlete, criticize behavior not character, selectively ignore comments, do not be
sarcastic, and try not to have the last word. The majority of the rules apply to
communicating with coaches and athletes, but a few apply to communication with the
spectators. Use of positive nonverbal cues and selectively ignoring comments are two
rules that were developed to cope with the stress that spectators can cause for officials.
Even in a list that was developed for communication between officials, players, and
coaches, the influence of the fans on the official is still evident.
Rainey (1999) surveyed 1500 high school basketball officials to examine their
sources of stress. The factor that most heavily influenced burnout in officials was
interpersonal conflict, which was defined as hostile encounters with players, coaches,
and fans. Of concern was the fact that only 49% of the mailed surveys were returned.
The authors did not examine if the interpersonal conflict ever influenced the referee’s in
game decisions, but the study did show that there was a negative interaction between
the spectators and the referees and this interaction led to the drop out or retirement of a
number of referees. Zoeller (1985) in an article examining stressors for officials stated
that basketball is definitely the most stressful. Having to deal with hostile fans in small
gyms and working four or five days a week from December to March can cause a large
amount of stress on officials. The “importance of the game” being officiated can also
contribute to the stress levels. Holland (1979) conducted a study in which he monitored
the heart rate of referees during different game situations. Holland found that the mean
heart rate of referees during the high school state tournament was eight beats per
minute higher then when officiating games during the regular season.
Goldsmith and Williams (1992) surveyed football and volleyball officials to assess
their sources of stress. One relevant hypothesis was that intramural officials would
perceive more stress than noncertified or certified officials. On the subject of verbal,
abuse intramural officials reported more incidences than noncertified and certified
officials. After making adjustment to the results to compensate for age and experience
level, it was found that the intramural officials were not statistically different from the
other groups. Even though there was no statistical difference after the adjustment of
the means, it was interesting that the intramural officials did respond differently than the
other two groups.
Stewart and Ellery (1996) sent surveys to 470 certified volleyball officials after the
season was completed to assess the level of stress the officials experienced over the
season. Seventy five percent of the officials responded. The responses were recorded
on a five point Licket scale with one being a low level of stress and five being a high
level of stress. The mean stress rating was 2.3 sd = .6, which corresponded with an
answer between “very little” and a “moderate amount”. The researchers hypothesized
that the relatively low level of stress could be attributed to the nature of volleyball fans,
the timing the survey was administered, or the proximity of the fans to the officials. The
researchers also felt that higher levels of competition or the number of fans attending
the contests could have influenced the results.
The above mentioned studies show that fans can influence sports officials and
that officiating can be stressful, but none examined the official’s perception of fan
influence immediately post game when the events of the game would be fresh in their
mind. Research of immediate post game perception is lacking in the research literature.
Social Facilitation
Social facilitation is the theory that performance in the presence of an audience
facilitates the expression of a well learned task and impairs the expression of a weakly
learned task (Green and Gagne, 1977). For example, if a referee was well trained and
educated in the art of refereeing, that referee’s performance would improve in the
presence of spectators. On the other hand, if a referee had little experience or training
their performance would decrease in the presence of spectators.
Rajexki, Ickes, Corcoran, and Lenerz (1977) conducted a study examining if the
mere presence of spectators could influence the performance level of a simple task.
Subjects were required to run through a maze under different levels of outside
observation. The levels of observation used included a full audience present, full
blindfolded audience, manikin, blindfolded manikin, mirror, and a control with no
audience. The researchers found that the subjects performed the task fastest when an
audience, blindfolded or not, was present. An interesting finding was that the subjects
made more errors when the audience could see them rather then when they were
blindfolded. The results seem to show that the participants tried harder in the presence
of an audience, but also made more mistakes when the audience could see them.
Plantara and Moran (2001) conducted a study where participants completed a task with
and without an audience present. The researchers also found data that supported the
social facilitation theory.
Bell and Yee (1988) conducted a similar study that examined skilled and
unskilled Karate students completing a 15 second speed kick test. The participants
performed multiple round house kicks in the presence of an audience of experts and
without an audience. While the presence of an audience did not affect the accuracy of
the skilled students, there was a detrimental effect for the unskilled students who had a
reduced frequency of accurate kicks in the presence of the audience. The previously
listed studies have shown that the mere presence of an audience can affect the
performance of individuals. An assumption can be made that if the audience was
allowed to voice their opinions as they can in sporting events that there could be some
type of effect on the referees.
Gender
Discrimination against female basketball officials has been examined in previous
studies. With the implementation of Title IX there has been a large increase in the
number of females participating in athletics (Durrant, 1992). Even as the number of
female athletes participating in sports increased, the number of female officials has
decreased (Casey, 1992). A 1999 study hypothesized that male high school basketball
officials would be seen as more competent than their female counterparts (Graf &
Kooske, 1999). The researchers had one hundred and seventy one students rate male
and female referees officiating both men’s and women’s high school basketball games.
The students were given biographies of the referees that were to be examined. The
biographies established the status, or years of experience, that a referee had. Though
there was no statistical evidence found that supported the hypothesis, a clear finding
was that less experienced female officials were thought to be more competent at
officiating women’s games rather than men’s games. From this data, questions arise
concerning that there are perceived differences in the competencies of female and male
referees. Though this research was interesting, there was no information on how the
spectators at these basketball games could have influenced the officials in game
decisions. If the fans who filled out these surveys felt that certain referees were not as
capable as other referees could this possibly lead them to believe that those referees
could be intimidated or influenced by the fans themselves? Further research should be
conducted in this area because there seems to be potential for the fans to try to harass
and influence certain officials.
Eagly and Wood (1982) examined the popular belief that “men exert influence
more easily than woman, and women are more easily influenced than men” (p. 915).
The researchers presented scenarios to 223 males and 185 females in which males
and females were having a discussion on company policy. The job title of the
employees was omitted and the subjects were required to decide which employee held
the lower status position. In this scenario, it was believed at a significantly high rate that
the women held the lower status job. If this stereotype is applicable to other groups of
people such as spectators at an athletic event, it could be assumed that female officials
may be harassed more because of the perceived chance that they may be more easily
influenced than their male counterparts.
Many of aspects of sports show discrimination against females. Women involved
in athletics tend to make less than men employed at the same position (NCAA, 1989).
Male Division I basketball coaches make an average of $71, 511, while female coaches
at the same level make only $39, 177 (NCAA, 1992). Double standards abound when
considering gender differences in sport, and it is not that big of stretch to assume that
there might also be double standards concerning how different genders of referees are
treated.
Experience
Australian researchers examined the differences between adolescent and adult
referees (Kassidis & Anshel, 1993). They specifically examined the sources of stress
for both groups, and they compared the degree of perceived stress that each group of
participants felt. The referees rated 15 different stressors on a Lickert scale ranging
from 1 to 15 with one being no stress effect and 15 being a high stress effects. A
MANOVA of the data showed that younger referees were significantly more stressed
than older referees when it came to making a wrong call or giving a technical foul.
Stressors that ranked the highest for both groups included threats of physical abuse,
verbal abuse from coaches, and making the wrong call. Stressors that were ranked the
lowest were presence of the media, making a mistake in mechanics, and verbal abuse
by the spectators (Kassidis & Anshel, 1993). Although verbal abuse by the spectators
was rated low when compared to the other stressors, there is a definite difference in the
way that younger and older officials handle certain situations. The difference in the
ability to handle certain game situations may leave younger inexperienced officials more
vulnerable to the intimidation and influence that spectators can have.
Physical Abuse
Researcher’s surveyed 721 basketball officials in Ohio to examine if they have
been assaulted while refereeing (Rainey & Duggan1998). The referees who responded
had an average of 14.4 years of basketball officiating experience. Ninety eight of the
referees reported that they had been physically abused. Half of the assaults were
categorized as minor assaults and included pushing, grabbing, or spitting. The other
half were categorized as major assaults and these included punching, choking, and the
throwing of objects. No significant difference was found in the rates of assaults
between male and female referees. Almost half of the assaults were committed by
players followed by parents, coaches, and fans. Over half of the people who
committed the assaults were not punished at all, and alcohol was a factor in 20% of the
assaults.
Several studies examined factors that cause stress for basketball referees and
the coping strategies that referees use to deal with these stressors. Anshel and
Weinberg (1996) found that most referees handled abuse from spectators by
rationalizing that it was part of the game and felt that they should just ignore it . “The
strategy was likely facilitated by the referees’ perceptions that fans are relatively
ignorant of the facts that underlie the referee’s decision” (p. 184). Many of the officials
viewed spectator verbal abuse as a part of the game that they did not particularly like
but they believed it was here to stay. A study by Taylor, Daniel, Leith, and Burke (1990)
and another study by Anshel and Weinberg (1995) also listed fear of physical and
verbal abuse as sources of refereeing stress. The literature seems to show that verbal
and physical abuse by players, coaches, and spectators is a part of the officiating
experience. Officials handle these particular stressors in different ways, but the fact
they do handle them and they do acknowledge their existence shows there is a
possibility this kind of behavior could somehow influence the decisions referees make.
Cohen (1997) wrote an article that discussed a national shortage of referees. He
reported four different situations in which officials were physically assaulted by players,
coaches, or fans. Behavior like this is one of the factors that tend to limit the amount of
people who become officials. When officials have incidences like these in the back of
their mind it could have an effect on the way they call a game.
None of the previous research examined spectator influence on referees
immediately post game when the game would still be fresh in their minds. Influence of
referees by fans is eluded to throughout most of the literature, but it remains to be seen
if this interaction and influence actually affects the way an official enforces the rules of a
game. If a connection between these two could be documented, this may validate the
increasing need for crowd control to protect the integrity of the game and to protect the
referee’s themselves. The purpose of this observational study is to examine sport
officials post game perception of spectator influence on judgment calls and to asses the
hostility of the work environment in a collegiate intramural basketball program.