Umpire Participation: Is Abuse Really the Issue?
Umpires (or referees) are essential for the ongoing production of organised sport. It has been widely argued that abuse of umpires by players, coaches, and spectators is ubiquitous and aversive, therefore engendering attrition. Cognitive behavioural theory specifies that attrition and continuation are best understood by identifying the ways that stimuli are interpreted. In this study, 22 umpires of professional and semi-professional Australian Rules football were interviewed to determine what they think of abusive behaviour, and what they find to be rewarding about umpiring. Findings showed that umpires routinely reframe abuse, considering it to be a normal part of their role. Abuse was not deemed to be particularly aversive, and there was no evidence that it contributes to attrition. On the other hand, umpires enjoyed the social world they share with other umpires, and identified social interactions among umpires as a key reason for continuing to umpire. This study highlights the important role that socialisation into the social world of umpiring plays in helping umpires to reframe abuse, and the importance of socialising with other umpires in maintaining their commitment to umpiring. It is suggested that the social rewards of umpiring should be stressed in umpire recruitment, and that the social world of umpiring should be incorporated into umpire training and retention.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 10 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/716936/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/716936/bibliographic|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:spomar:v:10:y:2007:i:3:p:209-229. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.