Examining the Role of Social Cognitive Theory in the Prediction of Hazing Perpetration in Athletics

CLEARING THE HAZE: EXAMINING THE ROLE OF SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY IN THE PREDICTION OF HAZING PERPETRATION IN ATHLETICS

Ryan Hamilton

Bachelor of Arts with Honours (Psychology), University of New Brunswick, 2000 Masters of Sports and Exercise Science, University of New Brunswick, 2003

A Dissertation submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in the Graduate Academic Unit of Psychology

Supervisor: David Scott, Ph.D., Faculty of Kinesiology

Examining Board: Lynn Randall, Ph.D., Faculty of Education Lawrence Wisniewski, Ph.D., Department of Sociology Darren Piercey, Ph.D., Department of Psychology

External Examiner Tanya Forneris, Ph.D., School of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa.

This Dissertation is accepted by the Dean of Graduate Studies

THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK

March, 2011

Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-89139-1

Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-89139-1

NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Canada ii

Dedication

This thesis is dedicated to my family. To my parents who worry about my progress more than I do (no small feat) and who first taught me what effort and determination really are. To my children, who balance and define my life. And to my wife Karyn, who has respected the long journey that my studies have brought me on, celebrated my highs and supported (tolerated) my lows, and allowed me the freedom to pursue the professional and intellectual avenues that bring me joy. iii

Abstract

Hazing has been defined as "any activity expected of someone joining a group

that humiliates, degrades, abuses or endangers, regardless of the persons willingness to

participate" (Hoover, 1999, p.8). Hazing has been found to be a common experience for

varsity athletes in colleges (Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999) and high schools

(Hoover, 2000). Being hazed has been linked to negative physical and psychological outcomes including death, blunt trauma, acute alcohol intoxication, depression and post traumatic stress disorder (Brakenridge, 1997; Finkel, 2002; Nuwer, 2000; Sussberg,

2003). Despite the potential seriousness of hazing activities, very few studies have examined hazing from a theoretical perspective, particularly within the context of athletics. The purpose of the present study was to utilize Social Cognitive Theory

(Bandura, 1986) to predict the perpetration of hazing behaviour, with a particular focus on select personal and environmental factors. Participants included 338 athletes from 27 sports teams at seven Atlantic Canadian universities. Participants completed questionnaires related to personal factors (moral disengagement, rookie experiences with hazing, attitudes toward hazing, gender) and environmental factors (team size, degree of physical contact) were also measured. The results indicated that the personal and environmental factors significantly predicted the perpetration of hazing behaviours. The personal factor, experiences with hazing as a rookie, was found to be the most powerful predictor of hazing experiences as a veteran. Other significant predictors included moral disengagement, attitudes about the purpose of initiation, gender and the degree of physical contact in the sport. The broader theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed in detail. iv

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the athletes, coaches and athletic directors who supported this project and helped make it a reality. My supervisor, Dr. David Scott, has always been supportive of me foremost as a person, and also as a student. His influence on my academic career has been paramount. My supervisory committee of Dr. Diane

LaChapelle and Dr. Lucia O'Sullivan has contributed so much to the design, implementation and presentation of this project that their efforts must be acknowledged. V

Table of Contents

DEDICATION ii

ABSTRACT iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

LIST OF TABLES viii

LIST OF FIGURES ix

INTRODUCTION 1 Overview 1 The Role of Ritual In Sport Initiations 2 Hazing Prevalence and Incidents of Hazing 4 The Impact of Hazing 9 Legal Aspects of Hazing 11 Theoretical Explanations for Hazing 13 Power 13 Cognitive Dissonance 14 Social Cognitive Theory 17 Personal Factors 21 Moral Disengagement 21 Moral Disengagement and Morally Questionable Acts 29 Gender 30 Attitudes Toward Initiation 33 Experience of Hazing as a Rookie 34 Environmental Factors 36 Team Size 37 Degree of Physical Contact 39 Interactions 41 Moral Disengagement X Team Size 42 Moral Disengagement X Degree of Physical Contact 42 Gender X Team Size 43 Gender X Degree of Physical Contact 43 Summary of Literature 44 Purpose 47 Hypotheses and Research Questions 48

METHOD 52 Participants 52 Measures 53 Team Size 53 vi

Degree of physical contact 53 Demographic Questionnaire 54 Initiation Experiences Questionnaire 54 Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement Scale 55 Survey of Attitudes About Initiations in Sport 56 Procedure 56 Data Analysis 58

RESULTS 59 Data Screening 61 Descriptive Analysis of Independent and Dependent Variables 65 Research Question 1: Hazing Experiences as a Rookie 73 Hypothesis Testing 73 Regression I - Hazing Activities Used as a Veteran 73 Personal Hypotheses for Regression 1 76 Environmental Hypotheses for Regression 1 77 Regression II - Number of Seasons Hazing as a Veteran 79 Personal Hypotheses for Regression II 80 Environmental Hypotheses for Regression II 80 Summary of Results 84 DISCUSSION 84 The Gap in the Hazing Literature 84 Research Question 1 - Hazing Experiences as a Rookie 88 Application of Social Cognitive Theory 88 Personal Factors 88 Hypothesis 2a. Gender 96 Hypothesis 2b. Moral Disengagement 98 Hypothesis 2c. Attitude Toward Initiation Difficulty 99 Hypothesis 2d. Attitude Toward Initiation Purpose 102 Hypothesis 2e. Hazing Experiences as a Rookie 108 Environmental Factors 108 Hypothesis 3a. Team Size Ill Hypothesis 3b. Degree of physical contact 113 Personal x Environmental Interactions 115 Limitations 116 Directions for Future Research 121 Conclusions 125 REFERENCES 140 APPENDIX A - Invitation to participate 141 APPENDIX B - Consent Form 142 APPENDIX C - Debriefing vii

143 APPENDIX D - Demographic Questionnaire 144 APPENDIX E - Initiation Experiences Questionnaire 146 APPENDIX F - Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement 151 APPENDIX G - Survey of Attitudes About Initiation in Sport

CURRICULUM VITAE List of Tables

Table 1. Mean, Standard Deviation, Range and Cronbach's alpha for all Continuous Predictor and Criterion Variables 62

Table 2. Means and Standard Deviations of Participants' Veteran Use of Various Initiation Activities, Presented for the Entire Sample and for only those Using each Activity 64

Table 3. Means and Standard Deviations of Participants' Career Experiences with Hazing as a Rookie, Presented for the Entire Sample and for only those Experiencing each Type of Activity 66

Table 4. Means and Standard Deviations of Participants' University Experiences with Hazing as a Rookie, Presented for the Entire Sample and for only those Experiencing each Type of Activity 67

Table 5. Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Acceptable Initiation Activity, as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team 68

Table 6. Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Questionable Initiation Activity, as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team 70

Table 7. Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Alcohol-Related Initiation Activity, as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team 71

Table 8. Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Unacceptable Initiation Activity, as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team 72

Table 9. Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Number of Hazing Activities Used as a Veteran (N = 338) 74

Table 10. Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Number of Seasons in which Participants Hazed Rookies (N = 338) 78 ix

List of Figures

Figure 1. Social Cognitive Theory theorizes an interaction between personal, environmental and behavioural factors 18

Figure 2. Bandura's mechanisms of moral disengagement model and the level at which each mechanism influences the commitment of inhumanities 24

Figure 3. Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory model with the behavioural, personal, and environmental factors and corresponding hypotheses 49

Figure 4. Significant predictors of the number of hazing activities used as a veteran 81

Figure 5. Significant predictors of the number of seasons perpetrating hazing as a veteran 82 Predicting Hazing Perpetration 1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Overview

Hazing, has been defined as "any activity expected of someone joining a group

that humiliates, degrades, abuses or endangers, regardless of the person's willingness to

participate" (Hoover, 1999, p. 8). Other definitions have included activities that damage

private or public property (Nuwer, 1990). Although hazing occurs in many spheres of society, including fraternities, the military and corporations (Nuwer, 1990), the current study focused on hazing in the context of athletics.

Although the rates of hazing in athletics are seldom documented, tragic incidents receive considerable media attention when they occur (Finley & Finley, 2007). In recent years, incidents of extreme degradation, physical abuse, alcohol abuse, sexual abuse and death have been reported (Columbus Telegram, 2009; Finley & Finley, 2007; Gonzales,

2009; Koshan, 2005; Nuwer, 2001; Peritz, 2005). Hazing still exists throughout sport, despite significant developments in anti-hazing policy. Indeed, some researchers have suggested that anti-hazing policies shroud the problem further by leading to secret initiations (Bryshun & Young, 1999). It appears that political steps are not enough to eliminate hazing rituals, especially when these policies are not underscored by theory.

Unfortunately, theoretical explanations of hazing behaviour, especially from a social psychological perspective, have been scant, making efforts to understand and eradicate hazing largely ineffective.

One theory that may be relevant to understanding hazing is Social Cognitive

Theory (SCT). In SCT, behaviour is determined through the interaction of a triad of variables, including personal, behavioural and environmental factors. The current study Predicting Hazing Perpetration 2

applied SCT to the hazing phenomenon by assessing the efficacy of using personal (i.e.,

gender, moral disengagement, attitudes about hazing, rookie experiences with hazing)

and environmental (i.e., team size, degree of physical contact) factors to predict the

perpetration of hazing activities. The five basic human capabilities outlined within SCT were used to interpret and explain the results of the study. Particular theoretical focus was given to the self-regulatory, vicarious and forethought capabilities.

In order to develop a sound theoretical model of hazing, an extensive literature review was conducted. The literature review is divided into four main sections: (1) the origins and justifications for hazing behaviour; (2) hazing prevalence, hazing impact, anti-hazing laws and policies; (3) strengths and weaknesses of current theoretical explanations for hazing; and (4) the application of SCT, and consideration of selected personal and environmental factors to understanding hazing perpetration.

Three hundred and thirty eight participants from 27 teams at seven universities completed questionnaires assessing moral disengagement, attitudes about initiation and participation in hazing activities. Two hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to assess whether gender, moral disengagement, attitudes about initiation, rookie experiences with hazing, team size, degree of physical contact in the sport, and various interactions were related to the perpetration of hazing activities as a veteran.

The Role of Ritual in Sport Initiations

Ritual has been described as a series of actions that, although once thoughtful and deliberate, have become routine and habitual (Bell, 1992). Rituals serve many religious, social and cultural functions, but as activities progress from thoughtful to routine the activities can become disconnected from the beliefs upon which they were developed. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 3

Still, rituals are the outward manifestation of many cultural beliefs: they are related to

power and tradition, and in turn influence the behaviours and beliefs of a culture (Bell,

1992). Thus, rituals specifically apply to initiations since ritual styles promote social

patterns of behaviour and regulate the structure of social relations (Bell, 1992). This is

particularly relevant to the subculture of sport where rituals are evident, especially during

the initiation process. Indeed, hazing is often incorporated into the rituals of the initiation process.

There is an abundance of anthropological, historical, and sociological literature on the processes of rituals and on the initiation of young boys into manhood (Gewertz, 1998;

Morinis, 1985; Newman & Boyd, 1998). Examples of such behaviours include the whipping of young boys in the Zuni tribe of Mexico and the public circumcision of young boys in the Nandi tribe in East Africa (Bryshun & Young, 1999). These rituals are interpreted as a means of preparing young men for the life ahead of them; it is a masculinizing process intended to make them a part of their new group (Newman &

Boyd, 1998). Many of the traditional social dimensions (e.g., power, secrecy and intimidation) of initiation and hazing have been maintained in military, educational and sport cultures (Nuwer, 1990; Robinson, 2004). The intention of these behaviours has often gone unquestioned or ignored as a part of the dominant culture of the institution.

Where the sport culture is concerned, hazing has been embraced as a "part of the game"

(ESPN, 2005). The acceptance of hazing in sport is not unlike the Nandi tribe's acceptance of the rituals used to initiate young boys in their society; they are part of the culture and are maintained regardless of intended purpose or actual impact. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 4

Hinkle (2008) summarized the three most applicable components of ritual

initiation theory in sport hazing. The first component is symbolism whereby rookie

athletes, through initiation, are exposed to the groups' values, activities and traditions

(Hinkle, 2008). Social transition is the second applicable component of ritual initiation theory. From a social transition perspective, initiation serves to move initiates into the new roles and statuses expected of the group they are seeking to join (Hinkle, 2008). The third component is the power of pain to transform the individual. Through pain (referred to as "ordeal" by Morinis (1985) and the shared experience of overcoming and enduring pain, hazing victims and perpetrators alike are more closely bonded (Hinkle, 2008). It is theorized that the ordeal and resultant bonding helps athletes sever ties with their former group and become more attached to their new group. Rituals have also been considered to maintain group cohesiveness and create a sense of commonality (Collins &

Markowsky, 1999). Those in a group tend to view even the deviant acts and behaviours of initiation as beneficial (Collins & Markowsky, 1999). This perspective of ritual utility helps to maintain both the legitimacy of the group, and as an adjunct, some of the non functional hazing activities. Individuals who hesitate to be hazed or resist the group's norms and values are met with ostracism, verbal harassment, and in some cases, escalated forms of initiation (Muir & Seitz, 2004). Currently, ritualized hazing is a tradition strongly resistant to change and is forcefully defended (Pershing, 2006; Stop Hazing,

2006).

Hazing Prevalence and Incidents of Hazing Behaviours

The majority of research on hazing has occurred in fraternity and sorority settings in the United States (Campo, Poulos, & Sipple, 2005; Cokley et al., 2001; Drout & Predicting Hazing Perpetration 5

Corsoro, 2003). Campo and colleagues (2005) examined the hazing experiences of 736

university students on a U.S. campus. This self-report study indicated that 12.4% of students described experiences as a hazing victim and 6.7% described experiences as a hazing perpetrator at their university. Self-defined hazing victims and hazing perpetrators were most likely to be members of Greek letter societies (38.3% victims,

23.3% perpetrators) and varsity athletes (29.7% victims, 15.6% perpetrators) compared to all other groups. When applying the researchers' definition of hazing, which included behaviours such as the use of offensive language, abandonment of newcomers and intimidation, 81.6% of Greek letter society members and 49.1% of varsity athletes had experienced hazing as either a victim or perpetrator.

High profile hazing incidents have been documented in the military (0stvik &

Rudmin, 2001; Pershing, 2006). In a study of hazing in the US Naval Academy, the majority of midshipmen experienced a series of hazing activities a few times a month throughout their freshman year. These activities occurred despite the Naval Academy's adoption of anti-hazing policy (Pershing, 2006). Researchers have also examined hazing in military police recruits, and found that in some units, hazing is a mandated part of training. This 'training' involved painful pranks that often resulted in medical care, humiliating and embarrassing actions, and other activities intended to entertain the veterans (de Albuquerque & Paes-Machado, 2004). Furthermore, in the Canadian Air

Force, initiates are often forced to engage in a variety of demeaning, alcohol-related and physically demanding tasks (Winslow, 1999). Hazing has been advocated by some military officials as a critical component of re-socializing individuals from civilian to military life (Firestone & Harris, 1999). With the value of these activities being Predicting Hazing Perpetration 6

reinforced by high-ranked individuals in the military institution, it seems reasonable to

expect the hazing culture to persist despite policy advocating its elimination.

Although the prevalence of hazing appears to be widespread, there is little

research regarding its origins, practice and effects, especially in sport. However, extant

studies reach some notable conclusions. For example, using a self-report measure of hazing, Gershel, Katz-Sidlow, Small, and Zandieh, (2003) found that 17% of adolescent athletes were subjected to practices that they felt constituted hazing. However, researchers conducting more comprehensive studies examining the specific behaviours engaged in by rookie athletes reported higher rates of hazing. For example, in a national survey of college athletes, staff and coaches involved in American Collegiate Athletics,

Hoover (1999) found that 81% of college athletes reported being subjected to at least one

"questionable" act (e.g., being cursed at) as rookies, 51% reported participating in alcohol-related initiation (e.g., drinking contests) and 21% reported engaging in what the researchers defined as an "unacceptable act" (e.g., being tied up and confined to a small place). These percentages reflect independent instances of hazing; however, many athletes were subjected to multiple hazing activities: 17% of respondents were subjected to five or more hazing behaviours as a rookie.

In a similar large-scale investigation, Hoover and Pollard (2000) determined that hazing is also highly prevalent in American high school athletics. The authors administered a survey to 1,541 high school athletes and found that 35% reported being subjected to some form of hazing during their freshman year (Hoover & Pollard, 2000).

Of those hazed, 44% were subjected to humiliating activities, 22% engaged in hazing involving substance abuse, and 22% were subjected to dangerous hazing. Based on this Predicting Hazing Perpetration 7

research, it has been projected that approximately 800,000 American high school athletes

are hazed on an annual basis (Rosner & Crow, 2002).

In one of the most ambitious prevalence studies, Allan and Madden (2008)

conducted a nationwide survey in the U.S. and examined the hazing experiences of

11,482 participants at 53 post secondary institutions. They investigated hazing incidents in a variety of student groups including varsity athletics, fraternities and sororities, performing arts, intramural and club sports, academic clubs and honour societies. The researchers indicated that varsity athletes were the most likely (74%) to have experienced at least one hazing incident as a part of joining their university team. The most commonly reported hazing behaviour for varsity athletes was participating in a drinking game (47%) followed by singing and chanting in public (27%), drinking large amounts of a non-alcoholic beverage (24%), drinking alcohol to the point of being sick or passing out

(23%) and being screamed, yelled or cursed at (21%). Other behaviours endured by varsity athletes included getting a tattoo or piercing (15%), having their head or other body part shaved (16%), and performing sex acts with the opposite gender (16%). These studies (Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999; Hoover & Pollard, 2000) represent the only empirical investigations of hazing prevalence in athletics. Although the data are based on American samples, the findings underscore the relevance of hazing as a possible threat to the safety of university and high school athletes in Canada.

Although similar investigations have not been undertaken in Canada, there have been many reported incidents of hazing in this country, primarily covered by the media

(O'Hara, 2000). Bryshun and Young (1999) reported graphic hazing incidents in the sports of wresting, volleyball, rugby, field hockey, water polo, football, and basketball. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 8

Both genders were widely represented; however, most of the degrading incidents

involved male teams. For example, Bryshun (1997) reported that in 1994, members of a

hockey team in Chatham Ontario were forced to masturbate publicly as a part of their

hazing procedure. Also in 1994, members of the Lethbridge Hurricanes hockey team

were forced to fasten buckets to their penises, which were then gradually filled with hockey pucks. In addition, in 1996, three members of the University of Guelph hockey team had their spots on the team revoked by team staff for refusing to eat feces- contaminated marshmallows (Bryshun, 1997). Robinson (2004) suggested that these incidents are indicative of an ongoing trend in Canadian hockey. There has also been prominent media coverage of more recent Canadian hazing events involving the Windsor

Spitfires major junior (Ontario Hockey League) hockey team (Koshan, 2005), as well as the McGill Redmen football team. The Windsor Spitfires incident, in which rookies were forced to strip naked and cram into a bus washroom (called a 'hot box'), resulted in the suspension of the general manger and coach, as well as fines totaling $35,000. The hazing incident at McGill University, where rookies were forced to simulate oral sex, strip naked and were threatened with sodomy by a broom, resulted in a high profile quarterback leaving the school and the cancellation of the McGill Redmen football season (Peritz, 2005).

Alcohol has been used prominently in hazing practices at Canadian universities.

In a case at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton, a 17-year old rugby player nearly died of alcohol poisoning from excessive and forced alcohol consumption at a

"rookie party" (Trota & Johnson, 2004). Although each of these incidents exemplifies the graphic and harmful nature of many hazing practices, researchers are still unclear as Predicting Hazing Perpetration 9

to what constitutes typical hazing in Canadian university athletics. To help address this

gap, the rookie hazing experiences of athletes were analyzed in the present study. The

prevalence of 25 different initiation activities (acceptable and hazing) was assessed for

participants over the course of their entire athletic career and on their university team.

The Impact of Hazing

Given the prevalence of hazing (Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999; Hoover &

Pollard, 2000) and the often extreme acts involved (Bryshun, 1997; Koshan, 2005; Trota

& Johsnon, 2004), the potential for negative outcomes is high. Cases of death have been documented not only in the fraternity setting, but also in athletics (Finkel, 2002; Nuwer,

2000; Nuwer, 2004). For example, in 1990 a rookie lacrosse player at Western Illinois

University died following his involvement in a range of hazing activities, including unorthodox calisthenics in his underwear, being paddled by veterans, drinking a concoction of various foods and liquids and being forced to drink large quantities of alcohol (Nuwer, 2000).

Although incidents of death in athletic hazing are rare, incidents of assault occur more frequently (Bryshun, 1999; Hoover, 1999; Nuwer, 2000; Robinson, 1998). Many of the activities and descriptions of hazing provided by Hoover (1999) and Hoover and

Pollard (2000) could be considered assault or abuse. Robinson (1999), who discussed sexual abuse as it relates to hazing in Canadian junior hockey, and Nuwer (2000,2004), who outlined abusive and sexually abusive hazing in a range of sports, both stated that abusive hazing is related to a range of negative physical and psychological sequelae.

It has been suggested that survivors of sexual abuse, harassment, and exploitation in sport may become suicidal, feel lonely and embarrassed, lose their capacity to trust, Predicting Hazing Perpetration 10

become depressed or feel like they are 'owned' by their abusers (Brackenridge, 1997;

Cense, 2001; Konkol, 2009). A case study of a female soccer player demonstrated the

abuse and degradation she faced during her varsity initiation (Sussberg, 2003). These

activities included simulating oral sex on a banana, disrobing, and being verbally

harassed by veterans and her coach. The athlete developed post traumatic stress disorder,

quit playing soccer entirely and withdrew from the university (Sussberg, 2003).

Hazing activities have also been found to result in a wide range of injuries and

medical emergencies (Finkel, 2002). Injuries resulting from hazing can be quite severe.

These injuries have included drowning or near drowning, acute alcohol intoxication, burns, exposure (to cold), near suffocation, blood loss and blunt trauma (Finkel, 2002;

Nuwer, 1999; Nuwer, 2000). These incidents may result in acute difficulties or may become chronic, having a lasting impact on quality of life.

Hazing also has a very public aspect that commonly manifests itself in two ways.

Firstly, Allan and Madden (2008) found that 25% of athletes who were hazed reported that at least some aspect of their hazing occurred in a public place. A second public manifestation of hazing is the posting of photos and videos on Internet-based sites (Allan

& Madden, 2008). Administrators of websites such as Badjocks.com have posted a multitude of hazing incidents including underage drinking, forced exercise, confinement, binge drinking and sexual acts (Waldorn, 2008). The public presentation of hazing activities likely heightens and prolongs the impact of the event (Waldorn, 2008). The perpetuation of embarrassing, humiliating, and illegal activities has the potential to create undue psychological distress for the victim. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 11

Legal Aspects of Hazing

The existence and enforcement of hazing laws varies across the United States and

Canada. For instance, the state of Texas has lengthy statutes with detailed information

for individual and organizational hazing, whereas New York state addresses hazing in

only two sentences (Crow & Phillips, 2004). Hazing activities, such as forced alcohol consumption, addressed by some states may be overlooked in others. Furthermore, there

is little consensus among states regarding which activities constitute hazing. For example, a major problem in defining hazing relates to the issue of consent since, in some states, if consent is given or implied by the rookie, hazing is said not to have occurred; whereas in others, consent cannot be used as a defense by the accused hazer (Rosner & Crow, 2002).

The majority of American states consider hazing to be a misdemeanor offense, with penalties including fines ($10 - $10,000), jail time (10 days to 12 months), expulsion from school and the withholding of diplomas (Rosner & Crow, 2002). The application of hazing statues of law, however, are still quite rare as the majority of hazing incidents are not reported to coaches or administrators. When surveyed, 60% of NCAA athletes endorsed that they would not report hazing to a university official (Hoover, 1999). In addition, the effort warranted to pursue criminal charges is often disproportionate to the resulting minimal penalties (Rosner & Crow, 2002). The bulk of hazing cases reported in the United States tend to involve civil suits rather than criminal charges.

Although 43 states have anti-hazing statues in the U.S., there is no Canadian legislation addressing hazing (Crow & Phillips, 2004). In Canada, hazing is viewed as a prosecutable activity only when the activities that comprise the hazing are covered in other laws (e.g., assault, harassment). Negligence is also a consideration of the Canadian Predicting Hazing Perpetration 12

legal system when it comes to sport organizations and hazing. A duty of care is expected

of team administrators and staff in terms of protecting their athletes. If this care is not

provided, then charges based on negligence could be filed. Consent is not a plausible

defense in Canada as individuals cannot provide consent for others to contravene the law

(Crow & Phillips, 2004).

Although anti-hazing policy has become more common in U.S. fraternity settings, such developments have not been as prevalent in athletics. Recently, a resource document produced in cooperation with the NCAA began to fill this gap by suggesting alternatives to hazing activities for teams (Wilfert, 2007). The hazing prevention document also discussed the role that each of the major stakeholders involved with team leadership (i.e., administrators, coaches, athletes, captains) can play in preventing hazing within their organization (Wilfert, 2007). Although the Wilfert (2007) report serves as a resource for student athletes and team staff, it could be strengthened further by corresponding policy at member institutions and an enhanced theoretical understanding of why hazing occurs and who is most likely to perpetrate hazing activities. With regard to hazing policy, another researcher has suggested that policy makers consider the unique cultures present in each sport, as well as how each sport organization may be best served by a policy that is reflective of its unique needs and circumstances (Findlay, 1998).

Development of hazing policy in Canada is hindered by a number of factors: little is known about its prevalence or impact, the sport environment is complex and entrenched, and there is a lack of understanding of the personal and environmental phenomena that allow hazing to occur. The warning by Bryshun and Young (1999) that strict policy serves only to push hazing out of public view is noteworthy. Understanding Predicting Hazing Perpetration 13

why hazing occurs and which aspects of the sport culture enable hazing to transpire are

potential keys to curbing it, rather than reactive, consequence-driven policy and

inconsistently enforced laws. The following section introduces potential theoretical

explanations for hazing behaviour.

Theoretical Explanations of Hazing in Sport

Theoretical explanations for hazing have been scant and have focused primarily on why hazing persists over time and the rewards associated with perpetrating hazing.

This proposal considers extant theoretical explanations for hazing to illustrate the complexities of the issue and to highlight that, to date, a satisfactory explanation as to which veteran athletes become perpetrators of hazing has yet to have been offered.

Power. The division of status, role, and power between rookie and veteran athletes may be one factor that enables many of the hazing activities that occur in the team setting. Traditionally, athletics is an institution where participants are asked to sacrifice their individualism to become part of a team (Holman, 2004). Teams have rules, routines and rituals that persist over time. Rookies joining the team often enter a cohesive group in which the power structure has already been established, usually in a hierarchical manner (Bryshun, 1997).

Hierarchy is imposed on rookies through the process of initiation and they are pressured to accept their situation of powerlessness (Bryshun & Young, 1999). Leaders and group members typically hold the belief that new initiates should undergo the same initiation process they did (Keating, Pomerantz, Pommer, Ritt, Miller & McCormick,

2005). The process of hazing not only forces rookies to go through a series of sometimes degrading and dangerous acts, but also to internalize the power structure that currently Predicting Hazing Perpetration 14

exists on the team. Some of the violent hazing incidents in hockey discussed previously

not only forced rookies to adopt a new role on the team (regardless of previous identity),

but also reinforced the dominant power position of the veterans (Bryshun, 1997).

Nevertheless, while hazing does appear to be related to power, the power

explanation falls short in explaining why veterans haze rookies. Although, theories of

power (e.g., Bryshun, 1997; Bryshun & Young, 1999; Holman, 2004) discuss the

attractiveness of being in control and the purpose that hazing behaviours may serve to

those with power, they do not explain how individuals within a group can personally inflict various forms of harm on others in the absence of moral self-censuring.

Furthermore, examining power alone overlooks dispositional and environmental influences that may contribute to hazing perpetration. Finally, power theories do not account for why some athletes opt not to haze.

Cognitive dissonance. Another possible theoretical explanation for why hazing persists in the athletic culture is cognitive dissonance. Researchers have demonstrated that the more effort individuals invest in becoming part of a group (whether in the form of time, exertion, pain or money), the more positively they evaluate the result of that effort and the more new members like the group (Aronson & Mills, 1959; Kruger, Wirtz,

Van Boven, & Altermatt, 2004). This can partly be explained using Festinger's

Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957). Dissonance is an uncomfortable psychological state brought about when a person has two discrepant cognitions. In a hazing situation, the person being hazed may believe that he or she is a valuable and respectable person. This cognition would be dissonant with the experience of being yelled at and forced to engage in degrading behaviours. After the individual completes Predicting Hazing Perpetration 15

the initiation process, he or she is motivated to seek support and reassurance for his/her

willingness to be subjected to the hazing. This typically involves validating and

justifying the process endured as important, thereby relieving the dissonance.

Alternatively, cognitive dissonance may be linked to an athlete's perception

regarding the status of the team that he or she has joined. Applying Festinger's (1957)

theory, it may be that dissonance is created through the relationship between the initiation that the athlete has endured and his or her corresponding evaluation of the team whose membership he or she sought. As a result, athletes may be inclined to focus on the positive aspects of the team, downplay the faults, and essentially convince themselves that being on the team was worth enduring the initiation. Cognitive dissonance theory appears to account for how athletes interpret and reframe the hazing experience.

Applying the theory of cognitive dissonance to athletic hazing, Hinkle (2006) examined participants' responses to a hazing questionnaire, a brief narrative description of their hazing encounters and an interview regarding their experiences. Hinkle (2006) found that hazed athletes actively downplayed the impact of the hazing experience, rationalized their participation in it, and justified their experiences as meaningful. Hazing was viewed as a rite of passage to get onto the team and strong athletic identities may have influenced the rookies' willingness to accept the hazing ritual (Hinkle, 2006).

These findings were viewed as indicative of the process of cognitive dissonance (Hinkle,

2006). In other words, valuing their group membership, individuals downplayed the negatives of the initiation process. This rationalized view of the hazing experience serves to legitimize hazing activities as an integral part of team membership, with the negative attributes of hazing being ignored or reframed so as to avoid cognitive dissonance. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 16

While it appears that cognitive dissonance accounts for certain aspects of the

hazing experience, the process and extent of hazing perpetration is not accounted for.

The dissonance explanation helps clarify how rookies justify the psychological discomfort brought about by being subjected to a hazing ritual, but it is unlikely that the decision to perpetrate hazing is due exclusively to these personal rationalizations about one's own experiences. It is more probable that decisions to perpetrate hazing are influenced by a combination of social, environmental and personal factors.

In summary, although the power and cognitive dissonance theories explain some elements of the hazing process, they do not fully address the structural, environmental, social and motivational influences that allow hazing perpetration to occur. Hazing perpetration is likely influenced by more than the cognitive dissonance experienced by hazing victims or the impact of having power and being in control; hazing, in a behavioural sense, is the commitment of abusive or degrading acts toward another person. As a result of these theoretical inadequacies, this exploratory study seeks a more comprehensive theoretical structure.

Through the interactionist perspective provided by SCT the interplay between environmental, personal and behavioural factors can be explored. SCT can provide theoretical insight into how individuals are influenced by personal and environmental factors in the perpetration of hazing behaviours. It is unlikely that a single variable can account for all veteran hazing activities. Rather, a combination of personal and environmental factors, and the interactions between them, may be most predictive of who engages in the perpetration of hazing activities. Therefore, SCT has been chosen as the theoretical model to explore the veteran athlete's perpetration of hazing. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 17

Social Cognitive Theory

SCT has been widely used to explain the behaviour of both individuals and

groups (Bandura, 1999; Hafez, 2006; Murnan, Sharma & Lin, 2006; Van Zundert, Nijhof

& Engels, 2009; Wallace, Buckworth, Kirby & Sherman, 2000). Proponents of SCT

argue that behaviour is determined by the interaction of a triad of variables, including

personal factors, behaviour and the environment (Bandura, 1986) (See Figure 1, p. 18).

The interplay among the triad of factors is bi-directional, but the variables do not

necessarily influence behaviour equally. For example, a hockey player who physically

fights an opposing player during a game may be strongly influenced by the team's support for the activity (environmental factor) and the occurrence of certain incidents that led to frustration during the game (environmental factor). Thus, personal factors, such as being predominantly non-violent and non-aggressive, although related to behaviour, may be superseded by environmental determinants.

These three factors (personal, environmental, behavioural) interact through what

Bandura (1996) refers to as the five basic human capabilities. The first is symbolic capability, which enables individuals to add meaning and contiguity to their experiences through the formation of symbols (i.e., images, words). Individuals then store these experiences in their memories and use them to guide future behaviour. The ability to use thought as the basis for action does not mean that individuals always make sound decisions regarding how to act. In fact, thinking can be the cause of human failure, if the symbols or information used to make decisions are faulty, misrepresent the situation or Predicting Hazing Perpetration 18

Behavioural Factors

Personal Environmental Factors Factors

Figure 1. Social Cognitive Theory theorizes an interaction between behavioural, personal and environmental factors. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 19

do not encompass the full consequences of the action (Bandura, 1986).

The second basic capability is vicarious capability through which individuals are

able to learn about certain behaviours and their outcomes by observing others, rather than

engaging in the behaviour themselves (Bandura, 1986). This allows humans to avoid

time-consuming trial and error, in which the errors can have severe consequences.

Vicarious capability allows individuals to learn important information about actions and

consequences without extending personal boundaries. Modeling, which is enabled by the vicarious capability, is an essential aspect of learning, especially where new social environments and behavioural expectations are present (Bandura, 1986). According to

Bandura (1986), modeling is a powerful means of transmitting values, attitudes and patterns of thought and behaviour. The influence of behavioural models (e.g., veterans) may have explicit implications for how hazing behaviours are perpetuated. Bandura further specified several modeling phenomena, including: observational learning effects, inhibitory/disinhibitory effects, response facilitation effects, environmental enhancement effects and arousal effects. The impact of these various modeling effects on behaviour is moderated by attention, retention, production and motivation-based processes.

Forethought is the third basic human capability and represents an individual's capability to anticipate and plan his or her own behaviour. People do not simply live and react to their immediate environment; rather, they engage in purposeful actions aimed at future goals, consequences, and expectations. Forethought reduces the importance of the immediate environment and can result in behaviours that may seem unexpected for a given situation (e.g., a rookie dressing up in a costume and attending class or drinking alcohol to the point of becoming ill). People may be motivated to engage in foresightful Predicting Hazing Perpetration 20

behaviours because of future plans, goals or needs (Bandura, 1986). Furthermore,

individuals in an environment where certain behaviours are rewarded (e.g., hazing) may

purposefully engage in these activities to meet a need or attain a benefit. Through

exercise of forethought, people guide their behaviour in an anticipatory manner (Bandura,

1991).

The fourth capability is self-regulation. The self-regulatory capability allows

people to have control over their actions, thoughts and feelings. The external environment plays a large role in influencing behaviours; however, individuals can act with purpose and not simply respond to environmental cues through self-regulation.

After personal standards have been established, discrepancies between behaviour and these standards result in evaluative self-reactions, which influence subsequent behaviours. These evaluative reactions may be self-rewarding or self-sanctioning and play an important role in determining which behaviours will be chosen for future situations. Self-reward and self-sanctioning occur anticipatorily and therefore require the capability of forethought (Bandura, 1991). Self- regulation is of particular importance when considering hazing, as inflicting abuse, harm or embarrassment onto another may violate many personal standards of behaviour. The way in which individuals circumvent the self-sanctioning process may be an important component of how and why individuals perpetrate hazing behaviours.

The final basic human capability is self-reflection, through which individuals can assess their own behaviours and thoughts and make adjustments in the future. Through this process, individuals can modify their behaviour and their thinking. Self-efficacy is a major component of self-reflection and refers to an individual's beliefs about his or her Predicting Hazing Perpetration 21

abilities and potential (Bandura, 1986). One particular component of self-efficacy

applicable to the current research relates to how efficacious athletes feel to influence their

environment. Athletes who believe that they will be inefficacious in producing change

are unlikely to attempt to influence an environment that is supportive of hazing and may

instead participate in the hazing behaviours perpetrated by the group.

Behaviours of violence, abuse, harassment and degradation are typically viewed

negatively in society on legal, ethical and moral grounds; however, when these

behaviours occur in athletic hazing rituals, they are met with little formal consequence

(Hoover, 1999; Rosner & Crow, 2003). The basic human capabilities outlined above can assist in explaining why these behaviours occur in hazing, especially when the self-

regulatory and vicarious capabilities are considered; however, SCT also acknowledges

that the social environment can have a significant impact on behaviour. This is pertinent to the current study because athletic environments are inextricable from the hazing process. SCT emphasizes the triadic reciprocity of personal, behavioural and environmental factors. Both personal and environmental factors may be predictive of hazing behaviour and are presented in following sections.

Personal Factors

Moral disengagement. Moral reasoning, which can be conceptualized as one's own view regarding the morality of a specific behaviour, is translated into action through self-regulatory procedures, such as self-sanction and self-reward (Bandura, 2002).

Nevertheless, even the most profound moral reasoning does not necessarily result in moral action if there are breakdowns in the process of self-regulation. There are certain situations where individuals behave in accordance with their self-standards and other Predicting Hazing Perpetration 22

situations where individuals free themselves from moral sanctions and engage in

behaviour they might typically find immoral. As a result, despite having a set of moral standards, it is an individual's ability to activate and deactivate internal controls that lead to moral or immoral acts (Bandura, 1986).

Violating one's moral standards often brings about self-condemnation, an

uncomfortable psychological state that people try to avoid (Bandura, 1986). Avoiding self-condemnation differs from cognitive dissonance in that the purpose is to avoid situations that create psychological discomfort, rather than restructure thoughts to lessen the effect. Moral agency guides individuals to operate within their own moral standards; however, people are not programmed moral agents who are unaffected by the social and environmental contexts in which they live (Bandura, 1986).

The social situations in which people choose, or are forced to live, present many moral dilemmas. Military and law enforcement professionals are often put in positions where they are required to inflict harm on others; a behaviour that may violate their prevailing moral standards (Bandura, 1999). Being an athlete on a competitive sports team may also present moral dilemmas. Morally laden situations emphasize the role of morals in everyday life, but also demonstrate that seemingly morally-grounded individuals can circumvent the process of self-sanctioning. This deactivation of moral self-sanctioning is achieved through a process of moral disengagement and has important implications for hazing perpetration.

SCT incorporates the role of the social environment, with particular regard to its impact on self-regulatory systems. Bandura (1986) stated that environmental influences can affect the operation of the self-regulatory system in three major ways: they can Predicting Hazing Perpetration 23

influence the development of self-regulatory sub-functions, provide support for

adherence to internal behavioural standards, and facilitate the selective activation and

disengagement of self-regulatory processes. The disengagement of self-regulatory

processes is pertinent to the present research. Specifically, the ways in which internal standards of morality are set aside by athletes as they engage in the hazing of newcomers to their teams, is emphasized in this study. Eight mechanisms of moral disengagement act individually and collectivity at three particular points (levels) of influence - the reprehensible conduct itself, the detrimental effects of the conduct, and the victim of the conduct (See Figure 2, p. 24).

The first type of moral disengagement is moral justification. In this process, individuals cognitively reconstruct their detrimental conduct into something that is personally and socially acceptable by deeming that it serves a productive function

(Bandura, 1999). Moral justification occurs at the level of the reprehensible conduct itself and can transpire in many different ways. For example, soldiers are not morally altered in a permanent fashion in order to kill the 'enemy'. Rather, the killing of the enemy is justified by the belief that this behaviour is serving some superior moral or social purpose, thus disengaging the self-regulatory function. This is applicable to the hazing situation, as veterans may choose to focus on the perceived team-building function of initiation, rather than focus on the potentially injurious nature of the acts being committed.

Euphemistic labeling is another mechanism of moral disengagement operating at the level of reprehensible conduct (Bandura, 1999). It has been found that people behave Predicting Hazing Perpetration 24

Moral Justification Disregard and Distortion of Dehumanization Euphemistic Labeling the Consequences Attribution of Blame Advantageous Comparison

REPREHENSIBLE * DETRIMENTAL * VICTIM CONDUCT EFFECTS

Displacement of Responsibility Diffusion of Responsibility

Figure 2. Bandura's mechanisms of moral disengagement model and the level at which each mechanism influences the commitment of inhumanities. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 25

more maliciously when their actions are stated in less severe or neutral terms

(Diener,Dineen, Endresen, Beaman & Fraser, 1975). Diener and colleagues (1975) found

that adults behaved more than twice as aggressively when their behaviour was labeled as

a 'game' rather than as 'aggression'. These sanitizing euphemisms are often used in

hazing when rookies are said to be have "earned their stripes", "gone through team orientation", or "participated in initiation activities".

Another way that perpetrators make culpable behaviour appear acceptable is

through the use of advantageous comparison. This form of moral disengagement uses the contrast principle, in which judgments about an activity largely depend on comparisons (Bandura, 1999). Essentially, the degree of cruelty or inhumanity perceived to be in a behaviour depends on the types of behaviours to which it is compared

(Bandura, 1999). Perpetrators of hazing may engage in any number of exonerative social comparisons including comparing the activities they are perpetrating to the hazing they endured or to more extreme hazing activities perceived to be carried out on other teams or at other institutions.

The first three types of disengagement outlined above involve cognitively restructuring the reprehensible conduct. Acts that were originally viewed as morally condemnable become restructured in a way that makes them accepted or valued.

Individuals do not typically engage in reprehensible behaviour until they have moral justification (Kelman, 1973) and, therefore, the advanced restructuring of hazing is important in influencing future actions and behaviours.

Other moral disengagement mechanisms may serve to reduce the perceived role that the individual plays in the commitment of harmful acts and their detrimental effects. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 26

The first such mechanism is the displacement of responsibility, which involves displacing

the responsibility for one's behaviours onto a higher source of authority, thus allowing

the individual to exempt him/herself from moral self-evaluation (Bandura, 1999). In

these cases, people will behave in ways they would normally renounce if an authority,

deemed to be legitimate, accepts responsibility for the conduct (e.g., military colonel,

head coach). This phenomenon has been demonstrated in the seminal research by

Milgram (1974) where participants continued to invoke physical pain on others in the

form of an electrical shock, despite the victim's pleas to stop. This behaviour was carried out because an authority (the researcher) gave them an order to continue. In the context of hazing, individuals can sometimes displace responsibility for their acts on the team, captain or coach. In addition, it is possible that veterans could suggest that they are simply following the traditions of the team and, therefore, had no choice but to act in the manner that they did.

Hazing acts are more often carried out in a team setting than by individuals acting on their own (Bryshun, 1997; Nuwer, 2000). Thus, diffusion of responsibility is also an applicable form of moral disengagement in the hazing context. Personal moral agency becomes obscured when an individual plays only a small part in the overall act or when the decision to engage in an act was made in a group context (Bandura, 1999). The concept of diffusion of responsibility has been demonstrated by Bandura, Underwood, and Fromson (1975), where participants behaved more aggressively when not the sole cause of a punitive action. Bandura (2007) has also described how diffusion of responsibility is present during executions. The tasks associated with preparing an individual for execution is highly fragmented amongst a large number of prison staff Predicting Hazing Perpetration 27

thereby reducing feelings of personal responsibility. Being able to diffuse responsibility,

as well as utilize other mechanisms of moral disengagement, frees those responsible for

putting an inmate to death from the moral self-censuring that might otherwise be

associated with such an act.

Disregard and distortion of the consequence is another means of weakening

moral agency at the level of the detrimental effects. Through this process, those

committing the negative behaviours separate themselves from the consequences of their action. The relevance of one's consequence-ownership is evident in the Milgram (1974) obedience study. Participants under the condition of commanded aggression saw the pain caused by their actions and, as this became more evident, they were less likely to comply with the researcher (Milgram, 1974). Thus, as the consequences of an aggressive act become undeniable, the proneness to disengage morally appears to be reduced. This mechanism of moral disengagement is applicable to hazing activities in that it is possible for veterans to ignore or minimize the consequences of their actions by ignoring any harm they may have caused. In addition, athletes are often adept at hiding pain, so the consequences of the hazing act (physical, psychological and emotional) are not as salient as with other groups (Gervais, 2004). As long as the detrimental impact of one's behaviour is ignored, distorted, or minimized, it is unlikely that moral self-sanctioning will occur.

The final domain in which moral disengagement occurs is at the level of the victim. Human qualities promote empathic emotional reactions; therefore, to disengage morally, it is essential that the perpetrator downplay the human qualities and perceived similarities between him/herself and the victim (Bandura, 1986). Dehumanization is one Predicting Hazing Perpetration 28 of the more widely investigated mechanisms of moral disengagement. In a survey of

1,499 randomly selected participants, McAlister, Bandura and Owen (2006) tested the influence of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. on moral disengagement. Support for military action against Iraq after the attack increased from

70% to 81%. The dehumanization of terrorists showed a marked increase as well, with respondents being more likely to agree that terrorists do not deserve to be treated like humans, and that "enemy rulers" and their followers were no different than animals.

Similarly, when rookies are denigrated, it may be easier for veterans to haze them, despite the common connection of being on the same team. In sport, new players are not deemed to be on par with the veterans until they have completed the initiation process

(Gervais, 2004). In this capacity, rookies are often made to wear costumes, are referred to as "rooks" or "grunts" and deemed to be less than full individuals.

Dehumanization may be further relevant in athletic hazing as veterans are typically in a position of coercive power and are often not required to answer to others for these activities. Veterans and leaders on sports teams are often flattered and privileged, resulting in an inflated personal view (Bandura, 1986). The label associated with one's position (i.e., veteran) may make it easier to view newcomers to the team as less worthy than oneself. When this is combined with the active dehumanization (e.g., use of degrading labels or costumes) described above, the likelihood of hazing is increased.

Bandura (1986) suggested that humanization and dehumanization may be of considerable theoretical and social significance as far as the prevention of injurious conduct is concerned. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 29

The second victim-based element of moral disengagement is attribution of blame.

By attributing the blame for one's injurious actions to others or to the situation, an

individual is able to escape moral self-censure (Bandura, 1999). Attribution of blame has

been found to be a significant means for prison guards involved in the execution process to disengage morally (Osofsky, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 2005). In the hazing context, it is possible that rookies get blamed for the hazing because they are too defiant, too compliant, too emotional, or not emotional enough.

Despite the potential relationship between moral disengagement and hazing, the theory of moral disengagement has not been explored in the hazing literature. Although other theories are useful in explaining elements of hazing, moral disengagement, within

SCT, may be instrumental in understanding how individuals are able to haze. The theory of moral disengagement has been outlined to emphasize the potential applicability to hazing, especially with respect to those elements within the team environment that permit such acts.

Moral Disengagement and morally questionable acts. The concept of moral disengagement has been researched in situations that have relevant moral overtones. One particular area assessed by McAlister (2001) was the relationship between proneness for moral disengagement and support for war. McAlister reported that those who supported wars in both Iraq (Gulf War) and Yugoslavia had significantly higher moral disengagement scores.

The role of moral disengagement has also been studied in the context of death penalty executions. Osofsky and colleagues (2005) found that prison guards, who were involved in an execution, had higher levels of moral disengagement than both prison Predicting Hazing Perpetration 30

guards not involved in the execution or social workers associated with the execution.

Although the death penalty scenario may be more morally laden than hazing, the

theoretical potential of moral disengagement as a precursor to hazing is plausible. This is

especially true since moral disengagement has been used to demonstrate how morally

questionable acts occur free from moral self-sanctions. By understanding the moral processes that allow hazing activities, the breadth of potential intervention may be enhanced. Moral disengagement theory may also broaden the overall theoretical understanding of hazing and help further conceptualize the issues associated with it.

Therefore, with a focus on predicting hazing behaviour, moral disengagement is an important personal factor in the SCT model.

Gender. A second personal factor that may contribute to the perpetration of hazing is gender. Johnson, Greaves and Repta (2009) discussed the different ways that gender can be operationalized in research. Researchers may examine gender identity, gender roles, gender relations and institutionalized gender. Institutionalized gender focuses on how powerful institutions shape social norms and promote different expectations and opportunities for women and men (Johnson et al., 2009). Sport, as an institution, divides boys and girls at a young age thereby exposing them to different norms, pressures, models and expectations. For the purposes of the current research, gender will be viewed primarily as an institutionalizing force that has significant implications for the social environments in which boys and girls develop.

In a nationwide U.S. study examining a range of university groups (including varsity athletics), men (61%) were more likely than women (52%) to have experienced hazing as a part of joining their group (Allan & Madden, 2008). Other researchers have Predicting Hazing Perpetration 31

found that there are both similarities and dissimilarities for men and women who

experience hazing (Hoover, 1999). For instance, men and women reported similar rates

of participating in calisthenics not related to the sport (men 14%, women 11%), acting as

a personal servant to veterans (men 10%, women 8%), and participating in drinking contests (men 35%, women 34%); however, men were more likely than women to report participating in violent forms of hazing including destroying or stealing property (men

11%, women 5%) and being paddled, whipped or beaten (men 5%, women 1%) (Hoover,

1999). Hoover found that men (68%) were slightly more likely than women (63%) to take part in at least one questionable (embarrassing or degrading) activity, but men were much more likely to have participated in at least one unacceptable (dangerous or illegal) activity (men 27%, women 16%). Keating and colleagues (2005) found that men were significantly more likely to have endured painful, socially deviant, and psychologically challenging initiations than were women. Men also report involvement in multiple hazing activities more often than do women (Hoover, 1999).

Hazing practices in fraternities not only occur more frequently and intensely than in sororities, but also involve more violent activities (Allan, 2005). Nuwer states that,

"although some violent hazing, alcohol misuse and even branding have occurred in college sororities, hazing has been far less a problem in female clubs than in male fraternities" (Nuwer, 2000, p. 36). The incidents of death and injury from hazing in fraternities vastly outnumber those found in sororities (Allan, 2005).

Gender differences have also been found in cases of military hazing (Pershing,

2006). In a questionnaire-based study examining hazing practices at the U.S. Naval

Academy, only male recruits reported experiences of abusive hazing, such as being tied Predicting Hazing Perpetration 32

up or beaten (Pershing, 2006). There were, however, more similarities than differences

between men and women in hazing experiences reported in this study. An important

consideration is that in this examination of military hazing, men and women participated

in training and non-training activities together. Therefore, the hazing of women was

carried out by both men and women, with men doing the majority of the hazing

(Pershing, 2006). As men predominantly hazed the women in this study, the differences

between the genders in terms of the frequency and degree to which they were hazed may have been obscured.

The majority of the research to date has focused on experiences of hazing as a victim (rookie). Comparisons between genders have also primarily been made in terms of rookie experiences; however, a study assessing participation in hazing across a range of university groups found that men (8.8%) were significantly more likely to be self- defined hazers than were women (5.4%) (Campo et al., 2005).

In summary, women are less likely to be intensely hazed (e.g., physical abuse, kidnapping, confinement) and tend to participate in fewer hazing activities overall than do men (Allan, 2005; Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999; Keating et al., 2005; Nuwer,

2000). Preliminarily, it also appears that men are more likely to define themselves as hazers than are women. Where gender and hazing is concerned, SCT may account for hazing differences in two particular ways. First, personal differences between men and women may contribute to differences in hazing perpetration. Second, institutionalized gender segregation may contribute to the development of unique social environments that predispose male athletes to more hazing activities than female athletes. Elements of these gendered environments may impact self-regulatory processes and vicarious learning Predicting Hazing Perpetration 33

differently for men than women. Thus, gender may be an important predictor of who is

more likely to perpetrate hazing as a veteran.

Attitudes toward initiation. Along with the personal factors of gender and moral

disengagement, attitudes toward initiation may also be predictive of hazing behaviour.

According to the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), people's attitudes and the subjective

norms of their environment have a direct influence on their behavioural intentions, which are the immediate antecedents to behaviour (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen,

1975). Within SCT, attitudes and beliefs about certain behaviour may serve as personal factors that, through triadic reciprocity, influence and are influenced by environmental and behavioural factors. Given the potential relationship between attitudes, intentions and behaviours, athletes' hazing attitudes may serve as personal factors capable of predicting hazing behaviour.

There has been debate over the utility of using attitudes to predict behaviour; however, attitudes have been shown to have predictive ability under certain conditions

(Ajzen, 2001; Kraus, 1996). Attitudes are most predictive of behaviours when they are highly embedded (Prislin & Ouellette, 1996) and when the person holding the attitude has a vested interest in the subject matter (Crano, 1997). Given the long exposure to sport typically required of an athlete to reach varsity status at university, attitudes regarding initiation are likely well formed by the time the athlete reaches that level. Indeed, many athletes are subjected to initiation activities during their freshman year of high school

(Hoover and Pollard, 2000). The development of an embedded attitude is plausible with early and persistent exposure to hazing. Athletes on sports teams may also have a vested interest in the activities that they and their team participate in as these teams comprise a Predicting Hazing Perpetration 34

significant proportion of their social network and identity (Hinkle, 2008; Holman, 2004;

Robinson, 1998).

Cokley and colleagues (2001) examined the relationship between attitudes toward

initiation in college fraternities and a series of other variables. The authors indicated that men were more likely to believe in the importance of conforming to initiation rules than were women, and women were more likely to believe that initiation should be a positive experience (Cokley et al., 2001). Additionally, members of U.S. fraternities and sororities had more positive beliefs about the purpose of pledging than did non-members (Cokley et al., 2001). Although this research does not directly link attitudes with behaviours, the findings regarding attitudes are consistent with research on hazing behaviours, suggesting construct validity. For instance, men are more likely to haze than are women (Hoover,

1999) and members of fraternities and sororities are more likely to haze than are non- members (Campo et al., 2005).

Attitudes and aggressive behaviour in sport have also been linked: Nixon (1997) found that athletes who reported more favourable attitudes toward the importance of toughness in sport were more likely to engage in aggressive behaviours in their everyday lives. Thus, with the support for a link between attitudes and behaviour (Crano, 1997;

Prislin & Ouellette, 1996) and preliminary findings in the hazing field by Cokley and colleagues (2001), initiation attitudes are viewed here as another potential predictor of hazing behaviour.

Previous hazing activities as a rookie. Nearly all perpetrators of hazing (i.e., veterans) were once victims (i.e., rookies) and these experiences as hazing victims may have an impact on the range and frequency of hazing activities they choose to engage in Predicting Hazing Perpetration 35

as veterans. As the hazing literature does not address why this cycle may occur, other

relevant literature was explored, including research on sexual abuse. With regard to the

victim to perpetrator phenomenon, researchers have found that 61% of pedophilia victims

became perpetrators, while 75% of victims of both pedophilia and incest were also

perpetrators (Glasser, Kolvin, Campbell, Glasser, Leitch, & Farrelly, 2001).

Additionally, it has been demonstrated that the proportion of male pedophiles that report having been sexually abused as a child is larger (28.6%) than that of men who have not been charged with a sexual offense (13.9%) (Freund, Watson, & Dickey, 1990).

The findings mentioned above indicate that victims of sexual abuse are more likely to become perpetrators than non-victims. Theoretical explanations for the transformation from victim to perpetrator have been offered. One theory argues that emotionally-deprived youth can be more easily seduced by an adult, resulting in a youth more likely to bond and identify with this adult (Glasser et al., 2001). The memories of childhood abuse create feelings of weakness and passivity. The subsequent future abuse by the once-victim upon a new victim is an attempt to gain mastery over these feelings

(Glasser et al., 2001). Other researchers have theorized that becoming an abuser is an attempt to overcome the feelings of powerlessness created when they were a victim

(Bolton, Morris, & MacEachron, 1989). According to attachment theory, maltreatment primes the emotional system to seek protection (Bowlby, 1969). When the only potential caregiver available is the individual perpetrating the abuse, affiliative responses may be directed toward him or her (Bowlby, 1969). In the hazing context, Keating and colleagues (2005) found that individuals experiencing discomforting initiations showed a stronger interpersonal attraction to the agents of initiation than did participants receiving Predicting Hazing Perpetration 36

an innocuous induction process. The heightened interpersonal attraction, resulting from

more severe initiations, could potentially promote conformity in both opinion and

behaviour.

Although the experiences of childhood sexual abuse are quite removed from athletic hazing, some theoretical insight is gained by reviewing this work. For instance, rookie athletes may identify with the older veterans on their team, and may eventually model the activities to which they were subjected. It is also conceivable that experiencing the power, control and respect associated with becoming a hazer is an effective strategy to overcome past feelings of weakness.

Rookies may learn about the benefits of being a hazer through the vicarious capability described within SCT (Bandura, 1996). As rookie victims, athletes observe veterans exercise power over them through hazing. During this process, rookie victims may also observe the benefits to veterans of engaging in these activities, and seek to model these behaviours to experience the same rewards. Veteran athletes serve as salient models in the acquisition of hazing activities. Furthermore, the heightened interpersonal connection between the rookies and veterans brought about by more severe hazing may also serve to make imitation, in an attempt to please, more likely. Thus, the inclusion of rookie experiences with hazing may add valuable predictive insight to hazing perpetration.

Environmental Factors

As noted previously, SCT emphasizes the interaction of personal, behavioural and environmental factors. Bandura (1986) posited that environmental influences may have a direct impact on the self-regulatory sub-functions of SCT. Specifically, social factors Predicting Hazing Perpetration 37

influence the development of moral standards, provide support for adhering to them and,

most importantly to this review, facilitate selective activation and disengagement of

moral self-regulation (Bandura, 1991). Within the sport environment, there are a number of environmental factors that may influence the propensity of athletes to haze, including team size and the degree of physical contact in the sport.

Team size. Team size may be a relevant factor in predicting hazing behaviour because of the interaction between group size and moral disengagement, and the subsequent impact on the self-regulatory capability of SCT. One particular mechanism of moral disengagement related to team size is diffusion of responsibility (Bandura,

1999). It is possible as team size increases, so does the likelihood that responsibility for hazing behaviours will be diffused throughout the group. Thus, similar to Bandura's

(2007) finding that diffusion of responsibility, created through the fragmentation of roles and responsibilities amongst a group of prison guards, reduces the personal responsibility felt by the guards during an execution, it is possible that as team size grows, the experience of individual responsibility is lessened, resulting in an increased likelihood of engaging in hazing behaviour. For example, on a team of two (e.g., sailing) with only one veteran and one rookie, there would be no fragmentation of initiation tasks. The one individual responsible for initiation would be unable to diffuse responsibility for any wrongful or injurious actions taken. Individuals competing on a team with two members would be hypothesized to perpetrate fewer hazing behaviours than those on a team of 25.

Therefore, whilst engaged in hazing, being a member of a large team may facilitate the disengagement of associated self-sanctioning reactions. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 38

Additionally, larger team size may promote deindividuation, which occurs when

individuals feel less identifiable (Diener, 1980). Deindividuation is the experience of a

loss of individuality, self-evaluation apprehension and self-awareness, and occurs when

joining a group (Diener, 1980). It has been suggested that deindividuation causes

individuals to perpetrate wrongdoing and commit aggressive acts (Zimbardo, 2004).

Kugihara (2001) found that as group size increases, the experience of deindividuation

becomes more likely and the degree of aggressive behaviour is greater. Within

deindividuation theory and the theory of moral disengagement, team size may also be

related to displacement of responsibility, as there are more stakeholders on which to

blame the activity when team size is larger (Bandura, 1999). Athletes may feel that if

they are only one of many involved, they will be less likely to be personally punished for their involvement in the hazing activities. With larger teams having more veterans involved in the hazing process, the increased anonymity may enhance an individual's willingness to perpetrate hazing behaviours against others.

Conformity is a process in which individuals modify their responses, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours to match those of a group (Asch, 1955; Hodges & Geyer, 2006).

Conformity is most likely to occur when individuals have a desire to achieve a sense of security or belongingness with a valued group, and non-conforming carries social risks including rejection and ostracism. Bond (2005) found that the size of the group also influences conformity. In a meta-analysis of 125 conformity studies it was concluded that the size of the group has a positive linear relationship with conformity in situations where tested responses were public (Bond, 2005). According to Kelman (1958), conformity can occur in three main ways: compliance (public conformity while keeping Predicting Hazing Perpetration 39

own private beliefs), identification (conforming to someone who is liked and respected)

and internalization (confirming in both private beliefs and public displays). The public

manifestations of conformity are most relevant to engagement in hazing behaviours. In

athletics, public conformity to team rituals and traditions could be viewed as an

expectation of team membership for rookies and veterans alike. Increased conformity

may be plausible on larger teams due to the public nature of initiation practices in

athletics.

Finally, large groups with a history of initiation may overpower any non-

consenting opinions. As teams are supposed to be cohesive and the power hierarchy is to

be respected, those with opposing views may be hesitant to express them and feel less efficacious to make any type of meaningful change (Bandura, 1991; Bryshun & Young,

1997). Because of the potential for deindividuation, increased conformity and the interaction with components of moral disengagement, team size may contribute to explaining hazing behaviour.

Degree of physical contact. The degree of physical contact in a sport may also serve as an important environmental determinant of hazing behaviour. Silva (1983) classified sports into the following three categories: collision (physical contact is necessary and integral to play), contact (physical contact is legal and occurs incidentally), and non-contact (physical contact between opponents is not allowed). The degree of physical contact permitted in a sport has been related to higher levels of aggression, both in the sporting domain and outside of it. Sports with more contact have been found to have higher levels of extra-sport aggression. Nixon (1997) surveyed 218 U.S. varsity athletes at an NCAA Division 1 university. Of those surveyed, 49% of men and 22.7% Predicting Hazing Perpetration 40

of women contact sport athletes reported being aggressors outside of their sport. The

proportion of contact athletes who reported being aggressors was found to be significantly greater than non-contact sport athletes, among whom only 22.7% of men and 6% of women reported being aggressors outside of sport. Athletes competing in contact and collision sports report more legitimacy in aggressive behaviour than non- contact sport athletes (Conroy, Silva, Newcomer, Walker, & Johnson, 2001).

Furthermore, collision sport athletes are expected to engage in activities on the field of play that cause them to use their body as a tool, depersonalize their opponent and demonstrate toughness and courage through ignoring injury or pain (Allan & DeAngelis,

2004). Collision sports have been considered to promote a hyper-masculine environment where athletic prowess and toughness are valued (Allan & DeAngelis, 2004; Mosher &

Sirkin, 1984). Veteran athletes in collision sports may be more likely to perpetrate hazing, as the hazing process serves as an opportunity to demonstrate their own toughness, as well as test the toughness and masculinity of the rookies joining their team.

Furthermore, consistent with SCT, athletes in collision sports may learn vicariously through veteran models who exhibit aggressive behaviours and are subsequently rewarded. Athletes in aggressive collision sports may be exposed to models more likely to haze than their counterparts in non-collision sports. This vicarious learning may lead to differences between collision and non-collision sport athletes.

In qualitative interviews with five former collegiate and professional hockey players, Pappas, McKenry and Catlett (2004) found that aggression on the ice was related to aggression in daily life and interpersonal relationships. Aggressive behaviours were not just a manifestation of pre-existing tendencies, but were also a product of sport Predicting Hazing Perpetration 41

socialization (Pappas et al., 2004). Being a participant in an aggressive sport socializes

the athlete to be more accepting of violence and to use aggressive behaviours in contexts

other than the sport. A potential context for aggressive behaviours is in the hazing of

rookie athletes.

Further research by Lemieux, McKelvie, and Strout (2002) found that contact sport athletes report higher levels of hostile aggression than non-contact sport athletes.

Hostile aggression refers to aggression that is intended to cause physical harm and is not associated with achieving the goals of the sport, as is the case with instrumental aggression (Tenenbaum, Stewart, Singer, & Duda, 1997). Hostile aggression has been linked to aggressive acts and behaviours outside of the sport (Lemieux et al., 2002).

Some forms of hazing (e.g., paddling, beating) can be viewed as aggressive acts and typically occur outside the field of play. The link between contact sports and off-field aggression may also be relevant to predicting other specific hazing behaviours.

Finally, being a part of an environment where aggression is rewarded may have a direct influence on the development of moral standards for behaviour. According to

SCT, the interplay between personal self-standards and environmental phenomenon has direct implications for the self-regulation of behaviour (Bandura, 1991). Beliefs about what behaviours are worth sanctioning and the rules forjudging behaviours on a moral basis may be heavily influenced by prolonged exposure to these aggressive environments.

Within the sport environment, level of physical contact may serve as an important predictor of hazing behaviours.

Interactions between Personal and Environmental Factors Predicting Hazing Perpetration 42

Bandura (1986) theorized in SCT that behaviour is determined through triadic reciprocity of personal, environmental and behavioural factors (Bandura, 1986). As a means of directly representing this triadic reciprocity, four interactions between personal and environmental factors were considered. The interactions between both environmental factors (i.e., team size and degree of physical contact) and two personal factors (moral disengagement and gender) were examined.

Moral disengagement x team size. The interaction between the personal factor, moral disengagement, and the environmental factor, team size, may predict hazing perpetration as a veteran. Moral disengagement has been linked to the perpetration of injurious acts (Bandura, 1999,2007; Osofsky et al., 2005) and is composed of eight mechanisms of disengagement (Bandura, 1999). One mechanism of moral disengagement is diffusion of responsibility, under which individuals are able to escape moral self-sanctioning because responsibility for the act is shared amongst a group

(Bandura, 1999). Furthermore, Diener (1980) argued that deindividuation occurs in group settings and Zimbardo (2004) suggested that deindividuation is related to engagement in aggressive acts. Bandura (1991), also suggested that environmental factors may affect the operation of the self-regulatory system by facilitating the selective deactivation of self-sanctions. Team size may be a contributing factor in this regard.

Thus, a cumulative dynamic may exist where individuals on large teams not only experience more deindividuation, but also are more likely to disengage morally. As moral disengagement and team size increase together, the propensity to perpetrate hazing behaviours may be heightened. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 43

Moral disengagement x degree of physical contact. A cumulative effect may also exist between moral disengagement and the degree of physical contact in the sport, whereby individuals already prone to perpetrate hazing, due to heightened levels of moral disengagement, become more prone to do so as a result of the aggressive environment in which they compete (Bandura, 1991; Pappas et al., 2004; Lemieux et al., 2002).

Additionally, being a part of a collision sport environment may influence the rules through which moral behaviour is judged and the very standard of behaviour deemed to be censurable. By combining an athletic environment supportive of aggressive acts, with an individual prone to escape self-sanctioning for injurious behaviours, a cumulative effect where hazing perpetration is more likely could exist.

Gender x team size. Previous research suggests that men (Allan & Madden,

2008; Hoover, 1999) and individuals in large groups (Diener, 1980; Zimbardo, 2004) may be more prone to engage in hazing behaviour. Consistent with triadic reciprocity, environmental factors and personal factors interact with each other. This interaction may account for significant differences in hazing perpetration where men, who are predisposed to perpetrate more hazing than women, in an environment where hazing is more likely (increasingly more likely as team size gets larger), perpetrate more hazing than others.

Gender X degree of physical contact. A final interaction variable that may predict hazing perpetration is composed of gender and the degree of physical contact in the sport.

Men competing in collision sports may be more prone than men in non-collision sports or women in either collision or non-collision sports to perpetrate hazing. Men, who have been found to be more likely to perpetrate violent forms of hazing (Hoover, 1999), Predicting Hazing Perpetration 44

competing in an environment where physical aggression is rewarded (Silva, 1983;

Lemieux et al., 2002), may seek more opportunities to haze than women or men

competing in non-collision sports. The propensity for the engagement in hyper- masculine behaviours may also be impacted by this interaction. Men in an environment where dangerous and aggressive acts are rewarded may be more prone to engage in these activities both during competition and outside of it. Indeed, men have been found to be more than twice as likely as women to report engaging in aggressive behaviours outside of their respective collision sport environments (Nixon, 1997).

Summary of Literature

The majority of hazing research has focused on the prevalence rates and nature of hazing victimization. Hazing has been shown to be prevalent in athletics with a multitude of negative consequences (Allan & Madden, 2008; Bryshun, 1997; Finkle,

2002; Hoover, 1999; Hoover & Pollard, 2000; Nuwer, 2000; Nuwer, 2004; Robinson,

1998). With an understanding of the potential negative outcomes associated with hazing, attempts to limit hazing through legal and political means have been made; however, efforts to curb hazing have been only marginally effective (Crow & Phillips, 2004;

Findlay, 1998; Rosner & Crow, 2002; Wilfert, 2007). One particular challenge to developing anti-hazing policy is the lack of theoretical understanding about why, and by whom hazing is perpetrated. To date, cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957;

Kruger et al., 2004; Hinkle; 2006) and power based explanations (Bryshun, 1997;

Bryshun & Young; 1999; Holman, 2004) for hazing have been offered, but both have proven inadequate in explaining many aspects of hazing behaviour, especially hazing perpetration. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 45

In the present study, SCT was chosen as a theoretical framework for exploring the

predictors of hazing behaviour. SCT has been found to be effective in explaining

phenomena through the triadic reciprocity of personal, environmental and behavioural factors (Bandura, 1999; Hafez, 2006; Murnan, Sharma & Lin, 2006; Van Zundert, Nijhof

& Engels, 2009). These factors interact and influence each other through the five basic human capabilities (symbolic capability, vicarious capability, forethought capability, self- regulatory capability and self-reflective capability). Of particular importance in the present investigation were the self-regulatory and vicarious capabilities described in SCT

(Bandura, 1986; 1991). Many different interrelationships are possible within the model of triadic reciprocity proposed in SCT; however, the present study focused on the prediction of hazing behaviours using environmental and personal factors. As researchers had not delineated which personal and environmental factors may be related to hazing perpetration, the personal and environmental predictors were chosen based on their potential relationships with hazing victimization, self regulation, vicarious learning and other phenomena associated with hazing perpetration.

Previous research has indicated that men are more likely to experience hazing than women; therefore, gender was included as a personal factor in the model (Allan,

2005; Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999). Institutionalized gender segregation in sport may influence the models to which athletes are exposed, the engagement in hyper- masculine activities and the moral standards against which behaviour is judged (Bandura,

1991; Johnson et al., 1999; Mosher & Sirkin, 1984).

Within SCT, self-regulatory processes form the basis for purposeful action and mediate the effects of most external influences (Bandura, 1991). Evaluative self- Predicting Hazing Perpetration 46

reactions (i.e., self-reward, self-sanction) anticipatorily guide future behaviours.

However, individuals can circumvent the self-sanctioning associated with immoral

conduct through the selective disengagement of internal standards of behaviour. This

exoneration from self-sanctioning is accomplished through the application of the eight

mechanisms of moral disengagement. Although the relationship between moral

disengagement and hazing had not been explored previously, moral disengagement has

been linked to a number of injurious behaviours (Bandura, 1999; Hafez, 2006; McAlister

et al., 2006; Osofsky et al., 2005) and was thus included as a personal predictor in this

study. Researchers have related attitudes to behaviours under certain conditions, and

tentative support exists for a link between hazing attitudes and behaviours (Ajzen &

Fishbein, 1980; Cokley et al., 2001; Prislin & Ouellette, 1996). Therefore, two attitudes

toward hazing measures were included.

According the SCT, the vicarious capability allows individuals to learn through

observation and avoid potentially costly trial and error (Bandura, 1986). Observational

learning emphasizes the importance of behavioural models in the acquisition of new

values, attitudes and patterns of behaviour (Bandura, 1986). For rookie athletes, veterans serve as available and salient models of behaviour. The hazing behaviours modeled by veterans and therefore experienced by rookies may be predictive of subsequent hazing perpetration by athletes as they progress from the rookie to veteran role. Although, the relationship between hazing victimization and perpetration has not been explored previously, hazing victimization was included as a personal predictor in the current model. Links between victimization and perpetration have been made in other domains, Predicting Hazing Perpetration 47

including sexual abuse research (Bolton et al., 1989; Freund et al., 1990; Glasser et al.,

2001).

The environmental predictors of team size and degree of physical contact in the sport were included as predictors. SCT acknowledges the influence that environmental

variables have on personal factors such as attitudes and beliefs as well as the influence the environment has on overt behaviour (Bandura, 1986,1991). Identifying, pertinent environmental factors helps complete a predictive model of hazing behaviour. Team size was included as an environmental factor because links have been made between group size, moral disengagement, conformity, deindividuation and aggression (Asch, 1955;

Bandura, 1999; Bond, 2005; Kugihara, 2001; Mullen et al., 1994; Zimbardo, 2004).

The degree of physical contact in the sport was also included because athletes in collision sports have been found to engage in more extra-sport aggression than non contact athletes (Conroy et al., 2001; Lemieux et al., 2002; Nixon, 1997; Pappas et al.,

2004; Silva, 1983). Hypermasculinity is also more likely in collision sport environments and may influence engagement in aggressive or violent hazing behaviours (Mosher &

Sirkin, 1984). Finally, four interactions (moral disengagement x team size, moral disengagement x degree of physical contact, gender x team size, gender x degree of physical contact) were included to emphasize the reciprocal relationships proposed between personal, environmental and behavioural factors in SCT.

Purpose

The primary goal in this study was to test a predictive model of hazing behaviour derived from SCT. Five personal factors (gender, moral disengagement, attitudes toward initiation purpose, attitudes toward initiation difficulty, rookie hazing experiences), two Predicting Hazing Perpetration 48

environmental factors (team size, degree of physical contact) and a set of four

interactions (moral disengagement x team size, moral disengagement x degree of physical contact, gender x team size, gender x degree of physical contact) were used as predictors of hazing. A second goal was to collect data on the rate of hazing in Atlantic University

Sport with a sample balanced for gender, degree of physical contact, and team size.

Hypotheses and Research Questions

A model outlining the hypotheses investigated in this study can be found in

Figure 3 (p. 49).

Research Question 1. Which initiation activities have participants experienced as a rookie over the course of their entire career and during their university team initiation?

Research Question 2, Do personal factors, specifically gender, moral disengagement, attitude toward initiation difficulty, attitude toward initiation purpose, and rookie experiences as a hazing victim, predict the range and frequency of hazing perpetration?

Hypothesis 2a. Men will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated

hazing over a greater number of seasons than women.

Hypothesis 2b. Participants who have a higher propensity to disengage morally

will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater

number of seasons than those with a lower propensity to disengage morally.

Hypothesis 2c. Participants with more favourable attitudes toward difficult

initiations will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing

over a greater number of seasons than those with less favourable attitudes toward

difficult initiations. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 49

Hypothesis 2d. Participants with more favourable attitudes about the purpose of

initiation will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over

a greater number of seasons than those with less favourable attitudes about

initiation purpose.

Hypothesis 2e. Participants who have been subjected to more hazing activities as

a rookie will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over

Behavioural Factors A# of hazing activities used (Hyp-i) A Seasons perpetrating hazing (Hyp-ii)

HYP 4

HYP 2 P X E Interaction Factors HYP 3 4a) AMD x Team Size 4b) AMD x Physical Contact 4c) A Gender x Team Size 4d) A Gender x Physical Contact

Personal Factors Environmental Factors 2a) Male Gender 3a) ATeam Size 2 b) A Moral Disengagement 3 b) A Degree of Physical Contact 2c) A Initiation Attitude (Difficulty) 2d) A Initiation Attitude (Purpose) 2e) A Hazing Experiences as rookie

Figure 3. Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory model with the behavioural, personal, and environmental factors analyzed and corresponding hypotheses. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 50

a greater number of seasons than those who have been subjected to fewer hazing activities.

Research Question 3. Do environmental factors, specifically team size and degree of physical contact in the sport, predict the range and frequency of hazing perpetration?

Hypothesis 3a. Participants competing on larger teams will have (i) used more

hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than

those on smaller teams.

Hypothesis 3b. Participants competing in collision sports will have (i) used more

hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than

those competing in non-collision sports.

Research Question 4. Do personal x environmental interactions, specifically moral disengagement x team size, moral disengagement x degree of physical contact, gender x team size, and gender x degree of physical contact in the sport, predict the range and frequency of hazing perpetration?

Hypothesis 4a. Participants who have a higher propensity to disengage morally

and who compete on larger teams will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) Predicting Hazing Perpetration 51

perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than participants who have a

lower propensity to disengage morally and who compete on smaller teams.

Hypothesis 4b. Participants who have a higher propensity to disengage morally

and who compete in collision sports will have (i) used more hazing activities and

(ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than participants who have a lower propensity to disengage morally and who compete in non-collision sports.

Hypothesis 4c. Men competing on larger teams will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than women competing on smaller teams.

Hypothesis 4d. Men competing in collision sports will have (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than women competing in non-collision sports. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 52

CHAPTER 2: METHOD

Participants

Approximately 2000 athletes from 11 universities compete in the Atlantic

University Sport (AUS) conference annually (Atlantic University Sport, 2007). Of these

athletes, approximately 1400 compete in the sports of hockey, football, soccer,

basketball, volleyball, cross country and rugby. To ensure a sufficient and balanced

number of collision and non-collision athletes, as well as equal numbers of men and

women, participants were recruited from 27 different teams at seven Atlantic Canadian

universities as follows: 1 football team (men), 4 hockey teams (3 men, 1 women), 4 soccer teams (2 men, 2 women), 4 basketball teams (2 men, 2 women), 6 cross country teams (3 men, 3 women), 4 volleyball teams (2 men, 2 women), and 4 rugby teams

(women). Participants were not offered incentives.

Two hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to analyze the data.

An estimated effect size of r2 = 0.175 was used in the calculation of the required sample size. The moderate effect size estimate was based on previous research findings

(Bandura et al., 1996) using the Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement Scale and a pilot test assessing the measure. As a result of multiple significance tests, a Bonferroni correction was applied and alpha was set at p = .025 for the major analyses and hypothesis testing. Using an alpha of/? = .025,11 predictors, an anticipated effect size

(r2) of 0.175, and a beta of 0.80, the minimum required sample size was determined to be

123 participants for the regression analyses.

Four hundred and eighteen athletes participated in this study. As a result of the Predicting Hazing Perpetration 53

over sampling, participants with missing data were deleted listwise without power

constraints. Of the 418 participants, 80 were excluded from the analyses, resulting in a

final sample of 338 athletes. Among the excluded participants, 55 were eliminated

because at least one piece of data was missing, 11 skipped at least one questionnaire, 10

completed some aspect of the questionnaire incorrectly, three had never been a veteran,

and one was a multivariate outlier. Of the final sample, 61 (18%) were women

competing in collision sports, 93 (27.5%) were men competing in collision sports, 96

(28.4%) were women competing in non-collision sports and 88 (26.0%) were men

competing in non-collision sports.

Measures

Team size. Team size data were collected using Canadian Interuniversity Sport

(CIS) documents (Canadian Interuniversity Sport, 2007). The team size measure was the

roster size limit for CIS championship competition. Following are the roster size limits for all sports included in this investigation: volleyball 12, soccer 18, hockey 23, football

40, cross country 7, basketball 14 and rugby 25. Team size was treated as a continuous

predictor because the proportional difference between teams was of theoretical relevance.

Degree ofphysical contact. The degree of physical contact in each sport was classified using guidelines established by Silva (1983). Silva (1983) classified sports into three categories: collision (contact is necessary and integral to play), contact (contact is legal and occurs incidentally) and non-contact (contact between opponents is not allowed). The present investigation modified this classification by comparing only collision (coded as 2), and non-collision (coded as 1) sports; non-contact and contact sports were coded as non-collision sports. Football, men's hockey, and women's rugby Predicting Hazing Perpetration 54

were classified as collision sports and basketball, soccer, women's hockey, volleyball and

cross country were classified as non-collision sports.

Demographic questionnaire. A demographic questionnaire (Appendix D) was

utilized to assess gender, sport, age, years competing in the sport and other sports in

which the respondent competed. Participants were not queried as to the university they attended or the province in which they lived; this omission helped ensure the anonymity of both the individual respondent and the institutions participating in the project.

Initiation experiences questionnaire. An Initiation Experiences Questionnaire

(IEQ) was developed by the researcher to capture data on experiences as a hazing victim and perpetrator (Appendix E). Nearly all of the hazing questions were modeled after those used in the 1999 National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) study assessing hazing rates in the U.S. (Hoover, 1999). These data were used to specify the levels of hazing in AUS athletics and offer a description of the hazing activities experienced by athletes in the conference. Both dependent variables were derived from this questionnaire. Using the IEQ, participants were asked if they had taken part in a list of

25 different initiation activities both as a rookie and as a veteran. These activities fell into Hoover's (1999) classification of acceptable, questionable, alcohol-related and unacceptable activities. All activities in the questionable, alcohol-related and unacceptable categories were classified by the researcher as hazing behaviours. For the veteran section of the IEQ, participants were asked how many seasons they had used each of the behaviours. The range of hazing activities used overall was the first dependent variable and the highest number of seasons using any of the hazing behaviours served as the second dependent variable. The IEQ was pilot tested with a group of university Predicting Hazing Perpetration 55

students in May 2007. Feedback from 47 participants led to the streamlining of some

items, clarification of confusing items, and the elimination of items that were not

gathering pertinent information.

Moral disengagement. The Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement Scale (MMDS)

(Bandura et al., 1996) (Appendix F) was completed by all participants. The scale

measures individuals' propensity to disengage the cognitive processes responsible for the

self-regulation of moral behaviour. The scale consists of 32 items and eight subscales representing moral justification, euphemistic labeling, advantageous comparison, displacement of responsibility, diffusion of responsibility, distorting and disregarding consequences, attribution of blame and dehumanization. The concurrent validity of the

MMDS has been supported by researchers finding the scale to be negatively related to prosocial behaviour and positively related to aggressive behaviour across a number of age groups (Bandura et al., 1996). In terms of reliability, the total scale has shown acceptable internal consistency with Cronbach's alphas ranging from 0.82 (Bandura et al., 1996;

Pelton et al., 2004) to 0.90 (Caprara, Barbaranelli, & Zimbardo, 1997) in samples of children, adults and minority populations.

The 32-item MMDS requires participants to choose one of three options for each statement to indicate their level of agreement (i.e., Completely Disagree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, or Completely Agree). In the present study, wording of the questionnaire was adjusted slightly to reflect the unique context of athletics. Although the changes to the MMDS were minor, pilot testing of the modified scale was completed to ensure the items still promoted a range of responses and that the internal consistency of the scale was maintained. The MMDS has primarily shown a one-factor structure (Bandura et al., Predicting Hazing Perpetration 56

1996, 2001). In the pilot test, the one-factor structure of the modified MMDS was found

to have an acceptable distribution of scores and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha =

.82). In the present study, the internal consistency of the MMDS was found to be

acceptable (a = .85).

Attitudes about initiation. The Survey of Attitudes about Fraternities and

Sororities (Pledging) (SAAFS) (Cokley et al., 2001) was modified for the athletic setting

through consultation with the scale author and is herein referred to as the Survey of

Attitudes About Initiations in Sport (SAAIS) (Appendix G). Pilot testing for the

modified SAAIS was conducted in conjunction with the pilot testing of the MMDS and

IEQ. The original SAAFS consisted of 47 items representing six subscales of attitudes about initiation: Attitudes about Initiation (purpose) (a = .87), Impact of Initiation (a =

.72), Conformity to Initiation Rules (a = .64), Perceptions of Fraternities (a = .72), Moral

Concerns about Initiation (a = .53), and Beliefs about Initiation Difficulty (a = .74)

(Cokley et al., 2001). In the current study, only the attitudes about initiation purpose and beliefs about initiation difficulty subscales were used. Pilot testing revealed that the two subscales had acceptable levels of internal consistency (initiation purpose, a = .80, initiation difficulty, a = .79). Internal consistency for the subscales was also found to be acceptable in the present study (initiation purpose, a = .76, initiation difficulty, a = .73).

Procedure

Data were collected using questionnaires administered at each participating university. Following the receipt of ethics approval from all seven participating universities, the local Athletic Directors (ADs) were contacted for approval to approach the coaches of the varsity teams at their schools. Once approval was obtained from an Predicting Hazing Perpetration 57

AD at a given university, the AD informed coaches that the study was taking place and

that a researcher would be contacting each coach directly. Every coach who was invited

to participate agreed to have his or her team take part. The majority (25) of the 27 data

collection sessions occurred immediately before or after a team practice. One team

completed the questionnaires after a game and another team held a meeting specifically

for the data collection. Participants completed questionnaires in one of three places: a

classroom, locker room or the stands surrounding their court/field of play. Regardless of

the location, the data collection session followed the same process. Following a brief

introduction, an invitation to participate (Appendix A) was distributed to all athletes in

attendance. An informed consent form (Appendix B) was then given to each participant outlining all details of the project. Participants who did not wish to participate were

permitted to leave the meeting or remain with teammates until the completion of the data collection process; this happened on only two occasions. Participants were informed that

they had the right to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty.

Participants who provided consent received the questionnaire booklet. The package was completed individually by each participant and took approximately 15 minutes. Participants were encouraged to leave as much physical space as possible between themselves and other participants to help ensure confidentiality. Coaches were not present during data collection and were not given any feedback regarding who participated. This procedure helped ensure that coaches were unaware of who participated and also minimized any impact the coaches may have had on participant responses or willingness to participate. As participants submitted the questionnaires, they were given a debriefing form (Appendix C) and offered the opportunity to ask questions. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 58

Upon completion of each data collection session, participants were thanked for their role in the project.

Data Analysis

Data was analyzed using two hierarchical multiple regression analyses. The criterion variable in Regression I was the number of hazing activities used as a veteran, whereas Regression II used the variable the number of seasons perpetration any hazing activity as the criterion. In accordance with temporal and theoretical considerations, predictors were entered in an identical three step order in both regression analyses Predicting Hazing Perpetration 59

CHAPTER 3: RESULTS

Data Screening

Four hundred and eighteen athletes agreed to participate in this study. Of these

418 participants, 24 were immediately excluded: three because they were never on a team

as a veteran, 10 because they incorrectly completed some aspect of the questionnaire and

11 because they left at least one of the questionnaires completely blank. Thus, data from

394 participants were included as the data screening began.

Missing data. Participants with missing data on any of the predictor or criterion

variables were deleted listwise. The listwise deletion method led to the exclusion of 55

participants, resulting in a sample of 339. Listwise deletion can have a negative impact

on statistical power; however, given the large sample size in the present study, power

constraints were mitigated. Of the 55 participants excluded because of missing data, 46

were missing data on one of the two dependent variables. According to Cohen and

Cohen (1983), listwise deletion is the most appropriate treatment of missing data on

dependent variables. A missing value analysis indicated that Little's MCAR test was

insignificant (jf2 = 77.95, p = .060); from which it could be inferred that the data was

missing completely at random, thereby making listwise deletion more appropriate. The

large proportion of missing data on the dependent variables is attributable to the complex

nature of the measures. The use of listwise deletion ensured reliability in the

measurement of the dependent variables and allowed all analyses to be conducted with an identical sample. Participants found to have no missing data on the dependent variables,

but had missing data on at least one of the independent variables, were also deleted listwise to maintain consistency in the treatment of missing data. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 60

Univariate outliers. All predictor and criterion variables were analyzed for

univariate outliers. Every continuous variable was converted into a standardized score

(Z-Score) and an examination of the standardized variables' frequencies and histograms

was conducted. A participant whose score was three standard deviations from the mean

and discontinuous from the rest of the distribution was judged to be an outlier and

considered for correction or deletion (Cohen & Cohen, 1983). An examination of standardized scores found that four variables had univariate outliers: MMDS Total Score

(one case), number of hazing activities experienced as a rookie (one case), number of hazing activities used as a veteran (four cases), number of seasons as a hazer (two cases).

Consistent with recommended correction procedures, scores on these measures for each outlying case, were modified to 1 point higher than the largest non-outlying score

(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).

Multivariate outliers. After the corrections to univariate outliers were completed, multivariate outliers were identified using the Mahalanobis distances for each case. One case was eliminated from the regression analyses because its Mahalanobis distance score

(jf = 70.17, p < .001) exceeded the cutoff of 31.26 and was discontinuous from the rest of the Mahalanobis scores (Cohen & Cohen, 1983). As a result, 338 cases had acceptable

Mahalanobis scores and comprised the total sample for all analyses.

Assumptions. The two criterion variables (i.e., number of different hazing activities used and number of seasons perpetrating hazing as a veteran) were not normally distributed; however, their negatively skewed distributions were anticipated because many athletes (29%) had not been involved in hazing rookies at all. The histograms demonstrated that as the number of different hazing activities used and the number of Predicting Hazing Perpetration 61

seasons perpetrating hazing increased, the number of participants endorsing these

activities decreased. While such a violation of normality typically has a negative impact on statistical power (Cohen & Cohen, 1983), transformations were not conducted due to the large sample size used in the analyses and because these values reflected the actual

hazing experiences of the population. All other continuous variables were normally

distributed.

Descriptive Analyses of Independent and Dependent Variables

Table 1 summarizes the mean, standard deviation, range and Cronbach's alphas

(as applicable) for all the continuous variables used in the major analyses.

Moral disengagement. Moral disengagement was measured using the 32-item

MMDS (Bandura et al., 1996). Higher scores on the MMDS indicated a heightened proneness to disengage morally, or justify one's own harmful behaviour. Participants' mean score on the MMDS was 51.93 (potential range 32-96), which indicated that the participants did not strongly endorse that it was acceptable to engage in injurious behaviour toward others; they were only moderately prone to disengage morally.

Attitudes regarding initiation difficulty. Participants' attitudes toward difficult initiations were measured using the Initiation Difficulty subscale of the modified S AAIS

(Cokley et al., 2001). A mean score of 8.38 (SD = 3.03) on the measure indicated that participants were more likely to disagree than agree that difficult initiations were necessary.

Attitudes regarding initiation purpose. Participants' attitudes toward the purpose of initiation were measured using the Initiation Purpose subscale of the modified SAAIS Predicting Hazing Perpetration 62

Table 1

Mean, Standard Deviation, Range and Cronbach's alpha for all Continuous Predictor and Criterion Variables.

Variable Mean Observed Potential Cronbach's

(SD) Range Range Alpha

Moral Disengagement 51.93 (8.52) 35 -78 32 -96 .85

Hazing Activities as a Rookie 5.26 (3.45) 0- 16 0- 18 -

Attitude: Initiation Purpose 22.15(4.77) 7-•35 7-•35 .77

Attitude: Initiation Difficulty 8.38 (3.03) 4- 17 4- 20 .73

Hazing Activities as a Veteran 3.17(3.16) 0- 13 0- 18 -

Hazing Seasons as a Veteran 1.91 (1.91) 0- 9 - - Predicting Hazing Perpetration 63

(Cokley et al., 2001). The obtained range on this measure was 7-35 with a mean score of

22.15 (SD = 4.77). Thus, participants agreed to some extent that initiation plays an

important role on teams.

Hazing activities as a rookie. The number of hazing activities participants experienced as a rookie was measured using the Initiation Experiences Questionnaire.

The mean value of 5.26 indicated that in their entire career, athletes in this study had been subjected to more than five different hazing activities. Men (5.40 total activities, 1.13 unacceptable activities) and women (5.10 total activities, 0.88 unacceptable activities) experienced similar degrees of total hazing and unacceptable hazing activities.

Team size. Team sizes of 7, 12, 14,18,23,25 and 40 were recruited for participation. Of the 338 participants, 33 (9.8%) were on a team of 7,44 (13.0%) were on a team of 12,40 (11.8%) were on a team of 14, 57 (16.9%) were on a team of 18, 62

(18.3%) wereonateam of23,61 (18.0%) were on a team of25 and41 (12.1%) were on a team of 40. Although distinct team sizes were recruited for participation, the team size variable was treated as a continuous variable as the relative size of the team was of theoretical relevance.

Hazing activities as a veteran. The number of different hazing activities used by participants as veterans was measured using IEQ. Scores on this measure assessed the range of hazing activities used by participants in their entire athletic career and are summarized in Table 2. In their entire career, 71.0% of participants had perpetrated at least one hazing activity, with an average of 4.5 different activities perpetrated by these hazers. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 64

Table 2

Means and Standard Deviations of Participants' Veteran Use of Various Initiation

Activities, Presented for the Entire Sample andfor only those Using each Activity.

Entire Sample Those Using this Type of Activity

Activity M SD N (%) M SD

All Initiation Activities 7.53 4.29 318(94.1) 8.00 3.97

Acceptable Activities 4.34 2.01 316(93.5) 4.61 1.70

All Hazing Activities 3.17 3.16 240(71.0) 4.46 2.87

Questionable Activities 1.70 1.79 222 (65.7) 2.58 1.62

Alcohol-Related Activities 0.98 0.94 185 (54.7) 1.79 0.41

Unacceptable Activities 0.51 1.04 90 (26.6) 1.91 1.19 Predicting Hazing Perpetration 65

Hazing seasons as a veteran. The number of different seasons in which

participants hazed rookies as a veteran was also measured with the IEQ. On average,

participants had hazed rookies in 1.91 different seasons as a veteran. When only the 71%

of the sample who had hazed at least once as a veteran were considered, it was

determined that these athletes had hazed in 2.69 (SD = 1.75) seasons.

Research Question 1: Exploration of Hazing Experiences as a Rookie

Although the overall focus of this study was on the hazing experiences of

participants as veterans, a descriptive analysis of hazing experiences as rookies was also conducted. Results are based on the responses of all 338 participants.

Hoover (1999) classified initiation activities into four main categories: acceptable

activities, questionable activities, alcohol-related activities, and unacceptable activities.

Frequency results for rookie hazing experiences in each initiation category are

summarized for participants in two ways: over the course of their entire career (Table 3) and as a part of their university initiation (Table 4). The following sub-sections will explore each initiation category in greater detail.

Acceptable activities. At some point in their career, all participants but one reported taking part in at least one acceptable initiation activity. In their entire career,

7.7% of the athletes had taken part in acceptable initiation activities only, while 13.6% of athletes had taken part in acceptable activities only when initiated into their university team. Although participation in acceptable activities was prevalent, the majority of participants also experienced hazing activities. Table 5 summarizes the degree of participation in each of the acceptable initiation activities surveyed. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 66

Table 3

Means and Standard Deviations of Participants' Career Experiences with Hazing as a

Rookie, Presented for the Entire Sample and for only those Experiencing each Type of

Activity.

Entire Sample Those Experiencing this Type of Activity

Activity M SD N (%) M SD

All Initiation Activities 11.40 3.89 337(99.7) 11.43 3.84

Acceptable Activities 6.14 1.24 337 (99.7) 6.15 1.19

All Hazing Activities 5.26 3.45 312(92.3) 5.70 3.22

Questionable Activities 2.98 1.91 309 (91.4) 3.26 1.75

Alcohol-Related Activities 1.28 0.87 243 (71.9) 1.77 0.42

Unacceptable Activities 1.10 1.49 160 (47.3) 2.14 1.27 Predicting Hazing Perpetration 67

Table 4

Means and Standard Deviations of Participants' University Experiences with Hazing as

a Rookie, Presented for the Entire Sample and for only those Experiencing each Type of

Activity.

Entire Sample Those Experiencing this Type of Activity

Activity M SD N (%) M SD

All Initiation Activities 9.48 3.61 336 (99.4) 9.54 3.55

Acceptable Activities 5.60 1.51 335 (99.1) 5.66 1.42

All Hazing Activities 3.88 2.95 292 (86.3) 4.49 2.71

Questionable Activities 2.22 1.72 282 (83.4) 2.66 1.54

Alcohol-Related Activities 1.10 0.90 216(63.9) 1.71 0.45

Unacceptable Activities 0.56 1.10 112(33.1) 1.70 0.86 Predicting Hazing Perpetration 68

Table 5

Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Acceptable Initiation Activity,

as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team.

Acceptable Entire Career University Team

Activity N (%) N (%)

Attend Preseason Training 316(93.5%) 296 (87.6%)

Team Building Activities 318(94.1%) 297 (87.9%)

Testing for Skill / Endurance 314 (92.9%) 302 (89.3%)

Maintaining Specific GPA 300 (88.8%) 293 (86.7%)

Dressing up for Functions 318(94.1%) 290 (85.8%)

Volunteering as a Team 265 (78.4%) 214 (63.3%)

Taking an Oath, Signing a Contract 242 (71.6%) 204 (60.4%) Predicting Hazing Perpetration 69

Questionable activities. In their entire career, 91.4% of participants reported

participating in at least one questionable initiation activity as a rookie. As a part of their

university initiation, 83.4% of participants reported participating in at least one

questionable activity. Table 6 summarizes the sample's participation in each questionable activity.

Alcohol-Related activities. Participants' degree of participation in each alcohol- related initiation activity is displayed in Table 7. In their entire career, 71.9% of athletes reported participating in at least one alcohol-related initiation activity as a rookie and

63.9% of participants reported participating in at least one alcohol-related initiation activity as a part of their university initiation.

Unacceptable activities. In their entire career, 47.3% of athletes reported participating in at least one unacceptable initiation activity as a rookie, whereas 33.1% of participants reported participating in at least one unacceptable activity as a rookie. Table

8 provides a breakdown of rookie participation in each unacceptable initiation activity.

Unacceptable and alcohol-related activities were combined to explore the level of participation in the more dangerous types of hazing. This analysis found that 75.4% of participants had taken part in at least one alcohol-related or unacceptable initiation activity over the span of their career. Furthermore, 66.9% of participants had taken part in at least one alcohol-related or unacceptable initiation activity as a rookie on their university team. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 70

Table 6

Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Questionable Initiation Activity,

as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team.

Questionable Entire Career University Team

Activity N (%) N (%)

Yelled or Cursed at 266 (78.7%) 224 (66.3%)

Wore Embarrassing Clothes 182 (53.8%) 153 (45.3%)

Tattooed, Shaved, Branded 48 (14.2%) 15(4.4%)

Unnecessary Calisthenics 107 (31.7%) 84 (24.9%)

Couldn't associate with certain people 96 (28.4%) 61 (18.0%)

Acted as a Servant to Veteran 145 (42.9%) 100 (29.6%)

Deprived of Sleep or Food 37(10.9%) 25 (7.4%)

Consumed Disgusting Food 126 (37.3%) 88 (26.0%) Predicting Hazing Perpetration 71

Table 7

Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Alcohol-Related Initiation

Activity, as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team.

Alcohol-Related Entire Career University Team

Activity N (%) N (%)

Participated in a Drinking Contest 220 (65.1%) 194 (57.4%)

Had to Chug or Shoot Alcohol 211 (62.4%) 176 (52.1 %) Predicting Hazing Perpetration 72

Table 8

Number and Percentage of Participants Involved in each Unacceptable Initiation

Activity, as a Rookie, in their Entire Career and on their University Team.

Unacceptable Entire Career University Team

Activity N (%) N (%)

Prank Called/Harassed Others 70 (20.7%) 37(10.9%)

Destroyed or Stole Property 51 (15.1%) 32 (9.5%)

Simulated Sexual Acts 72 (21.3%) 51 (15.1%)

Engaged in Sexual Acts 30 (8.9%) 19(5.6%)

Was Tied Up, Taped, or Confined 61 (18.0%) 30 (8.9%)

Paddled, Whipped, Beaten 44(13.0%) 16(4.7%)

Forced to Beat Others 6(1.8%) 3 (0.9%)

Kidnapped or Transported 8 (2.4%) 2 (0.6%) Predicting Hazing Perpetration 73

Hypothesis Testing

Regression I: Hazing Activities Used as a Veteran

All hypotheses were tested using two separate hierarchical multiple regression analyses. The first set of hypotheses focused on predicting the number of different hazing activities used as a veteran. Through implementation of a Bonferroni correction, alpha was set at p = .025 for all significance tests. The first step of this regression included: gender, moral disengagement, hazing experiences as a rookie, team size and degree of physical contact in the sport as the predictors. Step 2 included two predictors

(attitudes toward the purpose of initiation and attitudes toward difficult initiations) and

Step 3 included the interaction terms (moral disengagement x team size, moral disengagement x degree of physical contact, gender x team size and gender x degree of physical contact).

The regression results are summarized in Table 9. As the first two steps of the regression were significant, the individual predictors within those steps (i.e., gender, moral disengagement, team size, degree of physical contact, rookie hazing experiences, attitudes toward initiation difficulty and attitudes toward initiation purpose) were examined for their individual contributions to the model. Because Step 3 was not significant, all hypotheses regarding predictors on that step were rejected (i.e.,

Hypotheses 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d).

Personal factor hypotheses for Regression I. According to Hypothesis 2a, men were expected to have used more hazing activities as a veteran than were women. When examined bivariately, men on average had used 3.64 hazing activities in their career compared to women who had used 2.62, confirming the anticipated direction of the Predicting Hazing Perpetration 74

Table 9

Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Number of

Hazing Activities Used as a Veteran (N - 338)

Variable B SEB /? t Sig. (p)

Step 1

Gender 0.35 0.27 .06 1.32 .187

Moral Disengagement 0.08 0.02 .21 4.44 <.001

Team Size -0.01 0.02 -.04 -0.54 .587

Degree of Physical Contact 0.48 0.40 .08 1.19 .236

Hazing Activities as a Rookie 0.53 0.04 .58 13.61 <.001

:ep 2

Attitude: Initiation Difficulty 0.04 0.05 .04 0.79 .429

Attitude: Initiation Purpose 0.08 0.03 .11 2.66 .008

ep 3

Moral Dis. x Team Size <0.01 <0.01 .33 0.68 .494

Moral Dis. x Physical Contact <0.01 0.05 .04 0.07 .944

Gender x Team Size 0.03 0.07 .21 0.49 .623

Gender x Physical Contact -0.73 0.96 -.27 -0.76 .446

Note. R2 = .49 (p < .001) for Step 1; A R2 = .01 (p = .010) for Step 2; A R2 < .01 (p =

.674) for Step 3. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 75

relationship. However, when considered in conjunction with the rest of the predictors in

Regression I, gender was not a significant unique contributor (sr = .05) to explaining

variance in the number of different hazing activities the athletes had used in their career.

Hypothesis 2b predicted that participants with a higher propensity to disengage

morally would have used more hazing activities as a veteran than would those with a

lower propensity to disengage morally. Moral disengagement and hazing activities as a veteran had a positive correlation of r = .41, p <.001. When examined in Regression I, moral disengagement emerged as a significant predictor of the number of different veteran hazing activities (sr = .13). Individuals with a higher propensity to disengage morally used more hazing activities as a veteran than did those less inclined to disengage morally.

According to Hypothesis 2c, participants with more favourable attitudes toward difficult initiations were expected to be more likely to have used a greater number of hazing activities than were those with less favourable attitudes. Attitudes regarding initiation difficulty and the number of different hazing activities used as a veteran had a positive correlation of r = .37, p <.001. However, when considered as a part of the set of predictors, an insignificant semi-partial correlation of sr = .03 was observed. Thus, attitudes toward difficult initiations did not contribute uniquely to explaining variance in the number of hazing activities used as a veteran.

Hypothesis 2d stated that participants with more favourable attitudes toward the purpose of initiation would have used more hazing activities as a veteran than would those with less favourable attitudes. A positive correlation of r = .33,/? < .001 was found between attitudes regarding initiation purpose and the number of different hazing Predicting Hazing Perpetration 76

activities used as a veteran. When considered as a part of the Regression I model,

attitudes toward initiation purpose was found to be a significant unique predictor of

veteran hazing activities (sr =.10). Participants who had more favourable attitudes

toward the purpose of initiation engaged in a greater number of hazing activities as a

veteran than did those with less favourable attitudes about initiation's purpose.

Lastly, in Hypothesis 2e it was predicted that individuals who had participated in more hazing activities as a rookie would have used more hazing activities as a veteran than would those who had taken part in fewer hazing activities as a rookie. A large

positive correlation of r = .66, p < .001 was found between the amount of hazing activities as a rookie and the number of different hazing activities used as a veteran.

When analyzed further as a part of Regression I, rookie experiences with hazing was found to be a significant predictor of the number of different hazing activities used as a veteran (sr = .53). That is, athletes who had more hazing experiences as a rookie used more hazing activities as a veteran compared to those with fewer rookie experiences.

This was the strongest relationship in Regression I.

Environmental factor hypotheses for Regression I. According to Hypothesis 3 a, participants competing on larger teams would have used more hazing activities as a veteran than those competing on smaller teams. A small positive correlation of r = .27, p

< .001 was found between team size and hazing activities used as a veteran. However, when analyzed as a part of the Regression I model, team size was not found to be a significant predictor (sr = -.02).

According to Hypothesis 3b, participants competing in collision sports were expected to have used more hazing activities as a veteran than participants competing in Predicting Hazing Perpetration 77 non-collision sports. When examined alone, collision sport athletes on average had used

4.22 (SD = 3.49) different hazing activities as veteran compared to non-collision sport athletes who had used 2.28 (SD = 2.53). ANOVA confirmed this difference to be statistically significant, F(l, 336) = 34.81,/? < .001. Despite this significant bivariate result, the hypothesis testing in this study was focused on the unique contributions of each predictor when all were considered together. When degree of physical contact was considered with the other predictors in the Regression I model, it was found to have a small and insignificant semi-partial correlation (sr = .05). Therefore, the degree of physical contact in the sport did not uniquely contribute to predicting variance in the number of different hazing activities used as a veteran.

Regression II: Number of Seasons Using Hazing Activities.

The second hierarchical multiple regression analysis used the number of seasons in which participants hazed rookies as the criterion and the same set of predictors as in

Regression I. Predictors in Regression II were entered in identical steps to those outlined in Regression I.

The results of Regression II are summarized in Table 10. Only Step 1 of this regression was significant; thus, only the individual predictors comprising that step (i.e., gender, moral disengagement, degree of physical contact, team size and rookie hazing experiences) were examined for their individual contributions to the model. Since Steps

2 and 3 of Regression II were not significant, all hypotheses regarding predictors on those steps were rejected (i.e., Hypotheses 2c, 2d, 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d). Predicting Hazing Perpetration 78

Table 10

Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Number of

Seasons in which Participants Hazed Rookies (N = 338)

Variable B SEB ft t Sig. (p)

Step 1

Gender 0.74 0.19 .19 3.84 <.001

Moral Disengagement 0.01 0.01 .06 1.01 .313

Team Size -0.01 0.02 -.07 -0.88 .378

Degree of Physical Contact 0.92 0.29 .24 3.19 .002

Hazing Activities as a Rookie 0.20 0.03 .36 7.07 <.001

:ep 2 i

Attitude: Initiation Difficulty -0.02 0.04 © -0.69 .492

Attitude: Initiation Purpose 0.04 0.02 .09 1.74 .082

:ep 3

Moral Dis. x Team Size -0.01 <0.01 .98 -1.68 .093

Moral Dis. x Physical Contact 0.07 0.04 1.25 1.85 .065

Gender x Team Size 0.03 0.05 .34 0.66 .509

Gender x Physical Contact -0.10 0.69 -.06 -0.14 .889

Note. R2= .28 (p < .001) for Step 1; AR2 < .01 (p = .214) for Step 2; AR2 = .01 (p =

.332) for Step 3. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 79

Personal factor hypotheses for Regression II According to Hypothesis 2a, men

were expected to have used hazing activities in a greater number of seasons than were

women. When examined bivariately, men on average had hazed over 2.35 (SD = 2.10) seasons compared to women who had hazed over 1.41 (SD = 2.10) seasons. An ANOVA confirmed that this difference was significant F(l, 336) = 21.56,/? < .001. When entered into the Regression II model, and considered with the other predictors in Step 1, it was found that gender had unique predictive ability in the hypothesized direction (sr = .18).

Hypothesis 2b predicted that participants with a higher propensity to disengage morally would have perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than would those with a lower propensity to disengage morally. Moral disengagement and the number of seasons perpetrating hazing had a positive correlation of r = .29, p < .001.

However, when examined in the regression analysis, moral disengagement did not emerge as a significant unique predictor of the number of seasons perpetrating hazing (sr

= .05).

Hypothesis 2e predicted that individuals who had participated in more hazing activities as a rookie would have perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than would those who had taken part in fewer hazing activities as a rookie. A positive correlation of r = .44,/) < .001 was found between the amount of hazing activities experienced as a rookie and the number of seasons participants hazed as a veteran. When analyzed further as a part of Regression II, rookie experiences with hazing was found to be a significant predictor of the number of seasons perpetrating hazing as a veteran (sr =

.33). Athletes who had more hazing experiences as a victim perpetrated hazing more often than did those with fewer rookie hazing experiences. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 80

Environmental factor hypotheses for Regression II. According to Hypothesis 3a,

participants competing on larger teams would have perpetrated hazing as a veteran over a

greater number of seasons than would those competing on smaller teams. A positive

correlation of r = .27, p < .001 was found between team size and the number of seasons

hazing as a veteran. However, when considered as a part of the Regression II model, team size was not found to be a unique predictor of the number of seasons hazing as a veteran (sr = -.04).

According to Hypothesis 3b, participants competing in collision sports were expected to have perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than those competing in non-collision sports. When examined alone, collision sport athletes had hazed on average 2.62 (SD = 2.14) seasons, whereas non-collision sport athletes had hazed 1.32 (SD = 1.44) seasons. ANOVA confirmed this difference to be statistically significant, F (1,336) = 44.23, p < .001. When degree of physical contact was analyzed in the Regression II model, it was found to have unique predictive ability in explaining variance in the number of seasons over which participants perpetrated hazing (sr =.15).

Summary of Results

The results of this study can be summarized by examining the theoretical model proposed in this research. Figure 4 (p. 81) presents the significant predictors of the number of hazing activities used as a veteran and Figure 5 (p. 82) presents the significant predictors of the number of seasons perpetrating hazing as a veteran. Both regression models were found to be predictive of hazing behaviour. In particular, the regression Predicting Hazing Perpetration 81

Behavioural Factor A Hazing Activities used as a Veteran (r2 = .50)

sr2 = .03

A Moral A Attitude: A Hazing Disengagement Initiation Experiences as Purpose a Rookie

Personal Factors

Figure 4. Significant predictors of the number of hazing activities used as a veteran. Predicting Hazing Perpetration

Behavioural Factor A Seasons Perpetrating Hazing as a Veteran r2 = .27 L sr2 = .03 sr2 = . 11 sr2 = .02 7 A Hazing A Degree of Gender Experiences as physical a Rookie contact

Personal Environmental Factors Factor

Figure 5. Significant predictors of the number of seasons perpetrating hazing as a veteran. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 83 analysis investigating the number of different hazing activities used indicated that the predictors explained over 50% of the variance. Interestingly, the significant predictors in each of the two regression analyses were largely different (with the exception of rookie hazing experiences). A discussion of the findings and theoretical implications for each hypothesis is presented in the following section. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 84

CHAPTER IV: DISCUSSION

The Gap in the Hazing Literature

Very few researchers have explored the precursors to hazing perpetration or the factors that perpetuate the practice's existence (Keating et al., 2005). Recent empirical efforts have focused on understanding prevalence and incidence rates of hazing at U.S. universities and high schools (Allan & Madden, 2008, Campo et al., 2005; Hoover, 1999;

Hoover, 2000). Only one study has investigated the proportion of individuals who report perpetrating hazing as a veteran (Campo et al., 2005). Although some initial research has been conducted to explain why veterans perpetrate hazing (Bryshun & Young, 1999;

Hinkle, 2006), a large gap still exists in explaining which factors predispose an individual to carry out hazing activities. The present study applied SCT (Bandura, 1986) by examining the predictive efficacy of personal and environmental factors in explaining hazing behaviour. The discussion section will explore the results of each hypothesis within the context of the previous literature, original rationale for inclusion, and new information gained through the analytic process.

Rookie Hazing Experiences. More than 92% of the athletes participating in this study reported being hazed at least one time over the course of their career in sport. This is the highest rate of hazing found in any research study on athletic hazing. Given the negative outcomes associated with hazing victimization (Brackenridge, 1997; Finkel,

2002; Nuwer, 2004; Robinson, 1999; Sussberg, 2003), a hazing rate of 92% is troubling.

The impact of these hazing experiences is likely to vary based on the nature of the activities experienced; thus, the rate of various hazing activities is discussed in subsequent sections. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 85

The experience of questionable hazing activities: Using Hoover's (1999)

classification system of acceptable, questionable, alcohol- related and unacceptable

behaviours, it was found that 91% of the athletes in this study had experienced a

questionable hazing experience as a rookie. These activities included being yelled or

cursed at (79%), being forced to wear embarrassing clothing (54%) or acting as a servant

to veteran athletes (43%). Although these behaviours are classified as questionable by

Hoover (1999), some athletes may find these activities belittling and unacceptable. It is

notable, and largely consistent with previous research, that nine out of ten athletes were

subjected to at least one questionable hazing activity. Although these activities may not

seem as severe as others, they have the potential to alienate, degrade and create

psychological discomfort for the athletes involved.

The experience of alcohol-related hazing activities: Alcohol abuse has been

described as a dangerous aspect of the hazing process (Nuwer, 2000; Trota & Johnson,

2004). Indeed, the only death reported to my knowledge as a result of athletic hazing

involved the overconsumption of alcohol (Nuwer, 2000). Despite apparent risks, the

current research found alcohol to be a major component of athletic hazing with 72% of

the sample experiencing binge drinking as a part of their rookie initiation. More

specifically, 65% of participants reported participating in a drinking contest and 62%

reported "chugging" or "shooting" alcohol as a part of their rookie initiation. Hoover

(1999) found that 49% of athletes participated in a drinking contest as a part of their collegiate initiation. Allan and Madden (2008) found that 47% of athletes had taken part

in a drinking game as a part of their initiation and 23% had consumed large amounts of alcohol to the point of being sick. The 72% of athletes who reported being hazed while Predicting Hazing Perpetration 86 using alcohol is a somewhat greater percentage than found in previous research.

Although, the substantive finding may stem from the nature of the recruited sample, it may also be due to measuring hazing during the participants' entire athletic career, rather than measuring hazing only in university, as Hoover (1999) and Allan and Madden

(2008) did in their studies. Consistent with this suggestion, when university experiences alone were considered, only 57% of the current sample had participated in a drinking game and 52% had "chugged" or "shot" large amounts of alcohol as a part of their university initiation.

It should be noted that, in general, athletes are more prone to binge drinking than non-athletes (Nelson & Wechsler, 2001). Explanations for the elevated rates of binge drinking in athletes include the formation of strong social ties inherent to sport teams, which have been found to be associated with this behaviour (Nelson & Wechsler, 2001).

The heightened exposure to alcohol experienced by athletes may contribute to the use of alcohol and binge drinking behaviours in the hazing of rookie athletes. This suggestion is tenuous, however, as other researchers have failed to find a difference in alcohol consumption between athletes and non-athletes (Pritchard, Milligan, Elgin, Rush & Shea,

2007). Finally, Waldorn (2005) suggested that athletes with a strong social approval orientation may be more prone to engage in binge drinking behaviours than those who are less likely to value social acceptance. This is important in sport environments and may be related to athletic identity (Brewer, van Raalte & Linder, 1993). Rookie athletes may not approve of the behaviours they are being asked to engage in, but the costs to their athletic identity for not engaging in the binge drinking may be greater than the risks perceived from participating. The motivation to be a part of the group and protect Predicting Hazing Perpetration 87

athletic identity may set up a dangerous situation where inexperienced drinkers are

participating in binge drinking. Regardless of the origins and risks of alcohol use in the

hazing of athletes, this behaviour appears to be prevalent.

The experience of unacceptable hazing activities: Finally, nearly half (47%) of

the athletes surveyed reported participating in a hazing activity as a rookie that most

would consider highly unacceptable. Some participants engaged in sex-based initiations

with 9% being forced to engage in some form of sexual activity and 21% made to

simulate a sexual activity. Simulating sexual activity was the most commonly experienced unacceptable hazing activity. The athletes participating in this study were also physically beaten (13%), forced to harass others (21%) or engaged in delinquent and criminal activity, such as stealing or damaging others' property (15%). Restricting the observations to hazing during university, 33% of the athletes in the present study were subjected to unacceptable hazing activities as a part of their rookie initiation to their university team. This is slightly higher than the rate of 21% found by Hoover (1999).

The somewhat inflated hazing rates found in the present study (relative to Hoover,

1999 and Allan & Madden, 2008) may be partially attributed to sampling procedures. In the present study, athletes were sampled in a purposeful manner, in an attempt to have balanced numbers of participants across different degrees of physical contact, genders and team sizes. This selection does not reflect the actual distribution of athletes in AUS or the NCAA. The present study over-represents the number of athletes competing in collision sports. Considering the seven sports sampled, across the entire athletic population of the AUS, 33% of athletes compete in collision sports, but collision sport athletes represented 46% of the sampled population in the present study. Among the Predicting Hazing Perpetration 88

AUS athletes surveyed, collision sport athletes (99%) were more likely to have

experienced hazing as a rookie than were non-collision sport athletes (87%). Therefore,

it is possible that the current study found somewhat inflated rates of hazing relative to the entire population of AUS athletes.

Despite sampling considerations, the present study demonstrates that rookie athletes competing in the AUS have taken part in a wide range of hazing activities during the course of their athletic career. These activities, especially those using alcohol or those categorized in the unacceptable category, pose a serious threat to the physical and psychological well-being of a large proportion of varsity athletes. These findings further emphasize the importance of understanding the factors that lead to hazing so that preventative steps can be implemented.

Application of Social Cognitive Theory

In this study, the contribution of personal and environmental factors to the prediction of hazing behaviour was examined. With a limited theoretical understanding of hazing perpetration in athletics, SCT was applied by viewing triadic reciprocity broadly. The basic human capabilities were used to interpret the relationship of personal and environmental factors with the hazing perpetration criteria. The following discussion presents the relationships found between each of the predictors and criteria.

Theoretical possibilities for each of the relationships are outlined, especially where the findings for a given criterion are discrepant.

Personal Factor Hypotheses

The role of gender in hazing perpetration. Johnson and colleagues (2009) argued that institutionalized gender (referring to role of powerful institutions such as sport) has a Predicting Hazing Perpetration 89

pronounced impact on social norms, expectations, opportunities and values. These

impacts, may influence the culture of a group and the activities in which the group

engages. Within the institution of sport, researchers have found that gender differences

exist in the rookie hazing experiences of varsity athletes (Allan, 2005; Allan & Madden,

2008; Hoover, 1999; Nuwer, 2000) and in self-reported hazing perpetration (Campo et al., 2005). Specifically, men appear to be more involved in hazing than are women.

However, an analysis of the rookie experiences of participants in this study found no significant differences between genders. Men in this study had experienced an average of

5.4 hazing activities as a rookie compared to women who had experienced 5.1. This finding replicates Hoover's (1999) finding that men and women do not differ substantially in questionable or alcohol-related hazing experiences. However, in the present study men also did not experience significantly more unacceptable hazing behaviours than women (1.13 and 0.88 respectively). This finding suggests that both genders are equally likely to be targets of hazing and contradicts almost all previous research on gender and hazing (Allan, 2005; Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999;

Nuwer, 2000).

The findings from this study support Young and White's (1995) observation that the sport practices of women are becoming more aligned with those of men. Johnson and

Holman (2009) suggested that as women's participation in sport has evolved to include traditionally male sports (e.g., hockey, rugby), many aspects of the male sport subculture have also been adopted. Furthermore, a prominent rationalization for hazing practices is that hazing is an important sport tradition (Johnson & Holman, 2009). As women competing in traditionally male sports often have no female tradition from which to draw, Predicting Hazing Perpetration 90

it follows that many of the male-defined hazing practices may be incorporated into the

female sport subculture as well. Although sport is usually divided along the gender

domain, it appears that women may be looking to male models in their initiation

practices, especially in team based, traditionally male sports. The present study balanced

participants by gender and sport type; thus, the gender differences in rookie hazing

experiences observed in previous studies may have been presently mitigated by the

purposeful inclusion of women competing in traditionally male sports. It is suggested that the institutionalized gender divide may not be as prominent in traditionally male sports as in others and that previous research may have erroneously concluded that women do not experience hazing at the same rate as men.

Although the findings regarding rookie experiences with hazing are informative, the primary focus of the present study was on the hazing behaviours perpetrated by athletes as veterans. It was hypothesized that men would have (i) used a greater number of hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than had women. Contrary to the first hypothesis, however, gender did not significantly predict the number of hazing activities used as a veteran. Although bivariate analyses revealed the expected significant difference between men (3.6 activities) and women (2.6 activities), gender was not a unique contributor in the regression model. This finding indicates that other predictors were more important than gender in accounting for the number of hazing activities perpetrated, or that gender differences were accounted for by other factors. Of the three variables found to be significant predictors in Regression I, only moral disengagement showed significant gender differences. Thus, the relationship between gender and the number of hazing activities used as a veteran could potentially be Predicting Hazing Perpetration 91

accounted for by moral disengagement. In support of this finding, gender differences in

moral disengagement have been found by other researchers (Bandura et al., 1999,2002;

Paciello, Fida, Tramontano, Lupinetti & Caprara, 2008; Turner, 2009) indicating that

men are more prone to disengage morally than are women. According to Paciello and colleagues (2008), as youth progress through adolescence to young adulthood, the majority of boys and girls experience a decrease in their levels of moral disengagement.

However, boys tend to experience less of a decrease than girls and make up the majority of adolescents in the chronically high moral disengagement group. Furthermore, Turner

(2009) found that gender differences in bullying and other aggressive behaviours were largely accounted for by moral disengagement. Thus, although bivariate gender differences in the perpetration of hazing activity were observed, they may have been accounted for by gender differences in moral disengagement; this is a novel finding and worthy of further exploration.

Consistent with the second gender related hypothesis, a significant difference was found between men (2.4 seasons) and women (1.4 seasons) in the number of seasons over which they perpetrated hazing and gender was also a significant unique predictor of hazing frequency. This finding supports previous findings suggesting men are more involved in perpetrating hazing than women (Hoover, 1999; Allan & Madden, 2008,

Campo et al., 2005). Campo and colleagues (2005) reported that men were more likely to be self-defined hazers than were women. The current study found that gender significantly predicted the number of seasons perpetrating hazing (an indication of hazing frequency), but not the number of different activities perpetrated (an indication of hazing Predicting Hazing Perpetration 92

extent). The contradictory findings between the two dependent variables are considered

below.

The first dependent variable examined the number of different hazing activities

used throughout the participant's athletic career, whereas the second focused on the

number of seasons perpetrating any hazing activity. Although indicative of repeated

involvement in hazing, the number of seasons perpetrating hazing may not be as sensitive to involvement in more dangerous forms of hazing. For example, an athlete may have only subjected rookies to one questionable initiation activity, such as "making the rookie wear embarrassing clothing", but did so during six different seasons. A second athlete may have chosen to physically assault a rookie, force a rookie to consume alcohol and confine the rookie to a small space, but only did so during two different seasons. The first athlete described would have been found to be involved in hazing more than three times as often as the second, despite the lessened severity of the activity. To assess this assumption, an analysis of the bivariate correlations between the number of different hazing activities used, the number of seasons perpetrating hazing and the number of unacceptable hazing activities used as a veteran (indicator of engagement in riskier hazing) was conducted post hoc. This analysis revealed that the number of unacceptable activities perpetrated as a veteran had significant positive correlations with both the number of seasons perpetrating hazing (r = A2,p < .001) and the total number of hazing activities used (r = .11, p < .001). The larger correlation between unacceptable and total hazing activities supports the contention that the number of hazing activities is more closely related to the perpetration of unacceptable hazing activities. When considering the gender findings in the present research, it appears that male gender is a significant Predicting Hazing Perpetration 93 unique predictor of repeated involvement in hazing (hazing frequency), but is inadequate in explaining the range of the hazing behaviours perpetrated.

Although the gender disparity for the number of different hazing activities used as a veteran was accounted for by other predictors, the unique relationship between gender and the number of seasons perpetrating hazing warranted further attention. Offered below are three plausible explanations as to why men haze more frequently than women.

The first explanation explores the different subcultures to which men and women are often exposed, beginning as young athletes.

Johnson and Holman (2009) suggested that traditional male sport subcultures place a considerable amount of pressure to adopt masculine values and beliefs and that hazing is a mechanism through which this is achieved. Although women are exposed to the masculine aspects of sport culture, they may not be as motivated to pursue activities that demonstrate masculinity. Indeed, women in sport are under conflicting pressures to appear both masculine and feminine (Johnson & Holman, 2009). The self-regulatory capability of SCT, as it relates to the monitoring of gender linked conduct, is of interest here. Bussey and Bandura (1999) theorized that individuals regulate their gender-based behaviours through self-observation, judgment of conduct in relation to personal standards and environmental circumstances, and through self-reactive processes. The environmental demands of some sport subcultures may prompt women to engage in socially-defined masculine behaviours; however, pressure still remains to appear feminine and also adhere to personal standards of behaviour. The ambivalence experienced by women through these competing demands may limit their prolonged engagement in masculine practices (e.g., hazing) outside the field of play. Men may not Predicting Hazing Perpetration 94

experience the same level of ambivalence as women and, therefore, more readily engage

in hazing practices year after year. Indeed, as Martin (1993) suggests, men monitor their

behaviour along the gender dimension much more closely than do women because they

are more likely to be reproached for deviations in behaviour from those expected of their

gender.

Gender difference in hazing practices may also be related to the construct of hypermasculinity. According to Mosher and Sirkin (1984), a macho personality constellation is composed of three components: a) calloused attitudes toward women, b) a conception of violence as manly and c) a view of danger as exciting. The environment created by a gendered sporting culture may promote hypermasculinity among boys and men. At an early age boys are exposed to the masculine value of heroism in sports. In an attempt to overcome feelings of self-contempt and shame related to instances where they have not demonstrated courage or stoicism, boys and men may be motivated to engage in hyper-masculine activities such as degrading others, demonstrating dominance and perpetrating violence (Mosher & Sirkin, 1984). These hyper-masculine activities are often incorporated into the hazing process. Thus, hypermasculinity may lead men to perpetrate hazing over a larger number of seasons than women.

In summary, the sport subculture may expose men and women alike to hazing behaviours. The motivational pressure to appear masculine and adopt masculine values on male teams may account for the more frequent engagement in hazing practices exhibited by men in comparison to women (Johnson & Holman, 2004; Mosher & Sirkin,

1984). Furthermore, it has been suggested that as women enter traditionally male sporting environments (e.g., rugby, hockey), they incorporate male traditions and values, Predicting Hazing Perpetration 95

including initiation practices (Johnson & Holman., 2009). Thus, both women and men

are influenced by male hazing models. They may learn hazing practices vicariously

through direct or indirect observation of male hazers. Consistent with observational

learning (Bandura, 1986), men and women may then attend, retain, and initially produce male hazing practices; however, men are more likely than women to be rewarded for perpetrating hazing, thereby differentially enhancing their motivation to perpetuate hazing over a greater number of seasons relative to women.

A third explanation as to why men may haze in a greater number of seasons than women is the length of time that both men and women are involved in sport. Research by

Sabo and Veliz (2008) found that boys begin playing sports at a younger age than girls.

In a sample of 2185 children (grades 3 to 12), it was found that boys began playing sports at 6.8 years compared to girls at 7.4 years; this gap was more pronounced in urban areas.

Additionally, it was found that girls drop out of sport at a younger age than their male counterparts (Sabo & Veliz, 2008). The earlier onset of sport participation in boys may be linked to increased opportunity and exposure to sport traditions. In the present study, a post hoc analysis identified that men had been competing in their sport for over 12 years compared to women, who had been competing for approximately 8.5 years. The difference between genders was not as evident when participants were asked how many seasons they were veterans on a team (men 4.6 times, women 4.1 times). However, both time in sport (r = .32) and total seasons as a veteran (r = .43) were positively correlated with the number of seasons perpetrating hazing. Therefore, the gender difference in the number of seasons perpetrating hazing may be partially explained by the length of time that men and women participate in their sport. Further research must be conducted to Predicting Hazing Perpetration 96

delineate clearly what variables account for and/or mediate the relationship between

gender and the frequency of hazing perpetration. As Johnson and colleagues (2009)

suggest, gender analyses may be enhanced through a clear operational understanding of

gender in advance of study.

Proneness to morally disengage and hazing perpetration. Moral disengagement

was found to be a significant predictor of the number of hazing activities used as a veteran. Conversely, moral disengagement was not found to predict a significant amount of variance in the number of seasons perpetrating hazing. This paradoxical finding is plausibly linked to the disparities inherent in the two dependent variables. Moral disengagement is predictive of the range, and arguably severity of hazing participation, but not the frequency. The lack of significant findings in hazing frequency may suggest that perpetrating hazing over multiple seasons does not have the same moral implications as perpetrating a large number of hazing activities. Hazing frequency appears to be explained by other factors (i.e., gender, degree of contact in sport, rookie experiences with hazing). These factors may predispose athletes to participate in hazing but on a minor scale, where the moral implications are negligible. Therefore, a propensity to disengage moral self-standards would not be a necessary component of perpetuating minor hazing activities over a number of seasons. However, the moral implications of perpetrating a large number of hazing activities, even if on just one intense occasion, may be more pertinent.

The significant relationship between moral disengagement and the number of different hazing activities perpetrated as a veteran lends support to Bandura's theory of moral disengagement, as well as to the work of other researchers who have linked moral Predicting Hazing Perpetration 97

disengagement to injurious behaviour (Bandura, 1986; Bandura et al., 2001; Hafez, 2006;

Osofsky et al., 2005). This finding indicates that athletic hazing is not solely perpetrated

by morally deficient individuals. Rather, it may be that individuals who chose to

perpetrate a greater range of hazing activities are more prone to disengage moral self-

regulation. Within SCT, moral disengagement is proposed to have a disabling effect on self regulatory capabilities (Bandura, 1986). Moral behaviour is anticipatorily influenced by self-reward when behavioural standards are upheld and self-sanctioning when they are not (Bandura, 2002); therefore, circumventing self-sanctioning reactions may promote more harmful behaviour. According to Bandura and colleagues (1999), high moral disengagers behave more injuriously and are more prone to aggressive thinking than those who apply moral self-sanctions to their detrimental conduct. It has also been found that those more prone to moral disengagement are less prosocial, less troubled by feelings of guilt and more likely to resort to vengeful ruminations. These factors were all related to augmented engagement in delinquent behaviours (Bandura et al., 1999). In the present scenario, a proclivity for moral disengagement may allow individuals to avoid the self- sanctioning reaction that may typically accompany perpetrating a large number of potentially injurious and delinquent hazing activities.

A significant link between moral disengagement and the perpetration of hazing activities is an important finding as insight is provided into a personal characteristic predictive of hazing behaviour. With the exception of gender-based comparisons (Allan

& Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999), researchers in the hazing field have not identified personal factors predictive of hazing perpetration. The identification of this and other factors is a unique contribution of this research. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 98

The potential triadic reciprocity between moral disengagement, environmental factors and hazing behaviours also has practical implications. Hafez (2006) suggested that proneness to disengage morally is not a static characteristic, but is influenced by environmental, social and cultural contexts. Bandura and colleagues (2001) have also acknowledged that one's proneness to disengage morally is shaped by social and environmental factors. As moral disengagement is related to hazing perpetration, social and environmental modifications that influence moral disengagement may also influence hazing behaviours. Specifically, in an attempt to prevent hazing, an intervention at the level of those environmental and social factors found to enhance proneness to disengage morally, may encourage athletes to feel more personally responsible for the activities that occur (i.e., they would be less likely to disengage morally). The anticipated self- sanctioning associated with hazing rookie athletes may deter engagement in hazing.

The link between hazing attitudes and hazing behaviours. Attitude measures were included as personal factors in this study because attitudes have been found to be predictive of behaviours in instances of high embeddedness (Prislin & Ouellette, 1996) and personal vested interest (Crano, 1997). The career of university varsity athletes typically develops over a long period of time and can be an important part of their personal identity (Hinkle, 2008). Participants in this study were involved in their sport for a mean of 10.5 years, or over half of their lives (Mean age = 20.4). This level of sport involvement has the potential to produce embedded and stable attitudes; however, attitudes about difficult initiations were not found to be predictive of either measure of hazing perpetration. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 99

A possible reason for the lack of unique predictive ability for the attitude toward initiation difficulty variable is that the measurement of this attitude may not have been specific enough to the actual initiation experiences of veterans. Overall, the attitudes of the majority of participants were toward the lower end of the scale (M = 8.4 with a possible range of 4 to 20) indicating that on average, participants disagreed with items like "it is necessary for individuals who are being initiated to be frightened" and "team membership should be exclusive and therefore earned through initiation This finding may indicate that participants had largely unfavourable attitudes toward difficult initiations as measured by the SAAIS. Alternatively, social desirability may have also influenced participants' responses (Edwards, 1957). Consistent with social desirability, participants may have responded in a way that they deemed more socially acceptable, thereby disagreeing with items indicative of difficult initiations. The lack of specificity between the measured attitude and typical hazing perpetration, as well as social desirability, may have limited the variable's predictive ability.

Conversely, participants' attitudes about the purpose of initiation were found to be predictive of the number of hazing activities used as a veteran. Individuals who more strongly agreed with items stating: "initiation prepares players to be leaders " and

"creates team unity" were more likely to engage in a greater range of hazing than those who did not. This finding supports previous research regarding a link between behaviours and attitudes (Crano, 1997; Kraus et al., 1995; Nixon, 1997; Prisline &

Ouellette, 1996) and supports another personal factor in the model as being predictive of hazing behaviour. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 100

In this study, attitudes about hazing purpose were used to predict hazing

perpetration. The direction of the relationship, however, may not be causal. Although attitudes have been found to predict behaviour (Crano, 1997; Draus et al., 1995), given the triadic reciprocity hypothesized within SCT, the behaviours that individuals engage in may also modify their attitudes. As hazing perpetration was measured retrospectively in the present study, the possibility for post-hazing attitude modifications was increased.

Hinkle (2006) suggested that athletes who experience hazing engage in rationalizations of their experience and other cognitive dissonance-reducing activities. Researchers have demonstrated that the use of dissonance-reducing strategies can also change attitudes.

Indeed, dissonance theorists and researchers including Festinger (1957), Harmon-Jones

(1999) and Senemeaud & Somat (2009) have posited that attitude change aims to relieve the cognitive dissonance experienced after engaging in behaviours not consistent with previous attitudinal or behavioural dispositions. Senemeaud and Somat (2009) also demonstrated that the attitude change observed in forced compliance experiments was maintained over time. Although previous research on cognitive dissonance and attitude change was conducted primarily through forced compliance experiments, others have demonstrated the impact in applied investigations (Beauvois, 2001; Festinger, 1964). It is plausible that athletes who chose to haze did not inherit or establish a set of static beliefs about hazing. It is also plausible that hazing beliefs are not solely shaped by coaches, teammates, moral dispositions or other personal or environmental factors.

Rather, certain predisposing conditions (e.g., sport culture, family beliefs) in conjunction with attitudes, may make it more likely for an athlete to perpetrate hazing activities initially; participating in those activities then creates cognitive dissonance. Athletes are Predicting Hazing Perpetration 101

then motivated to relieve the dissonance they are experiencing and engage in a number of

rationalizations and justifications including modifying their attitudes about the behaviour

in which they engaged. The significant association between the range of hazing

behaviour and attitudes about its purpose signifies a measurable predictor of who will

perpetrate hazing activities, and also indicates the triadic reciprocity inherent in SCT.

Attitude toward initiation purpose was entered as a personal factor in the SCT model and found to predict the number of hazing behaviours perpetrated; however, it was not found to be predictive of the frequency (number of seasons) of hazing behaviour. It may be that in some instances attitudes have a more pronounced influence on hazing behaviour, whereas in other situations, environmental factors are more important.

Specifically, the variables that predict hazing perpetration may be influenced by whether the range of hazing activities or the frequency of hazing involvement is considered. One thought is that personal factors may be more important in explaining the range of hazing activities used, whereas environmental factors are more important in determining hazing frequency. This idea is addressed again in the environmental factors discussion.

Although the attitude measures showed some predictive ability, their impact is not as significant as the contributions made by some of the other predictors. This is consistent with the results of a meta-analysis conducted by Kraus (1995), in which he reported that most attitude - behaviour correlations are in the .30 range. The correlations of attitudes about initiation with (i) the number of hazing activities used as a veteran were r = .37

(attitudes regarding initiation difficulty) and r = .33 (attitudes regarding initiation purpose). Despite the correlations in the r = .30 range, when attitudes were considered with the other predictors, their relationship with the number of hazing activities used as a Predicting Hazing Perpetration 102

veteran was largely accounted for by the other variables. The correlations were much

smaller with (ii) the number of seasons perpetrating hazing (initiation difficulty r = .20,

initiation purpose r = .20) and insignificant in the regression analysis. The attitude and

behavioural measures may have been more highly correlated in the current research if they were measured at corresponding specificity. That is, if the initiation attitude measures were more directly tied to the hazing behaviours in the Initiation Experiences

Questionnaire, a stronger relationship between attitudes and behaviours might have been realized.

The impact of hazing victimization on hazing perpetration. Hazing experiences as a rookie was the most predictive variable in both regression analyses. Rookie hazing experiences accounted for nearly 30% of the variance in the number of hazing activities used as a veteran and over 10% of the variance in the number of seasons perpetrating hazing. The analysis of this personal factor demonstrates that having more experiences with hazing as a rookie victim is strongly related to perpetrating hazing as a veteran.

This finding is consistent with reports in the sexual abuse literature; specifically, victims of sexual abuse are more likely to sexually abuse than non-victims (Freund et al., 1990;

Glasser et al., 2001). Glasser and colleagues (2001) found that 61% of victims of pedophilia also became perpetrators. In the present study, 76% of participants who were subjected to at least one hazing activity as a rookie went on to perpetrate at least one hazing activity as a veteran. Of those subjected to at least one unacceptable activity as a rookie, 85% went on to perpetrate at least one hazing activity. Conversely, of the 26

(7.7%) participants in this study who had not experienced hazing as a rookie, only three

(11.5%) had perpetrated a hazing activity as a veteran. The present study suggests that Predicting Hazing Perpetration 103

past experience as a hazing victim is the most important predictor of who will haze as a

veteran. Four explanations (modeling and vicarious capability of SCT; psychological

mastery of feelings of powerlessness; cognitive dissonance; athlete identity) for the

progression from victim to perpetrator are offered.

According to SCT, the vicarious capability allows individuals to learn through indirect experiences, typically through the observation of behavioural models (Bandura,

1986). During an impressionable time in a new social environment, rookies are likely to search for models of appropriate behaviour. The most powerful and salient models are the veteran athletes on the team. Rookie athletes may vicariously learn how to be successful and accepted on their new team, in both sport-based and extracurricular activities. Through direct observation of the hazing practices they endure, and the manner in which these activities are carried out by veteran models, rookies are exposed to various modeling phenomena. Of particular import to the current discussion is the impact that veteran hazing models have on observational learning (new behaviour patterns and rules are learned), disinhibition (antisocial behaviours are viewed as acceptable in this environment) and response facilitation (the positive consequences of engaging in hazing activities are observed and retained) (Bandura, 1986). Bandura (1986) stated that, "the types of models that prevail within a social milieu partly determine which qualities, from among many alternatives, are selectively activated" (p. 50). On a team, or in a sport, where hazing is a consistently practiced behaviour, models who engage in these activities are most likely to be rewarded and prevail in garnering the attention of rookie observers.

For modeled behaviours to be transformed into learned action, four distinct processes are required: attention (i.e., observer must attend to what the model is doing); Predicting Hazing Perpetration 104

retention (i.e., the observed behaviour must be transformed into symbols and retained);

production (i.e., through a conception matching process the observer attempts the

acquired behaviour); and, motivation (i.e., acquired behaviours are performed when

adequate motivation is provided) (Bandura, 1986). For rookies to learn hazing activities

through observation, the motivational process associated with observational learning is

likely to require a capacity for forethought (one of the five basic human capabilities).

Forethought is likely required because while being hazed as a rookie the only directly

experienced consequences are those of a victim; however, in observing veterans carrying

out these activities, rookies can vicariously observe the positive consequences

experienced by the veterans. The prominence of these incentives and the extent to which a rookie can foresee these same consequences being available to him or her in the future likely influences to what degree the modeled behaviours are attended and retained.

In short, an athletic environment that appears to support hazing satisfies many of the requirements of effective modeling and observational learning. For instance, the hazing behaviours modeled by veteran athletes are salient to rookies who may find themselves in a vulnerable position and motivated to attend. Through this narrowed attention, rookies may learn which behaviours constitute acceptable initiation, which behaviours are rewarded and also foresee themselves receiving these positive consequences in the role of veteran the following season. Furthermore, the incentives experienced by veterans are clear and may have a substantial influence on the motivational processes that impact whether a rookie athlete will chose to perform the acquired hazing behaviour. These newly observed behavioural patterns and rules, the apparent acceptance of hazing in a particular sport environment, and the response Predicting Hazing Perpetration 105

facilitation effects related to the inherent social rewards experienced by veteran hazers,

may account for the strong positive relationship between rookie and veteran hazing activities.

Other explanations may also help clarify the relationship found between rookie and veteran hazing experiences in this study. The experience of being a sexual abuse victim has been investigated by Glasser and colleagues (2001) who suggested that some child sexual abuse victims become perpetrators to gain power over feelings of passivity.

Additionally, Glasser and colleagues (2001) discussed the vulnerability of child sexual abuse victims, arguing that they are impressionable and may look to model the activities of the individual who perpetrated against them. It is plausible that rookie hazing victims become veteran perpetrators in an attempt to master feelings of inadequacy and powerlessness created by their own hazing experiences as a rookie. Hoover and Pollard

(2000) found that 12% of high school athletes reported participating in hazing because they "wanted revenge." This finding shows a latent response (one season to the next) to overcome the negative emotions associated with being hazed. Interestingly, the revenge experienced is symbolic in nature, as veterans do not haze the individuals who hazed them, but rather, new rookies on the team. Furthermore, many athletes are exposed to hazing while they are in high school (44% in their freshman year of high school; Hoover,

2000). This initial experience in youth, during a formative and vulnerable time, may demonstrate for athletes what it means to have power in this subculture. The inclination for rookies to engage in the modeled hazing activities may be enhanced by the attachment they feel toward the veterans on their new team. As Keating and colleagues (2005) suggested, initiates experiencing a discomforting induction process formed stronger Predicting Hazing Perpetration 106

interpersonal connections with initiating agents than did participants experiencing

innocuous inductions. Cognitive dissonance could potentially mediate this effect.

Regardless, relatively severe treatment during initiation increased vulnerability to group

influence and conformity with group opinions (Keating et al., 2005). In the present

context, the rookie victim to veteran perpetrator progression may be based on a

psychological need to overcome feelings of weakness as well as a heightened dependency

on, and conformity with, the abusing agent (i.e., hazing veteran). More severe rookie

initiations may intensify both the negative emotions experienced and the proclivity to

conform to the group's opinions and behaviours.

Cognitive dissonance is a third plausible explanation for why victims of hazing

become perpetrators. Hinkle (2005) found that hazed athletes actively downplayed the impact of their hazing experience, rationalized their participation in it, and justified their experiences as meaningful. The active rationalization of the rookie hazing experience may inoculate rookies against any dissonant cognitions developed during the hazing process. With time and through cognitive dissonance, being subjected to hazing may enhance athletes' sense of belongingness to the group and their fondness for their team and teammates. Ultimately, athletes may view the hazing process as being an integral part of why they feel so strongly connected to the team. A hazing experience comprised of embarrassing, marginalizing and potentially dangerous elements is rationalized as a necessary component to building strong team unity and group commitment. Through this process, the rookie victim progresses to become a veteran on the team who values the hazing process, even more so after having experienced it. The more intense the initiation experienced, the stronger the connection to the team and the process that enabled team Predicting Hazing Perpetration 107

membership (Aronson & Mills, 1959; Kruger et al., 2004). The once rookie victim may

become a motivated perpetrator of hazing activities.

A final explanation for why rookie victims of hazing become veteran perpetrators involves the relationship between one's athletic identity and the normative environment of his or her particular sport or team. The environmental or social factors inherent in some sports or teams may consistently promote a culture of hazing. This hazing culture may persist through time and promote participation in hazing as both a rookie and a veteran. Bandura (1986) stated that "the people with whom one regularly associates, either through preference or imposition, delimit the behaviour patterns that will be repeatedly observed, and hence, learned most thoroughly" (p. 55). Thus, repeated exposure to hazing models may influence the acquisition of observationally learned hazing behaviours; however, the extent to which athletes perform these activities may be additionally influenced by motivational processes related to athletic identity.

As Hinkle (2008) suggested, athletes who have been involved with their sport for a long time period assimilate into the sport subculture and form identities highly influenced by this association. Brewer, Van Raalte and Linder (1993) defined athletic identity as the degree to which an individual identifies with the athlete role and

Baumeister and Leary (1995) suggested that the need to belong underlies human motivation and behaviour in a goal-directed way. Athletes may be motivated to make decisions and engage in activities that satisfy their need to belong to a team and support their athletic identity. Indeed, as Fine and Kleinman (1979) suggested, the need or desire to be a part of a group may motivate individuals to adopt the norms, values and behaviours of the group's subculture. The experience of being hazed as a rookie may not Predicting Hazing Perpetration 108

be a pleasurable experience; however, during this process the normative and expected

behaviours are effectively modeled. The desire to acquire or maintain membership on a

team, as well as the desire to protect one's athletic identity, may supersede an athlete's

reluctance to perpetrate hazing behaviours (Hinkle, 2008).

Sports or teams with a subculture supportive of hazing, likely expose rookies to more hazing activities, and potentially promote greater involvement in hazing as a veteran. In a subculture where hazing is consistently practiced, the former rookie athlete may once again see modeled (this time as a veteran) a variety of hazing activities. This renewed modeling of previously learned behaviours could serve to prompt the performance of hazing behaviours, especially with the consequences to athletic identity deemed to be at stake.

Environmental Factor Hypotheses

The influence of team size on hazing perpetration. It was hypothesized that as team size grew, the potential for diffusion of responsibility and deindividuation would also increase and consequently, hazing perpetration would be more likely. Team size was positively related to both the number of different activities used as a veteran and the number of different seasons perpetrating hazing; however, team size did not have a significant unique relationship with hazing perpetration. The present findings are inconsistent with research by Bandura (2007) indicating that diffusion of responsibility amongst a group reduced the self-sanctioning reactions of prison guards, and Zimbardo

(2004) who found that the deindividuation brought about by group membership was related to the commitment of both aggressive and antisocial acts. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 109

In the present study, when the smallest team size was compared to the largest,

significant results were found. For instance, teams with 40 participants used ten times

more hazing activities (3.71,0.36) and perpetrated hazing across 10 times as many

seasons (2.29, 0.27) than those on teams with 7 participants. However, as a continuous variable, team size was not found to be uniquely predictive. Furthermore, participants with a team size of 40 did not show the greatest rates of veteran hazing. The highest levels of veteran hazing involvement were found for participants with a team size of 23, who perpetrated a mean of 4.79 (SD = 3.44) hazing activities over a mean of 3.21 (SD =

2.26) different seasons. It may be that the fragmentation of tasks on larger teams influences whether someone chooses to engage in hazing; however, this fragmentation may hit a critical level beyond which there is no additional influence on deindividuation.

Moreover, as teams become increasingly large, members of the team may be able to opt out of perpetrating hazing because there is already a large group able to carry out the hazing traditions and activities planned by the team. The enhanced anonymity on larger teams may allow veterans wishing not to participate to take on a reduced role or avoid the initiation process completely. The "in-group" is large enough that not all members need to be present. Thus, personal factors may become increasingly important in determining who will perpetrate the hazing activities.

Another possibility for the lack of a unique relationship between team size and hazing, relates to the work of Meier, Hinsz and Heimerdinger (2007) who challenged the direct link between deindividuation and the commitment of aggressive acts. Meier and colleagues (2007) suggested that individuals in a group can be expected to be disinhibited, but the behaviour in which they engage will be consistent with what is Predicting Hazing Perpetration 110

expected in the specific situation. Members of large teams may still experience

disinhibition, but this disinhibition is not necessarily directed to aggressive or anti-social

behaviours (Meier et al., 2007; Postmes & Spears, 1998). Indeed, team members may be disinhibited to engage in pro-social behaviours.

Bond (2005) demonstrated that group size was related to the amount of conformity an individual would exhibit, especially when this conformity was publically displayed. Hazing activities are largely public (others can observe the behaviour) and, therefore, conformity with team hazing behaviours was thought to be a plausible outcome of participation on larger teams. The conformity explanation suffers from the same limitation as the disinhibition explanation: even if team size enhances conformity, there was no direct measurement as to what the athlete was conforming. Without a measurement of exhibited initiation activities for each team, it became difficult to determine if conformity had actually occurred.

In summary, competing on a large team does not appear to enhance an individual's likelihood of engaging in hazing behaviour; rather, it is more likely that the deindividuation associated with being a part of the team increases the probability that the individual will engage in behaviours consistent with the social norms for the situation.

Team size may also influence an athlete's conformity (either publically or privately), but this does not necessarily make hazing more likely. Athletes on larger teams may be more likely to conform with the normative behaviours and activities of the team (which may or may not include hazing activities), whereas other variables (rookie experiences with hazing, moral disengagement, gender, attitudes) that vary independently of team size, more strongly predict engagement in hazing behaviour specifically. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 111

Collision sports and hazing perpetration. Another factor examined in the current study was whether participants competing in collision sports had (i) used more hazing activities and (ii) perpetrated hazing over a greater number of seasons than those in non- collision sports. The data indicated that degree of physical contact was not a significant predictor of the number of hazing activities used, but was significant in the prediction of the number of seasons over which hazing was perpetrated. The latter finding is consistent with previous research on sport aggression where it has been found that contact sport athletes report more extra-sport aggression than do non-contact athletes

(Nixon, 1997, Pappas et al., 2004). In the present study, athletes competing in sports where physical contact is rewarded and integral to play were more likely to perpetrate hazing on a season over season basis than athletes competing in sports where physical contact is either incidental or forbidden. The degree of physical contact was also an important predictor of hazing seasons, even when the contributions of the other personal and environmental factors were considered. Due to the differing findings for the number of seasons perpetrating hazing (degree of contact predictive) and the number of hazing activities used (degree of contact not predictive), the collision sport hypothesis is only partially supported.

I have argued that the number of different hazing activities used is more closely related to the perpetration of dangerous or unacceptable hazing activities than the number of seasons over which someone hazes. Degree of physical contact was included as an environmental predictor because of the hypothesized "spill over" of sport related aggressive activities to extra-sport situations. Furthermore, it was suggested that hypermasculinity (Mosher & Sirkin, 1984) would be more prominent in collision sport Predicting Hazing Perpetration 112 environments, and an increase in the macho personality constellation would contribute to more aggressive behaviours within and outside of the sport environment. Aggressive hazing activities are primarily represented in the unacceptable section of Hoover's (1999) classification. Unacceptable activities were found to be more highly correlated with the number of hazing activities used than the number of seasons perpetrating hazing.

Although the anticipated difference in the number of hazing activities perpetrated was observed (collision 4.22 activities, non-collision 2.28 activities), the degree of contact in the sport was not uniquely predictive. Thus, the relationship between collision sports and aggressive behaviours is not fully supported as degree of physical contact was only uniquely related to hazing frequency.

By further examining the number of different hazing activities used (and by association the more dangerous activities), it was found that only personal factors were predictive; however, when the number of seasons perpetrating hazing was considered, degree of physical contact (an environmental predictor) was found to be a unique predictor. Gender, also only uniquely predictive of the number of seasons over which participants hazed, is a personal factor but also a major determinant in the division of sport, thereby influencing the environments in which athletes compete. Taken together, the findings may indicate that characteristics of the sporting environment (i.e., male teams, collision sports) contribute to the consistent perpetration of hazing. A sport culture may develop where men more than women, and collision sport athletes more than non-collision athletes, are repeatedly exposed to hazing behaviour due to sport socialization. These sport subcultures may expose athletes to hazing on a number of different occasions and provide the opportunity to perpetrate hazing on a yearly basis. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 113

The opportunities to haze provided by the collision sport environment may help account

for hazing on a season over season basis. Conversely, the extent of hazing activities that athletes choose to perpetrate appears more dependent on personal factors (rookie hazing experiences, moral disengagement, and attitude toward the purpose of initiation) than other variables. This explanation posits environmental determinants as predictors of frequent engagement in hazing, and personal differences as predictive of the range of hazing activities used. Specifically, rookie hazing experiences and moral disengagement accounted for nearly all of the predicted variance in the number of hazing activities perpetrated. Thus, the observed differences in the number of hazing activities perpetrated between collision and non-collision athletes were largely irrelevant.

Personal and Environmental Interaction Hypotheses

This study used the environmental and personal components of SCT as a means of predicting hazing behaviour. The regression models were found to be significant and helped explain different aspects of hazing perpetration. The inclusion of the interaction component of the design was intended to demonstrate that the relationships between personal and environmental factors with the behavioural factors do not occur independently; rather personal and environmental factors influence each other as well.

Examining the relationship between the interaction of personal and environmental factors with hazing behaviours was posited as an effective way to represent the triadic reciprocity of the SCT model. These interaction-based hypotheses, however, were found to be insignificant. The large sample size and reliable measures makes it unlikely that power was an issue in detecting significance. It is plausible that personal and Predicting Hazing Perpetration 114 environmental factors do not interact significantly to explain hazing behaviour, at least in this sample.

The variables chosen to compose the interaction terms in this study were based on theoretical and research considerations; however, other interactions may be more predictive of hazing behaviour than those tested in the present study. Specifically, the interaction between rookie hazing experiences and other personal and environmental factors may enhance our understanding of why athletes perpetrate hazing. Although team size was not found to be uniquely predictive in the current study, it may interact with rookie hazing experiences. Larger teams with more rookie hazing experiences may influence the level of conformity to hazing behaviours that athletes will display (Bond,

2005; Asch, 1955). In the present study it is impossible to assess whether large team sizes prompted heightened deindividuation or conformity. These constructs were only included to provide justification as to why a relationship between team size and hazing perpetration might exist. By examining the rookie experiences with hazing, we have an indication as to what the normative behaviour for the team is. If a tendency to conform is increased by larger teams than a positive interaction between team size and rookie experiences with hazing would be expected to relate to hazing perpetration as a veteran.

As only limited research has been conducted on hazing, the interactions hypothesized in the present investigation were general in nature. Future research using

SCT to predict hazing behaviour may still benefit from examining personal and environmental factor interactions. With the findings of the present study in mind, it may be possible for future researchers to define and test more precisely the nature of the interactions between the most relevant personal and environmental factors. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 115

Limitations

Consistent with most research studies, the results of this study are limited by

methodological constraints. The primary purpose of this research was to explore the personal and environmental factors that predict hazing behaviour. With theoretical focus, a sample balanced for gender, degree of physical contact and team size was recruited as these variables were entered as predictors in the major analyses. However, gender, degree of physical contact and team size are not balanced entities in either the AUS or

NCAA. Employing this recruitment strategy resulted in a non-representative sample of the population, making it difficult to compare the findings to samples used in previous research of hazing prevalence (Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999). The data from this study can only be generalized to a population of athletes balanced for gender, team size and degree of physical contact. This is not to say that the prevalence data obtained from participants in this study are not informative; rather, an assessment of the prevalence of hazing throughout the AUS should not be based solely on this study.

A second limitation of this research is that the dependent variables are not directly representative of the more dangerous forms of hazing behaviour. The variable number of different hazing activities used as a veteran measured the range of hazing activities used.

The classification of hazing activities (acceptable, questionable, alcohol-related and unacceptable) developed by Hoover (1999) and used by others (Allan & Madden, 2008;

Campo et al., 2005; Hoover & Pollard, 2000), is comprehensive but is not without limitations and could benefit from refinement. As Kirby and Wintrup (2002) described,

Hoover's (1999) classification suffers from three main problems. The first challenge is that the categories are not mutually exclusive; the second problem is that for some Predicting Hazing Perpetration 116 individuals the "unacceptable" category may include two few activities, whereas for others it includes too many; and finally, the inferred severity of the different behaviours is not linked to the amount of harm experienced by athletes (Kirby & Wintrup, 2002).

The present study used Hoover's (1999) classification of questionable, alcohol-related and unacceptable activities to be indicative of all hazing behaviour. Participants using a greater number of any of these activities were deemed to be more involved in hazing.

The present investigation also linked (by way of correlation) the number of activities to the number of unacceptable activities. Establishing this indirect link helped differentiate between conflicting results in the two regression analyses. The results of this study could be strengthened by the development of a measure more sensitive to hazing severity.

The number of different seasons perpetrating hazing was used as a measure of ongoing involvement in hazing but, as it was applied in the present research, does not measure participation in the more severe forms of hazing. A ranking system of hazing activities could be a beneficial development in the study of hazing prevalence and participation. Another suggestion is the development of a scale reflecting the number of seasons perpetrating hazing, the number of hazing activities used and the amount of harm caused. The current study provides a solid starting point for more precise analyses of hazing in athletics and its relationship with personal and environmental factors.

Directions for Future Research

Future researchers could effectively build on the use of SCT as a means of predicting hazing behaviour. The refinement of hazing measurement as well as the inclusion of other personal and environmental variables could enhance the prediction of hazing perpetration. Although the environmental predictors included in the present study Predicting Hazing Perpetration 117

showed only limited unique predictive ability, other aspects of the athletic environment

could be related to hazing perpetration.

The social status of a sport may be an important environmental predictor of

hazing behaviours. Status could be measured by surveying game attendance, the amount of investment by the university to a particular team, scholarship money attributed to a team or the degree of media coverage different sports receive. The status of the sport may be important as it may be linked to a prevailing sense of entitlement by the team

(Bryshun, 1999; Robinson, 1998; Robinson, 2004). In the present study, varsity athletes were recruited for participation due to the heightened social status relative to intramural or club level athletes. Researchers have found that varsity athletes were more likely to experience hazing as a rookie (74%) than club level athletes (64%) or intramural athletes

(49%) (Allan & Madden, 2008). Heightened team status may promote stronger athletic identities and team subcultures, which may in turn influence the extent to which team members engage in hazing as a perpetrator or victim (Hinkle, 2008). Thus, level of status should be included in future studies. An additional environmental predictor worth consideration for future study includes a measurement of the existence, extent and application of anti-hazing policies within the institution. If anti-hazing policy prevents hazing behaviour, it could be hypothesized to emerge as a significant predictor in future studies.

A personal factor that may be of interest in future research is that of athletic identity. A strong athletic identity has been linked to positive and negative consequences for athletes (Allan & DeAngelis, 2004). Those athletes with a stronger athletic identity, and a more narrowly defined sense of self, may be more prone to engage in hazing Predicting Hazing Perpetration 118 activities (Allan & DeAngelis, 2004; Hinkle, 2008). It is plausible that rookie athletes who identify strongly with the athlete role will participate in hazing to achieve their desired status on a new team. Furthermore, veteran athletes who have a strong athletic identity may be more likely to perpetrate hazing activities to maintain and demonstrate their status on the team.

Another potential predictor of the number of activities used, and hazing severity, is alcohol use by the perpetrator. It is plausible that hazing occurs in social settings where alcohol is readily available. Indeed, nearly 72% of participants in the present study had been hazed using alcohol and 55% had used alcohol as a means of hazing rookies. It may be that those veterans who used the most hazing activities also consumed more alcohol. Future research may wish to build on the association between alcohol and hazing from the perspective of both victim and perpetrator.

Conformity (Asch, 1955; Bond, 2005) was discussed in the present study in relation to team size; however, it was not directly measured. Given the social implications of joining and feeling connected to a team, and the risks of not conforming to team rules and rituals, it seems that conformity could be related to the perpetration of hazing behaviour. The importance of conformity is enhanced due to the public display of hazing behaviours as it is clear to all team members who has participated in hazing and who has not. The degree of conformity that an individual experiences (from compliance to internalization) may help account for the number of hazing activities perpetrated.

A personal factor from the present study worthy of further exploration is that of rookie experiences as a hazing victim. Specifically, exploring the strong relationship between rookie experiences as a victim of hazing and veteran experiences of perpetrating Predicting Hazing Perpetration 119

hazing could enhance the understanding of the victim to perpetrator phenomenon

observed in this and other domains (Glasser et al., 2001). As rookie hazing experiences

accounted for such significant proportions of variance in both analyses, researchers may

wish to empirically explore why such a strong relationship exists. The interaction of

rookie hazing experiences with other personal and environmental factors could extend the

application of SCT to understanding hazing perpetration. For instance, the interaction

between rookie experiences with hazing and team size may provide insight into whether

individuals on large teams are more likely to conform to the hazing experiences they had

as a rookie, as indicated through the activities they perpetrate as a veteran. A three-way

interaction is also possible and could include rookie hazing experiences, team size and

degree of conformity.

As moral disengagement was related to hazing perpetration, future researchers

may wish to explore each of the eight mechanisms of moral disengagement to determine

which mechanisms are particularly related to hazing perpetration. More detailed

information about those mechanisms of moral disengagement most closely tied to the

perpetration of hazing would also have further theoretical and practical implications.

Theoretically, a more complete understanding of how moral disengagement enables

athletes to perpetrate hazing activities could be gained, which in turn could lead to the

generation of more systematic and informed intervention strategies. For instance, if

diffusion of responsibility and dehumanization emerged as the subscales of the MMDS

most predictive of hazing behaviours, policy makers, administrators and coaches may be

able to intervene by preventing these types of moral disengagement. An intervention could focus on ensuring all athletes were fully aware of their personal responsibility, even Predicting Hazing Perpetration 120

for actions taken by the team, thereby reducing diffusion of responsibility.

Dehumanization could be avoided by having veterans meet rookies' families and getting

to know them on a personal level before the season begins. Although enhancements to the MMDS subscales' reliability need to be realized before one can more thoroughly explore their relationship with hazing, it appears that moral disengagement is related to hazing perpetration.

Researchers interested in building on the present study may also gain more insight into hazing by qualitatively exploring the reasons why veterans haze rookies. Interviews with perpetrators of hazing activities may provide additional awareness into the culture and experience of hazing in athletics. Qualitative inquiries into sport-related phenomena have been informative (Hinkle, 2006; Pappas et al., 2004). This type of analysis, coupled with the present research, may enable future studies using the SCT model to identify the most important personal and environmental factors, thereby conceptualizing and predicting hazing behaviour to a greater extent. Such an effort may also have practical significance, and might lead to the development of effective interventions.

Another direction for future research would be a prospective study predicting who will, and who will not haze, using the predictors outlined in this study as well as past experiences with hazing as a veteran. SCT has been used to predict behaviour with success (Van Zundert et al., 2009). The present study used regression analyses to predict past hazing behaviours as a veteran. Research that prospectively explores hazing behaviours could provide many opportunities for informed intervention in the prevention of hazing behaviours. A prospective study may also provide the opportunity to measure more precisely the types of hazing behaviours engaged in. This would help eliminate Predicting Hazing Perpetration 121

recall difficulties inherent in retrospective investigations, and more specifically assess the

severity of the activities perpetrated. As hazing is a socially sensitive topic, future

researchers may benefit from the use of anonymous online surveys to prevent social

desirability biases.

Finally, to date, a true prevalence analysis of hazing experiences, as a rookie or a

veteran, has not been undertaken in Canada. The present study (using a sample with an over-representation of collision sport athletes) showed rates of hazing experiences as a rookie consistent with, and in many cases exceeding, data from the NCAA in the U.S.

(Allan & Madden, 2008; Hoover, 1999); the majority of athletes competing in the AUS have been targets and perpetrators of hazing. A more comprehensive study of hazing prevalence in Canada would contribute empirical support for the qualitative and media based reports of hazing in Canadian university sport, junior hockey and other relevant sport leagues and organizations.

Conclusions

This research demonstrates that through the triadic reciprocity enabled by the basic human capabilities proposed within SCT, personal and environmental factors can be used to predict hazing behaviour. This study builds upon research that has used SCT in a predictive manner (Murnan et al., 2006; Van Zundert et al., 2009; Wallace et al.,

2000). SCT has been applied in a limited capacity to predict behaviour in sport, but until now had not been used to predict behaviours that have the potential to injure or harm others in this domain.

Moral disengagement is a component of the self-regulatory capability described within SCT. This study found that moral disengagement is related to the number of Predicting Hazing Perpetration 122

hazing activities perpetrated by veterans. From a theoretical perspective, this is an

important finding. Moral disengagement is a personal factor conceptually linked to the self-regulatory processes inherent in the SCT model. Through the assessment of moral disengagement, another factor within the SCT model (the behavioural factor of hazing perpetration) could be predicted. This finding supports previous research on moral disengagement (McAlister et al., 2006; Osofsky et al., 2005) as well as some of the theoretical assertions of moral disengagement and SCT (Bandura, 1986, 1999); namely, that the self-regulatory processes outlined in SCT may be influenced by personal and environmental factors, and circumventing these processes can lead to injurious behaviour.

Rookie experiences with hazing emerged as the most significant predictor in both regression analyses. A potential interpretation for the progression from rookie victim to veteran perpetrator of hazing was also rooted in the five basic human capabilities

(Bandura, 1986). It was suggested that the vicarious capability accounts for how rookies learn, retain, produce and become motivated to engage in hazing behaviour.

Theoretically linking personal factors to basic human capabilities, as a means of explaining behaviour, is unique to this research and presents future opportunities for the development of SCT.

The forethought capability also adds to the explanation of hazing perpetration by veteran athletes. During the vicarious learning experience that rookie athletes undergo as they are initiated to their new teams, the capacity for forethought may allow them to anticipate being in a veteran role the following season. The strong link between rookie and veteran experiences suggests that rookie athletes can anticipate the benefits to perpetrating hazing and are motivated to learn and retain team traditions and rituals, even Predicting Hazing Perpetration 123

in advance of the opportunity to perpetrate them as a veteran. Furthermore, there may be a connection between forethought and self-regulation when considering hazing practices.

Athletes may perpetrate hazing in a goal-directed manner because the social implications of being accepted on a team are significant. Thus, goal-directed hazing, even in the form of compliance, is indicative of anticipatory self-regulation and requires a capacity for forethought. Although only offered as theoretical suggestions, the potential for future research to address more precise elements of SCT, moral disengagement and the basic human capabilities may help comprehensively explain why veteran athletes haze rookies.

Understanding the personal and environmental factors that are related to hazing behaviour also has many practical implications. Recognizing that men and collision sport athletes are more likely to haze can help channel and enhance intervention efforts.

Identifying that hazing perpetrators are more likely to be victims of hazing, prone to morally disengage and to have more supportive attitudes toward the purpose of initiation, could contribute to the development of effective hazing prevention interventions. Hazing policies and laws have been found to be marginally effective in preventing hazing (Crow

& Phillips, 2002; Rosner & Crow, 2002). Future policy makers and stakeholders interested in curbing or eliminating hazing may benefit from an enhanced theoretical understanding of hazing behaviour.

In conclusion, the application of SCT was an effective way to predict and explain hazing behaviour. This research has identified personal and environmental predictors related to the number of hazing activities perpetrated and the number of seasons over which participants carried out hazing. Identifying factors and a model predictive of Predicting Hazing Perpetration hazing perpetration is a unique contribution of this research and presents many opportunities for future investigations into injurious hazing conduct. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 125

References

Allan, E.J., & DeAngelis, G. (2004). Hazing, masculinity, and collision sports:

Unbecoming heroes. In J. Johnson & M. Holman (Eds.) Making the team: Inside

the world of sport initiations and hazing (pp. 19-49). Toronto, ON: Canadian

Scholar's Press Inc.

Allan, E.J. (2005). Hazing and gender: Analyzing the obvious. In H. Nuwer (Ed.) The

hazing reader: Examining rites gone wrong in fraternities, professional and

amateur athletics, high schools, and military. Indiana, IN: Indiana University

Press.

Allan, E.J., & Madden, M. (2008). Hazing in view: College students at risk. Initial

findings from the National Study of Student Hazing. Retrieved, July 10,2008,

from http://www.hazingstudy.org/publications/hazing_in_vie w_web.pdf

Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52,

27-58.

Andrus, B.C. (1969). The infamous of Nuremberg. London: Fravin.

Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group.

Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181.

Asch, S.E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 193 (5), 31-35.

Atlantic University Sport (n.d.). Varsity athlete roster sizes. Retrieved November 27th,

2006 from http://atlanticuniversitysport.com/

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 126

Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms of moral disengagement. In W. Reich (Ed.), Origins of

terrorism, psychologies, ideologies, theologies, states of mind (p. 161-191).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities.

Personality and Social Psychology Review. (Special Issue on Evil and Violence),

3, 193-209.

Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency.

Journal of Moral Education, 31(2), 101-119.

Bandura, A. (2007). Moral disengagement in state executions. In B. L. Cutler (Ed.).

Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law, Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications.

Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, D., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of

moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 71, 364-374.

Bandura, A., Underwood, B., & Fromson, M. E. (1975). Disinhibition of aggression

through diffusion of responsibility and dehumanization of victims. Journal of

Research in Personality, 9(4), 253-269.

Bell, C.M. (1992). Ritual theory, ritual practice. New York, NY: Oxford University

Press.

Bolton, F., Morris, L., & MacEachron, A. (1989). Males at risk: The other side of sexual

abuse. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Bond, R. (2005). Group size and conformity. Group Processes and Intergroup

Relations, 8, 331-354.

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 127

Brackenridge, C. (1997). He owned me basically. International Review for the

Sociology of Sport, 32(2), 115-130.

Bryshun, J. (1997). Hazing in sport: An exploratory study of veteran/rookie relations.

Unpublished master's thesis, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Bryshun, J., & Young, K. (1999). Sport-related hazing: An inquiry into male and female

involvement. In P. White and K. Young (Eds.), Sport and gender in Canada (pp.

267-292). Don Mills, Canada: Oxford University Press.

Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and

differentiation. Psychological Review, 106(4), 676-713.

Campo, S., Poulos, G., & Sipple, J.W. (2005). Prevalence and profiling: Hazing among

college students and points of intervention. American Journal of Health

Behaviour, 29(2), 137-149.

Caprara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C., & Zimbardo, P.G. (1996). Understanding the complexity

of human aggression: Affective, cognitive and social dimensions of individual

differences in propensity toward aggression. European Journal of Personality,

10(2), 133-155.

Cense, M., & Brackenridge, C. (2001). Temporal and developmental risk factors for

sexual harassment and abuse in sport. European Physical Education Review,

7(1), 61-79.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the

behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Crano W.D. (1997). Vested interest, symbolic politics and attitude-behavior consistency.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72,485-491. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 128

Crow, B., & Phillips, D. (2004). Hazing: What the law says. In J. Johnson & M. Holman

(Eds.) Making the team: Inside the world of sport initiations and hazing (pp. 19-

49). Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholar's Press Inc.

Cokley, K., Miller, K., Cunningham, D., Motoike, J., King, A., & Awad, G. (2001).

Developing an instrument to assess college students' attitudes toward pledging

and hazing in Greek letter organizations. College Student Journal, 55(3), 451-

457.

Collins, R., & Makowsky, M. (1989). The discovery of society (4th ed.). New York:

Random House.

Columbus Telegram (2009). Former frat members react to allegations. Retrieved on

April 28th, 2009 from http://www.columbustelegram.com/articles/2009/04/27/new

s/local/doc49f5c0df89677038256032.txt

Conroy, D.E., Silva, J.M., Newcomer, R.R., Walker, B.W., & Johnson, M.S. (2001).

Personal and participatory socializers of the perceived legitimacy of aggressive

behavior in sport. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 405-418.

Cox, R. L., Lopez, N. L., & Schneider, H. G. (2003). Anger expression: Parental and

cognitive factors. Psychological Reports, 93(1), 59-65.

De Albuquerque, C. L., & Paes-Machado, E. (2004). The hazing machine: The shaping

of Brazilian military police recruits. Policing and Society, 14(2), 175-192.

Diener, E., Dineen, J., Endresen, K., Beaman, A. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1975). Effects of

altered responsibility, cognitive set, and modeling on physical aggression and

deindividuation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 328-337. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 129

Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in

group members. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), The psychology of group influence. Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum.

Drout, C. E., & Corsoro, C. L. (2003). Attitudes toward fraternity hazing among

fraternity members, sorority members, and non-Greek students. Social Behaviour

and Personality, 31(6), 535-544.

Edwards, A.L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality assessment and

research. New York, NY: Holt.

ESPN.com, (2005). Comments from "Outside the Lines" Retrieved July 15th, 2006 from

http://espn.go.com/otl/hazing/monday.html

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.

Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, decision and dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford

University Press.

Finkel, M. A. (2002). Traumatic injuries caused by hazing practices. American Journal

of Emergency Medicine, 20(3), 228-233.

Finley, L.L., & Finley, P.S. (2007). They're just as sadistic as any group of boys! A

content analysis of news coverage of sport-related hazing incidents in high

schools. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 14(2), 197-219.

Firestone, J. M., & Harris, R. J. (1999). Changes in patterns of sexual harassment in the

U.S. military: A comparison of the 1988 and 1905 DOD surveys. Armed Forces

and Society, 25, 613-632.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An

introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 130

Freund, K., Watson, R., & Dickey, R. (1990). Does sexual abuse in childhood cause

pedophilia: An exploratory study. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 19(6), 557-

568.

Gershel, J.C., Katz-Sidlow, R.J., Small, E., & Zandieh, S. (2003). Hazing of suburban

middle school and high school athletes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 52(5),

333-335.

Gervais, J. (2004). Cracking the myths of hazing. Paper presented at the meeting of the

National Hazing Symposium, West Lafayette, IN.

Gewertz, D. B. (1998). The father who bore me. In G. H. Herdt (Ed.), Rituals of

manhood: Male initiation in Papau New Guinea (pp. 286-320). New Brunswick,

NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Glasser, M., Kolvin, I., Campbell, D., Glasser, A., Leitch, I., & Farrelly, S. (2001). Cycle

of child sexual abuse: Links between being a victim and becoming a perpetrator.

British Journal of Psychiatry, 179, 482-494.

Gonzales N. (2009). Woman speaks out about involvement in USU student's death.

Retrieved April 28th, 2009 from http://www.ksl.com/7nidH 48&sid=6069429&aut

ostart=y

Gretzky, W., & Reilly, R. (1990). Gretzky: An autobiography. Toronto, ON: Harper

Collins.

Groth, C. (2004). Hazing research: Understanding the phenomenon. Paper presented at

The National Hazing Symposium, West Lafayette, IN.

Hafez, M.M. (2006). Moral agents, immoral violence: Mechanisms of moral

disengagement in Palestinian suicide terrorism. In J. Victoroff (Ed.) Tangled Predicting Hazing Perpetration 131

Roots: Social and Psychological Factors in the Genesis of Terrorism. New

York, NY: IOS Press.

Haney, C., Banks, W.C., & Zimbardo, P.G. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a

simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69-97.

Harmon-Jones, E. (1999). Toward an understanding of the motivation underlying

dissonance effects: Is the production of aversive consequences necessary? In E.

Harmon-Jones & J. Mills (Eds.), Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a pivotal

theory in social psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association.

Hinkle, S.L. (2006). Cognitive dissonance in athletic hazing: The roles of commitment

and athletic identity. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67 (1-B), 599.

Hinkle. S.L. (2008). Hazing in school sports. EBSCO Research Starters. Retrieved,

June 15,2009 from EBSCO Online Database PsycINFO.. http://web.ebscohost.

com.proxy.hil.unb.ca/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=2&sid=2bc7a08e-9cc6-4f58-873e-

1 ea6ec746b91 %40sessionmgr4&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbG12ZQ%3d%3d#

db=e0h&AN=31962613db=e0h&AN=31962613

Hodges, B.H., & Geyer, A.L. (2006). A Nonconformist Account of the Asch

Experiments: Values, pragmatics and moral dilemmas. Personality and Social

Psychology Review, 70(1), 2-19.

Holman, M. (2004). A search for a theoretical understanding of hazing practices in

athletics. In J. Johnson & M. Holman (Eds.) Making the team: Inside the world

of sport initiations and hazing. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholar's Press Inc. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 132

Hoover, N.C. (1999). National Survey: Initiation rites and athletics for NCAA sports

teams. Alfred, NY: Alfred University.

Hoover, N.C., & Pollard, N.J. (2000). Initiation rites in American high schools: A

national survey. Alfred, NY: Alfred University.

Johnson, J., & Holman, M. (2009). Gender and hazing: The same but different. Journal

of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 80(5), 6-9.

Johnson, J.L., Greaves, L., & Repta, R. (2009). Better science with sex and gender:

Facilitating the use of a sex and gender-based analysis in health research.

International Journal for Equity in Health, 5(14). doi: 10.1 186/1475-9276-8-14.

Keating, C.F., Pomerantz, J., Pommer, S.D., Ritt, S.J.H., Miller, L.M., & McCormick, J.

(2005). Going to college and unpacking hazing: A functional approach to

decrypting initiation practices among undergraduates. Group Dynamics: Theory,

Research, and Practice, 9(2), 104-126.

Kelman, H.C. (1973). Violence without moral restraint: Reflections on the

dehumanization of victims and victimizers. Journal of Social Issues, 29, 25-61.

Kirby, S.L., & Wintrup, G. (2002). Running the gauntlet: An examination of

initiation/hazing and sexual abuse in sport. The Journal of Sexual Aggression,

8(2), 49-68.

Konkol, M.J. (2009). Ex-prep football player sues over 1999 hazing. Chicago Sun

Times. Retrieved July 7th, 2009, from http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/

1645041 ,CST-NWS-stevenson30.article Predicting Hazing Perpetration 133

Koshan, T. (2005, October, 19). OHL spitting mad: Comes down hard on Spitfires'

Mantha over hazing, fighting. Slam Sports. Retrieved October 25th, 2006, from

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/Junior/2005/l 0/19/1269108-sun.html

Kraus, S.J. (1996). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: A meta-analysis of the

empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(1), 58-75.

Kruger, J., Wirtz, D., Van Boven, L., & Altermatt, W. (2004). The effort heuristic.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 91-98.

Kugihara, N. (2001). Effects of aggressive behavior and group size on collective escape

in an emergency: A test between a social identity model and deindividuation

theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 575-598.

Langan, P.A., & Levin, D.J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Federal

Sentencing Reporter, 75(1), 58-65.

Lemieux, P., McKelvie, S.J., & Strout, D. (2002). Self-reported hostile aggression

in contact athletes, no contact athletes and non-athletes. Athletic Insight: The

Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 4(3). Retrieved November 19th, 2002 from,

http://www.athleticinsight.eom/Vol4Iss3/SelfReportedAggression.htm#Reference

Madden, M.J., Ellen, P.S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned

behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 18(\), 3-9.

McAlister, A.L. (2001). Moral disengagement: Measurement and modification. Journal

of Peace Research, 55(1), 87-99. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 134

McAlister, A.L., Bandura, A., & Owen, S.V. (2006). Mechanisms of moral

disengagement in support of military force: The impact of September 11. Journal

of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25(2), 141-165.

McCarroll, J.E., Thayer, L.E., Liu, X., Newby, J.H., Norwood, A.E., Fullerton, C.S., &

Ursano, R.J. (2000). Spouse abuse recidivism in the U.S. Army by gender and

military status. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(3), 521-525.

Meier, B.P., Hinsz, V.B., & Heimerdinger, S.R. (2007). A framework for explaining

aggression involving groups. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, /(l),

298-312.

Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York, NY:

Harper & Row.

Morinis, A. (1985). The ritual experience: Pain and transformation of consciousness in

ordeal of initiation. Ethos, 13(2), 150-174.

Mosher, D.L., & Sirkin, M. (1984). Measuring a macho personality constellation.

Journal of Research in Personality, 18,150-163.

Muir, K. B., & Seitz, T. (2004). Machismo, misogyny, and homophobia in a male

athletic subculture: A participant-observation study of deviant rituals in collegiate

rugby. Deviant Behaviour, 25, 303-327.

Murnan, J., Sharma, M., & Lin, D. (2007). Predicting childhood obesity prevention

behaviours using Social Cognitive Theory: Children in China. International

Quarterly of Community Health Education, 26(1), 73-84.

Nelson, T.F., & Wechsler, H. (2001). Alcohol and college athletes. Medicine and

Science in Sports and Exercise, 33(1), 43-47. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 135

Newman, P. L., & Boyd, D. J. (1998). The making of men. In G. H. Herdt (Ed.), Rituals

of manhood: Male initiation in Papau New Guinea (pp. 286-320). New

Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Nixon, H.L. (1997). Gender, sport, and aggressive behavior outside sport. Journal of

Sport and Social Issues, 21 (4), 379-391.

Nuwer, H. (1990). Broken pledges: The deadly rite of hazing. Marietta, GA:

Longstreet Press.

Nuwer, H. (2000). High school hazing: When rites become W\wrongs. New York, NY:

Franklin Watts.

Nuwer, H. (2004). Why NCAA Faculty Reps Should Loudly Ban Hazing: A Friendly

Nudge. Retrieved April 6th, 2005, from http://www.stophazing.org/nuwer/

ncaareps.htm

O'Hara, J. (2000). The hell of hazing: At universities and in junior hockey, rookies often

undergo barbaric initiation rites. MacLean's, 113(10), 50-52.

Osofsky, M.J., Bandura, A., & Zimbardo, P.G. (2005). The role of moral disengagement

in the execution process. Law and Human Behaviour, 29(A), 371-393.

0stvik, K., & Rudmin, F. (2001). Bullying and hazing among Norwegian army soldiers:

Two studies of prevalence, context, and cognition. Military Psychology, 13( 1),

17-39.

Paciello, M., Fida, R., Tramontano, C., Lupinetti, C., & Caprara, G.V. (2008). Stability

and change of moral disengagement and its impact on aggression and violence in

late adolescence. Child Development, 79(5), 1288-1309. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 136

Pappas, N.T., McKenry, P.C., & Catlett, B.S. (2004). Athlete aggression on the rink and

off the ice: Athlete violence and aggression in hockey and interpersonal

relationships. Men and Masculinities, 6(3), 291-312.

Pelton, J., Gound, M., Forehand, R., & Brody, G. (2004). The moral disengagement

scale: Extension with an American minority sample. Journal of Psychopathology

and Behavioural Assessment, 26(1), 31-39.

Peluso, A.R. (2006). Hazing in sports: The effects and legal ramifications. The Sport

Journal, 9(1), 1-8.

Peritz, I. (2005). Student quits McGill over hazing. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved

October 30th, 2006, from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.

20050923.wxhazing23/BNStory/Sports/

Pershing, J .L. (2006). Men and women's experiences with hazing in a male-dominated

elite military institution. Men and Masculinities, 8 (4), 470-492.

Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and antinormative behavior: A meta

analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123(3), 238-259.

Prislin R. (1996). Attitude stability and attitude strength: One is enough to make it stable.

European Journal of Social Psychology, 26,447-77.

Pritchard, M.E., Milligan, B., Elgin, J., Rush, P., & Shea, M. (2007, March).

Comparisons of risky health behaviors between male and female college athletes

and non-athletes. Athletic Insight, 9(1). Retrieved September 29,2007, from

http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol9Issl/HealthBehaviors.htm

Robinson, L. (1998). Crossing the line: Violence and sexual assault in Canada's national

sport. Toronto, Canada: McClelland & Stewart. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 137

Robinson, L. (2004). Hazing: A story. In J. Johnson & M. Holman (Eds.) Making the

team: Inside the world of sport initiations and hazing. Toronto, ON: Canadian

Scholar's Press Inc.

Rosner, S.R., & Crow, B.C. (2002). Institutional liability for hazing in interscholastic

sports. Houston Law Review, 39,275-305.

Sabo, D., & Veliz, P. (2008). Go out and play: Youth sports in America. East Meadow,

NY: Women's Sport Foundation.

Senemeaud, C., & Somat, A. (2009). Dissonance arousal and persistence in attitude

change. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 65(1), 25-31.

Silva, J.M. (1983). The perceived legitimacy of rule violating behavior in sport. Journal

of Sport Psychology, 5,438-448.

Sports Hazing Incidents. Retrieved on April 8th, 2005, from http://www.espn.go.com/

otl/hazing/list.html

StopHazing.org: Educating to Eliminate Hazing (n.d.). Pro-Hazing e-mail comments.

Retrieved November 21st, 2006 from http://www.stophazing.org/pro-

hazing/index.htm

Sussberg, J.A. (2003). Shattered dreams: Hazing in college athletics. Cardozo Law

Review, 24(3), 1421-1491.

Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (4th Edition).

Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Tenenbaum, G., Stewart, E., Singer, R.N., & Duda, J. (1997). Position statement on

aggression and violence in sport: An ISSP position stand, http://issponline.org/. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 138

Trota, B., & Johnson, J. (2004). A brief history of hazing. In J. Johnson & M. Holman

(Eds.) Making the team: Inside the world of sport initiations and hazing.

Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholar's Press Inc.

Tucker, L.W., & Parks, J.B. (2001). Effects of gender and sport type on intercollegiate

athletes' perceptions of the legitimacy of aggressive behaviors in sport. Sociology

of Sport Journal, 18,403-413.

Turner, R.M.C. (2009). Moral disengagement as a predictor of bullying and aggression:

Are there gender differences? ETD Collection for University of Nebraska -

Lincoln.

Van Zundert, R.M.P., Nijhof, L.M., & Engels, R.C.M.E. (2009). Testing Social

Cognitive Theory as a theoretical framework to predict smoking relapse among

daily smoking adolescents. Addictive Behaviors, 34,281-286.

Waldorn, J.J. (2005). Whatever it takes: Health compromising behaviors in female

athletes. Quest, 57(3), 315-329.

Waldorn, J.J. (2008). I have to do what to be a teammate? Journal of Physical

Education, Recreation and Dance, 79 (5), 4-10.

Wallace, L.J., Buckworth, J., Kirby, T.E., & Sherman, W.M. (2000). Characteristics of

exercise behavior among college students: Application of Social Cognitive

Theory to predicting stage of change. Preventive Medicine, 31,494-505.

Wechsler, H., & Davenport, A. E. (1997). Binge drinking, tobacco, and illicit drug use

and involvement in college athletics. Journal of American College Health, 45,

195-200. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 139

Winslow, D. (1999). Rights of passage and group bonding in the Canadian Airborne.

Armed Forces and Society, 25, 429-457.

Zimbardo, P.G. (2004). A situationist perspective on the psychology of evil:

Understanding how good people are transformed into perpetrators. In A.G. Miller

(Ed.), The Social Psychology of Good and Evil (pp. 21-50). New York: Guilford

Press. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 140

Appendix A: Invitation to Participate

Clearing the Haze: The Role of Moral Disengagement in the Perpetration of Hazing Activities on New Team Members in Athletics

Principal Investigator: Ryan Hamilton [email protected]") Telephone: (506) 460-8341

Academic Supervisor: Dr. David Scott ([email protected]) Telephone: (506)447-3311

Project Overview:

As a varsity athlete you have likely had a long affiliation with your sport. As a part of this affiliation you have likely gone through the process of joining a new team as a rookie. This research project is interested in the types of activities that you engaged in to become a part of a team (both positive and negative) as well as the activities that you may have used to initiate others onto your team(s). This study is also interested in how these activities relate to certain personality based variables. As the principal researcher on this project I am interested in your honest experiences as an athlete as they relate to the initiation process. Varsity athletes representing the sports of football, basketball, soccer, hockey, swimming, cross-country, and volleyball from seven different Atlantic University Sport universities are being invited to participate in this study. If you choose to participate in this study you will be asked to complete a short questionnaire booklet which assesses your experiences in your sport and with initiation, your attitudes toward initiation in general, and your attitude regarding a series of life situations. The answers that you provide will be kept strictly confidential and no identifying information will be linked to the results you provide in the questionnaires. We will not ask for your name or the name of your university. This research project is not interested in singling out particular athletes or universities; rather the overall trends in university sport are of primary importance. It will take approximately 20 minutes to complete the questionnaire package. If you are interested in taking part in this study please complete the consent form. If you are not interested please do not feel pressured to take part and thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Ryan Hamilton Predicting Hazing Perpetration 141

Appendix B: Informed Consent Clearing the Haze: Examining the Role of Moral Disengagement in Initiation Activities in Athletics is a research project being carried out by Ryan Hamilton ([email protected]. (506)460-8341) from the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton, New Brunswick. The project is being supervised by Dr. David Scott ([email protected]. (506) 447-3311), from the Faculty of Kinesiology at the University of New Brunswick.

The following is a description of the project. Please read the form carefully, ask the researcher any questions that you may have, and if willing to participate sign the bottom of the form. • Each participant will be given a questionnaire booklet consisting of five separate questionnaires. The questionnaires will ask you questions about your background, the role that initiations play in sport, as well as assessing some of your attitudes and opinions about life situations. Participation will take 30 minutes or less. • You will not be asked to provide any identifying information on the questionnaire other than some general demographic data. All data will be kept safely stowed and locked in the researchers office. • Your participation is completely voluntary and you are free to withdraw from the study at any time. • Your name and the name of your university will NOT appear on any of the research materials. This study is focused on the overall results not individual results from athletes or the universities that they go to. • Your choice to participate, or not participate, will have no impact on your status with this team nor will your participation be documented in any way.

If you would like to participate in this project please sign your name below. If you have particular concerns about the project and would like to contact someone not connected to the study you may contact Dr. Barry Spinner, Chairperson Psychology Ethics Review Committee ((506) 458-7686) or Dr. Bernd Kurz, Chairperson, UNB (Fredericton) Research Ethics Board (506) 453-5189).

Statement of Consent

I have read the consent form and understand the details of my participation in this research project. I have had all my questions regarding the study answered to my satisfaction and understand the conditions under which I will participate. I am willing to participate in this study.

Name (please print) Signature Date

If you would like to receive a summary of the results of the study when it is completed please leave your e-mail or mailing address below. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 142

Appendix C: Debriefing

Thank you for participating in this research project. The aim of this study was to explore in detail whether personal and environmental factors predict past participation in hazing behaviours. As you would have seen in the questionnaires one aspect of the study was to get an idea of how many times varsity athletes have gone through the initiation process and the range of activities they were asked to participate in. A second questionnaire looked at athletes' attitude toward different aspects of the initiation process and the third measured athletes' proneness to disengage from their morals. The overall aim of my thesis is to determine if there are links between moral disengagement, gender, sport characteristics and hazing behaviours. By establishing links between dangerous hazing activities, proneness to disengage from morals and the specific environmental circumstances of university sport much information can be gained. Many universities are developing policies to address hazing; however, these activities are still occurring with much prevalence. By understanding the circumstances under which hazing occurs and the potential enablers of dangerous initiation activities, the ability to effectively intervene is enhanced. This is particularly important due to the presence of deindividuation in group settings. Research has demonstrated that people behave in ways they normally wouldn't when susceptible to the dynamics and power of a larger group. Every year for the past 30 years in the United States there has been a hazing related death. It is with this in mind that this project was developed and your participation was sought. Thank you so much for taking the time to complete this survey. The issues discussed in this research project may be of a sensitive nature to you. If participating in this project has been upsetting to you, you may contact the University of New Brunswick Counseling Services at: E-mail: counsel@,unb.ca. Phone: (506) 453- 4820. If you have any further questions or comments about this study please contact Ryan Hamilton ([email protected], ((506)460-8341) at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton, New Brunswick. Any concerns about this study may be addressed to Dr. Sandra Byers, Chairperson Department of Psychology ((506) 458-7697), Dr. Barry Spinner, Chairperson Psychology Ethics Review Committee ((506) 453-4974) or Dr. Bernd Kurz, Chairperson, UNB (Fredericton) Research Ethics Board (506) 453- 5189).

If you are interested in further reading on the topic of hazing or moral disengagement please consult the following research publications.

• Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review. (Special Issue on Evil and Violence), 3, p. 193-209. • Hoover, N.C. (1999). National Survey: Initiation rites and athletics for NCAA sports teams. Alfred, USA: Alfred University. Predicting Hazing Perpetration 143

Appendix D: Demographic Questionnaire

1. Age:

2. Gender (please circle): Male Female

3. Year of University:

4. Please list all the university Varsity Sports you compete in starting with the sport vou are being surveyed with right now.

A )

B )

5. Total number of years in your entire career involved in this sport (Please circle one number):

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23+ Predicting Hazing Perpetration 144

Appendix E: Initiation Experiences Questionnaire

AS A ROOKIE

1. In your entire career how many seasons have you been a rookie on a team for this sport?

2. Of these seasons as a rookie, how many seasons were you initiated?

3. AS A ROOKIE IN THIS SPORT have you ever taken part in any of the following activities when being initiated to your team? Did you participate in these activities when you were initiated to your university team?

Activitv Ever Universitv Happen? Team? a) Attending preseason training Yes No Yes No b) Taking part in team-building exercises, camps, trips Yes No Yes No c) Test for skill, endurance, or performance in your sport Yes No Yes No d) Keeping a specific grade point average Yes No Yes No e) Dressing up for team functions (beside uniforms) Yes No Yes No f) Doing volunteer community service Yes No Yes No g) Taking an oath or signing a contract of standards Yes No Yes No h) Being yelled, cursed, or sworn at Yes No Yes No i) Being forced to wear embarrassing clothing Yes No Yes No j) Tattooing, piercing, head shaving, branding Yes No Yes No k) Participating in calisthenics not related to the sport Yes No Yes No 1) Associating with specific people but not others Yes No Yes No m) Acting as a servant to veterans off the field/court Yes No Yes No n) Being forced to deprive self of sleep, food, or hygiene Yes No Yes No o) Consuming extremely spicy / disgusting concoctions Yes No Yes No p) Participating in a drinking contest Yes No Yes No q) Being forced to chug or shoot large amounts of alcohol Yes No Yes No r) Making prank calls or harassing others Yes No Yes No s) Destroying or stealing property Yes No Yes No t) Simulating sexual acts Yes No Yes No u) Engaging in sexual acts Yes No Yes No v) Being tied up, taped, or confined in a small space Yes No Yes No w) Being paddled, whipped, beaten, kicked Yes No Yes No x) Being forced to beat others Yes No Yes No y) Being kidnapped or transported and abandoned Yes No Yes No

4. a) Have you ever been hazed? Yes No (If NO continue to Question 5)

b) If YES how many times? Predicting Hazing Perpetration 145

AS A VETERAN

5. In your entire career how many seasons have you been a veteran on a team for this sport?

6. Out of the seasons you've been a veteran in this sport how many seasons did you take a role in initiating the rookies?

7. AS A VETERAN of this sport, when initiating rookies, did you use any of the following activities to initiate rookies? Of the seasons in which you were a veteran initiating rookies in this sport how many different seasons did you use each of these activities?

Activity Have vou ever How Many Used this Seasons Did Activity You Use? a) Encourage attendance at preseason training Yes No b) Taking part in team-building exercises, camps, trips Yes No c) Testing for skill, endurance, or performance in sport Yes No d) Have them keep a specific grade point average Yes No e) Have them dress up for team functions Yes No f) Have them do volunteer community service Yes No g) Get them to take an oath or sign a contract of standards Yes No h) Yell, curse or swear at them Yes No i) Get them to wear embarrassing clothing Yes No j) Tattooing, piercing, head shaving, branding Yes No k) Have them do calisthenics not related to the sport Yes No 1) Have them associate with specific people but not others Yes No m) Have them act as a servant to veterans off the field/court Yes No n) Deprive of sleep, food, or hygiene Yes No o) Get them to consume spicy / disgusting concoctions Yes No p) Have them participate in a drinking contest Yes No q) Have them chug or shoot large amounts of alcohol Yes No r) Get them to make prank calls or harass others Yes No s) Have rookies damage or steal property Yes No t) Have them simulate sexual acts Yes No u) Have them engage in sexual acts Yes No v) Tying up, taping, or confining in small spaces Yes No w) Paddling, whipping, beating rookies Yes No x) Having rookies beat others Yes No y) Transporting and abandoning Yes No

8. Of the seasons where you've been involved in initiating rookies, how many of these seasons would you say you hazed the rookies? Predicting Hazing Perpetration 146

Appendix F: Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement Scale

Below is a list of 32 statements. Each of these statements reflects an opinion or feeling that people may have about different kinds of behaviour. Please rate how much you agree with each of these statements by circling one number on the rating scale provided below each statement.

1. It is alright to fight to protect your teammates or friends. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

2. Slapping and shoving is just a way of joking. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

3. Damaging property is no big deal when you consider that others are beating people up. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

4. A player on a team should not be blamed for the trouble caused by the team. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

5. If players are competing under stressful or negative conditions they cannot be blamed for behaving aggressively. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

6. It is okay to tell small lies because they don't really do any harm. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree Predicting Hazing Perpetration 147

7. Some people deserve to be treated like animals. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

8. When a player is aggressive and defiant it is their coach's or opponents fault. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

9. It is alright to be physically aggressive with someone who insults your family. I 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

10. To hit obnoxious people is just giving them "a lesson". 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

11. Stealing a bit of money is not too serious compared to those who steal a lot of money. / 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

12. A player who only suggests breaking the rules should not be blamed if other players go ahead and do it. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

13. If players are not disciplined they should not be blamed for inappropriate behaviour. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree Predicting Hazing Perpetration 148

14. People do not mind being teased because it shows interest in them. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

15. It is okay to treat somebody badly who behaved horribly toward you. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

16. If people are careless about where they leave their things it is their own fault if they get stolen. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

17. It is alright to fight when your team's honour is threatened. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

18. Taking someone's car without their permission is just "borrowing if 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

19. It is okay to insult another player because hitting him/her is worse. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

20. If a team decides together to do something harmful it is unfair to blame one player on that team for it. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree Predicting Hazing Perpetration 149

21. Players cannot be blamed for using questionable language when all of their teammates do it. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

22. Teasing someone does not really hurt them. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

23. Someone who is obnoxious does not deserve to be treated like a human being. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

24. Players who get mistreated have usually done something to deserve it. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

25. It is alright to lie to keep your friends out of trouble. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

26. It is not a bad thing to "get high" once in a while. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

27. Compared to the illegal things people do, taking some things from a store without paying for them is not very serious. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree Predicting Hazing Perpetration 150

28. It is unfair to blame a player who had only a small part in the harm caused by a group. 12 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

29. Players cannot be blamed for misbehaving if their teammates or coach pressured them to do it. / 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

30. Insults among teammates do not really hurt anyone. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

31. Some people have to be treated roughly because they lack feelings that can be hurt. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree

32. Players are not at fault for inappropriate behaviour if their coaches or management push them too much. 1 2 3 Completely Neither Agree Completely Disagree nor Disagree Agree Predicting Hazing Perpetration 151

Appendix G Survey of Attitudes About Initiations in Sport (SAAIS)

Directions: This questionnaire is designed to measure attitudes and perceptions about initiation onto athletic teams. There are no right or wrong answers. Read each statement and decide if you 1) Strongly Disagree, 2) Disagree, 3) Undecided, 4) Agree, or 5) Strongly Agree. Indicate agreement by circling the corresponding number on the scale provided.

1. Individuals who desire to join a team, but do not want hazing to be a part of the initiation process, should still be able to join.