Show HBCU Referee Bias the Red Card: Testing Communication Theory in Division I Women’s College Soccer

IF 3.2 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Andrew Dix
{"title":"Show HBCU Referee Bias the Red Card: Testing Communication Theory in Division I Women’s College Soccer","authors":"Andrew Dix","doi":"10.1177/21674795241239562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current study focused on the red cards and yellow cards that referees gave to historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in Division I women’s college soccer for their in-game communicative actions. These cards are distributed to players who are perceived to have engaged in a reckless play or an action that involved excessive force. Within the United States, HBCUs are institutions of higher education that historically and primarily serve students who are of African American descent. Thus, the strong Black woman collective (SBWC) theory of communication was the theoretical frame because this study focused on small groups that were mostly comprised of African American women. Previous studies on referee bias were summarized in the literature review. Publicly available data on 19,360 soccer games were then analyzed. The findings indicated that referees gave more red cards to HBCU women’s college soccer teams relative to predominantly White institution (PWI) women’s college soccer teams at a statistically significant level. Yellow cards were also disproportionately distributed to HBCUs relative to PWIs. Implications for communication theory were noted in the study discussion as were interpretations on why referee bias against HBCUs continues to occur.","PeriodicalId":46882,"journal":{"name":"Communication & Sport","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication & Sport","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21674795241239562","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current study focused on the red cards and yellow cards that referees gave to historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in Division I women’s college soccer for their in-game communicative actions. These cards are distributed to players who are perceived to have engaged in a reckless play or an action that involved excessive force. Within the United States, HBCUs are institutions of higher education that historically and primarily serve students who are of African American descent. Thus, the strong Black woman collective (SBWC) theory of communication was the theoretical frame because this study focused on small groups that were mostly comprised of African American women. Previous studies on referee bias were summarized in the literature review. Publicly available data on 19,360 soccer games were then analyzed. The findings indicated that referees gave more red cards to HBCU women’s college soccer teams relative to predominantly White institution (PWI) women’s college soccer teams at a statistically significant level. Yellow cards were also disproportionately distributed to HBCUs relative to PWIs. Implications for communication theory were noted in the study discussion as were interpretations on why referee bias against HBCUs continues to occur.
向 HBCU 裁判偏袒出示红牌:检验一级女子足球联赛中的沟通理论
本研究的重点是,在女子大学足球甲级联赛中,裁判向历史上著名的黑人大学(HBCUs)在比赛中的交流行为出示的红牌和黄牌。这些牌是发给那些被认为有鲁莽行为或过度使用武力行为的球员的。在美国,HBCUs 是历史上主要为非裔美国人后代服务的高等教育机构。因此,强势黑人女性集体(SBWC)传播理论是本研究的理论框架,因为本研究关注的是主要由非洲裔美国女性组成的小团体。文献综述中总结了以往关于裁判偏见的研究。然后分析了 19360 场足球比赛的公开数据。研究结果表明,相对于白人占主导地位的院校(PWI)女子大学足球队而言,裁判给 HBCU 女子大学足球队的红牌更多,这在统计学上具有显著意义。相对于白人院校,黄牌也不成比例地分配给了高地白种人大学。研究讨论中指出了传播理论的意义,并解释了为什么裁判对高地白种人大学的偏见仍在继续。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
44
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信