Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Are Head Coaches in Intercollegiate Athletics Perceived as Masculine? An Evaluation of Gender Stereotypes and the Effect of Sexism on Intercollegiate Coaches

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Gender Issues Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study focused on determining if gender stereotypes existed in intercollegiate athletics in relation to coaches, and if the discourse was enveloped within sexist beliefs. Specifically, we tested the relationship modern sexism had with traits ascribed to successful head coaches. Results indicated no gender differences in the traits ascribed to head coaches. Further, modern sexism did not moderate the relationship between gender and masculinity scores for the head coach. This research study bolsters previous research in that we found no gender differences in ascribed leadership traits, and expands the literature about sexism in sport.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2008). Women in intercollegiate sport: A longitudinal national study—Thirty-one year update. Unpublished manuscript, Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn College.

  2. Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2002). Women in intercollegiate sport: A longitudinal study—Twenty-five year update. Unpublished manuscript. Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn College.

  3. Aicher, T. J., & Sagas, M. (2009). Sexist beliefs affect perceived treatment discrimination among coaches in division I intercollegiate athletics. International Journal of Sport Management, 10, 243–262.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bem, S. L. (1981). Bem sex role inventory: Professional manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brenner, O. C., Tomkiewicz, J., & Schein, V. E. (1989). The relationship between sex-role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics revisited. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 662–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cralley, E. L., & Ruscher, J. B. (2005). Lady, girl, or woman: Sexism and cognitive busyness predict use of gender-biased nouns. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 24, 300–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cunningham, G. B., & Sagas, M. (2008). Gender and sex diversity in sport organizations: Introduction to a special issue. Sex Roles, 58, 3–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dardenne, B., Dumont, M., & Bollier, T. (2007). Insiduous dangers of benevloent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 764–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving the contradictions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fernandez, M. L., Castro, Y. R., Otero, M. C., Foltz, M. L., & Lorenzo, M. G. (2006). Sexism, vocational goals, and motivation as predictors of men’s and women’s career choices. Sex Roles, 55, 267–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fielding-Lloyd, B., & Mean, L. J. (2008). Standards and separatism: The discursive construction of gender in English soccer coach education. Sex Roles, 58, 24–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kennedy, C. L. (2009). The glass ceiling on the playing fields report card III. Gender Issues, 26, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Masser, B. M., & Abrams, D. (2004). Reinforcing the glass ceiling: The consequences of hostile sexism for female managerial candidates. Sex Roles, 51, 609–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Powell, G. N., Butterfield, D. A., & Parent, J. D. (2002). Gender stereotypes: Have times changed? Journal of Management, 28, 177–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Russel, B. L., & Trigg, K. Y. (2004). Tolerance of sexual harassment: An examination of gender differences, ambivalent sexism, social dominance, and gender roles. Sex Roles, 50, 565–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schein, V. E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 675–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Schein, V. E., & Mueller, R. (1992). Sex role stereotyping and requisite management characteristics: A cross cultural look. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 439–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Schein, V. E., Mueller, R., & Jacobson, C. (1989). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among college students. Sex Roles, 20, 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Schein, V. E., Mueller, R., Lituchy, T., & Liu, J. (1996). Think manager—think male: A global phenomenon? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sczesny, S. (2003). A closer look beneath the surface: Various facets of think manager—think male stereotype. Sex Roles, 49, 353–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shaw, S., & Frisby, W. (2006). Can gender equity be more equitable? Promoting an alternative frame for sport management research, education, and practice. Journal of Sport Management, 20, 483–509.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Shaw, S., & Hoeber, L. (2003). A strong man is direct and a direct woman is a bitch: Gender discourses and their influence on employment roles in sports organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 17, 347–375.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. (1972). The attitudes toward women scale. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Swim, J. K., Mallett, R., & Stangor, C. (2004). Understanding subtle sexism: Detection and use of sexist language. Sex Roles, 51, 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tougas, F., Brown, R., Beaton, A. M., & Joly, S. (1995). Neo-sexism: Plus ca change, plus c’est pariel. Personality and Social Psycology Bulletin, 21, 842–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sport Management, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA

    Thomas J. Aicher

  2. Department of Tourism, Recreation, and Sport Management, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Michael Sagas

Authors
  1. Thomas J. Aicher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Sagas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas J. Aicher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aicher, T.J., Sagas, M. Are Head Coaches in Intercollegiate Athletics Perceived as Masculine? An Evaluation of Gender Stereotypes and the Effect of Sexism on Intercollegiate Coaches. Gend. Issues 27, 165–174 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-010-9092-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-010-9092-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation