Search

The present study investigated aspects of moral development in sport, according to the form of participation, type of sport, and sport experience. 510 participants, 14 to 49 years of age (M = 24.9, SD = 8.3) who came from organized competitive sports included athletes (n = 327), referees (n = 138), and coaches (n = 45) in football (n = 161), handball (n = 198), and basketball (n = 150). Years of sport experience ranged from 1 to 6, 7 to 14, and 15 to 30 years of participation in sports. The Defining Issues Test was given; analysis showed no significant differences in development of moral reasoning among participants across different types of sports, forms of participation, and years of experience in sport.

Liberalism is the view that humans are independent, autonomous, and self-sufficient and, thus institutional policy is warranted only when it advances these values. As an important thread in moral thought today, liberalism defines a good life as the complete freedom of all people to pursue their own desires, provided that little or no harm is done to others along the way. Moral liberalism also pervades the literature in philosophy of sport today. In this paper, I argue that liberalism as moral policy in sport is wrong because liberalism as moral policy is wrong. Human autonomy implies social responsibility, which moral liberalism today disavows. At paper's end, I sketch out a normative account of sport, aretism, that fleshes out the types of responsibilities that bind athletes to sport, properly construed as a social institution.

Television and newspaper coverage of sports and athletes has changed over the last several years. Sports is now big business, and many athletes earn huge salaries. More investigative reporting is being done, and many fans object to having their heroes and hometown teams portrayed in a negative light. Corruption on the part of team owners and managers is being disclosed more than it was in the past, and the criminal activities of athletes are being reported. Covering up of scandal was once standard practice. Reporters today need to seek a balance.

This study examines some well-known attributional tendencies in a unique situation. Specifically, it examines attributions for the unexpected fall of a Canadian hero, Ben Johnson, who was stripped of his Olympic gold medal for the use of anabolic steroids. The results reveal a reversal of the fundamental attributional bias and the use of base rate information in observers' attributions. The findings are interpreted and discussed in terms of Psyczynski and Greenberg's (1987) biased hypothesis-testing model.