Due in 5 and half hrs Journal Article review no outside sources other than the article itself/ Sociology of Sports Terminology must be used. Enclosed as well

Duerden, M. D., & Witt, P. A. (2010). The Impact of Socialization on Youth Program Outcomes: A Social Development Model Perspective. Leisure Sciences, 32(4), 299-317. doi:10.1080/01490400.2010.488189   ( THIS IS THE ONLY RESOURCE TO USE AND THAT CAN BE USED )






The permalinks in this page will open up in the Academic Premier database.  You may have to click again on the PDF format to see the full article. 


Guidelines enclosed in word document attachement below.


APA 2 pages double spaced at minium

Journal Article Critique Guidelines

 The following outline includes general questions or issues to address while reading and critiquing a scholarly journal article. For each of the Roman numeral headings, summarize the article’s content and answer the questions. This will help you to organize your thoughts. Your critique should be clear and succinct. You should include the terms, concepts and theories from the class/text that apply to the topic

 I.                  Citation

A.       Provide a full citation for the article (use the APA Style Manual)

II.                 Topic

A.     Briefly describe the topic of the journal article as provided by the author. Is the topic clearly specified? Does the abstract meaningfully summarize the purpose and content of the article? How might this work be integrated into one of the sections in your textbook?

Identify the author’s major objective in this article.

Identify the important concepts and variables being focused on by the author. Are the definitions for concepts clear?

D.     Does the author seem to be making any assumptions?

E.      Is there bias apparent in the author’s approach?

III.               Theory

A.     Is the author being guided by a particular theoretical perspective or theory? If so, describe the author’s interpretation and use of the theory.

B.     Does the theory seem to be applied appropriately to the issue or topic?

C.     Compare the author’s understanding and use of the theory to how the theory is presented in the text.

IV.              Research Methods

A.     What research design does the author use? Does it seem appropriate for the author’s objective?

B.     Does the author clearly describe the procedures used for this research?

C.     What procedures were used to select subjects for this study? What was the response rate?

D.     Is the study cross-sectional or longitudinal in design?

E.      Are the data clearly and meaningfully presented?

V.                 Discussion and Interpretations

Do the data support the author’s conclusions?

Is the article thought provoking? What new questions, if any, is the author raising?

What is your evaluation of the author’s literature review? How comprehensive is it? Does the author include citations from more than just one perspective or viewpoint?

Is the research cited current? Does the author provide historical perspective through the citations?

VI.              Reflection

A.     How has this article expanded upon material presented in the text?

B.     What was the most important thing you learned by reading and critiquing this article?

Functionalist theoretical perspective

Conflict theoretical perspective

Critical theoretical perspective

Interactionist theories




minority group

dominant group



Ideological sexism

Institutional sexism

Feminist theoretical perspective

social class

social stratification

economic capital

social capital

cultural capital


ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act 


masters athletes


deviance – is the recognized violation of cultural norms.  Deviance is universal.  It exists in all societies.  Deviance is variable.  Any act or person can be lableled deviant.  Deviance is political.  Norms (including laws) reflect the interests of powerful members of society.

deviant –

Social foundations of deviance:  Deviance is shaped by society.  Deviance varies according to cultural norms and norms change.  People become deviant as others define them that way.  We all violate norms at one time or another; what matters is how others perceive, define and respond to it.  How societies set norms and how they define rule breaking both involve social power.

Functions of deviance – 4 essential functions.  1.  Affirms cultural values and norms. 2.  Responding to deviance clarifies moral boundaries.  3.  Responding to deviance brings people together, 4.  Deviance encourages social change.



violence in sport

on-field violence in sport

off-field violence

PEDS – Performance enhancing drugs

prescription drugs and over the counter drugs


anabolic steroids

doping (defined on page 332)

eating disorders:  anorexia nervosa, bulimia

compulsive exercise



Leisure Sciences, 32:


–317, 2010
Copyright C© Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0149-0400 print / 1521-0588 online
DOI: 10.1080/01490400.2010.488189

The Impact of Socialization on Youth Program
Outcomes: A Social Development Model Perspective


Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX, USA

This study employs a mixed-methods design and a social development model (SDM) to
examine the role of socialization processes within an international immersion program
for adolescents. Longitudinal data from 108 participant and 49 comparison group
members are analyzed using structural equation modeling procedures. Qualitative data
are also used to assess participants’ perceptions of these processes. The quantitative
findings indicate that the SDM fits the data well and partially mediates the growth of
observed recreation program outcomes. The qualitative findings offer additional insights
into the role of within program socialization processes.

Keywords mixed-methods, structured recreation settings, youth development

The individuals with whom adolescents interact across the contexts of their lives exert a
powerful developmental influence. These people include parents (Baumrind, 1991), peers
(Hartup, 1996), teachers (Hughes, Cavell, & Willson, 2001; Hughes & Kwok, 2007),
and other nonparental adults including mentors (Beier, Rosenfeld, Spitalny, Zansky, &
Bontempo, 2000). Although interpersonal relationships and socialization play major de-
velopmental roles during adolescence, their influence is often overlooked when evaluating
the impact of programs offered by youth serving agencies (Grossman & Bulle, 2006) and
recreation organizations.

The social developmental model (SDM) provides a theoretical approach to understand-
ing the impact of relationships and socialization on behavior (Catalano & Hawkins, 1996;
Hawkins & Weis, 1985). The model posits that individuals develop bonds to groups and
organizations when they experience opportunities for involvement, possess the skills neces-
sary for involvement, and receive positive feedback regarding their involvement (Hawkins,
Catalano, & Arthur, 2002). Bonding influences individuals to adopt and act in accordance
with the norms and expectations of the group (Catalano & Hawkins). The SDM has proven
efficacious in a variety of settings (Catalano, Haggerty, Oesterle, Fleming, & Hawkins,
2004; Catalano, Oxford, Harachi, Abbott, & Haggerty, 1999) but has yet to be tested in a
traditional recreation context such as an out-of-school-time program.

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to employ a SDM to assess the mediating influ-
ence of socializing processes on outcomes associated with participation in an international
immersion/environmental education program for middle and high school-aged youth. The

Received 24 June 2009; accepted 4 December 2009.
Address correspondence to Mat D. Duerden, Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, 2261

TAMU, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. E-mail: duerden@tamu.edu


300 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

findings from this study provide insights regarding the influence of interpersonal processes
on program outcomes and represent a positive youth development application of the SDM
in an out-of-school-time program context.

Literature Review

The SDM (see Figure 1) resulted from efforts to explain the origins and processes asso-
ciated with adolescent deviance (Hawkins & Weis, 1985). Social learning theory, social
control theory, and differential association theory were used to create a framework to ex-
plain both deviant and prosocial behavior from a social development perspective. Social
learning theory suggests that behaviors, especially repeated behaviors, result in part from
positive reinforcement (Akers, 1977; Bandura, 1977). Social control theory highlights the
importance of bonds to socializing units (e.g., family, school, peers) in the development
of behavior (Hirschi, 1969). Differential association theory proposes that both deviant and
prosocial behaviors share similar developmental pathways (Matsueda, 1982).

The SDM identifies key constructs that influence the development of social bonds
and beliefs in societal norms which in turn affect behavior (Catalano & Hawkins, 1996).
For socialization to occur, youths need to be aware of opportunities to become involved
within a socializing unit and subsequently engage in these opportunities. To successfully
participate in an activity, adolescents also need to possess and apply appropriate skills.
Actual involvement and skill levels influence the type and degree of reinforcement an
individual receives. Perceived positive reinforcement leads individuals to form social bonds.
These bonds consist of attachment to the socializing unit as well as a commitment to act
according to the unit’s associated beliefs and norms (Catalano & Hawkins, 1996). This
commitment, in turn, influences future behavior.

The SDM has been effective in predicting negative behaviors. In a study of alcohol
misuse at ages 14 and 16, the SDM explained 45% of the variance in alcohol misuse at age
16 and significantly mediated the relation between age 14 and 16 drinking (Lonczak et al.,
2001). In a study to address antisocial behavior among elementary school children, the SDM
was able to explain 25–35% of the variance in behavior for children whose parents modeled
deviant behaviors and those who did not (Catalano et al., 1999). Similar findings have
also shown that children’s drug use is significantly related to parents’ drug use (Fleming,


Skills for


Belief in




FIGURE 1 Social development model (adapted from Hawkins & Weis, 1985).

The Impact of Socialization 301


Skills for


Belief in



in GEx

FIGURE 2 Proposed conceptual model.

Brewer, Gainey, Haggerty, & Catalano, 1997). Additional research has also validated the
effectiveness of interventions based upon the SDM to promote positive behavior (Catalano
et al., 2004).

Although untested in recreational contexts, the SDM has the potential to provide
insights into the role of social processes in youth recreation programs and their impact
on targeted outcomes. Researchers have addressed important socialization related issues,
including the role of autonomy (Hill & Sibthorp, 2006), identity development (Shaw,
Kleiber, & Caldwell, 1995), and intrinsic motivation (Kleiber, Larson, & Csikszentmihalyi,
1986) in recreation settings, but additional work specifically focused on socialization is
needed. Structured leisure activities clearly offer youth access to the socializing influence
of peer groups (Barber, Stone, Hunt, & Eccles, 2005), but the exact mechanisms behind
this socialization remain unclear. For example, Persson, Kerr, and Stattin (2007) found
that older adolescents were more likely to continue participating in structured recreation
programs in which their friends were involved but called for further research on the role
of bonding to better understand these participation patterns. The SDM provides a tested
theoretical lens to address the components, processes, and impacts of socialization as they
pertain to youth recreation program contexts. Therefore, this study tested the mediating
affect of a conceptual SDM (see Figure 2) on outcomes associated with an international
immersion/environmental education program. The following hypotheses were tested:

1. Program participants will experience a significantly greater increase in self-reported
levels of program outcomes in comparison to the controls.

2. The conceptual SDM will partially mediate the development of program outcomes that
occur during both the preparatory (T2) and international workshop (T3) portions of the

The qualitative portion of the study was guided by the following research questions:

1. From the participants’ perspective, what role did socialization processes play in the
overall program experience?

2. What influence did these processes have across the program components?


The study employed a quasi-experimental, concurrent nested mixed-method design
(Hanson, Creswell, Clark, Petska, & Creswell, 2005) to address the hypotheses and re-
search questions. This design involved the simultaneous collection and analysis of both

302 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

qualitative and quantitative data. Emphasis was given to the quantitative data and hypothe-
ses and the qualitative data were used to gain additional insights.

Program Description

The program studied was offered by Global Explorers (GEx), a nonprofit organization that
provides international immersion experiences for middle school and high school students
and teachers. GEx programs focus on four core disciplines (i.e., science, culture, leadership,
and service) with the overall goal of helping students develop into responsible global citizens
(Global Explorers, 2008). Each program includes three stages: a preparatory program, an
international field workshop, and a post-trip service project. During the preparatory program
youth participate in 9–12 sessions, which take place during the after-school free-time portion
of the student’s day, ranging in length from one to three hours specific to each groups’ travel

The international field workshop lasts between 7 and 14 days. Each group consists
of students, teachers, and optional adult chaperones. All aspects of the international field
workshop are arranged and supervised by GEx staff. In addition to local guides, GEx
provides each group with a volunteer field scientist and a GEx staff member. During this
portion of the program, students and teachers take part in cultural, scientific, and service
activities led by GEx staff and local contracted guide services. Locations include Peru,
Costa Rica, and Tanzania. Upon returning from the field workshop, participants design and
implement a service project directed either toward the needs of their own community or
the international community they visited.


Data for this study were collected from seven different groups who traveled with GEx
during 2008. Youth in the program were recruited by teachers at each participating school.
For our study, each participating teacher was asked by the researchers to recruit students to
serve as members of a nonequivalent comparison group (Babbie, 2005). Parental consent
and student assent were obtained for all students involved in the study.

The participant group consisted of 108 students (females = 51; males = 57) from seven
different groups and 49 students (females = 29; males = 20) who served as comparisons.
We originally hoped to collect data from a larger portion of the 215 youth who participated
in a GEx program during 2008, but a number of the groups either declined participation
or had low response rates primarily due to lack of support for the evaluation from some
teachers. In addition, only three of the seven teachers were able to recruit comparison group
students. At the beginning of the study, participating and comparison students had a mean
age of 14.5 years (SD = 1.65) and 13.6 (SD = .89) respectively. Eighty-two percent of the
participants and 90% of the comparisons were White.

Quantitative Methodology

Data collection. Several procedures were employed to collect questionnaire data from
the participant and comparison groups. At the completion of the preparatory program (T2),
participants completed a questionnaire containing both traditional and retrospective pretest
items. The traditional items addressed issues related to SDM components (e.g., bonding,
opportunities for involvement) within the preparatory program. The retrospective pretest
items assessed pre (T1) and post preparatory program (T2) levels of self-reported program
outcome variables (i.e., environmental knowledge, attitude, and behavior). Students in the

The Impact of Socialization 303

comparison group also completed the retrospective pretest items during approximately the
same timeframe as their participating counterparts.

Retrospective pretests were employed due to both logistical limitations that did not
allow for data collection before all groups began their participation and to guard against self-
report bias. Retrospective pretests occurred at the conclusion of the preparatory program
and required respondents to indicate their current perception of the degree to which they
possessed a specific trait, attitude, or attribute previous to their participation in the prepara-
tory program (Sibthorp, Paisley, Gookin, & Ward, 2007). Use of this approach guarded
against response-shift bias, which occurs between pre- and posttests when individuals’
internal scale of measurement changes as a result of an experience (Pratt, McGuigan, &
Katzev, 2000; Sibthorp et al., 2007). For example, youth participants might rate themselves
high on a pretest skills inventory as a result of inaccurate perceptions of the difficulty of the
required tasks. After completing the tasks, even though individuals gained a greater degree
of competence from their experience, they might rate themselves lower on the posttest than
the pretest due to a more accurate perception of task difficulty.

After completing the international field workshop (T3), participants completed all
items from the T2 questionnaire to provide information regarding the impact of this program
component. To follow up with both the participant and comparison groups, a final round
of data collection occurred during the fall of 2008 (T4). T4 data collection took place after
the groups had completed their posttrip service projects. Thus, time between posttravel and
follow-up data collection periods ranged from three to seven months. Because logistical
difficulties associated with collecting data from the comparison group during the summer,
data were only gathered from the comparisons at T1, T2, and T4.

Table 1 contains a breakdown of the responses collected at each of four data collection
periods. Although the number of questionnaires collected across the first three data collec-
tion occasions remained static, attrition occurred at T4 despite efforts to maintain a high
response rates.

An attrition analysis was conducted to identify potential differences between those
individuals with and without complete data. One-way ANOVA statistics revealed no signif-
icant differences within both the participant and comparison groups. The assumption that
the data were missing at random was supported by these findings. This finding, along with
the low rate of missing data (i.e., < 5%) from individuals who completed at least a portion of the survey at each time wave, provided justification for imputing some of the missing data. Imputation was conducted using the LISREL 8.8 multiple imputation procedure to address missing values at each time wave for individuals who completed at least some portion of the questionnaire. Data were not imputed if no response was collected from an individual for a particular wave of data collection.

Measures. Items adapted from the Seattle Social Development Project (Hawkins et al.,
2003) were used to measure opportunities for involvement, skills for involvement, rewards
and recognition, and bonding at T2 and T3. Sample items for the various scales included
statements such as: “I had lots of chances to participate in GEx activities” (opportunities

TABLE 1 Participant and Comparison Group Data Collection


T1 T2 T3 T4

Participants 106 106 108 75
Comparisons 49 49 — 30

304 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

for involvement), “I had difficulty following directions during GEx activities” (skills), “My
GEx teachers praised or complimented me when I worked hard” (rewards), and “I liked
the GEx program” (bonding). These scales have produced adequate estimates of internal
consistency in previous studies (e.g., .64 for opportunities for involvement, .68 for rewards
and recognition, and .76 for bonding; personal communication Karl G. Hill, October 25,
2007). No statistics were available from previous research for the skills scale. A six-item
scale to measure GEx students’ beliefs about service, science, culture, and leadership (e.g.,
“I believe that learning about science can help us reduce our impact on the environment”)
was developed by the authors after a review of GEx curriculum and was evaluated for
content validity by GEx administrators.

Environmental attitudes (EA) and pro-environmental behaviors (EB) were measured
using the affect and behavioral commitment subscales from the Children’s Environmental
Attitude and Knowledge Scale (CHEAKS, Leeming, & Dwyer, 1995). These subscales
consisted of 12 items each. The EA subscale contained statements such as: “I get angry
about the damage pollution does to the environment” and “I am frightened to think people
don’t care about the environment.” Items from the EB subscale included statements such as:
“I have asked my family to recycle some of the things that we use” and “I do not let a water
faucet run when it is not necessary.” Previous testing of the CHEAKS subscale from which
this study’s EA and EB measures were drawn suggested acceptable levels of reliability and
validity (Leeming & Dwyer, 1995). Finally, a five-item scale (e.g., “I can explain what
the term ecology means”) to measure environmental knowledge (EK) was developed by
the authors through a review of GEx curriculum and was evaluated for content validity by
GEx administrators. All items employed in this study were assessed using a 5-point Likert
response format (1 = very untrue to 5 = very true). All measures produced adequate levels
of internal consistency (Table 2).

Analysis procedures. To guard against a family-wise error rate that would have arisen
if multiple analyses had been conducted for each of the program outcomes, and due to the
study’s relatively low sample size, a composite outcome score (KAB) was created by taking
the mean of the EK, EA, and EB mean scores at each time period. The latent constructs
associated with these scales were theoretically linked and provided further justification for
this combination. Providing empirical support for the creation of a composite score, the
EK, EA, and EB scores were significantly correlated (.30 to .58) across all time periods
and the new KAB variable produced adequate reliability coefficients (T1 = .68; T2 = .68;

TABLE 2 Reliability Coefficients for all Measures

Alpha Coefficients

Pre- Post Post Follow-
Scale Program Preparatory Travel up

Opportunities — .67 .61 —
Skills — .75 .79 —
Rewards — .75 .70 —
Bonding — .75 .87 —
Beliefs — .63 .61 —
Environmental knowledge .78 .83 .77 .88
Environmental attitude .85 .85 .84 .86
Environmental behavior .75 .71 .65 .75

The Impact of Socialization 305

T3 = .71; and T4 = .74). Accordingly, the KAB as a more parsimonious representation of
the program’s targeted outcomes was employed in the study’s analyses.

The first hypothesis, that the participants would experience a significantly greater
increase in program outcomes in comparison to the controls, was tested using a repeated
measure, ANOVA. Covariance structure analyses using LISREL 8.80 were employed to
test the second hypothesis regarding the mediating role of the SDM on the development of
pro-environmental behavior. Two separate structural test models were analyzed with one
for the preparatory and one for the international workshop portions of the program. The
analyses of two separate models allowed for the investigation of the contribution of the
socializing processes from each program context to the overall development of outcomes.

The first model included KAB measured at T1 and T2 and all T2 SDM variables. The
second model included KAB measured at T2 and T3 as well as all T3 SDM variables.
Several analysis adaptations were necessary due to the relatively small sample size. Item
parceling was used to create the “observed” model variables as opposed to employing
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test and refine latent variables created from multiple
scale items (Kishton & Widaman, 1994). Although the use of CFA and latent variables
to create a structural model is the preferred analysis strategy, the number of parameters
needed to estimate this study’s models would have led to an unacceptably low parameter
to sample size ratio. Kline (2005) suggested that researchers should strive for at least a 5:1
sample size to parameter ratio. To meet this benchmark for our study, item parceling was

Qualitative Methodology

Data collection. Working with GEx administrators, one of the participating groups
was invited to serve as a case study for the qualitative portion of the evaluation. This group
was selected due to the number of student participants (N = 46) and teacher support for the
project, and because the group was traveling to Peru, GEx’s most popular travel destination.
Qualitative data collection involved focus groups and dyadic interviews (Table 3) as well
as responses from all participant group members to a variety of open ended items on the
T2, T3, and T4 questionnaires.

Focus groups and dyadic interviews were conducted with youth participants and their
parents during three site visits conducted by the principal investigator (PI). The first two
visits occurred during the middle and towards the end of the preparatory portion of the
program. These site visit lasted approximately three days and consisted of student focus
groups (i.e., 4–6 participants), one large parent focus group with 8–12 parents, and prepara-
tory program observations. The third site visit occurred during fall 2008. This visit allowed
the PI to interview the same groups of individuals regarding their overall assessment of the
program as well as their perceptions of the long-term impact of their experiences.

TABLE 3 Number of Case Study Interviews/Focus Groups

Preparatory International Follow-
Program Workshop up Total

Participants 10 23 11 44
Parents 2 5 1 8
Group sponsors 3 1 1 5
GEx staff — 2 — 2

306 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

The PI also traveled with and observed the group during their two-week international
workshop in Peru. The first week was spent at several guest lodges in the Peruvian Amazon
basin, and the second week took place in southern Peru hiking the Inca Trail to Machu
Picchu. The entire group participated in the Amazon portion of the trip, and approximately
half of the group stayed for the Inca Trail portion. Interviews and focus groups were
conducted with all participants, including teachers and GEx staff members regarding issues
pertaining to this study. The PI also conducted participant observations each day of the
workshop and took field notes.

Analysis procedures. Interviews and the PI’s field notes were recorded and transcribed.
The analysis process was guided by grounded theory methodology as outlined by Strauss
and Corbin (1998a) and the study’s research questions. Open coding process enabled the
development of themes that were grounded in the data themselves (Strauss & Corbin,
1998b). Axial coding allowed for the development of abstract categories and grouped
subcategories (Strauss & Corbin, 1998b). Once categories emerged, the researchers moved
to selective coding, whereby a core category was identified and the focus of the analysis
shifted to connecting other categories to this core category (Strauss & Corbin, 1998b).

The final step of the analysis process involved the integration of themes and relation-
ships between these themes into a coherent response to the research questions. Throughout
the analysis process, the codes, analyses, and the emerging theory were reviewed by co-PIs
as well as the participants themselves to ensure that all analyses remained true to the raw
data and lived experience of the respondents (Strauss & Corbin, 1998a). This study em-
ployed four validation strategies (Creswell, 2007): extensive time spent in the field with the
subjects, the use of multiple forms of data (e.g., interviews with parents, teachers, GEx staff
and youth, field notes, open ended survey questions), member checking, and peer review.

Researcher’s relationship to the data. As noted, the PI spent time with members of the
case study group as a passive observer of the program. The focus was on building rapport
with participants to develop relationships that would foster the open sharing of information.
The PI had previous experience as a director of youth programs but taking on the role of
observer represented a new experience that required a conscious effort to avoid taking a
participatory position in the program. However, the PI’s presence in the field invariably
influenced the youths’ experience. For example, without the interviews and focus groups,
many of the youth would not have had a comparable opportunity to discuss and debrief
their experiences.


Quantitative Findings

Descriptive statistics. Descriptive statistics for the relevant variables are provided in
Table 4. One-way ANOVA’s and chi-square tests were conducted to investigate the pos-
sibility of group age, gender, and ethnicity differences as well as baseline equivalence on
program measures. Results indicated that participants had slightly higher composite pro-
gram outcome scores at baseline (F (1, 150) = 4.08; p = .05) and had a higher mean age
(F (1, 150) = 11.7; p = .001) than the comparisons. Comparison girls reporting higher lev-
els of pro-environmental behavior at T2 (F(1, 47) = 5.76, p = .02) was the only significant
gender difference.

Hypothesis 1. Results from a repeated measures ANOVA comparing participant and
comparison KAB scores across T1, T2, and T4 (T3 was not used in the analysis due to

The Impact of Socialization 307

TABLE 4 Participant and Comparison Descriptive Statistics

T1 T2 T3 T4

Measure Group M SD M SD M SD M SD

KAB Participant 2.79 .66 3.66 .57 3.88 .55 4.00 .53
Comparison 2.57 .52 3.03 .65 — — 3.26 .60

Opportunities Participant — — 4.00 0.62 4.28 0.56 — —
Rewards Participant — — 4.00 0.71 3.23 0.47 — —
Bonding Participant — — 4.47 0.54 4.65 0.51 — —
Skills Participant — — 3.92 0.98 3.55 0.41 — —
Beliefs Participant — — 4.60 0.40 4.65 0.37 — —

the lack of comparison data from this collection period) supported the hypothesis that the
participant group experienced significant program outcome growth in relation to the com-
parison group. Although Levene’s tests indicated nonhomogenous error variance between
the participant and comparison groups for KAB at T1, assumptions for sphericity were
met, which represents the most critical assumption for repeated measures ANOVA’s (Field,
2005). Consequently, no transformations were made to the data. Results revealed a signifi-
cant main effect for time of testing (F(2, 208) = 130.43, p < .001, partial eta squared = .56), a significant interaction effect for time of testing x group (i.e., participant or comparison; F(2, 208) = 11.20, p < .001, partial eta squared = .10), and a significant group effect (F(1, 104) = 27.49, p < .001, partial eta squared = .21). These findings indicated that the participant group reported higher overall KAB scores and experienced a significantly greater growth pattern (i.e., time x group interaction; see Figure 3) than the comparisons.

Hypothesis 2a. A covariance structure analysis was used to test the hypothesized
mediating role of the SDM in terms of KAB development during the preparatory portion
of the program. Before testing the conceptual model at T2, a correlation matrix of all of
the model’s variables (Table 5) was reviewed. Due to a nonsignificant correlation between
T1 KAB and T2 opportunities, this path was removed and a path from T1 KAB to T2
beliefs was added (Figure 4). The authors considered this adaptation to be both empirically
and theoretically justified. In this revised model, belief mediated relationships between T1
KAB and T2 KAB and was influenced by the SDM variables.

Rewards (T2)

Skills for
Involvement (T2)


(T2) KAB (T2)

Opportunities (T2)

KAB (T1)

FIGURE 3 Participant vs. comparison KAB scores.

308 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

TABLE 5 Intercorrelations between T2 Model Variables (n = 103)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. T1 KAB — 0.10 0.08 0.02 0.10 0.33∗∗ 0.60∗∗

2. T2 Opportunities — 0.52∗∗ 0.43∗∗ 0.16 0.41∗∗ 0.29∗∗

3. T2 Rewards — 0.41∗∗ 0.30∗∗ 0.25∗∗ 0.21∗

4. T2 Bonding — 0.28∗∗ 0.44∗∗ 0.25∗∗

5. T2 Skills — 0.24∗ 0.13
6. T2 Beliefs — 0.57∗∗

7. T2 KAB —

∗ p < .05; ∗∗ p < .01.

The model was run as specified in Figure 4. All exogenous variables (i.e., opportunities,
skills, and KAB) were allowed to correlate. Rewards and bonding were also allowed to
correlate as this addition significantly improved model fit. Results indicated that all paths
were significant and that the data fit the model well (χ 2 = 11.41, 10 df, N = 103; NNFI =
0.99, CFI = 0.99, and RMSEA = 0.03). The model explained 52% of the variance in T2
KAB. The full results from this model are presented in Figure 5.

The indirect effect of T1 KAB to T2 KAB was significant (t = 3.18). Thus, T2 beliefs
partially mediated the development of KAB from T1 to T2. Table 6 contains a complete
presentation of all direct and indirect model effects.

Because the social development model makes claims regarding the predictive sequence
of its variables, two nested models were run to test this assumption. The first model involved
all T2 model variables except for T1 KAB. The second model contained the same variables
but with all paths running in the opposite direction (e.g., T2 KAB predicting T2 beliefs).
The difference in fit between the two models, forward nested (χ 2 = 11.56, 8 df, N = 103;
NNFI = 0.96, CFI = 0.98 and RMSEA = 0.06) and backward nested (χ 2 = 11.13, 7 df,
N = 103; NNFI = 0.5, CFI = 0.98 and RMSEA = 0.07), was nonsignificant regarding
change in chi-square (.43).








Comparison Participant

FIGURE 4 Preparatory program social development model.

The Impact of Socialization 309

Rewards (T2)

Skills for
Involvement (T2)


(T2) KAB (T2)

Opportunities (T2)
KAB (T1)





.85 .43 .42

FIGURE 5 Preparatory program social development model results.

Hypothesis 2b. The same model was retested at T3 to determine the mediating effects
of the SDM during the international workshop portion of the program. A correlation matrix
including all of the model’s variables (Table 7) was developed for all applicable variables.
All proposed model relationships were supported by the appropriate significant correlations.

All exogenous variables (i.e., KAB, opportunities and skills) were allowed to freely
correlate. Although all paths, except for skills → rewards (β = .14, p > .05), were
significant, the fit of this model to the data was weak (χ 2 = 38.39, 11 df, N = 102; NNFI =
0.85, CFI = 0.92 and RMSEA = 0.14). A second model was run with an added path
based on the modification indices from KAB to rewards. In this revised model, which
represented a significant chi-square change (χ 2 = 19.17) from the initial model, all paths
were significant and fit was adequate (χ 2 = 19.22, 10 df, N = 102; NNFI = 0.95, CFI =
0.97 and RMSEA = 0.09). The model explained 61% of the variance in T3 KAB. The full
results from this model are presented in Figure 6. The indirect effect of T2 KAB to T3 KAB
was significant (t = 1.45). Thus a portion of the SDM (i.e., rewards, bonding, and beliefs)
partially mediated the development of KAB over the course of the international workshop.
See Table 8 for a complete presentation of all direct and indirect model effects.

To test the model’s linear sequence the same procedure was followed as employed
with T2 nested models. Neither model fit the data particularly well, forward nested

TABLE 6 Summary of Preparatory Program Effects

Path Indirect Total SE t

T1 KAB → T2 KAB — .59∗∗ .07 7.69
T1 KAB → T2 KAB .13∗∗ — .04 3.18
T2 Opportunities → T2 KAB .07∗∗ — .02 3.01
T2 Skills → T2 KAB .04∗ — .01 2.39
T2 Rewards → T2 KAB .15∗∗ — .04 2.91
T2 Bonding → T2 KAB .18∗∗ — .05 3.82
∗Significant at the p < .05 level. ∗∗Significant at the p < .01 level.

310 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

TABLE 7 Intercorrelations between T3 Model Variables (n = 103)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. T2 KAB — 0.29∗∗ 0.48∗∗ 0.32∗∗ 0.02 0.52∗∗ 0.76∗∗

2. T3 Opportunities — 0.54∗∗ 0.38∗∗ 0.31∗∗ 0.26∗∗ 0.31∗∗

3. T3 Rewards — 0.57∗∗ 0.29∗∗ 0.39∗∗ 0.59∗∗

4. T3 Bonding — 0.21∗ 0.55∗∗ 0.43∗∗

5. T3 Skills — 0.11 0.17
6. T3 Beliefs — 0.56∗∗

7. T3 KAB —

∗ p < .05; ∗∗ p < .01.

(χ 2 = 40.63, 9 df, N = 102; NNFI = 0.77, CFI = 0.87 and RMSEA = 0.18) and backward
nested (χ 2 = 37.92, 9 df, N = 102; NNFI = 0.79, CFI = 0.87 and RMSEA = 0.16), but
the backward nested model had a significantly smaller (i.e., better) chi-square statistic.

Qualitative Findings

The focus of the qualitative research questions was to understand the role of socialization
processes across the components of the program. The core category of shared experiential
experiences emerged as the main driving force behind social bonding. The nature and impact
of these shared experiences differed between the preparatory and international workshop
portions of the program. Accordingly, the characteristics and role of shared experiences are
discussed separately for the preparatory and international workshop portions of the program.
Attention is also given to the occurrence and impact of negative social processes. Finally,
a theoretical schema is proposed regarding the interrelationship of these two categories of
shared experiences and their impact on bonding as an outcome of participation.

Preparatory program shared experiences. When discussing their experience during
the preparatory portion of the program, youth frequently highlighted the positive role of
team building and group activities. In addition to the preparatory curriculum provided by
GEx, the case study group participated in a three-day retreat at a local camp. This experience
represented a key shared experience for teachers, parents, and youth. The principal of the
case study school, who also participated with the GEx group, noted the role of the retreat
in helping the group come together. He also noted he would not forget the interactions and
that “ . . . those kids [who attended the retreat] and I have a bond in the hallway that I do
not have with any of the other kids.”



Skills for



KAB (T3)

Opportunities (T3)

KAB (T2)




.56 .43 .23



FIGURE 6 International workshop social development model results.

The Impact of Socialization 311

TABLE 8 Summary of International Workshop Model Effects

Path Indirect Total SE t

T2 KAB → T3 KAB — .75∗∗ .06 11.63
T2 KAB → T3 KAB .11∗∗ — .04 2.79
T3 Opportunities → T3 KAB .02∗ — .01 2.23
T3 Skills → T3 KAB .01 — .004 1.60
T3 Rewards → T3 KAB .06∗ — .02 2.55
T3 Bonding → T3 KAB .10∗∗ — .04 2.74
∗Significant at the p < .05 level. ∗∗Significant at the p < .01 level.

Thus, even at an early stage in the program, shared experiences facilitated bonding
within the group. One of the teachers indicated that “even the parents liked it [the retreat]
because they got to know the kids better and you could see the personalities of the kids
and what you might need to do on the trip to help them be more successful.” Regarding the
SDM, the retreat afforded participants the opportunities for involvement specifically related
to getting to know each other which laid the foundation for the development of stronger
bonds during the international workshop.

International workshop shared experiences. During the international workshop, all
participants were placed into 24/7 contact with each other over a 10–16 day period. Based
upon the qualitative findings, the subcategories linked to shared experiences during the
international workshop were leaving the comfort zone, challenge, social support, and social
equality. While approximately 50% of the youth participants had traveled internationally
before, only two had previously participated in a GEx program. The culture, climate,
language, food, and ecology starkly contrasted their home environment. Most participants
at one point or another felt they had left their comfort zone, which in turn appeared to
positively affect many of the youth. For example, one participant reported that “ . . . being
away from home and my family and put in this totally different environment has definitely
made me stronger and kind of showed me that I can do this. I have really gained a lot of

The physical and emotional challenges faced by many of the participants added to
their out of the comfort zone perceptions. In describing their experience along the trail,
some participants noted that the experience was both physically and mentally challenging
but they felt confidence in themselves after completing it. Others experienced challenge
in dealing with heights while traversing the rain forest canopy walkways (e.g., “when I
got up there and I actually started walking and it was wobbly and that’s when I got really
scared”), a new climate (e.g., “The climate was very different from home and was very
uncomfortable”), or homesickness (e.g., “I did not really know how much I was going to
miss my mom and my brother until now”).

These challenges as well as others created opportunities for participants to both give
and receive social support. They were put into foreign situations where they had to rely on
each other. The PI observed that on a particularly difficult section of the trail, each time the
group stopped for a break group members would continue to encourage those who were
still hiking. One male participant shared the following social support experience he shared
with his mom while on the trail:

312 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

I feel like the most important thing I learned today was that helping somebody
else’s experience could end up helping yours in the end . . . .I stayed back with
my mom today and I know that she appreciated it a lot because [we] all kept
supporting her and telling her to keep going.

The support needed and given was not always due to physical challenges. At times youth
who were far away from home simply needed someone to talk: “I think just having some-
body to talk to is really important and I think everybody stepped up . . . you were able to
talk to them if you needed them and I think we just kind of grew closer that way.”

While going through the international workshop, the nature of many of the relationships
changed. Participants appeared to see each other from more equitable perspectives. The
salience of roles such as teacher, adult, student, or cool kid was superseded by being a
member of the “rainforest posse,” as one youth dubbed the group. Relationships became
more egalitarian as adults and youth participated in many of the same activities together.

In addition, social cliques dissolved as new relationships formed across old social
boundaries. One of the teachers indicated that the program took the students out of their
school peer groups and put them with kids they would “not normally run with.” The teacher
explained the impact on one particularly popular student “ . . . [who] let down some guards
that she usually has [and] realize[d] that hey, wow, I do kind of like you. I never paid any
attention to you before because I thought I was too cool for you but I like you.”

Youth and adults also began to see each other differently. In talking about the teachers
on the trip one youth commented: “It is like the adults are kids too because they are here
to learn and have fun just like we are, and that way they are like us.” After completing a
difficult portion of the Inca trail a parent noted that: “I kind of see these kids as not kids
anymore . . . I mean they are interacting with adults like adults . . . it was almost like they
are starting to cross over from being a kid to being an adult and interacting with us on an
adult level.”

In summary, during the international workshop the shared experiences built upon the
foundation of the preparatory program and provided a context for group bonding, a process
with parallels to the SDM. Participants were afforded opportunities for involvement (e.g.,
getting to know each other, activity workshops, service projects, physically strenuous activ-
ities) within contexts that also promoted the development of requisite skills and rewarded
participants for successful participation. Thereby, strong bonds were produced. One mom,
who joined the group halfway through the trip, noted that relationships had deepened and
changed in ways that were immediately apparent even to an outside observer: “It was like
you guys were this bonded group that had this deep relation . . . . I was completely blown
away walking into that.”

Negative program experiences. In contrast to experiences marked by social equality
and social support, instances of negative interactions occurred. These interactions seemed
to be most closely associated with situations where youth felt a lack of autonomy or
involvement in the program. For example, some youth expressed a desire to play a more
active role in the preparatory program. In addition, during the international workshop
logistical and safety concerns sometimes led the adults to take on more controlling roles. On
the trip the PI noted that “youth travelers have to make very few decisions and accordingly,
appear to get distracted easily . . . I wonder if it would be easier to manage the groups
if the kids were given more leadership opportunities.” The adults’ responsibilities also
appeared to create stress that at times spilled over into negative interactions with the youth.
For example, one youth noted that some adults got really grouch during the trip. A few

The Impact of Socialization 313



Program Bonding

• Group Activities
• Getting to know

each other

• Leaning the
comfort zone

• Challenge
• Social support
• Social equality

FIGURE 7 Shared experience and bonding framework.

parents also noted that while the trip was a positive experience, in some instances adults
reprimanded youth unnecessarily.

While the qualitative data and the PI’s observations suggest that the majority of the
social interactions within the program were positive, noting and acknowledging negative
occurrences is important. One of the main differences between the observed positive and
negative social interactions was the degree to which individuals adhered to their traditional
teacher, parent, and youth roles. When individuals adopted these roles fewer opportunities
for youth involvement were provided, which seemed to impede the bonding process as
suggested by the SDM. Accordingly, it appeared that during the international workshop
negative shared experiences promoted an unequal social hierarchy while positive interac-
tions equalized youth/adult relationships and created situations where they all just became
part of the “rain forest posse.”

Proposed shared experience theoretical framework. Although the nature, quality, and
impacts of the shared experiences differed somewhat between the preparatory program and
the international workshop, they both had roots in experiential activities. Whether it was a
team building activity during a preparatory meeting or learning about leaf cutter ants while
on a hike through the rain forest, these shared experiences combined to produce a sense
of bonding among participants. Given the categories and subcategories that emerged from
the study, we propose the following theoretical framework to explain the interrelationship
between these constructs (Figure 7).

The framework suggests that bonding is an end result of the accumulation of shared
experiences across the program. The foundational importance of the preparatory program
shared experiences, which allowed the group to get to know each other and thereby prepare
themselves to experience the more intense and rich shared experiences associated with the
international workshop, is also highlighted. Without the socializing during the preparatory
program, the international workshop bonding likely would not have been as strong. Even
before traveling, the youth seemed aware of this connection and the importance of getting
to know each other; these experiences set the groundwork for the development of strong
social bonds during the international workshop. This finding echoes Brofenbrenner’s (1979)
assertion that the developmental potential of a new context is enhanced when individuals
are accompanied by others with whom they share a pre-existing attachment.

314 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt


The results of this study support the efficacy of the program under evaluation. The findings
also contribute to the leisure literature by presenting a significant application of a SDM to a
youth recreation setting. While social processes have long been identified as a key positive
component of youth recreation programs (Bocarro & Witt, 2005), this study connected
these processes, both theoretically and empirically, to the program’s outcomes. Also, the
successful application of the SDM in a structured leisure context identified at least some of
the socialization processes that may account for previous findings related to the influence
of peers on structured recreation program participation and outcomes (Barber et al., 2005).
These findings strengthen the efficacy and scope of the SDM and validate practitioner
efforts to target positive socialization as a core component of their programs.

Portions of the SDM played a partial mediating role in both the preparatory and
international travel components of the program regarding the development of program
outcomes related to environmental knowledge, attitude, and behaviors. Youth who felt more
involved, rewarded, and bonded to the program also reported higher levels of program
outcomes across both stages of their experiences. The SDM appeared to function more
robustly during the preparatory program. Indirect effects and path coefficients were stronger
in the preparatory model, and this model delivered a better overall fit than the international
workshop model. This finding is not surprising because during the travel workshop much
of the adult (i.e., coordinators, teachers, and parents) attention was occupied with logistics
and programming concerns due to the group size. Accordingly, socializing processes may
not have been given a chance to operate fully. Conversely, perhaps the processes were
operating but the socialization was more a peer-to-peer rather than a youth-to-adult process
during this portion of the program, which was not quantitatively assessed in this study.

The quantitative findings provided empirical evidence of the relationship between
bonding and program outcomes and the qualitative findings offer insights into the an-
tecedents of bonding. At the heart of the processes that led to bonding, the role of shared
experiences was identified as a major component. Intentionally designed recreation-based
youth programs can serve as prime contexts for youth and adults to share positive ex-
periences. In addition, the proposed shared experience and bonding framework suggests
the ability of shared experiences across the duration of a program may have a cumulative
impact on bonding.

The data also supported the role that adults can play in youth program contexts. In-
volving adults and especially parents in youth programs is a noted best practice for youth
program providers and educators (Eccles & Harold, 1993; Trotman, 2002) and research find-
ings support the efficacy of this practice (Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, & Hawkins,
2002). However, involving adults without providing them adequate direction and training
may actually have a negative impact on youth participants’ program experiences.

The data further supported the claim that socialization processes play an important
role in the development of program outcomes. Implications for the SDM suggest that data
should be collected not only on the degree to which opportunities within a context exist, but
also the nature of these experiences in terms of perceived equality. The perceived level of
social equality associated with a context’s opportunities for involvement may moderate the
impact of this variable within the model. Other variables may have significant predictive
links to bonding that the SDM does not take into account such as perceived challenge and
opportunities to provide and receive social support. Future research should be conducted to
ascertain whether or not adapting the involvement variable and adding additional variables
(e.g., perceived challenge and social support) to the SDM would prove efficacious.
Recreation program contexts could serve as a prime setting for such research efforts.

The Impact of Socialization 315

The study had several limitations. The lack of randomization of treatment and con-
trol assignment adversely affected generalizability. The sample also consisted mainly (i.e.,
>80%) of Caucasian youth from a middle to upper-middle class suburb of a major midwest-
ern urban area. The homogeneity of this group and the socioeconomic status also affects the
generalizability of the findings. The program implementation variability across the groups
also may have influenced our ability to identify within-person variability. In addition, a
larger sample would have allowed the testing of measurement models and more complex
and perhaps, more meaningful structural models. Although most variables exhibited strong
psychometric properties, some such as the GEx beliefs scale suffered from weak internal
consistencies. Improved measurement of the beliefs variable may lead to more accurate
assessments of the SDM in youth program contexts.


This study represents a contribution to the youth development, recreation, and SDM lit-
eratures. First, the study supported the efficacy of the program under evaluation. Program
participants experienced positive growth across selected outcome measures. The growth
can be attributed to the program due the study’s quasi-experimental design. Findings also
supported the predictive efficacy of employing the SDM to understand the relationship
between program processes and targeted outcomes within the context of youth programs.
The parsimonious nature of the SDM allowed for a straightforward transition from findings
to application. Thus, the model illustrates action-oriented research (Small & Uttal, 2005) by
promoting theoretically sound research that is conducive to practitioner applicability. The
SDM also deserves further consideration in the youth development and recreation literature
for both its predictive power and its practitioner accessibility.


Akers, R. L. (1977). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

Babbie, E. (2005). The practice of social research (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Barber, B. L., Stone, M., Hunt, J., & Eccles, J. (2005). Benefits of activity participation: The roles

of identity affirmation and peer group norm sharing. In J. L. Mahoney, R. Larson, & J. Eccles
(Eds.), Organizes leisure activities as contexts of development. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Baumrind, D. (1991). Effective parenting during the early adolescent transition. In P. A. Cowan &
M. Hetherington (Eds.), Family transitions (pp. 111–163). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Beier, S. R., Rosenfeld, W. D., Spitalny, K. C., Zansky, S. M., & Bontempo, A. N. (2000). The
potential role of an adult mentor in influencing high-risk behaviors in adolescents. Archives of
Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 154(4), 327–331.

Bocarro, J. N., & Witt, P. A. (2005). The power of people: Relationship-based programming. In
P. A. Witt & L. L. Caldwell (Eds.), Recreation and adolescent development (pp. 266–280). State
College, PA: Venture.

Brofenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Catalano, R. F., Berglund, M. L., Ryan, J. A. M., Lonczak, H. S., & Hawkins, J. D. (2002). Positive
youth development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth
development programs. Prevention & Treatment, 5(1), 1–117.

316 M. D. Duerden and P. A. Witt

Catalano, R. F., Haggerty, K. P., Oesterle, S., Fleming, C. B., & Hawkins, J. D. (2004). The importance
of bonding to school for healthy development: Findings from the Social Development Research
Group. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 252–261.

Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (1996). The social development model: A theory of antisocial
behavior. In J. D. Hawkins (Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Current theories (pp. 149–197). New
York: Cambridge University Press.

Catalano, R. F., Oxford, M. L., Harachi, T. W., Abbott, R. D., & Haggerty, K. P. (1999). A test of
the social development model to predict problem behavior during the elementary school period.
Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 9, 39–56.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1993). Parent-school involvement during the early adolescent years.
Teachers College Record, 94(3), 568–587.

Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics through SPSS. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fleming, C. B., Brewer, D. D., Gainey, R. R., Haggerty, K. P., & Catalano, R. F. (1997). Parent

drug use and bonding to parents as predictors of substance use in children of substance abusers.
Journal of Child and Adolescent Substance Abuse, 6(4), 75–86.

Global Explorers. (2008). Core disciplines. Retrieved March 24, 2000, from http://www.
globalexplorers.org/site/main/about/core disciplines/

Grossman, J. B., & Bulle, M. J. (2006). Review of what youth programs do to increase connectedness
of youth with adults. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, 788–799.

Hanson, W. E., Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. L., Petska, K., & Creswell, J. D. (2005). Mixed methods
research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 224–235.

Hartup, W. W. (1996). The company they keep: Friendships and their developmental significance.
Child Development, 67, 1–13.

Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Arthur, M. W. (2002). Promoting science-based prevention in
communities. Addictive Behaviors, 27(6), 951–976.

Hawkins, J. D., Smith, B. H., Hill, K. G., Kosterman, R., Catalano, R. F., & Abbott, R. (2003).
Understanding and preventing crime and violence: Findings from the Seattle Social Devel-
opment Project. In T. P. Thornberry & M. D. Krohn (Eds.), Taking stock of delinquency: An
overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies (pp. 255–312). New York: Kluwer
Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Hawkins, J. D., & Weis, J. G. (1985). The social development model: An integrated approach to
delinquency prevention. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 6(2), 73–97.

Hill, E., & Sibthorp, J. (2006). Autonomy support at diabetes camp: A self-determination theory
approach to therapeutic recreation. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 40(2), 107–125.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Edison, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Hughes, J. N., Cavell, T. A., & Willson, V. (2001). Further support for the developmental significance

of the quality of the teacher-student relationship. Journal of School Psychology, 39(4), 289–301.
Hughes, J. N., & Kwok, O. M. (2007). Influence of student-teacher and parent-teacher relationships

on lower achieving readers’ engagement and achievement in the primary grades. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99(1), 39–51.

Kishton, J. M., & Widaman, K. F. (1994). Unidimensional versus domain representative parceling
of questionnaire items: An empirical example. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
54(3), 757–765.

Kleiber, D., Larson, R. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1986). The experience of leisure in adolescence.
Journal of Leisure Research, 18(3), 169–176.

Kline, R. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York:
Guilford Press.

Leeming, F., & Dwyer, W. (1995). Children’s environmental attitude and knowledge scale: Construc-
tion and validation. Journal of Environmental Education, 26, 22–31.

Lonczak, H. S., Huang, B., Catalano, R. F., Hawkins, J. D., Hill, K. G., Abbott, R. D., et al. (2001).
The social predictors of adolescent alcohol misuse: A test of the social development model.
Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62(2), 179–189.

The Impact of Socialization 317

Matsueda, R. L. (1982). Testing control theory and differential association: A causal modeling
approach. American Sociological Review, 47(4), 489–504.

Persson, A., Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2007). Staying in or moving away from structured activities:
Explanations involving parents and peers. Developmental Psychology, 43(1), 197–207.

Pratt, C. C., McGuigan, W. M., & Katzev, A. R. (2000). Measuring program outcomes: Using
retrospective pretest methodology. American Journal of Evaluation, 21(3), 341–350.

Shaw, S. M., Kleiber, D. A., & Caldwell, L. L. (1995). Leisure and identity formation in male and
female adolescents: A preliminary examination. Journal of Leisure Research, 27(3), 245–263.

Sibthorp, J., Paisley, K., Gookin, J., & Ward, P. (2007). Addressing response-shift bias: Retrospective
pretests in recreation research and evaluation. Journal of Leisure Research, 39(2), 295–315.

Small, S. A., & Uttal, L. (2005). Action-oriented research: Strategies for engaged scholarship. Journal
of Marriage and Family, 67(4), 936–948.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998a). Basics of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998b). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin &
Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (Vol. II, pp. 158–183). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.

Trotman, M. F. (2002). Involving the African American parent: Recommendations to increase the
level of parent involvement within African American families. Journal of Negro Education,
70(4), 275–285.

Copyright of Leisure Sciences is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to

multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users

may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

How race and ethnicity are defined. Race refers to a person’s physical appearance, such as skin color, eye color or even


color. Ethnicity, on the other hand, relates to cultural f


ors such as nationality, culture, ancestry, language and beliefs.

How sport is both a positive and negative force for promoting racial and ethnic equality in society.Sports can help promote ethnic and racial equality in the society. This is because during these activities, people from different ethnic groups and races get to participate. In doing so, people get to see that they have the same potentials despite their differences. However, sports can also be negative forces for promotion of ethnic and racial equality. Emotions clearly run high in fast-paced competitive sport, such as football, but there needs to be an acknowledgement that using a person’s race, ethnicity or culture as a form of abuse is wrong. Racist behavior does not happen in isolation; it is a


of prejudices and/or lack of awareness

.Discuss the history of women’s participation in sport before the 1850’s.  What were the barriers?In the 1800’s, participation of women in sports was discouraged or banned. In the cities, their passive involvement was always encouraged through attendance at horse races, regattas, cricket matches and other spectator sports. Women back then were seen as an inferior group. Sexism back then took control of all activities and this was all about the unfair treatment of women.

How Title IX affected women’s sport participation.  Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, requires equal access for women in all facets of education, most notably athletics. It prohibits discrimination a


st girls and women in federally-funded education.

How increased sport participation by females has affected contemporary society.Participation of women in sports has brought about issues like gender equality. Whatever facilities women get should be as good as those men are using. This is unlike the past society where there was no such thing as equality, women were the minority group while men the dominant one. How does social class affect access or present barriers to participation in sport? Most sociologists define social class as a grouping based on similar social factors like wealth, income, education, and occupation. Social class plays a vital role in sports. It dictates who can participate in what sports and to what level of participation. The limiting factor associated with social class is money. Money is the means which to obtain the equipment and facilities necessary to partake in the sport, without money, one cannot perform organized sports.

Identify the different social classes in the U.S. and typical characteristics of each class.  Discuss the opportunities for social mobility through sport.

In the United States, there are three main levels of classes that include the upper class, middle class and lower class. The upper-upper class includes those aristocratic and “high-society” families with “old money” who have been rich for generations. The middle class are the white collar workers who have more money than those below them on the social ladder, but less than those above them. The lower class is typified by poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. These people suffer from lack of medical care, adequate housing and food, decent clothing, safety, and vocational training. Sport is a vehicle for personal and social change. The primary objective of development programs in this area is social inclusion.

Develop a list of the three major legislative acts that were passed to protect the civil rights of minorities, women, and the physically or mentally disabled.  Include the dates these laws were passed and discuss the impact of these laws on sports participation.


Civil Rights

Act of 1964 was a huge leap forward in attempting to end the hate,


, and marginalization created by racism,


, or intolerance of religious choice. These took care of the minority groups especially the African American and women. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is a law that prohibits, under certain circumstances,
based on


. These laws enabled full participation in sports of everyone regardless of physical ability or gender.

Describe the interrelationships between sport and religion.

Traditional religion and sport have had an interesting and interconnected relationship, specifically Christianity and sport can be discussed in this light. Christianity and sport actually have a history that has flourished over the years. Christianity has changed its views of sport if you look at the faith as a whole, there are a myriad of traditional religions that not only support sports but are intrinsically involved with sport. How do athletes, coaches, sport organizations and institutions use religion in sport?The relationship between religion and sport has become an important one to a point that many athletes use religion to express their athletic ability. Many of them publicly express their faith, and sincerely believe that their faith is driving them to do well. Before starting the sport activity, the coaches engage their players in prayers as a way of asking some sort of guidance and protection from a Supreme Being.

Describe some areas of conflict between religion and sport.Athletes are faced with reconciling their passion for sports with religious obligation. Experts say the issue arises in all faiths, in nearly every sport, and at all levels of competition. For instance the Jew religion prohibits sports contestants to take part in any sporting activities during Sabbath. This leads to extremely talented people joining sports just for the fun of it or to help them acquire discipline that comes with sporting. Other major sporting events have been postponed, however, for religious considerations. It is the reason major sporting events are rarely broadcast on Christmas Eve or that ESPN and Major League Baseball agreed, to switch the starting time of a Yankees-Red Sox game on Sept. 27, 2009, so it wouldn’t conflict with the beginning of

Yom Kippur

.Identify issues related to the use of performance enhancing drugs in sport.  How does doping impact athletes and fans of major league sports such as football, baseball, basketball or hockey?The integrity of sport is predicated on the assumption that all athletes compete on a level playing field. Unfortunately, the use and abuse of performance-enhancing drugs has become ubiquitous, creating complex challenges for the governing bodies of individual sports. When it comes to the world of sports, we now live in the age of doping. Baseball historians will contemplate describing the


time as the steroid era. Baseball’s greatest pitchers and hitters are now portrayed as villains. This is also affecting the fan base of these sports. The fans are losing trust with their favorite stars since one can never be sure if they are using stimulants. Psychiatrists who work with professional athlete

will have challenges that must be identified, acknowledged, and acted upon in agreement within the sport to ensure the integrity of the profession.

Violence is highly visible in American sport.  Discuss violence on the field and off the field and how violence can be reduced in the future.

It is not clear if on-field violent behavior leads to off-field violence. Common sense suggests that people who become accustomed to using physical intimidation and violence in sport naturally revert to those behaviors when facing conflict outside of sport. Some athletes do develop a sense of entitlement as their fame grows and this leads to their violent activities on the field. This should be addressed by providing Psychiatrist help to the sport personas. This will enable them control their anger issues. Although many barriers have fallen, name at least three barriers that remain in achieving equality for women in the sport world.In as much as things have changed in the sporting world for women, they are still facing challenges. For instance they are not allowed participation in some sports which are still considered for men. Women also face barrier that come with their religion. Like Muslim women are never allowed to participate in any activities according to their culture and sports is no exception. In the developing countries, women are unable to participate in such activities because of the


given to them. The society intentionally keeps them from developing their skills, including their potential in sports.

What is character, and does sports help build it?

Character is much more than just what an individual tries to display for others to see, it is who we are even when no one is watching. It is the complex of mental and ethical traits making a person. It is often said that sport builds character and gives people a strong base and core values to tackle the world with. There have been numerous studies on how sport develops character.  Yet, the conclusions of these studies conflict.  Some claim sport has positive character development, while others state negative development.  Some even found that sport has no effect at all on character development.

Where do you think individual-sport athletes, team-sport athletes, and non-athletes rank in each of these two categories?

Individual sport athletes get to build more on their moral character. However, they also get some of the attributes of the social character. Team sport athletes on the other hand acquire social character because of working in togetherness.

How do sports activities, athletes, and athletic competitions mirror the values of American society?Sport activities, athletic competitions mirror a lot of values of the American society. These values include achievements, success, activity and work and good moral behaviors. On the pitch, people of the two different teams aim for certain goals and work in a disciplined manner. If otherwise, one gets their punishment or a warning. Do you think athletes should be “heroes” in modern-day societies? What do think are the characteristics of a hero?Professional athletes have a profound role in society. They are seen as modern day heroes. These superstars are idolized and enjoyed by many aspiring young athletes. The sole purpose of a professional athlete in society is for entertainment. In a society that is often obsessed with being entertained, the qualities and sacrifices made by real heroes are often ignored. Professional athletes are involved in an economically profitable business. They are appreciated by millions of fans and this is often confused as heroism. Someone who goes above and beyond what’s expected of them, beyond their duty in order to help those in needs is an individual that portrays heroism.

How does the socialization process help a person learn about sports and sports participation? Give some examples, based upon the role which the following agents play: parents, peers, the school and the community.

Socializing process is a major factor in enabling children participation in sports and learns more about the activity. A child who relates more with the peers learn a lot on sports. A loner will never know the trends in sporting activities. The school and the community also facilitate children’s knowledge on sports by making sporting equipment available to them.

What are some of the reasons parents encourage their children to participate in sports? What do you think are positive reasons and what are negative reasons?

Parents encourage their children to take part in sports so as to better their relations skills. Sports also help children keep fit which


s them healthy. In doing so, children do not end up having eating disorders like anorexia nervosa in the name of trying to lose weight and keep fit.

Do you think that sports “builds character”? What does this phrase mean to you, and how can it be applied to youth sports in particular?

In some way, sports help build character especially to the youth. The interaction of different people despite their backgrounds helps create a sense of respect. Individuals also get to boost their confidence levels and get discipline as the games teach them.

In what ways are sports a part of the entertainment business? Why does ESPN place the word “entertainment” before the word “sports” in its title? Do you think this is significant? Why or why not.

Sports are more of entertainment businesses that social activities. The aim of winning for almost all sports is to bring some earnings to the teams participating. Players have price tags, literally speaking. Each player has a value that one must attain so as to hire their skills and talent. It is also a base of advertising brands for big companies which are business tactics. In the case of ESPN, they use the word entertainment instead of sports as a strategy. They might be doing this so as to avoid being specific on who can watch. It is some sort of assuring advert that anyone can be a viewer since it provides general entertainment.

Why is the connection between sports and the mass media so important? What are some of the positive and some of the negative aspects of this?

Sports and the media, two of the most prevalent elements in contemporary society, rely on each other to prosper and have been deeply ingrained in our daily lives. For instance, the Summer Olympic Games and Winter Olympic Games, hosted every four years, attract billions of viewers who enjoy the competitions through the global media. At such occasions, the media brings people together from all over where they directly participate in the activities. As much as this relationship has been helpful, it has also been an encouragement to negative issues arising in the society. Medias portray sports figures as some human beings. This makes the public youth want to attain this fame so badly that they engage in unethical behaviors. In some cases it also encourages, violent acts among the children. Wrestling and boxing have impacts on children all over. They also instill anger and too much aggression in children at their tender age. Despite bringing a lot of togetherness among people in the society, the sports world can bring negative impacts if not carefully addressed.

Sociology of Sports Terminology.

· Functionalism interprets each part of society in terms of how it contributes to the stability of the whole society.

· Conflict perspective assumes that social life is shaped by groups and individuals who struggle or compete with one another over various resources and rewards, resulting in particular distributions of power, wealth, and prestige in societies and social systems.

· Critical Theory is a broad approach to challenging and destabilizing established knowledge.

· The interactionist perspective focuses on the concrete details of what goes on among individuals in everyday life.

· Racism is the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race.

· Minority group is a culturally, ethnically, or racially distinct group that coexists with but is subordinate to a more dominant group.

· Dominant group is a social group that controls the value system and rewards in a particular society.

· Stacking is the using of a large amount of substance.

· Sexism is attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles.

· Sexism is the discrimination against woman in the system.

· Feminist theory is one of the major contemporary sociological theories, which analyzes the status of women and men in society with the purpose of using that knowledge to better women’s lives.

· Social stratification is a concept involving the classification of people into groups based on shared socio-economic conditions.

· Economic capital is the




of valued

goods and services

plus its




them in future.

· Social capital is an economic idea that refers to the connections between individuals and entities that can be economically valuable.

· Cultural capital refers to non-financial assets that involve educational, social, and intellectual knowledge provided to children who grow up in non-wealthy but highly-educated and intellectually-sophisticated families.

· Power is the


to cause or prevent an action, make things happen; the


to act or not act. Opposite of disability, it differs from a right in that it has no accompanying duties.

· Disability refers to the situation where individuals have physical or mental inadequacies.

· Americans with Disabilities Act is the Federal law enacted in 1990 to protect individuals with physical or mental disabilities from intentional or unintentional Master athletes are older men and women who compete in sports at a very high level, no matter how old they are.

· Religion is the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices.

· Deviant means indifference with what most people consider to be normal and acceptable.

· Sports violence can be defined as behavior which causes harm, occurs outside of the rules of the sport, and is unrelated to the competitive objectives of the sport.

· Performance enhancing drug is a term used primarily by weight athletes for any drug intended to improve performance.

· Prescription drug is a drug that is available only with written instructions from a doctor or dentist to a pharmacist.

· A stimulant is substance that generally increases alertness, heart rate, breathing rate, blood pressure and energy level.

· Steroid is a group of synthetic hormones that promote the storage of protein and the growth of tissue, sometimes used by athletes to increase muscle size and strength.

· Doping is the use of a drug or blood product to improve athletic performance.

· Eating disorders are a group of serious conditions in which you’re so preoccupied with food and weight that you can often focus on little else.

· Compulsive exercising is a disorder seen in competitive athletics, in which excess exercise is used for weight


, often associated with anorexia nervosa.

· Hazing refers to any activity expected of someone joining a group that humiliates, degrades or risks emotional and/or physical harm, regardless of the person’s willingness to participate.

· Gambling is betting that must result either in a gain or a loss.

Still stressed with your coursework?
Get quality coursework help from an expert!