4.3 Review

Organisational factors and non-accidental violence in sport: A systematic review

Journal

SPORT MANAGEMENT REVIEW
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 8-27

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.smr.2019.03.001

Keywords

Non-accidental violence; Sport; Organisational factors; Systematic review; Harassment; Abuse

Funding

  1. Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Melbourne [1757478]
  2. University of Melbourne [603783]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of the current systematic review was to investigate the organisational factors that enable and motivate non-accidental violence towards athletes in the sport context. The authors identified and reviewed 43 qualitative studies investigating psychological, physical, and sexual abuse of athletes, and developed a framework of organisational factors (i.e., structural, social, and stress factors) related to non-accidental violence. Athletes were the key informants, yet some studies included athletes' entourages. The authors independently coded the findings sections of the primary research, using the developed framework. Organisational tolerance for abuse and conformity to dominant values within sports were related to all three types of non-accidental violence. Power imbalance appeared as a relevant factor in both psychological and sexual abuse, while isolation was also relevant in sexual abuse. Believing that non-accidental violence had instrumental effects appeared related to both psychological and physical abuse, whereas a winner-take-all reward system was related to physical abuse. Based on this systematic review, the authors proposed an integrated perspective of the organisational factors driving non-accidental violence in sport and conclude by proposing a whole-of-system approach to the prevention and management of non-accidental violence. (C) 2019 Sport Management Association of Australia and New Zealand. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available