Differential Effects of Sex and Status on Evaluation of Coaching Ability

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The present study tested whether sex bias favoring males exists in the evaluation of basketball coaching ability for male and female coaches varying in professional status (defined by won/loss records and coaching honors). Subjects were male (n = 80) and female (n = 80) high school basketball athletes. Subjects evaluated written coaching philosophy statements from a hypothetical male and female coach described as having either high or low professional status based upon won/loss record and coaching honors. The coaches were evaluated with semantic differential scales which assessed knowledge of coaching, ability to motivate, player's desire to play for, and predicted future success. A forced preference procedure in which subjects had to select which of the two coaches they would prefer to play for was also employed. A sex of athlete by sex of coach interaction effect on the four unforced dependent variables indicated strong sex bias favoring males. Overall, male and female subjects rated the male coach the same and always higher than the female coach while male subjects rated the female coach even lower than did female subjects. The forced preference log-linear analyses also indicated sex bias in that both male (89%) and female (71%) athletes preferred a male coach. This “male is better” sex bias diminished only when the forced preference was between an unsuccessful male coach and a successful female coach. The potential impact that the more masculine nature of basketball might have on this bias is discussed. Future needs for testing the extent and generalizability of sex bias and its potential causes are identified. The advantage of log-linear analyses over traditional statistical procedures is also presented.