Abstract
This study documents how sports officials negotiate aggression from cisgender male athletes as a key feature of their occupational role. Through an ethnographic case study of a collegiate intramural athletic organization, sports officials ( N = 24) were observed while officiating and interviewed about their experiences with athlete aggression. Utilizing a phronetic iterative approach and positioning theory as an analytic framework, three organizational storylines were identified that contribute to the implicit, often gendered, rules related to the experience and expression of aggression in this context. Findings also indicated that male and female officials differed in their positioning strategies in response to athlete aggression, through (a) confidence positioning, (b) stoic positioning, (c) expert positioning, and (d) coercive positioning. Implications for how aggression work and positioning theory might build on past emotion management literature are discussed.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
