1. Introduction
A person’s religiosity can uniquely interact with athletic contexts to cultivate admirable moral and mental fortitude in competitors. Consider the example of former United States Soccer Women’s National Team player Marci Jobson1, who reached the pinnacle of success in her field: competing for the World Cup in 2007. Jobson has reflected on her national team experience, asking, “Who really cares if it’s not for something more? If we do not do it for a bigger purpose?” (Jobson 2021). Passionate about merging her Christian faith with the game of soccer, Jobson has relied on her bigger purpose of faith to give her strength and courage in the face of adversity as a professional athlete and Division I college coach. A religion can provide competitors with an identity that, when adopted and internalized, promotes the development of virtues and shapes their approach to sport.
Examining virtues in athletic contexts is essential because sportspeople often assume that sport positively affects character, but this is not always the case. Whether sport cultivates virtues in people depends on other social and motivational factors (Bredemeier and Shields 2006; Schnitker et al. 2020c), such as religiosity. The present study moves beyond the main effects of athletic involvement on moral outcomes to examine religiosity as a moderator, asking the following question: does the effect of sport on moral and identity outcomes differ depending on how religious a person is? Athletic involvement meets basic needs such as competency and belonging (Deci and Ryan 2012), and religion can provide a meaning-making system, community, and practices (Park et al. 2013; Schnitker et al. 2019b). The present study examines how sport and religiosity interact to predict virtue (i.e., courage and patience) and self-worth (i.e., approval and moral self-worth) outcomes.
1.1. Definitions: Religion, Religiosity, and Virtue Development
Although religion can be defined in both functional and substantive ways, this paper will rely upon a substantive definition of religion to refer to the formally identified world religions commonly included in sociology of religion surveys (e.g., Christian, Hindu, Muslim, etc.). This article, however, is primarily interested in what can be defined as religiosity, the degree to which a person adopts and internalizes a religion by engaging in the specific religion’s traditions, experiencing the Divine (e.g., God), and making it intrinsic to all of life (e.g., “I try to carry my religion over into all other dealings in life”; Koenig and Büssing 2010).
Scholars have argued that a virtue is a hybrid personality unit composed of characteristic adaptations (e.g., goals, mental schemas, reappraisals) and a transcendent narrative identity (i.e., bigger than self; Schnitker et al. 2019b). Building on this classification, other scholars have defined a virtue as a dispositional and deep-seated habit performed for the right reasons, which contributes to a flourishing life (Ratchford et al. 2023b). Character, then, might be understood as the summation of a person’s virtuous habits or their global disposition to respond appropriately to situational demands based on chronically accessible self-transcendent motivations (Lapsley and Narvaez 2014).
Furthermore, agricultural metaphors (e.g., “cultivate”) aptly represent the ecological process of virtue development, where people rely on their communities and meaning-making systems to bring about moral growth over time (Lerner 2019). For example, a particular religion, when internalized, provides people with a telos for their development, and people thrive when they can live out their strengths and values for the good of their community (Schnitker et al. 2019b). Athletics are also morally forming and can cultivate virtues and vices. Participation in both athletics and religion can provide people with communities, embodied ritualistic practices, and values that can influence the cultivation of virtues in people. The question central to the present study is whether sports cultivate virtues in the people who play them and what role intrinsic religiosity plays in this process.
1.2. Mixed Findings of Sport’s Effect on Virtue Development
Researchers must continue to examine virtue development in athletic contexts because findings on sport’s effect on morality are mixed. What follows is a review of empirical findings on the impact of athletic participation on morality.
1.2.1. Negative Effects of Sport
Early empirical research in athletic contexts focused on moral reasoning as an outcome. For example, one of the first studies to assess morality in athletes found that college non-athletes were significantly more mature in moral reasoning than college basketball players (interestingly, this effect did not replicate in a sample of swimmers or high school athletes; Bredemeier and Shields 1986). Similarly, Division I basketball players scored lower on moral judgment than non-athlete college students (Hall 1986). Moreover, another study found that high school team sport athletes scored lower on moral reasoning than non-athletes (Beller and Stoll 1995).
Athletes have also scored lower than non-athletes on other moral measures. For example, participation at higher competitive levels for more time was associated with greater justification of rule-violating behavior (Silva 1983). Assessing empathy as an outcome, another study found that youth were less sensitive to others the more years they spent in baseball (Kalliopuska 1987). In a multilevel study of after-school activities and youth outcomes, sport participation was associated with higher average delinquency scores and increased substance use (both average scores and growth over time; Fauth et al. 2007). Compared with non-athletes, athletes have been found to consume more alcohol and engage in more adverse alcohol-related behaviors (Barber et al. 2001; Leichliter et al. 1998). In another study, involvement in high school sports was associated with higher irritability and aggressiveness and lower values of self-control and independence (Rees 1990).
Research findings also suggest that sport participation has mixed associations with sociomoral values. Collegiate student-athletes reported more prosocial behavior toward teammates yet more antisocial behavior toward opponents (effects partially mediated by moral disengagement and ego orientation; Kavussanu et al. 2013). Similarly, non-athletes scored significantly higher on a moral character index, but team-sport athletes scored higher on a social character index (Rudd and Stoll 2004). These findings suggest that sport can—but does not always—negatively affect moral and virtue development.2
1.2.2. Positive Effects of Sport
In contrast, cross-sectional, longitudinal, and quasi-experimental evidence suggests that athletic participation can promote the cultivation of certain virtues. One study found that college athletes were higher in trait hope than non-athletes (Cury et al. 1997). Much of the empirical research demonstrating sport’s potential for positive character development comes from samples of runners. For example, higher self-report hope scores significantly predicted positive academic and athletic achievement outcomes in cross-country and track athletes, above and beyond self-worth and state measures (Cury et al. 1997).
Other evidence provides support for sport-specific virtue interventions and assessment. For example, a 90-min gratitude intervention for NCAA Division I student-athletes revealed significant increases in state gratitude, sport satisfaction, and social support and significant decreases in self-reported psychological distress and burnout (Gabana et al. 2019). Moreover, two studies (one U.S. sample and one Taiwanese sample) found evidence that sport-specific gratitude accounted for increased explained variance in athlete burnout and team satisfaction when controlling for trait gratitude (Chen and Chang 2017).
Findings on sport participation’s effect on moral formation show the importance of various moderators, such as type of sport (Ford 2007; Rudd and Stoll 2004; Priest et al. 1999), level of competition (Doty and Lumpkin 2010; Priest et al. 1999), and gender (Beller and Stoll 1995; Doty and Lumpkin 2010; Leichliter et al. 1998; Priest et al. 1999; Rudd and Stoll 2004; and Silva 1983). Extant empirical findings suggest that sport can cultivate particular virtues, but only under the right conditions (Bredemeier and Shields 2006; Schnitker et al. 2020c).
1.3. Performance Virtues in Sport: Courage and Patience
The present research assesses two virtues relevant to sport: courage and patience. Courage and patience are considered performance virtues because they are character strengths needed to achieve human excellence in a variety of performance domains (e.g., school, work, and sport; Baehr 2017; Davidson 2004). Courage and patience are key character strengths for athletic contexts because they emphasize goal pursuit and emotion regulation. Empirical and theoretical research also suggests that courage and patience work in tandem, counterbalancing each other’s vices of excess and deficiency (Callan 1993; Pianalto 2016; Ratchford et al. 2023a). Whereas courage enables the initiation of difficult tasks, patience facilitates sticking with challenges and waiting well (Gilbertson et al. 2019; Ratchford et al. 2023a).
1.3.1. Courage in Sport
Courage is willingly and knowingly acting despite risk (and often fear) for a worthwhile reason (Rate 2010). Courage enables people to pursue meaningful goals in everyday life, thus helping people to thrive when doing so is challenging or risky (Bounds et al., forthcoming). Indeed, one experiment found that encouraging people to “get outside their comfort zone” increased life satisfaction (Russo-Netzer and Cohen 2022). Although courage is relevant for extreme physical feats (e.g., running six marathons in six weeks; Brito 2021), courage is also relevant for overcoming personal social or psychological challenges (e.g., having a vulnerable conversation with a coach; Pury et al. 2007). Sport represents a personally meaningful context for its participants, making athletic goals worthy of courageous striving (Corlett 1996). Moreover, sport requires deliberate practice that involves moving outside one’s comfort zone (e.g., Duckworth et al. 2011). Courage is relevant to sport when fear of failure and risk of shame are great, but the competitor tries their very best despite the possibility of failing. The greatest fear an athlete faces is usually not physical, rather feelings of worthlessness after defeat or error. Some research has assessed sport-specific courage (Konter and Ng 2012), but more research is needed to examine courage in athletic contexts.
1.3.2. Patience in Sport
Patience is the ability to remain calm in the face of waiting, adversity, or suffering (Schnitker 2012). Patience is a key character strength in sport because of its relevance in long-term goal pursuit and connection to a higher purpose. A multilevel study of student goals found that patience was positively related to effort, meaning, and satisfaction in goal pursuit; moreover, people tended to enact more patience in pursuit of personally meaningful goals and were willing to enact greater effort while remaining patient in pursuit of meaningful goals (Thomas and Schnitker 2017). Patience is also a key character strength in sport because of its usefulness in coping with adversity and difficulty. Sport provides ample opportunities to suffer: the disappointment of defeat, difficult team dynamics, the discomfort of growth, nerves before a crucial competition, and injury (Schnitker et al. 2020a). More research is needed regarding the many ways patience may aid in enduring sport-specific challenges and the ways suffering in sport cultivates patience.
1.4. Identity in Sport: Contingent Self-Worth
Virtues not only involve adaptive habits, goals, and schemas but also the connection of these habits to an identity that values something beyond the self (Schnitker et al. 2019b). Given the identity component of virtues, it is important to assess how people are constructing their identity, which includes understanding where they find their worth and value. Thus, in addition to assessing courage and patience, the present research assesses two domains of self-worth contingency: others’ approval (i.e., the extent to which people base their self-esteem on other people’s approval) and morality (i.e., the extent to which people base their self-esteem on their own virtuousness). Contingent self-worth refers to self-esteem that fluctuates based on perceived failure and success in personal domains of contingency (i.e., areas of life that matter deeply to a person’s sense of self; Crocker and Wolfe 2001). For athletes, sport performance is a relevant domain that can be healthy for self-esteem, but it can also consume an athlete’s sense of self and limit options for other sources of identity (i.e., identity foreclosure; Brewer and Petitpas 2017).
Many athletes learn developmentally to use sport to earn approval (White and Bounds 2022). Sport culture can send messages that winning is everything and must be achieved at all costs, shaping competitor identity in the process (Careless and Douglas 2013; Rees et al. 2015). Sport culture can promote positive deviance and over-conformity to athletic norms such that athletes not only strive to be hard-working and competitive winners but the hardest-working, most competitive, winningest players (Hughes and Coakley 1991), sometimes to the detriment of their own well-being (Sinden 2013). Indeed, self-worth contingent on sport performance and others’ approval is inversely related to well-being. A latent profile analysis in a sample of elite athletes found that athletes with a performance-based narrative identity (high perfectionism, fear of failure, and contingent self-worth) demonstrated the highest levels of psychological disruptions, whereas a purpose-based narrative identity (high purpose, global self-worth, positive view of self after sport) was associated with the highest level of psychological well-being (Houltberg et al. 2018). Another study showed that athletes with high self-esteem based on respect and love for themselves demonstrated positive patterns of perfectionism, whereas athletes who have a self-esteem that is dependent on competence demonstrated maladaptive perfectionism (Koivula et al. 2002). Fear of failure (Conroy et al. 2002; Sagar et al. 2007), perfectionism (Sagar and Stoeber 2009), and performance-based depression (Hammond et al. 2013) are common among athletes, especially those who base their self-worth on earning approval via athletic success.
Self-worth contingencies also have predictive associations with virtues (Bounds et al. 2023; Crocker 2002). In one study of distance runners, moral self-worth positively predicted initiatory and inhibitory self-control, and competition self-worth inversely predicted initiatory and inhibitory self-control (Shubert et al. 2020). Another study found that high ego-oriented athletes were more inclined to approve of aggressive behaviors than those with lower ego orientation, and high task-orientated athletes had higher sportsmanship levels compared with low task-oriented athletes (Dunn and Dunn 1999). Self-worth contingencies are predictive of well-being and moral outcomes and are highly relevant to sport because of sport culture’s emphasis on victory and earning applause.
Religious Identity in Sport
A religion, when internalized, can offer athletes a superordinate identity (e.g., Null 2008), which can affect contingencies of self-worth and virtues. One study found that collegiate athletes self-reported greater levels of religious identity than non-athletes (Allen et al. 2022), suggesting that athletes embrace their religious identity more than non-athletes. In a sample of elite athletes, high levels of religiousness were related to high levels of self-worth, which then related to lower levels of shame and greater comfort when reflecting on a disappointing performance (Houltberg et al. 2017). Furthermore, that same study found that religiousness and high levels of self-worth positively related to adaptive views of competition. Qualitative interviews from adolescents and emerging adults training to raise money for a faith-based charity revealed identity work (i.e., understanding limitations, reflecting on self-growth) and reflection of purpose (i.e., self-focused, others-focused, God-focused) throughout training (Terrell et al. 2021). Thus, research suggests religion can provide athletes with a new source of identity.
Likewise, research supports that virtue development in sport is enhanced by incorporating religiosity into motivations and identity. Patience and courage, like other virtues, are often rooted in self-transcendent motivations that allow people to withstand challenges by regulating the emotions evoked by these challenges to still engage in the right action (Ratchford et al., forthcoming). Religion and spirituality can provide people with self-transcendent motivations that help people face and reframe challenges in sport. For example, in a study of adolescent and emerging adults training for a marathon to fundraise for a faith-based charity, baseline transcendent (i.e., spiritual, prosocial) motivations positively related to baseline patience, and changes in transcendent motivations positively correlated with changes in patience (Schnitker et al. 2020c). Furthermore, another study of elite athletes showed that intrinsic religiousness was indirectly related to higher patience through meaning-making and cognitive reappraisal (Schnitker et al. 2020a). Such effects have been replicated with other virtues besides patience; the internalization of religion during training was associated with higher post-race generosity for long-distance charity runners (Schnitker et al. 2020b). Goal pursuit researchers have found that people tend to engage more courage in pursuit of generativity and spiritual transcendence goals and less courage in pursuit of health and achievement goals (Ratchford et al. 2023a), further magnifying the importance of self-transcendent goals, which religion is well-suited to provide.
However, certain forms of religiosity can also morph into another sphere of perfectionistic striving for competitors. In a previously mentioned study of elite athletes, viewing God as perfectionistic related to shame and feelings of anger towards God when reflecting on a disappointing performance (Houltberg et al. 2017). Moreover, that same study found that viewing God as perfectionistic coupled with low levels of self-worth related to maladaptive views of competition. A different study found that a view of the divine as perfectionistic and critical was indirectly related to higher anxiety through self-worth contingent on performance and fear of failure (Schnitker et al. 2020a). More research is needed to understand how religiosity affects self-worth in athletic populations.
1.5. The Present Study
The purpose of the present study is to examine whether athletic participation differentially influences the virtues of courage and patience depending on intrinsic religiosity. We hypothesize:
Religiosity will moderate the effects of athletic participation on self-reported virtues (assessed both as traits and characteristic ways of pursuing goals), such that athletic participation will be related to higher virtue when participants are more religious.
We are assessing virtues as traits and characteristic ways of pursuing goals because previous research suggests goal-based virtue measurement is more sensitive to uncovering relations with contextual factors, like religiosity (Schnitker et al. 2019a). Goal-based assessment is especially useful for performance virtues, like courage and patience, employed in performance domains (e.g., sport).
Furthermore, our conceptualization of virtue highlights the importance of identity, so we examine self-worth contingencies as a second outcome, hypothesizing:
Religiosity will moderate the effects of athletic participation on approval and moral self-worth contingencies, such that athletic participation will be related to higher moral self-worth and lower approval self-worth when participants are more religious.
Study hypotheses, independent variables, dependent variables, and analytic plan were preregistered (
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Participants (N = 1930) were college students who attend religious institutions or are involved in Christian study centers (i.e., secular university adjacent religious organizations for students that provide intellectual engagement with the Christian tradition; see Hansen 2020) in the United States. Participant demographic information can be found in Table 1. There were no differences between athletes and non-athletes on year in school or religious identity, but there were significant gender (athletes were more likely to be male) and ethnic differences (non-athletes were less likely to be white; see the online Supplemental Materials [OSM] for chi-square values).
Of the participants, 22% (n = 415) compete in an intercollegiate varsity sport in the United States. Of the participants who indicated intercollegiate athletic participation, 31% indicated competing in either football or basketball, 84% indicated competing in a different sport other than football or basketball, and 15% indicated competing in both football or basketball and another sport. Regarding NCAA Division, 72% were Division I athletes, 27% were Division III athletes, and 1% were unknown.
2.2. Procedure
Ethical approval was attained from Baylor University’s Institutional Review Board. Participants were recruited via institutional emails, emails from study centers, on-campus events, or physical flyers posted around campus. Participants were compensated a $20 Amazon gift card for completing a 45–60-min Qualtrics survey online. Each institution and center also conducted a randomized drawing for five students with prizes of one $250 Amazon gift card and four $50 Amazon gift cards. The data from the present study come from a larger longitudinal study on faith and character (
2.3. Measures
Full measures information can be found in the OSM.
2.3.1. Athletic Participation
Two items from the Your First Year College Survey (Higher Education Research Institute 2018) were used to measure intercollegiate athletic participation. Participants were instructed to indicate whether the following two statements were true of them: “Participated in intercollegiate football or basketball” and “Participated in another intercollegiate sport”. The two items were summed to create a single dichotomous variable (1 = athlete, 0 = non-athlete). For participants who indicated involvement for both items, they were given a score of 1 and not 2 in order to create a dichotomous grouping variable.
2.3.2. Trait Measures
Trait Courage. The six-item Courage Measure (CM; Howard and Alipour 2014) was used. Responses ranged from 1 (never) to 7 (always). Internal consistency was good (ω = .87).
Trait Patience. The 11-item 3-Factor Patience Questionnaire (3-FPQ; Schnitker 2012) was used to assess three dimensions of patience in addition to total trait patience: Interpersonal, Life Hardships, and Daily Hassles. Responses ranged from 1 (not like me at all) to 5 (very much like me). Internal consistency across subscales and for a total patience score was somewhat inadequate to good (all ω range from .68 to .80).
Contingencies of Self-Worth. Ten items from the Contingencies of Self-Worth Scale (CSWS; Crocker et al. 2003) were used to assess two different domains of contingent self-worth: Others’ Approval (i.e., approval self-worth) and Virtue (i.e., moral self-worth). Responses ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Internal consistency across subscales was good (all ω > .83).
Intrinsic Religiosity. Three items from the Duke Religion Index (DUREL; Koenig and Büssing 2010) were used to assess intrinsic religiosity. Responses ranged from 1 (definitely not true of me) to 5 (definitely true of me). Internal consistency was good (ω = .91).
2.3.3. Goal-Based Measures
We used goals-based measurement to assess how much courage and patience participants enacted in pursuit of their goals (Ratchford et al. 2023a). Participants were asked to identify three goals that they planned to pursue that month (e.g., “Earn a 3.5 GPA” or “Be a good teammate”).
Goal Courage. Participants rated each goal on five items to assess how much courage they enact in pursuit of their three goals (e.g., “I am courageous in pursuit of this goal: ‘Earn a 3.5 GPA’” or “I can overcome my anxiety in pursuit of this goal: ‘Be a good teammate’”). Goals are rated zero to one hundred. To create a total goal courage score, each goal is averaged across the five courage items, and then the three goals’ courage scores are averaged to create a goal courage composite variable. Internal consistency was good (ω = .86).
Goal Patience. Participants rated each goal on six items to assess how much patience they enact in pursuit of their three goals (e.g., “I remain calm as I pursue the goal: ‘Earn a 3.5 GPA’” or “I am patient in pursuit of the goal: ‘Be a good teammate’”). Goals are rated zero to one hundred. To create a total goal patience score, each goal is averaged across the six patience items, and then the three goals’ patience scores are averaged to create a goal patience composite variable. Internal consistency was good (ω = .90).
3. Results
Analyses were performed with SPSS (version 28). Descriptive information by athletic participation can be found in Table 2, and bivariate correlations can be found in Table 3. Preliminary results indicated that intercollegiate participation was positively associated with trait courage (r(1928) = .09, p < .001) and negatively associated with approval contingent self-worth (r(1922) = −.05, p = .026). Furthermore, athletic participation approached a significant positive association with goal patience (r(1923) = .04, p = .051) and approached a significant negative association with daily hassles patience (r(1922) = −.04, p = .067).
Next, we tested our hypotheses to examine intrinsic religiosity as a moderator of the effect of athletic participation on virtues and self-worth. Moderated regression analyses were performed with the PROCESS macro package (Hayes 2022) in SPSS. Virtue and self-worth outcomes were regressed onto athletic participation, intrinsic religiosity, gender, and the athlete x religiousness interaction. Gender was controlled as a covariate. PROCESS syntax was used to mean-center continuous independent variables (i.e., religiosity) prior to analysis for ease of interpretation; categorical variables (i.e., athlete status, gender) were not mean-centered. Results for all moderation models can be found in Table 4. Supplementary analyses can be found in the OSM.
Religiosity as a moderator of virtue.
To test Hypothesis 1, trait courage, goal courage, trait patience, and goal patience were regressed onto athletic participation, intrinsic religiosity, the athlete x religiosity interaction, and gender in separate models. Although there was a significant association whereby athletes scored higher in trait courage, religiosity was not a significant moderator for trait courage. There were no main effects of athlete status on trait patience or goal patience, and there were no significant interactions for patience outcomes.
Religiosity significantly moderated the effect of athletic participation on goal courage, F(4, 1916) = 28.91, p < .001, R2 = .057. The model revealed a main effect of religiosity (t(1917) = 7.26, p < .001, B = 2.35), such that religiousness was positively associated with goal courage. There was no main effect of athlete status. There was a main effect of gender (t(1917) = −3.25, p < .01, B = −2.38) such that males reported greater goal courage. The interaction was significant (t(1917) = 2.68, p < .01, B = 1.88); higher levels of religiosity were associated with higher levels of goal courage for athletes compared to non-athletes (see Figure 13). Simple-slope tests examining the mean and one standard deviation above and below the mean of religiosity revealed a significant positive association between athlete status and goal courage at high levels of religiosity (t(1917) = 2.49, p < .05, B = 3.13), but no significant associations at average or low levels of religiosity (ts < |1.5|). Simple-slope tests comparing athletes and non-athletes revealed a significant effect for non-athletes (t(1917) = 7.26, p < .001, B = 2.35) but a stronger effect for athletes (t(1917) = 6.80, p < .001, B = 4.23).
Religiosity as a moderator of self-worth.
To test Hypothesis 2, approval and moral self-worth were regressed onto athletic participation, intrinsic religiosity, the athlete x religiosity interaction, and gender in separate models. Results found that religiosity was a significant moderator for both approval and moral self-worth.
3.1. Approval Self-Worth
Religiosity significantly moderated athletic participation on approval contingent self-worth, F(4, 1916) = 17.21, p < .001, R2 = .035. The model revealed a main effect of gender (t(1917) = 7.39, p < .001, B = 0.43) such that females and other gender identities had higher approval contingent self-worth. There was no main effect of religiosity or athletic participation. The interaction was significant (t(1917) = −2.73, p < .01, B = −0.15); higher levels of religiosity were associated with lower levels of approval self-worth for athletes compared to non-athletes (see Figure 2). Simple-slope tests examining the mean and one standard deviation above and below the mean of religiosity revealed a significant negative association between athlete status and approval self-worth at high levels of religiosity (t(1917) = −2.77, p < .01, B = −0.27), but no significant associations at average or low levels of religiosity (ts < |1.2|). Simple-slope tests comparing athletes and non-athletes revealed a significant effect for athletes (t(1917) = −2.88, p < .01, B = −0.14) but no effect for non-athletes (t < 0.40).
3.2. Moral Self-Worth
Religiosity significantly moderated athlete status on moral contingent self-worth, F(4, 1916) = 30.00, p < .001, R2 = .059. The model revealed a main effect of religiosity (t(1917) = 10.37, p < .001, B = 0.21), such that religiosity was positively associated with moral contingent self-worth. There was no main effect of athletic participation or gender. The interaction was significant (t(1917) = −2.00, p < .05, B = −0.09); higher levels of religiosity were associated with lower levels of moral self-worth for athletes compared to non-athletes (see Figure 3). Simple-slope tests examining the mean and one standard deviation above and below the mean of religiosity were nonsignificant (ts < |1.7|) but grew closer to significance at higher levels of religiosity. Simple-slope tests comparing athletes and non-athletes revealed a significant effect for athletes (t(1917) = 3.13, p < .01, B = 0.12) and a stronger effect for non-athletes (t(1917) = 10.37, p < .001, B = 0.21).
4. Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine whether intrinsic religiosity moderated the effect of athletic participation on self-reported virtue and self-worth outcomes. Contrary to predictions, religiosity did not significantly moderate trait courage, trait patience, or goal patience. Consistent with predictions, religiosity significantly moderated goal courage, approval self-worth, and moral self-worth.
4.1. Courage
Religious athletes tended to enact greater goal courage. Whereas intrinsic religiosity was positively associated with goal courage for non-athletes, the association was stronger for athletes. The more religious an athlete is, the more courage they enact in pursuit of their goals.
Recent findings suggest that people use greater courage in pursuit of spiritual goals and less courage in pursuit of achievement goals (Ratchford et al. 2023a). Sport may represent a domain of both achievement and spiritual strivings for religious athletes. It is possible that religious athletes sanctify their athletic goals (Lynn 2008), imbuing their everyday training and competition with transcendent significance (Ellis and Weir 2020; White 2018). Furthermore, religiosity and spirituality have also been identified as sources to help cope with the demands of elite sport (Vernacchia et al. 2000). Thus, it is possible that religious messages are particularly encouraging for athletes in high-performance contexts wherein challenging goal pursuit is salient.
Findings on goal courage diverge from past research that found non-athletes to have stronger character than athletes (Beller and Stoll 1995; Bredemeier and Shields 1986; Fauth et al. 2007; Hall 1986; Kalliopuska 1987; Rees 1990; Silva 1983). The present study did not find many differences between athletes and non-athletes. In contrast, the present research suggests that athletes may enact greater performance virtues in pursuit of their goals (e.g., Cury et al. 1997), especially when they have a religious orientation to life.
Moreover, it is worth highlighting the utility of both trait and goal-level virtue measures. Trait courage was significantly positively correlated with athletic involvement (regardless of religiosity), but goal courage was not. However, religiosity only moderated athletic involvement on goal courage and not trait courage. This finding suggests the utility of both trait and goal-based measurement, aligning with previous research suggesting goal-based measures are more sensitive to contextual factors like religiosity (Schnitker et al. 2019a).
4.2. Patience
Sport participation did not significantly affect trait or goal patience. Although athletic participation approached a significant positive correlation with goal patience, athletic participation also approached a significant negative association with daily hassles patience. It is probable that sport culture does not prioritize the character strength of patience, or it is possible that patience requires more time to develop. Although research shows that patience facilitates goal pursuit, coaches and athletes are socialized by a broader culture that does not prioritize patience; on the contrary, maintaining a view prevalent in Western cultures that patience may undermine performance (Harned 1997).
4.3. Self-Worth
Athletic participation is inversely correlated with approval self-worth. This finding is somewhat surprising given sport culture’s emphasis on earning applause (Houltberg et al. 2018; Hughes and Coakley 1991; White and Bounds 2022). Furthermore, religiosity moderated approval self-worth such that religiosity did not influence levels of approval self-worth for non-athletes but did so significantly for athletes. The more religious athletes become, the less important other people’s approval is for their sense of self.
It is possible that the combination of athletic participation and religiosity is beneficial for well-being and self-concept. Some have argued that sport can provide people with a meaning system in secular contexts (Sosis and Kiper 2022). However, for religious athletes, it is likely that sport provides basic needs such as competency and connectedness (Deci and Ryan 2012), and religion provides a meaning-making system (Park et al. 2013) and a sense of unconditional acceptance (Null 2008). Perhaps when religious athletes feel competent, coherent, and accepted, then they do not feel the need to perform to earn approval from other people. In this way, religiosity may free athletes from maladaptive performance tendencies.
Findings on approval self-worth are consonant with past research that has found that religiosity uniquely relates to self-worth in a way that positively impacts athlete well-being (Houltberg et al. 2017). Past findings suggest that religious athletes embrace their religious identity as primary (Allen et al. 2022). Furthermore, positive views of the divine have been found to increase virtue in athletes, whereas punitive views of the divine have been found to relate to contingent self-worth, fear of failure, and anxiety in athletes (Schnitker et al. 2020a). Therefore, in some contexts, religiosity boosts athletes’ self-worth, freeing them from a need to prove worthiness and earn approval.
Religiosity also moderated moral self-worth such that religiosity positively influenced moral self-worth greater for non-athletes than athletes. Whereas religiosity was positively associated with moral self-worth contingency for athletes, the association was stronger for non-athletes. It is probable that because sport provides athletes with a strong source of identity (Brewer and Petitpas 2017; Careless and Douglas 2013), morality is of less importance to an athlete’s sense of self.
Findings on moral self-worth somewhat align with past studies comparing athletes and non-athletes on moral reasoning. Past findings found that non-athletes tended to score higher on moral reasoning than athletes (Beller and Stoll 1995; Bredemeier and Shields 1986; Hall 1986). Although moral reasoning and moral contingent self-worth are discriminant, they are likely to relate positively.
4.4. Applications for Practitioners
We offer three suggestions for practitioners who seek to cultivate virtues in athletes. First, make purpose salient. Because virtues require a self-transcendent perspective, leaders should regularly remind athletes of their greater purpose. For example, ask each athlete to write a “why statement,” delineating why they compete, and ask for volunteers to share throughout the season/off-season. Hope College Women’s Soccer designed training shirts in 2016 with “WHY” printed upside down on the front so that when players looked down, they were reminded to consider why they play (see Figure 4). As our results on approval self-worth show, for religious athletes, reflecting on how their faith affects their purpose can detach self-worth from external domains such as others’ approval.
Second, results suggest that athletic involvement is more likely to cultivate courage than patience. To avoid recklessness (courage’s vice of excess), practitioners should intentionally cultivate patience alongside courage. Recent research has found that patience and courage can work in tandem to counterbalance each other’s vices of excess and deficiency (Ratchford et al. 2023a). Avoiding excess, such as recklessness, is crucial in a sport culture where athletes are encouraged to overconform, even to their own detriment of injury (Hughes and Coakley 1991; Sinden 2013).
Third, practitioners should model and reference virtues with their leadership. Practitioners can use positive reinforcement by naming virtues when seen or needed. For instance, coaches could celebrate an injured athlete’s patience during rehabilitation or remind athletes to use courage to overcome their nerves before an important competition. Sport leaders should also remind athletes of their inherent value and dignity regardless of their performance (Houltberg et al. 2017). Special care must be taken to avoid treating virtuousness as another sphere of perfectionistic striving and earning (Null 2008, 2016). Athletes are already hyper-focused on performance (Hughes and Coakley 1991) and should not be encouraged to cultivate strong character as another arena of performance. Our data confirm that virtue development in sport should happen in accordance with self-transcendent motivations rather than performance motivations.
4.5. Limitations and Future Directions
Limitations of this study include a cross-sectional design, thus limiting inferences about sport’s causal association with virtue. This study lacks robust measurement of type of sport, which does not allow comparison of effects across types of sports on virtue (e.g., team versus individual). Finally, this study also lacks measurement of sport-contingent self-worth, relying on extant measures of contingent self-worth (i.e., approval, virtue; Crocker et al. 2003) that, although relevant, do not directly assess how important sport is to an athlete’s identity.
We offer several suggestions for future directions of empirical research. First, it is important to highlight the importance of scholar-practitioner collaborations. Because both religion and sport are highly contextualized, researchers aiming to conduct research in these settings must engage practitioners throughout the research process to accurately understand the current sub-cultural distinctions and viable possibilities for change. Some scholars are already doing meaningful research in partnership with practitioners (e.g., Ettekal et al. 2017; Waller et al. 2016). Scholar-practitioner partnerships are especially effective for developing implementation-ready sport-specific virtue interventions that can be tested with experimental and quasi-experimental designs (e.g., Parker et al., forthcoming).
Second, in addition to intervention studies, longitudinal studies are needed to examine changes in intrinsic religiousness and virtues over time (e.g., Priest et al. 1999). Studies have been conducted looking at virtue and transcendent motivation in sport (Schnitker et al. 2020c), but studies are needed in diverse sporting contexts and with goals-based virtues assessment.
Third, researchers should further systematically test mechanisms and conditions under which sport cultivates specific virtues. In this study, we examine internal factors of athletes (i.e., intrinsic religiosity) that influence the effects of sport on their character and self-worth. Future studies should examine external factors (e.g., coaching style) as well as how internal factors and external factors interact (e.g., how religious vs. non-religious athletes respond to different coaching styles or religious vs. non-religious coaches).
Last, researchers should continue examining specific domains of contingent self-worth (Bounds et al. 2023; Crocker et al. 2003, p. 906). Relevant domains in sports include parental approval, coach approval, fan opinion, mastery, and victory. Person-centered approaches that look at the various combinations of contingencies may be especially useful as they reveal the strengths and risks individual athletes bring to moral formation and well-being in sport based on their entire constellation of self-worth contingencies.
4.6. Conclusions
Intrinsic religiousness interacts with athletic contexts to increase goal courage and free athletes from a need to perform to earn approval. The example of Marci Jobson is illustrative of our results. Jobson (2021) reflects on how her faith helped her grapple with her identity and find the courage to face challenges while competing for the National Team:
…my mind goes to a place of, I’m not good enough, I’m not strong enough, I can’t do this…But that is the beauty of God’s Word. Instantly, the ball at my feet, I could say, God help me, I need you, I’m afraid, I’m anxious, I want to invite you into this game here right now… And I could feel in those moments courage rise up in me, so that I could face a hard challenge. And I became brave.
Although Jobson has had an exceptional career, our data suggest that when it comes to the effects of her internalized faith on her virtues and self-worth, she is unexceptional. This study shows that religious college athletes are similar to Jobson: when they bring a strong religious faith to their competition, they are more courageous in pursuit of goals and less likely to base their self-worth on others’ approval.
Conceptualization, E.M.B., J.M.N. and S.A.S.; methodology, E.M.B. and J.M.N.; formal analysis, E.M.B. and J.M.N.; writing—original draft preparation, E.M.B.; writing—review and editing, E.M.B., J.M.N., K.K.M., P.L.G. and S.A.S.; visualization, E.M.B. and S.A.S.; supervision, S.A.S.; project administration, E.M.B.; funding acquisition, P.L.G., K.K.M. and S.A.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Baylor University (protocol code 1873017-5, approval date 10 July 2022).
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data are available for open access at
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
1. For more information about Marci Jobson, see
2. For a review comparing different types of sports on moral outcomes, see the
3. See the
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Participant demographic information.
| Athlete (n = 415) | Non-Athlete (n = 1515) | Total (N = 1930) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | n | % | |
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | 183 | 44.2 | 430 | 28.5 | 613 | 31.8 |
| Female | 230 | 55.6 | 1058 | 70.1 | 1289 | 67 |
| Intersex | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.1 | 2 | 0.1 |
| Other | 1 | 0.2 | 20 | 1.4 | 21 | 1.1 |
| Year in School | ||||||
| Freshman | 114 | 27.5 | 460 | 30.4 | 739 | 30.5 |
| Sophomore | 99 | 23.9 | 309 | 20.5 | 520 | 21.5 |
| Junior | 120 | 29 | 448 | 29.6 | 681 | 28.2 |
| Senior | 61 | 14.7 | 211 | 14 | 343 | 14.2 |
| Graduate Student | 16 | 3.9 | 68 | 4.5 | 109 | 4.5 |
| None of the above | 1 | 0.2 | 5 | 0.3 | 10 | 0.4 |
| Alum | 3 | 0.7 | 10 | 0.7 | 17 | 0.7 |
| Religious Affiliation | ||||||
| Protestant Christian | 203 | 49.0 | 764 | 50.6 | 968 | 50.3 |
| Catholic Christian | 125 | 30.2 | 411 | 27.2 | 536 | 27.8 |
| Buddhist | 2 | 0.5 | 12 | 0.8 | 14 | 0.7 |
| Hindu | 4 | 1 | 21 | 1.4 | 25 | 1.3 |
| Jewish | 3 | 0.7 | 5 | 0.3 | 8 | 0.4 |
| Muslim | 0 | 0 | 16 | 1.1 | 16 | 0.8 |
| None | 14 | 3.4 | 69 | 4.6 | 83 | 4.3 |
| Atheist | 10 | 2.4 | 40 | 2.6 | 50 | 2.6 |
| Agnostic | 23 | 5.6 | 65 | 4.3 | 88 | 4.6 |
| Other | 30 | 7.2 | 107 | 7.1 | 137 | 7.1 |
| Ethnicity | ||||||
| African American/Black | 6 | 1.4 | 60 | 4 | 66 | 3.4 |
| Asian/Pacific Islander | 44 | 10.6 | 236 | 15.6 | 280 | 14.6 |
| Hispanic | 29 | 7 | 107 | 7.1 | 136 | 7.1 |
| Native American | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0.4 | 6 | .3 |
| Caucasian/White | 332 | 80.2 | 1068 | 70.8 | 1401 | 72.8 |
| Other | 3 | 0.7 | 32 | 2.1 | 35 | 1.8 |
Descriptive statistics by athletic participation.
| Athletic Status | Religiosity | Trait Courage | Goal Courage | Total Trait Patience | Inter-personal Patience | Life Hardships Patience | Daily Hassles Patience | Goal Patience | CSW-Approval | CSW-Moral |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non | ||||||||||
| M(SD) | 3.55(1.27) | 4.40(1.02) | 61.00(16.14) | 3.47(0.60) | 3.57(0.70) | 3.30(0.82) | 3.46(0.86) | 61.38(15.64) | 4.30(1.28) | 5.22(1.05) |
| Athlete | ||||||||||
| M(SD) | 3.57(1.26) | 4.62(0.98) | 62.25(17.39) | 3.45(0.60) | 3.56(0.69) | 3.35(0.81) | 3.38(0.91) | 63.06(15.19) | 4.15(1.25) | 5.21(1.02) |
| Total | ||||||||||
| M(SD) | 3.56(1.27) | 4.45(1.02) | 61.28(16.42) | 3.46(0.60) | 3.56(0.70) | 3.31(0.82) | 3.45(0.87) | 61.74(15.55) | 4.27(1.28) | 5.22(1.04) |
Note. CSW = Contingent Self-Worth.
Bivariate correlations and measures reliability.
| 1. | 2. | 3. | 4. | 5. | 6. | 7. | 8. | 9. | 10. | 11. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Athletic Participation | - | ||||||||||
| 2. Religiosity | .01 | - | |||||||||
| 3. Trait Courage | .09 ** | .12 ** | - | ||||||||
| 4. Goal Courage | .03 | .22 ** | .33 ** | - | |||||||
| 5. Trait Patience | −.01 | .07 ** | .21 ** | .25 ** | - | ||||||
| 6. Interpersonal Patience | −.01 | .06 ** | .15 ** | .23 ** | .85 ** | - | |||||
| 7. Life Hardships Patience | .02 | .07 ** | .29 ** | .23 ** | .73 ** | .47 ** | - | ||||
| 8. Daily Hassles Patience | −.04 † | .02 | .06 * | .10 ** | .70 ** | .38 ** | .28 ** | - | |||
| 9. Goal Patience | .04 † | .10 ** | .30 ** | .68 ** | .38 ** | .33 ** | .38 ** | .17 ** | - | ||
| 10. CSW-Approval | −.05 * | −.03 | −.28 ** | −.26 ** | −.14 ** | −.08 ** | −.21 ** | −.06 ** | −.33 ** | - | |
| 11. CSW-Moral | .00 | .24 | .12 ** | .10 ** | .11 ** | .13 ** | .07 ** | .04 | .05 * | .10 ** | - |
| Omegas | - | .91 | .87 | .86 | .80 | .77 | .76 | .68 | .90 | .83 | .84 |
Note. CSW = Contingent Self-Worth. ** p < .01, * p < .05, † p < .07.
Moderation models for each outcome.
| B | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trait Courage | Goal Courage | Trait Patience | Life Hardships Patience | Inter-personal Patience | Daily Hassles Patience | Goal Patience | CSW-Approval | CSW-Virtue | |
| Athletic Participation | 0.16 ** | 0.74 | −0.04 | 0.01 | −0.03 | −0.10 * | 0.78 | −0.08 | −0.02 |
| Religiosity | 0.10 ** | 2.35 ** | 0.03 * | 0.04 * | 0.03 * | 0.01 | 0.88 ** | 0.01 | 0.21 ** |
| Athl*Rel | −0.04 | 1.88 ** | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.85 | −0.15 ** | −0.09 * |
| Gender | −0.32 ** | −2.38 ** | −0.12 ** | −0.20 ** | −0.10 ** | −0.07 | −4.85 ** | 0.43 ** | −0.04 |
| Model F | 24.21 ** | 28.91 ** | 7.15 ** | 9.78 ** | 4.36 ** | 2.12 | 17.97 ** | 17.21 ** | 30.00 ** |
| Model R2 | .048 | .057 | .015 | .020 | .010 | .00 | .036 | .035 | .059 |
Note. Athl*Rel = the interaction term, CSW = Contingent Self-Worth. ** p < .01, * p < .05.
Supplementary Materials
The following supporting information can be downloaded at
References
Allen, Daniel M.; Strehlow, Sean A.; Chisum, Audrey M.; Dougherty, Kevin D.; Glanzer, Perry; Schnitker, Sarah A. Student-athletes’ religious beliefs, religious behaviors, and religious identity at a Christian university. Journal of College and Character; 2022; 23, pp. 333-48. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2194587X.2022.2123827]
Baehr, Jason. The varieties of character and some implications for character education. Journal of Youth and Adolescence; 2017; 46, pp. 1153-61. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0654-z] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28332052]
Barber, Bonnie. L.; Eccles, Jacquelynne S.; Stone, Margaret R. Whatever happened to the jock, the brain, and the princess? Young adult pathways linked to adolescent activity involvement and social identity. Journal of Adolescent Research; 2001; 16, pp. 429-55. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0743558401165002]
Beller, Jennifer; Stoll, Sharon K. Moral reasoning of high school student athletes and general students: An empirical study versus personal testimony. Pediatric Exercise Science; 1995; 7, pp. 352-63. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/pes.7.4.352]
Bounds, Elizabeth M.; Ratchford, Juleitte L.; Schnitker, Sarah A. Profile membership of self-worth contingencies predicts well-being, virtues, and values. [Unpublished manuscript] Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Baylor University: 2023.
Bounds, Elizabeth M.; Pawl, Timothy; Schnitker, Sarah A. Forthcoming The courage to flourish: Pursuing the good life despite risk. Virtue of Courage; Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Bredemeier, Brenda J.; Shields, David L. Game reasoning and interactional morality. Journal of Genetic Psychology; 1986; 147, pp. 257-75. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1986.9914499]
Bredemeier, Brenda J.; Shields, David L. Sports and Character Development. President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports Resaerch Digest; 2006; 7, pp. 1-8. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jpah.3.2.255]
Brewer, Britton W.; Petitpas, Albert J. Athletic identity foreclosure. Current Opinion in Psychology; 2017; 16, pp. 118-22. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.05.004]
Brito, Christopher. Shalane Flanagan Completes Her Sixth Marathon in 42 Days, Finishing New York City Marathon: “The City Made Me Fly”. CBS News; 2021; Available online: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/shalane-flanagan-new-york-city-marathon/ (accessed on 9 January 2023).
Callan, Eamonn. Patience and courage. Philosophy; 1993; 68, pp. 523-39. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100041875]
Careless, David; Douglas, Kitrina. “In the boat” but “Selling myself short”: Stories, narratives, and identity development in elite sport. The Sport Psychologist; 2013; 27, pp. 27-39. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/tsp.27.1.27]
Chen, Lung H.; Chang, Yen-Ping. Sport-domain gratitude uniquely accounts for athletes’ well-being across two cultures: Incremental validity above the general gratitude. The Journal of Positive Psychology; 2017; 12, pp. 651-59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1257052]
Conroy, David E.; Willow, Jason P.; Metzler, Jonathan N. Multidimensional fear of failure measurement: The performance failure appraisal inventory. Journal of Applied Sports Psychology; 2002; 14, pp. 76-90. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413200252907752]
Corlett, John. Virtue lost: Courage in sport. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport; 1996; 23, pp. 45-57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00948705.1996.9714530]
Crocker, Jennifer. Contingencies of self-worth: Implications for self-regulation and psychological vulnerability. Self and Identity; 2002; 1, pp. 143-49. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/152988602317319320]
Crocker, Jennifer; Wolfe, Connie T. Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review; 2001; 108, pp. 593-623. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.593]
Crocker, Jennifer; Luhtanen, Riia K.; Cooper, M. Lynne; Bouvrette, Alexandra. Contingencies of self-worth in college students: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; 2003; 85, pp. 894-908. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.894]
Cury, Lewis A.; Snyder, C. R.; Cook, David L.; Ruby, Brent C.; Rehm, Michael. Role of hope in academic and sport achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; 1997; 73, pp. 1257-67. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1257]
Davidson, Mathew. Developing performance character and moral character in youth. The Fourth and Fifth Rs: Respect and Responsibility; 2004; 10, 6.
Deci, Edward L.; Ryan, Ryan M. Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation; Ryan, Richard M. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2012; pp. 85-107.
Doty, Joseph P.; Lumpkin, Angela. Do sports build or reveal character? An exploratory study at One Service Academy. Physical Educator; 2010; 67, 18.
Duckworth, Angela L.; Kirby, Teri A.; Tsukayama, Eli; Berstein, Heather; Ericcson, Anders K. Deliberate practice spells success: Why grittier competitors triumph at the National Spelling Bee. Social Psychological and Personality Science; 2011; 2, pp. 174-81. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550610385872]
Dunn, John G. H.; Dunn, Janice C. Goal orientations, perceptions of aggression, and sportspersonship in elite male youth ice hockey players. The Sport Psychologist; 1999; 13, pp. 183-200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/tsp.13.2.183]
Ellis, Robert; Weir, Stuart J. In praise of God: Sport as worship in the practice and self-understanding of elite athletes. Religions; 2020; 11, 677. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel11120677]
Ettekal, Andrea. V.; Konowitz, Lily S.; Agans, Jennifer P.; Syer, Tina; Lerner, Richard M. Researcher-practitioner collaborations: Applying developmental science to understand sport participation and positive youth development. Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education; 2017; 9, pp. 29-45.
Fauth, Rebecca C.; Roth, Jodi L.; Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne. Does the neighborhood context alter the link between youth’s after-school time activities and developmental outcomes? A multilevel analysis. Developmental Psychology; 2007; 43, pp. 760-77. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.760] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17484586]
Ford, Jason A. Substance use among college athletes: A comparison based on sport/team affiliation. Journal of American College Health; 2007; 55, pp. 367-73. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JACH.55.6.367-373] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17517549]
Gabana, Nicole T.; Steinfeldt, Jesse; Wong, Y. Joel; Chung, Y. Barry; Svetina, Dubravka. Attitude of gratitude: Exploring the implementation of a gratitude intervention with college athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology; 2019; 31, pp. 273-84. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2018.1498956]
Gilbertson, Madison Kawakami; Schnitker, Sarah A.; Carter, Evelyn R. Virtue interventions and interracial interactions. Theoretical Approaches to Multi-Cultural Positive Psychological Interventions; Van Zyl, Llewellyn Ellardus; Rothmann, Sebastiaan. Springer: Berlin and Heidelberg, 2019; pp. 229-59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20583-6_10]
Hall, Elizabeth R. Moral development levels of athletes in sport-specific and general social situations. Psychology and Sociology of Sport: Current Selected Research; Velden, Lee Vander; Humphrey, James Harry. AMS Press: New York, 1986; vol. 1, pp. 191-204.
Hammond, Thomas; Gialloreto, Christie; Kubas, Hanna; Davis, Henry. The prevalence of failure-based depression among elite athletes. Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine; 2013; 23, pp. 273-77. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JSM.0b013e318287b870]
Hansen, Andrew. A Christian college in a food truck? Christian study centers and moral formation. International Journal of Education and Belief; 2020; 25, pp. 83-95. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2056997120971656]
Harned, David B. Patience: How We Wait upon the World; Cowley Publications: Cambridge, MA, 1997.
Hayes, Andrew. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach; 3rd ed. Little, Todd D. The Guilford Press: New York, 2022.
Higher Education Research Institute. Your First Year College Survey; Higher Education Research Institute: Los Angeles, 2018.
Houltberg, Benjamin J.; Wang, Kenneth T.; Qi, Wei; Nelson, Christina S. Self-narrative profiles of elite athletes and comparisons on psychological well-being. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport; 2018; 89, pp. 354-60. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2018.1481919]
Houltberg, Benjamin J.; Wang, Kenneth; Schnitker, Sarah A. Religiousness and perceived God perfectionism among elite athletes. Journal of the Christian Society for Kinesiology, Leisure and Sport Studies; 2017; 4, pp. 29-46. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7290/jcskls04ur31]
Howard, Matt C.; Alipour, Kent K. Does the courage measure really measure courage? A theoretical and empirical evaluation. The Journal of Positive Psychology; 2014; 9, pp. 449-59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2014.910828]
Hughes, Robert; Coakley, Jay. Positive deviance among athletes: The implications of overcomformity to the sport ethic. Sociology of Sport Journal; 1991; 8, pp. 307-25. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/ssj.8.4.307]
Jobson, Marci. Integrating God in Your Game as a Player and Coach [Sermon]; Sports Ministry Chapel, George W. Truett Theological Seminary Baylor University: Waco, TX, USA, 2021.
Kalliopuska, Mirja. Relation of empathy and self-esteem to active participation in Finnish baseball. Perceptual and Motor Skills; 1987; 65, pp. 107-13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pms.1987.65.1.107]
Kavussanu, Maria; Boardley, Ian D.; Sagar, Sam S.; Ring, Christopher. Bracketed morality revisited: How do athletes behave in two contexts?. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology; 2013; 35, pp. 449-63. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jsep.35.5.449]
Koenig, Harold G.; Büssing, Arndt. The Duke University Religion Index (DUREL): A five-item measure for use in epidemiological studies. Religions; 2010; 1, pp. 78-85. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel1010078]
Koivula, Nathalie; Hassmén, Peter; Fallby, Johan. Self-esteem and perfectionism in elite athletes: Effects on competitive anxiety and self-confidence. Personality and Individual Differences; 2002; 32, pp. 865-75. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00092-7]
Konter, Erkhut; Ng, Johan. Development of sport courage scale. Journal of Human Kinetics; 2012; 33, pp. 163-72. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10078-012-0055-z]
Lapsley, Dan K.; Narvaez, Darcia. The having, doing and being of moral personality. The Philosophy and Psychology of Character and Happiness; Snow, Nancy E.; Trivigno, Franco V. Routledge: New York, 2014; pp. 133-59.
Leichliter, Jami S.; Meilman, Philip W.; Presley, Cheryl A.; Cashin, Jeffery R. Alcohol use and related consequences among students with varying levels of involvement in college athletics. Journal of American College Health; 1998; 46, pp. 257-62. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07448489809596001]
Lerner, Richard M. Character development: Four facets of virtues. Child Developmental Perspectives; 2019; 13, pp. 79-84. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12315]
Lynn, Quinten K. Sacred Sport: A Study of Student Athletes’ Sanctification of Sport. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation; Bowling Green State University: Bowling Green, OH, USA, 2008.
Null, Ashley. Some preliminary thoughts on philosophies of sports ministry and their literature. The Image of God in the Human Body: Essays on Christianity and Sports; Deardorff, Donald L., II; White, John. Edwin Mellen Press: New York, 2008; pp. 241-51.
Null, Ashley. Reformation pastoral care in the Olympic village. Sports Chaplaincy; Parker, Andrew; Watson, Nick J.; White, John B. Routledge: New York, 2016; pp. 120-32.
Park, Crystal. L.; Edmondson, Donald; Hale-Smith, Amy. Why religion? Meaning as motivation. APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality (Vol. 1): Context, Theory, and Research; Pargament, Kenneth I.; Exline, Julie J.; Jones, James W. American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, 2013; pp. 157-71. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14045-008]
Parker, Andrwe; White, John B.; Meyer, Andrew. Forthcoming Youth, sport, and faith: Identity formation in high school athletes. Religions.
Pianalto, Matthew. On Patience: Reclaiming a Foundational Virtue; Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, 2016.
Priest, Robert. F.; Krause, Jerry V.; Beach, Johnston. Four-year changes in college athletes’ ethical value choices in sports situations. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport; 1999; 70, pp. 170-78. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1999.10608034]
Pury, Cynthia L. S.; Kowalski, Robin M.; Spearman, Jana. Distinctions between general and personal courage. The Journal of Positive Psychology; 2007; 2, pp. 99-114. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760701237962]
Ratchford, Juliette L.; Cazzell, Amber; Schnitker, Sarah A. The virtue counterbalancing circumplex model: An illustration with patience and courage. Journal of Positive Psychology; 2023a; in press
Ratchford, Juliette L.; Pawl, Timothy; Schnitker, Sarah A. Forthcoming Patience, perseverance, and goal pursuit: Philosophical and psychological analysis of Aquinas’s distinctions. Endurance; King, Nichole L. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Ratchford, Juliette L.; Pawl, Timothy; Jeffrey, Anne; Schnitker, Sarah A. What is virtue? Using Philosophy to Refine Psychological Definition and Operationalization. Philosophical Psychology; 2023b; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2023.2203157]
Rate, Christopher R. Defining the features of courage: A search for meaning. The Psychology of Courage: Modern Research on an Ancient Virtue; Pury, Cynthia L. S.; Lopez, Shane J. American Psychological Associaiton: Washington, DC, 2010; pp. 47-66.
Rees, C. Roger. Do high school sports build character? A quasi-experiment on a national sample. The Social Science Journal; 1990; 27, pp. 303-15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0362-3319(90)90027-H]
Rees, Tim; Haslam, Alexander S.; Coffee, Pete; Lavallee, David. A social identity approach to sport psychology: Principles, practice, and prospects. Sports Medicine; 2015; 45, pp. 1083-96. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0345-4] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26092187]
Rudd, Andy; Stoll, Sharon. What type of character do athletes possess? An empirical examination of college athletes versus college non-athletes with the RSBH Value Judgment Inventory. The Sport Journal; 2004; 7, pp. 1-10.
Russo-Netzer, Pninit; Cohen, Geoffrey L. ‘If you’re uncomfortable, go outside your comfort zone’: A novel behavioral ‘stretch’ intervention supports the well-being of unhappy people. The Journal of Positive Psychology; 2022; 18, pp. 394-410. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2022.2036794]
Sagar, Sam S.; Stoeber, Joachim. Perfectionism, fear of failure, and affective responses to success and failure: The central role of fear of experiencing shame and embarrassment. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology; 2009; 31, pp. 602-27. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jsep.31.5.602]
Sagar, Sam S.; Lavellee, David; Spray, Christopher M. Why young elite athletes fear failure: Consequences of failure. Journal of Sports Sciences; 2007; 25, pp. 1171-84. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640410601040093]
Schnitker, Sarah A. An examination of patience and well-being. Journal of Positive Psychology; 2012; 7, pp. 263-80. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2012.697185]
Schnitker, Sarah A.; Houltberg, Benjamin J.; Ratchford, Juliette L.; Wang, Kenneth T. Dual pathways from religiousness to the virtue of patience versus anxiety among elite athletes. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality; 2020a; 12, pp. 294-303. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/rel0000289]
Schnitker, Sarah A.; Shubert, Jennifer; Houltberg, Benjamin J.; Fernandez, Nathaniel. Bidirectional associations across time between entitativity, positive affect, generosity, and religiousness in adolescents training with a religiously affliated charity marathon team. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health; 2020b; 17, 686. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17030686]
Schnitker, Sarah A.; Ratchford, Juliette L.; Emmons, Robert A.; Barrett, Justin. L. High goal conflict and low goal meaning are associated with an increased likelihood of subsequent religious transformation in adolescents. Journal of Research in Personality; 2019a; 80, pp. 38-42. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.04.004]
Schnitker, Sarah A.; Gilbertson, Madison Kawakami; Houltberg, Benjamin J.; Hardy, Sam A.; Fernandez, Nathaniel. Transcendent motivations and virtue development in adolescent marathon runners. Journal of Personality; 2020c; 88, pp. 237-48. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12481]
Schnitker, Sarah A.; King, Pamela E.; Houltberg, Benjamin. Religion, spirituality, and thriving: Transcendent narrative, virtue, and telos. Journal of Research on Adolescence; 2019b; 29, pp. 276-90. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jora.12443] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31206886]
Shubert, Jennifer; Houltberg, Benjamin; Ratchford, Juliette L.; Schnitker, Sarah A. Examinations of change in inhibitory and initiatory self-control in the context of endurance running. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology; 2020; 34, pp. 273-93. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2020.1787553]
Silva, John M. The perceived legitimacy of rule violating behavior in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology; 1983; 5, pp. 438-48. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jsp.5.4.438]
Sinden, Jane L. The elite sport and Christianity debate: Shifting focus from normative values to the conscious disregard for health. Journal of Religion and Health; 2013; 52, pp. 335-49. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10943-012-9595-8]
Sosis, Richard; Kiper, Jordan. Sport as a meaning-making system: Insights from the study of religion. Religions; 2022; 13, 915. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel13100915]
Terrell, Amanda; Houltberg, Benjamin; Brown, Sarah; Falco, Rachel; Schnitker, Sarah A. Humanitarian athletic participation and identity work. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living; 2021; 3, 669547. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.669547]
Thomas, Ryan M.; Schnitker, Sarah A. Modeling the effects of within-person characteristic and goal-level attributes on personal project pursuit over time. Journal of Research in Personality; 2017; 69, pp. 206-17. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.012]
Vernacchia, Ralph A.; McGuire, Richard T.; Reardon, James P.; Templin, David P. Psychosocial characteristics of Olympic track and field athletes. International Journal of Sport Psychology; 2000; 31, pp. 5-23.
Waller, Stevem N.; Huffman, Landon T.; Hardin, Robin L. The sport chaplains’ role in the holistic care model for collegiate athletes in the United States. Practical Theology; 2016; 9, pp. 226-41. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1756073X.2016.1221642]
White, Cynthai A.; Bounds, Elizabeth M. When Goods Become Gods: Fractured Identities and Safe Spaces in Sports. The Christian Society of Kinesiology and Leisure Studies; 2022; 7, 3. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7290/jcskls07byip]
White, John B. Sacramentally imagining sports as a form of worship: Reappraising sport as a gesture of God. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy; 2018; 12, pp. 94-114. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2017.1415369]
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Nelson, Jenae M 1
; Melton, Karen K 2
; Glanzer, Perry L 3
; Schnitker, Sarah A 1
1 Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Baylor University, Waco, TX 76706, USA;
2 Department of Human Sciences and Design, Faculty, Baylor University, Waco, TX 76706, USA;
3 Department of Educational Leadership, Faculty, Baylor University, Waco, TX 76706, USA;