The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport research

Research in the domain of safe sport frequently focuses on prevalence studies that have been historically dissimilar in methodology. Attempting to unify future studies for comparable results, Parent et al. (2018) introduced and validated the Violence Towards Athletes Questionnaire (VTAQ). The epist...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Benjamin Carr
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Bern Open Publishing 2025-01-01
Series:Current Issues in Sport Science
Online Access:https://ciss-journal.org/article/view/11988
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832542525543415808
author Benjamin Carr
author_facet Benjamin Carr
author_sort Benjamin Carr
collection DOAJ
description Research in the domain of safe sport frequently focuses on prevalence studies that have been historically dissimilar in methodology. Attempting to unify future studies for comparable results, Parent et al. (2018) introduced and validated the Violence Towards Athletes Questionnaire (VTAQ). The epistemological critiques of what knowledge this, or any, research tool generates about the sensitive topic of violence in sport has not been fully investigated. Additionally, how this ‘knowledge’ is used and by whom leads to further reconsideration about the validity of the data the VTAQ generates. Lastly, a brief discourse review illustrates how athletes’ capital may be appropriated to reinforce claims of validity and exclusivity of knowledge. The Question Appraisal System (QAS; Schaad, Jans & Scott, 2020) was used to review the VTAQ. Ethnographic research was conducted at safe sport conferences along with follow-up interviews with researchers and practitioners. These data were juxtaposed, along with a brief literature review, to better understand how the quantitative tool is conceived and used qualitatively by situated researchers. Analysis of the VTAQ highlighted myriads of elementary design flaws (e.g., more than 80% of the items were ‘double-barrelled’), most of which would tend towards over-reporting cases of violence. The qualitative data illustrated the political, activist motivations of prominent researchers in the field, and their professional dependency on high prevalence rates to justify funding for their research projects. Interviews also revealed the heterogeneity of athletes’ experiences and relationships to violence in sport, despite frequent use in the literature of the singular ‘the athlete voice’. As a reliable generator of knowledge, the VTAQ is arguably still in the development stage, and is not ready to be the standard-bearer of safe sport research. Researchers responsible for its creation are publicly open about their political motivations to use high prevalence rates to change policymakers’ decisions and to receive funding for future research. There is a significant overlap between what they consider scientific research and what ‘knowledge’ they need to promote their political aims as social activists. The scientific curiosity of their research is reasonably then called into question, when it is conducted with an objective of achieving a certain result. Furthermore, by presenting their research as ‘validated’ and representative of ‘the athlete voice’, they lean on the appropriation of scientific and sporting capital to valorise otherwise questionable data. Athletes are not a homogenous group, and have voices that vary, even sometimes in support of violence. Research that presents ‘the athlete voice’ as uniform support of the political aims of these researchers is better seen as a product of activism rather than science. References Parent, S., Fortier, K., Vaillancourt-Morel, M.-P., Lessard, G., Goulet, C., Demers, G., Paradis, H., & Hartill, M. (2019). Development and initial factor validation of the Violence Toward Athletes Questionnaire (VTAQ) in a sample of young athletes. Society and Leisure, 42(3), 471–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/07053436.2019.1682262 Schaad, A., Jans, M., & Scott, M. (2020). Improving the Question Appraisal System (QAS): Moving further away from black magic and black boxes. American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) 2020.
format Article
id doaj-art-90503cf97afd4163b7bfd69e18808fb5
institution Kabale University
issn 2414-6641
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Bern Open Publishing
record_format Article
series Current Issues in Sport Science
spelling doaj-art-90503cf97afd4163b7bfd69e18808fb52025-02-04T03:15:18ZengBern Open PublishingCurrent Issues in Sport Science2414-66412025-01-0110210.36950/2025.2ciss015The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport researchBenjamin Carr0ISSUL, University of Lausanne, Switzerland; Global Observatory for Gender Equality and Sport, Switzerland Research in the domain of safe sport frequently focuses on prevalence studies that have been historically dissimilar in methodology. Attempting to unify future studies for comparable results, Parent et al. (2018) introduced and validated the Violence Towards Athletes Questionnaire (VTAQ). The epistemological critiques of what knowledge this, or any, research tool generates about the sensitive topic of violence in sport has not been fully investigated. Additionally, how this ‘knowledge’ is used and by whom leads to further reconsideration about the validity of the data the VTAQ generates. Lastly, a brief discourse review illustrates how athletes’ capital may be appropriated to reinforce claims of validity and exclusivity of knowledge. The Question Appraisal System (QAS; Schaad, Jans & Scott, 2020) was used to review the VTAQ. Ethnographic research was conducted at safe sport conferences along with follow-up interviews with researchers and practitioners. These data were juxtaposed, along with a brief literature review, to better understand how the quantitative tool is conceived and used qualitatively by situated researchers. Analysis of the VTAQ highlighted myriads of elementary design flaws (e.g., more than 80% of the items were ‘double-barrelled’), most of which would tend towards over-reporting cases of violence. The qualitative data illustrated the political, activist motivations of prominent researchers in the field, and their professional dependency on high prevalence rates to justify funding for their research projects. Interviews also revealed the heterogeneity of athletes’ experiences and relationships to violence in sport, despite frequent use in the literature of the singular ‘the athlete voice’. As a reliable generator of knowledge, the VTAQ is arguably still in the development stage, and is not ready to be the standard-bearer of safe sport research. Researchers responsible for its creation are publicly open about their political motivations to use high prevalence rates to change policymakers’ decisions and to receive funding for future research. There is a significant overlap between what they consider scientific research and what ‘knowledge’ they need to promote their political aims as social activists. The scientific curiosity of their research is reasonably then called into question, when it is conducted with an objective of achieving a certain result. Furthermore, by presenting their research as ‘validated’ and representative of ‘the athlete voice’, they lean on the appropriation of scientific and sporting capital to valorise otherwise questionable data. Athletes are not a homogenous group, and have voices that vary, even sometimes in support of violence. Research that presents ‘the athlete voice’ as uniform support of the political aims of these researchers is better seen as a product of activism rather than science. References Parent, S., Fortier, K., Vaillancourt-Morel, M.-P., Lessard, G., Goulet, C., Demers, G., Paradis, H., & Hartill, M. (2019). Development and initial factor validation of the Violence Toward Athletes Questionnaire (VTAQ) in a sample of young athletes. Society and Leisure, 42(3), 471–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/07053436.2019.1682262 Schaad, A., Jans, M., & Scott, M. (2020). Improving the Question Appraisal System (QAS): Moving further away from black magic and black boxes. American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) 2020. https://ciss-journal.org/article/view/11988
spellingShingle Benjamin Carr
The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport research
Current Issues in Sport Science
title The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport research
title_full The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport research
title_fullStr The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport research
title_full_unstemmed The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport research
title_short The science and politics of ‘knowledge’ in safe sport research
title_sort science and politics of knowledge in safe sport research
url https://ciss-journal.org/article/view/11988
work_keys_str_mv AT benjamincarr thescienceandpoliticsofknowledgeinsafesportresearch
AT benjamincarr scienceandpoliticsofknowledgeinsafesportresearch