Reply Post Your reply post should read approximately 250 to 350 words in length and should reference at least one citation from the article the other student read for their initial

349

PROFILES

Krane is with the School of Human Movement, Sport, and Leisure Studies, Bowling Green State Univer- sity, Bowling Green, OH. Whaley is with the Dept. of Educational Psychology/Applied Developmental Science, Curry School of Education, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

The Sport Psychologist, 2010, 18, 349-372 © 2010 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Quiet Competence: Writing Women Into the History of U.S. Sport

and Exercise Psychology

Vikki Krane Bowling Green State University

Diane E. Whaley University of Virginia

To read the written history of U.S. sport and exercise psychology, one easily could assume that women were absent from the field. Yet, indisputably women have assumed influential leadership roles through their research, leadership in profes- sional organizations, editing major journals, and mentoring graduate students and novice professionals. Based on life history interviews, grounded in standpoint and feminist cultural studies perspectives, we present the collective contributions of 8 women who greatly affected the development of the field of sport and exercise psychology in the U.S. Although traveling different paths and having varied strengths and weaknesses, certain attributes distinguished their journeys; most notably, they were driven, selfless, dignified, humble, competent, and passionate about developing the field. Their legacy includes generations of students who have carved their own careers in sport and exercise psychology; lines of research that have established the field as rigorous, theory-based, practical, and relevant; and caring and competent leadership in our professional organizations.

To read the written history of U.S. sport psychology one easily could assume that women were absent from the field. Not surprisingly, this seems to be a common theme across the history of numerous scientific fields. For example, Kass-Simon (1993) expressed that “for women in science to be remembered, not only must their work be thought right, but usually it must have such impact upon scientific thought that exclusion is impossible” (p. xiii). Bonta (1991) also highlighted how the important work of women in natural history has been overlooked, as did Gürer’s (1995) treatise on women in computer science. Trescott (1993), discussing women in the development of engineering, noted the irony that while overlooked in recorded history, women “were highly visible during their careers due to their extreme underrepresentation” (p. 148). Referring to psychology, Furumoto and Scarborough (1986) pointed out that women “have been largely overlooked in

350 Krane and Whaley

histories of the discipline” (p. 35). The field of sport and exercise psychology is no different in terms of the telling of our history.

Indisputably, women have assumed influential leadership roles in developing the field of sport psychology1 through their research, leadership in professional organizations, editing major journals, and mentoring graduate students and novice professionals. However, most introductory textbooks that have a chapter on the history of sport psychology, at best give only cursory acknowledgment to women in the field (e.g., Anshel, 2003; Weinberg & Gould, 2007). An exception is Richard Cox (2007), who acknowledges that “women were also instrumental in the early development of sport psychology in North America” (p. 6). In fact, women such as Dorothy Harris, Tara Scanlan, Diane Gill, and Jean Williams, have been presenting their research since the early meetings of North American Society for the Psychol- ogy of Sport and Physical Activity (NASPSPA; e.g., Landers & Christina, 1977; Wade & Martens, 1974) and wrote chapters for early sport psychology texts (e.g., Silva & Weinberg, 1984; Straub, 1980; Straub & Williams, 1984). Yet their work has not received the same recognition as their male peers.

Other literature highlighting exemplars in the field followed a similar pattern. For example, Straub and Hinman (1992) profiled 10 leading sport psychologists from the 1980s. Included in their article were: Daniel Gould, Daniel Landers, Rainer Martens, Robert Nideffer, Bruce Ogilvie, Terry Orlick, Tara Scanlan, Robert Singer, Ronald Smith, and Robert Weinberg–only one woman. As recent as 2005, in an article with a brief overview of the history of applied sport psychology in North America, Zaichkowsky and Naylor point out books written by Bryant Cratty and Bob Singer as well as the research and teaching of clinical psychologists Bruce Ogilvie, Robert Nideffer, and Ron Smith. Interestingly, they also highlight a research article authored by educational psychologists Roland Tharp and Ron Gallimore (1976) considered highly influential. Yet, they did not mention a single female, including Dorothy Harris and Jean Williams who authored early prominent applied sport psychology books (Harris & Harris, 1984; Williams, 1986).

When women are mentioned in the history of sport psychology, typically the focus is on contributors to early history, before the formal recognition of the disci- pline of sport psychology (e.g., Celeste Ulrich) or women from psychology whose work has made a major impact on sport psychology (e.g., Carolyn Sherif, Carole Dweck, Susan Harter). Likely, and as pointed out by Robin Vealey (2006), reviewing the published literature reflects a gender bias in which women’s contributions were not recognized. While women were not absent in early sport psychology, finding them in our written history takes substantial effort. Publications by Diane Gill (1995), Carole Oglesby (2001), and Robin Vealey (2006) are notable exceptions.

Vealey’s (2006) pursuit of a comprehensive history of the field resulted in a far-reaching review of the historical literature in sport psychology. She inserted the accomplishments of a number of significant women, past and present, in her “timeline of events influencing sport and exercise psychology” (p. 135, 139, 142). Even still, little has been written about the accomplishments of these pioneering female sport psychologists beyond their areas of research and positions in profes- sional organizations. This invisibility of women in sport psychology has been recognized by contemporary professionals. Roper, Fisher, and Wrisberg (2005) interviewed eight anonymous women in sport psychology who had at least 10 years of professional experience. One prominent theme in their findings was about

Women and the History of U.S. Sport and Exercise Psychology 351

“women’s status in the field.” Their participants noted the lack of women in the written history of the field, although personally they noticed a “sizeable number of strong female professionals in the field of sport psychology” (p. 39).

To begin to remedy this absence in the formal history of our field, in this paper we “replace” them in their rightful, historical place. Borrowing from Janis Bohan (1990), we

use the term re-placing women to depict the process by which women can assume their rightful place in the history of the field. To place women in psychology would be a misnomer, as they were never without a place in the discipline. (p. 214, emphasis in original)

While Bohan was referring to our parent discipline of psychology, her words ring true for sport and exercise psychology as well. To replace exceptional women into the annals of sport and exercise psychology, we use a life history approach.

Life histories may be viewed as a resource for transforming historical under- standing and analysis. Here, a central place is given back to the people who made and experienced history, thus re-addressing their previous absence in dominant (and elite) historical documentation. (Goodley, 1996, p. 334)

This study is grounded in feminist standpoint perspective and feminist cultural studies (cf. Krane, 2001). Both of these perspectives acknowledge that knowledge is socially situated and individuals in minority or marginalized social groups have different experiences than people in dominant social groups. As our goal is to understand the experiences of trailblazing female sport psychologists, it is impor- tant to understand the world from their unique perspective, or standpoint. These women had to understand the world of academe and sport psychology from the dominant (i.e., male) perspective as well as operate within this world as a minority member (cf. Dewar, 1993). We evoke feminist cultural studies as we contextual- ize the participants’ experiences within the common social practices shaping their careers. Standpoint perspective and feminist cultural studies consider social power dynamics and privilege in framing individual experiences, allowing a holistic examination of the circumstances surrounding these female sport psychologists. We do not pose specific research questions. Rather, consistent with a life history approach, our goal is to tell the stories of women identified as trailblazers in U.S. sport and exercise psychology.

Method Employing life history methodology, we explore and validate the experiences of our participants, while gaining a comprehensive understanding of the social influences and contextual backdrop framing them (Cole & Knowles, 2001). The participants helped us understand the complexities of negotiating their personal and professional lives as well as their interpretation of being a trailblazing female in sport psychol- ogy. Our approach also borrows concepts from oral history, which emphasizes the need to understand the social context within “historical stories” (Anderson, Armitage, Jack, & Wittner, 2004). There have been great social changes affecting women in sport and academe, and the women interviewed in this project came of age in a very different culture than we now experience. As such, it is important to allow them to describe in vivid detail the social circumstances in which they lived.

352 Krane and Whaley

Participants Joyce Tang, in her 2006 book about women pioneers in science said, “while it might be difficult to become a pioneer, it is relatively easy to recognize one” (p. 1). As shown by Tang and others (e.g., Kass-Simon, 1993; McGrayne, 2001), there is no single path to becoming a pioneer, or what we call a trailblazer; rather a variety of experiences and accomplishments can result in trailblazing. Hence, the selection criteria for defining a trailblazer, are necessarily subjective and without a tangible precedent. The criteria we used to select participants for this study included: (a) quantity and significance of scholarly publications, (b) leadership in sport psychol- ogy professional associations, (c) influence on a substantial number of graduate students who remained in the field and have contributed to the body of knowledge and professional service, and (d) 25 years of professional involvement in sport psy- chology. With the exception of years as a professional, we did not create arbitrary cut-offs for these criteria such as a precise number of graduate students mentored. Rather, the totality of women’s accomplishments were considered; while each of the selected women attained high quality in each area, some had, for instance, a greater number of publications while others may have had more leadership positions.

To identify trailblazers in U.S. sport psychology, first we developed a list of potential participants. Then, to ensure that inadvertently we had not overlooked anyone, we asked each participant to identify women she felt significantly influenced sport psychology and who fit these criteria. We also informally polled about 15 sport and exercise psychology professionals, asking them who they would consider trailblazing women in the field. In all cases, their responses affirmed our selection of the eight trailblazers who participated in this study: Joan Duda, Deborah Feltz, Diane Gill, Penny McCullagh, Carole Oglesby, Tara Scanlan, Maureen Weiss, and Jean Williams. Table 1 provides a summary of their academic backgrounds and select accomplishments.

Procedure The participants committed a substantial amount of time to our study and engaged in a series of interviews and follow-up processes. The acquisition of life history data involved: (a) the assessment of participants’ curriculum vitae, (b) a background and biographical interview, (c) a focus group interview, and (d) a process of collabora- tive representation. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The focus group was video-recorded as well.

Background and Biographical Interviews. These initial interviews were unstructured (Kvale, 1996), lasted 5–8 hours (averaging about 6 hours), and were conducted in the interviewees’ home or at a conference site before a national meeting. In following with our life history approach, we posed a few broad, guiding questions that were given to the participants before the interview (Cole & Knowles, 2001). Sample questions included: tell me about your experiences in college and graduate school that led to becoming an academic and please describe your experiences as an assistant professor through gaining tenure. In all, broad questions were posed to learn about participants’ experiences in sport, academe, sport science, and sport psychology. Probing questions were interspersed as necessary to gain additional details or clarification (Kvale). Participants were

353

Ta bl

e 1

E du

ca tio

na l B

ac kg

ro un

d an

d S

el ec

t A cc

om pl

is hm

en ts

o f t

he T

ra ilb

la ze

rs

Ed uc

at io

n (y

ea r

re ce

iv ed

P h.

D. )

M en

to r

A ca

de m

ic

Po si

tio ns

Pr of

es si

on al

A

ss oc

ia tio

n B

oa rd

s Ed

ito ria

l B oa

rd s

M aj

or A

w ar

ds Fe

llo w

Jo an

D ud

a B

.A . (

Ps yc

h) R

ut ge

rs U

ni v.

M

.S . P

ur du

e U

ni v.

Ph

.D . U

ni v.

o f I

lli no

is

(1 98

1)

G ly

n R

ob er

ts

U C

L A

Pu

rd ue

U ni

v.

U ni

v. o

f B

ir m

in gh

am

Pr es

id en

t A

A SP

1 S

P A

ca de

m y2

O th

er O

ffi ce

A

PA D

iv . 4

7 I

nt ’n

at . A

ss oc

. o f P

E a

nd

S

po rt

fo r G

ir ls

a nd

W om

en

I SS

P3

N A

SP SP

A 4

A us

tr al

ia n

Jo ur

na l o

f Sp

or t a

nd E

xe rc

is e

P sy

ch ol

og y

IJ SP

5

JA SP

(E di

to r)

JS E

P

A us

tr al

ia n

In te

rn at

io na

l S po

rt

Ps yc

ho lo

gy S

ch ol

ar

R Q

E S6 O

ut st

an di

ng W

ri tin

g A

w ar

d

A A

SP

A A

K PE

7

R es

ea rc

h C

on so

rt iu

m

D eb

F el

tz B

.S . (

PE ) S

U N

Y B

uf fa

lo

M .S

. P en

n. S

ta te

U ni

v.

Ph .D

. P en

n. S

ta te

U ni

v.

(1 98

0)

D an

ie l L

an de

rs

M ic

hi ga

n St

at e

U ni

v. Pr

es id

en t

A A

K PE

N

A SP

SP A

O

th er

O ffi

ce

A A

K PE

A

PA D

iv . 4

7 N

A SP

SP A

G ro

up D

yn am

ic s

JS E

P

M ea

su re

m en

t i n

P E

&

E xe

rc is

e Sc

ie nc

e R

Q E

S (s

ec tio

n ed

ito r)

M ab

el L

ee Y

ou ng

P ro

fe s-

si on

al A

w ar

d, A

A H

PE R

D

N A

SP SP

A E

ar ly

S ch

ol ar

O

ut st

an di

ng D

is se

rt at

io n

A w

ar d,

S P

A ca

de m

y R

es ea

rc h

C on

so rt

iu m

S ch

ol ar

R

Q E

S O

ut st

an di

ng W

ri tin

g A

w ar

d

A A

K PE

A

PA D

iv 4

7 R

es ea

rc h

C on

so rt

iu m

D ia

ne G

ill B

.S . (

PE ) S

U N

Y C

or tla

nd

U ni

v.

M .S

. U ni

v. o

f I lli

no is

Ph

.D . U

ni v.

o f I

lli no

is

(1 97

6)

R ai

ne r M

ar te

ns

U ni

v. o

f W at

er lo

o U

ni v.

o f I

ow a

U ni

v. o

f N or

th

C ar

ol in

a at

G

re en

sb or

o

Pr es

id en

t A

PA D

iv 4

7

N A

SP SP

A

R es

ea rc

h C

on so

rt iu

m

O th

er O

ffi ce

A

PA D

iv . 4

7 N

A SP

E 8

R es

ea rc

h C

on so

rt iu

m

A m

er ic

an J

ou rn

al o

f H

ea lth

P ro

m ot

io n

JA SP

(s ec

tio n

ed ito

r) JS

E P

(E di

to r)

Q ue

st (E

di to

r) M

ea su

re m

en t i

n P

E &

E

xe rc

is e

Sc ie

nc e

R Q

E S

(s ec

tio n

ed ito

r) TS

P 8

W SP

A J10

N A

G W

S11 P

at hfi

nd er

A w

ar d

N A

K PE

H E

12 D

is tin

gu is

he d

Sc ho

la r A

w ar

d N

A K

PE H

E H

om an

s L

ec –

tu re

r,

R es

ea rc

h C

on so

rt iu

m

M cC

lo y

L ec

tu re

r R

es ea

rc h

C on

so rt

iu m

S ch

ol ar

A A

K PE

A

A SP

A

m er

ic an

Ps

yc ho

lo gi

ca l

So ci

et y

A PA

D iv

. 3 5

A PA

D iv

. 3 8

A PA

D iv

. 4 4

A PA

D iv

. 4 7

R es

ea rc

h C

on so

rt iu

m (c

on tin

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.