MOTIVES OF SWIMMING PARTICIPANTS IN A UNIVERSITY CAMPUS ENVIORMENT

1. MOTIVES OF SWIMMING PARTICIPANTS IN A UNIVERSITY CAMPUS ENVIORMENT by Kellen Edelbrock January 2009

2. The Question • What motives do participants have to swim? • What differences, if any, exist between these participants based on their classification within the aquatic swimming community? • Differences related to: • Gender? • Age? • Affiliation status within the University? • Frequency of participation?

3. Aquatic Swimming Community

4. Swimming Motivation

5. Statement of the Problem • The problem of the study was to investigate participation motives of swimmers in a university campus environment and specifically determine whether there were differences in motives based upon: • Gender • Age • Affiliation Status • Frequency of Participation • Classification

6. Purpose of the Study • Provide club and masters coaches with information about the motives of their team members. • Provide campus recreational sports administrators and programmers with insight into their participant’s motivations. • Provide athletic administrators and coaches with information about what motivates their student athletes to swim at the collegiate level.

7. Hypotheses The study was designed to test the following: There is no significant difference in the participation motives of swimmers based on: Gender Classification Age Affiliation Status Frequency of Participation

8. Justification for the Study • Little research conducted on motivations for participating in sport and recreation in the university campus environment. • Studies on swimming motivation deal with youth and masters participants. • Most studies in motivation: athlete vs. non-athlete. • Very few look at the full spectrum of sport delivery areas as presented in the leisure sport management model (Mull, Bayless, Jamieson, 2005).

9. Review of the Related Literature • Modeling Participation Motivation • Athlete by Situation Interaction Model of Motivation • Participation Motivation Questionnaire • Participation Motivation in College Sports

10. Arrangement for Conducting the Study • Approval from the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects • Consultations: • Aquatics Director at IU Rec Sports • Head Swim Coach for IU Varsity men’s and women’s teams • Officers of the IU swim club • Administrator of the IU Master swim club

11. Selection of Participants • Comprehensive email address list from the administrators/coaches: • IU Varsity swim team • IU Swim club • IU Masters swim club • Informal participants were approached by either researcher or a lifeguard about participating in the study • Provided a valid email address • Completely voluntary

12. Instrumentation • A version of the Participation Motivation Questionnaire or PMQ (Gould, Feltz, and Weiss, 1985). • 35 items revealing insight into their reasons for involvement in the sport of swimming. • 5-point Likert scale 1 = not at all important, 2 = not very important, 3 = somewhat important, 4 = very important, 5 = extremely important • Demographic and Background Questions

13. PMQ I like the teamwork. I like to go to meets. I want to improve my skills. I like the coaches. I like the team spirit. I like the excitement. I like to compete. I want to learn new skills. I like being on a team. I like to compete at higher levels. I like to meet new friends. I like the challenge. I like to receive ribbons and trophies. I like the action. I like to do something I’m good at. I like to get in shape or stronger. I like to exercise.I want to improve my health. I like how my body looks and feels.I like to be active. I want others to notice me. I want to be popular with others. I like to feel important. I like to win. I want to stay in shape. I want to be with friends. I like team dinners/picnics. I want to get rid of energy. I like to have something to do. I like to get rid of frustrations. I like to get out of the house. My friends want me to participate. My family wants me to participate. I like to swim in the pool. I like to have fun.

14. Data Collection • Elements of Dillman’s (2007) Tailored Design Method and well as Young and Ross (2003) were used in order to achieve a high response rate: • Respondent-Friendly Questionnaire • Three Contacts with the Questionnaire Recipient • Email with a web link to the questionnaire • www.surveymonkey.com

15. Data Analysis • Descriptive Statistics and univariate statistical techniques were used • Means & Standard Deviations on the 35 items of the PMQ • T-test were used to determine if significant differences existed in motives of swimmers varying in gender. • ANOVAs were used to determine if significant differences existed in swimmers varying in classification, age, affiliation status, and frequency of participation. • Tukey post hoc tests were used in order to determine which groups differed from each other. Note: Differences in group means were accepted at the .05 level.

16. Analysis of Data • Data-Gathering Instrument Distribution • Gender Differences • Classification Differences • Age Differences • Affiliation Status Differences • Frequency of Participation Differences • Discussions of Findings

17. Data Gathering Instrument Distribution 502 swimming participants from all four classifications of swimmers were sent an email inviting them to participate.

18. Gender Differences

19. Gender Differences There were three motives where the SD was smaller than all ther rest indicating agreement between males and females: I like to get in shape or stronger I like to be active I want to stay in shape

20. Classification Differences ANOVA revealed that 29 of the 35 motives significantly differentiated the four classification of swimmers. All 29 motives were related to either achievement/status or team atmosphere.

21. Classification Differences

22. Age Differences The significance of the difference of the separate F-tests based on the one-way analysis of variance by age on many of the group means reached the acceptable level of .05. 28 of the 35 motives for participation in swimming significantly differentiated the five age groups. Motives were related to achievement/status and team atmosphere, while one, “I like the excitement” was related to the excitement and challenge of the sport.

23. Age Differences

24. Affiliation Status Difference Specifically, 29 of the 35 motives for participation in swimming significantly differentiated the five affiliation statuses within the university campus environments. The top seven motives of the F-tests revealed that most of the motives were related to achievement/status team atmosphere, while one, “I like to be with friends” dealt with relationships.

25. Affiliation Status Differences

26. Frequency of Participation Differences • 24 of the 35 motives for participation in swimming significantly differentiated the four categories for frequency of participation. • The top seven motives of the F-tests revealed that all of the motives were related to either achievement/status or team atmosphere.

27. Frequency Differences

28. Gender Implications Males • Achievement Status • Many opportunities to compete • Intramural Swim meets • Weekly challenges • Competition during practice w/peers Females • Frustrations • Provide more opportunities during stressful times of the year

29. Classification Implications • Varsity and Club motivations are not so different • Like the excitement, feel important, and to compete • Varsity • Want to improve skills and learn new ones • Individual time for coaches to help. • Club members • Want to get out of the house, have something to do, and are influenced by friends • Incentive program for getting friends to join • Informal • Fitness and health aspects • Provide workouts at informal swim times

30. Age Implications • 18 to 29 yr olds vs. 30+ • Like to compete, get out of the house, go to meets, the excitement, being on a team, and the challenge • Capitalize on the incoming freshman and graduate students • Introduce them to the sport – get them involved! • Call out meetings for club teams • Open House during orientations • Free sessions with a swim instructor to meet their motivation to improve their skills

31. Affiliation Status Implications • Undergraduate vs. All • Similar to age due to the strong correlation • Like the coaches, teamwork, meeting new friends, being with friends, and team dinners. • Provide social opportunities to meet new people at the pool but as well as outside • Provide times during workouts to meet new people during a kick set • Aqua jogging and Deep/Shallow Water exercise are great opportunities to socialize while at the pool

32. Frequency Implications • 5 times/week vs. < 5 times/week • Like winning, competing, excitement, being on a team, and being with friends. • Provide participants at all ability levels who use the pool five times per week opportunities to be challenged and compete • Intramural Swim Meets • Exciting Weekly Challenges/Incentive Programs

33. Limitations The results from this investigation were interpreted considering the following limitations: 1. The generalizability of findings is limited to the Indiana University, Bloomington and other college and universities with a similar classification structure of swimming participants. 2. Subjects who participated in the study were volunteers and were recruited as a matter of convenience, which does not allow all members of the survey population to have an equal or known chance of being sampled for participation in the questionnaire (Dillman, 2007).

34. Recommendation for Further Study • What discourages participants from swimming? • Currently study should be replicated in other sports other than swimming. • Do motivations vary by NCAA classifications, size, region of the county, and type (liberal arts, university, college, community college ect).

35. MOTIVES OF SWIMMING PARTICIPANTS IN A UNIVERSITY CAMPUS ENVIORMENT by Kellen Edelbrock THANK YOU