Connecticut College Psychology Journal 2020

Connecticut College

Psychology Journal

Published by the Connecticut College Chapter of Psi Chi

Volume 32 Spring 2020

2

Connecticut College Psychology Journal

Volume 32 Spring 2020

Empirical Articles

Defining Family Through Experience …………………………………………………………. 4
Carly Breslin

Relationship of Athletic Participation to Wellbeing in the NESCAC...………………………..24
Kirby Heffrin

Perceptions and Prevalence of Academic Dishonesty..……..……………………...…………..45
Elizabeth Magnan & Emma Benington

The Effects of Trigriluzole on Glutamate Transporters on Oxycodone Conditioned Place
Preference……………………………………………………………………………………….65

Grace Neale

Stigma Associated with Alcohol and Caffeine ………………………...……………………… 79
Cameron Peyko and Sarah Nolan

Is a Peer Wellbeing Coaching Program Beneficial…………………………………………… 102
Madison Smith

Review Articles

Neuroscience of Volition: A Brief Analysis of Psychological Studies Addressing the Free Will
Debate…………………………………………………………………................................ 136

Ahmed AboHamad

Planning a Community-Based Mental Health System from the Perspective of a Family Member:
A Review……………………………………………………………………………………. 162

Tashayla Borden

The Biological Effects of Trauma…………………………………………………………… 168
Daphne Miche

Psychopathy: An Overview of Historical and Contemporary Understandings …..……………183
Daphne Miche

3

EDITORIAL BOARD

EDITORS
Zelal Kilic
Callahan Wilde

FACULTY ADVISORS
Ms. Jillian Marshall
Dr. Ann Sloan Devlin

4

Empirical Articles

Running head: DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 5

Defining Family Through Experience
Carly Breslin

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 6

Abstract
The topic of this study revolves around familial satisfaction in its relation to familial structure.
Participants were asked to what extent they feel their family structure compares to their ideal
version of family; and to explain their ideal version of family if it is different than their own
familial structure. The participants consisted of male and female identifying Connecticut College
students of all class years. This was a correlational research design using several scales from
previous researchers based in the area of familial satisfaction: The Brief Family Relationship
Scale; The Positive Relationship with Father/Mother Scale; The Measure of Relationship
Satisfaction; and The Relationship With Mother and Father Measure. Findings suggest structure
does correlate to satisfaction due to significance levels that adequately support the hypotheses.

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 7

Defining Family Through Experience
Definitions of family have changed over time, according to our Census, our media, and
our own personal formations of families (Despain, Tunnell, Wilcox, & Morrison, 2015). Non-
nuclear formations of family, such as those formed through Artificial Reproductive Technologies
or same-sex couples, were not so frequently publicized in years past as they are now. The current
formations of families in reality and in the media are now much more reflective and
representative of our current times, as well as of the changing political movements and ideals.
These new and more accepted formations and definitions of family are not tied so closely to the
old definition of a father, a mother, and their two, biological children. Marriage and biology are
not seen as foundations for family as often as they once were and more studies are showing that
individuals, both parents and children, have perceived family as a foundation of love,
connection, caring, support, and ideologies (MacDonald, 2017). It should be noted that biology
and producing one’s own child from one’s own body and genes may still be an important and
determining element for some individuals in their formations of family; some couples even feel
slighted or “less than” for being unable to produce a child biologically (Nordqvist, 2017).
While biology can be a very important factor in defining a family to some individuals, it
does not always necessarily make a family “a family.” As long as individuals are willing to step
into roles of love and support for others, a familial role is formed. Those roles could be filled by
grandparents with no biological ties to their grandchildren (Chapman, Coleman, & Ganong,
2016), or foster parents who have created roles for their foster children to feel connected and
loved by their foster parents (Miller-Ott, 2017). These positions parental figures can create for
their children, regardless of biological or even legal connections, help children to feel their
parental figures’ involvement and support. These roles allow for individuals to feel more

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 8

cemented in their connection to others in their family and can lead to success in later life, such as
a strong work ethic instilled through this support (Nemova, Retivina, Kutepova, Vinnikova, &
Kuznetsova, 2016), as well as a regulation of emotion in children due to this stability (Batki,
2017). The structure of family matters less in correlation to the child’s well-being, as the care
given and boundaries set for the child allows for the child to grow to be a healthier and more
stable individual (Cenegy, Denney, & Kimbro, 2018; Frias-Navarro, 2009; Houseknecht, 1996).
These roles and boundaries allow children to feel there is a position/role in the family for them,
as mentioned previously.

Studies have shown the importance of care, such as hugs and kisses, as well as
boundaries and rules set by parental figures. It has also been shown that the roles of
disciplinarian and “homemaker,” which have been correlated with gender in the past, have
changed with time. Women have adapted with waves of feminism and become more visible and
seen in the workforce and so their roles at home have been changing as well (Katz-Wise, Priess,
& Hyde, 2010). While many women in recent decades have chosen to delay having children or
not have any at all, those who do have children, have picked up the roles of helping with the
family finances, as well as being both a caring and disciplinary parent when needed (Skoczeń,
Cieciuch, Oud, & Welzen, 2015). These changes in household roles have led to a change in tasks
and increased partnerships. The legality and acceptance of same-sex partnerships and single
parent households has also affected the roles in these households and families.

Support and family values can also affect how a child is raised, as well as the parental
figure who raises the child. Not only can children’s definitions of families and how they can be
formed change through experience and outside influence, but the definitions of those raising
children or creating their own families can be influenced by experience and the opinions of

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 9

outsiders and communities to which they are attached (Maseko, 2003). Individuals and couples
who may not be able to build a family the traditional way may seek alternative methods to have
children and build their family. Individuals and couples go to great lengths to have children
through many avenues, such as in vitro fertilization, adoption, or surrogacy. The method that is
used may be influenced by those around them, their personal or political views, their religion,
or/and their community (Jennings, 2010).

The ways families are formed, as well as the definitions, practices, and rules set in place
by the matriarchs and/or patriarchs may also have been influenced by their own experiences with
their families (Ferring, 2017). Schemas, ideals, and stereotypes can be formed due to these
experiences and teachings, which is why families are not always defined by biology or legality.
In fact, many families co-exist with individuals related to them through different aspects,
whether those be biology, legality, love, care, or all of these. The varying possibilities of how
families can form pushes the exploration of how personal rearing has influenced ideas about
family and how to raise that family.

The researcher wanted to further explore if there is a correlation between an individual’s
family structure—the family that reared that person—and the satisfaction the previously
mentioned individuals feel towards their family. She hoped to further explore whether or not
how one is raised and the structure of that family, correlates to a mental schema for what a
family specifically looks and acts like to that individual. She predicted that family structure
would be related to family satisfaction and the Ideal Family Definition individuals have.

Method
Participants

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 10

Participants included Connecticut College students from Psych 100 courses, as well as
from other class years at Connecticut College (Class of 2019-2022), with ages ranging from 18
to 22. Male and female identifying participants completed this study, as well as individuals of
many different races and ethnicities, such as African American, Asian, Asian American, Asian
Indian, Bangladeshi, Biracial/Multiracial, Black, Caucasian/White, Caucasian Greek, Hispanic,
Hispanic/Latinx, Korean, South Asian, White Jewish, and White Latinx.
Materials and Procedure

Brief Family Relationship Scale
The Brief Family Relationship Scale (BFRS), developed by Folk, Allen, and Henry
(2014), measures family functioning. Item examples consisted of, “In our family there is a
feeling of togetherness” and “My family members really support each other.” A rating scale
with three anchors (“Not at all,” “Somewhat,” and “A lot”) is used to answer and score the
scale’s items. Internal consistency for the measure was reported as α = .8-.88. For this study the
researcher completed, the Cronbach’s alpha value for Cohesion was .87, Expressiveness was
.82, and Conflict was .87 (α = .82-.87).
Positive Relationship with Father/Mother Scale
The Positive Relationship with Father/Mother Scale, developed by Lee, Ho, and Lwin
(2017), measures level of agreement with statements pertaining to parental satisfaction. An item
example consisted of, “I am happy with my relationship with my father.” A five-point Likert
scale with 1= “Strongly disagree” to 5 = “Strongly agree” is used to rate the items of the scale.
Statements included in the scale pertaining to the “father,” had a Cronbach alpha of .92 and those
pertaining to the “mother,” had a Cronbach alpha of .91. For this study the researcher completed,
Cronbach’s alpha was .61. The value would not improve by much if any of the items were

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 11

deleted due to the value either dropping as low as .48 (Item three) or as high as .66 (Item four)
with the deleted items.

Measure of Relationship Satisfaction
The Measure of Relationship Satisfaction, developed by Lemay and Dudley (2009),
measures the level of satisfaction among relationships. An item example consisted of, “I feel
satisfied with our relationship.” The scale is comprised of two items/statements pertaining to
relationship satisfaction, to be answered with a nine-point Likert scale where 1 = “strongly
disagree,” and 9 = “strongly agree.” Although the original usage of the scale was for
relationships among friends, the researcher used this scale for parental relationships. For
instance, the researcher asked the participant to use the Likert scale to rate the following
statement “I feel satisfied with our relationship,” based upon the relationship with one of their
parents, and then again, if applicable, for the participant’s second parent. The internal
consistency, or Cronbach alpha value, for this scale is .91. For this study, both parental
relationships being looked at were analyzed, so as to look at individuals with two parents, rather
than one. The first parent’s alpha value (with that parent status assigned by the researcher) in this
study was .97, and the second parent’s alpha value was .99.
Relationship With Mother and Father Measure
The Relationship With Mother and Father Measure, developed by Maurizi, Grogan-
Kaylor, Granillo, and Delva (2013), measures the quality of parental relationships with their
children. An item example consisted of, “How often does your father/mother let you know
he/she really cares about you?” The items of the scale are rated on a four-point scale with 1 =
“never” and 4 = “always.” The internal consistency rating/Cronbach alpha value for this scale
equals a value of .89. The question was amended to say “first parent” and “possible second

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 12

parent” and then asked twice in order to account for individuals without a nuclear family made
up of two, heterosexual parents. In this study, the researcher tested reliability for the entire
measure as a whole because she was not looking at differences in satisfaction with each parent,
but overall satisfaction with the parental unit in the household. The researcher assigned a
Cronbach’s alpha value for the first parent of -.23 and the second parent was assigned an alpha
value of -.12. It is unknown why such a low alpha score was yielded but it can be assumed to
have been influenced by the last two questions that inquire as to the parent’s anger towards the
participant and if the parent insults the participant. It is likely that the participants gave these
questions low ratings in order to say “never”. Since these questions were half of this measure, the
other half pertained to parental love toward the participant and thus it would be likely that
participants would answer positively to these. These conflicting scores could lead to such low
alpha scores.
Procedure

The recruitment of participants was through SONA. The researcher placed the
anonymous survey link in multiple Connecticut College Facebook groups, such as the Class of
2019, 2021, and 2022. The survey was also sent to all of Blackstone House (the researcher's
place of residence on campus) at Connecticut College and the Center for Internationalized
Studies and the Liberal Arts (CISLA), a center of which the researcher is a part. The researcher
also invited Conn students she knew to complete her survey on walks through Conn’s campus.
The participants who completed the link outside of SONA, without receiving credit, completed
the survey on their own. The study was distributed through Qualtrics and every participant
received the same version of the questionnaire. About 56.82% (the remaining percentage) came
from Facebook Groups, mass emails, and word of mouth interaction.

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 13

Ethical Issues
To the knowledge of the lead researcher, there were no prominent ethical issues involved

in the completion of this study.
Results

After downloading the data to SPSS from Qualtrics, all empty or missing cells with
numerical-based item values were imputed with the mean values of each item the cell belonged
to. The researcher reverse coded the items that needed to be reverse coded according to the
authors of the measures used. The researcher then computed all of the items into four new
variables, one variable for each scale, according to which scale each item belonged.

This study had 88 participants (n = 88) whose responses were deemed viable. The only
responses not included were those who had not answered any questions, especially the scale-
based multiple choice measures. Ten participants left some cells incomplete, but the majority of
the items were answered for those participant responses so the researcher still used their data.
The frequencies of participants were as follows: for class year, 10.2% of participants were from
the class of 2019, 14.8% of the participants were from the class of 2020, 28.4% of the
participants were from the class of 2021, and 35.2% were from the class of 2022. Just over 11%
did not answer this question on the survey. Regarding gender identification, responses varied in
terms of cis woman to womxn to cis male and so all responses were separated into categories of
female identifying, male identifying, and no response. There were no trans-identifying or non-
binary-identifying individuals to the researcher's knowledge, according to the responses
collected. There were 69.3% female identifying participants, 19.3% male identifying
participants, and 11.4% of participants did not respond to this question. Participant responses
surrounding race consisted of: 1.1% African American, 5.7% Asian, 1.1% Asian American,

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 14

2.3% Asian Indian, 1.1% Bangladeshi, 3.4% Biracial/Multiracial, 2.3% Black, 63.6%
Caucasian/White, 1.1% Caucasian Greek, 1.1% Hispanic, 1.1% Hispanic/Latinx, 1.1% Korean,
1.1% South Asian, 1.1% White Jewish, 1.1% White Latinx, 11.4% no response. As for age,
according to responses, participants consisted of 15.9% 18 year olds, 26.1% 19 year olds, 26.1%
20 year olds, 11.4% 21 year olds, 9.1% 22 year olds, and 11.4% did not respond to this question.

Internal consistencies were then calculated. To evaluate the hypothesis that family
satisfaction relates to family structure, a Pearson’s r analysis was conducted. A significant
negative correlation was indicated between Family Structure and The Positive Relationship With
Father/Mother Scale, r(75) = -.32, p < .01. A non-significant negative correlation was also
indicated between Family Structure and The Brief Family Relationship Scale, r(75) = -.12, p =
.314. Another non-significant negative correlation was indicated between Family Structure and
The Relationship With Mother and Father Measure, r(75) = -.12, p = .316. A final non-
significant (but trending) negative correlation was indicated between Family Structure and The
Measure of Relationship Satisfaction, r(75) = -.22, p = .054.

To evaluate the hypothesis that Family Structure correlates to Family Satisfaction, a
MANOVA (Multivariate Analysis of Variance) was performed on four dependent variables, The
Relationship With Mother and Father Measure, The Measure of Relationship Satisfaction, The
Positive Relationship With Father/Mother Scale, and The Brief Family Relationship Scale, with
Family Structure as the fixed variable. Family Structure had two value labels, nuclear (n = 50)
and non-nuclear (n = 25). The analysis indicated a significant multivariate effect for Family
Structure, Wilks’s Lambda = .87, F(4,70) = 2.52, p < .001. The univariate findings indicated a
significant difference for The Positive Relationship With Father/Mother Scale, F(4,70) = 8.15, p
< .001. There were no significant differences for The Relationship With Mother and Father

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 15

Measure (p = .316), The Measure of Relationship Satisfaction (p = .054), and The Brief Family
Relationship Scale (p = .314), although the Measure of Relationship Satisfaction approached
significance. Means and standard deviations of the four measures are presented in Table 1.

A content analysis was performed on how participants responded to what describes their
ideal family. A chi squared analysis was applied to this, with an inter-rater reliability (Cohen’s
kappa) following for 10% of the responses. To evaluate the hypothesis of whether or not family
structure (nuclear or non-nuclear) correlates to Ideal Family Definitions, a chi squared analysis
was conducted between Family Structure and each of the eight categories participants’ Ideal
Family Definitions could have fit into. A chi squared analysis was chosen by the researcher so as
to look at the observed and expected outcomes between the eight variables from the Ideal Family
Definitions and Family Structure. A Bonferroni correction was applied in order to adjust for a
Type I Error. In order to take this correction into account, the researcher divided a significant p
value level by the eight variables, .05/8 = .006. This meant that only p values less than .006 were
significant when accounting for a Type I Error. Given the new p level, the only significant
analysis involved the definitions given by participants that mention their ideal family being
similar to their current family structure,2 (1, 87) = 17.5, p < .001 (2-sided). The first
nonsignificant analysis was to see whether the definitions given by participants mentions their
ideal family having the same race or ethnicity, collectively, 2 (1, 87) = .39, p = .532 (2-sided).
The second non significant analysis involved whether the definitions given by participants
mentions their ideal family not caring about or being affected by gender, race, ethnicity,
sexuality, and/or religion, 2(1, 87) = 1.03, p = .310 (2-sided). The third non significant analysis
involved whether the definitions given by participants mentions their ideal family having
parents/guardians with a good relationship between them, 2(1, 87) = 5.61, p = .018 (2-sided).

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 16

The fourth non significant analysis involved whether the definitions given by participants
mentions their ideal family having two parents, 2(1, 87) = .35, p = .553 (2-sided). The fifth non
significant analysis involved whether the definitions given by participants mentions their ideal
family having at least one child, 2(1, 87) = 3.94, p = .047 (2-sided). The sixth non significant
analysis involved whether the definitions given by participants mentions their ideal family
including parents/guardians who are married to each other, 2 (1, 87) = 6.13, p = .013 (2-sided).
The seventh non significant analysis involved whether the definitions given by participants
mentions, in some way, their ideal family being supportive, loving, caring, open, and
communicative, 2 (1, 87) = 5.42, p = .020 (2-sided). Percentages and frequencies can be seen in
Table 2. Cohen’s kappa was performed by hand to see if the responses for Ideal Family
Definitions were placed in the categories with common agreement on the placement of the
responses in the categories (the eight variables mentioned previously) by the researcher. Cohen’s
kappa was about .10, which indicated slight agreement.

Discussion
This study examined the relationship of Family Structure to Family Satisfaction and Ideal
Family Definitions. It was hypothesized that the Family Structure of an individuals would be
correlated to their Familial Satisfaction. Results indicate partial support for the hypothesis.
Familial Satisfaction was shown to correlate to Family Structure with The Positive Relationship
With Father/Mother Scale. This scale measures level of agreement with statements pertaining to
satisfaction with one’s parents. This statement of correlation can be seen in the significant
negative correlation between Family Structure and The Positive Relationship With
Father/Mother Scale, as well as the significant multivariate effect for Family Structure. The
univariate findings indicated a significant difference for The Positive Relationship With

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 17

Father/Mother Scale. The significance level only reached the corrected level set to achieve
significance for The Positive Relationship With Father/Mother Scale, and this finding supported
the hypothesis. The values from none of the other scales supported the researcher’s hypothesis.

It was hypothesized that Family Structure would be correlated to Ideal Family
Definitions. Results indicate partial support of this hypothesis. A significant chi squared analysis
demonstrated that Family Definitions and Ideal Family Definitions given by participants
involves their ideal family structure correlating to their current family structure. However, none
of the other categories the Ideal Family Definitions were assigned to showed sufficient p values
at a level to pass a Bonferroni correction (Type I Error) and reject the null hypothesis.

Due to previous research on familial satisfaction, the researcher assumed that treatment
of individuals would aid in satisfaction because the treatment of individuals correlates to their
satisfaction with their families (Batki, 2017; Cenegy et al., 2018; Frias-Navarro, 2009;
Houseknecht, 1996; Nemova et al., 2016; Skoczeń et al., 2015). The researcher believed this
could be seen in such measures displaying how individuals feel about their parents and whether
they feel cared for by their parents. However, measures asking about how individuals are treated
in their family and how the family interacts together, did not reliably support the hypotheses.

The literature review did support the influence of an individual’s own family structure
influencing their definition of the ideal family or what that individual expects the family to look
like (Ferring, 2017). The results in this study supported this hypothesis of Family Structure
correlating to Ideal Family Definitions, if only partially. While the only supported category for
Ideal Family Definitions was whether the ideal family structure was similar to the current family
structure, that is an important and supportive category showing how one’s family structure can
influence their ideal family structure or how they perceive family to be constructed.

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 18

Most countries and individuals in the world believe the perfect family is the nuclear
family, made up of a mother, a father, and children, as one unit. The treatment of the individuals
in those families is not often of similar importance. Legally, familial structure takes great
precedence and control over satisfaction within these family structures in countries such as the
United States and Italy. There are many restrictive laws concerning family growth, reproduction,
and adoption in Italy and the United States, so this research is important to aid in addressing the
restrictiveness of these policies.

While there is definitely need for improvement in this study, these results do support the
importance of treating children with love and respect when raising them, rather than focusing on
the “correct” family structure. There is not enough data and definite need for improvement in
order to test if there is a perception of a “correct” family, but the ideal families that most
participants described were based on their own familial structures, rather than society’s idea of a
nuclear family. Regardless of race, gender, sexuality, biological association, or religion,
participants rarely thought of families being limited to society’s standards, and often compared
their own structure to their ideal structure. In the future, the researcher hopes to expand this
research by studying how different types and formations of families are seen in Italy and the
United States of America. She hopes to improve this survey, translate it into Italian, and
distribute it through contacts made in Italy, including counseling centers and mental health
clinics.
Limitations

Limitations involve categorizing families into nuclear and non-nuclear families, due to
the wide variety of families that exist. Also, due to subjective judgments on how to categorize
responses, especially the Ideal Family Definition responses, these responses can be read

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 19

differently due to different points of view of the reader and the writer of the responses. For
instance, if the person responding has a nuclear family, but also has half-siblings who may not
have a nuclear family, the researcher would have to judge how to classify this family and others
may not agree with that judgment. A third limitation involves the participant pool deriving from
Connecticut College, a predominantly White institution, which is not representative of American
society and the multitude of families that exist. Since these were college students, most likely
completing this study for course credit, there is a chance of Non-Response Bias. For those who
completed the study outside of the scheduled times for any reason other than a grade, those
participants may have started the survey and walked away to complete it later, which may have
influenced their results. Finally, many of the participants knew the researcher and may have
taken the survey as a friend or a favor, which may have influenced the results and limited the
diversity of participants.

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 20

References

Batki, A. (2018). The impact of early institutional care on emotion regulation: Studying the
play narratives of post-institutionalized and early adopted children. Early Child
Development and Care, 188, 1799-1813. doi:10.1080/03004430.2017.1289190

Cenegy, L. F., Denney, J. T., & Kimbro, R. T. (2018). Family diversity and child health:
Where do same-sex couple families fit? Journal of Marriage and Family, 80(1), 198-
218. doi:10.1111/jomf.12437

Chapman, A., Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. (2016). “Like my grandparent, but not”: A
qualitative investigation of skip-generation stepgrandchild–stepgrandparent
relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78, 634-643. doi:10.1111/jomf.12303

Despain, S. M., Tunnell, M. O., Wilcox, B., & Morrison, T. G. (2015). Investigating shifts
in diverse family structures in newbery award and honor books utilizing US census
data, 1930–2010. Literacy Research and Instruction, 54, 316-340.
doi:10.1080/19388071.2015.1061072

Ferring, D. (2017). The family in us: Family history, family identity and self-reproductive
adaptive behavior. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 51(2), 195-204.
doi:10.1007/s12124-017-9383-9

Fok, C. C. T., Allen, J., & Henry, D. (2014). Brief Family Relationship Scale. PsycTESTS.
https://doi.org/Full; Full text; 999932614pass:[_]full_001.pdf

Frias-Navarro, D. (2009). Beliefs about children's adjustment in same-sex families scale.
PsycTESTS, doi:10.1037/t40229-000; Full; Full text; 999940229_full_001.pdf

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 21

Halberstadt, A. G., Cassidy, J., Stifter, C., Parke, R. D., & Fox, N. A. (1995). Self-
expressiveness in the family questionnaire. PsycTESTS, doi:10.1037/t01120-000; Full;
Full text; 999901120_full_001.pdf

Houseknecht, S. K., & Sastry, J. (1996). Family “decline” and child well-being: A
comparative assessment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 726-739.
doi:10.2307/353732

Jennings, P. K. (2010). “God had something else in mind”: Family, religion, and infertility.
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 215-237. doi:10.1177/0891241609342432

Katz-Wise, S., Priess, H. A., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). Gender-role attitudes and behavior
across the transition to parenthood. Developmental Psychology, 46(1), 18-28.
doi:10.1037/a0017820

Lee, E. W. J., Ho, S. S., & Lwin, M. O. (2017). Positive Relationship with Father/Mother
Scale. PsycTESTS. https://doi.org/Full; Full text; 999959625pass:[_]full_001.pdf

Lemay, E. P., Jr., & Dudley, K. L. (2009). Measure of Relationship Satisfaction.
PsycTESTS. https://doi.org/Partial; Full text; 999919165pass:[_]partial_001.pdf

MacDonald, M. (2017). “A picture of who we are as a family”: Conceptualizing post-
adoption contact as practices of family display. Child & Family Social Work, 22, 34-43.
doi:10.1111/cfs.12248

Maseko, M. (2003). A young parent's anxieties in raising her infant in a non-traditional
family structure. Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 15(2), 77-80.
doi:10.2989/17280580309486551

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 22

Maurizi, L. K., Grogan-Kaylor, A., Granillo, M. T., & Delva, J. (2013). Relationship With
Mother and Father Measure. PsycTESTS. https://doi.org/Sample; Full text;
999926254pass:[_]sample_001.pdf

Miller-Ott, A. (2017). Developing and maintaining foster family identity through foster
parents’ identity work. Journal of Family Communication, 17, 208-222.
doi:10.1080/15267431.2017.1293061

Nemova, O.A., Retivina, V.V., Kutepova, L.I., Vinnikova, I.S., & Kuznetsova, E.A. (2016).
Sociocultural mechanisms of intergenerational values and mindset translation in
modern family development and generational change. International Journal of
Environmental and Science Education, 11, 6226-6237. http://www.ijese.net

Nordqvist, P. (2017). Genetic thinking and everyday living: On family practices and family
imaginaries. The Sociological Review, 65, 865-881. doi:10.1177/0038026117711645

Skoczeń I, Cieciuch J, Oud JHL, & Welzen K (2015) Development and Validation of the
Computerized Family Relations Test for Children. Frontiers in Psychology 6:1687.
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01687

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 23
Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations of The Four Measures and Their Relationship to Family
Structures, as well as Univariate Analysis Results

Measures Nuclear Non Nuclear p
n = 50 n = 25
M SD M SD F(4,70)

RelWithFathMothMeasure 19.51 2.74 18.85 2.44 1.02 .316
24.21 7.87 3.85 .054
MeasureOfRelSatisfaction 28.04 8.01 21.47 4.96 8.15 .006
36.88 7.10 1.03 .314
PositiveRelWithFathMothScale 24.27 3.44

BriefFamRelScale 38.64 7.09

To preserve space, RelationshipWithMothAndFathMeasure was shortened to
RelWithFathMothMeasure, as well as MeasureOfRelationshipSatisfaction which was shortened
to MeasureOfRelationship.

DEFINITIONS, FAMILY, EXPERIENCE 24

Table 2

Percentages and Frequencies for How Participants Described Their Ideal Family Based on
Their Current Familial Structure, Nuclear or Non Nuclear

Ideal Family Includes Nuclear Non Nuclear
n = 50 n = 25
% %

Same Race/Ethnicity 72.7 27.3

Similar to Current Structure 85.7 14.3

Not Affected by Race/Ethn, Sex, 73.3 26.7
Gender, Sexuality, and/or Religion

Good Relationship Amongst Guardians 50.0 50.0

Two Parents 67.2 32.8

At Least One Child 73.5 26.5

Guardians Married to Each Other 78.9 21.1

Supportive, Loving, Caring, Communicative 51.5 48.5

_____________________________________________________________________

Running head: NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 25

Relationship of Athletic Participation to Well-Being in the NESCAC
Kirby Heffrin

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 26

Abstract
The current study used a sample of New England Small College Athletic Conference
(NESCAC) varsity athletes (N = 195) to investigate the influential factors contributing to mental
illnesses, the academic-athletic role conflict and their perceived relationship with their coach.
The instruments utilized were the College Student Athlete Life Stress Scale (CSALSS; Lu et al.,
2012), Academic-Athletic Role Conflict Scale (Sellers & Damas, 2002), and the Coach-Athlete
Relationship Questionnaire -Metaperspective Version, (CART-Q; Jowett, 2009). There was a
significant correlation between the two scales, CART-Q and CSALSS results were significantly
associated, p < .01. Additionally, scores on the CART-Q were significantly associated with role
interference p < .05. Results from the CART-Q were negatively associated with role separation,
such that individuals who saw being an athlete and being a student as more of a single role
reported stronger perceived relationships with their coach, p < .05. Results from the role
interference and life stress revealed a significant association, p < .01, such that athletes who
reported greater levels of life stress had lower scores on the role interference scale, suggesting
that as athletes have increasingly high levels of stress, the less role interference they
demonstrated. It is concluded that athletes in the NESCAC demonstrate less role interference,
which may allow for better concentration on the demands and tasks of each role, allowing
enhanced performance in each role. The student-athletes’ in the NESCAC are vulnerable to
unique stressors due to the rigor of the academics and athletics at the belonging institutions and
are a population that needs further investigation.

Keywords: collegiate student athletes, stress, coach-athlete relationship, role interference,
role separation

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 27

Relationship of Athletic Participation to Well-Being in the NESCAC
In 2017, there were an estimated 46.6 million adults ages 18 or older in the United States
living with a mental illness, which was 18.9% of all adults in the United States (National
Institute of Mental Health, 2017). In addition, approximately 25.8% of young adults aged 18-25
reported the highest prevalence of mental illness compared to any other age group, making
college students the target population for encountering mental illness (National Institute of
Mental Health, 2017).
College students are faced with typical stressors such as increased academic rigor,
formation of a new identity and social groups, and living independently. Although mental health
disorders may be partially rooted in genetic predispositions, environmental stressors and
available resources also have a strong influence on development and exacerbate mental health
disorders (Brown, 2014). Student-athletes are exposed to additional environmental factors
compared to their non-athlete peers, including time demands, performance pressures on and off
the field, coaching staff, and increasing academic stress. The very term student-athlete is defined
as an individual who must manage and succeed at being an athlete and a student (Woodruff &
Schallert, 2007).
Student-athlete well-being
It is generally accepted that athletes are vulnerable to physical injury, however the
psychological strain endured by athletes is not as widely accepted. An estimated 10-15% of
collegiate student-athletes suffer from clinically relevant psychological distress, and this
percentage continues to grow (Watson, 2006). Additionally, the level of performance and
function of athletes in sports competition is influenced by psychological factors such as
personality traits, competitive anxiety, and coping strategies (Mottaghi, Atarodi, & Rohani,
2013). However, mental health instability extends beyond just sports competitions for collegiate
student-athletes.

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 28

Student-athlete psychological distress may be heightened by the unique set of challenges

and demands they confront (Barnard, 2016). Additional challenges and demands encountered by

student-athletes include the long hours of practices and training, isolation from families and

friends, pressure to excel both academically and athletically, and maintaining a balance of

academic, athletic and social identities. Athletes frequently experience pressures on and off the

field, making them a high-risk population for increased emotional exhaustion (Chang, Wu, Kuo,

& Chen, 2018). On average, student-athletes devote 20 hours per week to their sports

participation, leaving little time for academics, extracurricular activities and socialization with

their non-athlete peers (Watson, 2006). The persistent stressors that student-athletes face can

negatively affect their sports identity and their self-esteem, which can ultimately lead to the

development of a mental illness (Barnard, 2016).
New England Small College Athletic Conference (NESCAC). The NESCAC was

founded in 1971 and consists of eleven highly selective liberal arts colleges and universities, and
the division states that the colleges and institutions are “committed first and foremost to
academic excellence and believe that our athletic programs must always support our educational
mission. (NESCAC, 2018). In addition, the NESCAC states that their core values include
“academic excellence”, as well as the expectation “that student athletes will participate in the
educational, co-curricular, and social opportunities made available to all our students, and
equally assume leadership roles on campus” (NESCAC, 2018). These values and expectations
maintained by both the NESCAC and their institutions display the intense rigor of academics and
athletics endured by NESCAC student-athletes, and the heightened pressures placed on student-
athletes to exceed on and off the field. In a study conducted by Wolanin et al. (2016) female
NCAA athletes were at a greater risk for developing mental illness compared to male athletes.

Therefore, it is hypothesized that female student-athletes in the NESCAC will experience greater

stress compared to male student-athletes in the NESCAC.

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 29

The College Student-Athletes’ Life Stress Scale (CSALSS; Lu et al., 2012), accounts for

the unique stressors that a student-athlete may encounter. Previous research has utilized the

CSALSS, however researchers have not assessed the wide variety of influential factors

contributing to psychological distress, specifically in Division III student-athletes. Additionally,

there has been no research investigating the well-being of student-athletes in the Division III

NESCAC. Therefore, the aim of the current study is to explore the influential factors

contributing to the overall well-being of male and female NESCAC student-athletes.

Coaches influence
As a figure of authority and power, coaches can substantially influence a student-athlete’s

mental health and motivation (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003). The greater the degree to which

athletes perceived their coaches to be autonomy-supportive, the more the athletes possessed self-

determined motivation, which has been found to be associated with positive cognitive, affective

and behavioral outcomes (Amorose & Anderson-Butcher, 2007).

In a study conducted by Yukhymenko-Lescroart, Brown, and Paskus (2015) researchers

examined how ethical and abusive behaviors of college coaches are related to athletes’

outcomes, particularly inclusion climate on the team, athletes’ satisfaction with their college

choice and willingness to cheat. Coaches were the focus of this research because coaches have

the most direct impact on their athletes, as they possess leadership roles. Yukhymenko-Lescroart,

Brown, and Paskus (2015) stated that “Coaches have legitimate authority over the student-

athletes and control valued outcomes (e.g. starting lineups, playing time, scholarship allocation),

this making them attractive and credible models in their athletes’ eyes.” (pg # for quote) The

researchers found that strong ethical leadership from coaching staffs enhanced student-athlete

satisfaction with their college choice and created a more inclusive team environment

(Yukhymenko-Lescroart, Brown, & Paskus, 2015). This study provides evidence of the

extensive impact that athletic coaches have on their athletes, which can influence retention,

willingness to cheat and team climate.

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 30

However, not all coach-athlete relationships are effective and successful. Negative
feelings of closeness (feeling unattached and/or distant), disoriented views (competing interests,
conflicting goals, and/or lack of understanding) and non-complementary behaviors (incompatible
roles and/or support) affect the coach-athlete relationship negatively (Jowett, 2003). Lorimer and
Jowett (2010) found that empathic accuracy (how accurately one can perceive the other’s
thoughts and feelings) of coaches and athletes is influenced by sports context situations and its
specific characteristics. It was found that coaches of team-based sports displayed less empathic
accuracy than coaches in individual sports (Lorimer & Jowett, 2010).

Tomlinson and Yorganci (1997) have argued that the perceived imbalance of power in
the coach-athlete relationship is particularly pronounced where a male coach is working with a
female athlete, reinforcing traditional gender-roles. Earlier research by Heffrin and Healy (2018)
on a sample of students from Connecticut College, found that female athletes who had female

coaches reported significantly higher levels of stress compared to female athletes with male
coaches, and male athletes who had male coaches. Research has found that the perceived
traditional gender-roles in society and are consistent with the traditional roles of the coach and
athlete: females are perceived as being more submissive and understanding than males, while
males are perceived as being more assertive (Lorimer & Jowett, 2010).

Despite the general acknowledgment that coaches have a profound influence on their

athletes, there has been minimal research conducted regarding the influential factors of a
coaches’ behaviors on an athlete’s mental health stability. Additionally, there is a lack of

discussion and awareness of the impact that NESCAC coaches can have on their athletes.

The Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire-Metaperspective Verion (CART-Q) was

developed by Jowet (2009) and accounts for the affective, cognitive and behavioral aspects of

the coach-athlete relationship. It is hypothesized that female student-athletes with female

coaches will report higher stress levels on the CSALSS than female athletes with male coaches.

Additionally, it is hypothesized that student-athletes who participate in team-oriented sports will

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 31

report lower scores on the CART-Q compared to athletes who participate in individual sports.

Changes in coaching staff will also be considered as an influential factor in overall stress levels

and the coach-athlete relationship.

Academic and athletic identities

Student athletes are a distinct population to investigate the influence of the two identities

on their well-being. The degree to which an individual identifies with their role as an athlete is

termed athletic identity. The tasks encountered by the two roles as a student and as an athlete are

distinct and sometimes contradictory (Sellers & Damas, 2002). Interference between the

demands of being an athlete and student are associated with increased levels of distress, whereas

individuals who believed that these roles were separate had higher levels of psychological well-

being (Sellers & Damas, 2002). Role interference may be due to increased involvement in one or

both roles (Sellers & Damas, 2002). Research suggests that role separation is associated with

positive well-being in student-athletes because when one identity role is poor, well-being may be

bolstered by more positive experiences in the other role (Sellers & Damas, 2002). Role

separation also allows individuals to better focus on the demands and tasks each role entails,

which results in enhanced performance in each role (Sellers & Damas, 2002).

In the Growth, Opportunities, Aspirations and Learning of Students in College (GOALS;

Paskus & Bell, 2016) report conducted by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)
found that about one-third of college athletes struggle “to find energy for other tasks because of
the physical demands of their sport” and “one-quarter reported being exhausted from the mental
demands of their sport.” Due to the fact that athletic participation causes physical exhaustion

which may lead to the problem of fatigue that makes concentration during studying more

difficult (Simons, Van Rheenen, & Covington, 1999). The NCAA has different academic

standards for the three divisions: Division I student-athletes must earn at least six credit hours

each term, Division II athletes must earn at least nine-semester/eight-quarter hours each term and

earn a 2.0 cumulative GPA, and Division III student-athletes have no minimum national standard

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 32

for maintain eligibility, however they must be in good academic standings and be enrolled in at

least 12 semester hours (NCAA, n.d.).

One pressure collegiate student-athletes encounter is the negative stereotypes that faculty,

administrators and non-athlete peers hold. Specifically in the NESCAC, the ways in which the

belonging institutions recruit, admit, and enrolls students varies over time and by institution

(NESCAC, 2018). Although admission decisions are made exclusively by the admission
committee, the coaches’ assessment on the athletes athletic ability and potential contribution to
the team’s success is considered in the admissions process at NESCAC institutions (NESCAC,

2018). Even though the NESCAC athlete admissions process is influenced by coaches input, the

applicant's academic standings and test scores are also evaluated. Additionally, all Division III

athletes are prohibited from receiving athletic scholarships, however, there are financial aid

awards that can be provided to sway athletes' decisions to attend one institution over another.

Despite these admission regulations, non-athlete students, faculty and administrators may still
maintain negative stereotypes of an athlete’s admission into the institution and that they are ill fit
for the college’s academic rigor. Individuals who view athletes and students as distinct and

separate roles are better able to avoid these negative consequences of low expectations of

nonathlete peers, administrators and professors (Sellers & Damas, 2002).

Student-athletes may be deferred from going to professors' offices for extra help or

working with their peers outside the classroom due to the negative stereotypes, in addition to the

extensive time commitment and pressures student-athletes endure from their sports participation.

Although a coach is prohibited by the NCAA to require a student to miss an unexpected

academic conflict for practice, it is generally frowned upon by teammates and coaches and this

disapproval weighs heavily on the student-athlete (Simons, Van Rheenen, & Covington, 1999).

Athletes tend to believe that if they miss an athletic commitment for academics their coach will

penalize them for choosing academics over athletics (Simons, Van Rheenen, & Covington,

1999). The fear of penalization by coaches results in student-athletes giving athletic participation

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 33

priority over academics, leading to struggles in the classroom (Simons, Van Rheenen, &

Covington, 1999).

In this study, student-athletes' perception of the role separation and role interference were

investigated in relation to the CSALSS, CART-Q, and participants' gender. It was hypothesized

that higher scores on the CSALSS would be positively associated with role interference, and

lower CSALSS scores would be positively associated with role separation. It was also

hypothesized that lower scores on the CART-Q would be positively associated with role

interference. Additionally, it was hypothesized that female athletes would have a greater degree

of role separation compared to male athletes.

Method

Research Design

The current study consisted of a quasi-experimental and correlational design. In the

quasi-experimental design, the quasi-independent variable was gender (two levels) and it was

viewed through the administration of the two conceptually related dependent variables, the
College Student-Athletes’ Life Stress Scale (CSALSS) and the Coach-Athlete Relationship

Questionnaire-Multiperspective Version (CART-Q). To evaluate the relationship of gender to the

two conceptually related dependent variables, a factorial multivariate analysis of variance (one-

way MANOVA) was conducted. The identity roles were analyzed through a correlational

analysis of separation and interference correlated with CSALSS and CART-Q.

Participants

The number of participants varied for each measurement because participants who did

not complete the entire survey were still included. A total of 195 NESCAC student-athletes

participated in the survey, 21.8% were male and 78.2% were female. There were 185 individuals

who completed the CART-Q measurement and 144 participants completed the CSALSS.

Additionally, there were 162 participants who completed the separation scale and 153 completed

the interference scale.

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 34

Materials

Demographics

After consenting to the survey, participants were asked if they participated in a NESCAC

varsity sport; if they selected no they were not eligible to participate and they were brought to the

debriefing form at the end of the survey. If they selected yes, they were asked sports

demographic questions, including the number of varsity sports they participate in, how long they

have been playing, the gender of their head coach and if their sport was team-oriented or based

on individual performance. Following completion of the three instruments, they were asked

general demographic questions. These questions included their class year, gender, what season

their sport was, if there had been any changes to their coaching staff, major, minor, and if they

are aware of any programs offered by their athletic department that supports the coach-athlete

relationship.

Coach-athlete relationship

The Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q-Metaperspective Version;
Jowett, 2009) was used to assess college student-athletes’ perceptions regarding the strength of
their relationship with his/her coach. The scale measures the degree to which the athletes’

believed their coach was (a) close, (b) committed and (c) complementary with them. The scale

totaled 11 items and the responses were completed on a 7-point response scale ranging from 1
(strongly agree) to 7 (strongly disagree). A sample question is, “My coach respects me.” The
Cronbach’s alpha in the literature has a high internal consistency in the three subscales:
closeness (α = .86), commitment (α = .81), and complementarity (α = .83). In the current study,
scores were reverse coded and the Cronbach’s alpha for the entire instrument was .942.
Additionally, here the Cronbach’s three subscales were: closeness, (α =.914), commitment (α
=.843), and complementarity (α = .856).

Student-athlete role conflict

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 35
The Student Athlete Role Conflict Scale was used to assess the academic-athletic role

conflict of a student athlete. Settles, Sellers, and Damas (2002) developed a 16 item scale with

two separate subscales: a role interference scale, and a role separation scale. Participants were

instructed to rate how true for them each statement was on a scale ranging from 1 (not really true

of me) to 7 (really true of me). The role interference subscale consists of 12 items that assesses

the degree to which the demands of being an athlete, and the demands of being a student,

interfere with each other, with higher scores indicating a greater level of interference. A sample
statement is, “Some student-athletes feel that they would perform better academically if they
were not an athlete.” The role interference subscale has a high Cronbach’s alpha of .84 (Settles,
Sellers, & Damas, 2002). Here the Cronbach’s alpha for the role interference subscale was .872.
The role separation subscale assesses the extent to which the individual perceives that being an
athlete and a student are separate and distinct identities, with higher scores indicating a greater
perception of being an athlete and a student are separate roles. A sample statement is, “Some
student-athletes view themselves more as a student than an athlete.” The Cronbach’s alpha in
literature was .54 for the role separation subscale, and a factor analysis in a sample of 200
collegiate athletes indicated that this two-factor model adequately fit the data (Settles, Sellers, &
Damas, 2002). Here, the Cronbach’s alpha for the role separation subscale was .43.

Student-athletes’ life stress
College student-athletes’ unique life stress was measured by the 24-item College Student-
Athletes’ Life Stress Scale (CSALSS; Lu et al., 2012).The scale measures student athletes’ life

stress related to eight factors: (a) sports injury, (b) performance demand, (c) coach relationships,

(d) training adaptation, (e) interpersonal relationships, (f) romantic relationships, (g) family

relationships, and (h) academic requirements. Participants indicated the frequency that they have

experienced the stressors in their daily life as a college student-athlete, measured on a 6-point
scale ranging from 1 (never) to 6 (always). A sample item is, “I am afraid of being eliminated
from competition because of poor performance.” The literature demonstrates moderate overall

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 36

reliability and validity with a Cronbach’s alpha of .70, (Chang et al., 2012); here the overall
Cronbach’s alpha was .899.

Procedure
In order to preserve anonymity, the 11 NESCAC schools are reported in randomized

order A-K. Initially student-athletes at all 11 NESCAC institutions were recruited to participate
in the study through personal outreach by the researcher. There were eight female teams, six
male teams and 3 co-ed teams who were contacted regarding participation in the survey, and
they were also asked to distribute the survey to their teammates and other athletes at their
institution. Additionally, email lists of all student-athletes’ were obtained from D and J. The
emails were then selected through randomization; 51 individuals were contacted at school D and
52 individuals contacted at school J were recruited to participate, see Appendix A for the
recruitment email. Additional participants were desired so the Athletic Directors at the 11
institutions were emailed requesting their assistance in distributing the survey to their student-
athlete population; one NESCAC institution aided in this request. The remaining recruitment
occurred through social media outreach and Facebook posts on NESCAC team pages.

The Qualtrics survey was accessible between April 11, 2019 and April 30, 2019. Upon

clicking on the link to the survey, the consent form was presented to all participants, which

explained that their participation was voluntary and ensured that they were over the age of 18.

Following the consent, all participants received the sports demographics, CART-Q, the Student-

Athlete Role Conflict Scale, the CSALSS, and then additional demographic information. After

completing all measurements, the debriefing form appeared, which discussed the intended aim of

the study.

Ethical Issues

There were neither ethical issues during participation in the study nor harm or discomfort

to the participant. No personal or identifiable information was collected.

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 37

Results

To evaluate the relationship of gender to the two conceptually related variables, the

CSALSS and CART-Q measurements, a between subjects one-way multivariate analysis of

variance was conducted. There was a significant correlation between the two scales, CART-Q

and CSALSS results were significant and negatively correlated, r = -0.468, p < .01, n = 142, but
there was no significant relationship between CSALSS and CART-Q based on gender, Wilk’s

Lambda = .511, F(2, 137) = .675, p = .571.
A univariate analysis revealed no significant relationship of gender to an athlete’s

reported life stress in the CSALSS, F(1, 140) = 1.694, p = .195 (see Table 1 for means and

standard deviations). There was no significant relationship of gender to CART-Q, F (1, 143) =

.340, p = .561 (see Table 2 for means and standard deviations).

Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations for CSALSSa and Coach Gender and Athlete Gender

Male Coach Female Coach Total
M SD n Mn
Athlete Gender M SD n 64.45 19.32 59 63.77 110

Female 62.98 20.21 51

Athlete

Male 59.86 17.07 29 - -- 59.86 29
Athlete

Note. Total scores for the CSALSS, ranging from 24 (low stress) to 144 (high stress), indicates
varying levels of stress, measured on a scale ranging from 1 (never) to 6 (always).
aCollege Student Athlete Life Stress Scale (CSALSS).

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 38

Table 2
Means and Standard Deviations for CARTQa and Coach Gender and Athlete Gender

Male Coach Female Coach Total
M SD n Mn
Athlete Gender M SD n 55.76 13.88 59 56.86 110

Female 58.14 10.58 51
Athlete

Male 58.03 16.22 29 - -- 58.03 29
Athlete

Note. CART-Q scores range from 11 (poor/weak relationship) to 77 (strong relationship), with scores
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
aCoach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q).

The average of all 12 items, rated on a 7-point scale, on the role interference were calculated
such that higher scores indicated a greater level of role interference (M = 40.67, SD = 12.54).
The average of all items for the role separation scale were computed, and the appropriate items
were reverse coded. Higher scores on the four item role separation measure, rated on a 7-point
scale, indicated a greater perception that being an athlete and a student are separate, and lower
scores indicated that being an athlete and being a student were viewed as a single role (M =
15.44, SD = 3.18). There was a significant correlation between the role interference and the role
separation scales, r = 0.168, n = 152, p = 0.038 (see Table 3 for means and standard deviations).

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 39
Table 3

Means and Standard Deviations for Separation and Interference Scales and Athlete Gender

Subscale Female Male
n = 113 n = 32
M SD M SD

Separation 15.27 3.23 15.96 3.12

Interference 39.96 14.47 41.93 15.91

Note. Higher scores on the separation subscale indicate a greater perception that being an athlete and a student
are separate roles, ranging from 4 (less role separation) to 28 (greater role separation), indicates varying levels
of role separation, measured on a scale ranging from 1 (not true of me) to 7 (really true of me). Higher scores on
the interference subscale indicate a greater level of role interference. Ranging from 12 (less role interference) to
144 (greater role interference), indicates varying levels of role interference, measured on a scale ranging from 1
(not true of me) to 7 (really true of me).

To assess the relationship between athlete identity with life stress a correlation analysis
revealed a significant association between scores on the CSALSS and the interference scale, r =
.470, p < .01, n = 142, but there was no significant relationship between the CSALSS and the
separation scale, r = .127, p = .131, n = 143. Scores on the CART-Q were negatively associated
with role interference, r = -0.191, p < .05, n = 160, and CART-Q scores were also negatively
associated with role separation, r = -0.162, p < .05, n = 151.

Discussion
The purpose of the study was to assess the impact that athletic participation and the
coach-athlete relationship can have on NESCAC student athletes’ mental health and identity.
The study consisted of three measures to assess (1) the student athletes perceived life stress, (2)
the coach-athlete relationship and (3) the degree to which student athletes feel that the demands
of being an athlete and the demands of being a student interfere with each other, or if they are
perceived to be two separate identities. It was hypothesized that female student-athletes with

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 40

female coaches would report higher stress levels on the CSALSS than female athletes with male
coaches. The results did not show a significant relationship between stress levels, athlete gender
and coach gender, however this may be due to the small number of male participants in the study
and there were no male athletes with female coaches. The lack of association is unlike the
findings of Heffrin and Healy (2018) who studied a sample of Connecticut College student-
athletes and found that female athletes with female coaches reported greater levels of stress
compared to female athletes with male coaches on the CSALSS. However, there was a
difference in averages on the CSALSS for female and male athletes, with female athletes
displaying greater stress levels compared to male athletes.

Additionally, it was hypothesized that student-athletes who participated in team-oriented
sports would report weaker relationships with their coaches compared to athletes who
participated in individual sports. There was no significant relationship between CART-Q and
whether the athlete participated in a team-oriented sport or a sport based on individual
performance. However, female athletes reported weaker relationships with their coach,
regardless of their coaches gender, compared to male athletes who reported moderately stronger
relationships with their coaches. In order to account for potential coaching changes during an
athletes collegiate sport career, they were asked whether there have been any changes to their
sports coaching staff (head coaches and/or assistant coaches). The qualitative results revealed
that a large number of NESCAC sports teams have frequent changes in assistant coaches, some
teams receiving a new assistant coach each year which may have influenced the coach-athlete
relationship.

Results from the CART-Q were negatively associated with role separation, such that
individuals who saw being an athlete and being a student as more of a single role reported
stronger perceived relationships with their coach. Additionally, the coach-athlete relationship
and perceived life stress were both negatively correlated with role interference, such that
individuals who saw the demands of being an athlete and the demands of being a student

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 41

interfere with each other had stronger perceived relationships with their coach but greater

reported life stress. Athletes who reported greater levels of life stress had lower scores on the

role interference scale, and thus as athletes have increasingly levels of stress, the less role
interference they demonstrated. When both roles’ of being a student and being an athlete are

negative, we would expect well-being to decrease (Jowet, Settles, & Damas, 2002). However, in
this sample of NESCAC student-athletes’ appear to have fairly positive experiences in their two

roles as a student and as an athlete. Less role interference may allow the student athlete to better

concentrate on the demands and tasks of each role, allowing enhanced performance in each role

(Jowet, Settles, & Damas, 2002).

Future longitudinal studies are essential to help determine the causal direction of the

relationship between well-being and role interference, as well as the causal direction of the

coach-athlete relationship with separation and interference. Additionally, future research is

needed, specifically in the NESCAC, to assess influential variables, such as GPA, familial
income, and differences in co-ed and single gender sports teams. The student-athletes’ in the

NESCAC are vulnerable to unique stressors due to the rigor of the academics and athletics at the

belonging institutions.

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 42

References

Amorose, A. J., & Anderson-Butcher, D. (2007). Autonomy-supportive coaching and self-
determined motivation in high school and college athletes: A test of self-determination
theory. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 4(3), 206-218
doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.11.003

Barnard, J. D. (2016). Student-Athletes’ perceptions of mental illness and attitudes toward help-
seeking. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 30(3), 161-175.
doi: 10.1080/87568225.2016.1177421

Brown, G. (2014). Mind, body, and sport: Understanding and supporting student-athlete mental
wellness [PDF]. Retrieved
from https://www.naspa.org/images/uploads/events/Mind_Body_and_Sport.pdf.

Chang, W. H., Wu, C., Kuo, C., & Chen, L. H. (2018). The role of athletic identity in the
development of athlete burnout: The moderating role of psychological flexibility.
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 39, 45-51. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.07.014

Executive Board Members, New England Small College Athletic Conference (2018). About
the NESCAC: History, identity, membership. Retrieved from www.nescac.com

Heffrin, K. & Healy, E. (2018). Gender and effects of athletic participation on student-athletes’
mental health [Unpublished academic research paper]. Connecticut College, New
London, CT.

Lorimer, R., & Jowett, S. (2010). The influence of role and gender in the empathic accuracy of
coaches and athletes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(3), 206-211. doi:
10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.12.001

Lu, F. J.-H., Hsu, Y.-W., Chan, Y.-S., Cheen, J.-R., & Kao, K.-T. (2012). Assessing college
student-athletes’ life stress: Initial measurement development and validation.

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 43

Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 16(4), 254–267.

doi:10.1080/1091367X.2012.693371

Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coach–athlete relationship: A motivational model,

Journal of Sports Sciences, 21(11), 883-904, doi: 10.1080/0264041031000140374

National Institute of Mental Health (2019). Mental illness. Retrieved from

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness.shtml

New England Small College Athletic Conference [NESCAC] (2018). Mission and core values.

Retrieved from https://www.nescac.com/about/mission_statement

Paskus, T. & Bell, L. (2016) NCAA GOALS study of the atudent-athlete experience [PDF].

Settles, I. H., Sellers, R. M., & Damas, A. J. [PDF] (2002). Student athlete role conflict

scale. PsycTESTS, doi:10.1037/t09243-000

Simons, H.D., Van Rheenen, D., & Covington, M.V. (1999). Academic motivation and the

student athlete. Journal of College Student Development, 40(2), 151-162.

Tomlinson, A., & Yorganci, I. (1997). Male coach/female athlete relations: Gender and power

relations in competitive sport. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 21(2), 134-155.

doi:10.1177/019372397021002003

Watson, J. C. (2006). Student-athletes and counseling: Factors influencing the decision to seek

counseling services. College Student Journal, 40(1), 35-42. Retrieved from

https://www.projectinnovation.com/college-student-journal.html

Wolanin A., Hong E., Marks D., Panchoo K., & Gross M. (2016). Prevalence of clinically

elevated depressive symptoms in college athletes and differences by gender and sport.

British Journal of Sports Medicine, 167-171. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-095756

Woodruff, A. L. & Schallert, D. L. (2008). Studying to play, playing to study: Nine college

student-athletes’ motivational sense of self. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(1),

34-57. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.04.001

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 44

Yukhymenko-Lescroart, M., Brown, M. E., & Paskus, T. S. (2015). The relationship between
ethical and abusive coaching behaviors and student-athlete well-being. Sport, Exercise,
and Performance Psychology, 4(1), 36-49. doi:10.1037/spy0000023

NESCAC STUDENT-ATHLETES WELL-BEING 45

Appendix A
Recruitment email
Hello,
You are being invited to participate in the study, “Relationship of Athletic Participation
to Well-Being in the NESCAC.” As an individual study project at Connecticut College, I am
investigating the well-being of athletes who belong to the New England Small College Athletic
Conference, as well as factors contributing to athletes’ overall physical and emotional well-
being.
I would like to mention that the survey contains some questions regarding the influence
of coaches on athletes’ well-being. The purpose of inquiring about the roles of coaching staff is
to help improve the understanding of the athletic experience of student-athletes at institutions
throughout the NESCAC. However, this questionnaire is anonymous, as I neither ask what sport
you participate in nor do I collect any personally identifiable information. Results will be
reported in the aggregate and will not be linked to individuals or to their institutions. You are
able to decline participation or stop at any point during the survey.
The survey can be accessed HERE
Please let me know if you have any questions, I can be reached at [email protected]

Thank you in advance,
Kirby Heffrin

Running head: PERCEPTIONS ON CHEATING & AN HONOR CODE 46

Perceptions and Prevalence of Academic Dishonesty
Emma Benington and Elizabeth Magnan

PERCEPTIONS ON CHEATING & AN HONOR CODE 47
Abstract PA
G
Previous studies indicate that in higher-level education, institutions with Honor Codes are E
10

privy to lower levels of academic dishonesty than those without. A correlational study was

conducted, highlighting the influence peers have on cheating levels and the effectiveness of

the Connecticut College Honor Code at curbing academic misconduct and encouraging

reporting. A total of 94 undergraduate students at Connecticut College responded to a series
of four surveys. Analyses demonstrated that peer influence is evident (Pearson’s r = .474, p <
.001), strong belief in the Honor Code lowers cheating levels (Pearson’s r = -.303, p = .003),

and that the Honor Code is not particularly effective when it comes to getting students to
report infractions (Pearson’s r = .194, p = .065). These results suggest that the Honor Code

has some effective features but could benefit from being more closely integrated throughout
the College experience. Future research could closely examine students’ reservation to report

their peers and how cheating levels differ demographically.

Keywords: academic dishonesty, honor code, likeliness to report, college
students

PERCEPTIONS ON CHEATING & AN HONOR CODE 48
PA
Perceptions and Prevalence of Academic Dishonesty G
Cheating, across its varied settings, inherently threatens the culture of a given E
community. Defined by Bertram Gallant, Binkin, and Donohue (2015): “copying on 10

assignments or exams; plagiarizing; presenting a false excuse to delay taking a test; having
another take one’s exam; submitting assignments written by another,” constitutes cheating in

an academic environment (p. 217). Given its prevalence in higher education, academic

dishonesty has drawn the attention of many research groups and many institutional
administrations. Further sparked by the pioneering efforts of Rutgers’ professor Donald

McCabe, who found that about 60% of college students in the 1990-1991 school year cheated

on some type of major assessment, there have been many studies conducted on the topic of

academic dishonesty (McCabe, 1992).
Much of the recent literature describes undergraduate students’ motivation to engage in

cheating. In a 2017 study, lack of self-control, college grade level, failing to prepare, and

perception of the cheating environment were some of the influential factors that led students to

cheat (Yu, Glanzer, Sriram, Johnson, & Moore, 2017). Similarly, other authors, such as

Mayhew, Hubbard, Finelli, Harding, and Carpenter (2009), offered that the theory of planned

behavior (which includes markers such as moral obligation and intention, among others) can

act as a useful predictor of future cheating behaviors. Another predictor comes from

perceptions of the student body: When students believe their classmates disapprove of

cheating, misconduct is low, and when they perceive that their classmates actively participate

in cheating, misconduct is high (McCabe & Treviño, 1997). One group further identified

immaturity (age), lack of commitment to studies, and the neutralizing attitude, as reliable

indicators for future misconduct (Haines, Diekhoff, LaBeff, & Clark, 1986). Together, these

PERCEPTIONS ON CHEATING & AN HONOR CODE 49
findings have begun to illuminate just why students are compelled to be academically PA
dishonest, though individual factors are not the sole contributor. G
E
A few studies have also shown that instructors’ policies either seemingly allow or 10

dissuade cheating. In one paper, it was indicated that when consequences given by college

administrators and professors are deemed harsh, fewer incidents of academic dishonesty are

reported (McCabe, 1993). In another, it was highlighted that students who are fearful of their

instructors are less confident that their cheating would go unpunished, and as a result, they

look to peers in order to gauge the level of risk surrounding cheating in the classroom (Spear

& Miller, 2012). Further supporting this finding, the literature shows that while judgments of

professors can clearly be influential in some cheating-related behaviors, students truly utilize

the opinions of other classmates for clarity, and those opinions ultimately dictate whether or

not they should engage in the behavior (Robinson & Glanzer, 2017). These studies help shed

light on the fact that the source of information and the way in which it is presented can

greatly impact the behavior of students.
To curb cheating and instill a sense of integrity /ownership in one’s work, many colleges

have some form of an Honor Code: a document that details both the values of the school and
the infractions that are not to be tolerated. Compared to students at schools without Honor
Codes, those who attend traditional-Honor Code colleges are more likely to find cheating
distasteful and are more likely to report such behaviors (McCabe, Treviño, & Butterfield,
2001; Schwartz, Tatum, & Hageman, 2013). That said, although institutions may have
established Honor Codes, research indicates that its simple presence is not enough to change
academic dishonesty, and instead, regular implementation and enforcement is required in

PERCEPTIONS ON CHEATING & AN HONOR CODE 50

PA

order to be effective (O’Neill & Pfeiffer, 2012; Roig & Marks, 2006). Other studies G

E
demonstrate that an Honor Code’s specific wording is important: Those who are satisfied with10

the phrasing are more committed to upholding its values, and those whose Honor Codes

include more formal writing are less likely to report academic misconduct (Dix, Emery, & Le,

2014; Gurung, Wilhelm, & Filz, 2012), respectively.

Building on the foundation of these previous findings, the researchers sought to

examine cheating in the context of Connecticut College, a small college with a long-standing

Honor Code. It was proposed that those who perceive the Connecticut College academic

environment positively (i.e., they trust the administration, believe in the Honor Code, and

perceive that peers do not tolerate cheating) are less likely to cheat and more likely to report

violations than those who perceive the environment negatively. While the study is rather

specific to cheating-related events at Connecticut College, it nonetheless provides a unique

perspective on academic dishonesty. Not only were peer perceptions and trust in the

administration / the Honor Code correlated with levels of cheating, but also Honor Code
effectiveness was correlated with students’ tendency to report academic infractions.

Method

Research Design
The research design for this study was correlational and examined the relationship

between perceptions of the Connecticut College cheating environment and students’
tendencies to both cheat and report cheating. Every participant received the following
questionnaires: The Connecticut College Academic Dishonesty Scale (Parts 1 and 2), the
Honor Code Effectiveness Scale, and the Likelihood to Report Academic Dishonesty Scale.