This critique focuses on the relationship between donation motivation and type of gender for students in athletics. This paper starts by identifying and indicating how the research article can be found. A summary outlining the major points of the article follows. These major points include: the purpose, sample, procedure, and results of the study. The paper concludes by my evaluation and insight regarding the article. I mention some of the features I found most intriguing in addition to bias I found in the study report.
This unit required a reading that was made up of an article based on a research performed by a doctorate student as part of her dissertation at Temple University. Carole Oglesby, Bonnie Parkhouse, and Michael Sachs assisted Ellen Staurowsky to complete her work. In addition the doctoral committee at Temple University also assisted in the completion of this study. The print form of this article appears on pages 401-416 of volume 10 in 1996’s Journal of Sport Management, titled “Women and athletic fund raising: Exploring the connection between gender and giving.”
The study was performed to examine the systematic relationship between gender and athletic behavior and motivation of donation. An athletic Contributions Questionnaire Revised edition- Il was used. Comparison between motivation profiles and demographic characteristics was done along the variables of the donor’s gender and gender of the recipient. Sample used for the study was gathered from higher education institutions. The criteria for selection involved the administrative model composed of men and women. Three institutions met the inclusion criteria although only two of them agreed to participate in the study. The sample was composed of 400 subjects who were randomly selected using a computerized random selection process. ACQUIRE-II which is the research instrument used to conduct this study has three parts. This instrument recognized many factors that affected the participants’ donation pattern among them being various motivational factors (Staurowsky, 1996).
The procedure that was used to conduct the research involved administration of the ACQUIRE-II by mail to the 400 subjects. Letters which had the questionnaire were exchanged between the researcher and the participants. The response was being received in the support group offices after which the mails were delivered to the investigator. Results of the study were analyzed using the Chi-square, SPSS-X, Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA). The study found out that there was a significant difference between sex, age, level of education, graduation decade, and annual contribution to athletics. This was the results of Chi-square test. This significance difference was also observed after a comparison of the demographic data for males and female donors was done. Multivariate analysis of variance also found significance when comparing athletic support groups. The findings of this study indicate the emergence of preliminary profile athletic donors. The results of this study implies that the representative donors are members of separate women’s and men’s athletic support groups and does not indicate the patterns present among coeducational donor groups. The research opens up the ground for further research as the sample used is youthful and the lower levels of female contribution. The research recommends the practitioners to take some tentative course of action (Staurowsky, 1996).
Failure to participate in this research may be has made me view the participatory role of women in this study as biased. In the donation events that I have participated, more women than men attend meaning that more donations comes from them. This research views women as lesser donors due to their many responsibilities, this is not always the case because there are women who drive donation ceremonies as the main guests and contribute more than their male counter parts. It is unfair to dismiss the alumnae as serious donor constituency with the claim that the female graduates are married into or inherit wealth. This is untrue since many women get employed and support their families and the society at large hence they are potential donors.
This study was gender biased and this could raise eyebrows on the validity of the results. Future studies should re-examine this issue. Women should be valued, their experiences should also be valued, and they should be acknowledged as an economic force. Uniqueness of the administrative model would reduce the size of the sample. Therefore, the study did not achieve saturation of the sample size further because some of the selected participants did not return the questionnaire. The study analyzed the findings using multiple methods which included; Chi-square, MANOVA, and SPSS-X which increase the trustworthiness of the results.