Search results

Gymnasts worldwide have turned to media to speak out about their experiences of abuse in sport. More formally, services to report abuse have been recognised as important; however, we know little about athletes' experiences of the process. Therefore, we consider in this chapter how (former) athletes experience the process of reporting abuse and maltreatment. This chapter begins with a narrative poem that was created using direct quotes from an interview with a former gymnast, Lisa (pseudonym), who described her involvement with her national gymnastics federation's reporting process. We then examine reporting services and discuss the reasons why (former) athletes may not report abuse and maltreatment. As a conceptual framework, we present the pixie model of women's artistic gymnastics (WAG) as the root of the culture of fear, control and silence that prevents gymnasts from reporting their experiences, and discuss factors that enable the reporting of abuse and maltreatment. To illustrate the ways the WAG pixie model shaped Lisa's reporting experience, the poem presented at the outset of this chapter is extended to a narrative about her engagement with reporting processes. The chapter concludes with a call to put abuse and maltreatment on the sports governance agenda, the development of trauma-informed processes and further research on reporting abuse in sport.

Decision-makers often struggle to combine advice with their own intuition. This study examines how advice-giver traits and decision-makers’ intuition influence advice uptake. We present a novel typology based on decision-makers’ trust in advice-givers and their perceived expertise.

This qualitative study uses a sample of publicly available interview data with 51 elite performers. Using inductive and content analysis, we explore the mediation between decision-makers’ intuitive competence (ability to effectively deploy intuition in interface with advice) and their autonomy (self-endorsement from past performance).

We identify four sources of advice: mentor advice, specialist advice, confidant advice and commentator advice. Drawing on instances of different sources of advice along varying degrees of trust and expertise, we propose a framework for interaction between intuitional competence and advice characteristics.

We offer a novel way of contextualising nuanced forms of advice and provide a structured typology of sources, characterised by trust and expertise. This typology and our findings help reconcile contradictions in decision-making research. Finally, we offer practical guidance for the uptake of advice.

COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Considering the restricted and enclosed nature of prisons and closed environments and the prolonged and close contact between individuals, COVID-19 is more likely to have a higher incidence in these settings. This study aims to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 among prisoners.

Papers published in English from 2019 to July 7, 2023, were identified using relevant keywords such as prevalence, COVID-19 and prisoner in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Google Scholar. For the meta-analysis of the prevalence, Cochrane’s Q statistics were calculated. A random effect model was used due to the heterogeneity in COVID-19 prevalence across included studies in the meta-analysis. All analyses were performed in STATA-13.

The pooled data presented a COVID-19 prevalence of 20% [95%CI: 0.13, 0.26] and 24% [95%CI: 0.07, 0.41], respectively, in studies that used PCR and antibody tests. Furthermore, two study designs, cross-sectional and cohort, were used. The results of the meta-analysis showed studies with cross-sectional and cohort designs reported 20% [95%CI: 0.11, 0.29] and 25% [95%CI: 0.13, 0.38], respectively.

Through more meticulous planning, it is feasible to reduce the number of individuals in prison cells, thereby preventing the further spread of COVID-19.

This study aims to investigate factors affecting consumers’ perceptions of brand allyship activities given the presence or absence of corresponding community investment. Using the black American community as a contextual group receiving support, this research probes factors that make brand allyship seem sincere and how brand allyship affects consumer self-esteem. It further examines how perceived sincerity and derived self-esteem affect consumers’ perceived self-brand connections and reported brand attitudes.

Collecting data with experimental surveys, hypothesized effects are tested in a main study (n = 1,184) using a general linear model and moderated mediation analyses.

Perceived sincerity is shown to interact with consumers’ self-esteem to induce an approach/avoidance reaction to a brand, where high self-esteem consumers are more apt to accept sincere brand allyship activities and reject insincere campaigns.

As sincerity is critical to brand allyship success, this research outlines instances where managers need to contextually manipulate sincerity perceptions by outlaying community investment to coincide with the campaign. Specific contexts revolve around racial diversity in the management group and the race of consumers/perceivers.