The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Wrote the paper: ROD DCG DAP. Edited the manuscript: SAH JK EF BW TG. Conceived and designed the experiments study 1: ROD DCG SAH JK. Conceived and designed the experiments study 2: ROD. Conceived and designed the experiments study 3: ROD DAP. Performed the experiments study 1: SAH. Performed the experiments study 2: ROD DAP EF BW TG. Perfomed the experiments study 3: ROD. Analyzed the data study 1: SAH. Analyzed the data study 2 & 3: ROD.
Much evidence indicates that men experienced an evolutionary history of physical competition, both one-on-one and in coalitions. We thus hypothesized that, compared to girls and women, boys and men will possess a greater motivational predisposition to be interested in sports, especially team sports. According to most scholars, advocacy groups, and the United States courts, however, this hypothesis is challenged by modest sex differences in organized school sports participation in the contemporary U.S., where females comprise 42% of high school participants and 43% of intercollegiate participants. We conducted three studies to test whether organized school sports participation data underestimate the actual sex difference in sports participation. Study 1 analyzed the American Time Use Survey, which interviewed 112,000 individuals regarding their activities during one day. Females accounted for 51% of exercise (i.e., non-competitive) participations, 24% of total sports participations, and 20% of team sports participations. These sex differences were similar for older and younger age groups. Study 2 was based on systematic observations of sports and exercise at 41 public parks in four states. Females accounted for 37% of exercise participations, 19% of individual sports participations, and 10% of team sports participations. Study 3 involved surveying colleges and universities about intramural sports, which primarily consist of undergraduate participation in team sports. Across 34 institutions, females accounted for 26% of registrations. Nine institutions provided historical data, and these did not indicate that the sex difference is diminishing. Therefore, although efforts to ensure more equitable access to sports in the U.S. (i.e., Title IX) have produced many benefits, patterns of sports participation do not challenge the hypothesis of a large sex difference in interest and participation in physical competition.
A game can be defined as an organized activity where two or more sides compete according to agreed-upon rules, and a sport can be defined as a game that requires physical skill (see
To the extent that these hypotheses hold, especially the second and third ones, we further hypothesize that, compared to girls and women, boys and men will, on average, have a far greater inborn motivational predisposition to participate in and monitor sports, especially sports involving combat-relevant skills and/or team play. This hypothesis follows from the following points. First, many lines of evidence indicate that throughout human evolutionary history and during contemporary periods, men have been substantially more likely than women to engage in contests involving extreme physical aggression
Second, a history of male-male aggression is revealed by pronounced sexual dimorphism in musculature, strength
Much evidence supports the hypothesis that males are more predisposed to be interested in sports. First, historical reviews of sports document that many societies had substantial female participation, but males are reported as being much more involved in most or all cases
It is important to emphasize that this evolutionary hypothesis is fully compatible with research implicating social influences on sports interest. For example, adolescent females often experience great pressure to eschew sports, especially stereotypically masculine sports
Despite the evidence for a greater male than female predisposition for sports interest, a powerful challenge to this hypothesis has emerged in the form of surging sports participation by girls and women in some contemporary nations. The most striking example is in the United States, where female participation in organized sports has grown steadily over the past four decades. For instance, in 1972 females comprised 7% of high school athletes, whereas in 2010, they comprised 42%
Most scholars, advocacy groups, and the U.S. courts have interpreted the substantial participation gains as indicating that females’ sports interest is intrinsically equal to that of males and that opportunities following in the wake of Title IX merely allowed females to express their interest. This “If you build it, they will come” logic is the bedrock of current Title IX interpretation and execution
“MYTH: Girls are not as interested as boys in playing sports. FACT: The dramatic increase in girls’ and women’s participation in sport since Title IX was passed in 1972 (by 545% at the college level and 979% in high schools) demonstrates that it was lack of opportunity – not lack of interest – that kept females out of high school and college athletics for so many years.”
The surge in female sports participation in the U.S. is certainly remarkable. Nevertheless, equal or nearly equal participation in organized school sports does not necessarily equate with equal or nearly equal interest in sports. One reason is that, on average, a participating male, compared to a participating female, may have a stronger interest in or valuation of sports or may have a stronger desire to be a sports spectator. Self-report studies conducted in the U.S. consistently support these suggestions, both for interests
Here we tested whether, as our evolutionary hypothesis predicts, the modest sex difference in organized school sports participation in the U.S. substantially underestimates the sex difference in sports participation of all kinds (i.e., organized and unorganized; school affiliated and unaffiliated). By contrast, our evolutionary hypothesis predicts no reliable sex difference in non-competitive physical activity, which is hereafter called “exercise.” To test these predictions, we conducted three studies: Study 1 was based on time-use surveys; Study 2 was based on observations at public parks; Study 3 was based on intramural registrations at colleges and universities.
These studies also allowed us to test additional predictions of the evolved male predispositions hypothesis. One is that the sex difference in participation will be larger for team than individual sports. This prediction follows because team sports require both motivation to engage in physical competition and motivation to engage in cooperative group challenges. Both kinds of motivation are greater in males
Another prediction of the evolved male predispositions hypothesis is that the sex difference will remain stable over time. The logic here is that once genuine opportunities were consistently provided for organized female sports, usually by the 1980s or 1990s, female participation would have been limited by female interest. Female interest, in turn, would be determined by the interaction between innate predispositions (e.g., due to prenatal androgen exposure) and social influences that would be have been persistently relevant during human evolution history, such as peer interest and approval
We tested the prediction of historical stability in two ways. In Study 1, we addressed it indirectly, by comparing younger and older age groups, under the assumption that the sex difference in sports interest in a given cohort will remain stable. We addressed this prediction more directly in Study 3, by examining changes in undergraduate intramural registrations in the 2000s.
Study 1 analyzed data from the American Time Use Survey (ATUS). The ATUS is a large, representative sample of all U.S. residents 15 years and older that was conducted continuously from 2003–2010 and included responses from 112,000 individuals
Activity | Male | Female | % Female |
||
% | CI | % | CI | ||
|
|||||
Baseball | 0.27 | (0.19, 0.35) | NA | NA | NA |
Basketball | 1.33 | (1.16, 1.49) | 0.18 | (0.12, 0.23) | 12.5 |
Hockey | 0.07 | (0.04, 0.10) | NA | NA | NA |
Football | 0.48 | (0.38, 0.57) | NA | NA | NA |
Soccer | 0.37 | (0.29, 0.45) | 0.12 | (0.08, 0.16) | 25.1 |
Softball |
0.15 | (0.10, 0.20) | 0.14 | (0.10, 0.18) | 49.8 |
Volleyball |
0.14 | (0.09, 0.19) | 0.17 | (0.12, 0.21) | 55.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Bowling | 0.32 | (0.24, 0.39) | 0.25 | (0.20, 0.30) | 45.5 |
Golf | 1.08 | (0.96, 1.20) | 0.23 | (0.18, 0.28) | 18.4 |
Gymnastics |
NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
Racquet sports | 0.37 | (0.29, 0.44) | 0.19 | (0.15, 0.24) | 36.1 |
Wrestling | 0.05 | (0.02, 0.08) | NA | NA | NA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Aerobics | 0.15 | (0.11, 0.18) | 0.60 | (0.52, 0.68) | 81.4 |
Biking | 0.71 | (0.62, 0.81) | 0.32 | (0.26, 0.38) | 32.6 |
Dancing | 0.22 | (0.17, 0.27) | 0.30 | (0.24, 0.36) | 59.0 |
Hiking |
0.15 | (0.11, 0.19) | 0.13 | (0.09, 0.16) | 46.7 |
Rollerblading | 0.13 | (0.08, 0.17) | 0.05 | (0.03, 0.08) | 31.5 |
Running | 1.47 | (1.33, 1.61) | 1.01 | (0.90, 1.13) | 42.4 |
Cardio | 1.86 | (1.69, 2.02) | 2.13 | (1.96, 2.30) | 55.0 |
Walking | 4.56 | (4.31, 4.80) | 5.34 | (5.09, 5.58) | 55.6 |
Water sports |
1.36 | (1.23, 1.49) | 1.40 | (1.28, 1.52) | 52.4 |
Weightlifting/strength training | 2.71 | (2.51, 2.92) | 1.24 | (1.11, 1.36) | 32.7 |
Working out, unspecified | 3.12 | (2.90, 3.34) | 2.77 | (2.59, 2.96) | 48.7 |
Yoga | 0.11 | (0.07, 0.16) | 0.40 | (0.33, 0.47) | 79.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CI = 95% confidence interval. p<.05 for difference between males and females except where indicated. NA = not applicable because (standard error/%) exceeds 0.30.
The exercise “caving, spelunking and climbing” is all NA (not shown).
No significant difference between males and females.
Estimates of % females do not correspond perfectly with male and female participation rates because there are more females than males in the population, especially in older age groups.
Sports and exercise participation rates varied with age (
Age Group | Team Sports | Individual Sports | Total Sports | Exercise | |
% | % | % | % | ||
Male | 17.0 | 2.57 | 19.4 | 15.8 | |
15–19 | Female | 4.89 | 1.34 | 6.13 | 12.5 |
% Female |
21.8 | 33.5 | 23.4 | 43.3 | |
Male | 5.02 | 2.49 | 7.31 | 14.2 | |
20–24 | Female | NA | NA | 1.53 | 10.3 |
% Female | NA | NA | 17.2 | 41.8 | |
Male | 1.98 | 1.29 | 3.27 | 13.2 | |
25–29 | Female | 0.60 | NA | 1.01 | 12.6 |
% Female | 23.0 | NA | 23.5 | 48.9 |
|
Male | 1.46 | 1.26 | 2.71 | 12.1 | |
30–39 | Female | 0.29 | 0.51 | 0.80 | 13.4 |
% Female | 17.1 | 29.4 | 23.3 | 53.1 | |
Male | 0.75 | 1.38 | 2.12 | 11.9 | |
40–49 | Female | 0.18 | 0.58 | 0.76 | 14.3 |
% Female | 19.5 | 30.5 | 27.1 | 55.5 | |
Male | 0.25 | 1.63 | 1.88 | 13.9 | |
50–59 | Female | NA | 0.63 | 0.69 | 13.8 |
% Female | NA | 29.0 | 27.9 | 51.2 |
|
Male | NA | 2.49 | 2.68 | 16.3 | |
60–74 | Female | NA | 0.94 | 0.95 | 14.2 |
% Female | NA | 30.1 | 28.7 | 49.8 |
|
Male | NA | 2.23 | 2.23 | 18.3 | |
75+ | Female | NA | NA | NA | 14.4 |
% Female | NA | NA | NA | 55.0 |
p<.05 for difference between males and females except where indicated.
NA = not applicable because (standard error/%) exceeds 0.30.
No significant difference between males and females.
Estimates of % females do not correspond perfectly with male and female participation rates because there are more females than males in the population, especially in older age groups.
A potential concern with measuring participation based on rates playing per day is that females might participate on fewer days but for longer durations. There were in fact significant sex differences in participation duration, but it was males, not females, who participated for longer durations. The sex difference in duration was 15% for team sports, 24% for individual sports, and 12% for exercise; these differences were significant (
Sex | Team Sports |
Individual Sports |
Total Sports |
Exercise |
Min/d | Min/d | Min/d | Min/d | |
Male | 116.0 (75.2) | 169.4 (96.5) | 140.0 (89.4) | 63.8 (52.4) |
Female | 101.3 (67.5) | 136.4 (74.9) | 122.2 (74.0) | 56.8 (46.9) |
Values indicate means and (standard deviations).
p = .001;
p<.0001.
Our predictions did not address educational achievement or race and ethnicity. Nevertheless, we explored whether these factors might have affected sports and exercise participation. Multivariate logistic regression indicated that non-whites, compared to Whites, participated more in team sports but less in individual sports; in addition, those who did not complete high school, compared to those graduated high school and those who obtained education beyond high school, participated more in team sports but less in individual sports (
Study 2 was based on systematic observations of unorganized sports and exercise participation at public parks in four U.S. locations: Grand Rapids, Michigan; State College, Pennsylvania; Tallahassee, Florida, and New Paltz, New York. Observations occurred in Summer and Fall 2011 and Spring 2012.
We documented a total of 2,879 sports and exercise participations (
Activity | Male | Female | % Female |
|
|||
Baseball | 95 | 11 | 10.4 |
Basketball | 685 | 51 | 6.9 |
Football | 267 | 13 | 4.6 |
Soccer | 445 | 56 | 11.2 |
Softball | 64 | 16 | 20.0 |
Ultimate frisbee | 116 | 31 | 21.1 |
Others | 88 | 23 | 20.7 |
|
1760 | 201 | 10.2 |
|
|||
Disc golf | 127 | 2 | 1.6 |
Tennis | 351 | 86 | 19.7 |
Others | 3 | 22 | 88.0 |
|
481 | 110 | 18.6 |
|
2241 | 311 | 12.2 |
|
|||
Biking | 23 | 21 | 47.7 |
Running | 34 | 36 | 51.4 |
Skateboarding | 63 | 2 | 3.1 |
Walking | 62 | 56 | 47.5 |
Other | 24 | 6 | 20.0 |
|
206 | 121 | 37.0 |
|
2447 | 432 | 15.0 |
p<.01 for difference between males and females except where indicated.
No significant difference between males and females.
Participations may not reflect independent decisions to participate because people may plan to meet at a park or an individual might become more likely to participate after observing others doing so. Thus, a key question is whether the sex difference in sports will remain strong if we examine the number of groups or parties, rather than individuals. For individual sports, there were 216 parties, and 7% were female only, 2% were female biased (more females than males), 16% were unbiased, 5% were male biased, and 70% were male only. For team sports, there were 389 parties, and 3% were female only, 2% were female biased, 5% were unbiased, 15% were male biased, and 74% were male only. Thus, a large majority of sports parties were comprised of more males than females, both for individual sports (75%; binomial test, p<.0001) and team sports (89%; p<.0001).
A related issue is the extent to which the sex difference might be due to males being more comfortable playing in larger groups (see
Observations were made by seven researchers at 41 parks, allowing an examination of the consistency of sex differences across locations and researchers. Some parks clearly fostered particular activities. Most notably, 85% of skateboarding participations occurred in one park, and 89% of disc golf participations in another park. Nonetheless, many sports, especially the popular team sports of soccer and basketball, occurred in many parks, and the sex difference generally occurred reliably. Most crucially, all seven researchers documented at least 108 team sports participations, and all found a large, significant sex difference (
State | Researcher | # Parks | Exercise | Individual Sports | Team Sports | ||||||
Male | Female | % Female | Male | Female | % Female | Male | Female | % Female | |||
MI | ROD | 9 | 34 | 20 | 37.0 |
81 | 17 | 17.3 | 559 | 43 | 7.1 |
MI | EF | 12 | 31 | 15 | 32.6 |
12 | 19 | 61.3 |
450 | 43 | 8.7 |
MI | DB | 4 | 65 | 2 | 3.0 | 18 | 1 | 5.3 | 94 | 14 | 13.0 |
PA | JK | 7 | 2 | 1 | 33.3 |
82 | 4 | 4.7 | 204 | 26 | 11.3 |
PA | CM | 6 | 54 | 68 | 55.7 |
92 | 29 | 24.0 | 192 | 31 | 13.9 |
FL | BW | 3 | 0 | 0 | NA | 191 | 39 | 17.0 | 145 | 28 | 16.2 |
NY | TG | 1 | 20 | 15 | 42.9 |
5 | 1 | 16.7 |
116 | 16 | 12.1 |
p<.01 for difference between males and females except where indicated.
No significant difference between males and females.
Researchers could only broadly estimate participants’ ages. Nonetheless, these estimates indicated that the sex differences (
Age (yrs) | Exercise | Individual Sports | Team Sports | ||||||
Male | Female | % Female | Male | Female | % Female | Male | Female | % Female | |
0–12 | 41 | 15 | 26.8 | 26 | 30 | 53.6 |
305 | 35 | 10.3 |
13–19 | 84 | 23 | 21.5 | 113 | 40 | 26.1 | 575 | 61 | 9.6 |
20–49 | 66 | 58 | 46.8 |
315 | 36 | 10.3 | 851 | 81 | 8.7 |
50+ | 15 | 25 | 62.5 |
27 | 4 | 12.9 | 29 | 24 | 45.3 |
p<.01 for difference between males and females except where indicated.
No significant difference between males and females.
Study 3 involved surveys of intramural sports registrations at colleges and universities in the U.S. An intramural sport is generally played by an undergraduate, usually between 18 and 24 years of age, who does not play the sport at the intercollegiate varsity level. There are generally no extrinsic incentives (e.g., substantial prizes or publicity) for intramurals, so they should provide a reliable indicator of intrinsic motivation to participate. Most intramural registrations entail playing a series of games (e.g., a six game season occurring over an academic semester). Data were from 2010 and 2011.
Thirty-four institutions provided information (see
Institution | Undergrads | % Female Undergrads | IM Registrations | % Female IM Registrations |
Alabama | 24882 | 52 | 10903 | 19 |
Arkansas St. | 10051 | 58 | 3577 | 24 |
Arkansas Tech | 9138 | 52 | 2787 | 33 |
Bloomsburg (PA) | 9136 | 57 | 4544 | 34 |
Boise St. (ID) | 17349 | 54 | 2635 | 28 |
Boston College (MA) | 9895 | 52 | 8879 | 20 |
California University (PA) | 7419 | 52 | 1802 | 21 |
Central Missouri | 9168 | 54 | 4868 | 35 |
Central Washington | 11052 | 50 | 3119 | 25 |
Cincinnati (OH) | 22449 | 51 | 5193 | 25 |
Connecticut | 17345 | 49 | 13903 | 30 |
Duke (NC) | 6697 | 49 | 6734 | 20 |
Eastern Michigan | 18554 | 57 | 1594 | 29 |
Emporia St. (KS) | 4066 | 61 | 1177 | 31 |
Fort Lewis (CO) | 3853 | 49 | 1489 | 42 |
Grand Valley St. (MI) | 20986 | 58 | 7190 | 31 |
Lenoir-Ryne (NC) | 1570 | 62 | 247 | 13 |
Minn. St. Moorhead | 6997 | 57 | 790 | 32 |
Nebraska-Kearney | 5162 | 53 | 4865 | 38 |
Northwestern (IL) | 9535 | 52 | 10106 | 23 |
Ohio Univ. | 20994 | 57 | 6961 | 28 |
Oregon St. | 19557 | 47 | 11429 | 28 |
Pittsburg St. (KS) | 5891 | 46 | 3003 | 24 |
Shippensburg (PA) | 7143 | 52 | 2041 | 30 |
SMU (TX) | 61938 | 53 | 4792 | 25 |
Stanford (CA) | 6940 | 49 | 6319 | 18 |
Stonehill (MA) | 2582 | 62 | 1988 | 37 |
Texas A&M | 39148 | 47 | 23121 | 24 |
Texas Tech | 25462 | 45 | 14210 | 26 |
Toledo (OH) | 18130 | 50 | 15673 | 23 |
UAB (AL) | 11028 | 58 | 4972 | 28 |
UNLV (NV) | 22534 | 55 | 4546 | 28 |
Washington St. | 21816 | 52 | 13358 | 28 |
Wingate (NC) | 1622 | 54 | 1056 | 26 |
p<.0001 for difference between males and females at all institutions.
Twenty-seven institutions provided information regarding registrations for specific sports (
Institution | Team | Individual | Football | Soccer | Basketball | Softball | Volleyball |
Alabama | 19 | 18 | 16 | 20 | 15 | 26 | 55 |
Arkansas St. | 22 | 37 |
25 | 15 | 23 | 26 | 27 |
Arkansas Tech | 34 | 24 | 22 | 47 |
33 | 36 | 49 |
Bloomsburg (PA) | 34 | NA | 0 | 30 | 22 | 50 |
51 |
Boise St. (ID) | 26 | 19 | 6 | 38 | 18 | 33 | 52 |
Boston College (MA) | 20 | 29 | 4 | 24 | 14 | 23 | 48 |
Central Missouri | 35 | 31 | 25 | 34 | 27 | 28 | 60 |
Cincinnati (OH) | 25 | 20 | 17 | 28 | 17 | 27 | 48 |
Connecticut | 30 | 33 | 26 | 34 | 22 | 20 | 42 |
Eastern Michigan | 28 | 44 |
19 | 35 | 15 | NA | 52 |
Emporia St. (KS) | 31 | 38 |
20 | 33 | 21 | 38 | 49 |
Grand Valley St. (MI) | 30 | 42 | 15 | 34 | 20 | 32 | 53 |
Lenoir-Ryne (NC) | 13 | NA | 0 | 19 | 20 | 8 | NA |
Minn. St. Moorhead | 32 | 33 |
6 | 15 | 27 | NA | 56 |
Nebraska-Kearney | 39 | 22 | 30 | 28 | 32 | 49 |
58 |
Northwestern (IL) | 23 | NA | 18 | 23 | 15 | 21 | 30 |
Ohio Univ. | 28 | 28 | 17 | 30 | 21 | 27 | 52 |
Oregon St. | 27 | 34 | 16 | 33 | 21 | 31 | 50 |
SMU (TX) | 25 | 38 |
28 | 26 | 14 | 17 | 38 |
Stanford (CA) | 17 | 26 | 11 | 14 | 9 | 16 | 31 |
Stonehill (MA) | 37 | 43 |
0 | 49 |
22 | 25 | 59 |
Texas A&M | 24 | 21 | 15 | 30 | 14 | 18 | 53 |
Texas Tech | 26 | NA | 13 | 23 | 23 | 26 | 38 |
UAB (AL) | 27 | 36 | 27 | 21 | 23 | 27 | 57 |
UNLV (NV) | 29 | 8 | 29 | 33 | 21 | 35 | 39 |
Washington St. | 27 | 51 |
17 | 32 | 18 | 27 | 58 |
Wingate (NC) | 27 | 13 | 27 | 33 | 19 | NA | 37 |
p<.01 for difference between males and females except where indicated.
No significant difference between males and females.
The most popular team sports were football (20% of all specific registrations), soccer (20%), basketball (19%), softball (16%), and volleyball (13%). Females did not account for the majority of registrations in any of these popular sports, although they came close in volleyball (football: 16%; soccer: 29%; basketball: 20%; softball: 27%; volleyball: 48%). These patterns were fairly consistent across institutions, with males being a significant majority of registrants at most institutions for all popular sports, with the exception of volleyball (
An interesting question is whether female sports participation is depressed due to the presence of male competitors. Intramural data are useful for addressing this because, at most institutions, team sports mainly involve single-sex competition (M = 71% of teams were single-sex rather than co-ed; SD = 5.5%; n = 10 institutions). Eight institutions provided data on single-sex registration for popular sports. In this context, females comprised a modest percentage of participants (football: 20% of single-sex registrations by females; soccer: 24%; basketball: 20%; softball: 15%; volleyball: 45%).
Intramural registrations generally involve playing in a series of games over a semester. It is therefore possible that registration might underestimate relative female participation because, for any given registration, females might participate more frequently. Five institutions provided information on participations per registration separately for males and females. In all five cases, however, males participated at greater rates (University of Toledo: 11% greater male participation per registration; University of Nevada, Las Vegas: 17%; Boise State University: 22%; Fort Lewis College: 44%; Southern Methodist University: 98%). In fact, if the median difference in participation rate (i.e., 22%) is extrapolated to all 34 institutions in
Another concern is that perhaps there are more males than females at the institutions in our sample, and this might be partly responsible for the large sex difference. However, across all institutions, females comprised 52% of undergraduates, and there were more female than male undergraduates at 24 of 34 institutions (
A crucial question is whether the sex difference in sports participation is decreasing historically. We were able to address this question because nine institutions provided at least five years of intramural data, some on total male and female participations and others on unique male and female participations (i.e., each individual counts once regardless of how many sports they play over the entire academic year). As shown in
Institution | Years | All years | Final year | Correlation |
Arkansas St. | 2004–2010 | 24.0 | 24.3 | 0.37 |
Arkansas Tech | 2001–2005 | 30.2 | 29.6 | −0.71 |
Boise St.(ID) | 1997–2010 | 29.4 | 27.8 | −0.07 |
Connecticut | 2006–2010 | 28.9 | 30.3 | 0.67 |
Grand Valley St.(MI) | 2004–2010 | 37.4 | 36.2 | −0.48 |
Minnesota St. Moorehead | 2001, 2003–2008, 2010 | 36.7 | 33.9 | −0.46 |
Northwestern (IL) | 2006–2010 | 23.7 | 22.7 | −0.42 |
Stonehill (MA) | 2006–2010 | 37.6 | 37.3 | 0.39 |
Texas Tech | 2002–2010 | 26.2 | 25.1 | 0.50 |
No correlation reached statistical significance, p<.05.
On the basis of an evolutionary history of one-on-one and coalitional competition among males, we hypothesized that men and boys possess an evolved predisposition to be interested in competitive physical activities, including sports. That males have apparently participated and monitored sports more often than females in most or all societies supports this hypothesis, but surging female participation in organized school sports in the contemporary U.S. challenges it. The three studies reported here, however, demonstrate that organized school sports participation substantially underestimates the sex difference. Specifically, females comprise approximately 42% of high school athletes and 43% of collegiate athletes, but they comprise only 24% of those who report playing sports on a given day (Study 1), 12% of those playing sports in public parks (Study 2), and 26% of those who register for collegiate intramural sports (Study 3). Even these percentages somewhat underestimate the sex difference because males play for longer durations (Study 1) and play more frequently per intramural registration (Study 3).
In addition, as predicted from our evolutionary framework, the sex difference in sports participation was greater for team than individual sports. This result was clear in Study 1 and Study 2. Study 3 also found a greater sex difference for team than for individual sports, although the difference was not consistent across institutions, perhaps owing to the fact that intramurals at most institutions rarely involve individual sports.
In contrast to both individual and team sports, the sex difference in exercise was unreliable (Study 1) or modest (Study 2). The exercise results indicate that both males and females are motivated to be physically active, but that males are generally more interested in pursuing this in a competitive way (see
Although our findings contradict the popular claim that there is no substantial sex difference in sports interest
Also paralleling the present study, when studies report non-competitive physical activity or exercise, they indicate minimal sex differences
Each of our three studies has potential limitations, yet none seriously challenge our conclusions. One possible limitation of Study 1 is that self-reports of physical activity typically show only low to moderate criterion validity, especially when based on retrospective queries
Another limitation of Study 1 is that, because there were no ATUS codes for them, we could not include the high school sports of water polo, lacrosse, swimming and diving, or competitive cheerleading
Study 2 was potentially limited by the fact it was based on convenience sampling, meaning that is possible that other, more representative public parks would not show a pronounced sex difference in sports participation. For several reasons, though, this possibility seems highly unlikely. First, we know of no bias in our sample, and all seven researchers independently documented a large sex difference in team sports participation. Indeed, we are unaware of any credible report of an area in the U.S. where females consistently play sports in public areas at rates similar to males. Second, Study 1 was based on a nationally representative sample, and it indicated the sex difference occurred for all educational and ethnic groups. Similarly, Study 3 found the sex difference across a broad sample of colleges and universities.
Study 3 might be viewed as limited because it focused on intramural sports, which are played mainly by undergraduates in their late teens and early 20s. In fact, this was an ideal sample for rigorously testing our main prediction. As revealed in Study 1, most sports, especially team sports, are played by those 24 years and younger. In addition, because participation rates in organized school sports are roughly 18 times greater in high school than in college
The evolved male predispositions hypothesis assumes that the large sex difference in sports participation reflects a large sex difference in sports interest. Is this assumption valid? It is a truism that many individuals with a strong interest in sports (or other activities) might not participate owing to lack of time, access to facilities, or other constraints. Although constraints on females’ sports participation must be greater than the constraints on males in some cases, for at least three reasons, this seems inadequate as a general explanation for females’ lower participation.
First, although females, especially girls, may have less time for sports and leisure in most societies
Second, that females do not play sports as much as males because they lack facilities or opportunities also seems unlikely, at least as a general explanation. This is illustrated by soccer and basketball, the two most frequently played team sports in the U.S. These sports require minimal equipment and facilities, and on school teams, female participation is almost as high as male participation
The present findings, together with questionnaire studies, demonstrate that there is a substantial sex difference in sports interest even in the contemporary U.S., a society where there is consensus that great progress has been made in equalizing organized school sports opportunities
Although the time depth was limited, Study 3′s analysis of temporal changes in intramural participation at nine institutions does not support the claim of convergence. Similarly, Study 1 compared older and younger groups with the ATUS and found no indication that younger women, who grew up with Title IX being better enforced, participate at relatively greater rates. Testing for changes over time with the ATUS would also be valuable, but we could not do so here because preliminary analyses indicated that, because of modest sample sizes, yearly sports participation estimates were highly unstable.
Another set of studies addressed historical convergence in a less direct fashion, focusing on sex differences in willingness to train competitively in distance running. Deaner
We hope that other measures of sports participation and interest can be identified that will allow assessments of temporal change. Similarly, it should be possible to revisit this issue in the future, after Title IX has had another generation or two to take effect. Nonetheless, for now, the hypothesis that the sex difference in sports interest is in the process of converging must be viewed as lacking empirical support.
Another argument that might be raised in defense of the “no intrinsic differences” view is that the changes produced by Title IX–changes focused on opportunities and incentives in organized school sports–are insufficient to catalyze female sports interest. For example, compared to boys, girls may still receive less childhood sports encouragement
Similarly, the fact that there are far fewer women than men who earn their livelihoods playing sports can be viewed as an effect, rather than a cause, of lesser female sports interest. For example, the premier men’s basketball league in the U.S., the National Basketball Association (NBA), has sponsored a women’s professional league (WNBA) since 1997, and the attendance and viewership is a small fraction of the NBA’s and has not grown
Finally, in considering the argument that Title IX might not be sufficient to substantially spur female sports interest, it is worth noting that this argument contradicts the claims of many scholars and the U.S. courts. The courts, in particular, have been clear that one of Title IX’s main purposes is to produce equal sports opportunities in schools and that doing this will, by itself, be sufficient to eventually produce equal sports interest
Our findings support the hypothesis of an evolved male predisposition for physical competition–one that manifests in contemporary societies as greater participation of males in sports. Two points about this hypothesis must be stressed, however. First, as noted in the
Our final point is that a greater male predisposition for sports interest does not contradict most arguments made by Title IX proponents. Most notably, it is indisputable that, prior to Title IX, girls and women in the U.S. generally had vastly inferior sports resources and opportunities than boys and men, that sports and exercise can provide substantial benefits for girls and women, that strong moral arguments exist for ensuring that males and females enjoy equal sporting opportunities, and that Title IX has had many positive effects. Nevertheless, our results do suggest that it may be a mistake to base Title IX implementation on the assumption that males and females have, or soon will have, generally equal sports interest.
The American Time Use Survey (ATUS) is a survey of the use of time among the civilian, non-institutionalized population aged 15 years and older conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the U.S Census Bureau
Annual sample sizes ranged from 12,248 in 2007 to 20,720 in 2003, though after 2003 the target was 13,000 completed interviews
We focused on sports with moderate to high participation rates in U.S. high schools. These were defined as sports that were played by more than 20,000 total girls and boys in 2009
Unfortunately, the ATUS lexicon did not correspond with the high school sports in several ways. First, there were no ATUS codes for swimming and diving, water polo, lacrosse, or competitive cheerleading
We defined exercise activities as ones apparently undertaken primarily for physical fitness rather than competition. We selected these based on their availability in the ATUS lexicon
We classified sports as individual sports or team sports. We classified bowling, golf, gymnastics, racquet sports, and wrestling as individual sports despite the fact that these sports can involve team competition (and generally do in U.S. high schools). We did so because an individual’s performance in these sports depends almost on entirely on their own efforts, rather than coordinated efforts with their teammates, a point revealed by the fact that these sports invariably include individual championships. By contrast, in “genuine” team sports, individuals may garner awards (e.g., “all star”), but there are no individual championships. We classified baseball, basketball, hockey, football, soccer, softball, and volleyball as team sports.
ATUS respondents were classified as having (or not having) participated in an activity on the recalled day for each of the 25 identified activities, for each of the three groups of activities (i.e., team sports, individual sports, and exercise), and for either individual or team sports. In addition, among those who participated in an activity group, we obtained their total minutes of participation.
We used tests of equality of proportions to assess the statistical significance of sex differences. We used multivariate logistic regressions to assess the effects of demographic characteristics on participation in team and individual sports. All analyses were weighted and, for the prevalence estimates, confidence intervals were computed from estimates of total variance according to methods used for the Current Population Survey
This study [243297-1] was approved as “exempt” by Grand Valley State’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) on June 6, 2011.
Each researcher was instructed to initially identify public parks where unorganized sports were often played. Each park was required to have at least one of the following: basketball court, tennis court, grass field or turf field. Parks might include other facilities such as a running track, handball courts, horseshoe pit, disc golf course, or skateboarding ramp. Researchers were instructed to avoid parks with pools, lakes, or other areas allowing aquatic sports. Because this study focused on sports, not exercise, researchers were also instructed to avoid trails where people walk, run, bike, or rollerblade. Parks often included distinctive areas for potential sports play (e.g., basketball court, softball diamond); these areas were considered part of the same park so as long as the researcher could visually monitor all areas simultaneously and there was no street dividing the areas. Parks could include the grounds of public schools so long as the schools were not in session. University gyms, sports clubs, and other non-public areas were not included.
Parks were selected based on the apparent occurrence of sports and researchers’ convenience in visiting them, which usually meant they were in the same geographical area. Each researcher was asked to identify a “circuit” of five to twelve parks, although sometimes circuits were smaller due to a researcher’s transportation limitations or because there were few local parks. Researchers’ circuits generally did not include common parks, although EF made twelve observations (45 participations) at one of ROD’s main parks (194 participations). Once researchers began observations, they did not add parks to their circuits, although they stopped visiting parks where they repeatedly observed no sports. The locations of the park circuits were fairly diverse: in Grand Rapids, Michigan, two circuits (RD’s, EF’s) occurred within the city, whereas another occurred in suburban towns west of the city (DB’s); in State College, Pennsylvania, a college town, the two circuits occurred within the city; in New Paltz, New York, a small college town, the circuit consisted of the single suitable public park; in Tallahassee, Florida, the circuit occurred within the city. Observers were aware of the sex difference hypothesis with the exception of the two observers in Pennsylvania who neither knew nor suspected that this study was focused on sex differences.
At times when sports participation seemed likely, such as early evenings or weekends when the weather was good, researchers would deliberately visit all parks in their circuit. To avoid bias, researchers did not make observations opportunistically, such as upon noticing sports being played when they were driving by a park. Researchers often completed their circuit several times per week but not more than once per day. No attempt was made to avoid repeated observation of the same individuals on different days. This could not be done reliably. Furthermore, participation frequency is actually a good measure for addressing the hypotheses of interest.
Upon arrival at a park, the researcher would document all instances of exercise or sports that were currently occurring (i.e., instantaneous time sampling
We classified activities as sports or exercise based on Study 1. Because of their similarities with other sports and because they met our definition, the following activities were also classified as sports: ultimate frisbee (147 total participations), disc golf (129), muggle quidditch (24), horseshoes (22), lacrosse (19), wiffleball (17), and kickball (8). The following were also classified as exercise: skateboarding (65), hackeysack (12), riding scooters (6), non-combative martial arts (4), and hula-hooping (1). We classified sports as individual sports or team sports based on Study 1.
Some instances of sport participation involved practice rather than competition. Examples include playing catch with a baseball or football, practicing shooting in basketball or soccer, or hitting a tennis ball against a backboard. We classified this kind of activity as sports participation, on the assumption that it is generally undertaken to improve one’s ability to compete in a sport.
We classified instances of sports participation as organized or unorganized. We defined organized sports as those that are directed by individuals besides the participants. Examples include high school sports, collegiate sports, club sports, intramural sports, recreational leagues, and training sessions organized by coaches. Researchers did not interact with participants and so did not ask sports participants if there was an organizing body or agent directing their play. Instead, researchers categorized participation as organized if they saw evidence of any of the following: uniforms, referees, judges, coaches, or formal leadership (e.g., team captains directing practice). We did not present data on organized participation in the
The data collection protocol was designed to promote reliability. ROD and EF tested this by simultaneously and independently collecting data on two evenings. Reliability was high for sex (Cohen’s κ = .99; n = 169), age group (κ = .95; n = 169), party exercise/activity classification (κ = .90; n = 22), and party organized/unorganized sport classification (κ = .90; n = 22).
This study involved surveying intramural organizers/administrators at colleges and universities. They voluntarily reported institutional data about demographic patterns of participation at their institution. They provided no data regarding individuals, meaning that this study did not technically include “human subjects” and thus did not require IRB approval.
We requested data from institutions that play football in the NCAA Division I (D1) Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) or in NCAA Division 2 (D2). We searched the website of each institution for an individual who was identified the primary intramural organizer. We identified such an individual at 74 of 120 D1 institutions and 73 of 151 D2 institutions. We then contacted these individuals by email; for D1 institutions, we did this in late October and early November 2011; for D2 institutions we did this in March 2012. We explained that we were conducting a study of intramural sports participation to assess which sports are most popular for men and women in different regions of the United States. We asked which sports were offered as intramurals at their institution, how many men and women registered or participated in each sport and in all sports combined, and whether each sport was offered as co-ed, single sex, or both. We requested data regarding the past year and any previous years. If we received no response, we sent one additional request about one week later.
Of the 74 D1 institutions, 36 responded but several did not provide useful data (e.g., they did not distinguish male and female registration); 19 provided data on overall sex differences in registration of all kinds, single sex and co-ed together (
Our primary measure of participation was registration, and one individual could register for several sports each year. If we had focused on unique participants, the sex difference would have been substantially smaller. However, total participations was the appropriate measure for the current study, which aimed to measure participation frequency, not simply its occurrence. Although institutions provided us with the absolute number of male and female registrants, we focused on the percentage of registrants that were female, rather than assessing what factors explained absolute variation in male or female registration across institutions. It was inappropriate to make direct registration comparisons across institutions because they varied widely in their menu of sports offered, duration of playing season, participation fees, and other factors.
Some institutions provided only total male and female registrations but, in most cases, they provided information for each sport, sometimes more than 30 in total. Whenever information was available for each sport, we retained it so that we could assess the popularity of particular sports (see
Historical analyses were based only on institutions that provided at least five years of data. Furthermore, we required that the data be based on similar methods of data collection and a similar menu of intramural options. In particular, at one institution, the number of intramural registrations doubled from one year to the next, suggesting that yearly comparisons would be unwarranted. Some institutions provided yearly data summaries that were not strictly comparable to ones shown in
(DOCX)
(DOCX)
For assistance with data collection, we thank Coralie McEachron, Jeffrey Krystek, and Dustin Baker. For commenting on previous versions of this paper, we thank Garry Chick, Mike Lombardo, and two anonymous reviewers.