“Never having the right to make a mistake, I think that’s the hardest part of being an official”: Exploring young sport officials’ experiences of abuse and their related coping mechanisms

Abstract

Although officials form an integral part of the sporting world, they are likely to experience abuse during their involvement. Research on abuse toward sport officials has primarily been conducted with adults and elite-level officials. Very little is known about young officials whose experiences may be different yet crucial in developing preventative measures tailored to their specific needs and context. Our goal was to document experiences of abuse by young officials aged between 14 and 20 years old. A total of 27 participants completed interviews on the nature of the abuse they experienced, the resulting consequences, and how they coped with those experiences. The findings from the thematic analysis highlighted descriptions of frequent abuse, of lower intensity, and of a psychological nature such as being yelled at or insulted. Participants described using both short-term coping strategies during the event of abuse, such as giving a warning, as well as long-term strategies to make sense of their experience, such as rationalization. Our study adds to the current literature by underlining similarities of young officials’ experiences with those of adults, such as type and frequency of abuse, while also identifying relevant distinctions in terms of perceived organizational support and consequences. In sum, our results suggest that abuse toward officials is deeply ingrained in the sport context and not only at the professional level. This reinforces the need for increased recognition of young officials’ reality within a broader cultural shift delegitimizing abuse in all forms toward officials of all ages and levels.

Lay summary: We interviewed 27 young sport officials, aged between 14 and 20 years old, to document their experience of abuse. The results highlight both similarities with adult officials and important differences. More attention should be given to the reality of young officials operating at the grassroots level.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

• Young officials experienced frequent, low intensity, mostly psychological abuse perpetrated by coaches and parents.

• Participants described short-term coping strategies during events of abuse, and long-term coping strategies to make sense of these experiences.

• Increased attention should be given to the experience of young officials to develop specific intervention strategies.

• A cultural shift is needed to delegitimize violence in all its forms toward officials of all ages and levels.

Although sport officials are essential in upholding rules and safeguarding athletes, they recurrently experience abuse (Dawson et al., 2022; Webb et al., 2019; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). Studies have reported the prevalence of abuse against officials ranging from 10% to 92% (Ackery et al., 2012; Cleland et al., 2018; Rayner et al., 2016; Webb et al., 2017, 2018; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020), with variations caused by diverse methodological and conceptual characteristics. Some discrepancies were also observed among different types of sport as reported by Webb, Rayner, et al. (2020) whose results showed that 93.7% of football referees reported having experienced verbal abuse compared to 53.7% of rugby union referees (Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). Living through situations of abuse can lead to psychological consequences. Studies have shown that sport officials reported symptoms of anxiety or low self-esteem following experiences of abuse (Anshel et al., 2013; Cuskelly & Hoye, 2013; Dell et al., 2016; Dorsch & Paskevich, 2007).

Research with officials has generally used samples composed of adult-aged males, operating in elite-level sports, with few studies documenting the officiating experience at lower levels of sport or at the beginning of a “career” (Cunningham et al., 2022; Forbes & Livingston, 2013; Hancock et al., 2021; Livingston & Forbes, 2016; Wicker & Frick, 2016). A recent literature review on sport officiating research showed that 74.5% of the 386 articles concerned officials at professional, national or international levels (Hancock et al., 2021). Another systematic review, which focused on the training and development of sport officials, reported that only one of the 27 studies had a sample of participants who were under 18 years old (Cunningham et al., 2022). The few studies with young officials generally include them in a larger pool of participants within a quantitative design (Cunningham et al., 2022; Cuskelly et al., 2009; Folkesson et al., 2002; Orviz-Martínez et al., 2021; Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020). For example, in a survey investigating the experience of abuse of 4,637 sport officials, only 9.1% of the participants were under 18 years old (Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020). Furthermore, these studies present mixed results, with some showing an increased risk of abuse for younger officials (e.g., Folkesson et al., 2002) and others suggesting the opposite (e.g., Orviz-Martínez et al., 2021). This creates a significant gap in knowledge and practice, which is especially alarming in the current youth sporting landscape. Media, sport organizations and researchers have been calling attention to an “exodus” of officials in the last few years, which has been accelerated by both abuse and the pandemic (Croucher, 2020; Fitz-Gerald, 2021; Medina, 2022; Webb, 2021). There is a need for research to explore young officials’ experience of the abuse they face to better prevent and manage such experiences. Although data on this specific age group of officials is lacking, future research should be anchored in the current knowledge concerning abuse toward officials more broadly. Informed by a public health perspective, which is well suited to conduct abuse surveillance and prevention (Krug et al., 2002), the following section presents an overview of the literature on abuse toward sport officials with information relevant to young officials indicated when available.

A growing body of literature has documented the experience of abuse reported by sport officials. Most participants reported being verbally abused (insults, threats) every couple of games or several times during the season (Ackery et al., 2012; Brick et al., 2022; Cleland et al., 2018; Rayner et al., 2016; Webb et al., 2019; et al., 2020). Although less frequent, physical abuse included manifestations such as hitting or throwing objects at the official (Brick et al., 2022; Rayner et al., 2016). A recent study has reported that the different forms of abuse are strongly correlated in soccer, which underlines the importance of taking a broad perspective toward prevention (Dawson et al., 2022). Although there is a lack of studies specifically documenting the prevalence of sexual harassment, several participants in qualitative studies reported receiving sexist or homophobic comments while officiating (Devís-Devís et al., 2021; Forbes et al., 2015; Kim & Hong, 2016; Reid & Dallaire, 2019).

Participants discussed the impacts abuse on their psychological well-being, such as anxiety, stress, depression, or low self-esteem (Anshel et al., 2013; Auger et al., 2010; Brick et al., 2022; Cuskelly & Hoye, 2013; Dell et al., 2016; Dorsch & Paskevich, 2007; Friman et al., 2004). The recurring experience of abuse appears to lead to a sense of isolation where officials felt pushed aside by their organization (Cleland et al., 2018; Phillips & Fairley, 2014; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). Studies have also suggested possible consequences on the performance of officials by decreasing their concentration and motivation (Folkesson et al., 2002; Friman et al., 2004). Ultimately, the abuse experienced can contribute to the decision of quitting officiating (Brick et al., 2022; Livingston et al., 2017; Ridinger et al., 2017).

Numerous risk factors of abuse toward sport officials have been identified at the individual, relational, organizational, and sociocultural levels (Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). The three most documented individual risk factors were being a woman (Forbes et al., 2015; Friman et al., 2004; Kim & Hong, 2016; Nordstrom, 2013; Reid, 2016; Tingle et al., 2014), belonging to an ethnic or cultural minority (Devís-Devís et al., 2021; Rayner et al., 2016), and being a young official with limited experience (Cuskelly et al., 2009; Folkesson et al., 2002; Phillips & Fairley, 2014; Warner et al., 2013). Furthermore, studies that have investigated the specific experience of women sport officials have underlined the recurrence of gendered and sexist abuse, which had negative impacts for their mental health (Baxter et al., 2021; Tingle et al., 2021; Webb et al., 2021).

At the relational and community levels, lack of support, inadequate initial training, and the absence of or deficient performance feedback represented risk factors of abuse (Dell et al., 2016; Livingston & Forbes, 2007). Moreover, officials often reported being unsatisfied with the sanctions provided to the perpetrators and the way their complaints were handled by their organization (Cleland et al., 2018; Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020). At the societal level, certain norms were identified as risk factors for abuse. Sport officials are perceived as scapegoats, which often translates into criticism and disrespect. The normalization and tolerance of abuse by various stakeholders (e.g., media, sport community) is often alluded to in studies regarding abuse in sport (Atkinson & Young, 2008; Young, 2019). The role of socialization in the officials’ community, which leads them to perceive abusive behaviors as “normal,” has also been noted (Kellett & Shilbury, 2007).

Some researchers have framed the issue of abuse toward sport officials through the inter-group conflict theory (Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). This theory supposes that there is a tendency to form “in-groups” who share common goals, values, and practices, and to oppose them to “out-groups” which are considered as having incompatible goals, values, and practices (Böhm et al., 2018). Applying this theory, Webb, Dicks, et al. (2020) stated that officials are often cast as the “out-group” of the sporting world, in the sense that they have different goals compared to other groups of stakeholders. The coaches, athletes, and supporters seek to enhance performance and, ultimately, win. The officials’ objective on the other hand is to enforce the rules and ensure the safety of athletes. Even opposing teams, who are competing to achieve their goal of winning, have more similar values and goals compared to officials. This theory proposes that the abuse of the “out-group” of officials is then considered normal by the “in-groups” as a way for them to achieve their goals (Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020).

It has been suggested that the normalization of abuse in sport may have an impact on the coping mechanisms used when facing stressful situations (Kavanagh et al., 2017). Coping refers to an individual’s cognitive or behavioral efforts to manage demands that they consider stressful or beyond their capabilities (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Problem-focused and emotion-focused are the most frequent coping strategies reported by sport stakeholders in recent studies (Devís-Devís et al., 2021; Kavanagh et al., 2017; Voight, 2009). Problem-focused strategies are mainly used to alter the demands caused by a stressful situation such as seeking instrumental support, problem-solving, planning, or increasing effort (Lazarus, 1993; Voight, 2009). Emotion-focused strategies are employed to decrease the emotional distress related to a particular stressor as is the case with denial or seeking social support (Lazarus, 1993; Voight, 2009). Studies have shown that many stressful situations faced by officials, such as making a controversial or a bad call, having difficulties with a colleague, or being confronted by coaches may require the use of coping strategies (Anshel et al., 2013; Dorsch & Paskevich, 2007; Neil et al., 2013; Voight, 2009).

The efficiency of coping strategies for sport officials to manage the abuse they experience seems to require a capacity to adapt to each situation. A review by Mojtahedi et al. (2022) reported results of studies where use of problem-focused strategies, such as giving a penalty, increased officials’ sense of control when successful. On the other hand, use of penalties had also led to an increase of abusive behaviors when the other party perceived the decision as wrong (Mojtahedi et al., 2022). A few studies in the review reported the use of emotion-focused coping strategies by officials, such as motivational self-talk or deep-breathing exercises, which seemed helpful in increasing one’s self-confidence and improving communication (Mojtahedi et al., 2022). Different factors can influence the choice of strategy, such as the type of perpetrator. For example, in one study, Spanish football officials reported using problem-focused strategies for coaches and players but emotion-focused strategies for spectators (Devís-Devís et al., 2021). Research on how officials cope with abuse is still scarce, and further studies should explore this subject in more depth, especially with young officials.

Although the portrait of abuse toward sport officials seems comprehensive, most research on this topic has been conducted with adult male participants, officiating at elite levels (Forbes & Livingston, 2013; Livingston & Forbes, 2016). The few studies that have analyzed age differences among officials present several limitations. For example, Folkesson et al. (2002) concluded that young officials reported significantly more abuse than their older counterparts regardless of their level of experience. The authors suggested that players, coaches, and spectators may perceive older officials as more worthy of respect. However, the “young” participants were, on average, 25 years old (Folkesson et al., 2002). In another study, younger participants, aged 14–18 years old, reported relatively low levels of verbal or physical aggression as well as the highest sense of efficacy of all age groups (Orviz-Martínez et al., 2021). This implies that contrary to what was reported in previous research, the youngest officials were not the most likely to experience abuse (Orviz-Martínez et al., 2021). These contradictory results reinforce the need to further document the reality of young officials as it is currently unclear what specific aspects of their experience are. Should young officials experience less abuse, as purported by Orviz-Martínez and colleagues (2021), it remains an important issue to address since no one should experience abuse in their work.

This is especially relevant in the context where officiating often represents one’s first job. Although employment may have benefits for youth, such as increased self-confidence, the consequences will depend at least partly on the stressors encountered in their workplace (Mortimer, 2010). We know very little about the experience of youth who begin their working career as officials and how to support their development (Cunningham et al., 2022). This research gap is significant given that beginner officials make up a greater proportion of sport officials then their expert counterparts (Cunningham et al., 2022). Also, the important dropout rates reported for beginner sport officials could be reduced if their specific experience was considered in developing adapted training and support mechanisms (Cunningham et al., 2022). Although young officials are crucial to the current sport structures, a positive experience for them can also increase the long-term stability of these structures by reducing dropout rates. More research is needed to better understand young officials’ perceptions of abuse they face with the goal of improving their overall experience of officiating.

In summary, research has shown that sport officials experience recurring abuse, mostly of psychological nature which can lead to deleterious consequences. Numerous risk factors have been identified at the individual, relational, organizational, and sociocultural levels. Some studies have investigated how officials cope with the pervasive abuse they faced. However, to our knowledge, no study has explored the specific experience of abuse of young sport officials. This study’s objective was to document the experiences of abuse in young officials aged between 14 and 20 years. More specifically, we sought to answer three questions: (1) What is the nature of the abuse faced by young officials? (2) What are the consequences of this abuse? and (3) How do they cope with abuse? Answering these questions could provide a better understanding of how young officials’ experiences may differ from that of adult officials, which is crucial in developing specific preventive measures.

Methodology

Researcher positionality

This qualitative study was situated within a constructivist paradigm where we assumed the existence of multiple, socially constructed realities and various consequences of these realities for individuals and groups (Patton, 2015; Tracy, 2020) As such, we considered that knowledge would be co-constructed by the researchers and the participants (Patton, 2015; Smith & Caddick, 2012; Tracy, 2020). In the interview process, the participants shared how they constructed their experience of abuse through interacting with the interviewer. Then, the research team acted as mediators by reflecting on these realities to answer the research objectives (Patton, 2015; Smith & Caddick, 2012; Tracy, 2020). This approach was coherent with the exploratory nature of the study and the goal of including various lived experiences of abuse. The research was also undertaken from a critical stance where we transparently acknowledged our perception of abuse toward officials as an unacceptable situation that should be addressed (Tracy, 2020).

We also recognized that our personal positionality would influence the way in which each member of our team would approach the study (Holmes, 2020). The first author was a doctoral student in psychology at the time the study was conducted with experience of qualitative research and a background of being a young official. The second author is a researcher and professor renowned for her expertise in violence in sport. The third author is a doctoral student whose thesis focuses on coaches who perpetrated sexual abuse. Finally, the fourth author is a researcher and professor in leisure studies who has extensive knowledge about the role of sport officials. Our combined experiences and knowledge informed every stage of the study, from its development to the writing of this paper. Although our positionalities were diverse, which proved useful in offering different interpretations of the findings, we shared a common goal of promoting changes to better support youth officials. We reflected individually and collectively on the ways our positions and values informed the study, as indicated in the “Study Quality” section, and in sum remained coherent with our paradigmatic approach (Tracy, 2020).

Procedure

Our research team contacted provincial sport federations from Quebec, Canada, to involve them in the recruiting of young officials. These federations received recruiting advertisements to send to their active and inactive officials and to promote the study on their website and social media platforms. To maximize recruitment, other sport-related organizations (e.g., regional associations) were contacted and advertisements were posted on social media platforms. Officials interested in participating in the study contacted the research team by email or phone where the study information was provided to them. Written informed consent was provided electronically by all participants, with minor participants having one parent sign an additional consent form. The current study was approved by the university’s ethics board.

Participants

Inclusion criteria were (1) being aged between 14 and 20 years, and (2) having been involved as a sport official (currently or in the past). The study initially targeted participants aged 14–17 years. However, the range was extended when a few older individuals indicated their desire to participate. We chose to increase the age limit to 20 years old since these potential participants were not significantly older than the initial age limit and had all begun officiating before turning 18. Furthermore, research has shown the existence of an additional development stage between adolescence and adulthood known as the “pre-adult” or “emerging adulthood” stage (Arnett, 2000; Hochberg & Konner, 2019). Individuals who are in this stage of development present different work experiences (Roberts et al., 2003) and ongoing brain development (Hochberg & Konner, 2019). The university’s ethics research allowed the modification.

A total of 27 participants completed interviews, which were conducted online using the Zoom platform and lasted 50 min on average (between 13 and 82 min). Most of the interviews were conducted in French while two were conducted in English. As indicated in Table 1, most participants identified as a man (77.8%) and had an average of 16.5 years old (SD = 1.3). The participants officiated soccer (51.9%) and hockey (37.0%), and six of them officiated more than one sport. They had been officiating for an average of 2.9 years (SD = 1.2).

Table 1. Participant characteristics.^a

Characteristic	n	%
Gender
Man	21	77.8
Woman	6	22.2
Age
14–15 years	5	18.5
16–17 years	18	66.7
18–20 years	4	14.8
Sport officiated^b
Soccer	14	51.9
Hockey	10	37.0
Volleyball	4	14.8
Baseball	4	14.8
Basketball	1	3.7
Softball	1	3.7
Experience
1 year	4	14.8
2 years	7	25.9
3 years	7	25.9
4 years	6	22.2
5 years or more	3	11.1

^a The ethnocultural identity reported by participants is not indicated in the Table, although we recognize its importance both in research and from an identity standpoint. However, the small number of participants who identified as being from an origin other than Canadian makes it difficult to present the results in a precise manner while protecting the participants’ confidentiality. ^bMore than one answer possible for the sports officiated by participants.

Data collection

The research team developed the interview guide starting with questions on the general experience of being a youth official (e.g., “In your opinion, what do people think of your work?”), followed by questions on their experience of abuse (e.g., “Can you talk to me about a situation where you experienced abuse in your role as an official?”). A list of manifestations was read by the interviewer to ensure that the participants had a common understanding of what was considered to be abused (e.g., “being insulted or humiliated,” “having things thrown at you”). This methodological choice was based on studies on sexual abuse that found that behaviorally specific survey questions lead to more precise results (Krebs, 2014). The interview concluded by asking the participants for suggestions on means to prevent abuse toward young officials in the future (see supplementary data for the complete interview guide). The first author (SR) conducted all the interviews with cameras turned off to respect the ethics board requirement for images not to be recorded. Interviews were then transcribed verbatim.

Data analysis

The data were analyzed following the six steps of thematic analysis (Braun et al., 2016; Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2022) with the NVivo 12 software. The main coder (SR) familiarized herself with the data by reading each transcript and creating memos with her initial impressions and ideas of relevant elements. Then, she coded the interviews systematically following an inductive approach and a codebook was developed with definitions for each code. At this stage, a semantic level of coding was used with names and definitions that stayed close to the participants’ discourse. Although the analysis evolved, she generated initial themes where certain codes were merged and latent themes regarding coping processes and social norms were identified. The coder also developed iterations of thematic maps to show relations between the themes which she shared along with the codebook and excerpts during frequent discussions with research team members. Data presentations with other stakeholders at key moments of the process enabled the main coder to confront and contrast her understanding of the themes.

As the analysis progressed, the themes were developed and reviewed. At this point, a search through the scientific literature helped refine each theme, as well as the relations between them, and the codebook was completed. The work on coping by Lazarus and Folkman (1984) which was used in recent studies with sport stakeholders (Devís-Devís et al., 2021; Kavanagh et al., 2017; Voight, 2009) was coherent with the data. The codebook was amended to include the different types of coping processes (appraisal) and strategies (problem-focused, emotion-focused, and avoidance). Four interviews were coded by another author (ES-P) and conversations enabled the two coders to confront certain interpretations. The main coder then reviewed the content of each theme to ensure that they were organized around a meaningful central concept. She also read each interview for a final time to ensure that all the data was coded in a coherent manner. The analysis was finalized by producing a report, with the research team choosing quotes that represented each theme well and crafting a narrative that integrated the themes to answer the study’s objectives.

Study quality

Throughout the study, the research team implemented many strategies to respect quality criteria in conducting qualitative research (Smith & McGannon, 2018; Tracy, 2010). The study concerns a worthy topic aimed at addressing a gap in the literature of abuse in sport with a focus on youth officials who have rarely been considered. This study emanates from an institutional concern in the province of Quebec with regards to issues of abuse toward youth officials. The results will directly serve to inform prevention and intervention measures and therefore show promise to offer significant contributions. Rich rigor was ensured through the contact with a variety of sources to appropriately reflect on the complexity of the problem. These sources included discussions with decision-makers and regional representatives who acted as critical friends (Smith & McGannon, 2018) by giving feedback at different points in the analysis. Furthermore, the research team anchored their ongoing analysis in theoretical and empirical literature during the latent coding stage to confront their own assumptions. Extensive fieldnotes were gathered, with reflexive memos written after each interview, transcription, research meeting, and throughout the analysis process. With this practice of reflexive journaling, we were able to keep track of our assumptions and of any questions that came up during the data collection and analysis. These questions were discussed and resolved through regular meetings held between research team members. In sum, the immersion in the data, the feedback from critical friends outside the research team, as well as the reflexive practices contributed to a rigorous qualitative study.

Results

The participants offered a description of their experience of abuse with details concerning the types of abuse, perpetrators, frequency of events, organizational responses, risk and protective factors, and consequences. The analysis also revealed latent themes concerning the participants’ coping processes, with strategies used during events of abuse, as well as longer-term strategies that contributed to making sense of their experiences. Finally, themes concerning social norms framing their experience were also identified.

Description of abuse

Participants described various aspects related to their experience of abuse as sport officials. They talked about the types of abuse they faced, the frequency with which these events occurred as well as the perpetrators. Participants also mentioned several risk and protective factors that could increase or decrease the likelihood of abuse. Finally, they discussed potential consequences.

With regards to the type of abuse experienced, participants mainly reported psychological abuse, with examples of both verbal (e.g., insults, yelling, complaining), and non-verbal (e.g., throwing arms in the air, snickering, offensive gestures) abuse. Events of physical abuse were rare, but some participants mentioned having been shoved, grabbed by their shirt, or having someone block their path. Participants also discussed indirect abuse, whether psychological (e.g., a coach being abusive toward their players) or physical (e.g., parents fighting).

Hmm, well you know it happens that I get yelled at or like that I’m told that I'm doing my job all wrong or that I'm not good. So you know, like yelling, insulting, humiliating, belittling, it happens … anyway. Not often, but it’s not rare either. W, 17, volleyball¹

Although no participants mentioned incidents of sexual harassment, certain experiences of psychological abuse based on sexism were identified. One participant underlined that the behaviors that affected her the most were those of male coaches who treated her in a manner they would not use with a male official.

So, it lasted for I don’t know how long, he was there for a good 2 or 3 min and he roasted us and put us down and everything. And, at the end, he ended up telling me "I'm going to stop because I don’t want to make you cry.” You wouldn’t have had that with a man. W,17, volleyball

Participants described the coaches and the parents as being the most frequent perpetrators of abuse toward officials, with varying opinions on which group represented the worst offenders. Athletes were also identified as being potential perpetrators of abuse but generally considered easier to manage given the sanctions that could be used against them. Several participants explained that the context of officiating was different in terms of their interactions with adults. It was the only space where they, as young officials, held authority over adults.

And you’re 15 and you have to manage the parents, and you can’t … technically the ref can’t say “Hey, parents, just shut up!” It’s not our job. Sometimes, I think they should be though, cause honestly, they’re the ones getting a kick out of it [vs coaches and athletes]. W, 16, baseball

Two frequency trends were identified by the participants. First, a certain level of abuse occurred on a regular basis, generally described as “every few games.” These events were under the threshold of what was considered problematic, and mostly involved actions such as complaining, common insults (e.g., “Open your eyes ref!”), and yelling. Second, important and memorable events of abuse happened less regularly. Most participants reported that such events occurred once or twice a season, with examples ranging from expelling a coach to having to call the police. Some participants reported that these more intense events developed progressively over a game with one person referring to a “domino effect.”

It’s from the moment you have two of these three [coaches, parents, or players] that have inappropriate behaviors that it can cause a problem. Because a player who sees his coach always angry, and always criticizing, well he’s going to do it too. If it’s only one player who criticizes, then he’ll calm down pretty quickly. All you have to do is talk to him and if he continues to criticize, he gets a yellow card. So that’s something that can be managed well. And when you have several types of people who behave badly, it’s more difficult. M, 17, soccer

With regards to the organizational response, most participants said that they felt supported by their local club or association when experiencing abuse. Many of them gave examples of support, such as receiving a call from their supervisor, or an email sent by the club to parents and coaches to reiterate their zero-tolerance policy toward abuse. However, some participants mentioned having felt isolated or even abandoned by their organization in relation to experiences of abuse. Some said that they had little support to complete complicated incident reports while one person mentioned that, after a situation where he received threats, he felt his association took the coach’s side.

The participants mentioned many risks and protective factors. For individual risk factors related to the official, giving a bad call or having a bad game was the most mentioned by the participants. Being shy, young (or appearing young) were also often named as risk factors. Many participants discussed the fact that some perpetrators (coaches or parents) did not “have a nice personality,” meaning that abusive behaviors were often committed by the same, small group of people.

Like if you give a coach respect, he will give it back, unless he’s not … he’s someone you don’t want to hang out with outside. Like if he doesn’t give you respect, when you give them respect, he’s obviously not a person, let’s say that gets along with other people very well outside of coaching. M, 17, hockey

With regards to sport-related risk factors, most participants reported that experiencing abuse was closely related to the importance of the call or the game. Calls that had a high impact (e.g., penalty kick, expelling a player) or games that held higher stakes (e.g., tournament, season finals) had higher chances of including abuse.

The most significant protective factor mentioned by the participants was the support received by their organization, namely from their chief official. Participants thought that the key to alleviating abuse included checking on young officials, implementing monthly meetings, or coming to their defense during a match. On an individual level for the officials, being confident and taking their role seriously (e.g., arriving early, having a proper and clean uniform) were mentioned as protective factors. Some also reported the involvement of their own parents in discussing their experience or taking actions such as calling the association after certain events.

We had to pull out all the stops because they were out of line. So the organization sent an email saying that it had to stop. And the referees received an email saying that the AA organization sent an email to their parents, to their players, because the referees were in over their heads about what was going on. So from that point on, the parents calmed down a bit. M, 16, baseball

When asked about the consequences of their experiences of abuse, most participants said there were none. Some explained that they “moved on” as soon as the game ended. Others mentioned that they felt the impacts of the abusive behaviors when they first began as officials, but that they “got used to it” with time. However, some participants reported feelings of frustration or sadness after games where events of abuse had occurred. A few said that they sometimes felt stressed before the following game because they worried about facing a similar situation. Finally, certain participants mentioned that they thought about quitting or decreasing their involvement as officials after a particularly abusive experience although none had acted on these reflections.

Well, I would say in the short term when it just happened, it really pisses me off, and it stresses me out for the next few games, and it gets to me, it makes me sad sometimes. It rarely makes me aggressive, more often sad. You know because I have the feeling that I'm not good, that I'm doing my job badly. M, 19, hockey

Coping processes

Participants’ discourse led to the identification of coping processes that were categorized either as short-term strategies used during events of abuse or as longer-term strategies that contributed to making sense of their experiences.

Short-term strategies

Many participants described their appraisal of abusive events as they were occurring. They named the questions that they asked themselves to evaluate the validity and impact of others’ behaviors. In certain situations, this led the participants to consider that the events did not pose a threat and therefore did not merit more attention or focus on their part. In other situations, the event was evaluated as a threat and participants described different strategies they used to cope.

So, that’s what you have to tell yourself as a referee: "Have they ever played? Do they know the rules? Have they seen what happened? Do they have the same point of view as me? And are they objective?" Well, when the parents are nagging, I often tell myself that. That’s what I tell myself, and that’s what helps me separate myself from their point of view. I'll hear what they say, but I'll take what I want from it. M, 15, basketball

Many participants mentioned problem-focused coping strategies, where they tried to manage the situation of abuse. Most often, participants chose to explain their contentious decision or to warn the person that was becoming abusive either verbally or non-verbally (e.g., nod of the head, serious look). These strategies were considered generally efficient in curbing abusive behavior. However, several participants described instances where they expelled coaches or athletes when the abuse escalated despite the previous warnings. Furthermore, the participants mentioned that parents or spectators were more difficult to control in this manner since they had very little control and no way to impose a sanction.

Yeah, I try to warn them. And sometimes the trick is to say, "Well, if you continue, I'll card you.” They’ll often stop when you say that. M, 14, soccer

Many participants described emotion-focused coping strategies, where they aimed to manage the emotions that the abusive events provoked, such as stress, fear, or sadness. In that regard, many participants evoked strategies to distance themselves from their emotions, creating a “bubble” or “shell” where abuse could not reach them. Some of these strategies were to be neutral in all circumstances, to stay confident in their knowledge and abilities as an official, or to concentrate on the game. Many mentioned that their role as officials gave them authority over adults which was unparalleled in their day-to-day lives. They therefore had to keep control of the game, and of themselves. One participant shared advice he had received from an experienced mentor: “You’re always the one in control of the game. If you lose control of yourself, the game is over, it’s sure that it’s over.” Letting their feelings show was considered a sign of vulnerability or even a weakness that could be used against them. A few others talked about using humor, especially with their colleagues, to diminish the drama occasioned by abusive behaviors.

But at the same time, I learned to move on. In refereeing, we build ourselves a shell, and that’s what allows me to continue, that I built myself that shell. I don’t care if someone yells at me, it goes 100 feet over my head, I don’t give a damn. And I learned that by continuing, but when you start you don’t have that shell. M, 20, soccer

Finally, some participants discussed avoidance coping strategies they used during experiences of abuse. They mentioned that they pretended not to hear comments by the spectators because there was nothing that they could answer without worsening the situation. One participant said that he occasionally ended heated conversations with certain coaches to resume the game. A few explained that they voluntarily ignored abusive behaviors in order not to give them importance. This strategy could be a double-edged sword because others mentioned that not sanctioning unacceptable behaviors could lead to an escalation in abuse.

Long-term strategies

Some participants made sense of their experiences by normalizing abuse in sport. They mentioned that situations of abuse were “part of the job” and that they just had to become accustomed to it. This was related in part to the role of officials as having to make decisions that would inherently penalize one team or another. One person considered this so normal that he first said he never experienced abuse as an official. He then went on to say “Well, if you consider being critiqued violently…” as if he needed to meditate on the fact that insults or yelling would be considered abusive. Similarly, several participants stated that there was a tipping point where behaviors became intolerable, with most of them saying that it was acceptable to “insult the uniform” but not to insult them personally.

He aimed at the person, he was insulting me, my person. I have a jersey, so if you insult me as a ref… Listen, I’m not always a referee. That’s my philosophy. Yes, sometimes there are things that affect me, but it rarely does […] When they attack your family, when they attack you, that’s when it affects me. As long as it stays, I mean it’s still a behavior I don’t want to see in hockey… But I tell myself “Listen, it’s part of the game” M, 18, hockey

Some participants used rationalizing to make sense of their experience. They explained that people involved in sports were passionate and that led them to lose control when they were invested in the game. Others talked about emotions that ran high, or pressure experienced by coaches and athletes which generated outbursts of abuse. Finally, a few participants said that it was understandable for people to “show their discontent” when officials missed calls or had bad games.

Well it’s sure that, in a volleyball game, there’s a lot of pressure for pretty much everybody. So I can understand that sometimes, it’s possible that everyone is a little more on edge. W, 15, volleyball

Several participants mentioned that their experiences of abuse as an official had led to personal growth and resilience. Some took a broad outlook and stated that through their career, they learned to be more confident and had improved their strategies. Others pointed to a specific event of abuse, even referring to it as their most positive experience as an official since it led them to take control of a situation and to develop the ability to stand up for themselves.

I think it [being subjected to abuse] helped me improve and become better at not listening parents’ comments, and to be more focused on my decisions. M, 14, soccer

Social norms

Participants discussed two social norms that shaped their experiences. First, many discussed a negative perspective of officials. Participants stated that people greatly underestimated the complexity that officiating entailed. Some felt that they were taken for granted and said that their role was not recognized as essential to sports organizations. Others mentioned that people expected perfect performances of officials, with no room for error or “bad days.” Yet others underlined the rampant “refs are against us” mentality, which some said they held themselves before becoming officials.

And even on the ice, it’s a bit like I was saying earlier, we start with the prejudice that everyone hates us and that we’re going to be bad and that the first thing we’re going to do is to be against them. So, this side of the working conditions is less fun because, apart from the people close to officiating that … you know, you are not valued by anyone. So that can be hard. M, 19, hockey

Second, many also mentioned the normalization of abuse in sports. This was described as part of the culture of sport, as “ingrained in the system” and therefore unavoidable. Participants discussed how people allowed themselves to behave in ways they would deem inappropriate in any other context. This led several participants to doubt that it would be possible to eradicate abuse toward officials.

Hmm, that’s a good question because it’s really, it’s ingrained in the sport. In hockey it’s part of the game, the referee is the third team on the ice that you’re supposed to hate. The fact is, it’s been deep in the sport for a long time. There are campaigns that have been done to make people aware of this. […] So, eliminating violence against referees in sport, I don’t know if, I don’t know if it will ever happen. M, 16, hockey

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of abuse in young officials aged between 14 and 20 years. In sum, participants described regular lower intensity abuse, mainly of a psychological nature and perpetrated by coaches and spectators (mostly parents). Physical abuse or more intense events were reported as less frequent. Most participants said they did not experience consequences of this abuse, with a few naming increased stress or sadness. This could be, at least partly, explained by short-term (emotion-focused and problem-focused) as well as long-term (normalization and rationalization) coping strategies used to manage abuse. Finally, participants’ discourse highlighted social norms that framed their experiences of abuse, such as normalization of abuse in sport. In the following section, we discuss the study’s main findings by framing them in the social norms that seem to contextualize much of the literature on abuse toward sport officials. We then highlight similarities and distinctions with the broader literature on abuse of sport officials that has typically focused on adult participants. Practical implications and limitations are also presented.

Social norms of disrespect and disregard for officials contribute to the acceptability of harassment, repetitive criticism, and disrespect toward them (Kellett & Shilbury, 2007; Livingston & Forbes, 2016). More broadly, it appears that the normalization of violence in sport and the emphasis on performance legitimize abusive behaviors toward officials (Dorsch & Paskevich, 2007; Kellett & Shilbury, 2007; Livingston & Forbes, 2016; Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020). Officials, having typically been socialized into sport first as athletes, come to view abuse against them as an integral part of their role (Dorsch & Paskevich, 2007; Kellett & Shilbury, 2007; Livingston & Forbes, 2016). Many participants in this study expressed that such abuse was “part of the job” and that they just had to “deal with it.” Other studies have similarly described that “[a]buse, it seems for these umpires, is an accepted part of the game and their role” (Kellett & Shilbury, 2007, p. 21). Although these studies have been conducted with adult sport officials, our results add a novel perspective of young officials on similar issues.

Young officials in the current study described their experiences of abuse in ways coherent with the literature concerning their adult counterparts, with some nuances. The recurrent, mostly psychological abuse reported by participants echoes other findings where verbal abuse was the most common form reported by officials (Ackery et al., 2012; Brick et al., 2022; Cleland et al., 2018; Rayner et al., 2016; Webb et al., 2019; et al., 2020). Our results show that coaches and parents were considered the most frequent perpetrators of abuse, while athletes were generally easier to manage. Although research has pointed to the three groups as mostly similar (Folkesson et al., 2002; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020), one study reported that officials viewed parents’ behavior as consistently problematic, especially at the grassroots level (Cleland et al., 2015). We also found some evidence pointing toward the experience of gendered and sexist abuse in female participants from the current study, which is coherent with recent findings (Baxter et al., 2021; Tingle et al., 2021; Webb et al., 2021).

Certain distinctions should be noted with regards to perceived organizational support and consequences related to events of abuse. This study’s participants described a mostly positive evaluation of the organizational support they received, and a few participants felt periodically isolated in their role as officials. Such findings contrast with research that underlined a general lack of satisfaction in that area (Mojtahedi et al., 2022; Parsons & Bairner, 2015; Ridinger et al., 2017; Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020). However, one study has identified a higher organizational support for younger officials early in their career with older officials mentioning that the support diminished over time (Livingston & Forbes, 2016). This suggests the importance of pursuing research with younger officials and tracking their development.

Discussion of consequences underlined another finding that differs with the literature focusing on adult officials. Most young officials in our study reported no consequences of the abuse they experienced, which seem to contradict previous reports of anxiety, stress, depression, or low self-esteem (Anshel et al., 2013; Auger et al., 2010; Brick et al., 2022; Cuskelly & Hoye, 2013; Dell et al., 2016; Dorsch & Paskevich, 2007; Friman et al., 2004). It is possible that participants in our study had experienced less abuse, although they reported frequent events of lower intensity, or that they were generally more resilient. Indeed, a few of them described positive lessons learned through coping with events of abuse. Another possible explanation is that participants had normalized their experiences in a way that made them less aware of potential consequences. This would be congruent with studies conducted with athletes who had experienced abuse in their youth but for whom recognition of this abuse took time, and sometimes occurred after the end of their involvement in sport (Stirling & Kerr, 2008). Finally, it could be that abuse can have a cumulative effect over the years, which would explain why some studies report poorer mental health outcomes for older sport officials (Orviz-Martínez et al., 2021).

Another novel finding of our study is the exploration of long-term coping strategies used by young officials when they faced events of abuse. Coping has been previously studied among sport officials, as shown by the 19 articles included in the section on this topic in the review by Mojtahedi et al. (2022). However, none of these studies focused specifically on young officials and while other studies have underlined the use of long-term coping strategies, they were not described in these terms. For example, participants have been shown to cope with abuse through normalization, such as when they attribute the insults they received to their symbol as officials (Devís-Devís et al., 2021). They can also use rationalization, such as when they explained the abusive behaviors of spectators based on their desire to win and their inability to manage their emotions (Devís-Devís et al., 2021). Similarly in our study, although some events such as physical altercations were clearly perceived as abusive, the line between acceptable and unacceptable was blurrier when it came to psychological abuse. The normalization and rationalization observed in our study replicate previous findings from adult officials with a sample of young officials, all of whom operated at amateur levels. These results suggest that socialization in officiating happens early in the career or can be carried on from time spent in the sport as an athlete.

Although few participants mentioned specific consequences of the abuse, many offered comments that showed they felt misunderstood and isolated as a group. One participant very distinctly addressed officials as being an out-group by stating that they represent “the third team on the ice that you’re supposed to hate.” Our findings add to recent work in the domain of abuse toward officials that has framed this issue through the inter-group conflict theory (Webb, Dicks et al., 2020; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). This theory postulates that such distinctions between in- and out-groups lead to disproportionate reactions and antipathy between group members (Böhm et al., 2018; Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). Sporting organizations have a challenging position in that they represent both in- (players and coaches) and out- (officials) groups. Although players, and in some cases spectators, are their clients who pay fees and expect services in return, officials are employees and therefore, expect workplace protection. This can lead to a conflict of loyalty where one group receives more support from the sport organization than the other. Because research has shown that officials report low levels of support from their governing structures (Mojtahedi et al., 2022; Parsons & Bairner, 2015; Ridinger et al., 2017; Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020), one can hypothesize which group garners greater support and loyalty. Although participants in the current study generally felt supported by their organization, they also frequently mentioned a sense of isolation with officials considered a “team” and treated differently than the other individuals involved in sport. Our findings therefore suggest that the intergroup conflict is deeply ingrained in the sport context as a whole and not only at the professional level.

Implications for practice

The current findings suggest areas of attention to tackle abuse experienced by young officials including recognition of lower intensity abuse, an increase in knowledge and sensitivity about young officials’ realities, and ultimately, changing the culture regarding normalization of abuse toward officials. Young officials are critical to the efficiency of the current and future sport structures, yet there seems to be little attention given to them either in research (Cunningham et al., 2022) or in safeguarding policies and practices (Carpenter, 2022).

There needs to be a recognition of the lower intensity events of abuse as participating in a systematic and recurring pattern of behaviors. From the perspective of coaches or parents, the few comments such as “Wake up ref!” shouted per game seem inoffensive, but to the officials, this cumulates in a chain of events that modulate how they think about their job and potentially about their work identity in general (Keashly, 2012). Through their role as employers, sport associations are responsible for protecting their employees from harm. Managing conflictual situations requires communication abilities, which are not always part of the curricula in the first trainings for officials focused on learning the rules of the game (Dell et al., 2016). Previous studies have documented the importance of communication and conflict resolution skills for officials (Deal et al., 2018) This type of training could be enhanced by a mentoring program where more experienced officials are paired with young officials (Mojtahedi et al., 2022). A few participants in our study did mention the positive impact that senior sport officials had on their development.

An increased knowledge and sensitivity about youth officials’ realities have the potential to reduce abusive behaviors toward them. Sport organizations need to improve the relationships between their different stakeholders and involve officials within conversations with coaches and athletes. Young sport officials should be recognized as essential to the structure and sport organizations should, in other words, treat them as being on the same team as the rest of the stakeholders. One way to address intergroup conflict is to diminish the distance between groups, by promoting positive contact for example (Webb, Dicks, et al., 2020). This contact could be created through meetings with teams at the beginning of the season where officials would introduce themselves and explain their objectives of ensuring respect of the rules and players’ safety. Steps should be taken to humanize officials and to underline the similarities between groups (e.g., all people passionate about the same sport) while minimizing their differences (Böhm et al., 2018).

To date, there has been local and regional efforts to implement prevention measures against abuse toward sport officials, with few being empirically evaluated (Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). One campaign which has been thoroughly evaluated, the Respect Program in English football has received mixed reviews with some sport officials reporting improvements while others thought it had made no difference (Cleland et al., 2015, 2018; Webb et al., 2017). Although such preventive strategies to reduce the prevalence of abuse are essential, there is also a pressing need to better manage abuse when it occurs. Participants in our study have reported their desire to see sanctions increased, especially toward persistent offenders. A call for better disciplinary processes has been made in previous research (Mojtahedi et al., 2022; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). In one study on disciplinary incidents in amateur soccer in Canada, participants reported that the lack of efficiency and communication in the disciplinary process led to under-reporting of abuse by officials (Deal et al., 2018). Increasing the severity of sanctions, the ease and transparency of procedures, and the support offered to officials throughout the process could improve officials’ trust in the system (Deal et al., 2018; Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020).

Through this study, we sought to document young officials’ perspective on the abuse they faced, which could be valuable in developing specific prevention measures. To be efficient, the suggested practical implications must be integrated into a cultural shift that delegitimizes abuse, in all its forms, toward officials. This cultural shift will take time, commitment, and investment from multiple sport stakeholders. The work needed to successfully tackle abuse toward sport officials includes many challenges that have yet to be resolved, such as sharing responsibilities and resources among conflicting stakeholders and organizations (Webb, Rayner, et al., 2020). The growing academic interest on abuse toward sport officials (p. ex. Brick et al., 2022; Dawson et al., 2022; Devís-Devís et al., 2021; Mojtahedi et al., 2022) suggests that recognition of the issue has improved which could lead to positive developments in the field.

Limitations and future research

This study presents certain limits worth noting. First, the participants in our sample were all actively involved in officiating which could have contributed to some of our findings, such as the few consequences named. They could have experienced less abuse, in intensity and frequency, than those who have abandoned officiating. It is possible that the study’s participants were more resilient than the average young sport official and therefore, had more success in coping with experiences of abuse. We took actions, such as targeted recruitment ads specifically identifying young people who were no longer active in officiating, with no success. As mentioned previously, studies with athletes who had experienced abuse in their youth suggested that recognizing this experience is a process that occurs over a long period of time (Stirling & Kerr, 2008) which could also explain why some officials were not ready to participate in our study. Second, our sample comprised notably fewer women than men. Although this is in line with the sociodemographic characteristics of officials in the province, it could have limited the importance of themes such as sexism. Some studies have documented sexism toward women officials (e.g., Baxter et al., 2021; Forbes et al., 2015; Tingle et al., 2021; Webb et al., 2021), yet it remains an understudied phenomenon. Third, we had participants from a diversity of sports but were not able to reach officials from individual sports (e.g., tennis) or parasport, which could have specificities that we were unable to identify.

Different research strategies could be implemented to build on and further the study’s findings. A longitudinal research design would allow many of the identified gaps to be filled. It could enable researchers to measure the development of coping strategies and evaluate their impact on the level of consequences reported. Validated quantitative measures (e.g., Ridinger et al., 2017; Sánchez et al., 2021) could be used in a longitudinal study to identify causal relationships between experiences of abuse, consequences, and outcomes such as turnover. More specific measures could also help identify potential consequence of abuse to the mental health of young officials who might not be entirely aware of them. Future studies should aim to better understand the realities of sport officials of participants of different genders, sexual orientations, and ethnocultural origins to gain a deeper understanding of their realities. Researchers can also contribute to the cultural shift needed to increase safeguarding for sport officials by advancing our knowledge of what prevention and intervention strategies are efficient to address abuse.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was granted by the institutional research ethics board, the Comité d’éthique de la recherche avec des êtres humains de l’Université Laval (certificate n° 2020-104).

Acknowledgments

We want to thank the 27 officials who took part in the study and offered key insights on issues of abuse they faced. We are also grateful to Richard Gamache for his help in the study, to Camille Desrochers-Laflamme for her research assistance at different stages of this project, as well as to all the sport federations and organizations who help in the recruiting. Finally, we would like to recognize the Ministère de l‘Éducation et de l‘Enseignement supérieur for the funding that made this research possible.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Data availability statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Additional information

Funding

The study was supported by the Ministère de l‘Éducation et de l‘Enseignement supérieur, grant number 125725.

Notes

1 Each quote includes the gender (M = man, W = woman), age in years of participants, and sport officiated, as they identified as the time of the study. Most quotes were translated from French.