The purpose of this study was to investigate hazing in collegiate marching bands. Specifically, the researchers were interested in marching band students’ experiences with hazing behaviors, to whom they were reported, attitudes toward hazing, and level of awareness of institutional hazing policies. Using a multistage cluster sampling approach, we distributed an online questionnaire to college marching band members attending National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I schools. Participants (N = 1,215) were representative of 30 different states and included college freshmen, sophomores, juniors, seniors, and graduate students. Nearly 30% of respondents indicated they observed some form of hazing in their marching band. The most common acts of hazing involved public verbal humiliation or degradation, which generally went unreported. Reticence to report hazing was largely due to fear of social retaliation or perceptions that the hazing behaviors were innocuous. The vast majority of participants had negative attitudes regarding hazing and most learned about their institution’s hazing policy through a marching band orientation. Implications for the college marching band, contextualization of results, and future directions are discussed.
AllanE. J.MaddenM. (2012). The nature and extent of college student hazing. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 24, 83–90. doi:10.1515/IJAMH.2012.012
AronsonE.MillsJ. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59(2), 177–181. doi:10.1037/h0047195
5.
BanduraA. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193–209. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
BosnjakM.TutenT. L. (2001). Classifying response behaviors in web-based surveys. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(3), 0. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00124.x
9.
CampoS.PoulosG.SippleJ. W. (2005). Prevalence and profiling: Hazing among college students and points of intervention. American Journal of Health Behavior, 29, 137–149. doi:10.5993/AJHB.29.2.5
10.
CarterB. (2012). Take note: Hazing in the marching band. Music Educators Journal, 98(3), 3. doi:10.1177/0027432112438179
11.
CattellR. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
12.
ChurchillG. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 64–73. doi:10.2307/3150876
13.
CiminoA. (2011). The evolution of hazing: Motivational mechanisms and the abuse of newcomers. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 11, 241–267. doi:10.1163/156853711X591242
14.
CokleyK.MillerK.CunninghamD.MotoikeJ.KingA.AwadG. (2001). Developing an instrument to assess college students’ attitudes toward pledging and hazing in Greek letter organizations. College Student Journal, 35, 451–457.
15.
CrowR.RosnerS. (2002). Institutional and organizational liability for hazing in intercollegiate and professional team sports. St. John’s Law Review, 76, 87–114.
16.
DillmanD. A.SmythJ. D.ChristianL. M. (2008). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
17.
DornbuschS. M. (1955). The military academy as an assimilating institution. Social Forces, 33, 316–321. doi:10.2307/2573000
18.
DroutC. E.CorsoroC. L. (2003). Attitudes toward fraternity hazing among fraternity members, sorority members, and non-Greek students. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 535–544. doi:10.2224/sbp.2003.31.6.535
19.
EllsworthC. W. (2004). Definitions of hazing: Differences among selected student organizations. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Maryland, College Park.
20.
FieldA. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
21.
FieldsS. K.CollinsC. L.ComstockR. D. (2007). Conflict on the courts: A review of sports-related violence literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 8, 359–369. doi:10.1177/1524838007307293
22.
FinkelM. A. (2002). Traumatic injuries caused by hazing practices. American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 20, 228–233. doi:10.1053/ajem.2002.32649
GershelJ. C.Katz-SidlowR. J.SmallE.ZandiehS. (2003). Hazing of suburban middle school and high school athletes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 32, 333–335. doi:10.1016/S0154-139X(03)00021-2
26.
GliemJ. A.GliemR. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert type scales. Paper presented at the Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, Columbus, OH. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1805/344
27.
GuynnK. L.AquilaF. D. (2004). Hazing in high schools: Causes and consequences. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
28.
HarachiT. W.CatalanoR. F.HawkinsD. (1999). United States. In SmithP. K.MoritaY.Junger-TasJ.OlweusD.CatalanoR.SleeP. (Eds.), The nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective (pp. 279–295). New York, NY: Routledge.
29.
HollmannB. B. (2002). Hazing: Hidden campus crime. New Directions for Student Services, 99, 11–24. doi:10.1002/ss.57
30.
HolmesR. W. (2013). How to eradicate hazing. Bloomington, IN: Author House.
31.
HoneycuttC. (2006). Hazing as a process of boundary maintenance in an online community. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00240.x
32.
HooverJ.MilnerC. (1998). Are hazing and bullying related to love and belongingness?Reclaiming Children and Youth, 7(3), 138–141.
33.
HooverN.PollardN. (1999). Initiation rites and athletics: A national survey of NCAA sports teams. Alfred, NY: Alfred University and Reidman Insurance Co. Retrieved from http://www.alfred.edu/sports_hazing/hazingpdf.cfm
34.
HooverN.PollardN. (2000, August). Initiation rites in American high schools: A national survey. Alfred, NY: Alfred University. Retrieved from http://www.alfred.edu/hs_hazing
35.
JacksonJ. F. L.TerrellM. C. (Eds.). (2007). Creating and maintaining safe college campuses: A sourcebook for evaluating and enhancing safety programs. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
36.
JohnsonJ. (2011). Through the liminal: A comparative analysis of communitas and rites of passage in sport hazing and initiations. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 36, 199–227.
37.
KeatingC.PomerantzJ.PommerS.RittS.MillerL.McCormickJ. (2005). Going to college and unpacking hazing: A functional approach to decrypting initiation practices among undergraduates. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9, 104–126. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.9.2.104
38.
KimbroughW. M. (2007). Why students beat each other: A developmental perspective for a detrimental crime. In JacksonJ. F. L.TerrellM. C. (Eds.), Creating and maintaining safe college campuses (pp. 58–74). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
39.
KittleP. R. (2012). Assessing the efficacy of analytical definitions in hazing education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Auburn University, Auburn, AL.
40.
KlineP. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. New York, NY: Routledge.
41.
KrantzJ. H.DalalR. (2000). Validity of web-based psychological research. In BirnbaumN. H. (Ed.), Psychological experiments on the Internet (pp. 35–60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
42.
LandisJ. R.KochG. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310
43.
LodewijkxH. F. M.SyroitJ. E. M. M. (2001). Affiliation during naturalistic severe and mild initiations: Some further evidence against the severity-attraction hypothesis. Current Research in Social Psychology, 6(7), 90–107.
44.
MatneyM. M. (2011). Removing hazing: Replacing false ties with genuine accomplishment. In HazingPrevention.org (Ed.), Connect the dots: Unite to prevent hazing (pp. 31–32). LaGrange, GA: HazingPrevention.org.
45.
McCrearyG. R. (2010). The impact of moral judgment and moral disengagement on hazing attitudes and bystander behavior in college males (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
46.
MeltonC. J. (2012). Facing the music: Student power relations in student leadership within high school band programs (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
47.
National Collaborative for Hazing Research and Prevention. (2010). National agenda for hazing prevention in education. Orono: University of Maine.
48.
NunnallyJ. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
49.
NuwerH. (1990). Broken pledges: The deadly rite of hazing. Atlanta, GA: Longstreet Press.
50.
NuwerH. (1999). Wrongs of passage: Fraternities, sororities, hazing, and binge drinking. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
51.
NuwerH. (2000). High school hazing: When rites become wrongs. New York, NY: Franklin Watts.
52.
NuwerH. (2004). The hazing reader. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
53.
OlweusD. (1999). Norway. In SmithP. K.MoritaY.Junger-TasJ.OlweusD.CatalanoR.SleeP. (Eds.), The nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective (pp. 28–48). New York, NY: Routledge.
54.
ØstvikK.RudminF. (2001). Bullying and hazing among Norwegian army soldiers: Two studies of prevalence, context, and cognition. Military Psychology, 13, 17–39. doi:10.1207/s15327876mp1301_02
55.
OwenS.BurkeT.VicheskyD. (2008). Hazing in student organizations: Prevalence, attitudes, and solutions. Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, 3(1), 40–58.
56.
ParksG. S.SoutherlandT. F. (2013). The psychology and law of hazing consent. Marquette Law Review, 97, 1–54. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2235742
57.
PattenM. L. (2011). Questionnaire research: A practical guide (3rd ed.). Glendale, CA: Pyrczak.
58.
PerkinsA. B.ZimmermanJ. D.JanosikS. M. (2011). Changing trends in the undergraduate fraternity/sorority experience: An evaluative and analytical literature review. Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, 6(1), 57–73.
59.
PershingJ. L. (2006). Men and women’s experiences with hazing in a male-dominated elite military institution. Men and Masculinities, 8, 470–492. doi:10.1177/1097184X05277411
60.
ReipsU. D. (2001). The web experimental psychology lab: Five years of data collection on the Internet. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 33, 201–211. doi:10.3758/bf03195366
61.
ReipsU. D. (2002). Standards for Internet-based experimenting. Experimental Psychology, 49, 243–256. doi:10.1027//1618-3169.49.4.243
62.
RhodesK. (2011). Band brutality: One band member tells his story. In HazingPrevention.org (Ed.), Connect the dots: Unite to prevent hazing (pp. 33–34). LaGrange, GA: HazingPrevention.org.
63.
RichardsonB. K.WangZ.HallC. A. (2012). Blowing the whistle against Greek hazing: The theory of reasoned action as a framework for reporting intentions. Communication Studies, 63, 172–193. doi:10.1080/10510974.2011.624396
64.
RutledgeG. E. (1998). Hell hath no fury like a pledge scorned and injured: Hazing litigation in U.S. colleges and universities. Journal of College and University Law, 25, 361–397.
SchachterS. (1959). The psychology of affiliation: Experimental studies on the sources of gregariousness. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
67.
SchultzA. J. (2010). Closing the gap: Historical values and modern characteristics of Greek-letter organizations. Journal of Student Affairs, 20, 48–55.
68.
StantonJ. M. (1998). An empirical assessment of data collection using the Internet. Personnel Psychology, 51, 709–725. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00259.x
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
72.
SweetS. (1999). Understanding fraternity hazing: Insights from symbolic interactionist theory. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 355–364.
73.
SweetS. (2004). Understanding fraternity hazing. In NuwerH. (Ed.), The hazing reader (pp. 1–13). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
74.
TaylorK. R. (2001). Is hazing harmless horseplay?Education Digest, 67(2), 25–30.
75.
ThompsonL. F.SurfaceE. A.MartinD. L.SandersM. G. (2003). From paper to pixels: Moving personnel surveys to the web. Personnel Psychology, 56, 197–227. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00149.x
76.
Van GennepA. (1960). The rites of passage. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
77.
Van RaalteJ. L.CorneliusA. E.LinderD. E.BrewerB. W. (2007). The relationship between hazing and team cohesion. Journal of Sport Behavior, 30(4), 491–507.
78.
WaldronJ. J.KowalskiC. L. (2009). Crossing the line: Rites of passage, team aspects, and ambiguity of hazing. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 80, 291–302. doi:10.5641/027013609x13087704028633
79.
WegenerC. J. (2001). Perceptions of hazing among Greek and ROTC students at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Nebraska–Lincoln.
80.
WinslowD. (1999). Rites of passage and group bonding in the Canadian Airborne. Armed Forces & Society, 25, 429–457. doi:10.1177/0095327X9902500305
81.
WitmerD. F.ColmanR. W.KatzmanS. L. (1999). From paper-and-pencil to screen-and-keyboard: Toward a methodology for survey research on the Internet. In JonesS. (Ed.), Doing Internet research: Critical issues and methods for examining the net (pp. 145–161). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
