Student stakeholder evaluations of college athletics scandals: The effects of scandal type and organizational responsibility

Abstract

Athletic scandals continue to threaten the reputation and legitimacy of collegiate athletic programs, yet limited research has examined how different types of scandals and levels of organizational involvement influence student stakeholders’ evaluations. This study investigated the effects of scandal type (on-field match-fixing vs. off-field doping) and scandal level (individual vs. organizational) on perceived scandal severity and the perceived effectiveness of organizational crisis response strategies. A 2 by 2 between-subjects factorial experiment was conducted with 250 undergraduate students who were randomly assigned to one of four fictitious collegiate athletic scandal scenarios. Results indicated that organizational-level scandals were perceived as significantly more severe than individual-level scandals, and a significant interaction emerged between scandal type and scandal level. Specifically, organizational doping scandals generated the highest perceived severity. Among the seven crisis response strategies, corrective action and mortification received the highest effectiveness evaluations, whereas denial and attacking the accuser were consistently perceived as least effective. Minimization was evaluated as more appropriate for individual-level than organizational-level scandals. The study provides practical guidance for collegiate athletic administrators seeking to develop effective communication strategies that protect organizational reputation and restore stakeholder trust following athletic scandals.

Keywords: college athletics, athletic scandal, crisis communication, image repair theory, situational crisis communication theory

DOI: 10.7176/JEP/17-9-06

Publication date: September 30th 2026