This article was downloaded by: [University Of Maryland]On: 18 October 2014, At: 11:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Sports SciencesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjsp20

Acculturation in elite sport: a thematic analysis ofimmigrant athletes and coachesRobert Joel Schinkea, Kerry R. McGannona, Randy Cesar Battochiob & Greg D. Wellsc

a Laurentian University, School of Human Kinetics, B241 Ben Avery Building, 935 RamseyLake Road, Sudbury, Ontario, P3E2C6 Canadab Laurentian University, Human Studies, Sudbury, Ontario, Canadac University of Toronto, Graduate Department of Exercise Sciences, Toronto, Ontario,CanadaPublished online: 20 May 2013.

To cite this article: Robert Joel Schinke, Kerry R. McGannon, Randy Cesar Battochio & Greg D. Wells (2013) Acculturationin elite sport: a thematic analysis of immigrant athletes and coaches, Journal of Sports Sciences, 31:15, 1676-1686, DOI:10.1080/02640414.2013.794949

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2013.794949

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Acculturation in elite sport: a thematic analysis of immigrant athletesand coaches

ROBERT JOEL SCHINKE1, KERRY R. MCGANNON1, RANDY CESAR BATTOCHIO2, &GREG D. WELLS3

1Laurentian University, School of Human Kinetics, B241 Ben Avery Building, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, Ontario,P3E2C6 Canada, 2Laurentian University, Human Studies, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, and 3University of Toronto,Graduate Department of Exercise Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

(Accepted 8 April 2013)

AbstractTo identify key issues concerning the acculturation of immigrant athletes in sport psychology, a thematic analysis (Braun &Clarke, 2006) was conducted on focus group interview data from immigrant elite athletes relocated to Canada (n = 13) andcoaches working with such athletes (n = 10). Two central themes were identified: (a) navigating two world views whichreferred to acculturation as a fluid process where athletes navigated between cultural norms of the home community and thehost community, and (b) acculturation loads, which referred to whether immigrants and those in the host country sharedacculturation (i.e., acculturation as a two-way process) or managed the load with or without support from others (i.e.,acculturation as one-directional). Each of these central themes comprised sub-themes, which provided further insight intothe experiences of acculturation for immigrant elite athletes. From the project, the authors recommend further researchutilising case studies to provide a holistic description of the acculturation process from the vantage of various people withinthe sport context.

Keywords: acculturation, immigration, elite sport, thematic analysis

Introduction

Athlete migration against a backdrop of globalisedsport culture is not a newly studied phenomenon insport sociology (see Magee & Sugden, 2002;Maguire, 2004; Weedon, 2011). The experiencesof athletes who relocate from their home country toa host country have also been recently considered insport psychology (see Kontos, 2009; Schinke,Yukelson, Bartolacci, Battochio, & Johnstone,2011). Within sport sociology and sport psychology,distinctions have been made between migrant (seeMaguire, 2004; Weedon, 2011) and immigrant ath-letes (see Schinke et al., 2011). Terms such asmigrants and sojourners pertain to athletes fluidlytravelling across national borders to pursue sportcareers (e.g., footballers playing out of country)(Magee & Sugden, 2002; Maguire & Stead, 1996).Immigrant athletes are the focus of the currentpaper; their post-relocation acculturation affirms acommitment to reside long term. Immigrant athletesnavigate sport contexts where certain aspects areregarded as better and others worse than in their

home (i.e. former) country, as they acculturate,opening themselves up to unfamiliar cultural prac-tices that require comprehension (Day, 1981).

Acculturation has been referred to as the process ofchange in cultural practices, such as changes in eatingpattern, dress, and language, that an immigrant orcultural minority member undergoes to align with thedominant societal group (Kontos & Breland-Noble,2002). This definition of acculturation is built fromBerry’s (1997) work in cultural psychology as he con-sidered the sorts of questions that spur acculturation:

What happens to individuals who have developedin one cultural context, when they attempt to livein a new cultural context? If culture is such apowerful shaper of behaviour, do individuals con-tinue to act in the new setting as they did in theprevious one, do they change their behaviouralrepertoire to be more appropriate in the new set-ting, or is there some complex pattern of continu-ity and change in how people go about their livesin the new society? (p. 6)

Correspondence: Robert Joel Schinke, Laurentian University, School of Human Kinetics, B241 Ben Avery Building, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury,Ontario, P3E2C6 Canada. Email: rschinke@laurentian.ca

Journal of Sports Sciences, 2013Vol. 31, No. 15, 1676–1686, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2013.794949

© 2013 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

In keeping with the complexities articulated inBerry’s questions it becomes evident why immi-grants might sometimes experience culture shock asthey seek to adjust to unfamiliar cultural environ-ments (see Oberg, 1960). From the field of anthro-pology, Oberg clarified that culture shock, aresponse encountered by some upon relocation, is“the anxiety that results from losing all of the familiarsigns and symbols of social intercourse” (p. 177).Within the discipline of humanistic psychology,Adler (1975) opted to describe the experiences asso-ciated with cross-border relocation as transitionshock, whereby one experiences profound learning,self-understanding, and change. Life change causedby relocation is undoubtedly a significant experi-ence, permitting communication scholars such asZaharna (1989) to recast the process of acculturationas self-shock; caused by the loss of communicationcompetence, the distorting of self-reflections as aresults of feedback from others in the host country,and the expectation that one change behaviours thathave until recently been indicative of identity. Itmust be acknowledged that acculturation need notbe presented and experienced as stressful or nega-tive. Fuligni (1998) found that first generation immi-grants benefit from improved health, and higherlevels of performance in educational settings, a phe-nomenon termed the “Immigrant Paradox”.

Scholarly writings concerning the acculturation ofimmigrant athletes are growing in number (e.g.,Kontos, 2009; Kontos & Breland-Noble, 2002;Njororai, 2010; Ryba, Haapanen, Mosek, & Ng,2012), in keeping with the increasing number ofthese athletes found in sport contexts. Supportingthis claim, in Canada, Schinke et al. (2011) foundthat since 1992, nearly 18% of Canadian Olympianshave been immigrant athletes. Schinke et al. consid-ered the large number of varsity international stu-dent athletes in one American university with highprofile sport teams, and identified the need for bet-ter-defined strategies to assist with acculturation.Immigrant elite athletes have also been writtenabout in Israel (Lidor & Blumenstein, 2009) andthe United States (Kontos & Breland-Noble,2002), with these writings complimenting sportsociology contributions that address expansivetrends of athlete relocation (see Maguire, 2004).Work in sport psychology began with Kontos andBreland-Noble in relation to relocated and culturalminority athletes in the United States. Kontos andBreland-Noble proposed that acculturation is bestassessed by the extent to which athletes retain theirhome culture or assimilate into the host culture invarious aspects of their lives, such as eating, dress,and social practices. Depending on how, and to whatdegree athletes acculturate, they risk losing theirhome culture or experiencing alienation (see

Kontos, 2009). In keeping with the psychology ofacculturation literature, findings with indigenousathletes (see Campbell & Sonn, 2009; Schinkeet al., 2006) suggest that the expectations to accul-turate are sometimes placed upon those relocated,contributing to acculturation challenges.

Critical theorists within cultural psychology haveraised questions concerning the conceptions ofacculturation in psychology and how appropriatesuch conceptions are in aligning with immigrants’experiences (e.g., Bowskill, Lyons, & Coyle, 2007;Verkuyten, 2005). Though such critiques differ intheir orientations, there is a consistent belief thatconventional acculturation scholarship is somewhatstatic and perhaps overly simplified (Chirkov, 2009;Rudmin, 2009). Though perspectives other than theforegoing critical views have spurred considerablediscussion about the acculturation process (seeBerry, Poortinga, Segal, & Dasen, 2002), it hasbeen recently argued by critical scholars that suchwork often excludes subtleties such as the fluiditiesof the acculturation process and how these areexperienced as an on-going process (Chirkov,2009), while immigrants mix and move betweencultural practices (see Bhatia, 2002). Consequently,acculturation is positioned, not as an outcome, butrather as something the immigrant might experiencein one instance, and not in another. Furthermore,acculturation is social, involving the immigrants andthose they encounter within various host contexts(Rudmin, 2009). Hence, acculturation pertains tohow immigrants and hosts navigate (i.e. workthrough) differences, and how both parties movebetween their own and each other’s cultural prac-tices (Verkuyten, 2005). More research is needed insport to delineate the acculturation process from theperspectives of participants engaging in the accul-turation process (e.g., athletes, coaches).

Purpose and research questions

Our purpose was to further understand acculturationby identifying some of the key issues concerning theacculturation of immigrant elite athletes in Canadausing a qualitative approach grounded in a conceptionof this topic as a socially constructed process. Thoughvarious levels of immigrant sport participants andtheir respective contexts experience acculturation,the current project was externally funded by a grant-ing agency that only targets research about elite sport.From a social constructionist perspective, accultura-tion experiences are conceptualised as socially (re)produced, as individuals come into contact withothers (e.g., coaches, teammates), rather than inher-ing solely within individuals’ minds or decontextua-lised experiences (McGannon & Mauws, 2000; Rybaet al., 2012; Smith, 2010; Weedon, 2011). The

Immigrant athlete acculturation 1677

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

following research questions guided the study: (a)what are the characteristics of the acculturation pro-cess for immigrant athletes? and (b) what are the keyacculturation issues encountered by immigrant ath-letes navigating an unfamiliar sport context?

Method

Participants

Convenience sampling was used to recruit 13 eliteathlete immigrants (10 male, 3 female) affiliated withone national sport centre, where elite level athletestrain for competition. The athletes, each able tospeak some English, immigrated as adolescentsbefore competing in at least one national champion-ship or representing a national organisation in pro-fessional sport. Schinke et al. (2006) consideredathletes to be elite in the current project, and so, inthe host country, as long as, at the minimum, theycompeted at the national level. Outside of being eliteimmigrants, the athletes varied in gender, country oforigin, sport discipline, and years post-relocation.The athletes ranged from 16 to 32 years of age.Two immigrants were from Columbia, and theremaining athletes were from Brazil, Bulgaria,Cameroon, Czech Republic, Egypt, Hungary,Russia, Slovakia, Sweden, Turkey, and theUkraine. Four athletes were ice-hockey players,three were swimmers, three were boxers, two weresynchronised swimmers, and one was from basket-ball. Five athletes competed in national champion-ships on behalf of a university, four representedmajor junior ice-hockey, three represented a profes-sional sport organisation, and one was an Olympian.The athletes had been in Canada from 1–9 years.

In keeping with the social constructionist assump-tion that the social context impacts experiences andthe meaning(s) attached to such experiences (seeMcGannon & Mauws, 2000; McGannon &Schinke, 2013; Ryba et al., 2012; Weedon, 2011),we sought to gain further understanding of the keyissues concerning the acculturation processes ofimmigrant athletes via gaining perspectives of 10coaches who work with elite immigrant athletes.While ideally we would have also interviewed team-mates and various significant others, such as parentsand friends, doing so was beyond the scope of thegrant’s time constraints. However, interviewing coa-ches, albeit their composition being from a diversityof home countries, provides insight into the socialconstruction of acculturation, particularly since coa-ches have recently been identified as important con-tributors to the acculturation experiences of athletes(see Ryba et al., 2012). Despite the identification ofcoaches as important to interview to further under-stand athletes’ cultural adaptation, as far as we are

aware, no published research has yet included theirvoices. Thus, 10 coaches were recruited to discusstheir interactions with immigrant athletes in theirrespective training contexts to further understandthe social construction of acculturation. The coa-ches, also a convenience sample (9 male, 1 female),varied in age from 28 and 61 years. Five coacheswere Canadian born, and those remaining were fromBosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic,India, and South Korea. Two coaches were fromskiing, two from cycling, and one each from badmin-ton, boxing, swimming, synchronised swimming, taekwon do, and track and field. The coaches variedfrom 3–19 years’ experience working with immigrantelite athletes.

Data collection

Upon receiving approval from the authors’ institu-tional research ethics board, elite immigrant athletesand coaches were emailed an electronic letter invit-ing them to participate in a semi-structured focusgroup. In addition, recruitment posters were placedthroughout the national sport centre, where immi-grant national team athletes gain their sport scienceresources. Focus groups were chosen for this pilotproject, three for athletes, and two for coaches, inorder to gain as many elite immigrant athletes’ andcoaches’ perspectives as possible within a con-strained funding period of one year. Though indivi-dual interviews might have been preferable in termsof participants’ in-depth experiences, the intentthrough this project was to inform the developmentof a federal grant application based on preliminaryfindings. Within forthcoming work of the first andsecond authors, the focus is thus on individual ath-letes’ experiences via conversational interviews, fol-lowed by case studies. Despite these limitations,there were advantages of using focus groups to col-lect the current project’s data: group interviewsallowed for the elicitation of a multiplicity of viewsand experiences within a social context, as well asbeing excellent research tools to gain informationaround lesser known social phenomena (in this caseacculturation in sport) (see Kitzinger, 1994;Morgan, 1988). Ultimately, using focus groups as amethod of data collection aligned with our study’spurpose and underlying social constructionistorientation.

The first group of immigrated athletes was com-prised of five elite amateur athletes (lasting120 min), the second group comprised four profes-sional athletes (lasting 80 min), and the third groupincluded four Canadian Hockey League players(lasting 60 min). The two focus groups with elitecoaches lasted 120 minutes and 90 minutes respec-tively, with five participants in each group. All five

1678 R. J. Schinke et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

digitally recorded focus groups were held in personby two Canadian-born authors, either at the nationalsport centre or at the immigrated athletes’ trainingvenues. Within each athlete focus group, participantswere asked about the following: (a) early sportexperiences post-relocation when compared withprevious sport experiences in their host country; (b)sport experiences they were most and least comfor-table with post-relocation; (c) any unfamiliar com-munication styles experienced working withteammates and coaches; (d) the most and least chal-lenging aspects of pursuing sport in the host country;(e) strategies used when navigating in the sport con-text. Parallel questions were asked to the coaches.

Thematic analysis

We used six steps proposed by Braun and Clarke(2006) to conduct an interpretive thematic analysis.First, the data was transcribed verbatim and the first,second, and third authors read and re-read tran-scripts to familiarise themselves with the content. Areflective segment was also used at this stage by thesesame authors to record initial impressions and notesimilarities and differences. Second, these sameauthors separately identified features in a systematicmanner using general codes across the athlete dataset, and then proceeding with the coach data second,writing these codes in the margins of each transcript.Third, the researchers met and discussed their pre-liminary codes and collated interpretations intofurther themes. Fourth, the coded data were devel-oped by consensus into a thematic map, whereby theresearchers considered the alignment of themes andsub-themes. Fifth, to refine each theme, clear defini-tions were derived for each label. As thematic analy-sis can go beyond organising and describing tointerpreting, Braun and Clarke’s sixth step wasemployed to theorise the significance of the patternsand their broader meanings and implications beyonda surface level. This sixth step comprised selectingcompelling extracts, and relating these back to theresearch questions and the literature.

As the landscape of qualitative research withinsport psychology is expanding to include variousgenres of qualitative research, it is necessary to clar-ify the criteria as to what makes a “good” piece ofresearch (see Sparkes & Smith, 2009) within thethematic analysis genre. In this regard, while a“good” interpretive thematic analysis aims to be sys-tematic and analytic, the above steps are not appliedin a rigid manner as may be the case with deductiveforms of thematic analysis. The identification of keyand noteworthy themes in our thematic analysis was“not necessarily dependent on quantifiable measuresbut rather on whether it captures something impor-tant in relation to the overall research question”

(Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 82). Thus, we strove tobe reflexive and interactive with the data, as opposedto applying foundational “set in stone” rules thatensure trustworthiness and truth. Ultimately, con-cept development and emergent themes were notsolely dependent upon a certain number or preva-lence of themes, but rather, upon what those themesand sub-themes revealed further aboutacculturation.

Results

Results are presented under two central themesencompassing the key issues relating to the accul-turation process: (a) navigating two world views; and(b) acculturation loads. Each of these central themesand the sub-themes within them are the specificanswers to the original research questions concern-ing the characteristics of the acculturation processfor immigrant athletes and the key acculturationissues encountered by immigrant athletes.

Navigating two world views

The immigrant athletes spoke of navigating betweenthe contrasting world views of two countries’ sportcontexts, illustrating acculturation as fluid. Withinthe first order sub-theme, frustrations with the hostcontext, the athletes made sense of their experiencesthrough the lens of their home country, drawingupon training practices (e.g., longer training hours,athlete accountability), and positioning these asdesirable for athlete development. Such practiceswere further used by athletes and also by the coacheswho work with them to highlight frustrations con-cerning training structures in the host country.Conversely, through another first order sub-theme,frustrations with the home context, there wereinstances when the athletes positioned their homecontexts as less humanistic and concerned with ath-lete health than their host contexts.

Frustrations with the host sport context. The secondlevel sub-themes pertaining to frustrations with thehost context were limited finances, and spoiled hostteammates.

Limited finances. The athletes found that the finan-cial load for training varied when they consideredtheir experiences in the host country through thelens of their home country. For many, their homecountry financially supported them so that theycould become full-time athletes. In some instances,the athletes earned a salary for training and competi-tion that supported their entire family, as one femaleathlete noted: “Relocating wasn’t a problem. It wasmore the financials. We just had to adjust financially,

Immigrant athlete acculturation 1679

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

where my parents had to get a job. That was more ofa challenge than anything” (Athlete 1, swimming). Asecond athlete from the same focus group confirmedthe foregoing point articulating that athletes relocat-ing to the host country need to garner financial sup-port, either through working or seeking assistancefrom their parents. This expanded stress load wasunique to the host country, as one athlete observed:

The kids are coming here with enthusiasm. If theyaren’t committed to the sport, the parents won’tpay. This is the biggest difference between Canadaand the rest of the world. In Canada, you have topay to play. If the parents are not 100% sure theirchild wants to be in sport and succeed, they won’tspend the money. (Athlete 3, swimming)

With financial support shifting onto the parents,responsibilities were positioned as familial. Somecoaches tried to ease financial burdens by helpingwith sponsorship, but even then, the divide betweenthe athlete’s previous and current financial supportwere worlds apart:

Training is expensive and her dad does whatever ittakes so that the payments get made and she isable to do it. But it can be very challenging livingon one income. Maybe I can get $600 but that’sher monthly payments. (Coach 6, synchronisedswimming)

Many athletes were surprised by a lack of supportfrom the host country’s federal government. Theseathletes responded to this stressor by negotiatingmoney in exchange for athletic performance. Inthese contexts, private funding opened up opportu-nities, not only for the athletes, but also for theirfamily, as another coach affirmed:

I had a (nationality) family move to Canada. Theyphoned me and wanted their daughter to play withus. They didn’t have a car and very little money,but the kid played. She was getting money at theage of 10 for training. She was able to bring indollars to her family… The parents called backand said we can’t do this. It was their impressionthat we were going to pay them. Because she wassuch a talent, one of the guys took care of it. WhatI am saying is that, here I am, a young athlete fromanother culture and suddenly, I have got to pay.Are you kidding me? (Coach 5, cycling)

Spoiled host teammates. Immigrant athletes alsocompared the mental and physical toughness of ath-letes in their home country with the softness of ath-letes in their host country. Given the challenges posedby learning a new culture, a new language, and a new

sport system, they regarded themselves as hardened,and their host teammates as soft, lazy, and spoiled:

This country has a lot of opportunities and youmake your own choice. Over there, there is earlyselection and the desperation that they have tosucceed in sport is much higher. Over here, youget a cushiony life. If our top athletes do notsucceed, it’s not because they weren’t allowed,it’s because they had too many choices. (Athlete1, swimming)

Coaches had similar perspectives concerningimmigrant athletes in contrast to athletes from thehost country: “Coaches at the top know that (immi-grant) athlete is more determined than the rest of thekids to go far” (Coach 8, swimming). This dichot-omy in work ethic and hunger opened up an oppor-tunity for shared acculturation (see also forthcomingtheme – acculturation loads) for some of the athletes,with the athletes teaching one another somethingfrom their culture of origin. However, the contrastin ambition between home and host athletes did notalways manifest in shared acculturation:

It’s very exciting for immigrants to come toCanada. It’s very hard. If you ask someone “doyou want to live in Canada?” They will say “yes”.So, when the kids come here, their fighting level isamazing. There is a clash between the kids that aresuper excited to be here and those from here thatsay: “oh my god, I have to do my workouts”. Theyare not half as motivated as we (immigrants) are.(Athlete 3, swimming)

Further illustrating the fluidity of meaning andexperiences concerning the acculturation process,the athletes also made sense of their home countrythrough the lens of the host sport context. Duringthese reflections, the meaning of acculturationshifted, as athletes identified positive aspects oftheir sport experiences in their host country anddownplayed certain cultural practices from theirhome country. Such explorations permitted a pulltoward the host country’s cultural sport practices,resulting in shifts in the pendulum of acculturativereflections.

Frustrations with the home sport context. As the athletesreflected upon their experiences training in hostsport contexts, the very athletes who earlier identi-fied weaknesses in their new sport contexts shiftedtheir explanations to reveal aspects that were morepositive than ones encountered earlier in their homecountry. The second level sub-themes identifiedwere nature versus nurture – pre-selection, and nat-ure versus nurture – post-selection.

1680 R. J. Schinke et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

Nature versus nurture – pre-selection. Immigrantathletes often found that the host country employeda system that nurtures athletes regardless of theirphysical composition and talent, whereas theirhome country identified talent early and used naturalselection as their development model. Reflectingupon this contrast permitted some forgiveness ofthe “softness” found in the host sport system. Oneswimmer commented on these two differentapproaches to athlete selection, and how there weremore opportunities for athlete advancement in thehost country: “Here, every coach has to train withyou and correct you. In (home country), if the coachlikes your body, then you will get to practice withher. She looks at the body first” (Athlete 5, synchro-nised swimming). The fact was that for many ofthese athletes, their beginnings were with coachesintolerant of physical imperfections:

Back in (home country), our coaches are super-super mean. They beat you, they swear to you andthey yell at you. One coach in (country) said “youcan’t make it because you have a short neck”.When I came here (coach) said “we won’t yell atpeople. We don’t beat people”. (Athlete 5, syn-chronised swimming)

This same athlete reflected about where and withwhom she presently trained: “We are so fluffyhere”, she said, but with enthusiasm. By “fluffy”,the athlete suggested that coaching in the host coun-try is soft, but here the meaning shifted to “compas-sionate,” instead of its earlier negative conception.Another athlete explained what it is about the hostcountry that is so “fluffy,” but also so liberating(positioning the term as desirable):

Sports in Europe … they pick the right athletes atthe right time to make them into a representativeof the country. Here, there is a lot more freedom.A parent can decide for the kids that they aregoing to do one sport or another. Over there,there are selections and they (coaches) guide youthrough primary and secondary school into whichprogram you will blossom. Then there is naturalselection where teachers make recommendationsto local clubs. In (home), you are done if youdidn’t make the cut by 8, 9, or 10. In the (host)system, it depends how much time you want toput into it. (Athlete 3, swimming)

Confirming the contrast between the pragmaticapproach of an athlete’s home and the “fluffier”(though desirable) host country’s approach, onecoach considered a European transplant with whomshe worked, and some of the psychological baggagebrought from home:

In (country), they had pools of kids to choosefrom. With (name), her coaches told her thatbecause she had a short neck, she would nevermake it to the Olympics. Because synchro is veryaesthetic, the kids are chosen based on height andweight but they also look at the parents to under-stand how someone is going to be. So (name)came over with insecurity - she was told that herneck was too short. (Coach 6, synchronisedswimming)

Nature versus nurture – post-selection. In this sec-ond sub-theme, we see the meaning of the hostcountry’s and home country’s sport practices shift,as the athletes identified that a soft approachafforded benefits, and that a hard approach led todetriment. Beyond athlete selection, several of theparticipants discussed how they were treated in theirhome country as opposed to their host country oncestreamed into a sport. From the vantage of a softerand more compassionate approach to training intheir host country, some participants reflected ontheir home country’s approach as bordering oncruelty once one is selected to train in a specificsport: “They didn’t allow us to drink water or havesnacks. You just had to train” (Athlete 4, synchro-nised swimming). Beyond a lack of access to basicneeds, the same athlete pondered over-training inher home country and how the strong were separatedfrom the weak:

We had a morning and a night practice. Peoplewould get injured because they are not being takencare of, so of course you are going to get injured.Everybody on the team including me got kneeinjuries. Before I came here, I had to stop forthree months. When I came here, I still needed afour month break. (Athlete 4, synchronisedswimming)

A second athlete, having listened to the storyabove, matched stories: “There was a girl on myteam and she was super skinny. She was not allowedto eat. She couldn’t have any sugar, candy, anything.Her bones were sticking out” (Athlete 5, synchro-nised swimming). The first athlete then respondedwith sarcasm and irritation, as she considered hersport training experiences within her home country:“You are basically training when hungry. You can doit, right?” (Athlete 4, synchronised swimming).Offsetting a similar earlier treatment within hishome country, a professional boxer conveyed sur-prise over the treatment he received in his hostsport context when he sustained injuries during aboxing match: “Everybody is in my hands” (Athlete6, boxing). This comment alone suggests a shift ofcontrol into the athlete’s hands, permitting more

Immigrant athlete acculturation 1681

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

autonomy. He continued: “I am happy because theynever let me down. I got hurt in my second worldchampionship and they didn’t let me down” (Athlete6, boxing).

Acculturation loads

Within this central theme participants discussed firstlevel sub-themes when acculturating was eitherexperienced as sharing the load, or shouldering theload. From these data, a deeper explanation isgained concerning how acculturation can be adap-tive or maladaptive dependent on whether it is a one-or two-way process. Furthermore, this central themeclarifies distinctions in how people might regardthemselves as generally supportive of cultural diver-sity, and yet, at the micro level, expect immigrantathletes to sometimes undergo changes withoutreciprocity.

Sharing the load. Sharing the load reflected effortsmade by the immigrant elite athlete and others(e.g., new teammates, other immigrant athletes, coa-ches). It was believed that together, two world viewscould merge via the second order sub-themes ofshared communication learning, shared culturallearning, and shared experiences with establishedimmigrant athletes.

Shared communication learning. Immigrant athletesworked through communication struggles in colla-boration with teammates and coaches who activelysought to meet them part way in understanding. Oneswimmer recalled her first day of training, when shespoke only her home language, and her teammates,English. Together, the athletes overcame a languagebarrier:

I have this memory - there I was not speakinganything and my teammates were standing in acircle, looking at me, not knowing how to explainthis thing. It was a challenge but it was fun. Theymade the effort and I made the effort. It’s impor-tant that they see that I will make the effort tolearn language; then they will help teach me.(Athlete 1, swimming)

There were also instances when teammates andcoaches engaged in language learning exchanges sothat they could converse with new immigrants. Oneexample comes from a coach working with Latinoprofessional boxers who noted, “It’s calledSpanglish. You put a lot of English words togetherwith French and Spanish. We understand each other”(Coach 7, boxing). To overcome the language divide,one athlete proposed a solution for coaches:

You probably could have a book that has 50 lan-guages and 10–15 words from each language. Youshould be able to say ‘hi, how are you? Have agood day.’ The coach and athlete (teammate) canlearn the language. You gain their trust if youspeak a few words in their language. Then youget the athletes for sure right off the bat. Youhave their trust and respect and they can adapt tothe system or club much easier. (Athlete 3,swimming)

When understanding one another is a priorityearly on, there are additional strategies employedby coaches until the sport context and immigrantathlete acculturate to one another, such as commu-nicating through posture and facial expressions. Oneimmigrant coach shared the following strategy:“Language problem is words, but sometimes it islooking at body language. We have program goingon and I make sure everybody see me. Immigrantperson watches and I want them to see me. Solanguage is no problem” (Coach 9, tae kwon do).Overall, the athletes and coaches indicated thatmeeting part way in language learning and additionalcommunication efforts were essential for reasons,including a garnering of mutual trust and respect.

Shared cultural learning. Shared cultural learningpertains to the immigrant athlete and the hostcoach and teammate(s) learning about each other’snuanced cultural norms. An example comes fromone coach who commented on his responsibility tolearn about the athlete’s customs:

It’s important for the coach to have a level of experi-ence with the culture so they have a better chance ofexplaining the differences. The coach is going tohave to find out what that culture supplied themwith to get here, understand the differencesbetween their culture and our culture, and thenhelp bring those two (worlds). (Coach 1, cycling)

In the quote above it seems that the coach is tryingto connect with athletes by seeking to create bridgesfor the two cultures. On the other hand, the coachseems to be referring to the immigrant athlete’s cul-tural standpoint as the “previous culture”, with theterm suggesting athlete assimilation. Despite thispotentially flawed acculturation approach, there wasthe coach’s promise of short-term efforts to meet theathlete somewhere in the middle.

Cultural differences in coaching tactics includednot only what was said, but also how things weresaid. The athlete below articulated how what is anacceptable communication approach in one culturemight vary from what is acceptable in another culture:

1682 R. J. Schinke et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

A communication breakdown could be becausestuff you can’t say in Canada is accepted in othercountries. There is no – you can yell. There arethings that other countries accept so maybe at thebeginning, you have to learn what is going on inour society. A (country’s) coaching style, they do alot of stuff where we are left shaking our headscompared to what I have seen in Canada, espe-cially with girls. (Athlete 3, swimming)

As a result of the potential divide between coach-ing approaches in the host country and what theathlete may be accustomed to, one coach suggesteda form of coach and peer athlete education module,acknowledging the issue but providing a potentialsolution:

There should be a module for preparing coachesand athletes. You have the comment about issueswith nutrition and food. It’s not just a matter oftaking a course but you need to know the ques-tions to ask to ensure that you have the appropri-ate foods. Any coach or sport that it would berelevant could sign up. (Coach 2, skiing)

A second coach expanded what else could bebrought into diversity education, opening the dis-cussion to communication tactics and under-standing that norms vary in terms of dress, andphysical space. While these approaches are sim-plistic, armed with these understandings, the coa-ches discussed that one can reach athletes byexplaining the meaning behind one’s own coach-ing pedagogy so that it becomes more accessibleand palatable:

Cultures do different things. Just understandingthat one fundamental thing will help. I just cameback from the world championships. Some of thegirls were covered from head to foot. What’s thereason for it? We must educate our coaches thatyou might get a kid that looks different, talksdifferent, and uses things differently. Ideas of per-sonal space might be different. What can be doneand what can’t be done. I have immigrant parentsfrom (country). They encourage me to be mean totheir child. They view that if I am not yelling andscreaming, I must not be teaching… I must notcare. (Coach 10, badminton)

From the above quotations it is further evidentthat coaches may struggle with their own culturalpractices in relation to another’s cultural prac-tices, as they attempt to meet immigrant athletessomewhere in the middle. Such intersections are apoint of the acculturation process, and they reveal

that struggles in the process can be reciprocal andnegotiated by athletes and coaches.

Sharing experiences with established immigrantathletes. The final sub-strategy identified is whenimmigrant athletes forge connections with immi-grant teammates. By exchanging experiences,acculturation processes are facilitated, such aslearning the contextual ropes, as one athleteexplained, “Based on what I’ve seen and come torealize through what other people have been goingthrough, I think having an entity inside the swim-ming federation with people that speak more thanEnglish or French would be good” (Athlete 2,swimming). Though the reference to an “entity”might mean any person to assist with acculturation,this athlete clarified what sort of resource wasdesired: “Immigrants that are easy to find andimmigrants that have different backgrounds wherewe can go to and talk to so they can show the ropeswould help” (Athlete 2, swimming). One profes-sional boxer noted that he shared a domicilewith his immigrant teammate and that they cooktogether: “We are always together. We live in thesame apartment. We have the same story” (Athlete8, boxing). This athlete later shared that he and histeammate also socialised and navigated around thecity, working as a team.

Finally, another athlete proposed that when immi-grants could not be found in the sport context, abroader network of more established immigrant ath-letes could be made available for recent transplantsto help them navigate the new sport context:

Give them the opportunity to meet with us whohave already experienced it. Maybe if they (newimmigrants) want, they could contact us. Wecould help them see that there is an end. Thereis a light at the end of the tunnel. It seems never-ending when you first come. It does get easier.(Athlete 3, swimming)

This broader social network helped to reach ath-letes who otherwise might not have gained peersupport from other athletes that have undergonesimilar experiences due to lack of access in theirsport contexts. More generally, there is evidencefrom these discussions from athletes and coachesthat a sharing of the load can happen in the sportcontext or in the broader sport community, withthe former being facilitated by coaches and team-mates and the latter facilitated by immigrant ath-letes across sport disciplines. These shoulderingattempts seem to pull immigrant athletes toward amore positive view of their host country and newsport culture.

Immigrant athlete acculturation 1683

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

Shouldering the load. Immigrant athletes also foundthat they were expected to acculturate to the normsand new contexts of the host country through thesecond order sub-theme of learning the languageone-directionally.

Learning the language one-directionally. Immigrantathletes discussed that they were expected to learnthe prominent language with little support from theirsport context. The option was either to pick up thelanguage or deselect from sport altogether:

I was quick to pick it up because I wanted tocontinue in the sport. I had no choice. I spentmost of my time having to listen and learn. Iexperienced it in school as opposed to my class-mates who didn’t have that extra activity. Myclassmates had a harder time to pick it up. I prac-ticed. I wrote stories to myself about my day. Iwrote “today, I did this and that.” I kept writing. Irewrote the same stories four or six times. I alwaysimproved. I guess I just learned on my own.(Athlete 1, swimming)

Above, we see an athlete, who similar to otherparticipants, found that the onus was placed on herto do the learning, with her attempts followed bycontextual openings, such as acceptance in thesport context. One professional boxer carried for-ward views of the athlete above, who spoke directlybefore him:

The relationship is good (with others in the sportcontext). I understand a bit of French and someEnglish. At first the language was difficult. Peoplein Canada like that I speak a little French andEnglish. When immigrants make an effort tospeak French, people are very friendly with them.(Athlete 7, boxing)

Hence, efforts are sometimes expected of the ath-letes, before their hosts meet them part way. Whenimmigrant athletes did not make such an effort, theyacknowledged that connections with others in thesport context were sometimes compromised.

Learning the language seemed a bumpy road forthese athletes, as they made mistakes with wordchoices and pronunciations. One Russian ice-hockey player shared his struggle with language,and how those within the host culture found ithumorous as he struggled: “I say wrong stuff. Idon’t say ‘hi.’ I say ‘he.’ I say ‘she’ when talkingabout man. They say ‘(name), he is man and she isgirl’” (Athlete 12, ice-hockey). Perhaps the ribbingduring these awkward searches for language leftsome immigrants reluctant to attempt the host lan-guage. Conversely, just as speaking English would

open up access to teammates, it could also open upa window to the sport context, including knowledgeimparted by coaches:

Here, I am just one guy from Russia. If you do notspeak English, it’s hard. Same in the game, it’shard. If you don’t speak English, you don’t under-stand what coach is telling you. I try to talk to guysand learn from movies and TV. (Athlete 12, ice-hockey)

Ultimately, the onus was placed on the athlete tolearn the language quickly, or struggle as an athleteand teammate. When considering the importance oflanguage, the contrast of where the responsibility isplaced determined how the athletes approached andexperienced this monumental challenge, as eithershared or shouldered.

Discussion

As noted in our introduction, while the topic ofathlete migration has been explored in some detailin sport sociology (e.g., Maguire, 2004; Njororai,2010; Weedon, 2011) sport psychology scholars areonly beginning to consider the topic of immigrantathlete acculturation, with present knowledge mostlyderived from conceptual or anecdotal sources (e.g.,Kontos, 2009; Schinke et al., 2011). Two parallelexceptions are studies conducted with Aboriginalelite athletes (Campbell & Sonn, 2009; Schinkeet al., 2006) relocating from marginalised culturalcommunities to urban settings in the same country.Interviews with these athletes expanded our under-standing about the challenges associated with reloca-tion to a host cultural context. What one finds whenconsidering these two research studies are athleteswho shouldered the acculturation load, often with-out support from teammates and coaches. As theathletes considered their stress, they often wishedfor shared acculturation to alleviate that stress. Inaddition, the athletes’ acculturation processes werepresented as something eventually resolved throughcultural assimilation, or enculturation via alienationwithin the sport context or a return to their homecultural community (see Schinke, Hanrahan, &Catina, 2009; Schinke et al., 2006).

Within this project, there are two types of accul-turation that emerged, shouldered and shared, akinto the work of Schinke et al. (2006) and Campbelland Sonn (2009). Within a shouldered load, experi-ences are defined as encountered alone or with sup-port, but without reciprocal learning. When theimmigrant athletes shoulder acculturation, itbecomes clearer how shifts toward alienation canhappen (see Chirkov, 2009). There are alsoinstances when the immigrant athletes opt not to

1684 R. J. Schinke et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

alienate; in these moments they seem pragmatic (seeWeedon, 2011), all the while attempting to over-come anger, such as when seeking to learn a lan-guage whilst being mocked. These tensions arefurther clarified when expectations from some ofthe coaches, as explained by a few immigrant ath-letes, are considered. In some instances it was articu-lated via the ice-hockey players that their coachesexpected them to learn the language as a prerequisiteto inclusion. There is a difference when immigratedathletes choose to engage in acculturation for prag-matic purposes as compared with attempts to adoptaspects of the host culture (Weedon, 2011).

When the shared load of acculturation is consid-ered, there is evidence of how the immigrant andhost athletes and coaches engage in the positiveresponse of integration (Berry, 1997), where severalworld views merge. Consider the female swimmer inthis project teaching her teammates a different workethic in exchange for language learning. Consideralso, the words of one coach: “Coaches at the topknow that (immigrant) athlete is more determinedthan the rest of the kids to go far” (Coach, 8, swim-ming). With these tougher immigrant athletes, thecoaches often considered how to use them as thestandard of effort required during training. Thougha case is made for shared learning and its advantagesfor immigrant athletes, it would seem that the advan-tages of sharing extend beyond the immigrant athletepragmatically to their hosts.

The most innovative aspect of the immediate pro-ject findings pertains to immigrant athletes navigat-ing between two world views while acculturating; inthis sense one cultural view point is not replaced ordropped for another, but rather, the two are layeredand may be used by athletes as resources to negotiatetheir experiences and behaviours in the host sportcontext (Weedon, 2011). Within critical accultura-tion writings, Benson (2001) and Chirkov (2009; seealso Verkuyten, 2005) have urged those interested inthe psychology of acculturation to consider this pro-cess as fluid as opposed to a resolution that even-tually becomes fixed. To this point our authors havebeen unable to find studies in sport psychologyarticulating this fluidity, and yet it makes sense thatthe process involves looking through two lenses toexperience one’s self as an acculturating athlete: thehome context and the host’s context. Despite fluiditybeing part of the acculturation process, what is cur-rently known from sport psychology is largely basedon static conceptualisations. In this regard, athletesmight acculturate in some regard differently,depending on whether they move toward or swingaway from the cultural norm(s) of the host sportcontext (e.g., Kontos & Breland-Noble, 2002;Schinke et al., 2009).

Though these two extremes in the pendulum maybe experienced at points in the athlete’s accultura-tion, our results allow us to open up the possibilitythat the process does not end when athletes experi-ence or exert certain forms of acculturation.Consider the term “fluffy” expressed by an athlete,with its meaning first suggesting lax standards, andlater positioned as comforting. As the term wassocially constituted, its meaning was consideredwithin the focus group discussion by the athletes,and its meaning shifted throughout the discussion,at one moment reflecting one lens and way of think-ing, and during the second moment reflecting on asecond lens and way of thinking (see McGannon &Mauws, 2000). Results from the current study sug-gest that coaches can facilitate the bridging of worldviews, via a positive view of the host contextbalanced with what can be learned from their immi-grant athletes’ home countries.

Conclusion

Acculturation is a complex process for immigratedelite athletes as well as those with whom they train.The present manuscript is the first sport psychologystudy the authors are aware of that provides empiri-cal evidence concerning immigrant athlete accul-turation as a fluid process, suggesting thatacculturation can be both adaptive or maladaptivedepending on whether acculturation loads are one-directional or bi-directional during each circum-stance. Sport researchers might expand upon thetopic of immigrant athlete acculturation by continu-ing to use qualitative methodologies that capture itscomplexities as a multifaceted, fluid, socially con-structed process. Where the present authors inte-grated the use of focus group data from athletesand coaches, the scholarship in this area would ben-efit from case studies and one-on-one interviews andobservations. Furthermore, acculturation is a sharedprocess encountered by immigrant athletes, team-mates, coaches, and sport scientists. Case studiesought to be constructed where scholars might pro-vide a holistic description and interpretation of eachelite sport context from various social agents in thesport context. In addition, as was the case with theparticipants from this project, athletes often immi-grate across national borders before they becomeelite athletes. Consequently, sport researchersshould expand what is presently known about theacculturation of elite sport participants to commu-nity and pre-elite sport contexts.

Gaining insight into the fluidities and shared pro-cesses associated with acculturation will permit sportscientists further knowledge of how to work withimmigrant athletes in a manner that supports their

Immigrant athlete acculturation 1685

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4

cultural identities. However, it should also be recog-nised that each sport context is unique, leading tovariations in how acculturation is experienced, eitheras monistic (i.e. shouldered) or shared. Furthermore,there are national cultural norms evident in each hostcontext, a unique sub-culture, and also uniqueness interms of each member’s intersecting aspects of iden-tity (e.g., age, gender, sexual orientation, race, reli-gion). These aspects are often invisible in sportcontexts, and yet, they inform the constituent mem-bers, and how these members experience and influ-ence the acculturation process. Applied practitionersneed to look and listen closely to how immigrantathletes and host members relate in order to discernhow the nuances of acculturation are unfolding, why,and where and when to assist with shared learning.

References

Adler, P. (1975). The transnational experience. An alternativeview of culture shock. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15(4),13–23.

Benson, C. (2001). Cultural psychology of the self: Place, moralityand art in human worlds. Oxford: Routledge.

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation.Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5–68.

Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segal, M. H., & Dasen, P. R.(2002). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bhatia, S. (2002). Acculturation, dialogical voices and the con-struction of the diasporic self. Theory and Psychology, 12, 55–77.

Bowskill, M., Lyons, E., & Coyle, A. (2007). A rhetoric of accul-turation: When integration means assimilation. British Journalof Social Psychology, 46, 793–813.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psy-chology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.

Campbell, E. E., & Sonn, C. C. (2009). Transitioning into theAFL: Indigenous football players’ perspectives. Athletic Insight,11. Retrieved from http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol11Iss3/Feature.htm.

Chirkov, V. (2009). Critical psychology of acculturation: What dowe study and how do we study it, when we investigate accultura-tion. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33, 94–105.

Day, R. D. (1981). Ethnic soccer clubs in London, Canada: Astudy in assimilation. International Review for the Sociology ofSport, 16, 37–52.

Fuligni, A. J. (1998). The adjustment of children from immigrantfamilies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 99–103.

Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: Theimportance of interaction between research participants.Sociology of Health, 16, 103–121.

Kontos, A. P. (2009). Multicultural sport psychology in theUnited States. In R. J. Schinke & S. J. Hanrahan (Eds.),Cultural sport psychology (pp. 103–116). Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.

Kontos, A. P., & Breland-Noble, A. M. (2002). Racial/ethnicdiversity in applied sport psychology: A multicultural

introduction to working with athletes of color. The SportPsychologist, 16, 296–315.

Lidor, R., & Blumenstein, B. (2009). Working with elite athletesin Israel. In R. J. Schinke, & S. J. Hanrahan (Eds.), Culturalsport psychology (pp. 141–154). Champaign, IL: HumanKinetics.

Magee, J., & Sugden, J. (2002). “The world at their feet”:Professional football and international labor migration.Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 26, 421–437.

Maguire, J. (2004). Sport labor migration research revisited.Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 28, 477–482.

Maguire, J., & Stead, D. (1996). Far pavilions? Cricket migrants,foreign sojourns and contested identities. International Reviewfor the Sociology of Sport, 31, 1–24.

McGannon, K. R., & Mauws, M. K. (2000). Discursive psychol-ogy: An alternative approach for studying adherence to exerciseand physical activity. Quest, 52, 148–165.

McGannon, K. R., & Schinke, R. J. (2013). “My first choice is towork out at work; then I don’t feel bad about my kids”: Adiscursive psychological analysis of motherhood and physicalactivity participation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 179–188.

Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. London:Sage.

Njororai, W. W. S. (2010). Global inequality and athlete labourmigration from Kenya. Leisure, 34, 443–461.

Oberg, K. (1960). Culture shock: Adjustment to new culturalenvironments. Practical Anthropology, 7, 170–179.

Rudmin, F. (2009). Constructs, measurements and models ofacculturation and acculturative stress. International Journal ofIntercultural Relations, 33, 106–123.

Ryba, T. V., Haapanen, S., Mosek, S., & Ng, K. (2012). Towardsa conceptual understanding of acute cultural adaptation: Apreliminary examination of ACA in female swimmers.Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 4, 80–97.

Schinke, R. J., Hanrahan, S. J., & Catina, P. (2009). Introductionto cultural sport psychology. In R. J. Schinke & S. J. Hanrahan(Eds.), Cultural sport psychology (pp. 3–11). Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.

Schinke, R. J., Michel, G., Gauthier, A., Pickard, P., Danielson,R., Peltier, D., … Peltier, M. (2006). The adaptation to elitesport: A Canadian Aboriginal perspective. The SportPsychologist, 20, 435–448.

Schinke, R. J., Yukelson, D., Bartolacci, G., Battochio, R. C., &Johnstone, K. (2011). The challenges encountered by immi-grated elite athletes. Sport Psychology in Action, 2, 1–11.

Smith, B. (2010). Narrative inquiry: Ongoing conversations andquestions for sport and exercise psychology research.International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 3,87–107.

Sparkes, A. C., & Smith, B. (2009). Judging the quality of quali-tative inquiry: Criteriology and relativism in action. Psychologyof Sport and Exercise, 10, 491–497.

Verkuyten, M. (2005). Immigration discourses and their impacton multiculturalism: A discursive and experimental study.British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 223–240.

Weedon, G. (2011). ‘Glocal boys’: Exploring experiences ofacculturation of migrant youth footballers in Premiere Leagueacademies. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 47,200–216.

Zaharna, R. (1989). Self-shock: The double-binding challenge ofidentity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13,501–525.

1686 R. J. Schinke et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and]

at 1

1:50

18

Oct

ober

201

4