SOCIOLOGY OF SPORT JOURNAL, 1985, 2, 144-156

Explaining Positive Deviance: Becker's Model and the Case of Runners and Bodybuilders

Keith Ewald Department of Development, State of Ohio

Robert M. Jiobu The Ohio State University

This research explores the topic of "positive deviance," that is, behavior which is pronormative but becomes deviant when pursued with an intensity and extensity going beyond conventional bounds. An application of Becker's original explanation for mari- juana smoking was adapted to the cases of serious, but not champion, long-distance runners and bodybuilders. Questionnaire data on 72 bodybuilders and 136 long-distance runners were analyzed using factors analysis and Guttman analysis. For runners, three dimensions were discovered and named "experience," "sensation," and "enjoyment." Guttman analysis suggested that the three dimensions formed a sequence supporting the Becker model. No support for the model was found among the bodybuilders' data. Reasons why the model m&ht not apply to activities such as bodybuilding-were discussed. Overall, it was concluded that the Becker model does explain socialization into positive deviance but that the conditions under which it does so must be further documented.

Positive Deviance

Most sociological research on deviance focuses on what may be termed "negative deviance, " that is, the violation of norms resulting in behavior deemed bad or undesirable. Put otherwise, negative deviance is counter-normative. Because societal concern often focuses on social issues, an emphasis on negative deviance is understandable. This em- phasis, however, should not deflect attention from the possibility of a different kind of deviance, namely, positive deviance.

Positive deviance, rather than being counter-normative, is pronormative. Even so, such behavior becomes deviant if it is extended and intensified beyond the bounds deemed appropriate. Such behavior may be defined as bad or undesirable but it is not as heavily sanctioned as negative deviance, nor does positive deviance constitute a major social issue. The positive deviant is simply viewed as carrying a good thing too far.'

Direct all correspondence to Robert M. Jiobu, Dept. of Sociology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210.

EXPLAINING POSITIVE DEVIANCE 145

Positive and negative deviance differ as to the kinds of norms being violated, and the resulting social definitions are therefore different. Nevertheless, the same socializa- tion process explains both kinds. As Schur (1979:219-220) states:

One learns to deviate by becoming familiar with general possibilities, by acquiring specific opportunities and skills, by developing attitudes that permit and support the deviant acts. This happens, just as any other learning does, through a variety of direct and indirect "transmissions" of knowledge ranging from childhood and continuing socialization to formal preparation for and apprenticeships in a deviant role.

If one learns to be negatively deviant through a generic process of social learning, then that same process should also explain positive deviance. One of the earliest recogni- tions of positive deviance (though not using the term) occurred in the famous Hawthorne Studies. Workers in the bank wiring room had well established norms defining produc- tivity as good, but this held only so long as the productivity level was not too high. Workers whose output exceeded informal production norms were positive deviants and subject to ridicule as "rate busters" or "speed kings," and to other sanctions as well.

Other examples of positive deviants are students who study beyond what student culture considers appropriate ("grinds"), people who work many hours or focus on their work to the exclusion of their personal life ("workaholics"), or people who devote large amounts of time to a particular activity such as continually working on computer pro- grams late into the night ("hackers"). In each case, while the activity per se is deemed laudatory, what is deviant is the extent and intensity to which it is pursued.

Running and Bodybuilding as Positive Deviance

This research examines two sports: long-distance running and bodybuilding. In order to provide contextual information, we should expand upon how sport constitutes positive deviance.

As a whole, sport is positive in two major respects. First, it embodies many values that American culture holds most high. For example, Edwards (1973) summarizes these values as follows: good character and hard work, the positive outcomes of competition, the desirability of physical and mental fitness, and the inherent goodness of religiosity and patriotism.

Second, fitness and health have become major preoccupations of popular culture. Several news magazines, for instance, have featured articles on health and the role exer- cise plays in acquiring it. Similarly, there has been a proliferation of popular books on participant sports in recent years. Sales of exercise equipment, membership in health spas and exercise clubs, not to mention the now common sight of joggers of both sexes and all ages, bespeak a health fad or perhaps a social movement (Curry & Jiobu, 1984). Statistics collected by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare show that approximately 40% of the adult population claims to participate in some form of organized sport. Analyzing the same data a different way shows that 50% claim to participate in regular exercise (HEW, 1978). Clearly this number of participants cannot be competing at championship levels. Their goals must be recreational and/or health oriented. Sport, by merging with this con- cern for health, acquires a positive halo: "It is good for you."

These two factors imply that sport can be considered-at least in some instances- as pronormative or positive. On the other hand, serious (not necessarily champion) long- distance runners and bodybuilders are also deviant in the positive sense. Participants devote

146 Ewald and Jiobu

a prodigious amount of energy and time to their activities. To anticipate some of the results of the present study, it was found that 94% of the runners Sumeyed exercised 3 or more days per week and 79% had workouts lasting from 1 to 2 hours. Of bodybuilders, 99% exercised at least 3 days per week for at least 1 hour while 89% exercised for more than 2 hours. Moreover, 88% of bodybuilders and 79% of runners had been participating in their respective activities for at least 2 years; approximately 20% of each group had been participating for at least 6 years. Whatever the normative standards regarding appropriate amounts of exercise might be, the serious runner and bodybuilder go well beyond the boundaries.

At a common-sense level, the question arises, "Why do they do it?" For the participants queried in this study, the rewards of winning athletic prestige and money do not apply. Like the overwhelming majority of participants in any competitive activity, few if any were high-level champions.

The question becomes harder to answer when one considers that the activities in question can be unpleasant. Indeed coaches and drill sergeants often use running as punish- ment (running laps). Lifting weight, in the form of one's own body (i.e., push-ups and sit-ups) is likewise used for punishment. As it so often turns out, then, this question does not have a common-sense answer. We suggest that the seeds of an answer can be found in the concept of positive addiction and Becker's model of socialization, each of which we will discuss in turn.

Positive Addiction

In using the term positive addiction, we are primarily focusing on the concept pioneered by William Glasser. By positive addiction, Glasser (1976:47) meant "a trancelike, transcendental mental state that accompanies that addictive exercise.. . .That is the core of positive addiction." In regard to long-distance runners, he argues that their initial motiva- tion is usually a concern for health. However, if they maintain a regular, rigorous pro- gram, they will become positively addicted, probably without even realizing it (Glasser, 197651). This addiction nevertheless is manifested when they must stop running for some reason. Then they become irritable, touchy, and generally out of sorts.

Although Glasser does not mention it, positive addiction is related to autotelic activity of many kinds. In a classic statement, Johan Huizinga (1950: 10-13) suggested that play was a free, voluntary experience, not serious but nevertheless an intensely ab- sorbing activity done for its own sake. Csikszentmihalyi (1975) used the term "flow" to describe a state one sometimes enters when engaging passionately in an activity with relatively immediate feedback, a state of being "lost in rapture." This state is pleasurable enough that people will seek it out for its own sake.

Whether one emphasizes the concept of positive addiction and seeks its biological basis as Glasser (1976) does, or emphasizes flow and its philosophical implications (see Csikszentrnihalyi, 1975; Leonard, 1974), or emphasizes the older concept of play as dif- ferentiated from work (nonplay), these concepts all have the idea that a strenuous physical activity can somehow become transformed into an activity that is pleasurable and sought for its own sake. We take this to be the defining element in our usage of the term "positive addiction."

Approaching this issue from a different perspective, Edward Deci (1975) has suggested that much of human behavior results from intrinsic motivation, or a need to feel competent and possessing self-determination. He further cites evidence supporting the hypothesis that extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are inversely related.

EXPLAINING POSITIVE DEVIANCE

There is some empirical evidence supporting various facets of the aforementioned concepts. Snyder and Spreitzer (1979) compared college student athletes (defined as those who had participated in high school competition) to nonathletes. As expected, nonathletes of both sexes felt that to "have fun" was the primary reward of sport; 55% and 47% so answered the poll. Nevertheless, even about 25% of the athletes kso agreed with the emphasis on having fun. One implication of these results is that intrinsic motivation is an important factor in physical activity.

In another study, Spreitzer and Snyder (1983) found that 53% of the runners polled agreed that the greatest value of physical activity is the thrill of competition, as contrasted to 77% of racquetball players. Consistent with this de-emphasis on competition by run- ners, more of them agreed that physical activity was a form of artistic expression (76% versus 67%).

If we accept, at least as a working hypothesis, that an autotelic, intrinsically moti- vating state results from certain kinds of physical activity, then it is reasonable to ask how this state develops. What is the process by which one becomes positively addicted? We suggest that a model introduced by Howard Becker provides a reasonable starting point to this inquiry.

Becker Model

In 1963 Howard S. Becker wrote a seminal article, "Becoming a Marijuana User," in which he proposed a model explaining the process by which one is socialized into smoking marijuana on a regular basis. Although running and bodybuilding are vastly different from marijuana smoking, we suggest that a common socialization process underlies them.

Becker begins by noting that marijuana smoking is neither inherently pleasant nor physiologically addictive. The neophyte must learn to enjoy it. According to the model, the socialization process consists of sequential stages through which one passes. Becker divides the process into three main stages: learning technique, learning to perceive ef- fects, and learning to enjoy effects. This process is a social one, taking place within the context of a primary group and being supported by a subculture of marijuana use. As an end result of the socialization process, the user learns to answer "yes" when asked, "Is smoking marijuana fun?"

Becker tested his model on a nonprobability sample of 50 marijuana users, half of whom were musicians. In effect he used a snowball sampling technique: Each respondent was asked to provide the names and whereabouts of other respondents. Given the legal situation regarding marijuana smoking during the time Becker conducted his research, as well as the cultural definition of marijuana as a "fiendish drug," snowball sampling was probably necessary. More problematic than the sampling procedures, however, was Becker's method of analysis: He used analytic induction.

Analytic induction is a methodology wherein an explanation is evaluated in light of new data (i.e., each new respondent). If the datum does not support the explanation, then the explanation is recast to accommodate the deviant datum, as well as all other previous data. Analytic induction has been criticized heavily. Without going into details, it will suffice to note that the method calls for ex post facto explanations of data already gathered. Since the explanation is recast for every negative case, eventually all cases fit or support the explanation and perfect explanation must inevitably result. This hardly conforms to the standard scientific logic of verifying a priori hypotheses on the basis of a body of data which may or may not conform to the original prediction (Robinson, 1951; Turner, 1953).

148 Ewald and Jiobu

Provided the caveats just discussed are borne in mind, the model-which is widely accepted for explaining certain kinds of negative deviance-deserves a wider application. We propose that it can be used to explain the process by which people become socialized into positive deviance.

In our application of the Becker model, the first stage remains essentially un- changed. We refer to it as "experience," and it consists of learning techniques. However simple running and bodybuilding may appear to the nonparticipant, that is not the case. For instance, runners must learn how to run (proper stride, footfall, posture, length of workout, distance, speed, types of running, diet, stretching, etc.), as well as proper dress for various weather conditions, shoes for different road surfaces, and so on. Similarly, bodybuilders must learn the proper exercises, how to perform them, how often, and with what weights and on what equipment; they must also learn proper nutrition, rest, and pos- ing routines. Some bodybuilders also take ballet lessons to learn graceful movements. Without some introduction to technique, both the novice bodybuilder and runner are like- ly to encounter difficulties that will discourage further participation.

We view the second stage-called "sensation"-as combining two subprocesses: learning to recognize the effects of the activity and learning to express the effects in con- ceptual categories understood by other participants. Both of these subprocesses occur simultaneously, one reinforcing the other. For instance, runners must learn to distinguish between different stages of tiredness. During the early part of a run the runner is likely to feel out of breath, but with experience he or she learns that the feeling will pass and be followed by another feeling, the so-called second wind. The experienced runner also knows that near the end of a very long run there is "the wallw--fatigue so great as to be disorienting. Bodybuilders talk of "pumping up": After exercise, the muscles take on the appearance most often shown in photographs. The muscles enlarge and their "cuts" appear, giving them a hard, chisled look, which is one effect the bodybuilder strives to attain.

Unless participants learn to perceive these consequences of exercise and express them in meaningful terms (i.e., in the argot of the subculture), they are not likely to pass into the third stage, called "enjoyment": The participant learns to define the effects of the activity as pleasurable. This process is helped along by first learning proper technique and how to communicate with others in the subculture.

At this point of one's progress in the activity, positive addiction has taken hold. New participants learn that the second wind is good and therefore enjoyable. They learn that being pumped up is a pleasurable state (in fact, one world champion describes it as akin to sexual pleasure). What the outsider perceives as self-torture, the insider redefines as enjoyable and worthy of pursuing for its intrinsic rewards.2

Other Models: Life-Cycle Approach. The present approach differs from, but is related to, a life-cycle approach. For instance, Snyder and Spreitzer (1978) suggest a com- plex causal model beginning with interests of the athlete's mother and father. Parental interests encourage the child to participate in sport, which in turn leads to an evaluation of the child's abilities. If the evalution is positive, the process goes on throughout life, eventually leading to adult sports involvement. At that point, participation may be rein- forced by the participant's spouse.

Kenyon and McPherson (1973) also focus on reinforcement over the life cycle. They suggest a model in which the participant's earlier experiences are reinforced by family, school, peers, and community. Over time, these same agents of socialization continue en- couraging the participants who show promise.

EXPLAINING POSITIVE DEVIANCE 149

In contrast to these approaches, our adaptation of the Becker model does not isolate specific agents at a specific point in the life cycle. Rather, the model suggests a generic social process. The agents can enter the process at any of the three stages. And probably the same agents have different effects at different stages. For example, the peer group may teach the neophyte some basic techniques. Later, or even simultaneously, the peer group may also teach a vocabulary through which the neophyte learns to express felt effects.

This process can begin and end at any time during a person's life. It does not presuppose that socialization in childhood is prerequisite to later participation. An adult may be a neophyte and pass through the stages of our model. In that way the model helps explain the phenomenon of "late bloomers," that is, persons who have had little if any contact with sport, physical recreation, and exercise, yet suddenly become highly enthusi- astic participants in later life. This point is particularly relevant to the present study, as it is based on samples of adults. In short, we apply a modified version of Becker's model, but in contrast to Becker we use a deductive method of research based on survey data.

Procedures

Long-distance runners and bodybuilders in Columbus, Ohio, were suweyed during 1978-1979. The data to be reported are for males only. Although females were surveyed, their number proved too small for statistical analysis, especially among bodybuilders.

Sample. Initially several key informants were contacted. They provided infor- mation regarding the technical aspects of each sport, how each activity was organized, and the names of local clubs. Operationally, a serious participant was defined as one who belonged to a club. One runners' club and one bodybuilders' club agreed to cooperate in the research and provided membership lists, which were the basis for obtaining respondents. Because serious runners and bodybuilders who belong to clubs may differ from nonaffiliated participants and from recreational participants, respondents cannot be considered a simple random sample from a well identified whole. This should be borne in mind when assessing the generality of findings.

Questionnaire. A preliminary questionnaire was constructed and pretested. Along with the key informants, a physical education class in conditioning and one in jogging (taught at The Ohio State University) served as pretest respondents. Several questions were revised, and the final questionnaire consisted of four main sections: (a) general background information; (b) questions concerning affects, feelings, meanings, personal interpretations of the activity; (c) questions concerning the amount of interpersonal contacts participants have with other participants, and the participants' sources of information about the activi- ty; and (d) open-ended questions soliciting the participants' biographies vis-8-vis the ac- tivity and their feelings and descriptions of various aspects of the activity. Sections 2 and 3 had Likert-type response categories.

The questionnaire was designed to be self-explanatory. Approximately half of the questionnaires were personally delivered to the respondents, who immediately fdled them out. For the other half a variety of techniques were used: mail to and mail back; mail to and follow-up by telephone; or delivery to a group and mail back. Usable question- naires were obtained from 72 bodybuilders and 138 long-distance runners, which indicated response rates of 71% for bodybuilders and 76% for runners. These figures are within the range of values accepted in this type of survey research.

150 Ewald and Jiobu

Findings

Factor Analysis. In order to provide evidence concerning the existence of three dimensions corresponding to experience, sensation, and enjoyment, factor analysis was first performed on the data for runners and bodybuilders. Socialization is a process, not a static nor isolated event, and interdependence between dimensions in the model are ex- pected. This consideration suggested the appropriateness of using oblique r~ ta t ion .~

Squared multiple correlation coefficients were used as estimates of the cornrnun- ality, and iterations to improve estimates were undertaken. An eigen value of 1.0 or greater was the criterion for accepting a factor, and a loading of .30 or greater was the criterion for accepting a relation between an item and the underlying factor. Because the sole pur- pose of the factor analysis was to determine whether three dimensions existed as hypothe- sized, only the factor pattern matrix is relevant here. The values on the pattern matrix indicate which variables cluster together; the higher the value, the more highly the variable is associated with that dimension. However, the values do not have absolute limits.4

Table 1 shows the runners' data. Results are exceptionally clear statistically. Three factors emerged with eigen values of 1.0 or greater, as hypothesized. For the first factor, the following items have loadings of .30 or greater: sport level, workouts per week, and length of workouts.5 These items tap a dimension of commitment to running. Respondents who score high devote great effort and time to the activity. Naturally, the more they prac- tice the more experience they accrue. While experience and commitment may be thought of as separate dimensions, in practice they cannot be separated. Accordingly, we call this factor "experience. "

Table 1

Factor Pattern for Runners*

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 experience sensation enjoyment

Sports level Workoutslweek Aver. length of workouts lncreased self-concept lncreased mental health lncreased mental strength As fun As art form Get hooked on Sacrifice other activities

Eigen values

*The factor pattern gives the best indication of clustering of variables, but is not an accurate index of the percent of variance of a variable accounted for by a factor. Factor pattern cor- relations may exceed 1 .O, but there is no statistical meaning to such phenomena. **Variables defining each factor. The correlation between dimensions are: experience and sensation, .40; experience and enjoyment, .58; sensation and enjoyment, .47.

EXPLAINING POSITIVE DEVIANCE 151

The second factor consists of increases in self-concept, mental health, and mental strength6 These physical and mental sensations are commonly mentioned in the profes- sional and popular literature on running and are the subject of frequent discussion among participants. Apparently, runners can recognize and express outcomes that they believe result from training. We name this factor "sensation."

Table 1 further shows a third factor consisting of respondents defining the activity as fun, as art, as something one gets hooked on, and as something one sacrifices for.7 In the model being tested, enjoyment may include frivolity and jocularity, but it goes fur- ther. Enjoyment refers to a deeper, more aesthetic concept. The feelings of fun, of artistic pleasure, of being important enough to sacrifice for, and of being hooked all suggest that this factor might be appropriately named "enjoyment" (or positive addicti~n)~ in accor- dance with our adaptation of the Becker model.

While the data for the runners are clear, the same is not true for bodybuilders (Table 2). Three factors emerge, but for the most part they are not clearly defmed or directly comparable to the factors found among runners. For instance, workouts per week and length of workouts both positively load on factor 1, but so does mental health. Mental health also negatively loads on factor 2, as does increased mental strength and getting hooked on the activity. Only factor 3 is directly comparable to the one found for runners. I t consists of bodybuilding as fun, as art, something one gets hooked on, and as something to sacrifice for.

In light of these ambiguities, the conservative choice is not to name the factors for bodybuilders. In other words, the bodybuilding data do not support the model and therefore are deleted from further statistical analysis.

The factor analysis of runners indicates there are three factors and they correspond, in content, to the stages of experience, sensation, and enjoyment. However, this does not mean that the factors are ordered in the sequence suggested by the model. To amass evidence consistent with this outcome, we turn to Guttman analysis.

Table 2

Factor Pattern for Weight-Lifters*

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

Workoutslweek Aver. length of workouts lncreased self-concept lncreased mental health lncreased mental strength As fun As art form Get hooked on Sacrifice other activities

Eigen values

*See notes on Table 1.

152 Ewald and Jiobu

Guttman Analysis. Without longitudinal data or strong assurance of respondents' full recognition and recall of passage through the stages of experience, sensation, and en- joyment, we rely on a statistical procedure to judge the sequence of the stages. Guttman's scaling technique is used. The Guttman technique ideally requires that a favorable response to a later question is always preceded by a favorable response to all earlier questions. As employed in scaling, the Guttman pattern of responses is sequential, irreversible, and unidimensional (Miller, 1970).

Here the mechanics of Guttman analysis have not been changed, but the technique is used for a different purpose than scaling per se. The technique provides a statistical index to assess a sequential ordering of dimension. Since the experience stage of the socialization process theoretically must occur before the sensation stage, and the sensa- tion stage before the enjoyment stage, the socialization model corresponds to the logic of the Guttman technique.

Guttman analysis requires dichotomized scores. Items comprising each dimension (see Table 1) were summed into a single score and cutting points were e~tablished.~ This resulted in three scores for each runner, one for each dimension. These scores were sub- mitted to Guttman analysis.

A problem with Guttman analysis concerns the fact that different cutting points produce different levels of scalability. We note here that the criterion for cutting points was chosen on an a priori basis. Another problem concerns the number of scores or items. On a random basis, the fewer the scores the more likely they will conform to the Guttman pattern. We recognize this as a limitation of the method, but it should be borne in mind that the scores for each dimension are composites which were theoretically specified, em- pirically tested by the factor analysis, and that sequence of "stages" was dictated by an a priori model. They are far from being random inputs.

Table 3 shows the result of the Guttman analysis. Of 136 runners, 129 had a more-than-moderate level of experience, or "passed" into the second stage, sensation. Of the 129, 65 passed into the third, or enjoyment, stage. The overall adequacy of the analysis was judged according to standard criteria: The coefficient of reproducibility was .94, and the coefficient of scalability was .73. Both values are within the range usually deemed acceptable.

We conclude that the data support the prediction. While Guttman analysis does not prove that the three stages of socialization are causally ordered, the results are consis-

Table 3

Guttman Pattern for Runners

Enjoyment Sensation Experience fail pass fail pass fail pass Total

0 57 0 57 0 57 57 50 8 7 51 1 57 58 20 0 15 5 5 15 20 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Totals 71 65 23 113 7 129 136

EXPLAINING POSITIVE DEVIANCE 153

tent with the notion that the stages are sequentially ordered in a way consistent with the model. To briefly recapitulate: For runners, the factor analysis shows that three identifiable dimensions of socialization exist: experience, sensation, and enjoyment. This was not the case for bodybuilders. Guttman analysis (applied only to the runners' data) implies that the three stages form a unidirnensional and cumulative sequence.

Discussion

The general support found for runners suggests the Becker model and models closely akin to it generalize beyond the rather narrow confines of recreational, non- physiologically addictive deviant substances (e.g., marijuana among musicians). The generic process may be applicable to (a) other types of initially unpleasant substances (such as alcoholic beverages, tobacco smoking), (b) initially unpleasant experiences (such as motor- cycle riding [Lundgren, 19781 or parachute jumping), and (c) positive deviance. From this perspective, the common terms "grit," "sticking with it," or "stick-to-itiveness" apply less to "character" (as it is commonly called) than to a sociological sequence of socialization.

The precise nature of this process is far from being definitively known, however. While the data offered here are consistent with one model, much remains to be investigated. For example, for lack of more data the correlates of the three stages or dimensions are not known. Yet it would be valuable to see what other attitudes and behaviors are associated with them, for such correlations would provide clues about the more subtle dynamics of the socialization process. They would also of course raise additional conceptual and methodological issues. For instance, how does one distinguish between an item that is a correlate of a dimension and an item that should be included as an integral part of the dimension? The resolution of these and other issues would greatly enhance current under- standing of socialization and sport.

Of course, no theory or model explains everything. In the present case the model was not appropriate for bodybuilders. Why? We can only provide a brief ex post facto suggestion. Retrospective examination of the qualitative and quantitative data indicate the two activities may have different meanings and goals to participants. Both groups find their activity sometimes painful (91 % of runners and 86% of bodybuilders so responded). However, each group handled pain in a different manner.

Runners appeared to circumvent or reduce pain, if possible. Some responded,

I avoid pain in daily runs, else I would not run at all. If I am tired or in pain, I don't run or don't run as far as I normally would.

Pains while on the run can only be dealt with by changing your style some minute degree or by dropping out. It's easier and more rewarding to make the change.

In contrast to this strategy, bodybuilders were more prone to seek and attack pain. Some responses were,

Pain has to be expected, accepted, and endured in this sport as well as any other phase of life. I love the pain. The pain makes you know it's [the exercise is] working. It's hard to describe but I find it [the pain] feels 'good.'

154 Ewald and Jiobu

The different orientations toward pain have implications for the model being tested. Recall that the model was designed to explain how one learns to enjoy a stimulus initially perceived as unenjoyable, or how one comes to say "yes" when asked, "Do you enjoy it?" On the other hand, if the stimulus is too noxious, a different socialization process may be required and/or different types of people may be selected into the activity, or both.

It is not for the present research to propose a detailed model of the process. How- ever, the data suggest that a potentially profitable beginning would be to reexamine the entire question of what serious participation in recreational activities means. Ewald (1981) proposes the bodybuilders may take a more instrumental orientation toward their activity and define it as work rather than as recreation or leisure. Runners, who reduce or avoid pain, are recreating. Bodybuilders may or may not enjoy pain, but it is something they recognize as necessary and perceive as rewarding because they believe pain leads to even more highly rewarding outcomes. This may be an attitude more appropriate to work than recreation.

In recent decades sociologists and others have emphasized that the classical notion of work as a mode of self-expression and meaning has increasingly been replaced by leisure.1° There is a prevalent use of the terms "leisure society" and "popular culture" in discussions of contemporary society. If so, subsequent theory might find it more ap- pealing and interesting to explore why people say "yes" when asked, "Do you enjoy your work?"

References

Becker, Howard S. 1963 Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: The Free Press.

Csikszentrnihalyi, Mihaly 1975 Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Curry, Timothy J. and Robert M. Jiobu 1984 Sport: A Social Inquiry. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Deci, Edward L. 1975 Intrinsic Motivation. New York: Plenum Press.

DeGrazia, Sebastian 1962 Of Time, Work and Leisure, New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.

Department of Health, Education and Welfare. 1978 Advancedata. March 15.

Edwards, Harry 1973 Sociology of Sport. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.

Glasser, William 1976 Positive Addiction. New York: Harper & Row.

Huizinga, Johan 1950 Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: Beacon Press.

Kando, Thomas 1975 Leisure and Popular Culture in Transition. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby.

Kenyon, Gerald and Barry D. McPherson 1973 "Becoming involved in physical activity and sport: a process of socialization." Pp. 303-332

in G. Lawrence Rarick (ed.), Physical Activity: Human Growth and Development. New York: Academic Press.

Leonard, George 1974 The Ultimate Athlete: Re-visioning Sports, Physical Education and the Body. New York:

The Viking Press.

EXPLAINING POSITIVE DEVIANCE

Lundgren, Terry 1978 Yes, I Enjoy It. Unpublished paper.

Miller, Delbert C. 1970 Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement, 2nd Ed. New York: David McKay.

Mills, C. Wright 1951 White Collar: The American Middle Class. New York: Oxford University Press.

Murphy, James F. 1981 Concepts of Leisure, 2nd Ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Nie, Norman H., Hadlai C. Hull, Jean G. Jenkins, Karin Steinbrenner and Dale H. Bent 1975 SPSS: Statistical Package for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Robinson, W.S. 1951 "The logical structure of analytic induction, " American Sociological Review, 16:812-818.

Roethlisberger, F.J. and W.J. Dickson 1939 Management and the Worker. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Scarpitti, Frank R. and Paul T. McFarlane (eds.) 1975 Deviance: Action, Reaction, Interaction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Schur, Edwin M. 1979 Interpreting Deiriance: A Sociological Introduction. New York: Harper & Row.

Snyder, Eldon E. and Elmer Spreitzer 1978 Social Aspects of Sport. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 1979 "Orientation toward sport: intrinsic, normative, and extrinsic." Journal of Sport Psychology,

1:170-175. Spreitzer, Elmer and Eldon E. Snyder

1983 "Correlates of participation in adult recreational sports." Journal of Leisure Research, 15:27-38.

Turner, Ralph H. 1953 "The question for universals in sociological research." American Sociological Review,

18:604-611.

Footnotes

'The concept positive deviance should not be confused with a "Durkheimian" form of analysis. Our purpose is not to suggest the functional or dysfunctional aspects of running or bodybuilding. The term "positive" is used as a statement of direction, not an evaluation of biological, psychological, or social well-being. However, we are aware that others have used the term in such a fashion; for example, see Scarpitti and McFarlane (1975) or Glasser (1976).

ZFrom this point on, we will use the term "enjoyment" rather than "positive addiction" in order to simplify semantics.

3A moderately high correlation between factors was assumed. Therefore, in using SPSS we set the delta value at .5. See Nie et al., SPSS, 1975:486.

41f orthogonal rotation had been performed, the two matrices would be identical (see Nie et al., 1975:chapter 24).

=What type of running are you primarily interested in? Under 10,000 meters to full marathon; How often do you workout per week? On the average, how long are your workouts (time and distance)?

6Improved body image, through running, increases my self-concept; running promotes mental health, running builds mental strength. All have Liiert-type response categories.

7Running is fun; running is something you get hooked on; I find that I often sacrifice other activities in order to run; running is an art form. All have Likert-type responses.

8As mentioned previously, the term "enjoyment" is consistent with Becker's original usage, hence we employ it.

'(~~61) OPW PUe '(1861) Lq&nw '(1961) e!zeigaa '(1~61) SIF~ am syiom LquomaIou tsom aw 8uomvo,

,;ssed,, paiapysuo:, aiam sanp iaqZ!q IIV ,;ssud IOU,, io awapom paiapysum aiam 'moq ue j@q 103 Ino 8upfiom pm 'yaam lad samg aaq ]no 8ugiom 'siqam 000'01 jo IaAaI e %u!u!q -1e 'uoysuaurlp muauadxa aw .rod ,, wed,, paiap!suo:, aiam 5 pm p sasuodsai f , ,smd IOU,, paiapys -uo3 aiam E pue '2 '1 jo sasuodsa~ :smo~~oj se pa~otoqq aiam may ado-vayl? aqh