Yes I had read the study, but that was not really relevant to what I was asking. I reacted to what I felt were emotional responses to an academic study without regard to how the study was conducted. I agreed with Mark Dexter regarding the conclusions section "reaching" for significance, and the anecdotal stuff up front is junk. But I also think the numbers are good. I wanted to see if folks even knew what the numbers say, or what UM reported to the press. For instance (and this is from UM's press release):
"The most common gambling activities were casino gambling, lotteries, and playing slot or other gaming machines. The study also found that approximately 40 percent of officials have bet on sports including 2.2 percent who admitted they bet on sports through bookies."
More importantly:
"Just over three percent were identified as problem or pathological gamblers according to a widely accepted measure of that behavior."
You can look at these numbers and decide for yourself whether you think this is problematic.
And yes, I do believe that individuals employed in sports administration that have Masters Degrees and follow accepted research methods can be regarded as professionals.
|