How does differential association theory apply to sport deviance?

• A. It posits deviance is a result of genetic predisposition.
• B. It suggests deviant behavior arises from personal moral weakness.
• C. It suggests deviant behavior is learned through association with others who approve or engage in it.
• D. It has no relevance to sport.

Answer: (C)

Deviance in sport is understood as something learned through social interaction. Differential association theory argues that deviant acts aren’t caused by biology or simply by personal weakness, but by being embedded in groups that define those acts as acceptable and show how to do them. In sport, players pick up attitudes, definitions, and techniques for cheating, doping, or bending the rules from teammates, coaches, or role models who engage in or endorse such behavior. When the team culture rewards victory at all costs and sanctions are weak or uneven, these pro-deviant views feel legitimate, and the athlete may internalize them as part of what it takes to win. Repeated, close contact with people who approve of deviance strengthens the sense that these actions are acceptable, making the deviant behavior more likely to be adopted and repeated.

This explains why deviance can spread within teams or athletic communities—the learning comes from those around you who normalize and demonstrate the behavior. The other ideas—genetic predisposition or personal moral failing—don’t capture the social learning process, and saying it has no relevance ignores the clear influence of an athlete’s environment on what they come to see as permissible.