Consider the Issues
Research and Theory
Social scientists have conducted relatively little research on hazing among college
students. Below are highlights from two key studies, including research at Cornell.
Hazing Deaths
- Numerous deaths have occurred from hazing, though little research has been done
to assess the incidence of hazing-related fatalities (or injuries). Author Hank
Nuwer has developed a web site hazing.hanknuwer.com that serves as an "Unofficial Clearinghouse to Track Hazing Deaths and Incidents."
- The second documented hazing death on a U.S. campus was at Cornell in 1873 (Nuwer,
1999). Kappa Alpha Sigma pledge Mortimer N. Leggett fell into the Six-Mile Creek
gorge in Ithaca and died after while trying to find his way home after being taken
into the woods at night.
Hazing at Cornell
In 2002-2003, undergraduate honors researcher Gretchen Poulos '03 and Cornell
faculty members Dr. Shelly Campo and Dr. John Sipple conducted a survey on team
building, initiation and hazing among Cornell students.
Background information:
- Anonymous, self-report web survey
- Sample size = 736 undergraduates completed
- Response rate of 37%
- Representative sample
- Results study were published in 2005 in the American Journal of Health Behavior, 29(2), 137-149.
Highlights of findings:
- Thirty-seven percent indicated that they had been involved in an at least one
activity that the researchers identified as meeting the university's definition
of hazing.
- Only 12% of students identified themselves as having been hazed. Therefore, some
students either do not realize or do not agree that they have been hazed.
Percentage of students who experienced forms of hazing at least once at Cornell:
| Participating in a drinking contest/games | 17% |
| Being deprived of sleep | 15% |
| Carrying around unnecessary objects or items | 14 % |
| Being required to remain silent or being silenced | 13% |
| Being yelled, cursed, or sworn at | 10% |
| Having food thrown at you or other new members | 6% |
| Being kidnapped or transported and abandoned | 5% |
| Acting as a personal servant to others | 5% |
| Being pressured to eat something you didn't want | 5% |
| Associating with specific people, not others | 4% |
| Destroying or stealing property | 4% |
| Being tied, taped up or confined | 3% |
| Engaging in or simulating sexual acts | 2% |
| Being hit, kicked or physically assaulted in some form | 1% |
| Making body alterations (branding, tattooing, piercing) | <1% |
Males, athletes, and members of fraternities or sororities were more likely than
other students to have engaged in hazing.
Although the subset of fraternity members in the study was relatively small,
it is notable that over three-fourths of them indicated that they had participated
in at least one of the above activities.
Hazing Among Athletes
In 1989-99, researchers at Alfred University in New York conducted a national survey examining hazing among student-athletes at National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) schools.
Below is an edited version of the executive summary of the study and a link to
the full report which includes information on the study's methodology:
Over 325,000 athletes at more than 1,000 National Collegiate Athletic Association
schools participated in intercollegiate sports during 1998-99. Of these athletes:
- More than a quarter of a million (250,000+) experienced some form of hazing to
join a college athletic team.
- One in five was subjected to potentially illegal hazing. They were kidnapped,
beaten or tied up and abandoned. They were also forced to commit crimes destroying
property, making prank phone calls or harassing others.
- Half were required to participate in drinking contests or alcohol-related hazing.
- Two in five consumed alcohol on recruitment visits even before enrolling.
- Two- thirds were subjected to humiliating hazing, such as being yelled or sworn
at, forced to wear embarrassing clothing or forced to deprive oneself of sleep,
food or personal hygiene.
- Only one in five participated exclusively in positive initiations, such as team
trips or ropes courses.
Athletes most at risk for any kind of hazing for college sports were men; non-Greek
members; and either swimmers, divers, soccer players, or lacrosse players. The
campuses where hazing was most likely to occur were primarily in eastern or southern
states with no anti-hazing laws. The campuses were rural, residential, and had
Greek systems.
- Women were more likely to be involved in alcohol-related hazing than in other
forms of hazing.
- Football players were most at risk for dangerous and potentially illegal hazing.
- Non-Greeks were most at risk of being hazed for athletics, even though a Greek
system on campus is a significant predictor of hazing.
- Eastern and western campuses had the most alcohol-related hazing.
- Southern and midwestern campuses had the greatest incidence of dangerous and
potentially illegal hazing.
Read the Full report of Alfred University's national survey: Initiation Rites and Athletics for NCAA
Sports Teams
Theoretical Perspectives
There are many theoretical explanations for hazing. One way to understand why
hazing occurs is to ask individuals who engage to explain their motivations. To review a summary of the purported benefits of hazing reported by those who
haze, go to Arguments For and Against Hazing.
Beyond the reasons given by individuals who haze, there are other influences
which likely contribute to hazing. Since no single theory can adequately explain hazing entirely, it is important to consider how multiple
factors may lead individuals to deviate from their own ethical standards or the
norms of society.
Below is an overview of some elements that may play a role in hazing:
Evolutionary psychology: our ancestors survived by forming groups that had strong bonds. Consequently,
we are social creatures with needs for affiliation. Our innate drives for connection
and preservation may contribute to practices such as hazing that are perceived
to strengthen the ties between group members.
Lack of external constraints: the social order of civilizations depends on accountability and shared agreement
to conform to behavioral norms. When external security is decreased (e.g., in
the aftermath of natural disasters), conformity to societal standards decreases
(e.g., looting). In the absence of strong internal leadership and prosocial norms,
groups that operate in secrecy, isolated from external constraints, are at greater
risk of deviating from societal norms of conduct. Hazing among students, the abuse
of prisoners in Iraq, and the Enron corporate scandal each reflect in part the
absence of external constraints on group behavior.
Conformity and obedience to authority: Research has demonstrated that social context has a powerful influence on people's
willingness to inflict harm on others. In Milgram's classic study, subjects being
pressured by interviewers delivered what they believed were highly painful (even
lethal) shocks to a person screaming in another room. In Zimbardo's (1973) Stanford
Prison Experiment, college students were assigned randomly to play the role of
either a prisoner or prison guard for a two-week, live-in experiment. The study
was stopped after five days because the "guards" became vicious toward the "prisoners."
Cognitive dissonance: when an individual holds two opposing beliefs in tension, he or she experiences
tension which may be resolved by changing one of the views. When people who view
themselves as smart, reasonable people participate in degrading experiences, they
may look back and minimize the extent that they experienced degradation. Otherwise
they would be left saying to themselves, "I'm a smart person and I joined a group
that degraded me," which would create tension. Saying to oneself, “It wasn't that
bad,” creates less tension. As a result, individuals in a group that is hazed
may eventually feel positively about the group that subjected them to the experience.
Groupthink: Irving Janis (1997) described a process in highly cohesive groups in which
faulty decision-making arises as a result of a convergence of dynamics, including
pressure for unanimity, suppression of individual moral objections, and degradation
of outsiders. These dynamics result in a failure to realistically appraise alternative
courses of action and may contribute to disregard for the safety of others. In
Wrongs of Passage, Hank Nuwer (2001) adapted the term "groupthink" to become "Greekthink,"
a reference to the dangerous process in which fraternal groups engage in reckless
rituals, put newcomers in danger, and demonstrate post-incident denial in the
face of clear evidence that they have made a mistake.
Beliefs about masculinity: culturally-constructed notions of what it means to be a "real man" place an
emphasis on physical and mental toughness, obedience to superiors, and the value
of force as a means of accountability. Such beliefs, combined with desires by
heterosexual men to demonstrate that they do not possess qualities associated
with gay men (e.g., vulnerability, emotionality, nurturance), contribute to the
perpetuation of hazing and in some cases even requests to undergo hazing (Allen,
2004). It is
notable that of the more than 60 documented hazing deaths, only three have been
women (Nuwer, 1999).
Sociopathy: some individuals within groups have personalities characterized by anti-social
tendencies. Psychologically speaking, "anti-social" does not mean "doesn't like
to party." It means traits such as to disregard the rights and safety of others,
failure to conform to societal norms, and lack of remorse. While such individuals
tend to be a small subset of groups, they can exert significant influence as hazing
ringleaders.
Shared coping: when individuals go through a highly stressful experience together (e.g., a
natural disaster, a battle), they may feel closer to each other as a result. Enduring
hazing together may make a group feel more unity, but as with hurricanes, the
experience may yield damage as well as benefits.
Cycles of abuse: individuals who are hazed may be at greater risk of hazing others because of
a displaced desire for revenge. As one fraternity pledge said immediately after
being hazed intensely, "I can't wait to do this to the pledges next year." In
addition, being hazed involves a learning process by which members model for new
members the accepted methods for initiation.
Identification with the aggressor: intensive hazing can involve complex strategies to “break down” individuals
and “remold” them to conform to the belief structures of the group. The group
may isolate new members and expose them to repeated experiences designed to conform
the new member's beliefs to those of the group. They may be told that the group
is special and superior, and that attainment of this status is worth whatever
must be endured to achieve it. Eventually, new members may desire to become like
the individuals who abuse them.
Symbolic interactionism: Stephen Sweet (1999) argues that hazing is not simply the result of psychologically-
or morally-flawed individuals, but “is the result of a confluence of symbols,
manipulated identities, and definitions of situations that are organized in the
context of initiation rites.” Symbolic interactionists view hazing as a cultural
phenomenon in which the meaning ascribed to social encounters and the power of
these “realities” shape individuals' choices about their actions.
Rites of passage: As adolescents and young adults pass through the developmental stage of identity
formation, rites of passage may help them mark their transition to full adulthood.
Rituals serve as a way for a community to assist members through this process
(e.g., commencement, birthday parties, religious confirmation, initiation into
a group). Most initiation practices do not involve hazing, while some do.
Need for esteem: self-esteem is bolstered by a sense of accomplishment and acceptance by others.
"Surviving" hazing may contribute to a sense of achievement and garner the "respect"
of group members, both of which can enhance individuals' esteem. Those who haze
may enhance their own sense of esteem and heroism by maintaining membership in
a group that "weeds out the weak." Television shows such as Survivor, The Weakest
Link, The Apprentice ("You're fired!"), and My Big Fat Obnoxious Boss are cultural
reflections of an underlying need to earn esteem.
Expression of power: hazing may gratify individuals' desires for a sense of power and control. As
one Cornell sorority sister stated, "There is no need to subject girls to degrading
acts; it is selfish and only provided the elder girls with a sense of power."
Some individuals acknowledge enjoying exerting power over others and even seeing
others experience pain.
Need for intimacy: many members of groups that haze cite closeness as a goal of hazing. Among males,
however, cultural definitions of masculinity tend to undermine overt attempts
at intimacy (e.g., talking about one's feelings). Hazing activities may thus be
designed to meet intimacy needs without violating cultural norms. For example,
being intoxicated makes it more acceptable to share one's feelings (e.g., "I love
you, man!"). Men who feel uncomfortable hugging each other may nonetheless perpetuate
naked "elephant walks" in which new members hold onto each others hands or genitals
in what some would describe as a homoerotic ritual.
Misperceived norms: in some groups, the majority of members believe that it is not important to
humiliate, intimidate or physically abuse new members. These members, however,
mistakenly believe that they are in the minority. They may therefore reluctantly
perpetuate these practices because they assume that everyone else believes that
they are the right things to do.
Fear of reprisal: even when an individual who has been hazed wishes to not perpetuate the practices,
he or she may do so out of fear of disapproval or retaliation by the group. Groups
may exert considerable pressure on dissatisfied members in order to maintain secrecy
about their hazing practices.
Perceived lack of alternatives: while the underlying needs of individuals and groups can be met through non-hazing
means, a lack of knowledge about those means and an absence of creativity enables
individuals to perpetuate the belief that hazing is necessary. When presented
with credible alternatives, many individuals agree to pursue them in place of
hazing.
