Why people who have been concussed are more willing to risk future concussions

Media Contact:
Mary O’Brien
ASU Center for Organization Research and Design
(602) 496-2371 [email protected]  

A new study by researchers at Arizona State University’s Center for Organization Research and Design identifies factors associated with taking risks to play sports, particularly football. The study, titled “Why Would Anyone Risk Brain Damage to Play NFL Football?” is based on data from a representative online survey of more than 700 US men over the age of 18, including many who have played football at the high school or college level and many of whom have had medically diagnosed concussions from football or other sports. 

The study, conducted by public affairs professor Barry Bozeman, education professor Molly Ott and graduate student and senior researcher Gabel Taggart, provided several scenarios relating the opportunity to play football in the National Football League (as opposed to their actual career trajectories), specifying various levels of risk of brain damage resulting from playing. The hypothetical opportunity to play in the NFL assumed the ability to sign a four-year $1.2 million per year contract (the average amount of the NFL’ second year draft choice). In one scenario the choice involved did not specify any risk, in a second a 25% chance of severe brain damage at age 50, in a third, scenario a 50% chance and in a fourth scenario a 100% certainty of brain damage. 

The study showed, perhaps not surprisingly, a strong preference for playing in the NFL (more than 85% chose to do so if it involved no specified risk) but also in many cases a willingness to take considerable risk to do so. In the scenario specifying a 25% chance of brain damage (which some studies show is a realistic expectation for persons having an NFL career), more than 35% would take the risk. With a certainty of brain damage more than 15% would take the risk. 

Why this risky behavior? One might assume that it is the attractiveness of the money involved, but this is a relatively minor factor. Generally, less affluent respondents were no more likely to take risks than are the more affluent respondents. Race and ethnicity also makes no difference. Risk taking to play football is more closely related to: 

1. Actually having played organized football at some level.

2. Fan measures- including knowledge of the game and its players, hours watching sports on television and percentage of friends who are football fans. 

3. Scores on standardized, general risk propensity psychological scales. 

4. Having previously had medically diagnosed concussions.

The authors suggest that the relationship of having had concussions to the willingness to risk future concussion is based on “selection effects;” that is, those who have had concussions tend to have developed them because a general willingness to take risks rather than due to random chance of injury from football. Some are willing to play high-risk positions (e.g. linebacker) and some are more willing to routinely throw themselves into the fray of high impact collisions. 

The findings suggest that reforms should include psychological elements in addition to medical provisions or equipment changes. Reforms should be designed to help those who will not help themselves. The authors suggest some reforms, a few of which have already been adopted in some levels of organized football. These include: 

•    Sharply limited contact during practice;

•    Reduced number of practice days;

•    Elimination of kick-offs (the circumstance of a great many concussions)

•    The implementation of a time-until-release rule for quarterbacks passing the ball,
prohibiting contact but limiting the possession time to, say, five seconds.

According to the Dr. Barry Bozeman, the study director, the results indicate that effective reforms will not be easy. According to Bozeman, “coaches, parents and teachers should not assume that education about risks will have much effect on the players themselves; the allure of football is powerful, young people are likely to focus on the here and now, and it is not going to be enough to appeal to reason, at least not when those appeals relate to outcomes three decades in the future.”

For contact with the authors or for a copy of the study, please contact Mary O’Brien, Center for Organization Research and Design, Arizona State University, phone 602-496-2371; email [email protected].