Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: James Mastro x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Peter McGrain, James Van Dyke and James Mastro

This study examined the coefficients of restitution (e) of selected balls used in team sports for the visually impaired: beep baseball and goal ball. Specifically, a basketball was compared to two men's standard goal balls, and a softball was compared to three different types of beep baseballs. The e for all balls was calculated by dropping each ball five times from heights of 6 ft (1.83 m) and 19.25 ft (5.88 m). A Sony reel-to-reel videotape recorder was used to record rebound heights on a background scale for each ball dropped. Reliability tests of the procedures yielded correlation coefficients (r) of 0.996 and 0.998 for the 6 ft (1.83 m) and 19.25 ft (5.88 m) drops, respectively. Two two-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests yielded significant differences across ball type and height of drop for the basketball and goal balls and for the softball and beep baseballs, respectively (p < 0.001). The es for the more recently developed beep baseballs are close to that of the standard softball, indicating a possible danger to visually impaired participants in beep baseball.

Restricted access

James Mastro, Daryl E. Miller, Carol A. Leitschuh and Barry Lavay

Restricted access

James V. Mastro, Allen W. Burton, Marjorie Rosendahl and Claudine Sherrill

Hierarchies of preference by elite athletes with impairments toward other athletes with impairments were examined by administering the Athletes With Impairments Attitude Survey (AWIAS) to 138 members of the United States Disabled Sports Team as they were traveling to the 1992 Paralympic Games. The AWIAS uses 12 statements concerning social and sport relationships to measure social distance from a particular impairment group. Five groups of athletes participated—athletes with amputations, cerebral palsy, dwarfism or les autres, paraplegia or quadriplegia, and visual impairment—with each participant filling out a separate survey for the four impairment groups other than his or her own. For all groups combined, the participants’ responses toward other impairment groups, ordered from most to least favorable attitudes, were amputations, les autres, para/quadriplegia, visual impairment, and cerebral palsy. The preference hierarchies for individual groups were very similar to this overall pattern.