Inspired by the regular reflections and suggestions for the future that regularly appear within Communication & Sport, this paper reports the result of a systematic review of a sample of articles from the first 10 vol of the journal to document the most common methods, forms of data employed, theoretical frameworks (and how they are applied), and nationality of author affiliation. Results reflect that the analysis of media texts, either qualitative or quantitative in nature, is the most common methodological approach. Moreover, qualitative approaches dominate the journal. With respect to theories or organizing frameworks, a select few theories appear most frequently, and frameworks related to gender are most common (i.e., hegemonic masculinity, heteronormativity, etc.). Furthermore, most references to theories or framework are just that—mere references. Only a minority of references offered theories as the guiding framework for the articles in which they appeared. To further advance legitimacy of the field, we offer suggestions for expanding the methodological approaches employed within the field, as well as suggestions for the explicit treatment of theory.

中文翻译：

---

10年的交流与运动：理论、方法和作者的回顾


受到《通信与体育》中经常出现的定期思考和对未来的建议的启发，本文报告了对期刊前10卷的文章样本的系统审查结果，以记录最常见的方法、采用的数据形式、理论框架（以及它们如何应用）以及作者所属国籍。结果表明，媒体文本的分析，无论是定性还是定量，都是最常见的方法。此外，定性方法在该杂志中占主导地位。关于理论或组织框架，少数理论出现频率最高，与性别相关的框架最常见（即霸权男子气概、异性恋等）。此外，大多数对理论或框架的引用只是——仅仅是引用。只有少数参考文献提供了理论作为它们出现的文章的指导框架。为了进一步提高该领域的合法性，我们提出了扩展该领域内采用的方法论方法的建议，以及对理论的明确处理的建议。