Sport Fans

The Psychology and Social Impact of Fandom

Daniel L. Wann, Jeffrey D. James

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780429852916
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Sports, and the fans that follow them, are everywhere. Sport Fans: The Psychology and Social Impact of Fandom examines the affective, behavioral, and cognitive reactions of fans to better comprehend how sport impacts individual fans and society as a whole. Using up-to-date research and theory from multiple disciplines including psychology, sociology, marketing, history, and religious studies, this textbook provides a deeper understanding of topics such as:

• 
  
  

• the pervasiveness of sport fandom in society

• 
  
  

• common demographic and personality characteristics of fans

• 
  
  

• how fandom can provide a sense of belonging, of uniqueness, and of meaning in life

• 
  
  

• the process of becoming a sport fan

• 
  
  

• sport fan consumption

• 
  
  

• and the future of sport and the fan experience.

The text also provides a detailed investigation of the darker side of sport fandom, including fan aggression, as well as a critical look at the positive value of fandom for individuals and society.

Sport Fans expertly combines a rigorous level of empirical research and theory in an engaging, accessible format, making this text the essential resource on sport fan behavior.

Chapter 1

An Introduction to the Study of Sport Fans

When people are asked to imagine a typical “sport fan” or “sport spectator,” their images can be vastly different. Some describe these persons as happy, well-adjusted individuals participating in a pastime that is important and beneficial to the structure of modern society. They imagine the strong social bonds that form among spectators—families coming together around a sporting event and groups of joyous fans storming onto the field to congratulate the victorious players. Others, however, hold a negative view of sport fans and spectators. They view them as beer-drinking couch potatoes possessing a pathological obsession with a trivial and socially disruptive activity. They conjure up images of the violent outbursts of sport fans, the strained marital relationships between fans and their spouses, lives that have been ruined because of sport gambling, and how sport directs attention away from life’s more important concerns, such as religion, politics, education, and the betterment of humanity.

Thus, although some view sport fandom as a positive force for individuals and society, others feel it has a predominantly negative impact. Which of these divergent perspectives is correct? Is sport beneficial or harmful for society and its members? Are sport fans psychologically healthy or emotionally disturbed? Are fans harmless or harmful? And what are we to make of the seemingly endless amounts of time and money fans devote to the pastime? What drives their passion to consume sport? To answer these questions accurately, one must conduct a careful and thorough investigation of the personalities and characteristics of sport fans, the reasons underlying their decision to participate in the activity, and the relationship between sport fans and society. Such an investigation is the aim of this text. We attempt to answer these and similar questions by discussing and critiquing the current state of social scientific research and theory on sport fandom. The desired result is a better understanding of fans, their consumption habits, the meaning of sport in their lives, and the place of sport in contemporary society.

In this first chapter, we examine several basic topics relevant to the exploration of sport fandom, thereby setting the stage for the remainder of the text. We begin by defining, comparing, and contrasting sport fans, sport spectators, sport consumers, and highly identified fans. We then paint a picture of the typical sport fan by examining research on their demographic and personality characteristics. Next, to establish the necessity of the discipline, we provide a justification for the social scientific study of fandom. We conclude this chapter by previewing subsequent chapters and laying the groundwork for the remainder of the book.

Defining and Classifying Sport Fans

An important first step in understanding sport fandom involves defining and classifying persons involved in the activity. A number of different typologies and classification schemes have been proposed for segmenting sport fans (Bouchet, Bodet, Bernache-Assollant, & Kada, 2011; Giulianotti, 2002; Hunt, Bristol, & Bashaw, 1999; Koo, Andrew, Hardin, & Greenwell, 2009; Markovits & Albertson, 2012; Ross, 2007). Although the segmentation of fans into various groups is a relatively common practice, this process can be problematic. For example, the labels and categories used for classification can seem arbitrary, particularly when the scheme was developed though non-empirical methods. Crawford (2004) identified several additional pitfalls accompanying the classification of fans into discrete types. For instance, he notes that typologies often fail to consider the ever-changing nature of the fan experience and the fact that fans frequently move across categories.

Although there are drawbacks associated with segmenting fans into categories, there are advantages as well. Stewart, Smith, and Nicholson (2003) argue that segmentation can provide valuable information on the behavioral and attitudinal patterns of fans, particularly if the typologies are based on sound theory and are multi-dimensional in nature. They list a number of advantages to using classification schemes, including a better understanding of demographic and social/cultural groups which, in turn, can lead to a greater understanding of antecedents to and consequences of fan loyalty and commitment. They note further that information provided by segmentation procedures can be valuable to sport marketing and management professionals as they attempt to better understand and serve sport consumers. For example, classification schemes can provide data on interest in sport products, satisfaction with arenas and stadiums, and feedback on the effectiveness of marketing campaigns.

Given that the classification of fans can be beneficial, in the following paragraphs we examine three ways of classifying fans by focusing on the distinctions between sport fans and spectators, direct and indirect sport consumers, and various levels of team identification.

Distinguishing Between Sport Fans and Sport Spectators

The first important distinction to be made involves differentiating between sport fans and sport spectators (Sloan, 1989; Wann, 1997). Sport fans are individuals that are interested in and follow a sport, team, and/or athlete, while sport spectators are those who actively witness a sporting event in person or through some form of media (radio, television, etc.). Unfortunately, the terms “sport fan” and “sport spectator” are often used interchangeably, a practice that can lead to confusion and frustration for researchers and practitioners (Trail, Robinson, Dick, & Gillentine, 2003). The distinction between fans and spectators is important because some sport fans rarely witness sporting events in person, while some spectators have little interest in identifying with a favorite team or player. For instance, consider a person who attends a college basketball game simply because he was given a free ticket. This person may go to the contest even though he has no interest in the event itself or the teams competing (perhaps he simply wishes to be with his friends who are also at the game). Although this person would be classified as a sport spectator, he should not be considered a sport fan.

Although we believe the distinction between fans and spectators is an important one, maintaining a consistent use of these terms is difficult when writing a book such as this. A strict adherence to the “fan” versus “spectator” nomenclature becomes cumbersome and likely overstates the importance of the distinction. In this text we are, more often than not, focusing on individuals with an interest in a sport, team, or player (i.e., a fan) rather than those who are merely observing a sporting event (i.e., a spectator). To avoid confusion and an overreliance on jargon, we have chosen to use the term fan throughout this book, unless the distinction of spectator is critical for the specific topic being discussed (e.g., the influence of watching sporting events on spectator violence).

Distinguishing Between Direct and Indirect Sport Consumers

Another important distinction involves the classification of sport consumers into two groups: direct and indirect (McPherson, 1975). Direct sport consumption involves one’s personal attendance at a sporting event. Indirect sport consumption involves one’s exposure to sport through some form of mass media, such as television, radio, or the Internet. Thus, an individual who attends the Super Bowl in person would be classified as a direct sport consumer, while someone watching the same contest on television would be classified as an indirect sport consumer. This distinction is important because the situational context in which one witnesses an event can impact his or her reactions (Brummett & Duncan, 1990; Hemphill, 1995; Wenner & Gantz, 1989). For example, consider the work by Wann, Friedman, McHale, and Jaffe (2003) on the consumption patterns of avid sport fans. Participants stated their preferences for consuming sport in person (i.e., direct consumption) and via television or radio (i.e., indirect consumption). The researchers found distinct differences between the various forms of consumption. For instance, only 2 percent of respondents indicated a preference for attending a sporting event alone. Conversely, 14 percent had a desire to watch sport on television by themselves and over 60 percent had a desire to listen to sport radio alone.

Wann and his colleagues (2003) offered two suggestions for the large proportion of persons preferring to consume radio sport programing alone. First, it could be that sport consumption via radio frequently occurs when driving, an activity that is often done alone. As a result, spectators may grow accustomed to listening to sport radio by themselves and develop a preference for this environment. Second, Wann and his associates suggest that, given the absence of verbal cues, consuming sporting events via radio may require greater levels of concentration than other forms of consumption. This greater level of focus may be disrupted by the presence of other persons, and, thus, fans may prefer to listen to sport radio broadcasts alone to better follow and comprehend the game action. Regardless of the reasons underlying the differences in consumption preferences, it is clear that such partialities do exist. Thus, it is important to differentiate between the two forms of consumption.

Distinguishing Among Fans Across Levels of Team Identification

A common approach to distinguishing fans is based on level of identification, or what has typically been referred to as team identification, although other terms (such as fan identification) have occasionally been used. Although researchers have utilized a variety of definitions of team identification, they often share commonalities (see Lock & Heere, 2017, for an insightful look at definitions of this construct). We will utilize an operational definition that is generally consistent with most others and view team identification as the extent to which a fan feels psychologically connected to a team (Guttmann, 1986; Lock & Funk, 2016; Wann, 2006a; Wann & Branscombe, 1993).

Although often thought to be a new term, references to team identification among sport fans can be found as early as the 1920s and 1930s. For example, consider the writings of Coleman Roberts Griffith (1938). Often viewed as the father of North American sport psychology (Green, 2009; Wann, 1997), Griffith was asked to consult with the Chicago Cubs Major League Baseball team. As part of a larger project to improve team performance and fan interest, he surveyed approximately 300 Cubs fans to gauge their motivations for following the team. The majority of respondents cited identification as a critical factor in fostering their interest in the team, leading Griffith to conclude that “interest in baseball was frequently based on the principle of identification” (p. 174). A few years earlier, Brill (1929) had also referenced the identification process among sport fans, arguing that fandom was a function of “the psychological laws of identification” (p. 430). Modern perceptions of identification within the realm of fandom typically have origins in general psychology (e.g., Kagan, 1958; Tolman, 1943) and, more particularly, Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979).

Research suggests that a fan’s sense of connection to a team is a highly stable trait. For example, team identification is not a function of the location or outcome of a team’s most recent game (Wann, 1996, 2000; Wann, Dolan, McGeorge, & Allison, 1994; Wann & Schrader, 1996). Rather, fans tend to report consistent levels of identification from game to game and from season to season. Additional evidence of the stability of team identification was noted in the work of Boen, Vanbeselaere, Pandelaere, Schutters, and Rowe (2008). These authors investigated identification with a basketball team that had been recently merged with another team. Interestingly, they found that, “identification with the pre-merger club was the best predictor of identification with the new merger club” (p. 165).

Identification with a team is usually a lifelong love affair that fans take to their graves—literally, as fans often express their love for a team after death. For instance, they sometimes choose to be buried in team and sport-themed coffins and/or display team logos on their tombstones. Furthermore, people frequently feel compelled to describe the fandom of their deceased loved ones in the obituary section. For example, in an examination of over 1,800 newspaper obituaries, End, Meinert, Worthman, and Mauntel (2009) found that over 10 percent of the descriptions mentioned the deceased individual’s fandom. Similarly, in his study of obituaries posted on legacy.com, Clotfelter (2015) found that 2 percent of the tributes specifically included mention of the person’s loyalty to a college team.

For fans with a low level of team identification, the role of team follower is a very small part of their self-concept. As a result, these persons tend to exhibit mild reactions to team performances, if they react at all. However, for fans with a high level of identification, the role of team follower is a central component of their identity. They willingly present themselves as a fan of their team in their written self-descriptions and their choice of apparel (Derbaix, Decrop, & Cabossart, 2002; Wann, Royalty, & Roberts, 2000). Because of their close association with a team, highly identified fans often view it as a reflection of themselves. That is, the team becomes an extension of the individual (Smith & Henry, 1996; Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979). The team’s successes become the fan’s successes, and their failures become the fan’s failures. Due to the increased importance highly identified fans place on their team’s performances, their affective, cognitive, and behavioral reactions tend to be quite extreme. In fact, the responses of these fans are a consistent theme running throughout this book. Subsequent chapters will include information about a variety of fan reactions i...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Photo Credits
• 1 An Introduction to the Study of Sport Fans
• Part I How and Why Fans Follow Sports, Teams, and Athletes
• Part II The Emotional and Aggressive Reactions of Sport Fans
• Part III The Consequences of Sport Fandom for Individuals and Society
• Part IV Summary and Conclusion
• References
• Index