Examining the state social psychological health benefits of identifying with a distant sport team.
Wann, Daniel L. ; Polk, Josh ; Franz, Gentzy 等
Humans appear to have a fundamental need to establish and maintain
memberships in formal and informal groups (Baumeister & Leary,
1995). There are many potential benefits to these memberships (Knowles
& Gardner, 2008), including the opportunity to acquire important
social connections and a sense of belonging that, ultimately, can assist
in the maintenance of well-being (Correll & Park, 2005). Indeed,
membership in a variety of groups has been linked to well-being
including stigmatized groups (Crocker & Major, 1989), religious
organizations (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999), and membership in
high school peer groups (Brown & Lohr, 1987). In fact, this effect
is so well documented that Compton (2005) concluded that "positive
social relationships" comprised one of the "core variables
that best predict happiness and satisfaction with life" (p. 48).
One specific form of group membership that has gained the attention
of social and sport scientists involves sport fans. According to several
authors (e.g., Kelley & Tian, 2004; Melnick, 1993; Smith, 1988)
sport fandom may have a positive impact on psychological health due to
the social nature of the activity. Sport fandom is generally a social
endeavor (Aveni, 1977; Crawford, 2004). Consequently, similar to other
leisure activities (Glover, Parry, & Shinew, 2005; Maynard &
Kleiber, 2005) it may lead to increased social capital (Crawford, 2004;
Palmer & Thompson, 2007; Swyers, 2005). With respect to the
relationship between fandom and social capital, Wann, Polk, and Weaver
(2008) recently found empirical evidence for this effect as level of
identification of one's college team (i.e., one's
psychological connection to the team, see Wann, Melnick, Russell, &
Pease, 2001) was positively related to several indices of social
connections including percentage of fans who were friends, beliefs that
fandom leads to new relationships with others, and a general sense of
connectedness to the campus as a whole.
In terms of the relationship between team fandom and well-being,
several studies have supported the positive association between these
variables. However, research indicates that it is not fandom that
correlates with well-being but rather team identification (Wann, Dunham,
Byrd, & Keenan, 2004; Wann & Pierce, 2005). For instance, team
identification has been found to be positively related to social
self-esteem and social well-being, vigor, extroversion, and frequency of
positive emotions and negatively related to loneliness and alienation
(Branscombe & Wann, 1991; Wann, 1994; Wann, Dimmock, & Grove,
2003; Wann et al., 2004; Wann, Inman, Ensor, Gates, & Caldwell,
1999; Wann & Pierce, 2005; see Wann, 2006a, for a review). In
addition, this relationship has been found in different cultures (Wann,
Dimmock, et al., 2003), in a variety of settings (Wann, Walker, Cygan,
Kawase, & Ryan, 2005), and appears to be causal in nature (Wann,
2006b).
To better explain the process through which sport team
identification and well-being are related, Wann (2006a) recently
developed the Team Identification- Social Psychological Health Model.
Wann argues that identification leads to well-being benefits not because
of the identification per se, but because it results in increased social
connections with others (Swyers, 2005). Two types of social connections
(i.e., forms of social capital) are expected to result from sport team
identification: enduring and temporary. Enduring social connections
result when a fan lives in a community where other fans of the team are
readily apparent and salient (e.g., a Chicago Cubs fan who lives in
Chicago). Temporary social connections occur when a fan who does not
reside in a community with enduring connections temporarily finds him or
herself in the company of other fans of the team (e.g., a Chicago Cubs
fan living in St. Louis who frequently watches Cubs games on television
with several other Cubs fans). The increased social connections are then
expected to increase social psychological well-being at either the state
(temporary connections) or trait (enduring connections) level. The model
also postulates that threats to social identity (e.g., poor team
performance and player arrests) and subsequent strategic coping
mechanisms (e.g., biased attributions) moderate the relationship between
social connections and well-being.
Thus, there are several key components to the Team
Identification--Social Psychological Health Model. Specifically, this
model predicts: a) team identification will assist in the establishment
and maintenance of temporary and enduring social connections, b) team
identification will be positively correlated with social well-being, and
c) the identification/well-being relationship will be moderated by
social identity threats and attempts to cope with the threat. Research
support for many of these predicted patterns is strong. For instance,
with respect to the relationship between team identification and social
connections (a), researchers have found that sport team identification
is indeed related to the development and maintenance of social
connections with others (Clopton, 2008; Wann et al., 2008). Further, as
for the relationship between team identification and well-being (b), as
noted above empirical work has consistently documented this pattern of
effects (e.g., Wann, 2006a, 2006b; Wann, Dimmock, et al., 2003; Wann et
al., 2004; Wann et al., 2005; Wann, 2006b). In addition, many studies
have confirmed that the social identities of fans can be threatened
(Hirt, Zillmann, Erickson, & Kennedy, 1992; Schwarz, Strack, Kommer,
& Wagner, 1987; Schweitzer, Zillmann, Weaver, & Luttrell, 1992)
and that fans utilize strategies designed to cope with the threats (c).
For instance, fans can rely on biased attributions, biased predictions
of future team performance, and biased evaluations of other fans to
assist in their attempts to cope with poor player/team performance (End,
Birchmeier, & Mueller, 2004; Wann, 2006a; Wann & Grieve, 2005).
Previous research on the relationship between team identification
and social psychological health has almost exclusively focused on
enduring social connections. That is, past efforts gave supported the
notion fans living within the geographic environment containing a team
exhibit a positive correlation between level of team identification and
social well-being (e.g., Wann, Dimmock, et al., 2003; Wann et al.,
2004). However, one area of Wann's (2006a) model that has not
received sufficient attention involves the impact of temporary social
connections. Such an examination was the focus of the current
investigation. The aim of this study was directed at the psychological
health of fans' support for a nonlocal team. Certainly, fans of
nonlocal teams (often referred to as displaced fans or long distance
fans) can have strong emotional attachments to their team even in the
general absence of other fans of the team (Hughson & Free, 2006).
These fans often maintain their allegiance after either the team has
moved to another city (Foster & Hyatt, 2007; Hyatt, 2007) or the
fans themselves have relocated (Kraszewski, 2008). Many of these fans
attempt to maintain a community with other fans of the team via the
Internet (Crawford, 2004) or by watching their team on television with
other fans (Kraszewski, 2008).
As noted, Wann's (2006a) framework predicts that, in normal
situations, fans of distant teams should not exhibit a positive
relationship between level of team identification and trait social
well-being found among fans of local teams because displaced fans do not
reside in an environment containing enduring connections. That is, other
fans of their team are not readily salient. Indeed, past research has
supported the lack of relationship between level of identification with
a distant team and well-being (Wann et al., 2004; Wann et al., 1999).
However, the model states that fans of distant teams can receive
benefits to their state levels of social well-being when they are in
situations in which temporary social connections are salient (e.g., when
they are watching their team on television with several other fans of
their team). Consistent with other models and research in social and
cognitive psychology (e.g., Robinson & Clore, 2002), the model
predicts that these temporary connections will contribute to state,
rather than trait, well-being because of the transient nature of the
connections (i.e., momentary events have a greater impact on momentary
well-being, see Oishi, Schimmack, & Diener, 2001).
Based on the pattern of effects predicted by Wann's (2006a)
model, we hypothesized that when displaced fans are put in an
environment with salient temporary connections (i.e., they are placed in
an environment with other fans of their team), they will report
increases in state social psychological health. However, Wann is
somewhat unclear as to what, precisely, needs to be made salient for the
effect to occur. Explicitly, the model suggests that the other fans need
to be salient, stating, "In situations where the temporary
connections are present but not salient (e.g., the fan of a displaced
team is not aware that he or she is in the presence of other similarly
displaced fans), identification would not be predicted to assist in the
maintenance of well-being" (p. 277). Thus, it is apparent that
knowledge of the presence of other fans is required. However, the model
also implicitly suggests that, in addition to the salience of fellow
fans of the team, a team-focused environment is also required for the
effect to occur. That is, when describing the expected effect, Wann
offers examples in which fans find themselves
in a situation in which their role as team follower would be highly
salient (i.e., the team in question is salient). For example, Wann has
suggested that the psychological benefits of temporary connections would
occur when a displaced fan watches his or her favorite team on
television with other similarly displaced fans (Wann, 2006a; Wann,
Martin, Grieve, & Gardner, 2008). In such an environment, both the
fellow fans of the team (i.e., social connections) and the role of team
follower would be made salient. Thus, it appears that Wann's
framework suggests that both variables are necessary. Therefore, we
hypothesized that fans of a distant team would report increased levels
of state social psychological health when placed into a situation in
which both their role of team follower and other fans were salient. We
tested this hypothesis by randomly assigning highly identified
basketball fans (selected based on pre-testing of their identification
with University of Kentucky basketball, a distant team) into one of four
conditions in a 2 (Condition: group or alone) x 2 (Video: University of
Kentucky Highlight Video or general sports highlight video) design.
Subsequent to viewing one of the videos, participants completed measures
designed to assess state levels of social well-being. Based on the Team
Identification--Social Psychological Health Model (Wann, 2006a) and the
reasoning described above, we expected only those participants watching
the University of Kentucky video (i.e., team identification salient) in
the group setting (i.e., social connections salient) to report the
increased well-being effect. Persons in the other three conditions were
not expected to exhibit increased social psychological health.
Method
Participants and Design
The Time 1 sample of participants contained 675 (219 male; 456
female) college students receiving extra course credit in exchange for
participation. They had a mean age of 20.36 years (SD = 3.91).
Participants returning for the Time 2 session were 71 (26 male; 45
female) college students choosing either extra course credit or $5.00 in
exchange for participation. The Time 2 participants had a mean age of
19.14 years (SD = 1.07). The design for the study was a 2 (Condition:
group or alone) x 2 (Video: University of Kentucky Highlight Video or
general sports highlight video) between-subjects factorial. Participants
were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions.
Materials and Procedure
Upon entering the Time 1 testing session and providing their
consent, participants (tested in groups) were handed a questionnaire
packet containing three sections. The first section contained
demographic items assessing age, gender, name, phone number, and the
last four digits of their social security number. The participant's
name and number were needed to contact the individual for participation
in Testing Session 2. The social security information was used to match
the Time 1 and Time 2 questionnaires. The second section of the packet
contained the Sport Spectator Identification Scale (SSIS; Wann &
Branscombe, 1993). The SSIS contains seven Likert-scale items with
response options ranging from I (low identification) to 8 (high
identification). Thus, higher numbers represented greater levels of
identification. The SSIS has been used in a number of studies involving
sport fans and has strong reliability and validity (see Wann &
Branscombe, 1993; Wann et al., 2001). Participants targeted the
University of Kentucky (UK) men's basketball team completing the
SSIS. This university is located approximately 265 miles from the
participants' own university. A sample item from this scale read,
"How important to you is it that the University of Kentucky
men's basketball team wins?"
The third section of the protocol contained two established,
reliable and valid instruments designed to assess specific components of
social well-being. Specifically, this section included 8 items from the
16-item Collective Self-esteem Scale (CSES; Luhtanen & Crocker,
1991) and 20-item the UCLA Loneliness Scale (UCLALS: Russell, Peplau,
& Cutrona, 1980). The CSES has been found to have strong concurrent
validity via comparisons with other measures of well-being (e.g., r =
.36 with the Rosenberg, 1965, Personal Self-esteem Scale) and adequate
test-retest reliability (rs > .60 for a six-week interval) (Luhtanen
& Crocker, 1992). The UCLALS also has strong psychometric qualities
as this scale has high internal consistency (alphas > .90) and
concurrent validity (e.g., r = .62 with Beck Depression Inventory,
1967). These measures were selected because they reflect the type of
well-being in question based on the Team Identification--Social
Psychological Health Model. That is, these scales assess components of
social well-being (Keyes, 1998; Keyes & Lopez, 2001) and they have
been used successfully in past research investigating the social
well-being of sport fans (Wann, 1994; Wann et al., 2005). Further, these
inventories are appropriate for college student populations (Luhtanen
& Crocker, 1992; Russell et al., 1980).
The items of each of these scales were worded to reflect trait
levels of social well-being. For instance, the items contained words
such as "usually" (e.g., "I'm usually glad to be a
member of the social groups I belong to"). Both questionnaires were
scored so that higher numbers reflected more positive levels of social
well-being (e.g., lower levels of loneliness and higher levels of
collective self-esteem). The Time 1 CSES response options ranged from 1
(low collective self-esteem) to 7 (high collective self-esteem) and,
therefore, had a potential range of 8 to 56. The Time 1 UCLALS response
options ranged from 1 (high loneliness) to 4 (low loneliness) and, thus,
had a potential range of 20 to 80. After completing their Time 1
questionnaire packet (approximately 20 minutes), participants were
debriefed and excused from the testing session.
Approximately 8 weeks after the conclusion of the Time 1 testing
sessions, participants scoring greater than 30 on the SSIS were
contacted via phone and asked if they would be willing to return for a
second testing session (a minimum SSIS score of 31 was chosen to ensure
that all Time 2 participants scored above the mid-point on the scale). A
total of 71 participants agreed to return and were given information on
date, time, and location for the second session. Upon arriving at the
Time 2 session, participants in the group and alone conditions were
randomly assigned to view either a University of Kentucky Highlight
Video or general sports highlight video. Participants in all conditions
were informed that they had been chosen to participate in the Time 2
session because they had high levels of identification with UK
men's basketball. In the group versus alone conditions,
participants either watched a video in a group setting or alone.
Participants in the group condition were allowed to talk and/ or respond
vocally to the video (e.g., cheer a specific play) but they were not
specifically instructed to do so (i.e., conversations among participants
and responses to the videos were neither encouraged nor discouraged). In
the UK video condition, subjects watched a highlight video titled
"Comeback Cats." The Official 1998 NCAA Championship
Video" which was approximately 45 minutes in length. This video was
intended to tender the participants' team identification salient
(given that past research had found a link between nostalgia and team
identification, such a manipulation was justified, see Gladden &
Funk, 2002). In the control condition, participants viewed a general
sports highlight video titled "Great Sports Memories" which
was approximately 30 minutes in length. The University of Kentucky was
not featured in the control video.
After watching the video, participants in all conditions were asked
to list the last four digits of their social security number (for
matching purposes) and to complete a short questionnaire packet
assessing their state level of social psychological health.
Specifically, they were again asked to complete 8 (different) items from
the 16-item Collective Self-esteem Scale (CSES; Luhtanen & Crocker,
1991) and the 20-item the UCLA Loneliness Scale (UCLALS: Russell et al.,
1980). (1) The items on each of these scales were worded to reflect
state levels of social well-being because, according to the Team
Identification--Social Psychological Health Model (Wann, 2006a),
temporary social connections should impact state, rather than trait,
levels of well-being. For instance, the items contained words such as
"right now" (e.g., "Right now I feel good about the
social groups I belong to"). Once again, both questionnaires were
scored so that higher numbers reflected more positive levels of social
well-being (e.g., lower levels of loneliness and higher levels of
collective self-esteem) and each questionnaire had the same responses
options and potential range of scores as was used in Time 1. After
watching the video and completing their Time 2 questionnaire packet
(approximately 45 minutes), participants were debriefed and excused from
the testing session.
Results
Preliminary Analyses
Items contained in each scale were summed to establish scale scores
for each measure. The means, standard deviations, and Cronbach's
reliability alphas for each scale are listed in Table 1. To insure that
the participants who returned for the Time 2 session did not differ in
social well-being from those who did not, a pair of one-way Analyses of
Variance (ANOVAs) were computed in which Time 1 CSES and Time 1 UCLALS
served as the dependent variables and "returned" or "did
not return" served as the grouping variable. These analyses failed
to indicate any significant differences between those who did and those
who did not choose to return (all ps > .05). (2)
To simplify the analyses, scores on the Time 1 CSES were subtracted
from scores on the Time 2 CSES to acquire a difference (i.e., change)
measure of collective self-esteem. Similarly, scores on the Time 1
UCLALS were subtracted from scores on the Time 2 UCLALS to acquire a
difference measure of loneliness. (3) Thus, for these difference
measures, higher numbers indicate improved social psychological health
at Time 2.
The potential impact of gender was assessed through three one-way
ANOVAs in which team identification (SSIS) and the psychological health
difference scores (i.e., CSES and UCLALS) served as the dependent
variables and gender was used as the grouping variable. The ANOVA on
identification did reveal a significant effect in which male
participants (M = 44.73, SD = 6.65) reported higher SSIS scores than did
female participants (M= 40.04, SD = 6.86), F(1, 69) = 7.87, p < .01.
However, the analyses of the psychological health difference scores did
not reveal a significant gender effect for either index (p > .05).
Further, gender was not involved in any significant main or interaction
effects in the ANOVAs described below on the CSES and UCLALS difference
scores. Thus, subsequent analyses were computed across gender.
Finally, a 2 (Condition: group or alone) x 2 (Video: University of
Kentucky Highlight Video or general sports highlight video) factorial
ANOVA was computed with team identification as the dependent variable to
insure that participants in each of the four conditions did not vary
with respect to level of identification with the UK team. This analysis
failed to find any significant main or interaction effects for level of
identification (all ps > .05). Thus, participants in each of the four
conditions were similar in the level of identification for the target
team.
The Impact of Condition and Video on Change in Social Psychological
Health
Based on the Team Identification--Social Psychological Health Model
(Wann, 2006a), it was hypothesized that when they were placed into an
environment in which their team identification and social connections to
others were made salient, highly identified fans would report improved
levels of state social psychological health. Highly identified fans in
conditions in which their identification and/or connections to others
were not salient were not expected to exhibit such a well-being
increase. Thus, in the current investigation, we expected only those
participants watching the UK video (i.e., team identification salient)
in the group setting (i.e., social connections salient) to report the
increased well-being effect. Persons in the other three conditions
(i.e., UK video/alone, control video/group, or control video/alone) were
not expected to exhibit increased social psychological health.
Scores on the CSES and UCLALS difference measures were first
examined through a pair of 2 (Condition: group or alone) x 2 (Video:
University of Kentucky Highlight Video or general sports highlight
video) between-subjects factorial ANOVAs. Next, the specific patterns of
hypothesized effects were investigating through a pair of one-way
ANOVAs with planned contrasts in which cell (UK video/group, UK
video/alone, control video/group, or control video/alone) served as the
independent variable and the social psychological health difference
measures served as the two dependent variables (see Table 2 for cell
sizes, means, and standard deviations). The contrasts reflected the
hypothesized pattern of effects (i.e., higher psychological health
difference scores among participants in the UK video/group condition
versus those in the other three cells).
With respect to CSES scores, the 2 x 2 ANOVA failed to reveal a
significant effect for condition, F(1,67) = 0.00, p > .90. However,
the main effect for video was significant, F(1, 67) = 7.57, p < .01.
Participants watching the UK video (M= 3.51, SD = 4.63) reported more
improvement in collective self-esteem than persons watching the control
video, (M= 0.44, SD = 4.62). The two-way interaction was hot
significant, F(1, 67) = 0.0 1, p > .90. With respect to the one-way
analysis with planned contrasts, the contrast test was not significant,
t(67) = 1.70, p > .05. An examination of Table 2 reveals that each
condition fell into the expected pattern of effects with the exception
of the UK video/alone condition, in which participants reported higher
than expected difference scores.
As for UCLALS scores, the 2 x 2 ANOVA failed to reveal a
significant main effect for both condition, F(1, 67) = 1.25, p > .20,
and video, F(1, 67) = 3.10, p > .05. Likewise, the two-way
interaction was not significant, F(1, 67) = 1.33, p > .20. With
respect to the one-way analysis with planned contrasts, the contrast
test was significant, t(67) = 2.35, p < .05. An examination of Table
2 reveals that each condition fell into the expected pattern of effects.
Specifically, participants in the UK video/group condition reported
higher state well-being scores than those in the other three conditions.
Discussion
According to the Team Identification--Social Psychological Health
Model (Wann, 2006a), team identification should be positively associated
with social well-being when the identification produces social
connections. In the current investigation we examined temporary
connections. A previously understudied component of Wann's model
(Wann, 2006b), temporary connections occur when displaced fans (i.e.,
fans who do not reside in the locale where the team is found)
temporarily find themselves in the company of other fans of the team.
Based on Wann's framework, we hypothesized that highly identified
University of Kentucky men's basketball fans watching a University
of Kentucky basketball highlight video (i.e., team identification
salient) in a group setting (i.e., social connections salient) would
report increased social well-being. Support for the hypothesized pattern
of effects was found for loneliness but not for collective self-esteem.
That is, persons in the group/University of Kentucky video condition
reported greater decreases in loneliness than persons in the other three
conditions (as expected). However, for collective self-esteem, only a
video main effect emerged in which participants reported greater
increases in social self-esteem in the University of Kentucky video
condition.
In terms of improved social well-being, an examination of Table 2
reveals that for state loneliness a combination of a salient team
identity and salient social connections resulted in better social
psychological health (i.e., lower levels of loneliness). If either of
these components were absent, significant changes in loneliness were not
found. Thus, it appears that for this dimension of social well-being,
both the role of team follower and social connections are necessary.
Thus, as noted by other authors (Branscombe, Ellemers, Spears, &
Doosje, 1999), it is critical that the social connections (i.e., other
fans) be rendered salient. Simply focusing the fan's attention on
his or her role of team follower will not suffice to improve loneliness,
as indicated by the lack of change among those in the University of
Kentucky video/alone condition. Likewise, simply rendering other fans of
the team salient without the salience of the relevant identity does not
lead to improved loneliness, as indicated by the lack of change in the
control video/group condition. Only when both factors were made salient
did loneliness significantly change.
However, with respect to collective self-esteem, only the salience
of the role of team follower was needed for improved well-being.
Participants in both the alone and group conditions reported increased
collective self-esteem subsequent to watching the highlight video. This
finding may have been due to the video itself. Because the team follower
role was made salient via a highlight video, participants in this
condition were reminded not only of their role as team supporter, but
also of the long history and tradition of success for the University of
Kentucky men's basketball program. This may have been at least
partially responsible for the increases in social self-esteem noted. It
would be interesting for future researchers to replicate the current
investigation with a video depicting different (i.e., less successful)
performances. Perhaps participants could view sections of games
involving the target team in which the team performs very poorly or view
a neutral team video, that is, one with neither particularly poor nor
successful team performance. The impact of these videos would an
important next step in this line of investigation given that Wann's
(2006a) model suggests that both a salient team identity and salient
social connections were required for state social well-being increases.
In the current work, although this was the case for state loneliness, it
was not so for state collective self-esteem. Given that the championship
video used here could have been the antecedent to the increases in
collective self-esteem, the viewing of videos with different content
would be an obvious choice for future researchers wanting to replicate
the current effect. Based on the Team Identification--Social
Psychological Health Model (Wann, 2006a) and the results reported above,
it may be that viewing such a video in a group condition (relative to a
non-team video) would result in increased loneliness regardless of the
video content (i.e., regardless of team performance). However,
collective self-esteem would remain unchanged by a neutral video while a
negative performance video would result in lowered collective
self-esteem.
That the hypothesis was supported for only one of the two dependent
measures has several important implications. First, this may simply have
been due to the fact that temporary social connections are more
associated with certain dimensions of social well-being and not others.
This is consistent with work on enduring connections in which these
connections have been round to be more associated with some dimensions
(e.g., social integration) than others (e.g., social acceptance, see
Wann & Weaver, 2009). However, it could also be the case that the
well-being effect for temporary connections may be less robust than for
enduring connections. That is, although not every dimension of social
well-being has been round to correlate with team identification (Wann
& Weaver, 2009), the list of dimensions that are related is quite
long and impressive (e.g., social self-esteem, social well-being,
extroversion, loneliness, and alienation; see Wann, 2006a, for a
review). Perhaps the list of forms of social well-being that are related
to temporary connections is fewer than that for enduring connections.
Future research assessing the relationships among temporary connections
and other forms of social well-being is needed to determine which
explanation has the greatest merit.
Although the current experiment is a valuable first step in
furthering our understanding of the impact of temporary social
connections, there is still much that remains unknown about this
phenomenon. For instance, the precise number of other fans needed to
produce the effect remains unknown. In the current investigation, the
groups ranged in size from 15 to 19. While this number was significant
to produce the hypothesized effect (for loneliness), the minimum number
required is not known. In addition, further researchers may want to
investigate the duration of the effect. In the study described above,
the assessment of state well-being took place immediately subsequent to
the viewing of the video and in the presence of the other group members.
Although certain persons reported lower levels of state loneliness, it
is unclear how long this effect would last. Certainly, the effect would
not be expected to be permanent, but the exact length could be
determined through longitudinal research (e.g., researchers could assess
social well-being at multiple times after the group has dispersed).
Based on Wann's (2006a) model, one would likely expect the effect
to last only as long as the other fans are present, but additional work
is needed to validate this hypothesis.
Future researchers may also want to better articulate what is meant
by a displaced/ distant fan. Wann (2006a) does not give a precise
operational definition of local versus distant fans. Wann and Martin
(2008) attempted to define these constructs. They operationally defined
a local fan as someone who supported a team in the local county. Other
perspectives could involve media coverage or precise mileage, to name
but a few. These definitions are important because Wann's framework
predicts different behaviors from local and distant fans (i.e., local
fans have the opportunity for enduring connections while displaced fans
do not).
In conclusion, the current investigation was an attempt to test
Wann's (2006a) Team Identification--Social Psychological Health
Model. Specifically, we examined the relationship between temporary
social connections and social psychological well-being. Interestingly,
the model was supported for one operational definition of well-being,
loneliness, but not for the other, collective self-esteem. As mentioned
earlier, this may have been due to the nature of the video itself.
However, it is also possible that Wann's model may need to be
adjusted with respect to temporary connections and there impact on
well-being. That is, perhaps the model needs to specific which
dimensions of well-being will be improved by temporary connections
(e.g., state loneliness) and those that will not (e.g., state collective
self-esteem).
References
Aveni, A. F. (1977). The not-so-lonely crowd: Friendship groups in
collective behavior. Sociometry, 40, 96-99.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. P. (1995). The need to belong:
Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression. New York: Hoeber.
Branscombe, N. R., Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B.
(1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In N.
Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity (pp.
35-58). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1991). The positive social
and self-concept consequences of sports team identification. Journal of
Sport & Social Issues, 15, 115-127.
Brown, B. B., & Lohr, N. (1987). Peer group affiliation and
adolescent self-esteem: An integration of ego-identity and
symbolic-interaction theories. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 52, 47-55.
Clopton, A. W. (2008). College sports on campus: Uncovering the
link between fan identification and sense of community. International
Journal of Sport Management, 9, 343-362.
Compton, W. C. (2005). An introduction to positive psychology.
Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Correll, J., & Park, B. (2005). A model of the ingroup as a
social resource. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 341-359.
Crawford, G. (2004). Consuming sport: Fans, sport, and culture.
London: Routledge.
Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem:
The self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96,
608-630.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999).
Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological
Bulletin, 125, 276-302.
End, C., Birchmeier, Z., & Mueller, D. (2004, September). How
time and group reactions influence sport fans' online defensive
reactions to various sources of identity threat. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Applied Sport
Psychology, Minneapolis, MN.
Foster, W. M., & Hyatt, C. (2007). I despise them! I detest
them! Franchise relocation and the expanded model of organizational
identification. Journal of Sport Management, 21, 194-212.
Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2002). Developing an
understanding of brand associations in team sport: Empirical evidence
from consumers of professional sport. Journal of Sport Management, 16,
54-81.
Glover, T. D., Parry, D. C., & Shinew, K. L. (2005). Building
relationships, accessing resources: Mobilizing social capital in
community garden contexts. Journal of Leisure Research, 37, 450-474.
Hirt, E. R., Zillmann, D., Erickson, G. A., & Kennedy, C.
(1992). Costs and benefits of allegiance: Changes in fans'
self-ascribed competencies after team victory versus defeat. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 724-738.
Hughson, J., & Free, M. (2006). Paul Willis, cultural
commodities, and collective sport fandom. Sociology of Sport Journal,
23, 72-85.
Hyatt, C. G. (2007). Who do I root for now? The impact of franchise
relocation on the loyal fans left behind: A case study of Hartford
Whalers fans. Journal of Sport Behavior, 30, 36-56.
Kelley, S. W., & Tian, K. (2004). Fanatical consumption: An
investigation of the behavior of sports fans through textual data. In L.
R. Kahle & C. Riley (Eds.), Sports marketing and the psychology of
marketing communication (pp. 27-65). Mahwah, N J: Erlbaum.
Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 61, 121-140.
Keyes, C. L. M., & Lopez, S. J. (2001). Toward a science of
mental health: Positive directions in diagnosis and intervention. In C.
R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.) Handbook of positive psychology
(45-59). New York: Oxford.
Knowles, M. L., & Gardner, W. I. (2008). Benefits of
membership: The activation and amplification of group identities in
response to social rejection. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 34, 1200-12-13.
Kraszewski, J. (2008). Pittsburgh in Forth Worth: Football bars,
sports television, sports fandom, and the management of home. Journal of
Sport and Social Issues, 32, 139-157.
Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1991). Self-esteem and intergroup
comparison: Toward a theory of collective self-esteem. In J. Suls &
T. A. Wills (Eds.) Social comparisons: Contemporary theory and research
(pp. 211-234). Hillsdale, N J: Erlbaum.
Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem
scale: Self-evaluation of one's social identity. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302-318.
Maynard, S.S., & Kleiber, DA. (2005). Using leisure services to
build social capital in later life: Classical traditions, contemporary
realities, and emerging possibilities. Journal of Leisure Research, 37,
475-493.
Melnick, M. J. (1993). Searching for sociability in the stands: A
theory of sports spectating. Journal of Sport Management, 7, 44-60.
Oishi, S., Schimmack, U., & Diener, E. (2001). Pleasures and
subjective well-being. European Journal of Personality, 15, 153-167.
Palmer, C., & Thomson, K. (2007). The paradoxes of football
spectatorship: On-field and online expressions of social capital among
the "Grog Squad." Sociology of Sport Journal, 24, 187-205.
Robinson, M. D., & Clore, G. L. (2002). Episodic and semantic
knowledge in emotional self-report: Evidence for two judgment processes.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 198-215.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The
revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity
evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 472-480.
Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Kommer, D., & Wagner, D. (1987).
Soccer, rooms, and the quality of your life: Mood effects on judgments
of satisfaction with life in general and with specific domains. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 69-79.
Schweitzer, K., Zillmann, D., Weaver, J. B., & Luttrell, E. S.
(1992). Perception of threatening events in the emotional aftermath of a
televised college football game. Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media, 36, 75-82.
Smith, G. J. (1988). The noble sports fan. Journal of Sport &
Social Issues, 12, 54-65.
Swyers, H. (2005). Community America: Who owns Wrigley Field? The
International Journal of the History of Sport, 22, 1086-1105.
Wann, D. L. (1994). The "noble" sports fan: The
relationships between team identification, self- esteem, and aggression.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 864-866.
Wann, D. L. (2006a). Understanding the Positive Social
Psychological Benefits of Sport Team Identification: The Team
Identification--Social Psychological Health Model. Group Dynamics:
Theory, Research, and Practice, 10, 272-296.
Wann, D. L. (2006b). Examining the potential causal relationship
between sport team identification and psychological well-being. Journal
of Sport Behavior, 29, 79-95.
Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1993). Sports fans: Measuring
degree of identification with the team. International Journal of Sport
Psychology, 24, 1-17.
Wann, D. L., Dimmock, J. A., & Grove, J. R. (2003).
Generalizing the Team Identification--Psychological Health Model to a
different sport and culture: The case of Australian Rules football.
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7, 289-296.
Wann, D. L., Dunham, M. D., Byrd, M. L., & Keenan, B. L.
(2004). The rive-factor model of personality and the psychological
health of highly identified sport fans. International Sports Journal,
8(2), 28-36.
Wann, D. L., & Grieve, F. G. (2005). Biased evaluations of
ingroup and outgroup spectator behavior at sporting events: The
importance of team identification and threats to social identity.
Journal of Social Psychology, 145, 531-545.
Wann, D. L., Inman, S., Ensor, C. L., Gates, R. D., & Caldwell,
D. S. (1999). Assessing the psychological well-being of sport fans using
the Profile of Mood States: The importance of team identification.
International Sports Journal, 3, 81-90.
Wann, D. L., & Martin, J. (2008). The positive relationship
between sport team identification and social psychological well-being:
Identification with favorite teams versus local teams. Contemporary
Athletics, 3, 81-91.
Wann, D. L., Martin, J., Grieve, F. G., & Gardner, L. (2008).
Social connections at sporting events: Attendance and its positive
relationship with state social psychological well-being. North American
Journal of Psychology, 10, 229-238.
Wann, D. L., Melnick, M. J., Russell, G. W., & Pease, D. G.
(2001). Sport fans: The psychology and social impact of spectators. New
York: Routledge Press.
Wann, D. L., & Pierce, S. (2005). The relationship between
sport team identification and social well-being: Additional evidence
supporting the Team Identification--Social Psychological Health Model.
North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 117-124.
Wann, D. L., Polk, J., & Weaver, S. (2008). The Team
Identification -Social Psychological Health Model: Gaining connections
to others via sport team identification. Unpublished manuscript.
Wann, D. L., Walker, R. G., Cygan, J., Kawase, I., & Ryan, J.
(2005). Further replication of the relationship between team
identification and psychological well-being: Examining nonclassroom
settings. North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 361-366.
Wann, D. L., & Weaver, S. (2009). Understanding the
relationship between sport team identification and dimensions of social
well-being. North American Journal of Psychology, 11, 219-230.
Daniel L. Wann, Josh Polk, and Gentzy Franz
Murray State University
Address correspondence to: Daniel L. Wann, Department of
Psychology, Murray State University, Murray, KY 4207 I. E-mail:
dan.wann@murraystate.edu
Footnotes
(1) Because previous work had successfully split the CSE into two
halves for use in a pretest-posttest design (Branscombe & Wann,
1994), we did so here as well. However, because research had hot
attempted to split the UCLALS into two parts, we used the entire 20-item
scale at each testing session.
(2) Although not directly related to the current study and
hypotheses, we also examined the relationship between level of
identification and Time 1 social psychological health (i.e., CSES and
UCLALS scores) for all participants. According to the Team
Identification--Social Psychological Health Model (Wann, 2006a), one
would not expect a significant relationship between these variables due
to the lack of enduring social connections. These analyses indicated a
small but statistically significant correlation between identification
and Time 1 CSES, r(673) =. 101, p < .05, and no relationship between
identification and scores on the UCLALS, r(673) = .066,p > .05. While
the correlation between identification and CSES was statistically
significant, the amount of variance accounted for was only 1%. The lack
of statistically significant relationship with one measure (UCLALS) and
a very weak relationship with another (i.e., although statistically
significant, the lack of variance accounted for in the relationship
between identification and CSES indicates a lack of practical
significance) suggest support for the Team Identification--Social
Psychological Health Model with respect to the lack of enduring social
connections of social psychological well-being.
(3) The Time 1 CSES and UCLALS questionnaires were significantly
correlated, r(69) = .410, p < .001, as were scores on the Time 2
assessments of the CSES and UCLALS, r(69) = .489, p<.001.
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Cronbach's Reliability Alphas
for the Dependent Measures.
Measure Mean SD Alpha
Team Identification (all participants) 19.47 13.77 .962
Team Identification (Time 2 participants only) 41.76 7.11 .805
CSES Time 1 (all participants) 43.43 6.16 .741
CSES Time 1 (Time 2 participants only) 44.93 5.24 .695
CSES Time 2 46.97 4.82 .662
UCLALS Time 1 (all participants) 67.56 9.12 .913
UCLALS Time 1 (Time 2 participants only) 69.82 8.09 .908
UCLALS Time 2 71.10 8.11 .914
Table 2. Cell Sizes, Means and Standard Deviations for the CSES and
UCLALS Difference Scores by Condition
UK Video Control Video
Group Alone Group Alone
n per condition 18 19 15 19
CSES difference score 3.61 3.42 0.40 0.47
(4.26) (5.07) (5.73) (3.69)
UCLALS difference score 4.06 0.90 0.00 0.05
(5.21) (4.86) (7.34) (5.96)
Note: Standard deviations appear in parentheses below each mean.