Understanding college sport fans' experiences of and attempts to cope with shame.
Partridge, Julie A. ; Wann, Daniel L. ; Elison, Jeff 等
Almost all sport fans have experienced feelings of embarrassment or shame related to a favorite team. A blowout loss to an archrival, a devastating loss in a conference tournament to a lower seeded opponent, academic suspensions for star players, or failing to qualify for postseason play are all examples of sport occurrences with which fans must cope. A recent investigation has revealed that sport fans experience a wide range of emotional reactions, and that these reactions may be more intense subsequent to certain types of contests, such as important games or losses (Sloan, 1989). Furthermore, it is apparent that athletic contests can impact spectators' levels of anxiety and arousal (Branscombe & Wann, 1992; Wann, Schrader, & Adamson, 1998) and that the affective reactions are more intense among fans with levels of team identification (Wann, Dolan, McGeorge, & Allison, 1994), that is, persons with a strong psychological connection to a team (Wann, Melnick, Russell, & Pease, 2001).
College students, in particular, have been found to hold significant levels of identification with sport teams and individuals (Wann & Branscombe, 1993; Wann et al., 1994). Research has also indicated that college students who showed higher interest in and involvement with their university's athletic teams demonstrated greater persistence toward graduation and positive emotions/perceptions of the university (Wann & Robinson, 2002). Furthermore, higher levels of identification in college students have demonstrated more frequent positive emotions and less frequent negative emotions (Branscombe & Wann, 1991). The impact of sport fandom on emotional outcomes in college students is therefore critical to understanding the overall college fan experience. Negative emotional states resulting from fandom seem particularly relevant, given instances of rioting, fighting, and other negative behaviors following athletic events on university campuses (Dietz-Uhler & Murrell, 1999; Young, 2002).
Nathanson (1992) identified the importance of a specific set of emotional experiences in the sport experience, shame and pride, when he stated, "Nowhere in contemporary Western society is the preoccupation with shame and pride to be as easily seen or studied as in our preoccupation with public sporting spectacles" (p. 353). However, to date researchers have yet to examine college fans' experiences of shame in their team, an affective experience that may well be an important component of fan reactions. Shame is a highly social, yet self-directed emotion that occurs as a result of being devalued in the eyes of others (Elison, 2005; Nathanson, 1992; Tangney, Miller, Flicker, & Barlow, 1996; Tompkins, 1963). It has been posited that this painful emotional experience can serve the valuable purpose of warning us when we are behaving in a way that threatens social inclusion (Elison, 2005; Gilbert & McGuire, 1998). Evolutionary models of shame are based on the observation that humans are a social species born with innate tendencies toward sociability (Baumeister & Leafy, 1995). Our sociability and organization into social units has adaptive advantages. One's status or rank within various social units affects access to resources relevant to survival and reproduction. Therefore, any threat to this inclusion as signaled by shame is potentially cause for a negative response (Fournier, Moskowitz, & Zuroff, 2002; Parker, 1998).
Not every person responds to shame in the same manner. An important aspect of the experience of shame is the way in which one copes with, or defends against, it. Shame coping may be considered to be either adaptive or maladaptive. Nathanson's (1992) Compass of Shame model, depicted graphically in Figure 1, suggests that there are four maladaptive coping styles that people adopt when dealing with shame. The four poles of the model are: Attack Other, Attack Self, Avoidance, and Withdrawal (Nathanson, 1992).
At the Attack Other pole, individuals do not internalize the negative messages associated with shame. Rather, the chosen response is to direct anger outward, perhaps toward the perceived cause of the shaming event. The cognitive experience is an awareness of someone else's actions or faults and may or may not involve awareness of shame. The individual is motivated is to bolster the self image and externalize the shame, perhaps by verbally or physically attacking someone or something else in order to cause a feeling of inferiority in others. For sport fans, the object of this outwardly-directed anger could include other fans, coaches, officials, or athletes who are actually participating in the contest.
At the Attack Self pole, the person acknowledges the experience as negative, accepts shame's message as valid, and turns resulting feelings of anger inward. The experience is negative; emotions include self-directed anger, contempt, or disgust, which magnify the impact of shame. Cognitions include awareness of one's shameful actions, faults, or characteristics. The individual who attacks self has a motivation to take control of shame with the ultimate goal of winning acceptance from others. The action tendency is to criticize the self, prevent reoccurrence of the shameful situation through change, conformity, showing deference to others, or engaging in self-deprecating remarks. Sport fans might attack self by questioning their allegiance to a poorly performing team, or by feeling disgusted by their identification with a losing team.
At the Avoidance pole, the person typically does not acknowledge the negative experience of self, typically does not accept shame's message as valid (i.e., denial), and attempts to distract the self and others from the painful feeling. Cognitions include little awareness of shame or one's shameful actions, faults, or characteristics. The individual's motivation is to minimize the conscious experience of shame or show oneself as being above shame. A fan that jokes with others about how terrible his favorite team is playing may be demonstrating avoidance behavior.
At the Withdrawal pole, the person acknowledges the experience as negative, accepts shame's message as valid, and tries to withdraw or hide from the situation (Elison, Pulos, & Lennon, 2006; Nathanson, 1992). The experience is negative, and the cognitions include awareness of one's discomfort with others, and possibly awareness of shameful actions, faults, or characteristics (although these negative feelings and cognitions may not be identified explicitly as shame). The motivation is to limit shameful exposure through the action of withdrawing from the situation. A sport fan might withdraw from the shaming experience by avoiding not only other people, but also coverage or discussion of the shaming event (e.g., a blowout loss to a rival team).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
Withdrawal and Attack Self share two important aspects: recognition of a negative experience and conscious acceptance (i.e., internalization) of shame's message (e.g., lack of status). An important difference between the two poles can be seen in their motivations, as individuals using an Attack Self approach often endure shame to maintain relationships with others while those using Withdrawal pull away from others to reduce their discomfort and shame experiences. This distinction is particularly important given the highly social nature of many sport fan experiences. That is, given that sport fandom and spectating tend to be social activities carried out in groups (Danielson, 1997; Wann et al., 2001) it is important to understand how fans cope with their shame and if they are indeed likely to withdrawal from other fans.
Not all shame responses are negative. Individuals may also respond adaptively to shame-inducing experiences. These adaptive responses occur when an individual evaluates the cause(s) of the shame and consider how the feeling could be avoided in the future. The baseball player who has a shameful strikeout may choose to spend more time in the batting cage or take extra baring practice to minimize the chance of exhibiting an embarrassing performance in the future. Paradoxically, encouraging an adaptive shame coping style in sport fans may be difficult in that the individual sport fan has little (if any) control over changing the antecedents to the shameful event (i.e., impacting the outcome of the contest), other than cutting ties with the team (although fans certainly feel as though they can influence the contests, see Wann et al., 1994). Consequently, when a fan is highly identified with a team, he or she experiences a "vicarious, affective experience" (Kagan, 1958, p. 297).
Vicarious Shame
Although shame is considered to be a self-directed emotional response, there is some evidence to suggest that shame can also be experienced through association with others (i.e., vicariously). The actions of an identified in-group may have an impact on the emotional responses of individuals who identify with that social group, and groups with which an individual identifies most strongly are more likely to result in stronger emotional reactions (Branscombe & Doojse, 2004; Johns, Schmader, & Lickel, 2005). Borg, Staufenbiel, and Scherer (1988) utilized facet theory to examine the intensity with which individuals experience shame and found that identified (or vicarious) shame may be impacted by the degree to which an individual identifies with another person or group. Results indicated that the closer one's relationship is to another person, the more likely that individual is to feel reflected levels of shame. Therefore, a parent would be more likely to feel intense levels of shame through a child's actions (e.g., throwing a temper tantrum in a grocery store) than would be a stranger witnessing the same event in the same location (Borg et al., 1988).
It is not necessary for a relationship to be familial to cause vicarious shame. Strong nationalistic identity has also been found to influence the shame experience. Johns and colleagues (2005) found that stronger levels of identification as an American predicted higher levels of shame and higher desire to distance oneself from the group when reacting to a very negative event (i.e., prejudice toward people of Middle-Eastern descent following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001). A similar study investigated the influence of vicarious shame by asking individuals to recall three distinct events in which they felt ashamed or guilty of the actions of a family member, a friend, and a person who they did not know well, but shared a common set of characteristics (i.e., ethnicity). Vicarious shame was predicted by a shared identity with a wrongdoer, an appraisal of a self-image threat, and a motivation to distance oneself from the event (Lickel, Schmader, Curtis, Seamier, & Ames, 2005). Research indicates that identity is related to experiences of shame (e.g., Johns et al., 2005; Lickel et al., 2005). Given that fans often possess high levels of team identification (Wann, 2006; Wann et al., 2001), and a fan's role as team follower can be a central component of their overall social identity (Wann, Royalty, & Roberts, 2000), this relationship also requires exploration as a mediator of vicarious shame experiences.
Given the exploratory nature of this study, no specific hypotheses were written. Instead, the current study examined the following research questions, "What maladaptive shame coping styles are most frequently endorsed by college sport fans?" and "What variables account for the greatest amount of unique variance in maladaptive shame coping styles of college sport fans?" We are not suggesting that shame is the only (or even primary) emotional response exhibited by highly identified fans in response to viewing their team in competition. Rather, research indicates that these persons report many different affective responses (Sloan & Van Camp, 2008). This includes both positive (e.g., happiness, satisfaction, and confidence) and negative emotions (e.g., anger, discouragement, and tension) (Sloan, 1989, Wann et al., 1994). However, shame as an emotional response had yet to be empirically examined and thus, this research was warranted.
Method
Participants
Participants were 287 college students (M age = 21.1 years; SD = 4.0) who volunteered to take part in the study. There were 162 (56.4%) males and 116 (40.4%) females (nine participants did not report gender and were not included in the gender analyses). The sample was obtained from universities in the Midwest, Mid-south, and Western regions of the United States.
Materials
Compass of Shame Scale-Fan. The Compass of Shame Scale (CoSS; Elison, Lennon, & Pulos, 2006; Elison et al., 2006) was originally designed to assess the four distinct maladaptive shame coping styles described by Nathanson (1992) and has been found to exhibit good psychometric properties. For this study, the original CoSS was adapted to target the responses of sport fans to sporting events. The CoSS-Fan consists of 11 situational scenarios (i.e., items) with four corresponding response statements, one for each pole of Nathanson's model: Attack Other (AO), Attack Self(AS), Avoidance (AV), and Withdrawal (WD). Each of the four response options to each of the 11 items utilizes a Likert response scale of I = never, 2 = seldom, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, and 5 = almost always. A sample CoSS-Fan item reads, "If my team loses a competition by a large margin...". Response options to this item are, "I tell myself that this competition wasn't important" (Avoidance), "I feel my team is worthless" (Attack Self), "I go someplace where I can be alone" (Withdrawal), and "I think of all the unfair things that happened during the competition" (Attack Other). Total possible subscale scores range from 11 (low use of the coping style) to 55 (high use of the coping style). Internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha reliability procedure revealed that each scale possessed adequate reliability (AS [alpha] = .88; AO [alpha] = .87; WD [alpha] = .82; AV [alpha] = .73).
It is important to note that the CoSS was designed to measure only maladaptive responses to shame. An individual who copes adaptively with shame can report low scores on each of the CoSS subscales, thus the questionnaire does not imply that any individual is maladaptively coping with shame. Furthermore, the responses to the stem statements do not necessarily require acknowledgement of shame, which means that individuals are not assumed to have any inherent level of shame present (Borg et al., 1988). Rather than inquiring about shame directly, responses describe related feelings and behaviors such as getting angry at others, being self-critical, or making jokes.
Sport Spectator Identification Scale. The Sport Spectator Identification Scale (SSIS; Wann & Branscombe, 1993) is a 7-item, Likert-scale measuring the degree to which an individual identifies with a specific team or athlete. Participants were asked to identify their favorite sport team by writing it on a line at the top of the SSIS. Participants could identify any team from any sport at any level, or an individual in an individual sport such as auto racing or figure skating. All questions on the subsequent questionnaires pertained to the identified team or athlete. A sample item from the SSIS is, "How important is it to YOU that the team listed above wins?" Possible responses ranged from 1 (low identification) to 8 (high identification). Therefore, higher numbers indicate greater levels of spectator identification. The SSIS has been found to be a highly valid and reliable measure (see Wann et al. 2001, for a review). Internal consistency for the SSIS was [alpha] = .95.
Dysfunctional Fandom Scale. The Dysfunctional Fandom Scale (DFS; Wakefield & Wann, 2006) is a 5-item, Likert-scale designed to measure an individual's level of dysfunctional fandom. A sample item from the DFS is, "I have had confrontations with others while watching the team listed above when I voiced my opinion." Responses range from 1 (inaccurate) to 8 (accurate). Higher numbers on the DFS indicate higher levels of dysfunctional fandom. The internal consistency of the DFS was [alpha] = .91.
Sport Fandom Questionnaire. The Sport Fandom Questionnaire (SFQ; Wann, 2002) is a 5-item, Likert-scale questionnaire that assesses the level of general sport fandom that an individual possesses. An example item from the SFQ is: "I consider myself to be a sport fan." Statement responses range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 8 (strongly agree). Higher scores on the SFQ reflect greater levels of fandom. The internal consistency for the SFQ was [alpha] = .95.
Procedure
Approval for the study was obtained from the Human Subjects Committees at the three target universities. Students from a variety of courses (e.g., kinesiology, psychology, sociology) at each university were recruited for the study in their regular classroom settings. Individuals who agreed to participate and provided consent were asked by research assistants to complete a questionnaire packet containing the following sections (the sections are detailed above): a demographics questionnaire, a measure of trait shame coping (Compass of Shame Scale-Fan), and three measures of fandom (Sport Spectator Identification Scale, Dysfunctional Fandom Scale, Sport Fandom Questionnaire). The measures were given to participants in a random order to avoid any ordering effects. Upon completion of the questionnaire packet (approximately 15 minutes), participants were thanked for their cooperation, debriefed, and released from the testing session.
Results
Descriptive statistics are reported in Table 1. To examine research Question 1 ("What maladaptive shame coping styles are most frequently endorsed by college sport fans?"), a series of paired-sample t-tests (df = 285) were used to compare the average shame coping style scores among college-aged sport fans (see Table 1). A Bonferroni test was used to adjust for inflated Type I error. Results indicated that the average score on the Avoidance subscale was significantly higher than the other three coping subscales (Attack Self, Attack Other, and Withdrawal). The Attack Self and Attack Other subscales did not differ from each, but both were significantly higher than Withdrawal.
Correlations were calculated using a Pearson product moment correlation and are shown in Table 2 (gender was coded as males = 1; females = 2). All comparisons were significantly different except for Avoidance and gender. To examine Research Question 2 ("What variables account for the greatest amount of unique variance in maladaptive shame coping styles of college sport fans?"), four separate linear regression analyses were performed, one each for the four shame coping subscales (AS, AO, AV, and WD). Gender, team identification, dysfunctional fandom, and sport fandom served as predictor variables while the shame coping strategies were the dependent variables.
Attack Other
The combined effect of the four predictor variables was significant, F(1,262) = 149.69, p < .001. With respect to independent contributions to AO scores, only dysfunctional fandom accounted for a significant amount of unique variance, t = 12.24, p < .001, [R.sup.2] = .36, [beta] = .60. The other variables did not account for a significant proportion of unique variance in AO scores (sport fandom [beta] = .069, t = 1.03, p > .50; team identification [beta] = .099, t = 1.38, p > .50; gender [beta] = -.024, t = .47, p > .50).
Attack Self
The combined effect of the four predictor variables was significant, F(2,262) = 92.57, p < .001. With respect to independent contributions to AS scores, two predictor variables accounted for a significant amount of unique variance: dysfunctional fandom, t = 11.39, p < .001, [R.sup.2] = .39, [beta] = .57, and gender, t = -3.55,p < .001, [R.sup.2] = .04, [beta] = -. 17. Team identification ([beta] = -.035, t = -.51, p > .50) and sport fandom ([beta] = -.01, t = -. 15, p > .50) did not account for significant amounts of unique variance.
Avoidance
The combined effect of the four predictor variables was significant, F(1,262) = 18.93, p < .001. With respect to independent contributions to AV scores, only fan identification accounted for a significant amount of unique variance, t = 19.12, p < .001, [R.sup.2] = .07, [beta] = .26. The other variables failed to predict for the dependent variable (SFQ, [beta] = .035, t = .33,p > .50; DFS, [beta] = .024, t = .272, p > .50; gender, [beta] = -.023, t = .36,p > .50).
Withdrawal
The combined effect of the four predictor variables was significant, F(1, 262) = 37.98, p < .001. With respect to independent contributions to AV scores, only dysfunctional fandom accounted for a significant amount of unique variance, t = 6.16,p < .001, [R.sup.2] =. 13, [beta] = .36. The other variables failed to predict for the dependent variable (sport fandom [beta] = .048, t =.61, p > .50; team identification [beta] = -.072, t = -.86,p > .50; gender, [beta] = -.062, t = 1.03, p > .50).
Discussion
Although shame is generally conceptualized as a negative emotional experience, coping styles can provide an individual with either negative or positive outcomes. Avoidance, Attack Other, Attack Self, and Withdrawal are negative shame coping strategies in which the individual attempts to deflect the occurrence rather than directly addressing the shaming experience. Therefore, to understand the impact of shame as an emotion in sport fans, it is crucial to examine the pattern(s) of shame coping styles most frequently employed by college fans.
The purpose of this study was to identify the most common shame coping styles endorsed by college sport fans, as well as to explore the unique contributions of fan identification, dysfunctional fandom, sport fandom, and gender toward differences in maladaptive shame coping styles of college sport fans. Results from paired samples t-tests indicated that overall Avoidance scores were significantly higher than the other three shame coping styles. Avoidance is a coping mechanism in which individuals deny the existence of shame and avoid the painful feeling through distraction (Nathanson, 1992). Furthermore, Avoidance has been found to protect against several negative psychological symptoms (e.g., depression, hostility, anger and psychopathy) in college samples (Campbell & Elison, 2005; Elison, Lennon, & Pulos, 2006; Elison, Pulos, & Lennon, 2006; Yelsma, Brown, & Elison, 2002). Perhaps when individuals are highly identified and invested in a team's performance, the internalization of shame is unlikely to occur. Nathanson specifically identified competition, particularly that of public sport, as a common means through which individuals experience "borrowed" levels of pride (1992). By establishing significant levels of identification with a specific team, the need to protect against any threats to levels of vicarious pride is perhaps necessary. Avoidance behaviors would provide such an externalizing protection, and therefore may be the most likely response to be endorsed in sport fans.
Results from the t-tests indicated that there was no significant difference between scores on Attack Other and Attack Self, although they differed significantly from both Avoidance and Withdrawal. These two subscales do share a common anger component (with Attack Other focusing the anger outwardly and Attack Self focusing it inwardly), and this may explain the similarities between the two Attack subscale scores.
The least common coping mechanism utilized was Withdrawal, which is an internalization technique in which an individual is aware of the shameful experience and attempts to avoid other individuals as well as discussion/coverage of the shameful event. Withdrawal behaviors would include refusal to read or watch any media coverage of a sporting event following a particularly embarrassing loss, or refusing to answer a cell phone call from other people. Given the proportion of males to females in this sample (and in sport fandom in general), higher levels of Avoidance are not surprising. Previous research has indicated that females express more Attack Self or Withdrawal (i.e., internalization of shame), while males exhibit moreAvoidance (Elison, Lennon, & Pulos, 2006).
Although not addressed in the current study, the type of sport being observed may impact the type of shame coping style that is utilized by fans. Studies from Cohen and colleagues (Cohen & Nisbett, 1994; Cohen, Nisbett, Bowdle, & Schwarz, 1996; Cohen, Vandello, & Rantilla, 1998) have identified the presence of what was termed, "cultures of honor" in which strength and power are highly valued. The social milieu that exists in the American South is an example of a culture of honor. In these settings, a loss of honor (i.e., a shaming experience) is extremely devaluing and the shamed individual must engage in violence to regain status in the group. Although specific sport allegiances were not measured in the current study, it is possible that if fans are observing certain sports that emphasize a "culture of honor" mentality such as football or hockey (which reward physical power to dominate others), fans may be even less likely to internalize their shame or embarrassment, and may express greater levels of maladaptive Avoidance and Attack Other behaviors.
Results from the regression analysis indicated that dysfunctional fandom explained a significant amount of the variance in three of the four coping mechanisms assessed in the current study: Attack Self, Attack Other, and Withdrawal. Although Attack Other is an externalization of shame, while Attack Self internalizes the negative emotional experience, these subscales do share a common anger component, which may be more acceptable for college sport fans to express. When a sport team is being beaten by a large margin, the anger associated with such an experience (especially one over which the identified fan has little to no control) may cause that individual to direct the anger either inwardly (e.g., "I am so stupid for thinking they could win this game"), or outwardly ("The first person to bring up this game is going to get punched"). Unfortunately, this common anger component can have significant implications on psychological health. Attack Self has been found to have a significant relationship with negative psychological symptoms such as depression, while Attack Other was significantly correlated with hostility, anger and psychopathy (Campbell & Elison, 2005; Elison, Lennon, & Pulos, 2006; Elison, Pulos, & Lennon, 2006; Yelsma, Brown, & Elison, 2002). Dysfunctional fandom has been associated with a variety of negative behaviors in sport fans, including alcohol abuse (Wakefield &Wann, 2006). Indeed, given that fan dysfunction includes a confrontational element, it seems reasonable that persons with high levels of dysfunction would cope in an attacking mode.
Variance in AS scores was also significantly explained by gender. Males exhibited higher AS scores than females, which is inconsistent with previous findings in general college samples (Elison et al., 2006), but is consistent with findings in a sample of high school athletes (Massey & Partridge, in press). Perhaps the domain of sport, with its emphasis on perfection, high achievement, and constant, public success/failure experiences may impact the traditional shame coping mechanisms. Although shame is traditionally thought of as a "feminine" emotion, the world of sport is traditionally considered a "masculine" domain, and both athletes and sport fans may be more likely to exhibit internalization of shame coping when the self is devalued. The high value placed on success in sport, particularly for males (Messner, 1990), may create a self-directed focus when one is forced to see oneself, or one's team as being "less" than others.
A significant amount of variance in the Avoidance subscale was predicted by fan identification. This form of coping is more of an externalization of the shame experience and it requires that the individual may utilize denial of the shaming experience in order to cope with the negative feelings associated with it. It is possible that by not directly addressing the shaming event, college sport fans are able to maintain their identity with the team while simultaneously denying any negative experiences associated with it. Nathanson identified this possibility, indicating that, "By far the most important reason people invest so heavily in public displays of athletic endeavor is the role of such activity in allowing displacement of tension deriving from activity along the shame/pride axis" (1992, p. 354).
Limitations and Future Directions
This study provides a basis for understanding the connection between team identification and shame coping styles. Ultimately, the connection between shame coping styles, sport fandom, fan identification, and dysfunctional fandom levels in sport may provide a greater understanding of college fan behaviors prior to, during, and after sport events. However, there are limitations to this research that should inform future research on this topic. First, the current study examined fan identification and shame coping at only one discrete time. It is possible that fans whose teams were in the midst of a successful season would give different responses to questions regarding shaming experiences than those whose teams were currently unsuccessful. The use of a longitudinal methodology would allow assessment of fan shame coping styles over the course of a season, which would allow researchers to identify variations in shame coping patterns as team/athlete performances might fluctuate over time. For example, a loss in a pre-season tournament for a college basketball team could lead to different coping strategies than a blowout loss to an archrival team in a conference tournament.
The current study utilized a sample of college sport fans; however, the participants were not sorted by their favorite sport. It is possible that the specific team with which a fan identifies may demonstrate different patterns of shame coping styles than others (e.g., fans of collision sports may be more likely to Attack Other than fans of non-contact sports such as volleyball).
Ultimately, the experience of coping with vicarious shame in college sport fans is highly relevant to many sport professionals, coaches, or administrators who wish to understand emotional behaviors in fans. These findings serve as a foundation on which to build future knowledge aimed at creating a positive affective experience for athletes, spectators, and highly identified fans.
References
Baumeister, R. F., & Leafy, M. g. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
Borg, I., Staufenbiel, T., & Scherer, K. R. (1988). On the symbolic nature of shame. In K. R. Scherer (Ed.), Facets of emotion: Recent research (pp. 79-98). Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Branscombe, N. R., & Doojse, B. (2004). Collective guilt: International perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Branscombe, N. R., &Wann, D. L. (1991). The positive social and self-concept consequences of sport team identification. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 15, 115-127.
Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1992). Physiological arousal and reactions to outgroup members that implicate an important social identity. Aggressive Behavior, 18, 85-93.
Campbell, J. S., & Elison, J. (2005). Shame coping styles and psychopathic personality traits. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 96-104.
Cohen, D., & Nisbett, R.E. (1994). Self-protection and the culture of honor: Explaining southern violence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 551-567.
Cohen, D., Nisbett, R.E., Bowdle, B.F., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern culture of honor: An "experimental ethnography." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 945-960.
Cohen, D., Vandello, J., & Rantilla, A.K. (1998). The sacred and the social: Cultures of honor and violence. In P. Gilbert & B. Andrews (Eds.), Shame: Interpersonal Behavior, Psychopathology, and Culture (pp. 261-282). New York: Oxford University Press.
Danielson, M. N. (1997). Home team: Professional sports and the American metropolis. Princeton, N J: Princeton University Press.
Dietz-Uhler, B., & Murrell, A. (1999). Examining fan reactions to game outcomes. A longitudinal study of social identity. Journal of Sport Behavior, 22, 5-27.
Elison, J. (2005). Shame and guilt: A hundred years of apples and oranges. New Ideas in Psychology, 23, 5-32.
Elison, J., Lennon, R., & Pulos, S. (2006). Investigating the compass of shame: The development of the Compass of Shame Scale. Social Behavior and Personality, 34, 221-238.
Elison, J., Pulos, S., & Lennon, R. (2006). Shame-focused coping: An empirical study of the compass of shame. Social Behavior and Personality, 34, 161-168.
Fournier, M. A., Moskowitz, D. S., & Zuroff, D. C. (2002). Social rank strategies in hierarchical relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 425-433.
Gilbert, P., & McGuire, M. T. (1998). Shame, status, and social roles: Psychobiology and evolution. In P. Gilbert (Ed.), Shame: Interpersonal behavior, psychopathology, and culture (pp. 99-125). New York: Oxford University Press.
Johns, M., Schmader, T., & Lickel, B. (2005). Ashamed to be an American? The role of identification in predicting vicarious shame for anti-Arab prejudice after 9-11. Self and Identity, 4, 331-348.
Kagan, J. (1958). The concept of identification. Psychological Review, 65, 296-305.
Lickel, B., Schmader, T., Curtis, M., Scamier, M., & Ames, D. R. (2005). Vicarious shame and guilt. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8(2), 145-157.
Massey, W. V., & Partridge, J.A. (in press). Patterns of shame coping styles in high school athletes. Journal of Youth Sports.
Messner, M.A. (1990). Boyhood, organized sports and the construction of masculinities. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 18(4), 416-444.
Nathanson, D. L. (1992). Shame and pride. New York: Norton.
Parker, S. T. (1998). A social selection model for the evolution and adaptive significance of self-conscious emotions. In M. Ferrari & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Self-awareness: Its nature and development (pp. 108-134). New York: Guilford Press.
Sloan, L. R. (1989). The motives of sports fans. In J. D. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games, and play: Social and psychosocial viewpoints (2nd ed.) (pp. 175-240). Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sloan, L. R., & Van Camp, D. (2008). Advances in theories of sport fan motives: Fan personal motives and the emotional impacts of games and their outcomes. In L.W. Hugenberg, P. M. Haridakis, & A. C. Earnheardt (Eds.) Sports mania: Essays on fandom and the media in the 21st century (pp. 129-157). Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. B. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1256-1269.
Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Affect/imagery/consciousness. Vol. 2. New York: Springer.
Wakefield, K. L., & Wann, D. L. (2006). An examination of dysfunctional sport fans: Method of classification and relationships with problem behaviors. Journal of Leisure Research, 38, 168-186.
Warm, D. L. (2002). Preliminary validation of a measure for assessing identification as a sport fan: The Sport Fandom Questionnaire. International Journal of Sport Management, 3, 103-115.
Wann, D. L. (2006). The causes and consequences of sport team identification. In A. A. Raney & J. Bryant (Eds.,) Handbook of sports and media (pp. 331-352). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
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., Dolan, T. J., McGeorge, K. K., &Allison, J.A. (1994). Relationships between spectator identification and spectators' perceptions of influence, spectators' emotions, and competition outcome. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 16, 347-364.
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., & Robinson, T. R., III (2002). The relationship between sport team identification and integration into and perceptions of a university. International Sports Journal, 6, 36-44.
Wann, D. L., Royalty, J., & Roberts, A. (2000). The self-presentation of sport fans: Investigating the importance of team identification and self-esteem. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23, 198-206.
Wann, D. L., Schrader, M. P., & Adamson, D. R. (1998). The cognitive and somatic anxiety of sport spectators. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21, 322-337.
Young, J. (2002). Standard deviations: An update on the North American sports crowd disorder. Sociology of Sport Journal, 19, 237-275.
Footnote
The complete CoSS-Fan and instructions for scoring is available from the first author upon request.
Julie A. Partridge
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
Daniel L. Wann
Murray State University
Jeff Elison
Purdue University
Address correspondence to: Julie A. Partridge, Department of Kinesiology, 1075 S. Normal Avenue, Carbondale, IL, 69201. Email: jpartrid@siu.edu. Phone: (618)453-3119. Fax: (618) 453-3329. Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the fan and shame coping variables. Mean SD Minimum Maximum Fan Measures-Overall Team Identification 39.13 13.48 7.00 56.00 Dysfunctional Fandom 21.20 9.95 5.00 40.00 Sport Fandom 25.49 10.96 5.00 40.00 Shame Coping Styles-Overall Attack Other 25.10 (b) 7.99 11.00 48.00 Attack Self 24.83 (b) 8.29 11.00 47.00 Avoidance 27.16 (a) 6.38 11.00 50.00 Withdrawal 16.65 5.64 11.00 41.00 Note: For the shame coping subscales, means with a common subscript are not significantly different (paired samples t-tests, p < .05). Table 2. Correlations among the variables. 1 2 3 4 Team Identification (1) -- Dysfunctional Fandom (2) .74 ** -- Sport Fandom (3) .82 ** .70 ** -- Attack Other (4) .50 ** .60 ** .42 ** -- Attack Self (5) .48 ** .63 ** .47 ** .66 ** Avoidance (6) .26 ** .18 * .18 * .42 ** Withdrawal (7) .24 ** .36 ** .25 ** .53 ** Gender (8) -.35 ** -.31 ** -.49 ** -.21 ** 5 6 7 8 Team Identification (1) Dysfunctional Fandom (2) Sport Fandom (3) Attack Other (4) Attack Self (5) -- Avoidance (6) .24 ** -- Withdrawal (7) .52 ** .25 ** -- Gender (8) -.34 ** -.06 -.16 * -- Note: * = p < .01; ** = p < .001.
