Sport fans' attitudes toward war analogies as descriptors for sport.

End, Christian M. ; Kretschmar, Jeff ; Campbell, Jamonn 等

If an individual were to listen to a discussion about sports, it would soon become evident that sport fans, sports writers, and athletes share a sports-specific vocabulary. Terms like "barn burner", "prevent D", and "RAC" (Run After the Catch) may sound like meaningless babble to the nonfan, while those involved in sports may find these terms/phrases to be colorful and informative descriptors of the players, the action on the field, and the venue. Tannebaum and Noah (1959) termed the unique language of sport fans, sportugese.

Tannebaum and Noah (1959) were interested in determining if the verb used to describe the outcome of a sporting event would be interpreted similarly by sports writers, sports readers, and nonsports readers. The authors found that the verb used to describe the outcome of the game was more informative for sports writers and sports readers in comparison to nonsports readers. When presented with only a verb that described the outcome of the game, sports writers and sports readers could more accurately estimate the point spread of the game than nonsports readers. These results suggest that sports writers' and sports readers' understanding of "sportugese" was more advanced, at least in terms of being able to predict the point spread of an athletic contest, than nonsports readers (Tarmebaum & Noah, 1959).

Wann, Metcalf, Adcock, Choi, Dallas, and Slaton (1997) found that other factors such as fan identification were also related to one's knowledge and understanding of sportugese. Specifically, they found that an individual's identification level with a team, the extent to which an individual claimed a sport fan identity, and an individual's perception of her/his knowledge of sports were positively correlated to understanding of sportugese. In addition to identifying these additional factors related to knowledge of sportugese, Warm et al. (1997) demonstrated that sportugese is a "modern day" phenomena.

Recently, there has been a public outcry by a large number of United States citizens against a specific subset of sportugese terminology. In light of the terrorist attacks on America, some individuals have been critical of sports writers' and sport fans' use of war analogies to describe sporting events (Holley, 2001; Miklasz 2001). Examples of these sport-war analogies include: using the term "bomb" to describe a long pass in football or a long home run in baseball, using "battle in the trenches" when referring to confrontations between offensive and defensive lineman in football, and the phrase "sudden death" to describe the situation when the next team that scores is declared the winner of the game.

Several national sports columnists have also expressed disdain toward the use of these sport-war analogies. Holley (2001), in a column for the Boston Globe, wrote, "I still have difficulty looking at sports analogies without being embarrassed ... a sports-war connection is more than trivial. It's disrespectful." Miklasz (2001), a columnist for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch echoed these sentiments when he wrote, "(Using sports-war analogies) is now blatantly offensive. The bottom of poor journalistic taste. In the aftermath of September 11th, sportswriters are examining our conscience and dictionary. And we are not alone. Football coaches and players are evaluating word choices."

The purpose of the following study was to determine if sport fans share this negative view of sport-war analogies. In light of the events of September 11th, a goal of this study was to assess sport fans' perceptions of the relationship between sports and war. Because high-identifying fans exhibit stronger emotional connections to sport teams than low-identifying fans (Branscombe & Wann, 1992), it was predicted that high-identifying sport fans would view sports as being more similar to war than low-identifying sport fans.

Because of the hypothesized perceptual differences of the similarity of war and sport, it was expected that an individual's level of identification might influence one's views of the appropriateness and approval of sport-war analogies. Specifically, it was hypothesized that high-identifying sport fans would report greater approval of these sport-war analogies, as well as deem them more appropriate than low-identifying fans.

Method

Participants

The participants were 95 (44 male and 51 female) undergraduates attending a midsize Midwestern university. The students participated for partial fulfillment of an Introduction to Psychology course research experience requirement. Most of the participants (55%) were first year students, while 27% of the participants were sophomores, 9% were juniors, and 9% were seniors. The average age of the participants was 19.11 (SD = 1.17) years.

Procedure

In late November of 200l, participants were asked to complete a series of "Sport Fan Behavior Questionnaires" during a departmental mass-testing session. Included in the series of questionnaires was a demographic survey, a questionnaire entitled "Sports Terminology", and the Sport Spectator Identification Scale (SSIS; Wann & Branscombe, 1993).

Sport Spectator Identification Scale. Participants were asked to fill out a modified version of the Sport Spectator Identification Scale (SSIS; Wann & Branscombe, 1993) in reference to their favorite team. The SSIS contains nine Likert-scale items designed to measure an individual's psychological connection with a sport team. The scale includes behavioral items (e.g., How often do you display your favorite team's insignia or logo at your home or place of work?), cognitive items (e.g., How important is being a fan of your favorite team to you?) and affective items (e.g., How much do you dislike your team's rival?). Participants were asked to respond to each item on a seven-point scale. The participants' responses were summed to produce a single identification score (Cronbach's alpha = .91). Previous research has demonstrated that the SSIS is a valid and reliable (standardized alpha = .93; Warm & Branscombe, 1993) measure of individuals' levels of sport identification. Lower scores indicate lower levels of identification, while high scores indicate higher levels of identification. A median split was performed on this index of identification in order to categorize participants as those who were low identifiers (scored less than or equal to 39) and high identifiers (scored greater than or equal to 40).

Sport Terminology Questionnaire. The sports terminology questionnaire contained 13 common sport-war analogies. The authors created the sports terminology questionnaire by selecting 13 sport-war analogies that were mentioned in several newspaper columns that addressed the appropriateness of commonly used sport-war analogies. Participants were informed that they would be presented a series of sport-war analogies. The participants were to read each analogy and then circle the response that corresponded with their feelings of the appropriateness of the analogy, as well as their approval of the use of the analogy. The participants rated each analogy on a seven-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all appropriate) to 7 (extremely appropriate). To measure participants' approval of the use of the various sport-war analogies, the participants also rated each analogy on a seven-point scale ranging from l (absolute disapproval) to 7 (absolute approval).

All analogies were presented in a manner that emphasized the war terminology and the specific aspect of sport the terminology was used to describe. For example, participants were presented with the following analogies "the use of "war rooms" when referring to NFL and NBA draft rooms", "the use of the phrase "field generals" to describe on-field leaders", etc. (See Table 1 for a complete list of sport-war analogies.)

After completing the approval and appropriateness ratings for all 13 analogies, participants were asked to indicate to what extent they felt that sports and war were similar on a seven-point scale ranging from 1 (not similar at all) to 7 (extremely similar).

In summary, individuals were categorized as being high and low-identifying fans according to their scores on SSIS. In addition to comparing high and low-identifying fans' ratings of the similarity of sports and war, t-tests were used to compare high and low-identifying fans' approval and appropriateness ratings for all 13 sport-war analogies.

Results

Perceptions of Similarity of Sports and War

Because high-identifying fans exhibit stronger emotional connections to sport teams than low-identifying fans (Branscombe & Wann, 1992), it was expected that high-identifying sport fans would perceive sports as being more similar with war than low-identifying sport fans. High-identifying fans (M = 3.60, SD = 1.61) rated sports as being marginally more similar to war than did low-identifying fans (M = 2.96, SD = 1.61), t (91) = 1.94, p = .055.

Perceptions of the Appropriateness of the use of Sport-War Analogies

To test whether high-identifying fans perceived the use of sport-war analogies to be more appropriate than low-identifying fans, participants' responses to the 13 appropriateness items on the continuums (1 = not at all appropriate to 7 = extremely appropriate) were averaged to produce a single average appropriateness score (Cronbach's alpha = .94). Lower average scores indicated lower levels of perceived appropriateness, while high average scores indicated higher levels of perceived appropriateness. A t-test was used to compare high-identifying and low-identifying participants' average appropriateness scores. Across sport-war analogies, high-identifying fans (M = 5.54, SD = i. 10) perceived the use of sport-war analogies to be significantly more appropriate than low-identifying fans (M = 4.98, SD = 1.11), t (87) = 2.36, p < .05. Individual t-tests (See Table 2) demonstrated that of the 13 sport-war analogies, high-identifying fans perceived "war rooms", t (92) = 2.52, p < .05, "crash and burn", t (92) = 2.10, p < .05, "bomb", t (91) = 3.30, p < .001, "field generals", t (88) = 2.52, p < .05, and "battle in the trenches", t (91) = 2.35, p < .05, analogies to be significantly more appropriate than low-identifying fans. (Because the comparisons of high and low-identifying fans' appropriateness ratings of specific sport-war analogies were exploratory in nature and not the specific focus of this research, a more liberal p-value of .05 was utilized to indicate significant differences. Because this more liberal p-value was utilized instead of applying a Bonferroni correction, observed differences at the .05 level may be the result of an increased probability of type 1 error.)

Approval of the Use of Sport-War Analogies

To test whether high-identifying fans approved of the use of sport-war analogies to a greater extent than low-identifying fans, participants' responses to the 13 approval items on the continuums (1 = absolute disapproval to 7 = absolute approval) were averaged to produce a single average approval score (Cronbach's alpha = .94). Lower average scores indicated lower levels of approval, while high average scores indicated higher levels of approval. A t-test was used to compare high-identifying and low-identifying participants' average approval scores. Across sport-war analogies, high-identifying fans (M = 5.58, SD = 1.07) approved of the use of sport-war analogies to a significantly greater extent than low-identifying fans (M = 4.97, SD = 1.12), t (87) = 2.70, p < .01. Individual t-tests (See Table 3) demonstrated that of the 13 sport-war analogies, high-identifying fans perceived "war room", t (92) = 2.88, p < .01, "warriors", t (92) = 2.52, p < .05, "crash and burn", t (92) = 2.11, p < .05, "bomb", t (91) = 3.69, p < .001, "battles", t(91) = 2.24, p < .05, "slaughter", t (91) = 2.11, p < .05, "field generals", t (91) = 2.61, p < .05, and "battle in the trenches", t (91) = 2.22, p < .05, analogies to a significantly greater extent than low-identifying fans. (As mentioned above, because the comparisons of high and low-identifying fans' approval ratings of specific sport-war analogies were exploratory in nature and not the specific focus of this research, a more liberal p-value of.05 was utilized to indicate significant differences. Because this more liberal p-value was utilized instead of applying a Bonferroni correction, observed differences at the .05 level may be the result of an increased probability of type I error.)

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to determine if sport fans have a negative perception of sport-war analogies. Because high-identifying fans exhibit stronger emotional connections to sport teams than low-identifying fans (Branscombe & Wann, 1992), it was predicted that an individual's identification with a team would influence their perceptions of the similarity of war and sport. Although only marginally significant, high-identifying fans did perceive that sport and war are more similar than low-identifying fans.

Although this difference between high and low-identifying fans' perceptions of similarity was observed, it should be noted that high identifiers did not perceive a high level of similarity between sport and war. High-identifying sport fans perceived sport and war to be more dissimilar (M = 3.5 on a scale with a midpoint of 4.0), than similar. These findings suggest that the perception that sports are "life and death" for an individual whose sport fan identity is an extremely salient social identity, may be misguided.

Despite reporting that sport and war are more dissimilar than similar, participants' generally approved of and deemed appropriate, the use of sport-war analogies. (Means were greater than the scales' midpoints in the direction of approval and appropriateness for all 13 sport-war analogies). These results suggest that negative attitudes of sport-war analogies publicized in the media may be representative of the attitudes of a small minority of individuals (i.e., sports writers and veterans, see Miklasz, 2001). Our findings suggest that despite the terrorist attacks of September 11th, individuals (especially high-identifying fans) report favorable attitudes toward the use of sport-war analogies. Additionally, it was expected that and individual's level of identification might influence one's views of the appropriateness and approval of sport-war analogies.

High-identifying sport fans reported greater general approval of and deemed the use sport-war analogies in general as being more appropriate than low-identifying fans. In regards to specific sport-war analogies, high-identifying fans approved of the use of the "war room", "warriors", "crash and burn", "bomb", "battles", "slaughter", "field generals", and "battle in the trenches" analogies to a significantly greater extent than low-identifying fans. High-identifying fans perceived the "war rooms", "crash and burn", "bomb", "field generals", and "battle in the trenches" analogies to be significantly more appropriate than low-identifying fans.

This research demonstrates that high-identifying fans, in comparison to low-identifying fans, perceive a higher level of similarity between sport and war. The results of this study suggest that this difference in perception may account for the difference in fans' attitudes toward the appropriateness and approval of sport-war analogies.

Alternative explanations for the observed approval and perceived appropriateness differences include differences in high and low identifying sport fans' familiarity with the sport-war analogies, as well as differences in the impact of the events of September 11th on the salience of high and low identifiers' social identities.

Research has demonstrated that high-identifying fans spend more time watching sports, talking about sports, and reading about sports in comparison to low-identifying fans (DietzUhler, Harrick, End, & Jacquemotte, 2000). Thus, high identifiers have more opportunities to be exposed to and to gain an understanding of sportuguese (Warm et. al., 1997). It has also been found that high-identifying fans are more knowledgeable than low-identifying fans in regards to sport-related information (Warm & Branscombe, 1995). Because people tend to exhibit greater attractiveness to familiar stimuli (i.e., people, objects, etc.) than unfamiliar stimuli (Bornstein, 1989), high-identifying fans may have more positive attitudes toward sport-war analogies as a result of greater familiarity with the analogies than low-identifying fans.

Another possible explanation is that the events of September 11th may have impacted high and low-identifying fans' social identities differently. For individuals whose sport fan identities were important social identities prior to September 11th, the pleas for "a return to normalcy" may have resulted in an increase in the salience of their sport fan identities. An increase in identity salience would in turn result in a greater adherence to ingroup norms (Lavarie & Arnett, 2000), which could include the use of sport-war analogies. Thus, it would be expected that high-identifying fans would express positive attitudes toward sport-war analogies. Conversely, for low-identifying sport fans a "return to normalcy" may have resulted in an increase in the salience of alternative social identities at the expense of their sport fan identities. As observed, low-identifying sport fans would be expected to report less favorable attitudes toward sport-war analogies than high-identifying fans.

Because observers sometimes form impressions of an individual that are distinct from the observers' attitudes toward the individual's behavior, future research should examine observers' perceptions of fans/sport writers who utilize sport-war analogies. Of particular interest would be how the perceiver's level of identification and the attributions formed influence an observer's perceptions of an individual utilizing sport-war analogies. If use of sport-war analogies is an attempt by high-identifying sport fans "to return to normalcy", will low-identifying perceivers recognize their patriotic and noble attempts (Smith, 1989) or will perceivers view users of sport-war analogies as boorish and ignoble individuals (Meier, 1989)? Additionally, if low-identifying fans attribute a writer's use of sport-war analogies to an external factor (a requirement of being a sport reporter), will low-identifying fans form impressions of the sports writer that are similar to high-identifying fans?

Future research should attempt to determine what extent the current findings generalize to a non-college student sample. If specific samples of individuals (i.e., veterans) hold more negative attitudes toward sport-war analogies than reported here, individuals in sport management and marketing may be motivated to discourage the use of these analogies in promotional materials to prevent alienating a current or potential fan.

In addition to examining how fans' attitudes toward sport-war analogies change over time, future research should also attempt to identify why individuals perceive similarity between a sport (a game) and war (life and death). Identifying "similarity factors" may provide information that could be useful in understanding why fans identify do strongly with sports, why fans aggress, or even why parents become abusive at youth sporting events.

Address Correspondence To: Christian M. End, Ph.D., Department of Psychology, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, MO 65409 (573) 341-6126,Fax: (573) 341-4110,endc@umr.edu Table 1 Sport-War Analogies War Terminology Sports Connotation War rooms NFL and NBA draft rooms Warriors Tough players Terrorized Defensive pressure Crash and burn A struggling offense Bomb A long pass in football or a long home run in baseball Battles Games between division opponents Slaughter A lopsided defeat Field generals On-field leaders Battle in the trenches Confrontations between offensive and defensive lineman in football War on the boards Competition between two basketball teams for rebounds War A boxing match Sudden death A situation when the next team that scores--wins Dog fight An extremely competitive athletic contest Table 2 High and Low Identifying Fans' Appropriateness Ratings of Sport-War Analogies Identification Level Analogy High Low p value war rooms 4.94 (1.42) 4.29 (1.20) .019 warriors 5.84 (1.20) 5.58 (1.36) .328 terrorized 4.76 (1.41) 4.44 (1.57) .315 crash and burn 5.49 (1.24) 4.82 (1.77) .036 bomb 5.88 (1.14) 4.87 (1.73) .001 battles 6.10 (1.28) 5.69 (1.33) .128 slaughter 5.21 (1.57) 4.82 (1.79) .271 field generals 5.87 (1.10) 5.21 (1.37) .013 battle in the trenches 5.60 (1.44) 4.87 (1.58) .020 war on the boards 5.67 (1.48) 5.33 (1.45) .275 war 5.10 (1.67) 4.89 (1.56) .522 sudden death 5.85 (1.54) 5.49 (1.54) .272 dog fight 5.81 (1.36) 5.47 (1.29) .220 Note. Table denotes means and (standard deviations). Table 3 High and Low Identifying Fans' Approval Ratings of Sport-War Analogies Identification Level Analogy High Low p value war rooms 5.10 (1.43) 4.36 (1.07) .006 warriors 5.96 (1.12) 5.33 (1.37) .017 terrorized 4.80 (1.46) 4.29 (1.55) .105 crash and burn 5.39 (1.32) 4.76 (1.55) .036 bomb 5.92 (1.16) 4.80 (1.69) .001 battles 6.17 (1.26) 5.58 (1.27) .027 slaughter 5.31 (1.68) 4.58 (1.69) .038 field generals 5.94 (1.08) 5.27 (1.37) .010 battle in the trenches 5.54 (1.49) 4.84 (1.54) .020 war on the boards 5.69 (1.48) 5.18 (1.42) .093 war 5.17 (1.67) 4.82 (1.48) .296 sudden death 5.94 (1.56) 5.38 (1.60) .091 dog fight 5.77 (1.43) 5.42 (1.25) .216 Note: Table denotes means and (standard deviations).

References

Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect. Overview and meta-analysis of research. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.

Branscombe, N. R. & Wann, D. L. (1992). Role of identification with a group, arousal,categorization processes, and self-esteem in sports spectator aggression. Human Relations, 4.5, 1013-1033.

Dietz-Uhler, B. D., Harrick, E. A., End, C. M., & Jacquemotte, L. (2000). Sex differences in sport fan behavior. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23, 219-231.

Holley, M. (2001, September 21). Words of war aren't fair game. The Globe, pp. D5.

Laverie, D. A. & Arnett, D. B. (2000). Factors affecting fan attendance: The influence ofidentity salience and satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 32(2), 225-246.

Meier, K. (1989). The ignoble sports fan. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 13(2), 111-119.

Miklasz, B. (2001, September 20). Out of respect, we must remember: Sports are notwar. The Post-Dispatch, pp. D1.

Smith, G. (1988). The noble sports fan. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 12(1), 54-65.

Tannebaum, P. H. & Noah, J. E. (1959). Sportugese: A study of sports page communication. Journalism Quarterly, 36, 163-170.

Wann, D. L. & Branscombe, N. R. (1993). Sport fans: Measuring degree of identification with their team. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 24, 1-17.

Wann, D. L. & Branscombe, N. R. (1995). Influence of identification with a sports team on objective knowledge and subjective beliefs. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 551-567.

Wann, D. L., Metcalf, L. A., Adcock, M. L., Choi, C. C., Dallas, M. B., & Slaton, E.(1997). Language of sport fans: Sportugese revisited. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 85, 1107-1110.

Christian M. End

University of Missouri-Rolla

Jeff Kretschmar

Wesley College

Jamonn Campbell

Shippensburg University

David G. Mueller and Beth Dietz-Uhler

Miami University