Search results

The purpose of this study is to understand the occurrence, formation and magnitude of negative effects for sponsors of rival sports teams and to identify means to counteract negative sponsorship effects.

Surveys measure fans’ identification with their team as well as attitudes toward rival teams and their sponsors in a soccer context. An experiment introduces sponsorship communication activities that aim at mitigating negative sponsorship effects by shifting the focus of the sponsorship.

Results from surveys and experiments demonstrate that identification with a sports team negatively affects perceptions of a rival team, negative perceptions of a rival team negatively affect perceptions of its sponsors, this effect is stronger for fans with higher levels of team identification, companies can improve perceptions of rival team sponsors by shifting the focus of sponsorship-linked communication activities, but attenuating negative sponsorship effects is more difficult to achieve for fans with higher levels of identification with their team.

Further studies need to disentangle mitigating effects of framing sponsorship communication and investigate in greater depth conditions under which sponsorship leverage can emphasize specific social identities of sports fans and enhance the inclusiveness of fans’ self-categorization.

Companies can learn from this study how they can frame, design and use sponsorship communication activities to mitigate negative sponsorship effects in the context of rival-team sponsorship.

The study is one of the few studies addressing negative effects of sponsorship. In particular, the study provides first insights into how social identity theory, social categorization theory and framing theory work together with theories of image transfer in both the formation and the attenuation of negative sponsorship outcomes.

Oppositional brand loyalty (OBL) has become widespread and has thus received growing scholarly attention in recent years. Although opposition behaviors have distinct manifestations, their differential antecedents remain underexplored. Drawing from the identity-based motivation model, this article aims to examine the impact of brand identification and brand disidentification on the two distinct dimensions of OBL (i.e. brand avoidance and trash talk) according to their different intensity and activation levels (passive or active). In addition, article aims to examine the moderating role of perceived inter-group rivalry.

The authors collected survey data and obtained 392 valid questionnaires from smartphone users. Structural equation modeling was used for hypothesis testing.

The results show that brand identification has a significant positive effect on avoidance of rival brands, but not on trash talk; brand disidentification has a significant positive effect on both avoidance and trash talk of rival brands; and perceived inter-group rivalry positively moderates the relationship between brand disidentification and trash talk, but does not alter the relationship between brand disidentification and brand avoidance.

This study extends the literature on OBL by investigating differential antecedents of two distinct dimensions of brand opposition. It provides more complete understanding of the formation of OBL by examining the role of users’ relationship with a focal brand, its competing brand and inter-group relationship.

The purpose of this research is to extend current knowledge regarding rivalry communication among sport consumers to better understand how rivals behave with one another when they communicate.

This national survey of US sport consumers used a novel approach to explore whether and with whom rivals discuss National Football League (NFL) game outcomes. The survey captured both uniplex and multiplex data by asking respondents to name rival discussants with whom they had recently interacted, and the fan behaviors they exchanged with those named rival discussants.

Through use of this novel data collection approach, new findings were uncovered related to blasting, glory out of reflective failure, schadenfreude and the influence of team identification on the exchange of rivalry fan behaviors. The results of the uniplex and multiplex data analyses uniquely showcase the ways in which social identity theory combines with team identification to enact rivalry behavior.

This research is the first to precisely dichotomize the psychological antecedents from the communicated behavior between rival fans. Results reveal the precise ways in which team identification influences discordant communication between rival fans, which differs from past research in an interesting new way.

Social media is replete with malicious and unempathetic rhetoric yet few studies explain why these emotions are publicly dispersed. The purpose of the study is to investigate how the intergroup counter-empathic response called schadenfreude originates and how it prompts media consumption and engagement.

The study consists of two field surveys of 635 in-group members of two professional sports teams and 300 residents of California and Texas with political party affiliations. The analysis uses SEM quantitative methods.

Domain passion and group identification together determine the harmonious/obsessive tendencies of passion for an activity and explain the schadenfreude response toward the rival out-group. Group identification is a stronger driver of obsessive passion compared to harmonious passion. Schadenfreude directly influences the use of traditional media (TV, radio, domain websites), it triggers social media engagement (posting), and it accelerates harmonious passion's effects on social media posting.

The study is limited by the groups used to evaluate the research model, sports, and politics.

The more highly identified and passionate group members experience greater counter-empathy toward a rival. At extreme levels of group identification, obsessive passion increases at an increasing rate and may characterize extremism. Harboring feelings of schadenfreude toward the out-group prompts those with harmonious passion for an activity to more frequently engage on social media in unempathetic ways.

This study links the unempathetic, yet common emotion of schadenfreude with passion, intergroup dynamics, and media behavior.

This study, an empirical research, aims to construct and validate a new love-hate scale for sports fans and tested its antecedents and consequences.

The scale was designed and validated in three separate empirical survey studies in the context of Israeli professional basketball. In Phase 1, the authors verified the factorial validity of the proposed scale using exploratory factor analysis. In Phase 2, the authors conducted a confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modeling. In Phase 3, the authors tested the nomological network validity of the scale.

The findings show that fans' involvement, loyalty and fandom significantly predicted their love–hate, which in turn significantly predicted self-reported fan aggression, fans' acceptance of fan aggression, price premium and frequency of watching games.

The model was tested on a relatively small sample of fans within a single country. This lack of generalizability should be addressed in future studies by examining the model in other sports contexts and countries.

This study suggests that understanding the properties of the love–hate measure may assist team sports clubs in identifying, preventing and controlling potential fan aggression.

The study provides three incremental contributions above and beyond existing research: it develops and validates a scale for measuring the phenomenon of sports fans' love and hate as mixed emotions; it makes it possible to capture the variations in the magnitude of fans' love–hate; and it relates fans' love–hate to important attitudinal and behavioral outcomes.

This study examines the relationship between in-group identification, intergroup schadenfreude, and the tendency to aggress against out-group members. More specifically, it assesses whether intergroup schadenfreude mediates the identification–aggression link.

This study is a cross-sectional study with the variables studied being in-group identification, intergroup schadenfreude, and tendency to aggress toward out-group members. A total of 123 participants were recruited for this study and questionnaires measuring each variable was administered to participants.

The results from a cross-sectional survey indicate a positive correlation between in-group identification and intergroup schadenfreude and between intergroup schadenfreude and tendency to aggress against out-group members. The results from this study also show that intergroup schadenfreude mediates the relationship between in-group identification and the tendency to aggress against out-group members.

Given the nature of cross-sectional study, claims regarding causal nature of the variables studied could not be made. Further, this study was also contextualized within the political context making expression of schadenfreude more “acceptable” and more easily expressed among participants. Suggestions for further research suggestions are discussed is light of these limitations.

Findings of this study highlight the importance of understanding intergroup schadenfreude in group contexts, and how such emotions can be employed by leaders to instigate, rather than diminish aggressive tendencies against out-group members.

This is one of the few studies to demonstrate that rather than diminishing tendencies to engage in aggressive behaviors, schadenfreude, when experienced within group settings, can instead elicit intentions to aggress against rival or opposing group members.

Strategic groups research has been hampered by the poor alignment between theory and methods. This has been due in large part to the lack of significance tests for cluster analysis. Now that significance tests are available, the theoretical and methodological implications are discussed. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The theory behind strategic groups is reframed to capitalize on the available significance tests. Subsequently, the significance tests are also modified to fit the proposed theory. Due to this integrative approach, this is both a theoretical and a methodological paper.

In lieu of significance tests, finding differences in performance emerged as the litmus test for the existence of discrete strategic groups. The concept of strategic groups gradually evolved to fit this requirement. Now that significance tests are available, these legacy effects of the structure-performance link can be removed. This reveals that three conflicting concepts have been sharing the label of strategic groups: strategic categories, interdependent strategic groups and strategic performance groups. The theory also reveals that the significance tests developed in ecological research need modifications for use in strategic groups research.

A theory is proposed for interdependent strategic groups and a significance test of external isolation is proposed as part of this integrative solution.

This integrative solution appears to resolve the historical mismatch between theory and methods that has plagued this field since its inception. This creates a variety of intriguing areas for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to review, integrate and extend the methods for constructing and interpreting a strategic groups map. A strategic groups map is a visualization tool for capturing the essence of the competitive landscape in an industry: extent of competition between and among strategic groups, mobility barriers, available niches, positioning and industry dynamics.

This paper extends Porter’s (1980, pp. 152-155) original prescriptions by reviewing the research on strategic groups in the almost 40 years since Porter’s contribution and by amalgamation of practitioners’ uncodified practices.

The process for constructing a strategic groups map consists of five steps: first, define the industry; second, identify strategic characteristics that distinguish between groups; third, divide firms into groups; forth, select the two main dimensions of the map, and draw the map; and five, interpret the map. Specific instructions are provided for practitioners and academic researchers. Several examples of strategic groups maps illustrate this. Ways to interpret the maps are discussed, followed by limitations and conclusion.

Though the topic of strategic groups has been widely researched since the 1980s, there has been very little done in the area of mapping these groups, leaving scholars of businesses and industries with few directions for constructing strategic groups maps. To fill this gap, a structured process for constructing and interpreting a strategic groups map is provided.

In explaining ethno-territorial conflicts, leadership preferences have an odd status. In case studies, leadership preferences are often viewed as highly significant causes but are not usually defined and measured explicitly. In large-sample statistical studies, leadership preferences are only captured by weakly related proxy variables. This paper aims to fill this gap by developing suitable theory, which can be used consistently in both case study and statistical applications.

Formal bargaining models are used to examine the expected impact of variation in leadership preferences. Relevant leadership characteristics are then used to construct measures of variation in leadership preferences, which are applied in case studies.

In bargaining models, variation in leadership preferences is expected to have a significant impact on ethno-territorial conflict outcomes. More extreme nationalist leaders and, more conditionally, strongly power-seeking leaders, should be more likely to be willing to use force to modify the status quo – although more moderate nationalist leaderships are also willing to do so under certain conditions. In five case studies, these formally derived hypotheses receive initial empirical support.

Theoretically and empirically, further refinement of research on variation in leadership preferences promises to add significant value. Formally, it is worth investigating the expected impact of additional preference types. Empirically, it is important to invest in measures of leadership preferences across large samples.