A== work, No plagairism, quality work, on time

Services Marketing Quarterly, 36:22–36, 2015 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1533-2969 print / 1533-2977 online DOI: 10.1080/15332969.2015.976506

Consumer Misbehavior: Aggressive Behavior by Sports Fans

AVIV SHOHAM Department of Business Administration, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

VASSILIS DALAKAS Department of Marketing, California State University, San Marcos, California

LIA LAHAV Department of Business Administration, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

Aggressive behaviors by sport spectators have become a major so- cial problem in multiple sports and numerous countries. This study examines several team-related antecedents, as well as personality traits that may be related with physical and verbal aggressive fan behaviors. Interestingly, there appears to be relatively little crossover effects of personality trait verbal aggression on actual physical ag- gressive behaviors. Similarly, trait physical aggression effects also do not cross over and do not appear to affect verbal aggressive be- haviors. These and additional drivers of aggressive fan behavior are discussed and their theoretical and practical implications are provided.

KEYWORDS sports fans, aggression, team identification

Attending live sporting events is a unique and exciting service experience for consumers worldwide. Just in the United States, it was estimated that specta- tor spending generates about $26 billion in terms of ticket sales, concession sales, and fan travel (Street and Smith’s Sports Business Journal, 2002).

Unfortunately, aggressive behavior expressed either as verbal aggression or as some form of physical violence is often witnessed in sporting events among spectators. Although many associate aggression and violence by fans simply with “hooliganism” in British soccer, it is especially noteworthy that

Address correspondence to Vassilis Dalakas, Department of Marketing, California State University San Marcos, 333 South Twins Oaks Valley Road, San Marcos, CA 92096-0001. E-mail: [email protected]

22

Fans’ Aggressive Behavior 23

such behaviors can be seen throughout the world and across many different sports (Wann, Melnick, Russell, & Pease, 2001; Young, 2000). In a review of fan surveys, Keating (2009) reported several cases of fans’ admission of their own aggressive behavior like yelling obscenities, heckling a referee or umpire, cheering an opposing player’s injury, threatening injury to someone, or using a racial slur against an opposing player or fan. In fact, it has been suggested that outside of wartime, “sports is perhaps the only setting in which acts of interpersonal aggression are not only tolerated but enthusiastically applauded by large segments of society” (Russell, 1993, p. 11).

Considerable research attention has been given to studying aggression of players or coaches participating in the competition (e.g., Keeler, 2007; Martin, Rocca, Cayanus, & Weber, 2009; Storch, Werner, & Storch, 2003). Our study focuses on the issue of aggressive behaviors by sports spectators in terms of both verbal and physical aggression. More specifically, it iden- tifies potential antecedents for such tendencies and examines their relative effect on predicting likelihood of sport spectators engaging in verbally and physically aggressive behavior. Understanding what may cause sports spec- tators to act in such ways can be helpful in helping service providers in sports addressing the issue and finding potential solutions for preventing it or curtailing it.

Team Attachment: Identification and Fan Aggression

Aggression is defined as “the infliction of an aversive stimulus, either physi- cal, verbal, or gestural, upon one person by another” (Tenenbaum, Stewart, Singer, & Duda, 1996, p. 229). Much of the discussion on antecedents of sport spectators’ aggression revolves around fans’ identification and psycho- logical attachment with their teams and, in broader terms, the concept of so- cial identity (Dimmock & Grove, 2005; Hogg & Abrams, 1988; Wann, 1993; Wann, Culver, Akanda, Daglar, De Divitis, & Smith, 2005; Wann, Haynes, McLean, & Pullen, 2003; Wann & Wilson, 1999). Consistently, research sug- gests that the higher a fan’s attachment to a team, the more likely the fan is to exhibit aggressive behavior or willingness to engage in aggressive be- havior. Besides behavior exhibiting aggression, high fan identification has been associated with other questionable attitudes and behaviors that could be linked to aggression. For example, Dalakas and Melancon (2012) found a relationship between fan identification and schadenfreude (joy at misfortune) toward rivals, while Wann and his colleagues found that team identification influenced fans’ willingness to consider illegally assisting their team (Wann, Hunter, Ryan, & Wright, 2001).

Wann and his colleagues have consistently found that strong attach- ment to a sport team contributes to fans’ willingness to engage in aggressive behavior (e.g., Wann, Carlson, & Schrader, 1999; Wann et al., 2003; Wann

24 A. Shoham et al.

et al., 2005). In some respects, sports facilitate aggression due to their com- petitive nature and the clear distinction between two opposing sides vying for victory. Predictably, strong attachment to one side vilifies the oppos- ing side (Simons & Taylor, 1992). The in-group versus out-group distinction inevitably influences fans’ perceptions in a way that is favorable for one’s own side and unfavorable for the opponent (Havard, Gray, Gould, Sharp, & Schaffer, 2013; Madrigal & Dalakas, 2008). Sometimes, fans direct aggression to the opposing side as a way to help their team win, known as “instru- mental aggression” (Tenenbaum et al., 1996; Wann et al., 1999), whereas in other cases it is simply intended to inflict harm on the other side for its own sake (“hostile aggression”; Tenenbaum et al., 1996; Wann et al., 2003). Shockingly, in one study, a (thankfully small) number of participants with strong attachment to their teams reported a willingness to even murder an opposing player or coach (Wann et al., 2005)!

Aggression literature suggests that certain factors like high levels of arousal, high levels of stress, bad moods, and frustrations tend to elicit ag- gressive behavior (see Anderson & Huesmann, 2007 for a review). Given that for identified fans, the team becomes an extension of one’s self, it comes as no surprise that strong identification with a sports team increases arousal and stress while watching sporting events and makes fans more likely to react in a violent manner (Branscombe & Wann, 1992, 1994; Wann et al., 1999). Branscombe and Wann (1992) found that highly identified fans’ di- astolic and systolic blood pressure increased after watching a competition they cared about while there was no change in the blood pressure of those who were not attached to the competitors. Moreover, a negative outcome to a sporting competition often creates bad moods and causes frustration; highly identified fans reported a higher likelihood to consider anonymous acts of hostile aggression subsequent to their team’s loss (Wann et al., 2005). The desire for specific outcomes of sporting events depends largely on the fans’ feelings toward the competing teams. The disposition theory of sport spectatorship (Zillmann, Bryant, & Sapolsky, 1989) suggests that fans’ emo- tional reactions are strongly tied to outcomes of games; highly identified fans experience bad moods when their team loses but also when a disliked rival wins.

Therefore, based on the conceptual link between team attach- ment/identification and aggression it is expected that:

H1a: Strong attachment to a team will be associated with higher levels of verbal aggression behavior.

H1b: Strong attachment to a team will be associated with higher levels of physical aggression behavior.

Fans’ Aggressive Behavior 25

Self-Esteem and Fan Aggression

Aggression literature also suggests personal factors like one’s personality and behavioral tendencies as important potential causes for aggression (Ander- son & Huesmann, 2007; Ruvio & Shoham, 2011). However, when it comes to aggression by sports spectators, individual-difference variables are often overlooked; researchers acknowledge that such variables could be impor- tant predictors of spectator aggression and call for research to incorporate them (Dimmock & Grove, 2005). Specific factors along those lines include self-esteem, impulsivity, and overall tendencies regarding verbal aggression and physical aggression (Arms & Russell, 1997; Dimmock & Grove, 2005; Russell & Arms, 1995, 1998).

In regard to self-esteem, popular belief traditionally associates low self- esteem with propensity to aggression. However, research evidence suggests that high self-esteem may be more likely to lead to aggressive or violent be- haviors, especially when one’s highly favorable views of self are challenged by other people or circumstances (Anderson & Huesmann, 2007; Baumeis- ter, Bushman, & Campbell, 2000; Baumeister, Smart, & Boden, 1996). Such situations are especially likely to occur in a sports context, where fans affil- iate with teams and the outcomes of those teams’ games reflect directly on the fans (Fisher & Wakefield, 1998). Research has established that fans use team victories as ways to enhance their own self-image and self-esteem by basking in the reflective glory of the team (Cialdini et al., 1976). When fans feel their image is threatened, they may resort to aggression toward rival out-group members as an image maintenance or enhancement mechanism (Dimmock & Grove, 2005; Wann et al., 2001). The phenomenon of “blasting” is directly associated with verbal aggression; fans try to increase their esteem by denigrating the perceived value of an opponent’s achievements (Madri- gal & Dalakas, 2008). Consequently, fans may engage in verbal aggression after their team’s defeat as a way of restoring their own damaged sense of identity and self-esteem (Branscombe & Wann, 1994; Cialdini & Richardson, 1980; End, 2001). This may be especially likely for fans that have a strong attachment to their team; Branscombe and Wann (1992) found that, follow- ing a loss, fans with strong attachment to their team to engage in blasting behavior directed at players and fans of the opposing team. Consequently, it is hypothesized that:

H2a: High self-esteem will be associated with higher levels of verbal aggression behavior.

H2b: High self-esteem will be associated with higher levels of physical aggression behavior.

26 A. Shoham et al.

Impulsivity and Fan Aggression

The concept of impulsivity is complex and can affect numerous behavioral tendencies, including consumption behaviors (for a review see Kaufman- Scarborough & Cohen, 2004). In regard to the relationship between impul- sivity and aggression, Wheeler and Caggiula (1966) found that high-impulsive participants exhibited more aggression than low-impulsive participants fol- lowing exposure to aggressive models, suggesting that impulsive individuals have lower inhibitions against violating social norms. Building on this work, research with hockey spectators found a strong connection between im- pulsivity and willingness to escalate in disturbance (Arms & Russell, 1997). In fact, “impulsive aggression” is considered a common type of aggression whereas individuals engage in aggressive behaviors that were not premed- itated (Anderson & Huesmann, 2007), making impulsive individuals more likely to engage in such types of aggression. Impulsivity becomes especially relevant because, in many cases, aggressive behaviors may be a function of triggers in a situation and a person’s ability to engage in self-control re- garding response to such triggers (Anderson & Huesmann, 2007). Given that impulsivity reduces the potential control one may exert over one’s behavior, it is logical to expect that high-impulsive individuals would be less likely to control themselves in a situation of high arousal like a sporting event. Subsequently, it is hypothesized that:

H3a: High impulsivity will be associated with higher levels of verbal aggression behavior.

H3b: High impulsivity will be associated with higher levels of physical aggression behavior.

Openness to Out-Group and Fan Aggression

As discussed earlier, high attachment to a sports team (or any social group) usually carries an in-group versus out-group dichotomy, where the out-group (i.e., opposing team) is vilified. However, from a personality trait standpoint, individuals differ on their openness to and tolerance of out-groups. There- fore, it is possible for fans to have a strong liking and attachment to their own team without necessarily disparaging or denigrating other teams. In fact, Dalakas and Melancon (2012) found that high fan identification was connected to higher schadenfreude toward opponents through the mediat- ing variable associated with importance of winning. In other words, not all highly identified fans took pleasure at their opponents’ misfortunes. Along these lines, it is expected that the trait of openness will have a relationship with fans’ propensity to engage in aggressive behaviors:

Fans’ Aggressive Behavior 27

H4a: Openness to out-group will be associated with lower levels of verbal aggression behavior.

H4b: Openness to out-group will be associated with lower levels of physical aggression behavior.

Aggression History and Traits

Lastly, people’s own history of past verbal aggressive behavior and physical aggressive behavior is likely to be a predictor of potential future aggression (Arms & Russell, 1997; Wakefield & Wann, 2006). In their study of hockey spectators, Arms and Russell (1997) found that, in addition to impulsivity, people’s previous fight history was strongly associated with their willingness to participate in more aggressive behavior. We view such past history and tendencies also as an individual difference type of variable and propose that there should be a strong association between past and future behavior for each type of aggression. Therefore, it is expected that:

H5a: Verbal aggression trait will be associated with higher levels of verbal aggression behavior.

H5b: Physical aggression trait will be associated with higher levels of physical aggression behavior.

Previous research has not examined how one’s past history with verbal aggression may relate to future acts of physical aggression and vice versa. While the two forms of aggression are related to an extent, they remain two different types of behavior. It may be logical to assume that because physical aggression is more intense than verbal aggression, people who have engaged in physical aggression in the past would be likely to engage in physical as well as verbal aggression in the future. However, the reverse may not be true and one’s past verbal aggression may be less likely to influence physical aggression in the future. Given the lack of previous research on this area, we did not formulate a formal hypothesis regarding the effect of past verbal aggression on future physical aggression or the effect of past physical aggression on future verbal aggression.

METHOD

Sample and Procedures

Questionnaires were distributed to 350 fans in four different games of Israel’s top football (soccer) league across four different stadiums during the early

28 A. Shoham et al.

season phases. Data were gathered in the stands by two research students, thoroughly instructed in research methodology.

An effort was made to recruit heterogeneous respondents on age, gen- der, and education. Age averaged 31.7 (SD = 12.6), 10.5% were females (which was similar to their ratio in the stands according to the data collec- tors’ estimate, and education averaged 13.1 years (SD = 2.4).

Response rate was high; specifically, 315 complete questionnaires were gathered for an effective response rate of 90%. Hence, nonresponse bias does not appear to be a problem in this study.

Measures

While identification is often used as the measure to assess psychological attachment to a team, we used three different summary measures to assess fans’ connection with their teams and overall attachment to them: team involvement, team internalization, and team cohesion. They all contribute to a strong attachment to their team but each incorporates a unique aspect of how such attachment is expressed.

Team involvement captured behavior in terms of games attended, spending time and money on the team, knowing team’s players. Team inter- nalization focused on an emotional connection with the team using items that addressed how personalized the team is to a fan (e.g., “feel better about your- self when winning” or “lost sleep over the team”). Both the team involvement and team internalization scales were based on the work of Capella (2002) and were found to have good reliability in our study (Cronbach’s alpha of .81 for involvement and .75 for internalization).

For team cohesion we adapted a scale on neighborhood cohesion by Perkins, Florin, Rich, Wandersman, & Chavis (1990). The eight scale items measure overall the relationships with other fans of the team and assess the extent to which fans feel a sense of belonging with the team and share same values as other fans of the same team. Sample items include, “Other team fans and I want the same things for the team” and “Fans of this team generally do not get along” (reverse-coded). Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was .80.

In addition to the three scales measuring connection to the team, there were also scales measuring five personality traits: impulsivity, verbal ag- gression, physical aggression, openness to out-group, and self-esteem. For impulsivity/impatience, verbal aggression, and physical aggression we used scales by Gladue (1991). The reliabilities were .84, .79, and .79, respectively. The work by Bosworth and Espelage (1995) on ethnic identity and conflict was used for measuring openness to out-group. Items were modified ac- cordingly to reflect a respondent’s openness to out-groups associated with a sport team rather than with an ethnic group. Reliability for the three-item

Fans’ Aggressive Behavior 29

scale was .60. Finally, self-esteem was assessed by a five-item scale based on Rosenberg’s self-esteem inventory (1965). The scale’s reliability was .78.

The scales for the two outcomes (on-field physical and verbal aggres- sion behaviors were taken from Capella (2002). The five items for verbal aggression and the four items for physical aggression formed reliable scales (.80 and .68, respectively).

Finally, averages were created for the regression models described be- low. Scales’ means, standard deviations, and reliabilities, as well as interscale correlations are provided in Table 1.

RESULTS

In order to assess the relative effect of the different proposed variables on verbal and physical aggressive behavior, regression analyses were used. First a regression was conducted with verbal aggression as the dependent variable. The model was significant and the predictor variables were able to explain 36% of the variance (adjusted R2 = 0.36, F(8,261) = 19.68, p < .001). When examining the effects of all variables within the framework of the hypotheses, past verbal aggression was the only individual-difference variable with a significant effect. All three team-attachment variables, team internalization (β = 0.24, p < .001), team involvement (β = 0.15, p = .02), and team cohesion (β = 0.12, p = .03) were found significant with team internalization having the strongest effect of the three. Table 2 summarizes the regression model for verbal aggression.

The regression model for physical aggression was also significant and again the predictor variables were able to explain a substantial percent of the variance (adjusted R2 of 0.34, F(8,262) = 16.70, p < .001). In this case, three of the five personality traits were significant: past physical aggres- sion (β = 0.25, p < .001) and impulsivity (β = 0.14, p = .01) were posi- tively associated with physical aggression whereas openness to out-groups (β = −0.22, p < .001) had a negative relationship with physical aggression. Team internalization (β = 0.18, p = .01) was the only significant team- attachment variables. Table 3 summarizes the regression model for physical aggression.

Our first hypothesis predicted that strong attachment to a team would be associated with high levels of both verbal and physical aggression. The results showed that only one aspect of team attachment, team internaliza- tion, was significant for both types of aggression. Team involvement and team internalization were significant for verbal aggression but not for phys- ical. Therefore, there was partial support for H1 in regard to the emotional connection to a team (through internalization) associated with both types of aggression.

T A

B LE

1 Sc

al es

’M ea

n s,

St an

d ar

d D

ev ia

tio n s,

R el

ia b ili

tie s,

an d

In te

rs ca

le C o rr

el at

io n s

Sc al

es C ro

n b ac

h ’s

al p h a

M (S

D )

In te

rs ca

le co

rr el

at io

n s

T ea

m at

ta ch

m en

t •C

o h es

io n

0. 80

3. 13

(0 .8

0) 1.

00 •I

n vo

lv em

en t

0. 81

3. 47

(0 .8

8) 0.

52 1.

00 •I

n te

rn al

iz at

io n

0. 75

2. 99

(0 .9

7) 0.

58 0.

60 1.

00

P er

so n al

ity tr ai

ts •S

el f- es

te em

0. 78

4. 40

(0 .7

5) 0.

21 0.

03 0.

18 1.

00 •I

m p u ls

iv ity

0. 84

2. 57

(0 .8

8) 0.

18 0.

29 0.

19 −0

.1 9

1. 00

•V er

b al

ag gr

es si

o n

0. 79

3. 12

(0 .8

6) 0.

34 0.

34 0.

31 0.

05 0.

40 1.

00 •P

h ys

ic al

ag gr

es si

o n

0. 79

1. 77

(0 .9

1) 0.

21 0.

18 0.

17 −0

.1 3

0. 42

0. 45

1. 00

•O p en

n es

s to

o u t- gr

o u p

0. 60

3. 78

(0 .9

3) 0.

02 −0

.1 2

−0 .0

9 −0

.0 1

−0 .1

2 0.

03 −0

.1 9

1. 00

O n -fi

el d

ag gr

es si

ve b eh

av io

rs •V

er b al

ag gr

es si

o n

0. 80

2. 59

(1 .0

7) 0.

42 0.

45 0.

46 −0

.0 1

0. 27

0. 42

0. 27

−0 .0

3 1.

00 •P

h ys

ic al

ag gr

es si

o n

0. 68

1. 44

(0 .6

9) 0.

29 0.

32 0.

34 −0

.0 3

0. 36

0. 32

0. 43

−0 .2

7 0.

42 1.

00

30

Fans’ Aggressive Behavior 31

TABLE 2 Factors Affecting Verbal Aggression

Variables Beta p-values

Team attachment variables Team cohesion 0.12 0.03 Team internalization 0.24 0.00 Team involvement 0.15 0.02

Personality trait variables Self-esteem −0.03 0.32 Impulsivity 0.08 0.86 Openness to out-group 0.02 0.34 Past verbal aggression 0.23 0.00 Past physical aggression 0.04 0.27

Note. p-values are based on one-way tests.

H2 hypothesized a relationship between both types of aggression and high self-esteem. However, self-esteem was not found to have a significant effect on either dependent variable. Consequently, H2 was not supported.

H3, which predicted that impulsivity would influence verbal aggression and physical aggression, was partly supported. Impulsivity was found to be significant for physical aggression but not for verbal aggression.

H4 proposed a negative relationship between openness to out-groups and aggression and was also partly supported. Such relationship was found for physical aggression but not for verbal.

Lastly, H5 hypothesized a relationship between past verbal aggression and verbal aggression tendencies as well as between past physical aggression and physical aggression tendencies. There was a significant relationship for both providing support for H4.

TABLE 3 Factors Affecting Physical Aggression

Beta P-values

Team attachment variables Team cohesion 0.07 0.14 Team internalization 0.18 0.01 Team involvement 0.01 0.47

Personality trait variables Self esteem −0.01 0.44 Impulsivity 0.14 0.01 Openness to out-group −0.22 0.00 Past verbal aggression 0.09 0.08 Past physical aggression 0.25 0.00

Note. p-values are based on one-way tests.

32 A. Shoham et al.

DISCUSSION

Both regression models had high R2 and were able to predict considerable amount of variance for verbal and physical aggression. It is noteworthy that the antecedents for verbal aggression and physical aggression were similar in some respects but overall not identical. From a practical standpoint, it is important to identify the specific variables that are associated with each type of aggressive behavior in order to focus on these factors to potentially suppress aggressive behavior.

Team internalization was the only factor that was found to be significant and had a strong effect on both types of aggression. Given that internaliza- tion reflects a strong emotional and personalized relationship between a fan and their favorite team, essentially the team becomes part of the fan’s self. That type of relationship inevitably increases a fan’s emotional involvement in sport competitions where the favorite team participates. Fans who inter- nalize their team are more likely to care about the outcome (Madrigal & Dalakas, 2008) and more likely to take personally everything that involves the team, which increases the likelihood for aggressive behaviors to emerge. Passionate fans that internalize their relationship with their team can be very beneficial for sports teams as they are more likely to attend games and pur- chase team merchandise (Bristow & Sebastian, 2001; Fisher & Wakefield, 1998). However, as our findings suggest, it is important to keep in mind that there can also be negative consequences by strong team internalization. Teams should encourage fans to be emotionally attached to their team but in a socially responsible manner, a balance that may not always be easy to achieve. Team personnel (e.g., coaches, players, administrators) should lead by example and be cautious about their actions or words (especially now that social media can communicate one’s thoughts to thousands of people within seconds) that intensify fans’ already high emotions and may add fuel to the fire. Similarly, in an effort to increase ratings, media may contribute to further charging already passionate fans by accentuating rivalry-related sto- ries, especially before big games; consequently, they may also have, however unintentional, a contribution to elevated levels of aggression of fans.

The second important finding is the strong role that one’s individual traits and personality play in terms of influencing aggressive behavior. Not surprisingly, there is a strong connection between one’s tendency for verbal aggression and actual behaviors of verbal aggression just like there is a similar connection between the trait of physical aggression and behaviors of physical aggression. However, it is interesting to note that there was no effect of the verbal aggression trait on physical aggression behavior and no effect of the physical aggression trait on verbal aggression behavior. In other words, those two seem to be indeed two different traits and their effect is relatively limited on specific behaviors rather than being diffused and making someone overall aggressive.

Fans’ Aggressive Behavior 33

Obviously, individual traits and personality are difficult, if not impos- sible, to be controlled by sports organizations. However, their significance highlights even more the need for sports teams to avoid creating situa- tions/triggers that may facilitate and encourage such traits to be exhibited. For example, while Internet forums can be a great way to engage sports fans and increase their attachment to their team, their anonymous nature facili- tates abusive and inappropriate language by several fans, which reinforces verbal aggression behaviors. Therefore, there is a critical need to monitor such forums regularly to prevent postings and content that motivates fans to engage in verbal aggression. Similarly, in their effort to build team spirit, sports teams may sometimes cross the line and vilify opponents and rivals, a seemingly innocent practice that may again facilitate and encourage aggres- sive behaviors by fans with traits and personalities conducive to aggressive behavior. Such concerns need to be kept in mind also during games and influence policies regarding alcohol serving and other practices that may contribute, however unintentionally, to fans exhibiting their tendencies for aggressive behavior. Along those lines, other factors, unrelated to the actual contest, may trigger or heighten aggression (e.g., long waits for admission to the sport facility, at concession stands or at the restrooms). Such factors can indeed be managed by the service provider and, thus, should be an important priority for sports organizations as, in addition to ensuring higher customer satisfaction, may also decrease incidents of fan aggression.

Another interesting finding was that impulsivity affected physical aggres- sion but not verbal aggression. The significance of this finding is that physical violence at a sporting event does not need to be the result of premeditated planning by hooligans; any impulsive fan may find himself or herself in a situation where they could become physically aggressive. Therefore, it is important for sports teams and organizations to always have alert security personnel in sporting events, even ones that may appear, on paper at least, as “safe” and unlikely for unruly behavior by fans.

Limitations and Future Research

This study provides interesting insight regarding the antecedents of aggres- sive behavior, in terms of both verbal and physical aggression. It is impor- tant to note that the data were collected in Israel and, therefore, there may be questions regarding how representative they may be of fans in other countries. Future research efforts should examine the phenomenon in differ- ent cultural contexts to assess potential similarities or differences regarding antecedents of aggressive behaviors by fans across the world. Given the issues with unruly fan behavior worldwide, such insight can be especially beneficial.

34 A. Shoham et al.

REFERENCES

Anderson, C. A., & Huesmann, L. R. (2007). Human aggression: A social-cognitive view. In M. A. Hogg & J. Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 259–287). London, England: Sage.

Arms, R. L., & Russell, G. W. (1997). Impulsivity, fight history, and camaraderie as predictors of a willingness to escalate a disturbance. Current Psychology, 15, 279–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-997-1005-0

Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., & Campbell, W. K. (2000). Self-esteem, narcissism, and aggression: Does violence result from low self-esteem or from threatened egotism? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 26–29.

Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., & Boden, J. M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5–33. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.5

Bosworth, K., & Espelage, D. (1995). Teen conflict survey. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Adolescent Studies.

Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1992). Role of identification with a group, arousal categorization processes, and self-esteem in sport spectator aggression. Human Relations, 45, 1013–1033. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679204501001

Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1994). Collective self-esteem consequences of outgroup derogation when a valued social identity is on trial. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 641–657. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420240603

Bristow, D. N., & Sebastian, R. J. (2001). Holy cow! Wait ‘til next year! A closer look at the brand loyalty of Chicago Cubs baseball fans. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18, 256–275.

Capella, M. E. (2002). Measuring sports fans’ involvement: The fan behavior ques- tionnaire. Southern Business Review, 27, 30–36.

Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Per- sonality & Social Psychology, 34, 366–375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514. 34.3.366

Cialdini, R. B., & Richardson, K. D. (1980). Two indirect tactics of image management: Basking and blasting. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 39, 406–415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.3.406

Dalakas, V., & Melancon, J. P. (2012). Fan identification, Schadenfreude toward hated rivals, and the mediating effects of IWIN (Importance of Winning Index). Journal of Services Marketing, 26, 51–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ 08876041211199724

Dimmock, J., & Grove, J. (2005). Relationship of fan identification to determinants of aggression. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 37–47. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/10413200590907559

End, C. M. (2001). An examination of NFL fans’ computer mediated BIRGing. Journal of Sport Behavior, 24, 162–181.

Fisher, R. J., & Wakefield, K. (1998). Factors leading to group identification: A field study of winners and losers. Psychology & Marketing, 15, 23–40. http: //dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199801)15:1<23::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-P

Fans’ Aggressive Behavior 35

Gladue, B. A. (1991). Qualitative and quantitative sex differences in self-reported aggressive behavioral characteristics. Psychological Reports, 68, 675–684. http: //dx.doi.org/10.2466/PR0.68.2.675-684

Havard, C. T., Gray, D. P., Gould, J., Sharp, L. A., & Schaffer, J. J. (2013). Development and validation of the Sport Rivalry Fan Perception Scale (SRFPS). Journal of Sport Behavior, 36, 45–65.

Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London, England: Routledge.

Kaufman-Scarborough, C., & Cohen, J. (2004). Unfolding consumer impulsivity: An existential-phenomenological study of consumers with attention deficit disorder. Psychology & Marketing, 21, 637–669. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mar.20022

Keating, P. (2009). Pulse of the nation. ESPN The Magazine, 12, 29. Keeler, L. A. (2007). The differences in sport aggression, life aggression, and life

assertion among adult male and female collision contact, and non-contact sport athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 30, 57–76.

Madrigal, R., & Dalakas, V. (2008). Consumer psychology of sport: More than just a game. In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. M. Herr, & F. R. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 857–876). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.

Martin, M. M., Rocca, K. A., Cayanus, J. L., & Weber, K. (2009). Relationship between coaches’ use of behavior alteration techniques and verbal aggression on athletes’ motivation and affect. Journal of Sport Behavior, 32, 227–241.

Perkins, D. D., Florin, P., Rich, R. C., Wandersman, A., & Chavis, D. M. (1990). Participation and the social and physical environment of residential blocks: Crime and community context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 83–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00922690

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Russell, G. W. (1993). The social psychology of sport. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Russell, G. W., & Arms, R. L. (1995). False consensus effect, physical aggression,

anger, and a willingness to escalate a disturbance. Aggressive Behavior, 21, 381–386.

Russell, G. W., & Arms, R. L. (1998). Toward a social psychological profile of would- be rioters. Aggressive Behavior, 24, 219–226.

Ruvio, A., & Shoham, A. (2011). Aggressive driving: A consumption experience. Psychology & Marketing, 28, 1089–1114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mar.20429

Simons, Y., & Taylor, J. (1992). A psychosocial model of fan violence in sports. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 23, 207–226.

Storch, E. A., Werner, N. E., & Storch, J. B. (2003). Relational aggression and psy- chosocial adjustment in intercollegiate athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 26, 155–167.

Street and Smith’s Sports Business Journal. (2002, March 11). About us—the sports industry.

Tenenbaum, G., Stewart, E., Singer, R. N., & Duda, J. (1996). Aggression and violence in sport: an ISSP position stand. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 27, 229–236.

36 A. Shoham et al.

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.

Wann, D. L. (1993). Aggression of highly identified spectators as a function of their need to maintain a positive social identity. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 17, 134–143. http://dx.doi.org/1177/019372359301700207

Wann, D. L., Carlson, J. D., & Schrader, M. P. (1999). The impact of team identification on the hostile and instrumental verbal aggression of sport spectators. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 14, 279–286.

Wann, D. L., Culver, Z., Akanda, R., Daglar, M., De Divitis, C., & Smith, A. (2005). The effects of team identification and game outcome on willingness to consider anonymous acts of hostile aggression. Journal of Sport Behavior, 28, 282–294.

Wann, D. L., Haynes, G, McLean, B., & Pullen, P. (2003). Sport team identification and willingness to consider anonymous acts of hostile aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 406–413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ab.10046

Wann, D. L., Hunter, J. L., Ryan, J. A., & Wright, L. A. (2001). The relationship between team identification and willingness of sport fans to consider illegally assisting their team. Social Behavior and Personality, 29, 531–526. http://dx. doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2001.29.6.531

Wann, D. L., Melnick, M. J., Russell, G. W., & Pease, D. G. (2001). Sport fans: The psychology and social impact of spectators. New York, NY: Routledge.

Wann, D. L., & Wilson, A. M. (1999). Relationship between aesthetic motivation and preferences for aggressive and nonaggressive sports. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89, 931–934. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/PMS.89.7.931-934

Wheeler L., & Caggiula A. R. (1966). The contagion of aggression. Jour- nal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ 0022-1031(66)90002-3

Young, K. (2000). Sports and violence. In J. Coakley & E. Dunning (Eds.), Handbook of sports studies (pp. 382–407). London, England: Sage.

Zillmann, D., Bryant, J., & Sapolsky, B. S. (1989). Enjoyment from sports spectator- ship. In H. H. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games and play: Social and psychological viewpoints (pp. 241–278). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Copyright of Services Marketing Quarterly is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.