Content uploaded by Keith Parry
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Keith Parry on Oct 02, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 1
An Examination of Sport Fandom in the United Kingdom: A Comparative Analysis of
Fan Behaviors, Socialization Processes, and Team Identification
Keith D. Parry
University of Western Sydney
Ian Jones
Bournemouth University
Daniel L. Wann
Murray State University
Keywords: sport fandom; team identification; fan behavior; fan socialization; comparative
analysis
Address correspondence to Keith Parry, School of Business, University of Western Sydney,
Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 1797 or to k.parry@uws.edu.au via Internet.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 2
Abstract
Despite recent cross-cultural analyses of sport fandom, work in the field is still limited. To
partially fill this research void, the current investigation investigated sport fandom in the
United Kingdom, and included cross-cultural comparison with existing data. Four research
areas were reviewed: a) sport fan behaviors, b) socialization into the sport fan role, c)
identification with the social role of sport fan, and d) team identification. A sample of 252
students at a university in the United Kingdom completed a questionnaire packet assessing
demographics, fandom, fan behaviors, team identification, and the impact of various
socialization agents. Results revealed gender differences in behavior (e.g., males reported
greater levels of participation than females) and both team identification and fandom were
significant predictors of fan behavior. The importance of the father as a socialization agent
was highlighted throughout the sample, and levels of identification were generally high.
Cross-cultural analysis indicated that socialization agents for the UK were more varied than
other countries, UK fans were more likely to watch sport live, and UK males were more
likely to watch and discuss sport daily. In general, it was demonstrated that UK fan behavior
was closer to that of Americans and, in particular, Australian fans, rather than fans in
European (Greek and Norwegian) samples.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 3
An Examination of Sport Fandom in the United Kingdom: A Comparative Analysis of
Fan Behaviors, Socialization Processes, and Team Identification
Since Wann and Hamlet (1995) commented upon the lack of literature focused upon
the sport fan, there has been a substantial increase in theoretical and empirical research on the
subject, leading to considerable advances in knowledge and understanding. There is still,
however, limited cross-cultural research, and according to Theodorakis and Wann (2008), a
need to explore cultural differences in fandom. This is particularly true given that existing
research indicates such differences to be present in the motivations and behaviors of sport
fans and spectators from different ethnic groups (Bilyeu & Wann, 2002; Wann, Bilyeu,
Breenan, Osborn & Gambouras, 1999), as well as different nationalities (Melnick & Wann,
2004, 2011; Theodorakis & Wann, 2008). To date, a limited number of cross-cultural studies
have been undertaken. Wann, Melnick, Russell and Pease (2001) report findings from data
collected from North American fans, and further empirical studies have tested Norwegian
(Melnick & Wann, 2004), Greek (Theodorakis & Wann, 2008), and Australian fans (Melnick
& Wann, 2011). The studies have all explored similar aspects of fandom: a) fan related
behavior (such as watching sport on television, b) the role of various agents in the
socialization process (such as parents or the media), c) gender differences, and d) the extent
of fan identification with a favorite team. The following paragraphs highlight some of the
more pertinent findings from these research endeavors.
Fan Related Behavior
Findings on fan related behavior demonstrate – in most cases – similarity across
contexts, with males consistently demonstrating greater frequencies than females for all types
of behavior. Males from all studies to date and Australian female fans demonstrate high
levels of television spectatorship, with 81% of Norwegian male fans, 86% of Greek male
fans, 97% of Australian male fans, and 86% of Australian female fans watching sport at least
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 4
once a week. Female television viewing is lower for Norwegian (66%) and Greek female fans
(34.8%). Listening to sport on the radio is, in most cases, comparatively rare when compared
to television viewing. It is a much more popular activity amongst Greek males, of whom 61%
listen at least once a week, and the entire Australian sample, where 59% of males and 38% of
females listen to sport at least once a week, compared to only 15.9% of Greek females, 16%
of Norwegian males, and 11% of Norwegian females.
The increased frequency of fan behaviors among Australian fans is also reflected in
terms of live attendance at sporting events. Half of male Australian fans (50%) and 31% of
female fans attend sporting events at least once a week according to Melnick and Wann’s
(2011) study, compared with 31% and 10% respectively of Norwegian fans, and only 10.1%
of male and 4.5% of female Greek fans. All studies, however, demonstrate the importance of
discussing sport with others, with 97% of Australian fans and 91% of Norwegian fans doing
so at least once a week. Theodorakis and Wann (2008) found that male Greek fans follow this
pattern, with 86.3% discussing sport once a week (however, only 54.7% of Greek females did
so). The final behavior explored was that of accessing sport on the internet. This was only
been undertaken by Melnick and Wann’s (2011) Australian study, which demonstrates
relatively high levels of internet use amongst Australian males, with 78% accessing sport at
least once a week, compared to 44% of females.
The Role of Various Agents in the Socialization Process
Each study highlights friends and peers as key socialization agents. There is less
consistency with regard to the role of parents, school and community in the socialization
process. The North American data reported by Wann et al. (2001) highlights the importance
of the school, followed by parents, and finally community. Greek fans report that parents and
community are the second and third most important agents. The variability between each,
however, is low. Australian fans, as with North American fans, also report the community as
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 5
least significant; however they rate all agents highly, with little variation between them.
Norwegian fans are shown by Melnick and Wann (2004) to be most strongly influenced by
the local community, and both Greek and Norwegian fans cite the school as the least
important socialization agent reflecting, to some extent, the different sporting structures
within each context, such as the emphasis upon club sport in Greece and Norway, as opposed
to the emphasis upon school based sport in the United States. In terms of the single most
influential factor, all studies to date highlight the importance of the father as a socialization
agent. The Greek and Australian studies both report 45% of respondents suggesting that their
father had been the most influential agent, with 30% of Norwegian fans citing this as the
case.
The Extent of Identification with a Favorite Team
Previous cross-cultural research also targeted team identification, which is the extent
to which a fan feels a psychological connection to a team (Wann et al., 2001). Levels of
identification for Australian fans have been found to be very high, with fans supporting an
Australian team scoring a mean of 40.11 (out of a possible 56) on the Sport Spectator
Identification Scale (Wann & Branscombe, 1993), and those following a non-Australian team
scoring 42.07. These are considerably higher than Greek (M = 36.9) and Norwegian fans (M
= 31). Australians also were more likely to have a favorite team (92%), compared to 87.5%
of Greek fans and 65.2% of Norwegian fans. Most Greek fans supported a team based in their
homeland compared to 90% of Australian fans and only 64% of Norwegian fans. As Melnick
and Wann (2011) suggest, this may be due to the absence of a professional sports industry in
Norway, whereas both Greece and Australia possess high profile professional sport teams.
The Current Investigation
Johnes (2005) suggests that the United Kingdom (UK) was the birthplace of modern
sport. Through the rationalization and codification of folk games in the nineteenth century (a
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 6
process Elias, 1986, terms “sportization”), many of the sports that are played around the
world saw their birth in the UK. Yet despite this sporting tradition, recent figures (Sport
England, 2011) indicate that only slightly over one third of the adult population participate in
regular (once per week) sporting activity. Although this percentage has risen since 2006,
there has been a decrease in the number of young people (aged 16 – 19) who regularly
participate in sport during the same period. Swimming, association football, athletics, and
cycling are the most participated in sports as identified in the most recent (2010-11) survey of
sports participation rates amongst adults (Sport England, 2011). In July 2005, London won
the right to host the 2012 Olympic Games. The London 2012 bid was backed by the
Government as it was believed that hosting the Olympic Games was one way to improve the
physical and mental well-being of the nation, with additional benefits such as urban
regeneration and a reduction in anti-social behavior (Hill, 2010).
However, although participation may be struggling, sport spectatorship remains high
in the UK. The sporting environment for fans in the UK is dominated both in terms of
attendance and media coverage by the English Premier League (association football). The
combined attendance figures for top-flight English football teams were over thirteen million
in the 2011-12 season (ESPN, 2012). Elsewhere, crowds at major sporting events appear to
be increasing, with the flagship tennis and motorsports events (Wimbledon and the British
Formula One Grand Prix) seeing record attendances in 2011 (PwC, 2011). Clearly, sport
fandom and spectating play an important role in the culture and society of the UK and
permeates many aspects of life.
The purpose of the current study was two-fold. First, we examined sport fandom and
spectating within the United Kingdom, replicating the procedure used in the aforementioned
cross-cultural examinations. Second, we provide a comparison with existing studies based
upon the different cultures outlined above. Due to the lack of past research of this type on
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 7
fans in the UK, establishing specific hypotheses was not appropriate (similar to the work by
Melnick & Wann, 2004; Theodorakis & Wann, 2008). Rather, the current investigation
attempted to examine the following research questions:
1. To what degree do male and female university students from the United
Kingdom engage in behaviors commonly associated with sport fandom?
2. To what extent do parents, friends / peers, school and community contribute to
their socialization into the sport fan role?
3. Which one of the aforementioned socialization agents is most influential?
4. How strongly do students identify with their favorite team?
Method
To facilitate comparison with previous studies, the methodology adopted was based
upon the previous cross-cultural studies discussed above.
Participants
Participants were a convenience sample of 252 students based in the Department of
Sport at a provincial university in the UK. The gender breakdown was 185 males (73.4%)
and 67 females (26.6%). The mean age was 20.61 (SD = 3.26).
Measures
The questionnaire packet contained five sections. The first section asked participants
to provide demographic information regarding gender, age, and year in school. In the second
section participants indicated how often they attended sporting events in person, watched
sporting events on television, listened to sporting events on the radio, and discussed sport
with friends and relatives. Responses options to these scale-items were: 1 = never, 2 = once a
year, 3 = twice a year, 4 = once a month, 5 = twice a month, 6 = once a week, 7 = twice a
week, and 8 = once a day.
The third section of the packet focused on fan socialization. Based on and consistent
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 8
with the work of McPherson (1975; 1976), Melnick and Wann (2004) and Wann et al.
(2001), four socialization agents were identified and selected as having the greatest potential
impact on the sport fan socialization process: parents, friends, school and community.
Respondents expressed the impact of each agent on an 8-point Likert-type scale anchored by
1 (the agent had no influence) to 8 (the agent had a great deal of influence). Additionally, an
open ended question was included to allow participants to identify the most influential person
or entity in their decision to be a sport fan. This additional item was justified due to the fact
that forced-choice measures may be less optimal in situations assessing sport fan socialization
(see Spaaij & Anderson, in press). Indeed, inconsistency between forced-choice and open
ended responses have been noted (e.g., Melnick & Wann, 2011).
The fourth section contained the Sport Fandom Questionnaire (SFQ; Wann, 2002) to
measure the degree of identification with the role of sport fan. The SFQ is a reliable and
valid unidimensional scale comprised by five Likert-scale items. Response options ranged
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 8 (strongly agree). Higher numbers represented greater levels of
sport fandom. The fifth and final section of the packet focused on team identification. In this
section, participants completed the Sport Spectator Identification Scale (SSIS; Wann &
Branscombe, 1993). Respondents targeted their favorite team when completing the SSIS.
The SSIS contains seven Likert-scale items with response options ranging from 1 (low
identification) to 8 (high identification).
Procedure
After receiving permission from class instructors, questionnaires were completed by
participants inside university classrooms. All subjects were informed that their participation
was completely voluntary, participants could withdraw at any time, and the individual
responses would be held in strict confidence. Upon completion of the study (approximately
20 minutes), the participants were debriefed and excused from the testing session.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 9
Results
Current Sample - Sport Fandom in the UK
Initial analyses. The five items on the SFQ were combined to form a single measure
of fandom (Cronbach’s alpha = .90). Using a one-way analysis of variance, males (M =
34.74, SD = 4.80) reported significantly higher [F(1, 243) = 97.62, p < .001] levels of fandom
than females (M = 26.40, SD = 8.04). The seven items of the SSIS were also combined (alpha
= .92), with males (M = 44.01, SD = 8.91) demonstrating significantly higher [F(1, 249) =
55.50, p < 0.001] levels of identification than females (M = 33.90, SD = 11.00).
Sport fan related behavior. The frequency of respondents’ engagement in sport fan
behaviors is presented in Table 1. Males demonstrated greater frequency of participation in
behaviors than females, with the exception of attending events in person (33% of females
attended twice a week or more, compared to 22% of males). Females were, however, also
more likely to be less regular attenders, with 36% attending less than once a month,
compared to 22% of males. Males tended to watch significantly more sport on television,
with over half (51%) watching every day, compared to only 8% of females. This pattern was
repeated for accessing sport on the Internet, but not in terms of listening to sport on the radio
(which was less common for all). Gender differences were also evident in terms of discussing
sport, with 84% of males discussing sport every day, compared to 33% of females.
The relationships among fandom behaviors, team identification and sport fandom
were examined using Spearman correlations. The findings demonstrated significant positive
correlations (all p < .01) between team identification and all five fan behaviors (identification
and attendance r = .24; watching sport on television r = .47; listening to sport on radio r =
.36; accessing sport on Internet r = .43; discussing sport r = .46). Similarly, significant
positive correlations (all p < .01) were found between sport fandom and the fan behaviors
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 10
(fandom and attendance r = .20; watching sport on television r = .49; listening to sport on
radio r = .36; accessing sport on Internet r = .54; discussing sport r = .53).
Regression analyses were undertaken to further explore the relationships among
fandom, identification, and fan behavior. Each regression used one of the behaviors as the
dependent variable while fandom and identification were predictor variables. Please see
Table 2 for information regarding regression statistics for the predictor variables. With
respect to attendance at sporting events, the combined effect of the two predictor variables
was significant, F(2, 237) = 8.20, p < .01 (R = 0.25; adjusted R2 = 0.06). With respect to
independent contributions to attendance, team identification accounted for a significant
proportion of unique variance while sport fandom did not. As for watching sport on
television, the combined effect of the two predictor variables was again significant, F(2, 240)
= 64.13, p < .001 (R = 0.59; adjusted R2 = 0.34). With respect to independent contributions
to watching televised sport, both team identification and sport fandom accounted for a
significant proportion of unique variance. The regression on listening to sport on the radio
revealed that the combined effect of the two predictor variables was significant, F(2, 240) =
24.51, p < .001 (R = 0.41; adjusted R2 = 0.16). As for independent contributions to sport
radio listening, both identification and fandom accounted for a significant proportion of
unique variance. With respect to accessing sport on the Internet, the combined effect of the
two predictor variables was significant, F(2, 241) = 64.80, p < .001 (R = 0.59; adjusted R2 =
0.34). With respect to independent contributions to sport on the Internet, identification and
fandom both accounted for a significant proportion of unique variance. And finally, for
discussing sport, once again the combined effect of the two predictor variables was
significant, F(2, 241) = 75.16, p < .001 (R = 0.62; adjusted R2 = 0.38). With respect to
independent contributions to sport discussions, both team identification and sport fandom
accounted for a significant proportion of unique variance.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 11
Sport fan socialization. To examine the impact of the four socialization agents,
scores were analyzed using a 2 (Gender: male or female) X 4 (Socialization Agent: parents,
friends, school and community) mixed factor analysis of variance. Means and standard
deviations appear in Table 3. Results indicated that the gender main effect was significant
(Wilks’ Lambda = .934, F(4, 245) = 3.93, p < .01). However subsequent univariate tests
indicated significant gender differences only in terms of friends/peers, who were more
important for male fans F(1, 249) = 13.01, p < .001), with no gender differences in terms of
parents, school and local community. Table 4 reveals responses for the greatest influence on
participants becoming a sport fan. Fathers (49%) were, by some margin, the most significant
socialization agent, followed by friends (8%). Fewer females (33%) identified their father as
most influential, however.
Team identification, favorite Team, and favorite Sport. Wann et al. (2001)
suggest that a score of 35 or above on the SSIS can be indicative of high identification. The
mean score from the SSIS was 41.31, thus demonstrating a very highly identified sample,
especially among males (M = 44.01). Females were, as noted earlier, significantly less
identified (M = 33.90). Most fans identified with an association football (soccer) team (77%).
Rugby union (10%), cricket (2%), basketball (2%) and American football (1%) were also
listed. Most respondents listed a UK-based team (96% of those who listed a team), with only
4% listing a non-UK team.
Comparison of British Sport Fans to Previous Samples
The results of the current study were compared with previous cross-cultural studies
(i.e., Melnick & Wann, 2004, 2011; Theodorakis & Wann, 2008; Wann et al., 2001).
Comparisons were drawn between levels of sport fandom, team identification, sport fan
behaviors, and socialization agents (note that Wann et al., 2001, did not examine levels of
fandom and identification).
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 12
Sport fandom. An analysis of SFQ scores showed that British fans appear to be
more comparable with Australian fans rather than their nearer neighbors in Europe (see Table
5). British fans had the highest average total score, and the highest score from all groups was
among British male fans (the Norwegian sample reported the lowest total mean). It is
interesting to note, however, that female fans from Britain had a mean score lower than those
of Australian females (26.40 compared to 30.34). This finding may be linked to falling
interest in sport in the UK, with lower participation by females than males, a gender gap that
appears to become more pronounced with age (Cox, Coleman, & Roker, 2006). Further, a
gender difference was found in each sample, with males reporting higher levels of fandom
than females.
Team identification. As shown in Table 5, British fans were highly identified with
their favorite teams. Although they identified more strongly than their European
counterparts, British female fans had a lower mean score than Australian females, a finding
consistent with the aforementioned data on fandom. Also similar to fandom, British males
had the highest mean score on team identification and, once again, gender differences were
noted in each sample (although magnitude of the difference was more pronounced in the
British and Greek samples).
Sports fan behavior. British fans were more likely to watch sport in person at least
twice per week than their counterparts (Table 6). British fans were similar to most other
samples in their high level of televised sport consumption (Table 7). Overall, 39% of British
fans and 51% of males from this sample reported watching sport on television on a daily
basis. These totals were the highest levels among all samples. With respect to comparisons
of listening to sport on the radio, subjects in the current sample were less likely to do so on a
weekly basis than those from Greece and Australia. The proportion of British males who
discussed sport each day was considerably higher than the other cultures here with 71% of
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 13
respondents indicating that they do so. Data for Internet use was only available for
Australian and British samples. It was clear that British fans use the Internet to follow their
teams to a greater extent than fans in the Australian study.
Socialization into the sport fan role. With respect to category rankings of the four
primary socialization agents, an examination of Tables 3 and 11 reveals that there were no
exact matches between the British sample and the other fan groups. However there were
some similarities between Australian and British fans for the importance of parents and the
importance of school for males. The importance of the local community was lower for
British and American fans.
In each sample, family members, and in particular fathers, were most often listed as
the primary socialization agent (see Table 4). Generally, the results from this British study
were more comparable to those found in the Australian and United States samples than with
the other European studies. The key differences between the British sample and those from
Greece and Norway were that Greek fans reported more friends as most influential while
Norway had higher percentages from friends and, especially, community.
Discussion
The current study reveals that British sport fans are highly identified, typically with a
British association football team, and that they engage in fandom related behaviors more
frequently than their North American, European, and Australian counterparts. The data reflect
the strong sporting culture within the UK, particularly that in terms of the cultural dominance
of association football as a spectator sport. The favorite sports selected by the UK sample is
noteworthy as only one of the four most popular participation sports for adults (association
football) provided the favourite sports team for the subjects. While swimming, cycling, and
athletics are popular participation sports they did not feature in the list of favorite teams.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 14
However given the more individual nature of these sports it may not be surprising that they
were not selected as a favorite.
It is interesting to note that, overall, British fans demonstrate greater proximity to
Australian fans than the two, geographically closer, European nations. This may support the
notion that a common European culture remains more theory than practice (Schneider &
Barsoux, 2003). The proximity of behavior reflects Hofstede’s (1980) suggestion that British
and Australian cultures are similar while differing on a number of dimensions from both
Norwegian and Greek cultures. This seems reasonable given the colonial history of Australia
which, although Asian influences are becoming more dominant, is still influential in
Australian sport behavior (Cashman, 2010; Schirato, 2007; Taylor et al. 2009). It has been
documented that there are tangible benefits from identifying with a sport team and that this
identification leads to greater levels of social interaction (Wann, 2006). As such, it might be
expected that this social connection could result in increased game attendance. However,
sport fandom was not found to be a significant predictor of attendance. This evidence
reinforces the findings of Wann, Brame, Clarkson, Brooks, and Waddill (2008) who, for the
case of college sports, found no interaction between game attendance and identification.
Higher levels of team identification for male fans was found to result in increased
indirect consumption through electronic media which suggested that the social connections
for highly identified male fans may be formed through the communal watching of sport
through electronic media. The consumption of sport through the media was found to be more
common than attendance in person at games across all samples, reinforcing Crawford’s
(2004) view that indirect sport consumption is now the norm. The extent to which indirect
consumption now dominates the fan experience can be see through a comparison of the
frequencies of attending in person and watching sport on television. Across all samples at
least 70 % of participants watched sport at least once a week via television, whereas, for
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 15
attending a game this figure is below 50% and it is in the American and Australian samples
that this distinction is most marked.
British fandom is also revealed to be somewhat male dominated. Specifically, male
fans were more highly identified, engaged in fan related behaviors more often, and fathers
were the most frequent socializing agent into sport fandom. This perhaps reflects the
dominance of male football as a spectator sport within the UK (Jones, 2008). However,
comparison to previous samples reveals that the socialization pattern is not confined to the
UK. In all cultures, the father was the most frequently cited socialization agent, indicating
that gender scripts [as discussed by Melnick and Wann (2004) in relation to their Norwegian
study] may be present across cultures and are witnessed in Europe, North America, and
Australia.
The apparent lack of importance placed upon community sport as a socializing agent
by UK participants is worthy of future consideration. As was the case with American and
Australian fans, community was ranked as the least important of the four socialization agents
by both males and females (see Table 11). The lack of importance placed upon community
sport may be reflected in the sport structures of these countries where large professional
teams dominate the sporting landscape. The greater emphasis placed on community sport (or
the lesser emphasis on professional sport) in Norway may be linked to their lower levels of
obesity (WHO, 2010) and may offer consideration for the UK in light of their low sport
participation figures (Sport England, 2011). The figures for frequency of attending sports
events in person (see Table 6) and watching sport on television (see Table 7) may also be of
concern for the health of the UK population. If the frequency of consuming sport is at the
expense of sport participation then, as this sample grow older (at present it is relatively young
with a mean of just over 20 years of age) it is likely that their participation will decrease even
further (Kokolakakis, Lera-López, & Panagouleas, 2011).
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 16
Summary and Limitations
The data have demonstrated both similarities and differences across different cultures.
Results revealed gender differences in behavior with males reporting greater levels of
participation than females. Both team identification and fandom were significant predictors of
fan behavior. The importance of the father as a socialization agent was highlighted
throughout the sample, and levels of identification were generally high. Cross-cultural
analysis indicated that socialization agents for the UK were more varied than other countries,
UK fans were more likely to watch sport live, and UK males were more likely to watch and
discuss sport daily. In general, it was demonstrated that UK fan behavior was closer to that of
American and, in particular, Australian fans, rather than fans in European (Greek and
Norwegian) samples.
Finally, a few limitations of the current research warrant mention. First, as with
several of the previous studies serving as comparisons for the current investigation (e.g.,
Melnick & Wann, 2004, 2011; Wann et al., 2001), the college student sample tested here was
quite homogeneous with respect to age and, perhaps, experience. That is, although perhaps
unlikely (Wann et al., 2001), it remains possible that younger and older fans as well as fans
without college experience may respond in a different fashion (e.g., report a differential
pattern of fan behaviors and/or a different set of primary socialization agents). Further, there
were several important fan behaviors that were not examined here, such as likelihood of
purchasing team merchandise and propensity to respond in an aggressive manner while
watching sporting events. Future investigators should add to the current work by expanding
the behaviors assessed. And finally, although the list of cross-cultural analyses of fan
behaviors and socialization processes continues to grow (and now totals five countries), there
are certainly many more locales from which samples are needed to acquire a more complete
picture of the cultural differences and idiosyncrasies that impact sport fandom.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 17
References
Bilyeu, J. K., & Wann, D. L. (2002). An investigation of racial differences in sport fan
motivation. International Sports Journal, 6, 93–106.
Cashman, R. (2010). Paradise of Sport: a history of Australian sport. Petersham, N.S.W.:
Walla Walla Press.
Cox, T., Coleman, L., & Roker, D. (2006). Understanding participation in sport: What
determines sports participation among 15-19 year old women? London: Sport
England.
Crawford, G. (2004). Consuming sport: Fans, sport and culture. London: Routledge.
Elias, N. (1986). An essay on sport and violence, In N. Elias & E. Dunning, Quest for
excitement: sport and leisure in the civilizing process (pp. 150-174). Oxford:
Blackwell.
ESPN, (2012). Barclays Premier League Stats - 2011-12. Available from:
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/stats/_/league/eng.1/year/2011/barclays-premier-
league?cc=3436
Hill, J. (2010). Sport in History: An Introduction, London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences, London: Sage.
Johnes, M. (2005). United Kingdom. In D. Levinsen & K. Christensen (eds.), Berkshire
Encyclopaedia of World Sport Vol 4 (pp. 1653-1660). Great Barrington, USA:
Berkshire Publishing
Jones, K. W. (2008). Female fandom: Identity, sexism, and men's professional football in
England. Sociology of Sport Journal, 25, 516-537.
Kokolakakis, T., Lera-López, F. & Panagouleas, T. (2011). Analysis of the determinants of
sports participation in Spain and England. Applied Economics, 44, 2785-98.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 18
McPherson, B. (1975). Sport consumption and the economics of consumerism. In D. W. Ball
& J. W. Loy (Eds.) Sport and social order: Contributions to the sociology of sport
(pp. 243-275). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
McPherson, B. (1976). Socialization into the role of sport consumer: A theory and causal
model. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 13, 165–177.
Melnick, M. J., & Wann, D. L., (2004). Sports fandom influences, interests, and behaviors
among Norwegian university students. International Sports Journal. 8, 1–13.
Melnick M. J., & Wann, D. L. (2011). An examination of sport fandom in Australia:
Socialization, team identification, and fan behaviour. International Review for the
Sociology of Sport, 46, 456-470.
PwC, (2011). Attendances rise at UK’s biggest annual sporting events Available from
http://www.ukmediacentre.pwc.com/News-Releases/Attendances-rise-at-UK-s-
biggest-annual-sporting-events-10dc.aspx.
Schirato, T. (2007). Understanding sports culture. London: Sage.
Schneider, S. C., & Barsoux, J. L. (2003). Managing across cultures. Harlow: Pearson
Education.
Spaaij, R., & Anderson, A. (in press). Parents or peers: Which is it? Sport socialization and
team identification in Australia: A rejoinder to Melnick and Wann. International
Review for the Sociology of Sport.
Sport England, (2011). Once a week sport participation factsheet: summary of results.
Available from:
http://www.sportengland.org/research/active_people_survey/aps5.aspx.
Taylor, T., Lock, D., & Darcy, S. (2009). The Janus face of diversity in Australian sport.
Sport in Society 12, 861-875.
Theodorakis, N. D., & Wann, D. L. (2008). An examination of sport fandom in Greece:
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 19
influences, interests and behaviours. International Journal of Sport Management and
Marketing. 4, 356-374.
Wann, 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). Examining the Potential Causal Relationship Between Sport Team
Identification and Psychological Well-being. Journal of Sport Behavior, 29, 79-95.
Wann, D. L., Brame, E., Clarkson, M., Brooks, D. & Waddill, P. J. 2008. College Student
Attendance at Sporting Events and the Relationship Between Sport Team
Identification and Social Psychological Health. Journal of Intercollegiate Sports, 1,
242 – 254.
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., Bilyeu, J. K., Breenan, K., Osborn, H. & Gambouras, A. F. (1999). An
exploratory investigation of the relationship between sport fan motivation and race.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, 1081–1084.
Wann, D. L., & Hamlet, M. A. (1995). Author and subject gender in sports research.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 225–232.
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.
WHO, (2010). WHO Global Infobase. Available from:
https://apps.who.int/infobase/Comparisons.aspx.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 20
Table 1
Frequency Distributions (Percentages) of Responses to the Items Assessing Sport Fandom Behaviors
among the British Sample.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response
Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attendance at sporting events
All participants 2 5 19 19 11 19 17 9
Males 1 4 17 22 12 21 14 9
Females 5 8 23 9 6 14 25 8
Sport television viewing
All participants 0 0 1 4 6 23 27 39
Males 0 0 0 1 3 19 27 51
Females 0 0 3 15 13 36 25 8
Sport radio listening
All participants 13 7 12 24 15 22 4 1
Males 9 6 12 26 16 25 4 1
Females 25 10 12 19 10 16 5 0
Sport on the Internet
All participants 2 3 2 11 6 16 19 42
Males 1 1 1 7 2 14 21 55
Females 3 9 5 22 16 22 15 8
Sport discussions
All participants 0 1 0 2 2 8 17 71
Males 0 0 0 0 1 2 14 84
Females 0 3 0 6 8 24 27 33
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Response options were: 1 = never, 2 = once a year, 3 = twice a year, 4 = once a month, 5 =
twice a month, 6 = once a week, 7 = twice a week, and 8 = just about every day. Percentages for each
item may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 21
Table 2
Regression Statistics for the Analyses Incorporating Sport Fandom Behaviors as the Dependent
Variables and Team Identification (SSIS Scores) and Sport Fandom (SFQ Scores) as the Predictor
Variables.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Team Identification Sport Fandom
Beta t Beta t
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attendance at events .19 2.4* .07 0.8
Sport television viewing .31 4.5*** .33 4.7***
Sport radio listening .27 3.5*** .18 2.2*
Sport on the Internet .24 3.6*** .41 5.8***
Sport discussions .25 3.6*** .43 6.3***
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * p < .05, ** p < .01., ***p < .001.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 22
Table 3
Means and Standard Deviations for the Impact of the Four Socialization Agents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Socialization Agent British Greek Australian Norwegian United States*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parents
All participants 5.67 (2.03) 4.36 (2.93) 5.72 (2.23) 4.67 (2.28) 4.69
Males 5.72 (2.00) 4.85 (2.94) 5.76 (2.18) 4.43 (2.30) 4.88
Females 5.54 (2.14) 3.16 (2.57) 5.66 (2.34) 4.84 (2.26) 4.52
Friends
All participants 5.67 (1.76) 4.47 (2.71) 6.01 (1.80) 4.97 (1.93) 5.47
Males 5.91 (1.69) 4.74 (2.74) 6.24 (1.58) 5.47 (1.89) 6.02
Females 5.01 (1.80) 3.81 (2.52) 5.65 (2.07) 4.62 (1.89) 4.99
Schools
All participants 5.33 (1.77) 4.26 (2.47) 5.52 (1.86) 3.82 (2.12) 5.14
Males 5.36 (1.72) 4.56 (2.46) 5.45 (1.79) 3.59 (1.98) 5.25
Females 5.27 (1.92) 3.55 (2.36) 5.63 (1.99) 3.99 (2.21) 5.04
Community
All participants 3.97 (1.89) 4.28 (2.57) 5.42 (2.00) 5.33 (2.01) 4.08
Males 4.09 (1.86) 4.53 (2.44) 5.65 (1.84) 5.45 (1.94) 4.30
Females 3.66 (1.94) 3.65 (2.78) 5.03 (2.19) 5.25 (2.15) 3.88
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Response options ranged from 1 (the agent had no influence) to 8 (the agent had a great deal
of influence). Standard deviations appear in parentheses next to each mean. *Wann et al. (2001) did
not report standard deviations for the US sample.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 23
Table 4
Percentages of Sport Socialization Agents Listed as Most Influential.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Agent British Greek Australian Norwegian United States
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All M F All M F All M F All M F All M F
Father 49 55 33 39 49 34 45 53 34 30 28 33 35 39 31
Mother 4 2 10 0 0 0 4 1 10 3 0 5 5 3 7
Both parents 2 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 1 0 4
Brother 6 5 8 6 5 6 8 6 11 5 10 0 8 11 5
Sister 2 1 5 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 5 2 1 2
Siblings 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 <1 0 <1
Grandfather <1 1 0 3 4 0 3 2 5 0 0 0 1 2 1
Grandmother 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 <1 <1 <1
Husband 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 2
Uncle 2 3 0 5 6 4 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 2 2
Cousin <1 1 0 2 2 2 1 0 2 1 2 0 1 <1 1
Family total 66 70 61 55 66 46 65 66 64 46 50 50 57 59 56
Friend 8 10 3 23 22 37 7 6 8 13 14 12 9 10 7
Boyfriend <1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 3 4 0 7
Friend total 9 10 5 23 22 37 8 6 10 15 14 15 13 10 14
School 7 4 15 0 0 0 7 5 10 9 6 10 12 8 15
Teacher 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 <1 0 <1
School total 11 6 17 0 0 0 8 5 13 9 6 10 12 8 16
Community <1 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 22 26 19 2 2 2
Mass media 2 3 2 1 <1 1 3 3 2 7 12 3 5 7 4
Coach 2 1 3 2 1 4 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 3 1
Sport team 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Famous player 6 8 4 0 0 0 10 14 5 0 0 0 1 1 <1
Myself 0 0 0 4 3 9 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Numbers are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. <1 = .1% to .4%. Columns do not total
100% due to responses classified as “other” and persons failing to provide a response.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 24
Table 5
Means and Standard Deviations for Sport Fandom (SFQ Scores) and Team Identification (SSIS
Scores).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
British Greek Australian Norwegian
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sport Fandom
All participants 32.53 (6.89) 27.66 (3.96) 32.35 (7.82) 26.32 (N/A)
Males 34.74 (4.80) 30.29 (6.77) 33.58 (6.83) 28.50 (7.40)
Females 26.40 (8.04) 21.75 (9.41) 30.34 (8.90) 24.80 (8.90)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Team Identification
All participants 41.31 (10.50) 36.91 (11.82) 40.31 (8.52) 30.50 (N/A)
Males 44.01 (8.91) 40.203 (10.18) 41.19 (8.05) 33.80 (9.80)
Females 33.90 (11.00) 29.91 (12.21) 38.74 (9.17) 27.20 (10.20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Wann et al. (2001) did not report fandom and identification scores for their United States
sample. N/A = data not available.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 25
Table 6
Frequency Distributions (Percentages) of Frequency of Attending Sporting Events in Person.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Frequency British Greek Australian Norwegian United States
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never
All participants 2 22 2 7 8
Males 1 16 2 6 N/A
Females 5 35 2 9 N/A
Once a year
All participants 5 13 6 3 9
Males 4 9 5 2 N/A
Females 7 23 8 4 N/A
Twice a year
All participants 19 21 12 21 23
Males 17 20 8 14 N/A
Females 28 25 19 27 N/A
Once a month
All participants 19 25 20 30 22
Males 22 33 18 33 N/A
Females 9 8 23 27 N/A
Twice a month
All participants 11 10 18 20 18
Males 12 12 18 15 N/A
Females 6 5 18 24 N/A
Once a week
All participants 19 5 33 14 13
Males 21 7 39 21 N/A
Females 14 2 23 9 N/A
Twice a week
All participants 17 2 7 4 6
Males 14 2 10 8 N/A
Females 25 2 3 1 N/A
About every day
All participants 9 1 3 1 1
Males 9 1 1 2 N/A
Females 9 1 5 0 N/A
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Response options were: 1 = never, 2 = once a year, 3 = twice a year, 4 = once a month, 5 =
twice a month, 6 = once a week, 7 = twice a week, and 8 = just about every day. Percentages for each
item may not sum to 100 due to rounding. N/A = data not available.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 26
Table 7
Frequency Distributions (Percentages) of Frequency of Watching Sport on Television.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Frequency British Greek Australian Norwegian United States
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never
All participants 0 1 0 1 4
Males 0 1 0 0 N/A
Females 0 0 0 1 N/A
Once a year
All participants 0 2 1 0 2
Males 0 0 2 0 N/A
Females 0 8 0 0 N/A
Twice a year
All participants 1 4 1 2 5
Males 0 2 0 2 N/A
Females 3 10 2 3 N/A
Once a month
All participants 4 10 2 8 11
Males 1 4 0 2 N/A
Females 15 22 5 12 N/A
Twice a month
All participants 6 13 2 8 9
Males 3 7 4 9 N/A
Females 13 25 7 8 N/A
Once a week
All participants 23 16 21 26 17
Males 19 14 12 21 N/A
Females 36 20 36 30 N/A
Twice a week
All participants 27 43 42 30 19
Males 27 57 42 32 N/A
Females 25 11 42 19 N/A
About every day
All participants 39 12 30 25 34
Males 51 15 43 34 N/A
Females 8 4 10 17 N/A
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Response options were: 1 = never, 2 = once a year, 3 = twice a year, 4 = once a month, 5 =
twice a month, 6 = once a week, 7 = twice a week, and 8 = just about every day. Percentages for each
item may not sum to 100 due to rounding. N/A = data not available.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 27
Table 8
Frequency Distributions (Percentages) of Frequency of Listening to Sport on the Radio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Frequency British Greek Australian Norwegian United States
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never
All participants 14 22 14 14 29
Males 9 16 14 12 N/A
Females 25 36 13 16 N/A
Once a year
All participants 7 7 4 16 13
Males 6 3 3 17 N/A
Females 10 18 5 16 N/A
Twice a year
All participants 12 8 9 22 15
Males 12 7 7 25 N/A
Females 12 10 13 21 N/A
Once a month
All participants 24 6 15 22 17
Males 26 5 12 19 N/A
Females 19 8 19 24 N/A
Twice a month
All participants 15 9 9 12 10
Males 16 9 6 12 N/A
Females 10 11 13 12 N/A
Once a week
All participants 22 11 32 9 7
Males 25 11 33 12 N/A
Females 16 11 31 0 N/A
Twice a week
All participants 4 30 16 2 5
Males 4 42 22 4 N/A
Females 5 3 7 7 N/A
About every day
All participants 1 6 3 3 4
Males 1 8 4 0 N/A
Females 0 2 0 4 N/A
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Response options were: 1 = never, 2 = once a year, 3 = twice a year, 4 = once a month, 5 =
twice a month, 6 = once a week, 7 = twice a week, and 8 = just about every day. Percentages for each
item may not sum to 100 due to rounding. N/A = data not available.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 28
Table 9
Frequency Distributions (Percentages) of Frequency of Discussing Sport with Friends, Relatives,
and/or Family Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Frequency British Greek Australian Norwegian United States
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never
All participants 0 1 0 1 4
Males 0 1 0 0 N/A
Females 0 1 0 1 N/A
Once a year
All participants 1 5 1 0 4
Males 1 2 0 0 N/A
Females 3 14 2 0 N/A
Twice a year
All participants 0 4 0 1 6
Males 0 2 0 0 N/A
Females 0 8 0 1 N/A
Once a month
All participants 2 5 1 3 10
Males 0 2 0 2 N/A
Females 6 13 2 4 N/A
Twice a month
All participants 2 8 1 5 8
Males 1 7 0 0 N/A
Females 8 11 3 9 N/A
Once a week
All participants 8 7 17 16 17
Males 2 2 13 11 N/A
Females 24 19 24 18 N/A
Twice a week
All participants 17 40 23 24 16
Males 14 49 19 21 N/A
Females 27 20 31 25 N/A
About every day
All participants 71 29 57 51 34
Males 84 35 68 66 N/A
Females 33 16 39 41 N/A
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Response options were: 1 = never, 2 = once a year, 3 = twice a year, 4 = once a month, 5 =
twice a month, 6 = once a week, 7 = twice a week, and 8 = just about every day. Percentages for each
item may not sum to 100 due to rounding. N/A = data not available.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 29
Table 10
Frequency Distributions (Percentages) of Frequency of Using the Internet to Access Sporting
Events/Programming.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Frequency British Australian
---------------------------------------------------------------
Never
All participants 2 10
Males 1 7
Females 3 15
Once a year
All participants 3 3
Males 1 1
Females 9 5
Twice a year
All participants 2 4
Males 1 3
Females 5 5
Once a month
All participants 11 12
Males 7 6
Females 22 21
Twice a month
All participants 6 8
Males 2 6
Females 16 11
Once a week
All participants 16 23
Males 14 21
Females 22 26
Twice a week
All participants 19 17
Males 21 22
Females 15 8
About every day
All participants 42 25
Males 55 35
Females 8 19
---------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Response options were: 1 = never, 2 = once a year, 3 = twice a year, 4 = once a month, 5 =
twice a month, 6 = once a week, 7 = twice a week, and 8 = just about every day. Percentages for each
item may not sum to 100 due to rounding. Wann et al. (2001), Melnick and Wann (2004), and
Theodorakis and Wann (2008) did not request information on Internet use in their research.
SPORT FANDOM IN THE UK 30
Table 11
Rank Order of the Impact of the Four Socialization Agents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample
Socialization Agent British Greek Australian Norwegian United States
All M F All M F All M F All M F All M F
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parents 1 2 1 2 1 4 2 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 3
Friends 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 1 2
Schools 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 2 2 1
Community 4 4 4 3 4 2 4 4 4 1 2 1 4 4 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
