Abstract
In this essay, Arthur Raney reflects on how decades of media scholarship have explored the importance of affective dispositions toward teams and contest outcomes to viewer enjoyment of live televised sport events. The introduction to the essay focuses on personal experiences that shaped his interests in understanding how spectator responses to mediated sport were culturally and psychologically significant. Raney reflects on his studies and collaboration with many of the scholars who were foundational in understanding how the role of affective disposition and enjoyment relates to sport media consumption. Throughout this essay, key themes emerging from empirical studies examining sports media enjoyment are identified. Further consideration is given to how new media technologies might impact sports enjoyment in the future.
My Journey and Why Sport Matters
Donald Clarence Raney grew up in Capito, a coal mining community in southern Kentucky, just west of Cumberland Gap. When he was not tending the store with my grandparents, he and the miner’s kids shot baskets or played baseball with a potato wrapped in electrical tape, both nearly always barefooted. He lettered in basketball, football, and track at nearby Middlesboro High School. As a star linemen, he even went on a recruiting trip to the University of Tennessee; he claimed the coaches only invited him because he was best friends with the real blue-chipper.
The GI Bill allowed my father to study mechanical engineering at the University of Kentucky, where legendary coaches Paul “Bear” Bryant and Adoph Rupp ruled the football field and basketball court, respectively. After graduate degrees from Auburn and Virginia Tech, my father landed in Tuscaloosa as an assistant professor of engineering mechanics at the University of Alabama; 30 years later, he retired as a department chair in the same college. Along the way, he played competitive volleyball and basketball at the YMCA, as well as handball, racquetball, and softball. He coached basketball and track at a local church, checking out training and coaching manuals from the campus library to help him prepare.
He and my mother got season tickets to watch the Bama men play basketball in the same auditorium where a few years earlier the segregationist Governor George Wallace had stood blocking three African American students from entering and enrolling. My parents—and from a very early age, my two brothers and I—watched from the stands as Bear Bryant’s Crimson Tide dominated Southeastern Conference (SEC) football through the late 1960s and 1970s. More than 40 years later, my mother still holds season tickets for Fall Saturdays in Bryant-Denny Stadium as well as for men’s and women’s basketball and softball.
Saturdays and the occasional Sunday afternoons in my youth were filled with, what seemed to be at the time, endless chores in the yard and garden, the soundtrack for which was the famed reverse prognostication show “Leonard’s Losers” followed by whatever game we could pick up on AM radio. I distinctly remember listening to Auburn football games while clearing a yard-wide swath of underbrush and trees around the perimeter of our property; my older brother Don later used this track as a training course ahead of his cross-country seasons. When we were finished with the day’s work, my father, brothers, and I would retire to the couch and doze to the Major League Baseball (MLB) Game of the Week, the NBA on CBS, and ABC’s Wide World of Sports. We rarely fell asleep when football was on.
We watched together as the Big Red Machine won back-to-back World Series titles in the mid-1970s. We saw Dad’s beloved Wildcats triumph in the 1978 NCAA basketball tournament. A few months later, we watched the Crimson Tide’s thrilling Sugar Bowl win that secured another national championship; we watched the following year as they repeated the feat. In February 1980, we watched the Miracle on Ice, and skipped church 2 days later to watch the gold medal match. We saw Bear Bryant coach and win his record-setting 323rd and final game. We watched Bo Jackson receive the Heisman Trophy and Larry Bird outduel Magic and Kareem for the NBA title. When I was in Texas pursuing my master’s degree, my father paid for the 3-hour phone call that allowed me to listen to the Alabama–Auburn football game on radio. When I returned to Tuscaloosa for my PhD, he and I attended most Alabama basketball game; the season I was dissertating, we were joined by my infant son Austin. In his final few years, my father tuned in for every Atlanta Braves telecast; I think the slow pace of baseball was something that he could grasp when Parkinson’s had robbed him of most everything else.
As I reflect on the importance of sports enjoyment and dispositions toward teams and athletes, these are the thoughts that fill my mind. Wann, Melnick, Russell, and Pease (2001) tell us that fathers are the most-cited agents for sports socialization; this is surely true in my case. The memories themselves—the beloved teams and players, bitter rivalries, epic wins, crushing defeats—are great. But I have also become acutely aware of how these experiences helped shape the interpretive lens through which I view sports, my career, and ultimately my life.
In his own life, my father placed great value on family, hard work, faith, education, generosity, loyalty, and tradition. The latter two values are surely reflected in his sports fandom, as there were constants: all things Alabama, Kentucky basketball, Atlanta Braves baseball, and to a lesser degree Virginia Tech and Auburn football. When these games were on, my father and I were usually watching. That is not to say that my father was a sports head. Yes, he was a fan, but no one would have mistaken him for a fanatic. Sports appeared as a role player in the narrative of his life and my childhood, but they never played the lead. They were a diversion: a specific and ritualized diversion, but a diversion nonetheless. Sports were filler, setting, background, or white noise for life’s more important things.
But I also do not want to minimize or overlook the role that sports spectatorship played in his life, in my upbringing, and in the lives of millions of others. It is because of their constancy, their ubiquity, their permanency in our social environment that sports and the media that deliver them matter so much. The emotional ties that bind us to our favorite teams ensure that sports matter a great deal; more on this later.
As I and others have previously noted, sports cut a unique edifice on the media landscape today (Bellamy, 2006; Raney, 2009). Save for a few awards and variety shows, sports are the only regularly scheduled, live entertainment events on television. Because of this they are the true reality television, with the authentic suspense, uncertain outcomes, surprise, and spontaneity that shows bearing that title can only wish for. Further, while sitcoms and dramas are routinely debuted and cancelled within a month’s time or preempted for special events, sports remain consistently periodic and sure-bet programming (lockouts and strikes notwithstanding). When September rolls around, it brings college football with it. April ushers in the MLB season. Saturdays? College football, basketball, MLB, and English Premier League soccer. Sundays? NFL, NBA, NASCAR, and final-round coverage of the PGA. Because of this, sports viewing is routinized, ritualized, scheduled, and anticipated in ways different from other programming.
But most germane to the current discussion, mediated sports matter because of the unparalleled partisanship the teams and athletes engender. Most nonsports media fanship is fleeting at best. Again, television series come and go; movies fascinate us until the next one comes along. Bob Dylan, U2, and Neil Young have cult-like followings, but the fan–artist relationship is quite different from the fan–team, fan–club, or fan–athlete one. And while a handful of people dress as their favorite characters for Comic-Con or Trekkie conventions, sports fans 1 don hats, scarves, sweaters, T-shirts, headbands, sneakers, and endure the pain of tattoos to display their sports loyalties. In many ways, sports teams and their fan bases are timeless, with allegiances passed from one generation to another, literally in cases like mine. As the following section details, these allegiances have served as a focal point in the study of sports media enjoyment.
Focus: On Enjoyment and Disposition
Although many have examined sports media enjoyment from a cultural or reception-studies perspective, the specific domain that I want to discuss is empirical in nature. It grew out of the “media effects” tradition in communication studies in the mid-1970s and has been informed greatly by social, cognitive, and behavioral psychology. In recent years, this research has come to fit into the growing body of scholarship known as “entertainment theory.” The primary question motivating this work has been “How is enjoyment derived from sports media spectatorship?” 2 Because of this, scholars have investigated the in situ experience of viewing live sporting events on television (and to a much lesser degree, listening to them on radio), most often using an experimental methodology in the field or the laboratory. Of course, this primary question leads logically to others related to motivations for and short- and long-term effects of viewing; for recent summaries of this literature, see Raney (2006) and Raney (2009), respectively. But my goal for the next several paragraphs is to identify three major themes emerging from studies that have interrogated the primary question of how we derive enjoyment from viewing live sports.
To accomplish this goal, we must first turn to the seminal works of Jennings Bryant. It is true that other scholars were writing about sports spectatorship from a similar psychological perspective in the late 1970s, notably Lloyd Sloan and Robert Cialdini. However, for communication scholars, Bryant is the pioneer. The research he conducted with his mentor and long-time collaborator Dolf Zillmann, colleague Barry Sapolsky, and students Paul Comisky and Dan Brown in many ways provided the theoretical and operational structure upon which the field has been built. 3 This work first identified the factors at play and the relationships between those factors in the process of enjoying mediated sports; several of the key studies are highlighted below. Much of the scholarship in the area to date has continued to examine these factors and relationships.
Theme 1: Sports Media Enjoyment as a Pleasure-Centric, Emotional Response to Competitors and Outcomes
Questions of enjoyment are not just central to mediated sports studies, but also to the broader field of entertainment theory. In many ways, the work of Bryant and his colleagues serves as the intellectual foundation for both of these areas. Operationally speaking, enjoyment was (and still is) described as an affective response to media stimuli experienced as pleasure perceived through the activation of neurotransmitters in the limbic and sympathetic nervous systems. That is, enjoyment is a pleasurable, emotional reaction to media content; or more simply, we feel enjoyment, and it feels good.
Of course, with sports, you are never guaranteed that the feeling will be pleasurable. The game might be boring. The officiating might unduly affect the outcome. Your favorite team might lose. And even if they do win, you might not experience the roller-coaster ride of a back-and-forth match as pleasure. Nevertheless, the Bryant group primarily examined enjoyment as a postmatch, end-state emotion: either the pleasure that accompanies a win or the disappointment (Zillmann, Bryant, & Sapolsky, 1989) or negative enjoyment (Zillmann & Paulus, 1993) associated with a loss. Ultimately, their early work led to the first, empirically testable propositions about the enjoyment process: the disposition theory of sports spectatorship (Zillmann et al., 1989; Zillmann & Paulus, 1993). According to the theory, the emotional experience of enjoyment is dependent upon the partisanship or affective dispositions that we form toward teams and athletes. Ultimately, enjoyment is a function of the intensity of these emotional investments and the outcomes of the contests themselves.
More specifically, the theory states that the dispositions that we hold fall along a continuum of affect, from intense disliking through indifference to intense liking. These passions hold the key to the enjoyment of sporting contests. Enjoyment increases the more the viewer favors the winning team and/or dislikes the losing team. Conversely, enjoyment decreases (or negative enjoyment increases) the more the winning team is disliked and/or the more the losing team is loved by the viewer. It follows then that maximum enjoyment from viewing sports should be experienced when a most-beloved team defeats a most-hated rival. In contrast, maximum disappointment or negative enjoyment should be experienced when a hated rival defeats your favorite squad. Research support for the disposition theory of sports spectatorship has been found with a variety of televised sports: professional American football (Zillmann et al.,1989), collegiate basketball (Peterson & Raney, 2008), international basketball (Zillmann et al.,1989), women’s international gymnastics (Reichart Smith, 2012), collegiate American football (Raney & Kinnally, 2009), tennis (Tüzünkan, 2007), and professional wrestling (Lachlan & Tamborini, 2008).
Of course, enjoyment of mediated sports is influenced by myriad other factors, some of which are heightened by our dispositions. For instance, scholars find that mediated sporting events can lead to increased levels of physiological arousal, especially when liked teams are involved. Hillman and his colleagues found that devoted fans reported greater arousal from viewing team-relevant photographs, both of winning and losing (Hillmann, Cuthbert, Bradley, & Lang, 2004); these self-reports were consistent with simultaneous physiological observations like smaller startle probe-P3 reflexes, increased positive slow cortical potentials, and greater skin conductance responses. Further, elevated levels of the same testosterone typically associated with sexual arousal were found in saliva samples of male fans following a televised World Cup soccer match featuring bitter rivals (Bernhardt, Dabbs, Fielden, & Lutter, 1998). Unsurprisingly, fans consistently report more positive mood states following favored-team wins (e.g., Schwarz, Strack, Kommer, & Wagner, 1987; Schweitzer, Zillmann, Weaver, & Luttrell, 1992; Sloan, 1979). Thus, the emotional affiliations that we hold toward teams and athletes allow us to feel for and feel with them; it should not be surprising then that empathy is generally considered a key explanatory mechanism within disposition-based theories of media enjoyment (cf. Zillmann, 1991, 1994).
Theme 2: Sports Media Enjoyment as an Emotional Response to Content Features
The nature of the play itself also impacts the emotional experience of enjoyment. For example, the more suspenseful the play—generally, assuming a positive outcome—the greater the enjoyment. Studies have shown that the closeness of the final score (Gan, Tuggle, Mitrook, Coussement, & Zillmann, 1997), cumulative game time that the score is extremely close (Peterson & Raney, 2008), play-by-play commentary about the postseason importance of the game (Bryant, Rockwell, & Owens, 1994), and shifts in viewer affect (Knobloch-Westerwick, David, Eastin, Tamborini, & Greenwood, 2009) all contribute to the experience of suspense during sports viewing, which in turn contributes greatly to enjoyment.
Another content variable that has been shown to impact enjoyment is violent or rough-and-tumble (Bryant, Comisky, & Zillmann, 1981) play. Generally speaking, greater perceptions of violence are associated with more enjoyment (e.g., DeNeui & Sachau, 1996; Goldstein & Arms, 1971; Raney & Depalma, 2006), especially for males. In fact, Bryant, Zillmann, and Raney (1998) found that violence as a content characteristic—as opposed to features like risk, artistry, action—received the highest enjoyment ratings across all sports on television. Moreover, our perceptions of how violent the games are appear to be influenced by the dispositions that we hold toward the participants, with subsequent effects on enjoyment. My colleague Will Kinnally and I (2009) found that television viewers perceived college football games between two bitter rivals to be more violent than nonrivalry games, with games won by the favored team seen as more violent than those lost. Further, viewers perceiving high levels of violence reported greater enjoyment than those who perceived less violence, regardless of the rivalry between the teams.
Television commentary also impacts enjoyment, in particular as it influences perceptions of suspense (as noted above) and aggression between the players and teams. For instance, Owens and Bryant (1998) observed how hometeam radio announcers (or homers) can lead homteam listeners to perceive games to be more suspenseful. Similarly, the Bryant research group demonstrated that they way announcers frame a contest—rather than simply describing the play—can greatly impact a viewer’s experience. In a classic study, the researchers created three versions of a tennis match between players described by the commentators as best friends, bitter enemies, or having no prior relationship. Despite the on-court action being identical across all three conditions, participants viewing the players-as-enemies version enjoyed the match significantly more than participants viewing the other two versions (Bryant, Brown, Comisky, & Zillmann, 1982).
Theme 3: Sports Media Enjoyment as a Function of Fulfilling Cognitive and Social Needs
It is clear that sports media enjoyment is experienced emotionally and that numerous content elements impact it. But it would be naïve to suggest that enjoyment is purely emotional, that it is purely a felt experience. The research record clearly identifies several cognitive factors that contribute to the live entertainment experience. For example, several studies have highlighted the importance of knowledge acquisition in sport viewership (Gantz, 1981, Gantz & Wenner, 1995), be it knowledge about the sports themselves, the leagues, the teams involved, or simply the outcome. This knowledge can be a source of pride and (perhaps moreover) social capital, which motivates such viewing, especially for those who routinely participate in so-called sports encounters (Melnick, 1993). Further, Smith (1988) noted that “a splendid athletic performance rivals any great work of art” (p. 58). Undeniably, many agree as they routinely report finding enjoyment in contemplating the beauty, grace, and extraordinary displays of athletes and of the games themselves.
Finally, fans also report deriving enjoyment from the behavioral aspects of live sports viewing. As social creatures, we seek out unity and cohesion with others, longing to identify with distinctive groups. Team identification (cf. Wann, 1997) is one way we try to meet these needs. Moreover, many find pleasure in sharing that identification with others while coviewing sporting events; in fact, sports are one of the few remaining television contents that we routinely and intentionally view with others (Danielson, 1997, Gantz & Wenner, 1995; Melnick 1993). Other fans report finding joy in the physicality of sports viewing: cheering, high-fiving, touchdown dancing, shouting at the screen, and “letting off steam” (Gantz, 1981). Still others find the act of placing a friendly (or not-so- friendly) wager on the outcome something that adds to their enjoyment.
Looking Ahead for Research on Enjoyment and Dispositions
Given this sizable body of work, you might wonder if this approach to studying sports viewing enjoyment, and the role of affective dispositions therein, has run its course. Perhaps, this would be the case if the sports media world was static. But, of course, it is not nor is the developing field of entertainment theory. Thus, many avenues for future exploration still exist. I will mention just a few.
First, in terms of the changing sports media landscape, the steady stream of new (and improved?) media technologies continually alters the viewing experience. Of course, this reality requires media scholars to (re)examine enjoyment of those experiences. For instance, new television technologies—stereoscopic 3D, Ultra HD television, and so on—promise more realistic image quality and visual precision. We might assume these would lead to increased engagement with, transportation into, and presence with sports content, ultimately leading to greater enjoyment. One initial study suggests that this might indeed be the case for sports on 3D televisions (Raney, Ellis, & Janicke, 2012). Of course, more such studies are needed. Moreover, we should seek to better understand how these technologies further influence the variables noted herein—perceptions of violence, arousal, commentary—as well as others heretofore overlooked in the sports media literature.
Beyond enjoyment of the games themselves, new media technologies and content might well modify the dispositions that we form toward teams and athletes. A few studies have examined the conflict experienced by fantasy sports players when their favorite team plays against members of their fantasy team (e.g., Corrigan, 2007), but many more such studies should follow, especially as fantasy sports participation becomes more frequent (cf. daily leagues) and lucrative. Further, seemingly limitless personal and professional information about athletes is now a Google or Twitter search away; how does it impact our dispositions and with what effect on game enjoyment? The same question can be asked of online forums in which fans can virtually meet up with fellow supporters or heckle rival fans. In general, scholars in the field are encouraged to explore the mediating and moderating role of new media technology in the relationships between dispositions toward athletes and teams and identity, self-presentation, self-esteem, nationalism, regionalism, and any number of other psychological states.
In terms of entertainment theory, the past decade has seen a flurry of intellectual activity examining fictional narratives, most of which has moved beyond the pleasure-centric model of enjoyment to explore issues of cognitive enjoyment (e.g., Krakowiak & Oliver, 2012), appreciation (e.g., Oliver & Bartsch, 2010), eudaimonic motivations (e.g., Oliver & Raney, 2011), intrinsic need satisfaction (Tamborini, Bowman, Eden, Grizzard, & Organ, 2010), morality (Tamborini, 2013), and adaptive play (Vorderer, 2001), to name just a few. These more sophisticated perspectives on enjoyment and the entertainment experience need to be used in the analysis of live sporting events. As an initial attempt to do just this, I have proposed how moral considerations might be explored in sports viewing (Raney, 2011), but many more such attempts need to follow if the field hopes to keep in intellectual lockstep with others. In fact, this same comment applies to the broader field of communication and sport.
At the end of the day, the research record is clear: Our enjoyment of live-mediated sporting events is, and will undoubtedly continue to be, contingent upon many factors. However, our emotion-laden dispositions toward the competitors and the outcomes they experience are absolutely central to the process. As a sports media scholar, I will likely continue to explore the complexity of the enjoyment process, attempting to draw connections between our work and that of other disciplines and to further illuminate the important role of sport in contemporary, global society. And as a sports fan, I will likely continue in my father’s footsteps and cheer every chance I get—with my son Austin by my side—for the Crimson Tide, the Braves, and Kentucky hoops. And, with any luck, he will love it all as much as I.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.