Florida State University Libraries

Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

2007 The Role of Morality and Physical Attractiveness of Athletes on Disposition Formations Firat Tuzunkan

Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected]

THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATION

THE ROLE OF MORALITY AND PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS OF

ATHLETES ON DISPOSITION FORMATIONS

By

FIRAT TUZUNKAN

A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Communication in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2007 The members of the Committee approve the dissertation of Firat Tuzunkan defended on July 20, 2007.

______Arthur A. Raney Professor Directing Dissertation

______Charles Hofacker Outside Committee Member

______Gary Heald Committee Member

______Laura Arpan Committee Member

Approved:

______Steven McDowell, Chair, Department of Communication

______John Mayo, Dean, College of Communication

The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members. ii

For my mom and dad, who made all this possible…

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Probably the biggest lesson I learned throughout my PhD career is that big accomplishments cannot be achieved without the help and support of others. Similarly, this dissertation would not have been possible if it was not for the support of many great people around me. First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Arthur Raney for being such a great professor, mentor, and most importantly a friend throughout the years I have spent at FSU. Every time I came to your office stressed, depressed and lost, I left your office with a smile on my face and full of encouragement. I feel extremely lucky to have known you and to have the opportunity of having you as my committee chair.

Dr. Laura Arpan also deserves a special “thank you” for spending a great deal of time providing me guidance on the methodological and discussion-related issues. Not only a great scholar, you are also a great person who is very encouraging and approachable, so thanks a lot for that. I would also like to thank Dr. Gary Heald whose superior statistics knowledge guided me throughout the whole process. I am always amazed to see how quickly you find errors and inconsistencies in a research paper and that you are always right about them. You give me confidence that if you approve something, it must be right. I extend my appreciation to Dr. Charles Hofacker as well for accepting to be on my committee and for being very responsive and collaborative during the whole process. I also have some very special friends who deserve special recognition. Without their constant support, endurance, and great friendship, I would not be able to finish this program. Beth Bell, I will never forget all your support and friendship, especially the “survival kit” you gave me during my preliminary exams. You are a special friend and I am deeply grateful for everything you’ve done for me. Will Kinnally, you are truly a great person and a great scholar and I already miss all the lunches and discussions we had together. Dr. Jason Smith, my officemate, lunch buddy and close friend, we went through difficult times together, but thanks to your friendship and support, we now both iv made it, buddy. My sincere appreciation also goes to Dr. Kristin Barton for opening his house for me during the last stage of my dissertation, Megan Fitzgerald for being a great friend, and Dr. Xiao Wang for all the statistics and methodology discussions. Finally, with all my heart and most sincere feelings, I want to thank my parents,

Utku and Akman Tüzünkan, who have made all this possible. Mom and Dad, I just don’t know how to thank you enough for your unending love, encouragement, support and always being there for me. Every time I thought of quitting the PhD program, I told myself that I would finish this program for you. And now that I’ve finished it, I hope that you see it as a symbol of a heartfelt “Thank you” for making me who I am today. Also, without my two brothers, Dr. Murat Tüzünkan and Ali Tüzünkan, I would not feel the urge and determination to finish the program.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ...... ix Abstract ...... x 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Problem Statement ...... 2 Significance of the Study ...... 3 Outline of the Study ...... 5

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 7 Explication of Enjoyment ...... 7 Disposition Theories of Enjoyment ...... 11 Overview of Disposition-Based Theories of Enjoyment ...... 11 Disposition Theory of Drama ...... 13 Formation of Dispositions in Drama ...... 14 Role of Empathy in Enjoyment ...... 18 Disposition Theory of Sports Spectatorship ...... 20 Formation of Dispositions in Sports ...... 23 Team Identification ...... 24 Team Identification and Social Identity Theory ...... 24 Antecedents of Team Identification ...... 28 Interpersonal Attraction Theory ...... 32 Physical Attractiveness ...... 33 Person Perception and Implicit Personality Theory ...... 34 Similarity ...... 40 Physical Attractiveness and Similarity ...... 42 Explaining the Similarity Effect ...... 43 Summary ...... 44

3. STUDY 1: MORAL JUDGMENT AND DISPOSITION FORMATION...... 46 Hypotheses ...... 46 Methodology ...... 47 Sample ...... 48 Procedure ...... 48 Pretest...... 49 Stimulus Materials ...... 50 Independent Measures ...... 51 Tennis Fanship ...... 51 Sportsfanship ...... 51 Dependent Measures ...... 52 Enjoyment of the game ...... 52 Disposition toward the athlete ...... 52 Results ...... 53

vi

Random Assignment Check ...... 53 Manipulation Check ...... 53 Research Questions ...... 56 Discussion for Study I ...... 56

4. STUDY 2: THE ROLE OF PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS IN FORMATION OF DISPOSITIONS ...... 58

Hypotheses ...... 58 Methodology ...... 60 Sample ...... 61 Procedure ...... 61 Pretest...... 62 Stimulus Materials ...... 64 Attitudes toward Attractiveness ...... 65 Tennisfanship ...... 66 Sportsfanship ...... 66 Dependent Measures ...... 67 Enjoyment of the Game ...... 67 Disposition toward the Athlete ...... 67 Results ...... 68 Random Assignment Check ...... 68 Manipulation Check ...... 69 Hypotheses ...... 69 Research Questions ...... 71 Discussion for Study II ...... 71

5. STUDY 3: MORAL JUDGMENT, PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS AND DISPOSITION FORMATION ...... 74

Hypotheses and Research Questions ...... 74 Methodology ...... 75 Sample ...... 75 Procedure ...... 75 Stimulus Materials ...... 76 Independent Measures ...... 77 Tennis Fanship ...... 78 Sportsfanship ...... 78 Dependent Measures ...... 78 Enjoyment of the game ...... 78 Disposition toward the athlete ...... 79 Results ...... 80 Random Assignment Check ...... 80 Manipulation Check ...... 80 Research Questions ...... 81 Discussion for Study III ...... 83 vii

6. DISCUSSION ...... 85

Implications for Disposition Theory ...... 8 5 Implications for Team Identification Literature ...... 87 Implications for Interpersonal Attraction Theory ...... 88 Limitations of the Study ...... 90 Recommendations for Future Research ...... 91 Conclusion ...... 92

APPENDIX A: MEDIA GUIDE BOOKLET FOR STUDY 1 ...... 93 APPENDIX B: IRB APPROVAL LETTER ...... 94 APPENDIX C: STUDY 1 SURVEY ...... 95 APPENDIX D: STUDY 1 PRETEST SURVEY ...... 100 APPENDIX E: STUDY 2 ONLINE PRETEST SURVEY...... 102 APPENDIX G: STUDY 3 MEDIA GUIDE BOOKLET ...... 129 APPENDIX H: STUDY 3 SURVEY ...... 130 REFERENCES ...... 135 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 135

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Independent Samples t-Test for Random Assignment Check ...... 54 Table 2: Athletes’ Perceived Morality on a Nine-Point Scale ...... 54 Table 3: Interpersonal Attraction toward Moral and Immoral Player ...... 55 Table 4: Enjoyment of Game in Moral and Immoral Conditions ...... 56 Table 5: The Highest and Lowest Rated Pictures on a Seven-Point Interpersonal Attraction Scale...... 64

Table 6: Independent Samples t-Test for Random Assignment Check ...... 68 Table 7: Interpersonal Attraction toward Attractive and Unattractive Player 69 Table 8: Enjoyment of Game in Attractive and Unattractive Conditions ...... 70 Table 9: Comparison of Enjoyment of the Game in the Attractive –Wins Condition Based on Participants’ Attitudes toward Attractiveness (ATAS) ...... 71

Table 10: Independent Samples t-Test for Random Assignment Check ...... 80 Table 11: Athletes’ Perceived Morality on a Nine-Point Scale ...... 81 Table 12: Interpersonal Attraction toward Moral and Immoral Player ...... 82 Table 13: Enjoyment of Game in Attractive and Unattractive Conditions ...... 83

ix

ABSTRACT

In understanding why people enjoy media content, disposition-based theories of media enjoyment have shown to be practical and helpful guides for researchers (Raney, 2004). In broader terms, this theoretical framework posits that enjoyment of media content is a function of viewers’ affective dispositions toward media characters, and whatever happens to those characters. However, one of the bigger gaps in the theory concerns the formation of dispositions. That is, how we come to like certain characters and why we form dispositions toward them is still a question. Therefore, more factors need to be identified that may induce formation of dispositions. The purpose of this study was to extend the disposition theory by identifying new factors that may induce formation of dispositions in the context of sports spectatorship. In two separate experiments, the study particularly examined the role of morality and physical attractiveness of athletes in formation of dispositions. Study 1 has applied Raney and Bryant’s (2002) Integrated Model of Enjoyment for Crime Drama in the context of sports, and findings suggested that when athletes are concerned, the moral judgment of athletes is a factor in formation of dispositions as well. Utilizing the interpersonal attraction theory, Study 2 tested whether physically attractive athletes have an effect on disposition formations for the spectators. Physical attractiveness was not found to be significant predictor of formation of dispositions. Because of the varied results in the first two studies, the researcher conducted a third study to investigate whether morality and physical attractiveness together stimulate formation of dispositions. The results revealed that morality has an additive effect on physical attractiveness regarding the formation of dispositions. Findings of this dissertation have implications for disposition theory, team identification literature and interpersonal attraction theory. A discussion of these implications is provided, and suggestions for future research are provided.

x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

Since the earliest accounts detected in 4000 B.C. in China, sports have been a major source of entertainment for humans regardless of ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds. From the more than 1,000 year old sport of the Japanese Sumo wrestling to the Roman Empire’s gladiators, and from the birth of the Olympic Games in Greece more than a century ago to the contemporary sports as we know today, individuals have found great enjoyment in sports both as participants and spectators. Prior to the introduction of the electronic media, as Bryant and Raney (2000) suggested, the enjoyment of sports was limited only to the players and those who attended the games. “When compared to the size of the audiences for televised sporting events, relatively few spectators saw these athletes play their games” (p. 156). With the help of improved technologies and the introduction of electronic media, however, sports today reaches millions of spectators and therefore have become undoubtedly more important than ever for both individuals and societies in both financial and cultural terms. One indicator of the economic importance of sports in American society is the amount of money networks and cable stations spend for the broadcasting rights of numerous sporting events. Network stations such as ABC, CBS and Fox paid a total of $17.6 billion to be able to broadcast the NFL games for eight years, and as a cable company, ESPN will spend $8.8 billion for an eight-year deal for

“Monday Night Football” through 2013 (Sports Business Journal, 2006). Furthermore, ABC/ESPN spent $2.4 billion on a six-year deal for the broadcasting rights to NBA games through 2007-2008 season. And, Major League Baseball signed a six-year, $2.5 billion contract with Fox. The magnitude of broadcast rights has a strong implication on how important sports are for the American society. Raney (2003) argues that “From fantasy baseball leagues to office pools on the big game, from Kentucky Derby parties to Super Bowl parties, from casual observers to rabid fans, sports is more thoroughly engrained in our social fabric than ever before (p. 401). Given the enormous popularity of sports, televised sporting events have become “a prominent contemporary social 1 phenomenon” (Bryant & Raney, 2000, p. 159). Stevenson (1974) addressed this issue by asserting, “The obvious enormity and the manifest importance of sport in society compels us to ask the question, ‘Why?’ Why has sport as an element of our society, of our culture, become so pervasive and so visibly central?” (p. 8). In this context, social scientists have been questioning what accounts for the spectators’ enjoyment of televised sporting contests. Bryant and Raney (2000) identified five factors for the spectators’ enjoyment of sports on electronic screens: 1. Viewers’ affective relationships to the players or teams involved in the contest; 2. The favorableness of the outcome of the contest to the spectator; 3. The amount of conflict and drama inherent in the contest or added to the sporting event by the sportscasting or production team; 4. The amount of suspense the contest has and how that suspense is resolved; and 5. The degree of novelty, riskiness, and effectiveness of play (p. 159). Given the context, the present study is centered on the enjoyment of mediated sports. The main question, in this sense, is what impacts the enjoyment of sports. Consistent with the first two factors listed above, Raney (2006) suggested that “one leading explanation of the media-enjoyment process centers on how individuals evaluate and form affiliations with media characters and how enjoyment is impacted by what happens with and to those characters” (p. 137). This explanation of media enjoyment has been framed mainly under the disposition theories of enjoyment. To date, disposition theories have been applied primarily in three areas: humor, drama, and sports spectatorship. Because the focus of this study is to investigate the association between viewers’ affective relationships with the players and the outcome of the contests, the character-based nature of the disposition theory of sports spectatorship seems appropriate to be utilized as the theoretical framework for the present research.

Problem Statement

As with all theories, disposition theory is neither perfect nor complete. One of the bigger gaps in the theory concerns the formation of dispositions. That is, although 2 extensive research supports the notion that enjoyment of mediated sporting contests is a function of witnessing liked teams or players achieve victories and be successful, how we come to like certain teams or players and why we form dispositions toward them is still a question. Previous research has focused a great deal on the effects of positive and negative affective dispositions toward characters and the satisfaction experienced by the audience member when positive or negative outcomes occur for that character (Zillmann & Bryant, 1975). The findings of these studies have provided ample support for the propositions of disposition theory. However, how these positive and negatives dispositions toward characters are formed is still a question. As Raney (2004) points out, “the disposition literature does not seem to actually address how dispositional valence is initially determined” (p. 353). Raney (2003) further suggested that more research is needed to understand how dispositions are formed; and in sports spectatorship terms, researchers should conduct additional research to identify factors that can predict fanship.

Significance of the Study

Given the theoretical context, this study was designed to extend the disposition theory of sports spectatorship by identifying new factors that may induce formation of dispositions. Previous research in this field have looked both at dispositions toward teams and players. Because of the latest free agency trend and the rising importance of individual athlete starship in professional sports (Andrews & Jackson, 2001), the current study is centered on exploring new factors for the formation of dispositions toward individual players. In this sense, the present study specifically examines the role of morality and physical attractiveness of athletes in the formation of dispositions. Why morality and physical attractiveness? In recent times, physical attractiveness and morality of athletes have been a topic of discussion and interest of public discourse, and more importantly, they received substantial amount of coverage in the media. In terms of morality of athletes, numerous incidents have made the headlines in the mainstream media. Most recently, Duke University and its athletic program have been struggling with the men’s lacrosse team’s rape scandal. Also, Los Angeles Lakers’ Kobe Bryant was covered extensively in the media for a sexual 3 assault case. Even though Bryant was not convicted for this alleged assault, his reputation has been severely damaged. As a result, McDonald's, Nutella, and Ferrero SpA cancelled their multi-million dollar endorsement contracts with the player.

Additionally, the sales of Bryant’ replica jersey from NBA merchandisers reduced significantly after the assault case.

Beyond immoral actions off the courts, athletes’ morality on the court has proved to be important as well. As the most recent example, Marcus Vick, the quarterback for Virginia Tech in 2005-2006 season, got dismissed from the Hokies team for intentionally stomping on the leg of Louisville defensive end Elvis Dumervil. Having been in trouble with law several times, the official Virginia Tech statement informed that Vick’s dismissal was “due to a cumulative effect of legal infractions and unsportsmanlike play” (Steger, 2006). Morality of athletes has been such an important aspect of athletes that professional football teams, for example, reportedly pay considerable amount of attention to the morality of the athletes during the drafting season. In this sense, this study will produce significant findings as to whether morality of athletes really has impact on the enjoyment of the games and spectator’s fanship towards a team or an individual athlete. From theoretical perspective, moral judgments of media characters have been widely studied in the field of dramatic presentations within the framework of the disposition theory. The general findings of these studies have shown that the audience members’ moral judgments of characters are a key determinant of enjoyment in both humor and drama. However, studies have yet to examine viewers’ moral judgment of athletes and its effects on enjoyment of sporting events. In this sense, applying the propositions of the disposition theory of drama, the first part of the current study is positioned to expand the disposition literature into the area of identifying and testing how viewers’ moral judgments of athletes’ actions might influence their evaluations of the athlete and enjoyment of the game. In terms of physical attractiveness, the good looks of athletes have received extensive coverage as well. Probably the most prominent example of this phenomenon is Anna Kournikova. Without any major victories on the tennis court, the Russian tennis player still manages to be one of the most photographed athletes in American media,

4 even more than the United States’ Lindsay Davenport who has achieved numerous Grand Slam titles over the years. Only a few would disagree that Kournikova’s popularity in the media is not because of her talent, but her good looks. As Bernstein

(2002) suggests, “the amount and type of coverage she gains does not correlate with the fact that she has yet to win her first major singles’ title” (p. 423). As a result of the extensive coverage, Kournikova signed numerous endorsement contracts with companies such as Adidas and Lycos.com and she was ranked fourth in a 2003 list of the athletes with the richest endorsements. British soccer star David Beckham is another athlete that along with his skills on the pitch, much of his international fame comes from his physical attractiveness.

Most American audiences might not be aware of Brazil’s Ronaldinho who is considered as not so attractive but probably the best soccer player in the world. However, it would not be surprising for the same people to be familiar with David Beckham whose good looks received extensive media coverage and whose name was even featured in a recent Blockbuster movie “Bend it Like Beckham.” Surely, Kournikova and Beckam are not the only examples of how physical attractiveness of athletes receive massive attention from the media. Athletes such as Andy Roddick, Amy Cuff, Maria Sharapova, and Brandy Chastain have all received extra media coverage because of their good looks. In this sense, physical attractiveness of athletes is an important issue in the media. However, while physically attractive athletes receive such attention, empirical studies have yet to examine the influence of the physical attractiveness of athletes on the formation of dispositions toward athletes or teams, and thus on the enjoyment of the sporting events. In this sense, the second part of this study will fill an important gap in sports spectatorship literature as well.

Outline of the Study

As noted above, this study will investigate the influence of two distinct notions on the formation of dispositions toward athletes and the enjoyment of the sporting event. Therefore, the paper was originally organized into a two-study dissertation. While Study 1 was designed to investigate the role of the morality of athletes, Study 2 5 would examine the effect of the physical attractiveness of athletes on the disposition formation and enjoyment. However, because of the mixed results, the researcher decided to conduct a third study in which morality and physical attractiveness of athletes are examined together, making it a three-study dissertation. In this sense, Chapter Two will ground both studies in the related theoretical and methodological foundation. The chapter begins with a discussion of what is meant by enjoyment. Disposition theories of enjoyment are then presented in a detailed fashion. Next, the chapter provides an overview of the team identification literature which helps better understand of the antecedents of becoming identified with a team or an athlete. Finally, the interpersonal attraction theory is reviewed particularly for Study 2 in order to explore the role of physical attractiveness in interpersonal attraction. Chapter Three is dedicated for Study 1 and it starts with the introduction of the hypotheses and research questions. Next, the chapter details the methodology that will be used to test the hypotheses and the research questions. The chapter will then present the results for the study and provide a brief discussion of the findings. Chapter Four is devoted for Study 2 and follows the same format with Chapter Three. Hence, the chapter first introduces the hypotheses and the research questions and describes the methodology that will be used to test these propositions. The chapter will then present the results of the experiment and provide a brief discussion of the findings. Chapter Five is dedicated for Study 3 and again uses the same format with Chapter Three and Four. That is, after introducing the research questions and describing the methodology, the chapter will present the results and provide a brief discussion of the findings. Chapter Six will provide a more extensive and combined discussion of both studies. The chapter will go on to discuss the limitations of the study and end with suggestions for further research.

6

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

Disposition-based theories predict enjoyment of media content (Raney, 2003). Hence, enjoyment is the main focus of the scholars of these theories. Because the present research focuses on the disposition theory, and is therefore specifically concerned with the enjoyment of viewers in different situations, this study would be incomplete without a discussion of what is meant by enjoyment. Moreover, enjoyment has been regarded as a research area of growing importance for communication theory as individuals in modern societies devote remarkable amounts of time to entertainment experiences (Vorderer, 2000). Therefore, it is important to understand the concept of enjoyment. In this context, this chapter will first explicate what is meant by enjoyment. A review of each of the three disposition-based theories of enjoyment, namely disposition theory of humor and mirth, disposition theory of drama, and disposition theory of sports spectatorship, will then be provided. Subsequently, the chapter will focus on disposition formations and discuss how individuals form dispositions toward characters in different forms of media content. Since the present study will explore the impact of physical attractiveness of athletes on enjoyment, the literature on physical attractiveness and interpersonal attraction will also be reviewed.

Explication of Enjoyment

Media enjoyment has been examined by entertainment scholars across a broad range of genres such as violent entertainment, (e.g., Krcmar & Greene, 1999; Slatter, 2003), horror films (e.g., Johnston, 1995), children programs (e.g., Valkenburg & Cantor, 2000), and sports (e.g., Bryant, Comisky, & Zillmann, 1981) generally to imply a positive disposition toward media content. Despite the popularity of the construct in the literature, however, the exact nature of enjoyment, especially enjoyment regarding media entertainment, has yet to be fully and clearly determined (Raney, 2004; Nabi & Krcmar, 2004). Vorderer, Klimmt, and Ritterfeld (2004) identified enjoyment as the core of media entertainment, and suggested that “media entertainment have become so

7 crucial in multiple domains of communication and daily life, we must formalize our understanding of it by using a theoretical framework and basic foundations” (p. 390). Raney (2003) broadly defined enjoyment as the pleasure experienced from consuming media entertainment. Admittedly, the author suggested that this definition adds little to our understanding of what leads to this pleasure, and how and why it differs between media type and content. In this sense, several researchers have attempted to address this shortfall in the media entertainment literature. Zillmann (1988) is among the first to use the term enjoyment in media entertainment studies generally to imply a positive disposition toward media content. Following Zillmann, other researchers (e.g., Oliver, 1993, Zillmann, 1998, Raney, 2003) have also used enjoyment in their studies to indicate individuals’ positive reaction to media experience. More often than not, the term liking is also used interchangeably with enjoyment to indicate positive evaluation of the program content. Nabi and Krcmar

(2004), however, differentiates the two terms by asserting that “whereas liking reflects reaction (cognitive, affective, or both) to a media message, enjoyment can reflect reaction to both the message as well as the fuller media experience, including situational and contextual elements” (p. 290). Other than liking, a range of terms including appreciation (Tamborini & Stiff, 1987), attraction (e.g., Cantor, 1998), and preference (e.g., Weaver, 1991) have been used by scholars synonymously with enjoyment. Nabi and Krcmar (2004) posit that these terms each convey different meanings and that “it is not clear that they capture the experiential nature connoted by enjoyment” (p. 290). Furthermore, the authors suggest that attraction, appreciation, and preference can occur independent of enjoyment. Specifically: [O]ne could enjoy programming to which one is not necessarily attracted (e.g., when attempting to alleviate boredom). Similarly, one could appreciate programming that one does not necessarily enjoy (e.g., well-written, well- conceived story that unfolds too slowly). Similarly, we might prefer period dramas and yet not enjoy a particular program within that genre (p. 290). The authors maintained that using different terms for enjoyment is problematic in the sense that we run the risk of inferring enjoyment when such experience may not have

8 occurred in response to a particular message. Thus, a clear and conclusive definition of enjoyment is needed in order to avoid confusion in future studies. Originally, enjoyment has been viewed merely as an affective response to media watching experience. However, there is increasing support for the notion that enjoyment is more complex than sheer affective response. Nabi and Krcmar (2004) conceived media enjoyment as a three-dimensional construct consisting of affective, cognitive, and behavioral components. Media researchers appear to have a consensus on the existence of the affective component of enjoyment. In earlier studies on disposition theory, Zillmann and Bryant (1975) conceptualized enjoyment as emotional response to characters in a program, and numerous other scholars have often focused on the affective constituent of enjoyment. More recent studies, however, introduced the role of cognition in the media enjoyment experience. Raney and Bryant (2002), for example, suggested that, in case of a crime drama, enjoyment is a function of moral judgment of characters and the justice depicted in the content. Finally, past viewing experiences, behaviors regarding the content, behavioral intentions of the viewer related to the content, and behaviors during viewing have been proposed as behavioral components of enjoyment. In this context, Nabi and Krcmar (2004) inferred that “the cognitive and affective reactions to past viewing associated with enjoyment, which in turn could predict later viewing” (p. 295). Related to this tripartite model of enjoyment, Vorderer and his colleagues (2004) suggested that enjoyment is comprised of physiological, affective and cognitive dimensions. Green, Brock, and Kaufman (2004) positioned media enjoyment within the framework of Green and Brock’s (2000) transportation theory, which attempts to explains media enjoyment through the process of becoming fully engaged in a narrative story. The authors argue that being taken into a narrative world, labeled as transportation, is a key aspect of media experience, because such experience provides escape from the realities of everyday existence. Furthermore, positive content is not always required for enjoyment. Many instances exist in which individuals are entertained by stories that involve sadness, anxiety, and suffering. The authors explain this phenomenon by suggesting that enjoyment is derived from the road that it leads, rather than the resulting sequence. Also, the personal “safety” of a narrative world was

9 associated with the enjoyment of watching characters encountering ordeal. That is, viewers identify themselves with the characters and even share the risks that the characters take in the narrative. If the protagonist survives the risks, viewers see themselves as invincible. However, even if the character is doomed, the viewer is

“safe.” In another attempt to conceptualize enjoyment, Sherry (2004) synthesized uses and gratification literature with Csikszentmihalyi’s (1990) flow theory, and suggested that media enjoyment takes place when the viewer’s cognitive skills match the skills required of the media message. The general pattern of the studies outlined above is that they focus on the content in explicating media enjoyment. Alternatively, drawing on uses and gratifications, social identity, disposition, and uncertainty reduction theories, Denham (2004) suggested that, beyond media content, enjoyment is also associated with social norms and viewing situations. Using televised football as a case study, the author contended that televised content does not exist in a vacuum, rather “multiple social and psychological factors stand to affect the audience experience” (p. 382). In American culture, individuals usually watch football in group situations, in which the presence of others leads individuals to be more expressive that they would we when watching alone. Denham (2004) considers vocalization as a significant part of enjoyment: In homogenous groups who assemble for sporting events, individuals do not face the kinds of repercussions they do elsewhere when it comes to blurting out harsh or at least off-the-cuff statements, and consequently, men who feel somewhat disaffected or reticent in their daily lives ... may find watching televised football in a familiar group milieu a reliable source of enjoyment (p. 372). Additionally, enjoyment of televised sporting contests, the author argued, can arise from different readings of the sports text. The masculine, intense, brutal, and combative nature of televised football, for example, reifies hegemonic masculinity among heterosexual men in the society through visual imagery of physical strength and violence. Therefore, while some people might see football as an opportunity to “poke fun at rigid, hegemonic ideals” (p. 373), homosexual males may perceive the same

10 televised sporting event as a form of mild eroticism. In this sense, it can be argued that enjoyment can be derived from separate readings of the content. The review of the studies explicating enjoyment reveals that enjoyment is a multidimensional construct and is associated with both content-related and context-related related issues. By looking at the influence of morality and the attractiveness of the athletes on enjoyment, the current study concentrates on the content aspect of enjoyment. As noted earlier, disposition-based theories are broadly concerned with the appreciation of media content, thus providing a useful theoretical framework for the study.

Disposition Theories of Enjoyment

Although a theory that can ultimately predict whether an individual will like or dislike a particular program, film, narrative, or character does not exist, disposition-based theories of media enjoyment can serve as useful guides in understanding how and why people enjoy these things (Raney, 2004). In general terms, disposition-based theories suggest that enjoyment of media content is influenced by viewers’ affective dispositions toward the characters depicted, and whatever happens to those characters. The theories posit that enjoyment increases when liked characters experience a positive outcome, and decreases when disliked characters experience positive outcomes. Conversely, enjoyment decreases when liked characters experience a negative outcome, and/or disliked characters experience a positive outcome.

Overview of Disposition-Based Theories of Enjoyment

“Why do we like what we like?” is a question that both content providers and social scientists seek to answer (Raney, 2003). What is it that makes us like certain TV shows, and hate others? Or, what is it about a movie that attracts millions and millions of people to pay and watch that movie, while some other producers almost “beg” people to go and watch their movies? Why do we root for certain teams or athletes, while strongly disliking the other? What are the reasons behind being a die-heart Seminoles fan, for example, and being a “Gator hater?” In other words, what makes us enjoy some media contents and dislike others? These are some of the questions that media

11 entertainment scholars have been attempting to answer. In this sense, communication scholars have long been interested in identifying the elements that would predict enjoyment in media. Among those elements, “none seem to control enjoyment as strongly and as universally as do affective dispositions toward interacting parties, especially parties confronted with problems, conflict, and aversive conditions” (Zillmann & Bryant, 1994). In general terms, affective dispositions are emotional reactions formed toward characters portrayed in media presentations. In this sense, disposition-based theories suggest that the feelings that viewers hold toward the characters portrayed are of utmost importance to enjoyment (Raney, 2004). That is, people appreciate media content that presents a favored character experiencing a positive outcome or a disliked character experiencing a negative outcome. Conversely, people are less likely to appreciate media content that features favored characters experiencing negative outcomes or disliked characters experiencing positive outcomes. Following these principles, we can expect that enjoyment increases the more positive our disposition is toward a character who experiences good fortune, and that enjoyment decreases the more negative our disposition is toward a character who experiences a good outcome. Conversely, viewers’ enjoyment of media content increases the more negative our disposition is toward a character who experiences misfortune, and decreases the more positive our disposition is toward a character who experiences a bad outcome. Raney (2004) argues that viewers’ selection of favored and unfavored characters is not indiscriminant. Instead, our emotional side-taking must be morally justified. So, how do we come to like or dislike characters in media? What guides our affective dispositions toward these characters? In order to better understand the affective disposition formations in dramatic presentations, we need to first map out the historical development of the theory. Disposition Theory of Humor and Mirth The disposition theory of humor focuses on humorous situations that involve disparagement. Developed by Zillmann and Cantor (1972), this theory attempts to explain how people react to jokes that involve disparagement of a particular person or group. The principles of the disposition theory of humor go back to Plato, who asserted that it is humans’ nature to laugh at the misfortunes of others. Similarly, Thomas

12

Hobbes argued that imperfect people laugh at the imperfections of others, because it gives them a better self-confidence and ego. This argument is the basic premise of superiority theory. This theory, however, fails to explain why we usually do not laugh at the imperfections of our family, friends, and loved ones. To resolve this problem, Wolff, Smith & Murray (1934) introduced the idea of group affiliation. The idea is that we laugh at the imperfections or misfortunes of people to whom are not related. We identify ourselves with a certain group because of some shared characteristics. And, if, in a disparaging joke, the inferior person is the one who is affiliated with our own group, we do not find that joke as humorous or enjoyable. Conversely, if the character who we are affiliated with is dominating the other character in a disparaging joke, our enjoyment increases. The problem with group affiliation is that the affiliation with a group is not guaranteed. For instance, a person can be Irish by birth or family tree, but if he lived the rest of his life in the US, he might not find himself affiliated with Irish people. Therefore, researchers introduced the idea of reference groups. In this way, the viewer can identify the reference group(s) that he or she belongs to. However, reference groups require that people be categorized in a dichotomous fashion. A person is either in that reference group or not. Zillmann and Cantor (1972; 1976) perceived the idea of dichotomous grouping as incomplete, and rejected the idea. Instead, they offered the continuum of affective dispositions. In this viewpoint, people form affective dispositions toward a character on a continuum of “extremely positive” to “extremely negative” affiliation. This way, we eliminate the dichotomous affiliations, and allow a more precise measurement of dispositional intensity or magnitude. In fact, the introduction of the continuum of affective dispositions has been regarded as one of the major advances of the disposition-based theories of enjoyment (Raney, 2003). This new approach to affiliation allows a viewer not only to be ambivalent or neutral toward a character, but also “for the introduction of negative responses or disliking, which proves crucial in our understanding of both dramatic and sports appreciation” (p. 79).

Disposition Theory of Drama The tenets of the disposition theory of humor have been applied in enjoyment or 13 appreciation of drama as well. In this sense, viewers’ feelings toward characters are the principal determinant of enjoyment. As with the disposition theory of humor, viewers form affective dispositions towards characters on a continuum of affect from extremely positive to extremely negative. While we like some characters and hope for positive outcomes, we dislike others and hope for negative outcomes. Hence, disposition theory of drama holds that viewers’ affective disposition toward characters and the outcomes experienced by those characters play a leading role in determining the enjoyment of media content. That is, the theory predicts that enjoyment will increase when positive things happen to liked characters, and negative things happen to disliked characters in the end of the narrative. Conversely, enjoyment will decrease when disliked characters experience positive outcome, and liked characters experience negative outcome. So, how do we come to like or dislike characters in media? What guides our affective dispositions toward these characters? The next section highlights what goes into, and explores the process of, forming alliances with media characters.

Formation of Dispositions in Drama

Raney (2006) suggested that “our human nature requires that our selection of favored and unfavored characters not be capricious” (p.140). Instead, our emotional side-taking must be morally justified. With the disposition theory of humor, Zillmann and Cantor (1976) argued that the presence of joke work provides the moral amnesty for deriving enjoyment from the debasement or disparagement of others. That is, individuals do not feel morally wrong for finding amusement in misfortune of others. Freud (1960) explains this by asserting that it is the nature and the presentation of the joke that make such actions morally justifiable. We do not evaluate the moral judgment of the actions of our liked characters very carefully.

Dramatic presentations, on the other hand, do not provide “the guilt-free opportunity to enjoy the misfortune –and benefaction for that matter – of others” (Raney, 2006, p. 140). In other words, finding enjoyment or mirth in somebody else’s misfortune is not as easily excused, or justified in drama. Because it is not socially approved to find pleasure in misfortune of others, the enjoyment of such dramatic presentations is influenced by our moral justification. Zillmann’s disposition theory 14 explains enjoyment of spectacle violence, or crime, based on the endorsement of social norms (Bryant & Miron, 2002). Therefore, viewers must act like “untiring moral monitors” while viewing drama presentations (Zillmann, 2000). From this perspective, disposition theory of drama posits that viewers come to like the characters whose actions we judge as proper, and dislike the characters whose actions we judge as improper. As Zillmann (1991) argues, it is this notion of approval or disapproval of characters’ actions that is the basis for the formation of the affective dispositions held toward those characters. That is, if we judge a character’s action as morally proper, we form a positive affective disposition toward that character. And, if the character’s actions are morally improper for the viewer, a more negative affective disposition is formed toward that character. Once the viewer forms his or her dispositions toward the characters, the enjoyment of the conflict and its resolution in drama is a function of the ultimate outcome for the loved and hated characters (Bryant & Miron, 2002). In other words, we hope for positive outcomes for the characters we like, and negative outcomes for the characters we dislike. In turn, we fear negative outcomes for liked characters, and positive outcomes for disliked characters. Hoping positive outcomes and fearing bad outcomes for liked characters, as well as hoping for negative outcomes and fearing positive outcomes for disliked characters, are known as anticipatory emotions. Based on these anticipatory emotions, we anxiously wait for the resolution outcome, which is what happens to characters at the end of a drama presentation. Producers of drama usually create suspense in these presentations that make viewers wonder if their anticipated outcome will ever occur or not. From this perspective, it can be inferred that our enjoyment increases as the outcome of a presentation is more concordant with our hopes, and it decreases as the outcome of a presentation is more discordant with our hopes. Simply put, our enjoyment should increase when characters we dislike experience misfortune and enjoyment should decrease when characters we like experience misfortune. Conversely, our enjoyment should decrease when disliked characters experiences good fortune, and it should increase when liked characters experience good fortune.

Raney and Bryant (2002) proposed the “integrated model of enjoyment” to explain the process of disposition formation. As noted above, disposition theory, and

15 entertainment theory in broader sense, has focused mainly on the affective reactions of viewers. More specifically, emotional responses of viewers to characters and their influence on enjoyment have been central to the theory. Other than affective responses, however, the role of moral judgments (cognitive reactions) in the entertainment experience received little attention from scholars. In an attempt to address this shortfall, Raney and Bryant (2002) proposed what they call an integrated model of enjoyment (Figure 1), in which they included both affective and cognitive reactions of viewers. With this theory, the authors introduced the notion of the justice sequence. The authors defined the justice sequence as “a series of events that portray the committing of a crime and the ultimate consequences experienced by the offender” (p. 404). According to this approach, the justice sequence begins with an “instigational action” where a character commits a crime against other character(s), labeled as injustice. The following scenes in the sequence show the originally harmed character(s) attempting to right the injustice, identified as retributional actions. Presentations of instigational and retributional actions complete the justice sequence. In this model, the key factor for predicting enjoyment is the judgment of justice, which is the process of evaluating the justice sequence. According to this conceptualization:

“The viewer (on some level of consciousness) compares his or her notion of proper justice to the one presented in the drama through the justice sequence. Therefore, the process of ascribing enjoyment to a crime drama is

dependent upon the relative degree of correspondence between the viewer’s sense of justice and the statement about justice made in the drama” (Raney & Bryant, 2002, p. 407). Along with judgment of justice, the judgment of characters (which is the main focus of disposition theory) is recognized as a factor of enjoyment. In this sense, the integrated theory of enjoyment posits that enjoyment of media drama is a function of these two judgments of characters and justice. In an attempt to test the proposed model, Raney and Bryant (2002) showed an 8-minute clip to participants, in which an arrogant

16

Figure 1: Raney and Bryant’s (2002) Integrated Model of Enjoyment for Crime Drama

collegiate basketball star attacks his well-liked coach, after the player is suspended from the team for a vulgar act. The clip also featured that the coach was treated for minor injuries, and the player was wounded during a wrestle with a security guard. The video ended showing that the player was sentenced to two years in prison. After the exposure to the video, the participants filled out a survey rating their enjoyment of the presentation, the level of sympathy they had for the victim, and how much the villain deserved the punishment. Findings provided support for the integrated theory of enjoyment, in that both the judgment-of-characters and the judgments-of-justice were found to be predictors of enjoyment. In a different study to better understand the relationship between factors involved in moral judgment of entertainment and the enjoyment of crime drama, Raney (2002) showed a clip that included crime punishment to the respondents. The clip varied in the type of crime presented. The findings of the study provided further support to disposition theory and integrated model of crime-drama enjoyment, in that enjoyment was found to be influenced by moral judgment. 17

In a more recent attempt to examine how individuals form dispositions, Raney

(2004) argued that viewers’ affective dispositions toward characters in media content are sometimes formed rather quickly, without any moral judgments. This viewpoint holds that humans are cognitive misers and that we form dispositions toward characters based on personal schemas and attributes. In mass media research terms, schemas are knowledge structures built on stereotypes and past experiences that influence how individuals interpret media messages. Consuming different types of media content helps viewers develop “story schemas or scripts.” In this context, Raney (2004) asserted: Through repeated exposure, we learn how similar stories are constructed, how typical actions relate to one another, how scenes and settings are constructed, and how themes are repeated, among other things. Over time, a viewer develops various schema structures that are activated when a subsequent media text is encountered. These structures then guide expectations about and interpretation of the ongoing narrative and the characters involved (pp. 353-354).

Role of Empathy in Enjoyment

It was already mentioned that viewers’ emotional responses are functions of their affective reactions to entertaining communications. Zillmann and Cantor (1977) argued that these emotional responses are based on an empathic process. In an attempt to explicate the concept of empathy, Zillmann (1991) reviewed the various conceptualizations of empathy and integrated them as follows: Empathy is defined as any experience that is a response (a) to information about circumstances presumed to cause acute emotions in another individual and/or (b) to the bodily, facial, paralinguistic, and linguistic expression of emotional experiences by another individual and/or (c) to another individual’s actions that are presumed to be precipitated by acute emotional experiences, this response being (d) associated with an appreciable increase in excitation and (e) construed by respondents as feeling with or feeling for another individual. Simply put, the empathic process is that the viewer, as a result of witnessing the emotional state of another person, comes to “share” that emotional state (Zillmann & Cantor, 1977). That is, we share the emotions of happiness and sadness with the 18 people we consider as close friends. The authors maintained that the notion of empathy yields obvious predictions of viewers’ affective responses. By whatever means empathy is held to develop, empathic reactions lead to the prediction that the viewer should experience affective responses similar to those expressed by the protagonist, independently of the type of behavior the protagonist performs initially (p. 156). Zillmann (1991) suggested that affective dispositions toward persons or their personalities basically determine empathy. Specifically, while positive affective dispositions toward characters generate empathic reactions, negative dispositions damage, prevent, or hedonically reverse these reactions (i.e., counter empathy). The extent to which viewers form empathy or counterempathy is a function of how positive or negative the initial affective disposition was toward a character. That is, as viewers form stronger positive affect, they will have more intense empathic reaction. Conversely, the stronger the negative sentiment they form toward the character, the more intense the counterempathic reaction they will have. This approach assumes that viewers observe the behaviors of characters and judge them as appropriate and good, or inappropriate and bad. In fact, this monitoring is what initiate s the affective dispositions we form toward those characters. Findings of numerous studies have supported this proposed chain of events. Zillmann and Cantor (1977), for example, conducted a study in which second and third grade boys and girls were exposed to specially-produced films. The films featured a protagonist who was portrayed either as a pleasant and helpful character or as an obnoxious and hostile one. The authors, then, examined the respondents’ affective reactions in facial expressions and in interviews. The findings showed the character was perceived either as benevolent or as malevolent in accordance with the manipulation. Moreover, the respondents came to like the nice character, and dislike the mean one. These findings provide support for the proposed statement that affective dispositions toward a person are formed on the basis of this approval or disapproval. In line with this research, Zillmann (1994) concluded that affective dispositions toward protagonists and antagonists virtually determine whether or not an empathic or counterempathic response occurs. Researchers have consistently found that empathy is a key factor for enjoyment

19 of drama. In a study to better understand the relationship between factors involved in moral judgment of entertainment and the enjoyment of crime drama, Raney (2002) found that the higher the levels of empathy viewers form for characters, the more likely viewers sympathize with the victim in a crime situation. Consequently, viewers with higher sympathy toward the victim were found to be more likely to enjoy the presentation, in which the crime is punished. Following these results, the author concluded that empathy is a response that comes only after viewers form their dispositions toward characters.

Disposition Theory of Sports Spectatorship As mentioned in the previous chapter, sports and sport contests are hugely popular in our world today. It is obvious that people find enjoyment in watching sport events. The enjoyment of watching sport contests, however, is not a simple function of excellence in motor and/or strategic skills displayed by the athletes (Zillmann, Bryant, & Sapolsky, 1989). Furthermore, Sapolsky (1980) maintained that sports spectators do not habitually enjoy the great performances by athletes or teams. Instead, people cheer and enjoy great plays if they are exhibited by their favored athletes or teams only. On the other hand, fans appreciate and enjoy the same great displays of skills and excellence much less, and possibly deplore, when they are exhibited by disliked athletes or teams. Raney (2003) stated that “virtually all of us have players and teams that we love and players and teams that we hate; that is the very nature of sports fanship” (p. 402). We cheer for the athletes or teams that we like, and hope to see them win a victory over the opposing team. Conversely, we hope to see the disliked athletes and teams get defeated. The indicated dynamics are those of the disposition theory of mirth and drama. Therefore, the basic premises of the disposition theory can be, and have been, applied to sports spectatorship as well. The disposition theory of sports spectatorship, then, applies the basic premises of disposition theories to sports content. The disposition theory of drama asserts that “loss of value inflicted upon our enemies and gain of value obtained by our friends is appreciated, and that gain of value obtained by our enemies and loss of value inflicted upon our friends is deplored” (Zillmann & Cantor, 1976, p. 113). Applying these attributes to the context of sports spectatorship, Zillmann, 20

Bryant, and Sapolsky (1989) offered two main propositions: 1. Enjoyment derived from witnessing the success and victory of a competing party increases with positive sentiments and decreases with negative sentiments toward that party. 2. Enjoyment derived from witnessing the failure and defeat of a competing party increases with negative sentiments and decreases with positive sentiments toward that party (p. 257). Following these propositions, it can be assumed that maximum enjoyment can be achieved when an intensely liked athlete or player defeats an intensely disliked athlete or team. On the contrary, we can expect minimal enjoyment from watching an intensely disliked athlete or team defeat an intensely liked athlete or team. It follows that watching games between similarly liked or similarly disliked players or teams will produce intermediate level of enjoyment (Zillmann & Paulus, 1993). Various investigations have consistently supported the disposition theory of sports spectatorship. Zillmann, Bryant, and Sapolsky (1989) conducted one of the earlier studies that tested the basic premises of the disposition theory of sports spectatorship. The authors examined whether dispositions toward competing teams influence the enjoyment of watching a contest between those two teams. The authors conducted the study in the context of NFL, and utilized Minnesota Vikings and the St.

Louis Cardinals as the teams of interest. The participants’ affective dispositions toward these two teams were measured and categorized into three levels of liking: positive, neutral, and negative. In the next stage of the study, the participants watched a contest between these two teams which was broadcast live on TV. During the exposure, the researchers measured participant’s enjoyment of every play and of the overall contest. The game was won by the Vikings, therefore, the researchers predicted that people with positive dispositions toward the Vikings would enjoy the game more than those who had positive dispositions toward the Cardinals. It was further hypothesized that the enjoyment would be even greater for those who really liked the Vikings and disliked the Cardinals. Extending from these propositions, it was also predicted that the enjoyment of watching the game for the people who liked the Cardinals and hated the Vikings would be minimal. All of the findings of the study were as expected, showing

21 support for the theory.

In a study of men’s high school basketball game, which provided further support for the theory, Sapolsky (1980) examined the relationship between player attributes and spectators’ enjoyment of a sports event. In the study, the researcher investigated race and its influence on affiliation with teams. Black and White college students watched a video of a high-school basketball game between an all-Black team and an all-White team. The video was manipulated to create conditions in which either the White team or the Black team won. It was expected that White students would form affiliations with the all-White team, and the Black students would form affiliations with the all-Black team, on the basis of the only obtrusive, prominent characteristics available, which was race. As mentioned earlier, the theory suggests that people who have positive affiliations toward a team or player, will want to see that team or player succeed, therefore increasing enjoyment. As expected, participants reported greater enjoyment when the outcome favored those who shared the same racial attributes. Moreover, Black participants enjoyed the plays by Black players significantly more than did the White spectators. However, the White spectators expressed no greater enjoyment of plays by White players than did the Black spectators. The study highlights the importance of considering how personal attributes affect an individual’s disposition toward an athlete or team. Additional support for the disposition theory of sports spectatorship came from an investigation of Olympic Basketball (Zillmann et al., 1989). Participants in the study watched a portion of the championship game of the 1976 Olympics between the United States and Yugoslavia and rated each play. As predicted, plays in which the Yugoslavian national team scored were not enjoyed; whereas, participants showed considerably higher enjoyment of plays that produced baskets for the American team. In fact, female participants even reported mild disappointment when Yugoslavia scored. Further findings of the study reveal even stronger support for the theory. The research took place at Indiana University, and two players on the American team were very popular and well-liked athletes, especially for being members of the 1976 NCAA Basketball Championship Team of Indiana University. Because participants had intensely favorable dispositions toward these athletes, the disposition theory would

22 predict that more enjoyment would be reported. Again, as predicted, baskets scored by either one of these athletes produced even more intense enjoyment among the participants. This investigation revealed significant findings that “further enhances our understanding of the sensitive nature of disposition in helping determine spectators’ enjoyment of carious dimensions of sports contests” (Bryant & Raney, 2000). The aforementioned studies show resemblance in the sense that they focus on the sporting event itself, and reaction to its dramatic nature and the outcome. Another group of studies in disposition theory of sports spectatorship consider the mediated aspect of a sports event, such as color commentary, and examine the individuals’ affective reactions and enjoyment. Owens and Bryant (1998) studied the effects of the home team announcer and color commentary on the enjoyment of a televised high school football game. The findings provided support for the disposition theory in that students from the home school enjoyed the game more than other respondents, when the game was called by the homer announcer. Bryant, Brown, Comisky, and Zillmann (1982) demonstrated that watching sporting contests in which the opponents are described as bitter enemies, rather than as good friends or neutral opponents, creates the greatest enjoyment for spectators. Consistently, Bryant, Comisky, and Zillmann (1977) exhibited that commentators make use of numerous dramatic statements, highlights actual or potential conflicts in order to increase enjoyment. In a more recent study, Bryant and

Raney (2000) observed that today’s media are no different, and asserted that “television seems to constantly push the ‘bitter conflict’ button” (p. 164). The authors suggested that the purpose of such “hype” is to instigate viewers to perceive the sporting contests as high drama. As outlined in Bryant and Raney’s study, Cheska (1902/1981) noted that “the elements of drama – participants, ritual, plot, production, symbolism, social message- are all brilliantly choreographed in the sports spectacular” (p. 376). In this context, Bryant and Raney concluded that dramatizing the sports context evidently helps to bring entertainment value into sports contest by converting important plays of great magnitude into high drama.

Formation of Dispositions in Sports

As noted earlier, in drama, viewers’ moral evaluations of the actions of the 23 characters are significant determinants of formation of dispositions toward those characters. It was also stated that disposition theory of sports spectatorship applies the same premises of the disposition theory of drama. Thus, the characters in mediated sports must play a significant role in forming dispositions among viewers. The question is, then, what are the characters in sports? Are they the teams playing against each other, or are they the athletes? The literature suggests that fanship allegiance with a team or player both governs formation of dispositions. So, what triggers dispositions toward the teams or the athletes? The team identification literature, though in a different discipline, seems to offer some possible explanations for allegiances with teams. Therefore, the team identification literature is reviewed in detail in the next few sections.

Team Identification

Previous literature has identified possible motives for individuals who find watching sport contests enjoyable. These motives include “benefits associated with self-esteem, an escape from everyday life, entertainment, economic factors, aesthetic or artistic qualities, group affiliation and family needs” (Jacobson, 2003). However, questions such as why individuals choose to support one team over another, and how this affiliation forms, have received little attention from researchers. Instead, the current literature focuses mainly on the consequences of team identification, and therefore does not sufficiently address the creation of identification (Jacobson, 2003). In this context, the purpose of this study is to explore and examine possible explanations of how these affiliations initially form. Sport fan affiliations with teams are largely discussed in the team identification literature. The present study focuses on tennis which is an individual sport. Therefore, it might seem, at glance, that team identification is not a useful construct for this project. However, the term is also used to describe a fan’s loyalty to a specific player as well (e.g., Rinehart, 1998; Wann, 1997). In this sense, the team identification literature does provide a useful framework for the purposes of the present study as well.

Team Identification and Social Identity Theory

24

A clear understanding of the term team identification is necessary before moving into the detailed discussion of the construct. Scholars have proposed numerous definitions for the team identification construct. Madrigal (2000) defined team identification as “an individual’s level of psychological attachment to or concern about a sports team” (p. 15). Asforth and Mael (1989) categorized team identification as “the spectators’ perceived connectedness to a team and the experience of the team’s failings and achievements as one’s own.” Additionally, Sutton, McDonald, Milne, and Cimperman (1997) conceptualized the construct as personal commitment and emotional involvement spectators have with a sport organization. Dimmock, Grove, and Eklund (2005) argued that most research in the literature categorized the team identification construct as a unidimensional construct. However, the authors suggested that team identification is a multidimensional construct, which includes cognitive – “Knowledge of membership to a group”, affective – “Emotional significance of group membership”, and evaluative – “Value of group membership” – dimensions. Surely, the psychological connection that individuals have with sport teams varies depending on each person. In this sense, Wann and his associates (2001) provided a useful comparison between fans with low level of team identification and fans with high level of team identification:

“For fans with a low level of team identification, the role of team follower is merely peripheral component of their self-concept. As a result, these persons

tend to exhibit only mild reactions to the team’s performances. However, for fans with a high level of team identification, the role of team follower is a central

component of their identity” (p. 4). Fans with high levels of team identification will readily present themselves as a fan of their team to others (Wann, Royalty, & Roberts, 2000). Furthermore, social identification theory, the team becomes an extension of the individual, because of the individual’s close association with a team (Smith & Henry, 1996). In such cases, Wann, Melnick, Russell, and Pease (2001) argue, the team’s successes become the fan’s successes and the teams’ failures become the fan’s failures. Owning the team’s successes and failures were also reflected in the 1999 NCAA men’s basketball championship tournament, when the games were marketed with the slogan, “When it

25 happens to my team, it happens to me” (Wann et al., 2001, p. 4). Team identification is a specific form of social identification that reflects a fan’s psychological connection to a team (Wann, 1997). In fact, As Wann (2006) argues, scholars’ definitions of team identification have been primarily influenced by the social identity theory. To better understand team identification, then, it is necessary to be familiar with social identity theory as well. Social identity theory refers to “the way in which individuals and collectives are distinguished in their social relations with other individuals or collectives” (Jenkins, 1996, p. 4). Derived from the symbolic interaction tradition, social identity theory examines the relationships between self, role, and society (Stryker, 1980). The theory suggests that our identity is shaped in part by our memberships and affiliations to various social groups (Hogg & Abrams, 1988; Tajfel &

Turner, 1979; Turner, 1988). Based on Festinger’s (1954) social comparison theory, social identity theory maintains that individuals will strive to attach themselves to other individuals who are similar or slightly better. The underlying reason for such tendency is that individuals are motivated to have a positive social identity (Hinkley, Marsh, & McInerney, 2002). In other words, people try to associate themselves with others who are known to be successful (Snyder et al., 1986). Applied to the field of sports and spectatorship, this provides a basis for the findings of Cialdini and his associates’ (1976) study. In an attempt to examine the strength of identification with a sports team, the authors found that fans associate themselves more with a successful team – known as “basking-in reflected-glory” or BIRGing – in order to enhance their psychological wellbeing. Researchers have also identified that in case of a preferred team’s loss or poor performance in a game, individuals disassociate themselves from that team - known as “cutting-off-reflected failure” or CORFing, this time in order to protect their psychological wellbeing. In the study, the experimenters examined the amount of college students who wore school apparel. The findings revealed that the proportion of the students who wore school apparel increased after a win by their school’s football team and decreased following a loss. In the second experiment of the study, the authors interviewed students via telephone and asked them to describe their school’s recent game. It was found that students were more likely to use the pronoun “we” to describe a recent win, and “they’ to describe a recent defeat.

26

Kimble and Cooper (1992) gave buttons of favorite football teams to viewers who were watching the two teams play against each other. Consistent with the BIRGing and CORFing phenomenon, it was observed that the fans of the winning team, compared to the fans of losing team, were more likely to wear the team buttons after the game. Furthermore, it was noted that the fans of the winning team were more likely to sign their names under the preferred team’s name. Moreover, Madrigal (1995), for example, found that highly identified fans of college women’s basketball teams were more likely to BIRG. Additionally, Mahoney, Howard, and Madrigal (2000) found that spectators were more likely to associate themselves with, and be fans of, winning teams. Similar findings were suggested in other studies as well (e.g., Snyder, Lassegard, & Ford, 1986; Wann et. al., 1995; Cialdini et. al., 1999). Team identification has been associated with numerous other affective and behavioral responses as well. Recently, social scientists have demonstrated strong empirical support for the influence of team identification on spectator behavior and emotions. The construct has already been associated with several types of behaviors. In terms of behavioral responses, Sutton, McDonald, Milne, and Cimperman (1997) found that individuals with higher level of fan identification are more likely to attend sport events. Dimmock and Grove (2005) found that highly identified fans would feel less control over their aggressive behaviors at games than lowly identified fans.

Similar to Dimmock and Grove’s study, Wann and his colleagues (2005) also found that, in the case of a loss by their team, highly identified fans are more likely to report a willingness to commit violent acts. Team identification has also been associated with several emotions and psychological health constructs. Introducing the team identification-psychological health model, Wann (2002) suggested that identification with a local sport team is related to psychological well-being. In a study of cognitive and somatic anxiety, Wann, Schrader, and Adamson (1998) found that highly identified spectators would report higher levels of anxiety than lowly identified spectators, and that spectators would be able to accurately recall their anxiety several days after an athletic event. Parallel with the disposition theory of sportsfanship, the team identification literature also suggests that fans with higher level of identification with a team are more likely to report greater

27 enjoyment when their team experiences victory over an opponent (e.g., Madrigal, 1995, 2003; Bernthal & Graham, 2003; Stets & Burke, 2000; Wann & Branscombe, 1990, 1992). In this sense, team identification construct provides a supporting framework for the present study as well. Although consequences of team identification have received much attention from researchers, scholars have paid comparatively little attention to how team identifications are created. Consequently, the current team identification literature does not adequately address how these identifications with teams actually form. The BIRGing and CORFing phenomenon indeed provides an understanding of what goes into being identified with a team or a player. Surely, however, there are more factors influencing an individual’s identification with a team. The next section, therefore, discusses the other causes of team identification.

Antecedents of Team Identification Wann (2006) argued that tracing down the causes and factors of team identification is a challenging task for researchers, simply because of so many potential antecedents. Wann, Tucker, and Schrader’s (1996) study illustrates the abundance of these antecedents in their study, in which they asked 91 sports fans to explain the reasons for being fans of their favorite teams. Responses of the participants suggested a wide variety of factors that were grouped into 42 distinct categories to influence identification with teams. The striking finding was that over 90 percent of the reasons were listed by fewer than 10 percent of the participants. The lack of significant overlap in the reported antecedents insinuates the difficulty of mapping out the common causes of team identification. Nevertheless, several studies have outlined some of the factors that influence one’s identification with a team. Wann (2006) categorized these factors into three main types of antecedents: psychological, environmental, and team-related. Psychological factors. Wann (2006) identified three kinds of psychological factors with team identification. First is people’s need for social belongingness and affiliation. As outlined in Mael and Ashforth (2001), Beisser (1967) suggested: Everyone needs to feel he has ties with others. With the dispersal of the traditional extended family, the clan and the tribe, this need to be identified with a group of some kind has become more intense. The sports fan ... can gather 28

with others, don his Dodger cap or some other identification badge, and ... in effect, by doing all this, he becomes a member of a larger, stronger family group, a collective entity (p. 129). Moreover, in their exploratory study, Wann, Tucker, and Schrader (1996) found that the opportunity for affiliation with others was a common antecedent for team identification among individuals. Similarly, Sutton, McDonald, and Cimperman (1997) suggested that community affiliation is among the most important causes of team identification. That is, individuals want to feel united and be in cohesion with others around them. In a more recent study, Gwinner & Swanson (2003) asserted that “the more contact a person has with an organization, the more likely that person is to define himself or herself as a member” (p. 278). That is, the more associations individuals have with a school, for example, the more likely that they will consider themselves as members of that particular school. Students and alumni for example can easily identify themselves as members of their school. Second, individuals desire to be part of distinct groups. Social identity theory suggests that individuals often would like to view their group different from other groups. Wann & Branscombe (1995), for example, asked the fans of University of Kansas Men’s basketball team to characterize the fans of this team and the fans of their greatest rivals. The results indicated that the fans of their team are categorically different than from the supporters of other teams. The desire to be distinct can sometimes be so strong that, being distinct can be more desirable than having a positive image (Mlicki & Ellemers, 1996). And third, Wann (2006) suggested that “identification with a sport team can assist in the maintenance of a positive image and, consequently, assist in one’s attempt to deal with his or her mortality” (p. 335). Derived from terror management theory, Dechesne, Greenberg, Arndt, Schimel (2000) examined whether increased concerns about mortality would increase individuals’ optimism about and identification with a favorite sports team. The results confirmed the expectations and suggested that “optimism about and identifications with successful sports team are, at least in part, motivated by the need to reduce concerns about mortality” (pp. 829-830).

29

Environmental factors. Danielson (1997) argued that sport spectatorship is a social process. Furthermore, Wann and his associates (2001) suggested that the socialization process plays a significant role in why individuals become sports fans. In this sense, numerous researchers found the socialization process to be influential in identification with a sports team. The common finding is that identification with a team is increased with the frequency of interaction with socialization agents such as parents, peers and friends, schools and community. Kolbe and James (2003) examined the internalization process that leads to team identification, and found that close relationships with friends foster identification with a team. Furthermore, parents and family have also been found to bolster individuals’ affinity with teams (Greenwood, 2001; Wann et al., 1996). James (2001) detected that especially fathers were the most influential socializing agent introducing children to sports teams. Living or having lived near a team is also a factor of team identification. Wann argued (2006) that identifying with a team that is geographically close to an individual is partly because of the socialization opportunity. The author asserted that “Living in close geographical proximity to the team leads to increased opportunities for socialization to occur ... it provides a greater opportunity to develop a sense of unity with other fans” (p. 335). Researchers have identified other environmental factors as well. Such factors include direct contact with a player (e.g., autograph sessions) (Kagan, 1958) and fans’ pride in the team’s stadium (Underwood et al., 2001). Team-related factors. The third set of causes for team identification involves team related factors. Wann (2006) categorizes these antecedents into three sub- groups: organizational characteristics, team performance, and player attributes. Organizational characteristics relate generally to the off-the-field image of the team. Underwood and his associates (2001) suggested that history and tradition is a fundamental characteristic of identity of many brands, and that “Historical associations serve to heighten our sense of identity and emotional involvement with a team or event” (p. 6). Consistent with social identity theory, team identification is also related to the

30 performance of the team in that being identified with a successful team can increase one’s prestige. Indeed, the exploratory study of Wann, Tucker, and Schrader (1996) on the factors influencing team identification suggested that the success of the team plays a significant role in origination of identification with a team. In a methodologically-more-sound study, Fink, Trail, and Anderson (2002) examined the motives behind team identification. The researchers detected that vicarious achievement of the teams, among other variables, contributed most to the variance of team identification. Wann, Roberts, and Tindall (1999) also examined the effect of team success on identification and found that participants preferred successful teams over unsuccessful ones, and that the success of the teams boosts individuals’ self-esteem. The findings of the studies are also consistent with, and an extension of, the BIRGing and CORFing phenomenon discussed in the previous section. Finally, as Wann and his associates (1996) argued, player attributes can be an important factor for team identification. To date, among other attributes, player similarity to the fan and player attractiveness have been consistently found to facilitate identification with a team. Ashforth and Mael (1989) suggested that similarity with group members may influence the extent to which individuals identify with a group. Additionally, as the authors acknowledged, identification with a group follows a similar process with identification with a person. The similarity effect in the context of interpersonal attraction is discussed in detail later in this chapter. Therefore, the particular section will provide a better understanding of the role of player similarity to the fan in team identification. As far as player attractiveness is concerned, it should be noted that player attractiveness in this context does not refer to physical attractiveness of an athlete, but an athlete who possesses desirable or pleasing qualities. For example, an athlete who is known for being religious can be attractive for religious fans. In fact, Kinnally, Tuzunkan, Fitzgerald, and Smith (2004) examined how an athlete's expression of religious affiliation in a news article might affect the reader’s evaluations of the athlete and the article, and the researchers found that individuals with higher levels of religiosity reported significantly better evaluations of both the athlete and the article. Furthermore, Fisher and Wakefield (1998) investigated the factors leading to group identification and found that group member attractiveness has a significant effect on

31 group identification. The authors further detected that the effect of group member attractiveness on team identification is even stronger for the fans of unsuccessful teams. The influence of personal attributes on team identification is closely related to the focus of the present study as well. By examining the role of morality and attractiveness of athletes in disposition formation, the present study will serve the team identification literature as well by providing a better understanding of how morality and attractiveness of athletes, as personal attributes, affect fans’ identification with a team or a specific player. The role of personal attributes in attracting others is widely discussed in the interpersonal attraction literature. The next section, therefore, reviews this literature.

Interpersonal Attraction Theory

Why we are attracted to some individuals but not to others is one of the most persistent questions in the field of social psychology (Klohnen & Luo, 2003). Over the past few decades, scholars have conducted numerous studies to identify the factors that influence people’s attraction to others. Why is it important to study interpersonal attraction? AhYun (2002) identified two primary reasons why interpersonal attraction has received such attention from scholars over the years: First, interpersonal attraction is positively related to the extent to which people communicate with others. Consequently, interpersonal attraction is one antecedent to predict communication partners that people have. Second, interpersonal attraction is positively related to the amount of influence that others have on us in interpersonal exchanges. As such, interpersonally attractive others can potentially play an influential role in our behaviors. Given the significance of interpersonal attraction in our lives, research concerning this variable is important (p. 147). A review of this literature reveals a number of variables associated with attraction. To date, proximity, similarity or difference on various dimensions, physical attractiveness, cooperativeness, exposure, fear, intelligence, and other variables too numerous to mention do, under specified circumstances, enhance one’s attraction to another (Crano 32

& Messé, 1982). Studies of interpersonal attraction, however, have concluded that physical attractiveness, attitude similarity, and proximity are among the main indicators of one’s attraction to another. This phenomenon has been studied most widely within the framework of interpersonal attraction paradigm (Byrne, 1961). Of the three main indicators of interpersonal attraction, physical attractiveness will be explained in detail in the next section of this chapter, given that this study will be examining the role of the physical attractiveness of athletes on enjoyment of mediated sporting contests. Although the similarity effect is not the primary focus of the present research, attitude similarity literature might provide a useful theoretical framework in understanding how similarities between morality of the athletes and the morality of the fans, as discussed in the disposition theory, influence media enjoyment. Thus, the similarity effect will also be discussed in detail in a separate section of this chapter. Proximity, however, though an important antecedent of interpersonal attraction, does not seem to be appropriate for this study, therefore will not be discussed in the present study.

Physical Attractiveness I cannot say often enough how much I consider beauty a powerful and advantageous quality. Socrates call it “A short tyranny,” and Plato, “The privilege of nature.” We have no quality that surpasses it in credit. It holds the first place in human relations; it presents itself before the rest, seduces and prepossesses our judgment with great authority and a wondrous impression. - Montaigne, Essays (quoted in Langlois et. al., 2000)

For centuries, beauty of people has interested poets, painters, artists, and philosophers (Langlois et. al., 2000). And within the last century, social scientists have shown a great deal of interest in this physical attractiveness phenomenon. To date, an ample amount of research has been conducted to test the relationship between physical attractiveness and positive traits. Many researchers (e.g., Kleck & Rubenstein, 1975) have argued that facial information is usually the first cue available to the observer. Maruyama and Miller

(1981) suggested that “since people tend to see others as integrated and consistent units, rather than as collections of situation-specific behaviors, a potent and

33 immediately evident basis for an evaluation, such as physical appearance, should intrude into and affect any overall and subsequent evaluation” (p. 204). Furthermore, Bull & Rumsey (1988) argued: [M]any societies have changed, and are changing, in the sense that people are becoming increasingly mobile in terms both of employment and of home. This has resulted in an increased incidence of people coming into contact with unknown others for the first time. This provides less time for individuals to get to know those persons to whom they have to respond. Therefore, it may well be the case that they have to rely on the available, limited information such as facial appearance (p. 1-2). From communications perspective, because physical appearance is the first and most obvious element people observe on other people in almost all communication instances, a thorough understanding of physical attractiveness is crucial. To date, a great deal of research has focused on the relationship between physical attractiveness and interpersonal attraction. The general finding of abundant studies in this field is that physical attractiveness is a powerful predictor of interpersonal attraction (Horton, 2003). Moreover, the effects of physical attractiveness in our society have been argued to be universal for both males and females. Patzer (1985), for example, contended that as the physical attractiveness of both males and females increases, perceptions of social desirability increases regardless of gender.

Person Perception and Implicit Personality Theory As Patzer (1985) stated, physical attractiveness is firmly established in the person perception literature. Taruiri (1954) defined person perception as the process by which a person perceives and thinks about other persons, their characteristics, their qualities, and their internal traits. Specifically, person perception holds that people draw inferences from their observations of other people. In this sense, physical attractiveness sends a powerful nonverbal message and contributes to the creation of first impressions (Ritts, Patterson, & Tubbs, 1992). Therefore, physical attractiveness is an important factor especially in the early stages of relationships. In general, people are more likely to interact with people who they find physically attractive. 34

Implicit Personality Theory (IPT) is a person perception construct and was introduced by Bruner and Tagiuri (1954). It denotes the notion that individuals have their own theory of what people are like. Wegner and Vallacher (1977) suggested that people do not see an individual as a set of unrelated cues. Instead, “people typically see other people as having personalities, entire sets of enduring dispositional or physical qualities that determine many of their behaviors” (p. 89). In this sense, IPT is a theory that attempts to explain how the attributes of a person are related to each other. Ashmore (1981) argues that IPT is related to stereotypes, which he defines as “the structured sets of beliefs about the personal attributes of women and of men” (p. 38). Similarly, Hastorf, Schneider, and Polefka (1970) contend that implicit personality theories are basically the stereotypes we hold about other people. In a review of sex stereotypes and IPT, Ashmore (1981) identifies four features of the implicit personality theory: First, “implicit personality theory” is a hypothetical construct. Second, “implicit personality theory” denotes a cognitive structure. Third, implicit theories of personality contain elements (i.e., attributes of personality) and relations (i.e., inferential relations between these elements). Finally, the naïve personologist is often not aware of his or her “theory of personality,” and most individuals are seldom required to elaborate full their “theories.” Drawn from these four characteristics, Ashmore (1981) defined implicit personality theory as “hypothetical cognitive structure, often held nonconsciously, that comprises the attributes of personality that an individual believes others to possess and the set of expected relations (i.e, inferential relations) between these attributes” (p. 40). Studies in this field suggest that physical attractiveness operates as an important attribute in our implicit theories of personality and impression formation (e.g., Wegner & Vallacher, 1977; Bar-Tal & Saxe, 1976). Specifically, implicit personality theory holds that physically attractive people are implicitly associated with a particular set of personality traits (Eagly, Makhijani, Ashmore, & Longo, 1991). The authors contend that these associations are caused by direct observations and cultural representations (such as media portrayals) of attractive and unattractive individuals. In

35 a review of physical attractiveness stereotype, Eagly, Makhijani, Ashmore, and Longo (1991) concluded that attractive individuals are rated more positively on social traits, such as popularity, social skills, and social confidence. In an earlier study, Miller (1970) investigated whether attractiveness levels are perceptually related to certain psychological traits. Both male and female participants rated 400 photographs on a nine-point scale of physical attractiveness. The respondents were also asked to rate the photographed persons on the Adjective Preference Scale. The results of the study indicated that unattractive individuals were associated with the negative end of the semantic differential scale, and the attractive individuals were associated with the positive side of the scale. For example, attractive individuals were judged to be happy rather than sad, active rather than passive, humorous rather than serious, confident rather than unsure, and amiable rather than aloof. The author concluded that an individual’s physical attractiveness induces a consistent set of assumptions and expectations by “a process of trait inference” (p. 241). Miller (1970) also found that physically attractive people were evaluated as curious rather than indifferent, complex rather than simple, perceptive, rather than insensitive, happy rather than sad, active rather than passive, amiable rather than aloof, humorous rather than serious, and pleasure-seeking rather than rigid. Berscheid, Walster and Bohrnstedt (1973) revealed that people believed that those who are physically attractive were happier, had better sex lives, and received more respect from others. Attractive people were also associated with glamour (Bassili, 1981). That is, attractive people were seen as having greater excitement, greater emotional stability, and a more active and exciting social life. Nielsen and Kernaleguen (1976) measured 30 college students’ perceptions of pictured females. Results indicated that facial attractiveness is a significant factor in the perception of physical attraction of social and professional happiness and social desirability. Furthermore, Dushenko, Perry, Scihlling, and Smolarski (1978) found that attractive individuals were associated significantly more with being exciting and poised. Beyond attribution of personality traits to attractive people, the existing literature also indicates that physical appearance of others influences individuals’ social judgment and evaluation outcomes in variety of settings as well. The

36 interpersonal realities of physical attractiveness phenomenon have been investigated by social researchers in different disciplines, from psychology to business, from education to legal issues, and many more. The following is a brief overview of studies from different disciplines that investigate the physical attractiveness phenomenon. In terms of dating and dating partners, numerous studies also found that, compared to less attractive people, highly physically attractive people are better liked and more preferred as dating partners (e.g., Brislin & Lewis, 1968; Kleck & Rubenstein, 1975). Stephan and Langlois (1984) detected that even parents had a clear bias in favor of their physically attractive babies. In a different context, McCall (1997) found that attractive people were less likely to get carded when buying alcohol. Literature on professional environments, specifically employee selection and employment interviews (see Dunnette & Borman (1979) for an extensive review) also suggests that physical attractiveness of employees and of job applicants influence judgments and evaluations of the employers. Dipboye, Arvey, and Terpstra (1977) found, in a job interview setting, that attractive candidates were preferred over unattractive candidates. In a more recent study, DeGroot and Motowidlo (1999) concluded that physical attractiveness, among other variables, influenced interviewers’ judgments, and performance ratings. In another meta-analysis on the effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes, Hosoda, Stone-Romero, and Coats (2003) conclude that attractive professionals are evaluated better than less attractive professionals. Studies investigating physical attractiveness in educational settings exist as well (see Ritts, Patterson, & Tubbs (1992) for a review). People often argue that physically more attractive people are treated better by those in authority. In fact, research in this field provides support for this view. Clifford and Walster (1973) conducted a study and showed elementary school teachers pictures of “attractive” and “unattractive” students which were all described as a B student. The study revealed that compared to unattractive children, teachers rated physically attractive children as more intelligent, having higher academic potentials, and having parents with a higher interest in education. Other research (e.g., DeMeis & Turner, 1978; Brophy & Evertson, 1981) also supports the notion that teachers expect physically attractive

37 students to be more intelligent and to have higher academic potentials. As with physical attractiveness of students, college professors’ physical attractiveness levels influences students’ evaluations as well. Romano and Bordieri (1989) examined the effect of physical attractiveness of college professors on students and found that attractive professors were seen as better teachers. Attractive professors were also found to be more likely to be asked for additional assistance, and more likely to be recommended to other students. Moreover, compared to unattractive colleagues, they are less likely to be blamed if a student received a failing grade for a course. In the field of psychology, Hansson and Duffield (1976) asked 100 nonprofessional participants to identify an epileptic person from a group of stimulus people. The findings revealed that a person of lower physical attractiveness was identified as the epileptic by the majority of the respondents (83 percent of the male participants, and 69 percent of the female participants). Cash, Kehr, Polyson, and Freeman (1977) found that maladjusted stimulus persons who were high in physical attractiveness were attributed more favorable personal characteristics. Jones, Hansson, Phillips (1978) also found similar results to Cash, Kehr, Polyson, and Freeman (1977). Studies have demonstrated that good looks of people have impact even on legal cases. Sigall and Ostrove (1975) varied the attractiveness of a crime defendant and the nature of the crime (attractiveness-related and attractiveness-unrelated). Participants were then asked to sentence the defendant in terms of imprisonment. In case of the attractiveness-unrelated crime, burglary, participants assigned more moderate sentences to the attractive defendant than to the unattractive defendant. In case of the attractiveness-related crime, swindle, the attractive defendant received more severe punishment. Vrij and Firmin (2001) examined victims’ and defendants’ attractiveness in a fictitious rape case. As hypothesized, observers of the case were more favorable towards attractive victims and defendants, compared to unattractive counterparts. The findings of these two studies have implications for the disposition theory as well. Based on the findings, it can be argued that when viewing media content, moral judgments of viewers might be influenced by the physical attractiveness of the media characters. That is, a viewer may find a crime committed by an attractive person, or an immoral

38 behavior, more acceptable or tolerable. Consequently, forming dispositions toward the attractive characters are facilitated by the good looks of the characters. Surely, the impact of others’ physical attractiveness on social judgments and evaluation outcomes are not limited to aforementioned fields. Studies in other areas have consistently produced similar results. As can be inferred from the studies mentioned above, physical attractiveness of people has strong influence on our impressions, opinions, and evaluations. Individuals form comprehensive ideas, assumptions and expectations about others based merely on his/her attractiveness level. In a review of the attractiveness literature, Patzer (1985) suggested four general findings based on the research in the field physical attractiveness and interpersonal attraction: 1. Greater social power is experienced by those of higher as opposed to lower physical attractiveness. 2. All other things being equal, individuals of higher physical attractiveness are better liked than those of lower physical attractiveness. 3. People of higher physical attractiveness are assumed to posses more positive and favorable characteristics than their counterparts of lower physical attractiveness. 4. Those higher in physical attractiveness have different effects on others and receive different responses from others than those lower in physical attractiveness (p. 42). In sum, the literature strongly suggests that physically attractive persons are consistently judged more favorably in initial interactions across different disciplines. Dion, Bescheid, & Walster (1972) referred this notion of positive bias toward attractive individuals as the “what-is-good-is-beautiful” phenomenon. Although the impact of physical attractiveness has been applied to numerous fields, studies have yet to investigate the influence of the physical attractiveness of the athletes on the formation of dispositions, and thus the enjoyment, of the spectators. In this sense, the present study will extend the attractiveness literature and combine it with the disposition literature by examining if, and how, viewers of sporting games react to the attractiveness of the athletes.

39

Similarity As noted earlier, scholars have long been studying the factors that influence people’s attraction to each other. Of all the variables that have been found to induce attraction, the association between similarity and attraction has received probably the most attention in social psychology literature (Condon & Crano, 1988; Horton, 2003). The basic premise of the similarity-attraction paradigm is that people are attracted more to the individuals with whom they share similar attitudes and characteristics.

th The roots of similarity-attraction paradigm go back to as early as the 4 century BC. As outlined in AhYun’s (2002) meta-analysis of the literature, Aristotle (trans., 1932) suggested that friends consider the same things as good and evil. Derived from Aristotle’s similarity principle, researchers have been empirically testing this proposition for almost a century. Byrne and Nelson (1965) found the first empirical evidence of a relationship between similar attitudes and interpersonal attraction. In a study where the authors asked research participants to read an attitude scale supposedly filled out by an anonymous bogus stranger and to evaluate him in terms of attraction, along with other variables, the researchers suggested a positive linear relationship between the proportion of similar attitudes and attraction. They argued that the greater the attitudinal similarity between two people, the greater the attraction between them. Byrne and Nelson went further to suggest this linear association as the law of attraction, which maintains that “attraction toward X is a positive linear function of the proportion of positive reinforcements received from X” (p. 662). The proposed law-like relationship has generated numerous studies across a variety of populations and numerous manipulations of similarity that have established similarity as a factor of interpersonal communication. Most of the research in this field, though, has been framed primarily in terms of similarity of attitudes, values, and beliefs. (e.g., Berscheid, 1985). Byrne (1971) conducted a study in which he asked participants to complete a questionnaire on their personal characteristics. The participants were then exposed to fictitious descriptions of a variety of different people and asked how they felt towards them. Results indicated that participants were attracted more to those with similar characteristics. In an earlier study with school children, Byrne and Griffitt (1966)

40 investigated attitude similarity and found that even in face-to-face interaction, attitude similarity, along with personal evaluation, affects interpersonal attraction. Bond, Byrne, and Diamond (1968) gave 139 students either occupational, attitudinal, or both types of information about a stranger; and rated their attractiveness toward the bogus stranger. It was found that while either type of information influence attraction alone, when the two types are combined, only attitude similarity induced attraction. Moreover, Touhey (1974) examined the attitude similarity-interpersonal attraction paradigm from situated identity theory (Alexander & Knight, 1971) perspective, and the results still correctly simulated the propositions of the similarity-attraction paradigm. De Wolfe and Jackson (1984) scrutinized moral reasoning and similarity of attitudes as factors of interpersonal attraction. Students were categorized depending on their level of moral reasoning and attitudes toward capital punishment. Students were then asked to evaluate strangers who had purportedly written essays about capital punishment. The results revealed that students who read essays similar to their own moral reasoning and attitudes toward capital punishment, reported more positive evaluations of the sources. This study is of particular importance in the sense that the findings support the main propositions of the disposition theory as well. As noted earlier, Raney & Bryant (2002) suggested in their integrated model of enjoyment for crime drama that viewers compare their perception of moral values and proper justice to the nature of the crime and the justice displayed in the media presentation. Consequently, the enjoyment of the presentation is associated with the similarity between the viewers’ moral reasoning and the one represented in the media content. As part of the attempts to test the similarity-attraction paradigm, scholars have produced numerous studies examining husband and wife similarities. Researchers’

th interest in similarities between spouses dates back to Galton’s (1870) late 19 century study. As outlined in Byrne (1971), Galton (reprinted 1952) posits, “[the findings] establish the existence of a tendency of [like to like] among intellectual men and women, and make it most probable, that the marriages of illustrious men with

[equivalent] women... are very common” (p.315). One of the early American studies in this field was Schiller’s (1932) research,

41 in which he found that, married couples, compared to random couples, are relatively homogeneous in age, education, weight, occupation, socioeconomic status, and opinions on current topics. As an extension to Schiller’s study, Newcomb and Svehla (1937) measured approximately 200 spouses’ attitudes toward church, war, and Communism. The results revealed correlations of .76, .43, and .58 on the three topics. Murstein and Beck (1972) conducted a study on married couples and investigated the effect of similarity on marital adjustment. They predicted that similarity would be correlated with marital adjustment. The study with 60 married couples supported their hypothesis. Russell and Wells (1991) also found similar results, suggesting that personality similarity between spouses is predictive of good marriage.

Physical Attractiveness and Similarity Beyond similarity in attitudes, similarity in physical attractiveness was also found to be positively correlated with attraction. As an extension to the studies with married couples as well, Stevens, Owens, and Schaefer (1990) found a great deal of similarity between spouses’ levels of physical attractiveness, suggesting that attractive people tend to have attractive spouses. Peterson and Miller (1980) achieved similar results in older American couples as well. In a two-year study of dating relationships among college students, Hill, Rubin, and Peplau (1976) detected that unequal level of physical attractiveness was a determinant of breakups before marriage. Berscheid, Dion, Walster, and Walster (1971) asked undergraduates to report which person they would choose to date from a list of pictured bogus strangers. The results point out that individuals chose to date whose physical attractiveness level is similar to their own. Correspondingly, White (1980) examined relative physical attractiveness of couples in various stages of relationship, and concluded that similarity of attractiveness was predictive of courtship progress. In fact, in a later study, romantic partners in actual relationships were found to be similar in their level of physical attractiveness (Feingold, 1988). Beyond cross-gender dating and romantic relationships, Cash and Derlega (1978) also observed that attractiveness levels of same-sexed close friends are more similar than would be expected by chance as well. (White, 1980) 42

The similarity-attraction effect, pioneered by Byrne and his associates, was found in other various areas of research as well. Abrami and Mizener (1983) for example, investigated attitude similarity of college professors and their students, and its effect on course evaluations. The results indicated that similarity of attitudes relevant to higher education was related to teacher ratings, while similarity of attitudes of irrelevant attitudes did not have any effect on teacher ratings. Despite numerous studies supporting the similarity-attraction paradigm, there are also studies in which the similarity effect was found to be either weaker or nonexistent. Several studies (e.g., Byrne, London, Griffitt, 1968; Horton & Montoya, 2004) found that similarity effect is weaker for peripheral attitudes compared to central attitudes. Montoya, Horton, and Kirchner (2004) also found that the similarity effect is weaker for personality traits than it is for attitudes. In a review of the similarity-attraction relationship, Sunnafrank (1992) contended that much of the similarity effect has been found in laboratory studies. The author argued that the similarity effect is weaker in field studies. Additionally, no effect for similarity-attraction was found for negative traits (Ajzen, 1974; Novak & Lerner, 1968).

Explaining the Similarity Effect Theoretical explanations for the effect of similarity on attraction and liking have centered on “the motivational processes that underlie people’s involvement in relationships” (Amodio & Showers, 2005, p. 818). One explanation of attitude similarity and attraction has been proposed by Byrne and Clore (1967, 1970). The researchers suggested that another person who holds similar attitudes is reinforcing for individuals. That is, the target’s similar attitudes provide a consensual validation for the legitimacy of our own attitudes and beliefs. This consensual validation satisfies individuals’ basic need for a consistent, logical, and correct interpretation of the environment, which helps “to function effectively in understanding and predicting events” (Byrne & Clore, 1970, p. 118). Authors identified this occurrence as the effectance motive. The effectance motive also holds that in the case of dissimilar others, there would be no consensual validation of one’s attitudes and beliefs, and this would cause uncertainty and inconsistency in respect of the self. Hence, similar people make us feel good, while

43 dissimilar people make us feel bad. Interpersonal attraction, then, is a function of these affective dispositions. Even though the effectance motive explanation of the similarity effect is considered “the most widely accepted and empirically developed treatment of the similarity-attraction relation” (Condon & Crano, 1988), several criticisms do exist against this explanation. Montoya and Horton (2004), for example, argued that effectance motive does not adequately explain the inconsistent results in the similarity effect. More specifically, the authors posit: According to the reinforcement-affect model, similarity on negative qualities should satisfy the effectance motive just as effectively as does similarity on positive qualities and thus should lead to attraction. However, similarity to another on negative qualities does not lead to attraction (e.g. Ajzen, 1974; Novak & Lerner, 1968) (p. 697). In fact, more recent studies in the attraction literature have centered on the ideal self as opposed to the actual self. LaPrelle, Hoyle, Insko, and Bernthal (1990) argued that the ideal self is the main determinant of interpersonal attraction. Specifically, “people are attracted to others who emulate the person they want to be rather than the person they actually are” (Herbst, Gaertner, & Insko, 2003, p. 1206). LaPrelle, Hoyle, Insko, and Bernthal (1990) measured individuals’ descriptions of actual self, ideal self, and the descriptions of participants’ liked and not-liked peers using numerous trait scales. The results demonstrated that the relationship between ideal similarity and liking is stronger than the relationship between actual self similarity and liking. In another study, Wetzel and Insko (1982) also found that ideal similarity had main effect on liking, not similarity to the self. Similarly, Herbst, Gaertner, & Insko (2003) maintained that “similarity to ideal self does not invariantly increase attraction but elicits opposing reaction to the ideal other” (p. 1215). Researchers also detected that while attraction increased as the partner became more similar to the participant’s ideal self, the attraction decreased as the partner surpassed the participants’ ideal self.

Summary

44

This study is an attempt to expand our knowledge on why we enjoy mediated sports. Therefore, this chapter starts with a discussion of what is meant by enjoyment. Of the previously identified factors for the enjoyment of sports on the media, this study focuses on the role of viewers’ affective responses to the players and desirableness of the outcome of the contests. The association between viewers’ evaluations of athletes and the outcome of the contests is best explained in the disposition-based theories of enjoyment. Therefore, the chapter subsequently reviews the disposition theory in detail. This study is centered specifically on identifying new factors that influence viewers’ dispositions toward athletes. In this sense, the review of the disposition theory includes in-depth overview of formation of dispositions as well, and demonstrates how moral evaluation of media characters is a key determinant of disposition formations and thus enjoyment of the media content. Outlining the role of moral evaluation on the formation of dispositions is directly related to the nature of the first study, in which the effect of viewers’ moral evaluations of athletes on disposition formations will be tested. Study 2 examines how the physical attractiveness of athletes influences the dispositions toward these athletes. The role of physical attractiveness in attracting others is widely discussed in the interpersonal attraction literature. Therefore, the chapter provides a review of this literature as well. In addition to physical attractiveness, the literature suggests that people are attracted more to the individuals with whom they share similar attitudes and characteristics. The disposition theory proposes that the enjoyment of media content is associated with the similarity between the viewers’ moral reasoning and the one represented in the media content. Therefore, the literature on the similarity effect is also reviewed because of its relation to the disposition theory and to the first study.

45

CHAPTER III STUDY 1: MORAL JUDGMENT AND DISPOSITION FORMATION

Hypotheses

As noted above, this study attempts to expand disposition theory by testing whether, and if so how, the morality of athletes and the outcome of the game influence individuals’ evaluations of the athlete and the sports media content. The review of disposition theory in Chapter 2 reveals that unlike humor, viewers’ enjoyment of non-humorous and dramatic presentations, which include maltreatment of others, requires moral justification. In other words, “viewers must constantly justify the moral propriety of their emotional side taking” (Raney, 2003). In this sense, Zillmann (2000) asserted that viewers must continually evaluate the rightness or the wrongness of a character’s actions. Accordingly, in dramatic presentations, viewers come to like characters whose actions are judged as proper or morally acceptable, whereas they dislike characters whose actions are judged as improper or morally unacceptable. From this perspective, we would expect that participants will form positive dispositions toward the moral player, and negative dispositions toward the immoral player. Therefore: H1: Participants will report higher levels of interpersonal attraction toward the moral player, compared to the immoral player. Disposition theory goes on to suggest that, as a result of forming dispositions toward the characters, viewers hope for good outcomes for the characters they like, and negative outcomes for the characters they dislike. Therefore, our enjoyment of the media presentation is a function of the outcomes associated with our anticipatory feelings toward those characters. That is, we enjoy media presentations more if the characters we like experience good outcomes, and less if the characters we like experience bad outcomes. Even though this proposition is offered for dramatic presentations, as Raney (2003) suggests, drama is inherent in every aspect of sports as well. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that feelings toward athletes, expectations for those athletes, and the enjoyment associated with the outcomes those athletes experience will occur 46 in a different way. Viewing athletes as characters in dramatic presentations, then, we would expect that viewers will form positive dispositions toward athletes whose actions they judge as proper and negative dispositions toward athletes whose actions they judge as improper. Consequently, viewers would hope that the athletes with proper moral values win over the athletes with improper moral values. Therefore: H2: Compared to participants who watch a tennis match won by an immoral player, participants who watch a tennis match won by a moral player will report higher scores on enjoyment of the game. The first stage of this study focuses only on the content of the stimulus materials, and compares participants’ evaluations of the video and the athletes. In the second stage, the focus will be extended to examine affective reactions to the content as a function of individual characteristics, namely sportsfanship and fanship of tennis. Under normal circumstances, we would expect that those with higher levels of sportsfanship and tennis fanship would enjoy the game more than those with lower levels of sports and tennis fanship. Because the morality of the players are modified in the stimulus materials, this study sought to examine whether morality of the players have influence on sports fans’ and tennis fans’ evaluations of the game and the athlete. Previous research does not provide sufficient information about how morality of athletes might influence sports and tennis fans’ evaluation of the game and the athlete. Therefore, the following research questions are introduced: RQ1: Will general sports fans enjoy the game more than those who scored lower on being sports fans in general? RQ2: Will tennis fans enjoy the game more than those who scored lower on being a tennis fan?

Methodology

Groups of male and female undergraduate students first read brief (approximately 100-200 words) summaries about two collegiate tennis players. The information for each player included a brief overview of who they are and their past victories and achievements in tennis, followed by comments about their personality (APPENDIX A). The information sheet portrayed one of the athletes as moral, and the 47 other one as immoral. After reading the information sheet, participants watched one of the two versions of a video tape that featured the two tennis players competing for a championship game. In the first experimental group, the player who was depicted as

“immoral” won the game, while in the second group, the “moral” player achieved the victory. Following the exposure to the video, the students rated their enjoyment of the game, and their dispositions toward each athlete. The survey also included measures to elicit participants’ attitudes toward the sport of tennis and their level of sportsfanship.

Sample

The participants were 121 undergraduate students enrolled in communication courses at the Florida State University. Less than two-thirds (63.6%) of the respondents were female. The ethnic structure of the sample was 68.6% Caucasian, 15.7% African American, 14.9% Hispanic/Latino, and .8% were Asian. The average age of the sample was 21.11 (SD = 2.85). Participants for this study were recruited from introductory and intermediate courses in the Department of Communication at The Florida State University. Convenience sampling was employed for recruiting participants. Specifically, the instructors of large classes in the two departments were asked to recruit participants for the experiment in their classes as an extra credit opportunity for their students. While participants were selected using a convenience sampling, the individuals were randomly assigned to each experiment group.

Procedure

For this study, the researcher told the participants that they would be watching a video tape featuring a tennis game and that they would be completing a survey about their enjoyment of the video. The researcher also informed the participants about the content of the video. Specifically, participants were told that they would be watching a collegiate-level tennis match, in which the players were competing to be able to represent the United States in Universiade 2007 in Bangkok, Thailand. Universiade is

48 essentially an international multi-sport event and is known as the Olympics of college athletes. The researcher also told the participants that before watching the game, they should have more information about who were actually competing to represent the United States in Universiade 2007. For this purpose, the researcher handed out an information sheet which included fictitious background information and some comments that portrayed the athletes as moral or immoral. The information sheet was presented as “Announcer Notes” from the media guide booklet (APPENDIX A) prepared for this match in order to increase the credibility of the information. No pictures of the athletes were provided in order to eliminate any bias toward the physical attractiveness of the athletes. Also, both athletes were presented as being from the state of Washington. The purpose for this was that since most of the participants of the study were from Florida, a distant state would minimize any presumption or bias toward the players’ hometowns. After reading and signing the IRB-approved consent form (APPENDIX B), the students spent about 5 minutes reading the “Announcer Notes” and viewed the 8minute video afterwards. Following the exposure to the video, the students completed a survey (APPENDIX C). Details about the questionnaire will be discussed in the “Dependent Measures” subsection.

Pretest In order to determine how to portray the athletes as moral or immoral in the

“Announcer Notes” from the fictitious media guide booklet, a pretest was conducted with a different sample to determine what kind of actions and behaviors would make a collegiate athlete immoral. A convenience sampling method was utilized to recruit participants for the pretest. Specifically, the researcher stood outside of a central building on the campus and asked students to fill out a short questionnaire which was presented as “Sportsmanship Study.” A total of 56 students participated in the study. Participants received candy for their participation. The questionnaire (APPENDIX D) included statements such as “One player starts fighting with the opponent” and “One player refuses to shake the opponent’s hand after the match.” Participants rated each behavior on a 7-point semantic differential scale. The results revealed that 49

“intentionally losing a game in exchange for payment” (M = 6. 60, SD = .86) and “punching opponent” (M = 6.40, SD = .89) received the two highest ratings for being immoral behaviors for a collegiate athlete. The participants of the pretest were not used in the main study, and they were asked not to discuss the details of the questionnaire with their friends. For moral actions, the researcher chose to include behaviors such as playing tennis for charity games, volunteering in youth camps to teach tennis, and being known for strong moral values.

Stimulus Materials

Two of The Florida State University women’s tennis team players were recruited to create the fictitious championship game. Because of the possibility that some participants might be acquainted with the players, the players were asked to wear a visor during the game in order to help conceal their identity. Additionally, the camera was set to a long shot which made it even more difficult to distinguish the players. The athletes were also asked to dress the same way, therefore both players had exactly the same white dress with no school affiliation on it. The camera was placed behind one of the players, which is also consistent with the traditional broadcasting style for tennis matches. After each play, a scoreboard graphic displayed the names of the athletes, and the current score. The names of the athletes were fictitious. The video featured the last two games of the final set of the championship game mentioned above. Previous research (e.g., Bryant, Rockwell, and Owens, 1994; Gan, Tuggle, Mitrook, Coussement, and Zillmann, 1997) suggests that suspenseful games made viewing less boring, more exciting, and more enjoyable. Therefore, in order to create interest in the stimulus materials, the video featured a very close game. Particularly, the initial screen in the video showed that both players won one set each by 6-4, and the current score was 5-5 in the final set. Starting the video at an even score also helped to eliminate any biases toward the underdog, which has also been found to create sympathy. Therefore, in order to keep morality of the athletes the only variable in the study, the video started with both players having equal points. Zillmann, Bryant, and Sapolsky (1989) detected that skilled and effective shots 50 or plays can also influence participants’ judgments of the players. Therefore, the types of plays won were the same for each player as well. That is to say, if one player won a point from ace, the other player had an ace as well. Furthermore, both players won points, for instance, by a serve-and-volley. Along with the effort to keep morality of the athletes the only variable in the stimulus material, the placement of the athletes, relative to the camera, was also the same. Specifically, from the camera’s perspective, each player will spent the same number of games at the near-side and far-side of the court.

Independent Measures

The first independent variable was the morality of the winner of the game. The stimulus video tape was manipulated to create two groups: in the first group, the moral athlete won the game, while in the second group, the immoral athlete prevailed.

Tennis Fanship Participants’ attitudes toward the sport of tennis were measured via eleven, 7-point semantic differential items. The scale was adapted from the Personal Involvement Inventory (PII) by Zaichkowsky (1985). This bipolar adjective scale was originally developed “to capture the concept of involvement for products” (p. 341). The scale was adapted for this study to assess the participants’ involvement in tennis. The observed Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the Tennis Fanship scale was .98.

Sportsfanship The Sportsfanship Index was adapted from prior research (Arpan, Raney & Zivnuska, 2003; Depalma & Raney, 2003; Raney, 2002). The index consists of 11 items and employs seven-point Likert-scale ranging from “Not at all interested” to “Extremely interested.” The Sportsfanship Index was used in the present study to explore interest in a variety of sports and focused on the respondents’ interest in specific professional and college sports such as football, basketball, and tennis. The Sportsfanship scale yielded an observed internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) coefficient of .93.

51

Dependent Measures

The dependent measures in this experiment were the enjoyment of the game and the disposition toward the athlete.

Enjoyment of the game The game enjoyment scale was adapted from prior research (Raney, 2002; Raney & Bryant, 2002) and features a ten-item measure consisting of nine-point, Likert-type items. Each item had different wording depending on the question. For example, the question “How interesting was the tennis match?” had Likert-type items, ranging from “Not interesting at all” to “Extremely interesting,” while items for the question “How arousing was the tennis match?” ranged from “Not arousing at all” to “Extremely arousing.” The observed internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient) was .93.

Disposition toward the athlete This construct was measured by three separate scales. First, Character Evaluation Scale, developed by Guthrie (2002), was used as part of the measurement for the evaluation of the athlete and featured items like “I feel that I would probably like _____ very much.” This three-item scale contained seven-point, Likert-type questions, and measures the athlete’s morality, maladjustment, and likeability. Montoya and Horton’s (2004) Interpersonal Attraction Scale (IAS) and Cognitive Evaluation Scale (CES) was also utilized to assess the viewers’ dispositions toward the athletes. IAS featured a total of nine items with nine-point Likert-type questions, which included items like “I would probably dislike talking with _____ at a party” and “I would like to get to know _____ better.” CES included seven items such as “_____ is probably well-respected” and “In general, how good a person do you think _____ is?”. For both scales, some of the items such as “To what extent are you looking forward to meeting _____?” were removed since they were not appropriate to the present study. In the end, the Disposition Toward the Athlete construct was measured with a total of eleven items. The scale was used separately for both moral attractive and immoral unattractive player. For the moral attractive player, the observed Cronhbach’s alpha

52 coefficient for the interpersonal attraction scale was .88. For the immoral unattractive player, the reliability score was .87. The responses to all eleven items in the scale were averaged for each participant, yielding a single factor that will hereafter be referred to as “Interpersonal Attraction toward Moral Attractive Player” and “Interpersonal Attraction toward Immoral Unattractive Player.”

Results

Random Assignment Check Although participants for this study were recruited utilizing the convenience sampling method, individuals were randomly assigned to each research condition and session. To evaluate whether participants were equally distributed among the conditions, a random assignment check was performed. Independent-samples t-tests were performed to determine the distribution of the sample among the two stimulus conditions. Age, attitudes toward attractiveness, sportsfanship, and tennis fanship were tested for possible unequal distribution among groups. As demonstrated in Table 1, the t-tests did not yield any statistically significant differences among age, and tennis fanship, suggesting an equal distribution of the participants among conditions. The distribution of males and females was also not significantly different for the two conditions. However, a significant difference was found among groups for the sportsfanship construct, suggesting that the sample was not equally distributed in terms of the individuals’ sportsfanship. The implication of unequally distributed sportsfanship scores is discussed later in the “Discussion for Study 1” section in this chapter.

Manipulation Check Before proceeding to test the hypotheses and the research questions, it was first necessary to check whether the intended manipulation of the morality of the athletes were indeed successful. That is, a test was conducted to make sure that the participants perceived the “moral player” as moral, and the “immoral player” as

53

Table 1: Independent Samples t-Test for Random Assignment Check Moral Immoral Wins Wins t-test for Equality of Means (n=64) (n=57) Mean Mean T df P (SD) (SD) 21.05 21.18 .247 116 .805 Age (1.67) (3.76) 4.77 4.13 2.360 118 .020 Sportsfanship (1.44) (1.52) 3.29 3.21 .52 116 .765 Tennis Fanship (1.72) (1.63)

immoral. Athletes’ perceived morality was measured by six-item, nine-point bipolar scale. Respondents rated each athlete’s morality on adjectives such as “Ethical | Unethical,” “Unrighteous | Righteous,” and “Immoral | Moral.” The observed Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient for the scale was .91. The results indicated that the manipulation of the athlete’s morality was valid with the sample. As Table 2 demonstrates, the observed morality of the “moral athlete” was very high, while the “immoral athlete” received low scores.

Table 2: Athletes’ Perceived Morality on a Nine-Point Scale

Moral Athlete Immoral Athlete (n=116) (n=118) Mean 7.57 3.61 Standard Deviation 1.27 1.42

Result statistically significant at p < .05 level.

Hypotheses

The first hypothesis predicted that participants would report higher levels of

54 interpersonal attraction toward the moral player, compared to the immoral player. The hypothesis was first tested for the whole sample, regardless of the research group the participants were in. The paired-samples t-test revealed that participants evaluated the moral player significantly more positively than the immoral player (t[120] = 11.613, p < .001). The hypothesis was, then, tested for each experiment group individually. The results were in the same direction in both conditions (tMoral Wins =

9.192, df = 63, p < .001; tImmoral Wins [56]= 7.191, p < .001). Table 3 presents the mean scores for participants’ interpersonal attraction towards the athletes and standard deviation scores. As a result, H1 was supported.

Table 3:Interpersonal Attraction toward Moral and Immoral Player Group 1 Group 2 Groups (Moral Wins) (Immoral Wins) Combined n=64 n=57 n=121

Moral Player (M) 6.58 a 6.37 b 6.48 c (SD) 1.07 1.21 1.14

Immoral Player (M) 4.21a 4.39 b 4.30 c (SD) 1.38 1.17 1.29

Subscripts indicate significance at the p <.001 level.

The second hypothesis predicted that individuals would enjoy the tennis game more when the game was won by a moral player. An independent-samples t-test supported the hypothesis, suggesting that the respondents in the experiment group in which the moral player won the game did enjoy the tennis match more than the participants who watched the same tennis game won by the immoral player (t[117] = 3.09, p = .002). Mean enjoyment scores in each stimulus group are presented in Table 4. As a result, H2 was also supported.

55

Table 4: Enjoyment of Game in Moral and Immoral Conditions

Group 1 Group 2 (Moral Wins) (Immoral Wins) n=63 n=56 Enjoyment of Game (M) 5.14 4.13 (SD) 1.70 1.86

Result statistically significant at p < .05 level.

Research Questions The two research questions in the study sought to examine whether participants’ evaluations of the video were influenced by their level of sportsfanship and tennis fanship. A linear regression analysis revealed that tennis fanship was a significant predictor of enjoyment scores ( = .53, t(114) = 6.20, p < .001), accounting for 22.8% of the variance in enjoyment. Sportsfanship alone was not found to be a predictor of the enjoyment scores, = .14, t(114) = 1.61, p = .111.

Discussion for Study I

The findings of the present study, in general, offered support to the basic tenets of the disposition theory. The first hypothesis (H1) that participants would have higher levels of interpersonal attraction toward the moral player was supported. That is, individuals reported dispositions toward the player who they found morally acceptable. Therefore, morality of characters was found to be a factor in formation of dispositions in the context of sports as well.

The main hypothesis (H2) of the study that the participants would enjoy the tennis game won by a moral athlete was also supported. Individuals’ enjoyment of the video in the stimulus group in which the moral player won the game was significantly higher than the enjoyment of the participants’ who watched the same game won by the immoral player. This finding provided more support for the basic proposition of the disposition theory, which holds that enjoyment of media content is a function of viewers’ affective dispositions toward the characters depicted, and whatever happens to those characters. Individuals who reported more favorable evaluations of the moral

56 athlete enjoyed the video more when they saw that the moral player actually experienced a positive outcome in the end of the video. Conversely the enjoyment decreased when the liked player, the moral player, experienced a negative outcome in the second research group. Two research questions were also asked to find out whether sports fans and tennis fans have different evaluations of the game. The results revealed that participants’ level of sportsfanship was not a significant predictor of their enjoyment of the video. However, the findings highlighted that the individuals’ tennis fanship was in fact a determinant of their enjoyment. This finding is interesting in that being a sports fan in general was not a predictor of enjoyment of the game. Perhaps, this is because the majority of those who considered themselves as sports fans were not fond of the sport of tennis in particular as much. It was stated that the sample was not evenly distributed among research groups in terms of the participants’ sportsfanship. However, since sportsfanship was not found to influence enjoyment, it is reasonable to suggest that the unequal distribution of the sample did not have any effect on the significant difference in enjoyment levels detected between the two stimulus groups.

57

CHAPTER IV STUDY 2: THE ROLE OF PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS IN FORMATION OF DISPOSITIONS

Hypotheses

The first group of hypotheses in Study 2 focuses on the athletes. Specifically, the hypotheses deal with the respondents’ perceptions of the physical attractiveness of the athletes. As demonstrated earlier, previous studies suggest that physical attractiveness plays an important role in impression formation and interpersonal attraction. The same studies have also demonstrated that physical attractiveness positively influences a number of outcomes. For example, attractiveness has been shown to influence, among other variables, initial impressions (Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991; Feingold, 1992; Jackson, Hunter, & Hodge, 1995), date and mate selection decisions (e.g., Adams, 1978), helping behavior (e.g. Benson, Karabenick, & Lerner, 1976), employment opportunities (e.g., Dipboye, Arvey, & Terpstra, 1977), teacher judgments of student intelligence and future academic potential (e.g., Ritts, Patterson, & Tubbs, 1992), voters’ preferences for political candidates (e.g., Adams, 1977), and even juror’s judgments in simulated trials (Mazzella & Feingold, 1994). In a recent meta-analysis of the attractiveness paradigm, Langlois et. al. (2000) concluded that people judge attractive individuals more positively and treat them more favorably. In this context, because of a generally positive stereotype associated with attractiveness, suggested by implicit personality theory, it would be appropriate to predict that participants in this study will be attracted more to the attractive player, compared to the unattractive player: H1: Participants will report higher levels of interpersonal attraction toward the physically attractive player, compared to the physically unattractive player. LeCroy and Daley (2001) have developed the Attitudes Toward Attractiveness Scale

(ATAS), which measures adolescent girls’ attitudes toward physical attractiveness. The scale was modified to measure a general sample’s attitudes toward attractiveness. We would expect that people who score higher on ATAS will pay more attention to the attractiveness of the athletes than the people with lower ATAS score. Therefore, 58 participants who score higher on ATAS will presumably form a more positive disposition toward the attractive athlete that those who score lower on the ATAS: H2: Compared to the participants with lower attitudes toward physical attractiveness, participants with higher attitudes toward physical attractiveness will report more favorable evaluations of the attractive athlete.

The second group of hypotheses extends the focus of this study from viewer’s perceptions of athletes to the enjoyment of the game. Based on previous studies on physical attractiveness, and consistent with the first hypothesis, we would expect that the physically attractive player would elicit more favorable evaluations from the viewers. Disposition theory suggests that the favorable evaluations of the athlete creates more positive dispositions toward that athlete, which would, in turn, create anticipation for the attractive player to win the game. The theory also holds that we enjoy the media presentation more in which good things happen to liked characters. Therefore, consistent with implicit personality theory and disposition theory, the following hypothesis was formulated: H3: Compared to participants who watch a tennis match won by a physically unattractive player, participants who watch a tennis match won by a physically attractive player will report higher enjoyment of the game.

Going back to LeCroy and Daley’s (2001) Attitudes Toward Attractiveness Scale, we would expect that people who score higher on ATAS would pay more attention to the physical attractiveness of the athletes. Therefore, in a game where a physically attractive player competes against an unattractive player, we would anticipate difference in viewers’ enjoyment of the tennis game based on their attitudes toward attractiveness. Particularly, we would expect that people with higher levels of attitudes toward attractiveness will enjoy the tennis game won by an attractive player over her unattractive counterpart more, compared to individuals with lower levels of attitudes toward attractiveness. Therefore: H4: Participants with higher attitudes toward attractiveness, compared to the participants with lower attitudes toward attractiveness, will score higher on the enjoyment of the tennis game in the stimulus group in which the game is won by an attractive player over an unattractive player.

59

Buss and Barnes (1986) found that women often select their spouse on the basis of their social power, whereas men, as the sex typically with greater social power, tend to choose their spouse more on the basis of beauty and physical attractiveness. Furthermore, Morse and Gruzen (1976) found no difference between males and females in terms of the way they evaluate the attractiveness of stimulus persons. However, the authors did find that men, compared to women, placed more emphasis on facial attractiveness, when rating opposite-sex people on a number of personality and

“sex appeal” dimensions. In the same study, women were found to be more affected by men’s personality traits. Other studies, such as Mazur (1986) and Feingold (1990), also found that when evaluating the desirability of the opposite sex, men place greater emphasis on the physical attractiveness. In this context, we would expect that male viewers of the tennis game would be influenced more by the physical attractiveness of the athletes. Therefore: H5: Compared to female participants, male participants who watch an all-female tennis match won by an attractive player will score higher on the enjoyment of the game.

Finally, as with Experiment 1, the study will examine viewers’ affective reactions to the content as a function of their individual characteristics such as sportsfanship and fanship of tennis. Therefore, the following research questions are introduced: RQ1: Will general sports fans enjoy the game more than those who scored lower on being sports fans in general? RQ2: Will tennis fans enjoy the game more than those who scored lower on being a tennis fan?

Methodology

Participants were randomly assigned to watch one of the two versions of a video tape that highlighted a tennis match between an attractive college-level tennis player and an unattractive player. The video was manipulated in a way that the physically attractive player won the game in the first experiment group, while the physically unattractive player was the winner of the match in the second group. After watching the video, the participants completed a questionnaire that measured their 60 dispositions toward the athletes and enjoyment of the game. The survey also measured the individuals’ media use, level of sportsfanship and fanship of tennis.

Sample

Participants were 87 undergraduate students enrolled in communication and business administration student at The Florida State University. While some students received extra credit in their class for participating in the study, others counted their research participation toward a requirement in their courses. The majority of the respondents (77.0%) were Caucasian; 10.3% were Latino/Hispanic, 8.0% were African-American; and 2.3% were Asian. A small group of participants (2.3%) did not specify their ethnicity. A slight majority of the sample (57.5%) was comprised of females, and 41.4% were male. One participant did not identify gender. The mean age of the sample was 22.1 (SD = 2.85).

Procedure

Buss and Barnes (1986) found that women select their spouse on the basis of their social power, whereas men, as the sex with greater social power, choose their spouse more on the basis of beauty and physical attractiveness. Furthermore, Morse and Gruzen (1976) found that there is no difference between males and females in terms of the way they evaluate the attractiveness of stimulus persons. However, the authors did find that men, compared to women, placed more emphasis on facial attractiveness, when rating opposite-sex people on a number of personality and “sex appeal” dimensions. In the same study, women were found to be more affected by men’s personality traits. Other studies, such as Mazur (1986) and Feingold (1990), also found that when evaluating the desirability of the opposite sex, men place greater emphasis on the physical attractiveness. In this context, because the current study focused on the physical attractiveness of the athletes, it seemed more reasonable to use female athletes as stimulus persons. Early studies (e.g., Illife, 1960; Udry, 1965) found strong interjudge agreement when ranking facial attractiveness, and that sex and locality of the raters had minimal

61 effects on the rankings. Numerous other studies (e.g., Feingold, 1992) in physical attractiveness continue to report significant and high interjudge agreement in ratings of people’s attractiveness. As Bull and Rumsey (1988) conclude, “people usually agree on the question of how attractive certain faces are” (p. 287). Therefore, a pretest with fewer amount of people were administered in order to determine the athletes to be used in the stimulus video.

Pretest An online survey (APPENDIX E) was created with pictures of 20 female collegiate tennis players, and participants were asked to rate the facial attractiveness of these players. The pictures were randomly gathered from the websites of the universities that the players attended. All pictures were similar in the sense that they were all medium close-up shots in a portrait format, in a studio with subtle backgrounds, and the athletes facing the camera and smiling. The “physical attractiveness” construct in the present study, then, was elicited from the ratings of facial attractiveness. Therefore, it might be argued that medium close-up shots of people reveal cues only about their facial attractiveness, and not the attractiveness of the whole body. However, Nielsen and Kernaleguen (1976) found that facial attractiveness is a significant factor in the perception of physical attraction of the total unit. From this perspective, it appears appropriate to use the ratings of facial attractiveness as “physical attractiveness” of the athletes. In order to make sure no other elements of the pictures influenced the judgments of the raters, school and clothing brand names and logos were removed using Adobe Photoshop CS2 software. Kinnally, Tuzunkan, Fitzgerald, and Smith (2004) found that religious affiliations of athletes induce positive dispositions toward the athletes; therefore, any jewelry with religious figures such as crosses were also removed from the pictures to make sure that individuals’ evaluations of the physical attractiveness of the athletes were not influenced by other factors. In order to eliminate the order bias, four different research groups were used, each with a different order of pictures. The researcher announced the research opportunity in several undergraduate-level communication classes in the Department of Communication at the Florida State University and explained that the students would 62 receive extra credit in their classes for participating in this study. Each student was given a note that contained the URL of the online survey. Each of the research groups had a different URL; therefore, each student randomly received one of the four possible URLs. Participants were asked to log in to the URL and rate the physical attractiveness of the persons pictured. The researcher told the respondents that they would probably never meet these people; therefore, it is important that they be honest in their rating and use the full range of the scales. A total of 54 students responded to the survey. Each picture was assessed by completing a five-item physical attractiveness scale (see APPENDIX E) developed by McCroskey and McCrain (1974). These five items were subjected to principal- component analysis, which yielded a single factor solution. The Eigen value for the physical attractiveness factor was 3.94, which explained 78.7% of the variance. Each item in the factor loaded at least |.86|. For the purposes of the present study, the five items were summed and divided by five to produce a mean score for physical attractiveness of each picture, which yielded an internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) coefficient of .93. Table 5 presents the highest and the lowest rated pictures. One sample t-tests revealed that there was a significant difference in the ratings of the physical attractiveness of two athletes, t(53) = 30.15, p < .001. The highest and lowest rated athletes were used in the stimulus materials for the main experiment sessions as

“attractive player” and “unattractive player,” respectively. The participants used in the pretest did not participate in the posttest. From this point on, the highest rated player will be referred as the “attractive player,” and the lowest rated player will be referred as the “unattractive player” in this study. Two experiment groups were created in the main experiment part of the study. Participants were randomly assigned to each group. The participants in each group were not informed that there was another research condition in the study. In each group the researcher informed the participants that they would be watching a tennis game on video, and that they would complete a survey about the video. The researcher, then, went on to provide more details about the video. Specifically, the respondents were informed that they would be watching a collegiate-level tennis game, and that the players are competing to be able to represent the United States in Universiade 2007

63 which will take place in Bangkok, Thailand. It was emphasized that both players had been working very hard for this opportunity and only the winner of this game would achieve her goal. Consequently, the researcher distributed the IRB-approved consent form (see APPENDIX B) to the participants. Following the signing of the consent forms, the researcher dimmed the lights of the room and showed the video on screens ranging from four foot to six foot. After viewing the video, the respondents completed the survey (APPENDIX F). Upon completion of the survey, the participants were debriefed and dismissed.

Table 5: The Highest and Lowest Rated Pictures on a Seven-Point Interpersonal Attraction Scale.

Picture of the highest Picture of the lowest

rated athlete. rated athlete. Hidden for privacy Hidden for privacy concerns. concerns.

Attractive Player Unattractive Player M = 5.93, SD = .98 M = 1.90, SD = .93 t(53) = 30.15, p < .001

Stimulus Materials

A tennis match was taped in order to create the stimulus materials. Two of the

Florida State University women’s tennis team players were recruited to record the

64 fictitious tennis match. The challenge was to create the video in a way that the two players playing in the video would be perceived as the highest and the lowest rated players from the pretest. For this reason, the camera was placed behind one of the players and the zoom level was adjusted in a way that the faces of the players were not recognizable. After each point in the game, a graphic was inserted displaying the pictures of the attractive and unattractive players, and the score of the game. The two FSU players used in the video were specifically chosen because of the similarity of their hair styles with the hairstyles of the attractive and unattractive players from the pretest. FSU players were asked to wear a visor during the game in order to first conceal their identities, and second to help create a visual connection, through their hairstyles, between the players in the video and the pictures in the score graphic. In this way, the participants of the study would perceive the video to actually be a match between the attractive tennis player and the unattractive one. The video featured the last two games of the final set of the championship game. As noted in Chapter 3, Gan, Tuggle, Mitrook, Coussement, and Zillmann (1997) suggested that close games and suspense in sports creates interest and enjoyment among viewers. Therefore, in order to create interest in the game among the participants of the study, the video featured a close game. Specifically, the video showed that the players each won a set by 6-4 and it is 5-5 in the final set. Having equal points for both players in the initial screen also helped to eliminate any bias toward the underdog of the game, which was found to induce sympathy. And finally, similar with the stimulus material in Experiment 1, the skill levels of plays were similar for each player as well. Independent Measures As noted above, one of the independent variables was manipulated in the fictitious tennis championship game: the level of the physical attractiveness of the winner of the match (attractive player wins vs. unattractive player wins). Other independent variables came from the survey (See Appendix F) that was used to elicit attitudes toward attractiveness, the sport of tennis, level of sportsfanship, and media use.

Attitudes toward Attractiveness 65

The Attitude toward Attractiveness Index was adapted from LeCroy and Daley (2001). The original index contained eight items and features four-point Likert scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.” Because the index was intended to measure adolescent girls’ attitudes toward physical attractiveness, it was modified to measure the present study’s participants’ attitudes toward physical attractiveness. For example, the item “There is more pressure for a girl to be pretty than for a boy to be handsome” was removed. Also, the wording of some items was slightly changed to make it appropriate for this study. The item “I think girls need to be skinny to be attractive,” for instance, was modified to read “I think people need to be skinny to be attractive.” The reliability test of the original 8-item scale revealed a relatively low score (

= .66). If the item “There is pressure in our society to be good looking” was deleted, the Cronbach’s alpha level would increase to .76. Therefore, this item was dropped from the scale.

Tennisfanship

Similar with Study 1, participants’ attitudes toward the sport of tennis was measured by adapting Zaichkowsky’s (1985) Personal Involvement Inventory scale. The scale features eight-item, seven-point semantic differential items. Although it was originally developed to elicit involvement for products, the scale was adapted for this study to assess the participants’ attitudes and involvement in tennis, and included items such as “Unimportant to me | Important to me” and “Means nothing to me | Very meaningful to me.” The tennis fanship scale yielded an observed internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) coefficient of .98.

Sportsfanship The sportsfanship construct in the present study was used to explore interest in a variety of sports and focused on the respondents’ interest in some of the more popular professional and college sports such as football, basketball, and tennis. The construct was measured by an 11-item, seven point Likert-scale index ranging from

“Not at all interested” to “Extremely interested.” The Sportsfanship Index was adapted from prior research (Arpan, Raney & Zivnuska, 2003; Depalma & Raney, 2003; Raney, 66

2002). The observed Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the Sportsfanship scale was .91.

Dependent Measures

Similar with Study 1, the dependent measures in this experiment were the enjoyment of the game and the disposition toward the athlete.

Enjoyment of the Game

Participants’ enjoyment of the game was measured by a ten-item index consisting of nine-point, Likert-type items. The game enjoyment scale was adapted from prior research (Raney, 2002; Raney & Bryant, 2002). Each item had different wording depending on the question. For example, the question “How interesting was the tennis match?” had Likert-type items, ranging from “Not interesting at all” to “Extremely interesting,” while items for the question “How arousing was the tennis match?” ranged from “Not arousing at all” to “Extremely arousing.” The observed internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient) was .92.

Disposition toward the Athlete

Three separate scales were utilized to measure participants’ dispositions toward each athlete. First, Guthrie’s (2002) Character Evaluation Scale was used as part of the measurement for the evaluation of the athlete. This three-item scale contained seven-point, Likert-type questions, and measured the athlete’s morality, maladjustment, and likeability. The scale featured items such as “I feel that I would probably like _____ very much.” Montoya and Horton’s (2004) Interpersonal Attraction Scale (IAS) and Cognitive Evaluation Scale (CES) were also utilized to assess the viewers’ dispositions toward the athletes. IAS featured a total of nine items with nine-point Likert-type questions, which included items like “I would probably dislike talking with _____ at a party” and “I would like to get to know _____ better.” CES included seven items, which included items such as “_____ is probably well-respected” and “In general, how god a person do you think _____ is?” Some of the items in both scales such as “To what extent are you looking forward to meeting _____?” were removed since they were not appropriate to the present study, leaving a total of eleven

67 items for the Disposition Toward the Athlete construct. The scale was used twice in the survey, one for the attractive and one for the unattractive player. The observed

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the attractive player was .83, while the reliability score for the unattractive player was .80.

Results

Random Assignment Check Although participants for this study were recruited utilizing the convenience sampling method, they were randomly assigned to each research condition or session. To evaluate whether participants were equally distributed among the conditions, a random assignment check was performed. Independent-samples t-test was performed to determine the distribution of the sample among the two stimulus conditions. Age, gender, attitudes toward attractiveness, sportsfanship, and tennisfanship were tested for possible unequal distribution among groups. As demonstrated in Table 6, the t-test did not yield any statistically significant differences among groups, suggesting an equal distribution of the participants among conditions.

Table 6: Independent Samples t-Test for Random Assignment Check

Attractive Unattractive t-test for Equality of Means Wins Wins Mean Mean t df p (SD) (SD) n = 39 n = 47 Age 21.92 22.26 -.537 84 .593 (3.62) (2.03)

n = 39 n = 48 Attitude toward 4.33 4.17 .555 83 .581 Attractiveness (1.40) (1.32)

n = 38 n = 47 Sportsfanship 4.33 4.17 .555 83 .581 (1.40) (1.32) n = 38 n = 47 Tennis Fanship 2.95 3.38 -1.128 83 .263 (1.56) (1.88)

68

Manipulation Check Physical Attractiveness of the Athletes. Even though the pictures of the athletes were chosen based on the results from the pre-test, it was still important to check whether the manipulation of the attractiveness level of the athletes was valid with the current sample as well. The paired-samples t-test revealed that the athletes were

indeed perceived as attractive and unattractive (MAttractive = 5.69, SD = .90; MUnattractive =

2.50, SD = .98; t[85] = 19.68, p < .001) in accordance with the pre-test.

Hypotheses The first hypothesis predicted that participants would report higher levels of interpersonal attraction toward the attractive player, compared to the unattractive player. The independent-samples t-test suggested no difference between group 1 (t = 2.213, df = 34, p = .017) and group 2 (t = .422, df = 38, p = .337). Table 7 presents the mean scores for participants’ interpersonal attraction towards the athletes and standard deviation scores. As a result, H1 was not supported.

The second hypothesis sought to determine whether participants’ attitudes toward attractiveness have any influence on the way they feel about the athletes. Linear regression analyses revealed that attitudes toward attractiveness was not a significant predictor of participants’ interpersonal attraction toward the athletes ( = .10, p = .395). As a result, H2 was also not supported.

Table 7: Interpersonal Attraction toward Attractive and Unattractive Player Group 1 Group 2 Group 1 & Group 2 (Attractive Wins) (Unattractive Wins) Combined n=35 n=39 n=74 Attractive Player (M) 5.22 5.28 5.26 (SD) .81 .80 .77 Unattractive Player (M) 4.95 5.22 5.09 (SD) .80 .95 .89

No significance detected at the p = .05 level.

69

Following the comparisons of participants’ dispositions towards the athletes, the next group of hypotheses (H3, H4, & H5) deal with the enjoyment of the game. Specifically, H3 predicted that individuals would enjoy the tennis game more when the game is won by an attractive player. As Table 8 displays, the t-test comparing participants’ enjoyment of the game between the attractive-wins and unattractive- wins stimulus groups revealed no significant difference (t[83] = .05, p = .48). As a result, H3 was not supported.

Table 8: Enjoyment of Game in Attractive and Unattractive Conditions Group 1 Group 2 (Attractive Wins) (Unattractive Wins) Enjoyment of Game (M) 4.52 4.50 (SD) 1.46 1.79

No significance detected at the p = .05 level.

The fourth hypothesis stated that, in the attractive-wins stimulus group, participants who scored higher on ATAS would enjoy the game more than the participants with lower ATAS scores. Participants’ ATAS scores were categorized into “Hi” and “Low” utilizing the median split method. As Table 9 demonstrates, independent-samples t–test revealed no significant differences in enjoyment of the game between the participants with high and low level attitudes toward attractiveness (t[37] = .93, p = .18). As a result, H4 was not supported. And finally, the fifth hypothesis predicted that male participants in the attractive-wins condition would enjoy the game more than the female counterparts. As shown in Table 9, independent-samples t-test showed that, even though male participants did enjoy the game more than the female participants (MMales = 4.87, SD =

1.51; MFemales = 4.24, SD = 1.38), the difference was not statistically significant, t[37] = 1.35, p = .09 (one-tailed). As a result, H5 was not supported, although there was a tendency for male participants to enjoy the game more.

70

Table 9: Comparison of Enjoyment of the Game in the Attractive –Wins Condition Based on Participants’ Attitudes toward Attractiveness (ATAS)

Hi ATAS Low ATAS Enjoyment of Game (M) 4.75 4.31 (SD) 1.62 1.31

No significance detected at the p = .05 level.

Research Questions The two research questions in the study asked whether sportsfanship and tennis fanship played a role in participants’ enjoyment of the video. A liner regression analysis indicated that sportsfanship of participants was not a significant predictor of the enjoyment of the video (β = .13, p = .257). The second research question examined whether respondents’ levels of tennis fanship played a role in their enjoyment of the video. A linear regression analysis revealed that tennis fanship was indeed a significant predictor of enjoyment scores ( = .42, p < .001), accounting for 24.4% of the variance.

Discussion for Study II

The first two hypotheses sought to elicit the participants’ perceptions of the physical attractiveness of the athletes, and therefore to bring out their affective reactions to the looks of these athletes. The first hypothesis (H1) proposing that participants would have higher levels of interpersonal attraction toward the attractive player was not supported. Even though the “attractive player” from the pretest was indeed rated as physically more attractive, the physical appearance of the athlete was apparently not enough for participants to report higher interpersonal attraction toward her. This finding seems contrary to the basic predictions of the implicit personality theory, which holds that attractive individuals are rated more positively on social traits, such as popularity, social skills, and social confidence. However, the particular finding in this study supports Eagly, Makhijani, Ashmore, and Longo’s (1991) suggestion that physical attractiveness is not as strong in generating positive perceptions, mainly suggested by studies of person perception and implicit personality theories. Consistent with this statement, the participants in this study did report higher interpersonal attraction toward the attractive player; however, it was not strong enough to yield a 71 significant difference.

The hypothesis related to the association between the participants’ attitudes toward attractiveness and their evaluations of the athletes (H2) was also not supported. When examined closer, the results for this hypothesis reveal that the majority of the participants found the player physically very attractive. Therefore, there is not much variance in the ratings, resulting in no significant difference between participants with higher and lower attitudes toward attractiveness. It is reasonable to suggest that a significant difference between the two groups could have been reached, if the attractiveness level of the athlete was not as high.

The main hypothesis (H3) of the study that the participants would enjoy the tennis game won by an attractive athlete was not supported. The disposition theory suggests that enjoyment of media content is a function of viewers’ affective dispositions toward the characters depicted, and whatever happens to those characters. However, as revealed in the first hypothesis, there was no significant difference in the interpersonal attraction toward any of the athlete. As mentioned earlier, the disposition theory suggests that watching games between similarly liked or similarly disliked players or teams will produce intermediate level of enjoyment (Zillmann & Paulus, 1993). In this sense, since participants had no clear affiliation with the athletes, it should be taken as normal, in other words expected, to see no difference in enjoyment between “attractive wins” and “unattractive wins” experiment groups. The hypothesis that the participants with higher levels of attitudes toward attractiveness would enjoy the game won by an attractive player more than those with lower attitudes toward attractiveness (H4) was not supported. A closer look at the results revealed that the results were in fact in reverse direction. That is, even though the difference was not statistically significant, participants with lower attitudes toward attractiveness reported greater enjoyment. However, the particular finding should be taken as normal, since attractiveness alone was not found to be a factor in formation of dispositions. Specifically, if attractiveness is not a determinant of disposition formations, and therefore enjoyment, it would not be reasonable to expect participant’s levels of attitudes toward attractiveness to have an effect on their enjoyment.

72

Therefore, this finding also suggests that there might have been other factors in this experiment that influenced the participants’ enjoyment of the video. The last hypothesis that males would enjoy the game won by the attractive player more than their female counterparts (H5) was not supported. Again, even though the male participants did report higher enjoyment, the difference was not enough for statistical significance. Eagly et al.’s (1991) finding that physical attractiveness is not as strong of positive perceptions and affiliations as suggested by other studies seems to be a possible explanation for this finding as well. Finally, the study asked two research questions to determine whether sports fans and tennis fans have different evaluations of the game. The results revealed that while sports fans and non-sports fans did not differ in their evaluations of the game, tennis fans did enjoy the game more than those who are not tennis fans. This finding is interesting in that being a sports fan was not a predictor of enjoyment of the game. Perhaps, this is because the majority of those who considered themselves as sports fans were not fond of the sport of tennis as much. Also, since physical attractiveness was not found to be associated with the enjoyment of the game, we can safely suggest that the tennis fans’ more positive evaluations of the game was mainly because of the fact that the game was in the sport of tennis, and not because of the physical beauty of the winner athlete.

73

CHAPTER V STUDY 3: MORAL JUDGMENT, PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS AND DISPOSITION FORMATION

As can be inferred from the previous two studies, while the morality of athletes (Study 1) was found to influence formation of dispositions among participants, physical attractiveness (Study 2) was not. We concluded in Study 2 that the lack of personal information about the athletes may have been the reason why physical attractiveness alone was not enough for participants to feel affiliated. Therefore, the main purpose of Study 3 is to combine both morality and physical attractiveness constructs, and to examine whether physical attractiveness of athletes, when combined with personal information about their morality, influences formation of dispositions among participants.

Hypotheses and Research Questions

Since morality was found to be a factor in formation of dispositions, and physical attractiveness was not, it would not be appropriate to offer hypotheses in a study in which physical attractiveness and morality of athletes are combined. Therefore, only research questions are introduced in Study 3. The research questions that will be tested in the present study are as follows: RQ1: Will participants report higher levels of interpersonal attraction toward the moral attractive player, compared to the immoral unattractive player? RQ2: Compared to participants who watch a tennis match won by an immoral unattractive player, will participants who watch a tennis match won by a moral attractive player report higher enjoyment from the game? RQ3: Compared to female participants, will male participants who watch an all-female tennis match won by an moral attractive player report higher enjoyment from the game? RQ4: Will general sports fans enjoy the game more than those who scored lower on being sports fans in general?

74

RQ5: Will tennis fans enjoy the game more than those who scored lower on being a tennis fan?

Methodology

A similar methodology used in Study 1 was utilized in Study 3. Again, participants first read a short paper that contained brief background information about two collegiate-level athletes, which also gives participants an idea about their morality. One of the athletes was depicted as moral, while the other athlete was portrayed as immoral. The athlete that was depicted as moral in the information sheet was represented as an attractive player, while the immoral athlete was portrayed as unattractive. Individuals then watched one of the two versions of a video tape that presented a tennis match between the two tennis players. After the participants were exposed to the video, they completed a survey that measured their dispositions toward the athletes and enjoyment of the game, as well as their level of sportsfanship and tennis fanship.

Sample

The participants for the study consisted of 103 undergraduate students enrolled in communication courses at the Florida State University. Of the total sample, the majority (72.8%) of the participants were females. The ethnic distribution of the sample was 71.8% Caucasian, 12.6% Hispanic/Latino, 10.7% African American, and 3.9%

Asian. One participant reported his/her ethnicity as “Other.” The average age of the sample was 20.2 (SD = 1.32).

Procedure

For this study, the researcher told the participants that they would be watching a video tape featuring a tennis game and that they would be completing a survey about their enjoyment of the video. The researcher also informed the participants about the content of the video. Specifically, participants were told that they would be watching a collegiate-level tennis match, in which the players were competing to be able to

75 represent the United States in Universiade 2007 in Bangkok, Thailand. Universiade is essentially an international multi-sport event and is known as the Olympics of college athletes. The researcher also told the participants that before watching the game, they should have more information about who was actually competing to represent the United States in Universiade 2007. For this purpose, the researcher distributed an information sheet which included fictitious background information that portrayed the athletes as moral or immoral. The information sheet was presented as “Announcer Notes” from the media guide booklet prepared for this match in order to increase the credibility of the information. While there were no pictures of the athletes in Study 1, the announcer notes in Study 3 included pictures of the athletes as well (APPENDIX G). The pictures used were the ones that received the highest and the lowest ratings in the pretest in Study 2. The highest rated picture was matched with the “moral player” and the lowest rated picture was matched with the “immoral player.” Thus, the athletes were portrayed as “moral attractive” and “immoral unattractive.” Both athletes were presented as being from the state of Washington. The purpose for this was that since most of the participants of the study were from Florida, a distant state would minimize any presumption or bias toward the players’ hometowns. After reading and signing the IRB-approved consent form (see APPENDIX B), the students spent about 5 minutes to read the “Announcer Notes” and viewed the 8minute video afterwards. Following the exposure to the video, the students completed a survey (APPENDIX H). Details about the survey will be discussed in the “Independent Measures” and “Dependent Measures” subsections.

Stimulus Materials

Two of The Florida State University women’s tennis team players were recruited to create the fictitious championship game. Because of the possibility that some participants might be acquainted with the players, the players were asked to wear a visor during the game in order to help conceal their identity. Additionally, the camera was set to a long shot which makes it harder to distinguish the players. The athletes were also asked to dress the same way, therefore both players wore exactly the same white dress with no school affiliation on it. The camera was placed behind one 76 of the players, which is also consistent with the traditional broadcasting style for tennis matches. After each point, a scoreboard graphic displayed the names of the athletes and the current score. The names of the athletes were fictitious. The video featured the last two games of the final set of the championship game mentioned above. Previous research (e.g., Bryant, Rockwell, and Owens, 1994; Gan, Tuggle, Mitrook, Coussement, and Zillmann, 1997) suggested that suspenseful games makes viewing less boring, more exciting, and more enjoyable. Therefore, in order to create interest in the stimulus materials, the video featured a very close game. Particularly, the initial screen in the video showed that both players won one set each by 6-4, and the current score was 5-5 in the final set. Starting the video at an even score also helped to eliminate any biases toward the underdog, which has also been found to create sympathy. Therefore, in order to keep the morality and the physical attractiveness of the athletes the only two variables in the study, the video started with both players having equal points. Zillmann, Bryant, and Sapolsky (1989) detected that skilled and effective shots or plays can also influence participants’ judgments of the players. Therefore, the types of plays won were the same for each player as well. That is to say, if one player won a point with an ace, the other player had an ace as well. Furthermore, both players won points, for instance, by a serve-and-volley. Along with the effort to keep the morality and the physical attractiveness of the athletes the only two variables in the stimulus material, the placement of the athletes relative to the camera was also the same.

Specifically, from the camera’s perspective, each player spent the same number of games at the near-side and far-side of the court.

Independent Measures

The winner of the game is one of the independent variables in this study. The stimulus video tape was manipulated to create two research groups: in the first group, the moral attractive athlete wins the game, while in the second group, the immoral unattractive athlete prevails.

77

Tennis Fanship

Participants’ attitudes toward the sport of tennis were measured via eight, 7point semantic differential items. The scale was adapted from the Personal Involvement Inventory (PII) by Zaichkowsky (1985). This bipolar adjective scale was originally developed “to capture the concept of involvement for products” (p. 341). The scale was adapted for this study to assess the participants’ involvement in tennis and included items like “Unimportant to me | Important to me” and “Means nothing to me | Very meaningful to me.” The observed Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the Tennis Fanship scale was .98. As a result, the responses to all eight items in the scale were averaged for each participant, yielding a single factor that will hereafter be referred to as “tennis fanship.”

Sportsfanship The Sportsfanship Index was adapted from prior research (Arpan, Raney & Zivnuska, 2003; Depalma & Raney, 2003; Raney, 2002). The index consisted of nine items and employs seven-point Likert-scale ranging from “Not at all interested” to “Extremely interested.” The Sportsfanship Index was used in the present study to explore interest in a variety of sports and focused on the respondents’ interest in specific professional and college sports such as football, basketball, and tennis. The

Sportsfanship scale yielded an observed internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) coefficient of .93. The responses to all nine items in the scale were averaged for each participant, yielding a single factor that will hereafter be referred to as “sportsfanship.”

Dependent Measures

The dependent measures in this experiment are the enjoyment of the game and the disposition toward the athlete.

Enjoyment of the game The game enjoyment scale was adapted from prior research (Raney, 2002; Raney & Bryant, 2002) and features a ten-item measure consisting of nine-point, Likert-type items. Each item had different wording depending on the question. For

78 example, the question “How interesting was the tennis match?” had Likert-type items, ranging from “Not interesting at all” to “Extremely interesting,” while items for the question “How arousing was the tennis match?” ranged from “Not arousing at all” to “Extremely arousing.” The observed internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .92. The responses to all ten items in the scale were averaged for each participant, yielding a single factor that will hereafter be referred to as “Enjoyment.”

Disposition toward the athlete This construct was measured by three separate scales. First, Character Evaluation Scale, developed by Guthrie (2002), was used as part of the measurement for the evaluation of the athlete and featured items like “I feel that I would probably like _____ very much.” This three-item scale contains seven-point, Likert-type questions, and measures the athlete’s morality, maladjustment, and likeability. Montoya and Horton’s (2004) Interpersonal Attraction Scale (IAS) and Cognitive Evaluation Scale (CES) was also utilized to assess the viewers’ dispositions toward the athletes. IAS featured a total of nine items with nine-point Likert-type questions, which included items like “I would probably dislike talking with _____ at a party” and “I would like to get to know _____ better.” CES included seven items such as “_____ is probably well-respected” and “In general, how good a person do you think _____ is?” For both scales, some of the items such as “To what extent are you looking forward to meeting _____?” were removed since they were not appropriate to the present study. In the end, the Disposition Toward the Athlete construct was measured with a total of eleven items. The scale was used separately for both moral attractive and immoral unattractive player. For the moral attractive player, the observed Cronhbach’s alpha coefficient for the interpersonal attraction scale was .88. For the immoral unattractive player, the reliability score was .87. The responses to all eleven items in the scale were averaged for each participant, yielding a single factor that will hereafter be referred to as “Interpersonal Attraction toward Moral Attractive Player” and “Interpersonal Attraction toward Immoral Unattractive Player.”

79

Results

Random Assignment Check A random assignment check was performed in order to ensure that the two research conditions were in fact distributed and represented equally on several key variables. Independent-samples t-test were performed for each of the independent variables (sportsfanship and tennis fanship), as well as participants’ sex. As Table 10 demonstrates, no statistically significant differences were observed between conditions for the sportsfanship and tennis fanship constructs. In terms of participants’ sex, although the majority of the sample was females, the distribution of males and females was not significantly different for the two conditions.

Table 10: Independent Samples t-Test for Random Assignment Check Immoral/ Moral/Attractive Unattractive t-test for Equality of Means Wins Wins Mean Mean t df P (SD) (SD) 4.45 4.82 Sportsfanship 1.273 100 .206 (1.44) (1.51) 3.62 3.38 Tennis Fanship .718 100 .475 (1.54) (1.38)

Manipulation Check Perceived Morality of the Athletes. Before proceeding to test the research questions, it was first necessary to check whether the intended manipulation of the morality of the athletes were indeed successful. That is, a test was conducted to make sure that the participants perceived the “moral player” as moral, and the “immoral player” as immoral. Athletes’ perceived morality was measured by six-item, nine-point bipolar scale. Respondents rated each athlete’s morality on adjectives such as “Ethical | Unethical,” “Unrighteous | Righteous,” and “Immoral | Moral.” For the immoral

80 athlete, the observed Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient for the scale was .89. For the moral athlete, the reliability score was .93.

The results indicated that the manipulation of the athletes’ morality was valid with the sample. As Table 11 demonstrates, the observed morality of the “moral athlete” was very high, while the “immoral athlete” received low scores.

Table 11: Athletes’ Perceived Morality on a Nine-Point Scale Moral Athlete Immoral Athlete (N=116) (N=118) Mean 7.64 3.11 Standard Deviation 1.23 1.27

Physical Attractiveness of the Athletes. Even though the pictures of the athletes were chosen based on the results from the pre-test in Study 2, it was still important to check whether the manipulation of the attractiveness level of the athletes was valid with the current sample as well. Unfortunately, some questionnaires did not include the Perceived Physical Attractiveness Scale for the athletes in the second stimulus group in which the immoral unattractive athlete wins the match. Therefore, of the 52 participants in this group, only 20 respondents rated the athletes’ physical attractiveness. All 51 participants in the first stimulus group were able to rate the athletes’ physical attractiveness. Even though not every participant could rate the athletes physical attractiveness, previous research suggests that people are generally in agreement of who is attractive and who is not (Bull & Rumsey, 1988). Therefore, 71 participants should still provide a general understanding of whether athletes were perceived as attractive or unattractive. A paired-samples t-test was performed for the manipulation check. The results revealed that the athletes were indeed perceived as attractive (MAttractive = 3.97, SD = .51) and unattractive (MUnattractive = 3.11, SD = .57), t[69] = 10.61, p < .001.

Research Questions

81

The first research question asked whether respondents would form more positive dispositions toward the moral attractive player. The research question was analyzed in two stages. In the first stage, the hypothesis was tested on the total sample without considering what research group the participants were in. A paired-sample t-test was performed to detect any statistically significant difference between the respondents’ evaluations of the moral attractive and immoral unattractive athletes. The results (Table 12) indicated that participants evaluated the moral attractive athlete more favorably than the immoral unattractive player (t[97] = 16.209, p < .001). In the second stage, the hypothesis was tested for each experiment group separately. The results were in the same direction for each group as well. Specifically, respondents’ evaluations of the moral attractive athlete were significantly more favorable than the immoral attractive athlete in both research conditions, tMoral Attractive Wins[46] = 11.429, p

< .001; tImmoral Unattractive Wins[50] = 11.522, p < .001. As a result, when compared to immoral unattractive player, respondents formed more positive dispositions toward the moral attractive.

Table 12: Interpersonal Attraction toward Moral and Immoral Player

Group 1 Group 2 (Moral Attractive (Immoral Groups Wins) Unattractive Wins) Combined n=64 n=57 n=121

Moral Attractive Player (M) 6.80 a 7.04 b 6.93 c (SD) .92 1.20 1.08 Immoral Unattractive Player 3.59 3.51 3.55 (M) a b c 1.32 1.27 1.28 (SD) Subscripts indicate significance at the p <.001 level.

The second research question sought to examine whether respondents who watched a tennis match won by a moral attractive player would report higher levels of enjoyment, compared to the participants who watch a tennis match won by an immoral 82 unattractive player. As Table 13 demonstratesm, an independent-samples t-test revealed no statistically significant difference in reported enjoyment levels between the two stimulus groups (t[101] = 1.375, p = .172). As a result, participants who watched the moral attractive player won the game did not enjoy the game significantly more than the participants who watched the immoral unattractive player won. The third research question asked whether male participants, compared to female participants, would report higher enjoyment from an all-female tennis match. A paired-samples t-test revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between the male and female participants’ enjoyment of the game (t[49] = 1.243, p = .342, equal variances not assumed). The fourth research question examined whether being a sports fan has an effect on respondents’ enjoyment of the video. A liner regression analysis indicated that sportsfanship of participants was not a significant predictor of the enjoyment of the video, F(2, 98) = 9.36, p = .428. Finally, the fifth research question asked whether respondents’ levels of tennis fanship played a role in their enjoyment of the video. A linear regression analysis revealed that tennis fanship was indeed a significant predictor of enjoyment scores ( = .50, p < .001), accounting for 24.5% of the variance.

Table 13: Enjoyment of Game in Attractive and Unattractive Conditions Group 1 Group 2 (Moral Attractive Wins) (Immoral Unattractive Wins) Enjoyment of Game (M) 4.30 4.74 (SD) 1.58 1.71

No significance detected at the p = .05 level.

Discussion for Study III

This study offered mixed results, making it difficult to reach a clear conclusion about its support for the disposition theory of sports spectatorship. First, the findings revealed that participants did form positive dispositions toward the moral attractive player and negative dispositions toward the immoral unattractive player (RQ1), which is

83 consistent with the basic tenets of disposition theory. However, even though respondents reported more positive valences toward the moral attractive athlete, results showed that the enjoyment level of the respondents who watched the moral attractive player win the game was not statistically higher than the participants who watched the moral attractive player lose (RQ2) as would be suggested by the theory. A possible explanation to this finding is that almost two-thirds of the sample comprised of female participants, who probably had low involvement in watching the sports video. Therefore, it is possible that even though respondents liked the moral attractive player more, most participants were indifferent about the winner of the game. As a result, there was no significant difference in the mean enjoyment levels of the participants in the two stimulus groups. The last two research questions that asked to find out whether sports fans and tennis fans have different evaluations of the game yielded similar results with the first two studies. As with other studies, while participants’ level of sportsfanship was not found to have an influence on their enjoyment of the video, the individuals’ tennis fanship continued to be a significant predictor of enjoyment.

84

CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION

The purpose of this dissertation was to extend the disposition theory of sports spectatorship by identifying new factors that may induce formation of dispositions toward the athletes. More specifically, this study examined the role of morality and physical attractiveness of athletes in the formation of dispositions, and thus their influence on enjoyment of the media content. Even though the dissertation was guided mainly by the disposition theory, the findings have implications on the other literatures that helped shape this study as well, namely team identification and interpersonal attraction theory. Therefore, this chapter provides discussions of the implications of the findings for each literature that was reviewed in Chapter II.

Implications for Disposition Theory

The dissertation extends the disposition theory of drama to the disposition theory of sports spectatorship. It was already found that moral evaluations of the characters in dramatic presentations played a role in formation of dispositions (Raney, 2002). This study has extended this finding into the context of sports. The findings from Study 1 suggest that moral judgment is indeed a factor in the formation and maintenance of dispositions toward sports athletes as well. The results revealed that the participants, as in drama, formed dispositions toward the athletes based on their moral evaluations. They came to like the athlete whom they perceived as moral, and to dislike the other whom they observed as having immoral behaviors. As a result of these dispositions, participants developed expectations about the outcome of the game. Specifically, they wanted the athlete who they judged as morally appropriate to win the game. Consequently, participants who watched the liked athlete win enjoyed the game more than those who watched the disliked athlete achieve the victory. In broader sense, as mentioned in Chapter IV, findings provide further support for the central proposition of the disposition theory, which holds that enjoyment of media content is a function of viewers’ affective dispositions toward the characters depicted, and

85 whatever happens to those characters. Even though the majority of the hypotheses were not supported in Study 2, the findings are interesting in that they may be seen as providing some support for disposition theory from a different perspective. Firstly, the physical attractiveness of the athletes was not found to influence formation of dispositions. Moreover, level of enjoyment was not significantly different between the two stimulus groups. A closer look at the results revealed that participants’ mean scores on interpersonal attraction toward both of the athletes were in the mid range, suggesting similar attraction to the players (See Table 7). The enjoyment derived from the game in both conditions were also almost identical and in the mid range (See Table 8). The enjoyment findings are consistent with the disposition literature, which suggests that watching games between similarly liked or similarly disliked players or teams will produce intermediate levels of enjoyment (Zillmann & Paulus, 1993). Study 3, which combined morality and physical attractiveness, provided ambiguous results for disposition theory. Firstly, results showed that participants in general did report more positive dispositions toward the moral attractive player. It was found in Study 2 that physical attractiveness alone was not a statistically significant predictor of formation of dispositions, and that lack of information about the athletes could be the main reason. Therefore, Study 3 sought to examine whether dispositions would be formed toward the athletes when information about their morality was included in addition to their attractiveness level. The results show that participants indeed formed positive dispositions toward the moral attractive athlete. Moreover, when comparing the reported interpersonal attraction toward the athletes in Study 3 with Study 1, we see that participants’ attraction is slightly higher toward the moral attractive athlete (MStudy 1 = 6.48, SD = 1.14; MStudy 3 = 6.93, SD = 1.08) and lower for the immoral unattractive player (MStudy 1 = 4.30, SD = 1.29; MStudy 3 = 3.55, SD = 1.28) in Study 3. In this sense, it seems like morality has an additive effect with attractiveness when it comes to disposition formations. However, although we can see some effect of these two constructs on each other, it should be noted that we cannot reach a definite, or statistically-defensible, conclusion on the interaction effect between the two constructs due to the methodology used in the study. The inadequacy of the

86 methodology for Study 3 is discussed in more detail under the “Limitations of the Study” subsection of this chapter. The ambiguity of the results in Study 3 mentioned above is caused by the fact that even though the participants in general reported significantly more positive dispositions toward the moral attractive athlete, the mean enjoyment levels in the two stimulus groups were not statistically different, as would be expected by disposition theory. However, as discussed in Chapter V, a possible explanation to this finding is the low involvement of the dominantly-female sample who viewed the video. This explanation actually highlights one of the acknowledgments of disposition theory. As outlined by Raney (2006), disposition-based theories acknowledge the role of various psychological factors in the process of enjoyment. One of those factors, the author suggests, is the “ability or willingness to attend to the narrative” (p. 148). That is, enjoyment is likely to decrease if a viewer is not willing to watch the media content, or does not feel involved in the content of the video. In this sense, we could argue that the forced-exposure nature of the experiment could result in low involvement with watching the video, therefore leading to the non-significant difference in enjoyment between the stimulus groups. The research questions that examined the influence of sportsfanship and tennis fanship on enjoyment consistently revealed the same results in all three studies. Specifically, while the sportsfanship of viewers was not found to be a strong enough predictor, tennis fanship consistently had an effect on enjoyment. In this context, it would be safe to suggest that the higher the level of fanship of the specific sport shown in the media content, the higher the enjoyment viewers will obtain from their exposure to such content. This is also coherent with disposition-based theories’ acknowledgment that enjoyment of media content is influenced by viewers’ preexisting attitudes about the genre (or the sport, in the context of sports spectatorship) as well (Raney, 2006).

Implications for Team Identification Literature

As mentioned in Chapter 2, the current team identification literature does not adequately address how these identifications with teams are actually formed (Wann, 87

2006). In this sense, the findings of the present study benefit the particular literature as well by suggesting what might cause sports spectators to form affiliations with a player or team. In an attempt to explore the antecedents of team identification, Wann (2006) suggested that player attributes have been found to be an important factor in forming affiliations with the athletes (eg. Wann et. al., 1996; Kinnally et al., 2004; Fisher & Wakefield, 1998). The findings of the present dissertation provides support for, and adds to, the literature, in that morality as a player attribute has shown to play a role in forming affiliations with players in the present study as well. However, even though participants came to like the moral and moral attractive athlete, it should be noted that team identification, or player identification, is not formed instantaneously. It takes time for spectators to feel affiliated with a team or a player. Therefore, reading a brief information sheet about the athletes and watching an 8minute video may very well be insufficient to form a clear affiliation toward the athletes. However, affiliation starts with some kind of initial liking or having good feelings towards. In that sense, reporting higher interpersonal attraction toward the moral and the moral attractive athlete does give us a clue that being moral can be an antecedent of identification with a player or a team. The team identification literature is coherent with disposition-based theories as well. Similar to the disposition-based theories, the team identification literature suggests that fans with higher levels of identification with a team are more likely to report greater enjoyment when their team experiences victory over an opponent (e.g., Madrigal, 2003; Bernthal & Graham, 2003; Stets & Burke, 2000). Study 1 and 2 revealed that when the liked player won the game, the enjoyment derived from watching the game significantly increased. Therefore, results from this dissertation are consistent with, and show support for, this proposition.

Implications for Interpersonal Attraction Theory

It was demonstrated in detail in Chapter 2 that physical attractiveness is a powerful predictor of interpersonal attraction. A copious number of studies have provided evidence for the strong influence of physical attractiveness in interpersonal attraction across numerous contexts and settings. Nevertheless, prior to the present 88 dissertation, no studies have investigated the influence of the physical attractiveness of the athletes on the formation of dispositions. Therefore, this study extends the physical attractiveness literature by examining the relationship between athletes’ physical attractiveness and spectators’ formation of dispositions. The findings of Study 2, however, revealed contrasting results to the physical attractiveness literature in general. Although physical attractiveness has been repeatedly found in the literature to have a positive effect on interpersonal attraction, in the context of the present dissertation, physical attractiveness of athletes was not found to have a significant effect on attraction. There could be several explanations to this finding. One explanation is that the stimulus material was not strong enough. That is, athletes’ physical attractiveness was determined only by a still mug-shot style picture that was displayed for 3 seconds on a scoreboard graphic after each point. The continuous long-shot of the video did not reveal any other clues about each athlete’s attractiveness. Therefore, it could be that still pictures were not strong enough stimulus materials. Another explanation to the finding is, as mentioned in Chapter IV, that Eagly, Makhijani, Ashmore, and Longo (1991) was accurate in their deduction that physical attractiveness is not as strong in generating positive perceptions, mainly suggested by studies of person perception and implicit personality theories. In their metaanalytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotyping, the authors suggested that the “what is beautiful is good” effect is highly variable, and that such an effect depends on the type of inference the perceiver is asked to make. While physical attractiveness generates strong implications about social competence, for example, it has little effect on other beliefs such as integrity and concern for others. Bassili (1981) reached similar results as well, noting that the effect of physical attractiveness is a content-specific phenomenon. In the context of this dissertation, the results suggest that attractiveness had little effect on viewers’ interpersonal attraction toward the athletes, especially when physical attractiveness was the only cue for participants (Study 2). However, we do see an increase in the attraction toward the attractive player, when another positive attribute (morality) was added to her profile. In this sense, this dissertation contributes to the interpersonal attraction

89 literature by suggesting that physical attractiveness alone may not be a strong predictor of attraction. However, it does help attract more when it is combined with other positive attributes such as morality. Lastly, we could speculate that in a sport setting, attractiveness of athletes does not matter much for the audiences, but the competition itself. Physical attractiveness might play a role over time, but it seems that when audiences are exposed to the athletes for the first time, they initially pay more attention to the competitive nature of the game, not the appearance of the athletes. From this perspective, it might be that audiences start paying attention to the personal attributes of the athletes after some time.

Limitations of the Study

As with other studies, this dissertation has its own limitations as well. The first limitation relates to the sampling method employed for the experiments. The available subject pool, undergraduate students at the Florida State University, would not allow for randomly chosen participants for the studies. Therefore, a convenience sample was drawn from communication and business-related undergraduate classes for all three studies. Thus, the sample does not represent larger populations and the results cannot be generalized to other populations. However, although the results are not generalizable, the findings do provide a springboard for scholars and future research. The second limitation concerns the assignment of the samples into each study. Even though participants were randomly assigned to each research condition within a study, they were not randomly assigned for each study. Samples were determined for each study separately. Hence, findings from studies could be a result of the characteristics of the sample used. Third, the stimulus video used for the experiments could be a limitation to the study. Due to technical and financial difficulties in creating a broadcast-quality video, a lower-quality video was produced. Specifically, the video shown to the participants was a fictitious video with no multiple camera angles and no announcer or commentators as would be expected from a traditionally televised tennis match.

Therefore, participants’ enjoyment of the video could have been different if the video 90 was in traditional broadcasting style with different camera angles, statistics, announcers and commentators. Lastly, the research methodology utilized in Study 3 does not allow for measuring the interaction effect between morality and physical attractiveness constructs. The methodology in the particular study only compares two positive attributes (moral and physically attractive) with two negative attributes (immoral and physically unattractive). The detection of the interaction effect could have been statistically possible by adding six more stimulus groups in which mixed attributes are ascribed to the athletes and the winner of the game is varied. These six groups were not added to the study because of the limited sample pool.

Recommendations for Future Research

It was noted earlier how dispositional valences toward the characters, athletes, and teams are formed is still a question in the disposition literature (Raney, 2004). In this context, the main purpose of this study was to fill a gap in disposition theory of sports spectatorship by identifying new variables that may have influence on formation of dispositions toward the athletes. Surely, there are more antecedents of disposition formations than morality and physical attractiveness. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to continue to examine other factors that may influence dispositional valences. While the present dissertation examines the role of morality and physical attractiveness of athletes in formation of dispositions, it does not take into account the personal characteristics of the individuals. Participants’ own morality and physical attractiveness, for example, were not addressed in this study. Therefore, future research should consider investigating the role of individuals’ own morality and physical attractiveness in their dispositions toward the athletes and therefore their enjoyment. In more general sense, scholars should continuously scrutinize the effect of personal characteristics, when studying not only disposition formations, but team identification and interpersonal attraction as well. The results may provide useful findings for each literature, as well as the similarity attraction paradigm. In order to test the hypotheses and answer the research questions, the present 91 dissertation utilized the sport of tennis which is an individual sport. Therefore, the findings from all three studies suggest directions for identification with the athletes only. We are not sure about how these principles would apply to team identification. In a sport like football, for example, where many players are involved in a team, how would players’ individual morality levels influence people’s perception of a team? In other words, how does individuals’ moral evaluation of a “team” change because of the “players’” morality? Also, how many immoral players would it take for a fan to start feeling distant from his or her favorite team? These are some of the questions that remain to be answered in the context of team identification. In this sense, future research should consider examining the role of player attributes at team sports level as well.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to extend the disposition theory of sports spectatorship by identifying new factors that may induce formation of dispositions. Specifically, the study investigated the role of morality and physical attractiveness of athletes in the formation of dispositions in separate experiments. In the first experiment in which morality was examined, the findings revealed that morality of athletes was indeed a factor in the formation of dispositions. This study extends the disposition theory of drama to the disposition theory of sports spectatorship and provided further empirical evidence for the role of morality in the formation of dispositions. The second experiment that studied the role of physical attractiveness, on the other hand, suggested that contrary to the expectations, the good looks of the athletes do not induce formation of dispositions. It was speculated that the competitive nature of sports attracts the audiences more than the mere good looks of the athletes. Because of the varied results in the first two studies, the researcher conducted a third study to investigate whether morality and physical attractiveness together stimulate disposition formation. The findings revealed that morality has an additive effect on physical attractiveness regarding the formation of dispositions.

92

APPENDIX A MEDIA GUIDE BOOKLET FOR STUDY 1

93

APPENDIX B IRB APPROVAL LETTER

94

APPENDIX C STUDY 1 SURVEY

95

96

97

98

99

APPENDIX D

STUDY 1 PRETEST SURVEY

100

101

APPENDIX E STUDY 2 ONLINE PRETEST SURVEY

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

APPENDIX F

STUDY 2 SURVEY

123

124

125

126

127

128

APPENDIX G STUDY 3 MEDIA GUIDE BOOKLET

129

APPENDIX H STUDY 3 SURVEY

130

131

132

133

134

REFERENCES

Abrami, P. C., & Mizener, D. A. (1983). Does the Attitude Similarity of College Professors and Their Students Produce" Bias" in Course Evaluations? American Educational Reserach Journal, 20(1), 123-136.

Adams, G. R. (1978). Racial membership and physical attractiveness effects on preschool teachers' expectations. Child Study Journal, 8, 29-41.

AhYun, K. (2002). Interpersonal communication research: Advances through metaanalysis. In M. Allen, R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle & N. A. Burrell (Eds.), Interpersonal communication research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 145-167). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Ajzen, I. (1974). Effects of information on interpersonal attraction: Similarity versus affective value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29(3), 374-380.

Alexander, C. N., & Knight, G. W. (1971). Situated identities and social psychological experimentation. Sociometry, 34(1), 65-82.

Amodio, D. M., & Showers, C. J. (2005). 'Similarity breeds liking' revisited: The moderating role of commitment. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(6), 817-836.

Andrews, D. L., & Jackson, S. J. (2001). Sport Stars: The cultural politics of sporting celebrity. New York: Routledge.

Aristotle. (1932). The rhetoric (L. Cooper, Trans.). New York: Appleton – Century - Crofts. (Original work published 330 BC)

Arpan, L. A., Raney, A. A., & Zivnuska, S. (2003). A cognitive approach to understanding university image. Corporate Communications: An international Journal, 8(2), 97-113.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20-39.

Ashmore, R. D. (1981). Sex stereotypes and implicit personality theory. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior (pp. 37-81). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bar-Tal, D., & Saxe, L. (1976). Physical attractiveness and its relationship to sex-role stereotyping. Sex Roles, 2, 123-133.

Bassili, J. N. (1981). The attractiveness stereotype: Goodness or glamour? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 2, 235-252. 135

Beisser, A. R. (1967). The Madness in Sports: Psychosocial Observations on Sports. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Benson, P. L., Karabenick, S. A., & Lerner, R. M. (1976). Pretty pleases: The effects of physical attractiveness, race, and sex on receiving help. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 409-415.

Bernstein, A. (2002). Is It Time for a Victory Lap?: Changes in the Media Coverage of Women in Sport International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 37(3-4), 415-428.

Bernthal, M. & Graham, P. (2003). The effect of sport setting on fan attendance motivation: The case of minor league vs. collegiate baseball. Journal of Sport Behavior, 26(3), 223-240.

Berscheid, E. (1985). Interpersonal Attraction. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 413-484). New York: Random House.

Berscheid, E., Dion, K., Walster, E., & Walster, G. W. (1971). Physical attractiveness and dating choice: A test of the matching hypothesis Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7(2), 173-189.

Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1974). Physical attractiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 157–215). New York: Academic Press.

Berscheid, E., Walster, E., & Bohrnstedt, G. (1973). The happy American body: A survey report. Psychology Today, 7(6), 119-131.

Bond, M., Byrne, D., & Diamond, M. J. (1968). Effect of occupational prestige and attitude similarity on attraction as a function of assumed similarity of attitude. Psychological Reports, 23(3, Pt. 2), 1167-1172.

Brislin, R. W., & Lewis, S. A. (1968). Dating and physical attractiveness: replication. Psychological Reports, 22, 976.

Brophy, J. E., Evertson, C. M. (1981). Student characteristics and teaching. New York: Longman.

Bruner, J. S., & Tagiuri, R. (1954). The perception of people. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 89-137). Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Bryant, J., Brown, D., Comisky, P. W., & Zillmann, D. (1982). Sports and spectators: Commentary and appreciation. Journal of Communication, 4, 109-119. 136

Bryant, J., Comisky, P., & Zillmann, D. (1981). The appeal of rough-and-tumble play in televised professional football. Communication Quarterly, 29, 256-262.

Bryant, J., & Miron, D. (2002). Entertainment as media effect. In J. (. Bryant, & D. (. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed.).; media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed.). LEA's communication series (pp. 549-582). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Bryant, J., & Raney, A. A. (2000). Sports on the Screen. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Media Entertainment: The Psychology of its Appeal (pp. 153-174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Bryant, J., Rockwell, S. C., & Owens, J. W. (1994). "Buzzer beaters" and "barn burners": The effects on enjoyment of watching the game go "down to the wire." Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 18, 326-339.

Bull, P., & Rumsey, N. (1988). The Social Psychology of Facial Appearance. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 735-747.

Byrne, D. (1971). The ubiquitous relationship: Attitude similarity and attraction: A cross-cultural study. Human Relations, 24(3), 201-207.

Byrne, D., & Clore, G. L. (1967). Effectance arousal and attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 1-18.

Byrne, D., & Clore, G. L. (1970). A reinforcement model of evaluative responses. Personality: An International Journal, 1, 103-12.

Byrne, D., & Griffitt, W. (1966). Similarity versus liking: A clarification. Psychonomic Science, 6, 295-296.

Byrne, D., & Griffitt, W. (1973). Interpersonal Attraction. Psychological Review, 24, 317-336.

Byrne, D., London, O., & Griffitt, W. (1968). The effect of topic importance and attitude similarity–dissimilarity on attraction in an intrastranger design. Psychonomic Science, 11, 303-304.

Byrne, D., & Nelson, D. (1965). Attraction as a linear function of positive reinforcement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 659-663.

137

Cantor, J. (1998). Children's attraction to violent television programming. In J. H. Goldstein (Ed.), Why we watch: The attractions of violent entertainment. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cash, T. F., & Derlega, V. J. (1978). The matching hypothesis: Physical attractiveness among same-sexed friends, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4(2), 240-243.

Cash, T. F., & Duncan, N. C. (1984). Physical attractiveness stereotyping among black american college students. Journal of Social Psychology, 122(1), 71-77.

Cash, T. F., & Janda, L. H. (1984). The eye of the beholder. Psychology Today, 46 52.

Cash, T. F., Kehr, J. A., Polyson, J., & Freeman, V. (1977). Role of physical attractiveness in peer attribution of psychological disturbance. Journal of Consulting and Clinial Psychology, 45, 987-993.

Cheska, A. T. (1981). Sports spectacular: The social ritual of power. In M. Hart & S. Birrell (Eds.), Sports in the sociocultural process (pp. 369-386). Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown. (Original Work published 1902).

Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, R. J., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three football field studies. Journal of personality and social psychology, 34, 366 - 375.

Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1999). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), The self in social psychology. Key readings in social psychology (Vol. ix, pp. 436-445). New York: Psychology Press.

Clifford, M. M., & Walster, E. (1973). The effect of physical attractiveness on teacher expectations. Sociology of Education, 46, 248-258.

Condon, J. W., & Crano, W. D. (1988). Inferred Evaluation and the Relation Between Attitude Similarity and Interpersonal Attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 789-797.

Crano, W. D., & Messe., L. A. (1982). Social psychology: Principles and themes of interpersonal behavior. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.

138

Danielson, M. N. (1997). Home team: Professional sports and the American metropolis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Davis, C., Shuster, B., Dionne, M., & Claridge, G. (2001). Do you see what I see?: Facial attractiveness and weight preoccupation in college women. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 20(2), 147-160.

De Wolfe, T. E., & Jackson, L. A. (1984). Birds of a brighter feather: Level of moral reasoning and similarity of attitude as determinants of interpersonal attraction. Psychological Reports, 54(1), 303-308.

Dechesne, M., Greenberg, J., Arndt, J., & Schimel, J. (2000). Terror management and the vicissitudes of sports fan affiliation: the effects of mortality salience on optimism and fan identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(6), 813 - 835.

DeGroot, T., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1999). Why visual and vocal interview cues can affect interviewers' judgments and predict job performance, Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(6), 986-993.

DeMeis, D. K., & Turner, R. R. (1978). Effects of student's race, physical attractiveness, and dialect on teacher evaluations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 3, 77-86.

Denham, B. E. (2004). Toward an explication of media enjoyment: The synergy of social norms, viewing situations, and program content. Communication Theory, 14(4), 370-387.

Depalma, A., & Raney, A. A. (2003). The effect of viewing varying levels of aggressive sports programming on enjoyment, mood, and perceived violence. Presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Diego, CA.

Dermer, M., & Thiel, D. L. (1975). When beauty may fail. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(6), 1168-1176.

Dimmock, J. A., & Grove, J. R. (2005). Relationship of Fan Identification to Determinants of Aggression. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17(1), 37 47.

Dimmock, J. A., Grove, J. R., & Eklund, R. C. (2005). Reconceptualizing Team Identification: New Dimensions and Their Relationship to Intergroup Bias. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9(2), 75-86.

Dion, K. K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290. 139

Dipboye, R. L., Arvey, R. D., & Terpstra, D. E. (1977). Sex and physical attractiveness of raters and applicants as determinants of resumé evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(3), 288-294.

Dunnette, M. D. & Borman, W. C. (1979). Personnel selection and classification systems. Annual Review of Psychology, 30, 477-525.

Dushenko, T. W., Perry, R. P., Schilling, J., & Smolarski, S. (1978). Generality of the physical attractiveness stereotype for age and sex. Journal of Social Psychology, 105(2), 303-304.

Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., Ashmore, R. D., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but . . .: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 109-128.

Feingold, A. (1988). Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and same-sex friends: A meta-analysis and theoretical critique. Psychological Bulletin, 104(2), 226-235.

Feingold, A. (1990). Gender differences in effects of attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research paradigms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 981-993.

Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125-139.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.

Fink, J. S., Trail, G. T., & Anderson, D. F. (2002). An examination of team identification: which motives are most salient to the existence? International sports journal, 6(2), 195-207.

Fisher, R. J., & Wakefield, K. (1998). Factors leading to group identification: A field study of winners and losers. Psychology & Marketing, 15, 23-40.

Freud, S. (1960). Jokes and their relation to the unconscious. (James Strachey, Ed. And Trans). New York: W. W. Norton & Company. (Original work published 1905).

Galton, F. (1870). Hereditary genius: an inquiry into its laws and consequences. New York: Horizon. (Republished 1952)

Gan, S., Tuggle, C. A., Mitrook, M. A., Coussement, S. H., & Zillmann, D. (1997). The thrill of the close game: Who enjoys it and who doesn't? Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 21, 53-64. 140

Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701 721. Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding Media Enjoyment: The Role of Transportation Into Narrative Worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311-327.

Gwinner, K. P., & Swanson, S. (2003). A Model of Fan Identification: Antecedents and Sponsorship Outcomes. Journal of Services Marketing, 17(3), 275-292.

Hansson, R. O, & Duffield, B. J. (1976). Physical attractiveness and the attribution of epilepsy. Journal of Social Psychology, 66, 233-240.

Herbst, K. C., Gaertner, L., & Insko, C. A. (2003). My head says yes but my heart says no: Cognitive and affective attraction as a function of similarity to the ideal self. journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1206-1219.

Hill, C. T., Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1976). Breakups before marriage: The end of 103 affairs. Journal of Social Issues, 32(1), 147-168.

Hinkley, J. W., Marsh, H. W., & McInerney, D. M (2002). Social Identity and Navajo High School Students: Is a Strong Social Identity Important in the School Context? In W. J. Lonner, D. L. Dinnel, S. A. Hayes, & D. N. Sattler (Eds.), Online Readings in Psychology and Culture (Unit 3, Chapter 5), (http://www.wwu.edu/~culture), Center for Cross-Cultural Research, Western Washington University, Bellingham, Washington USA.

Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. Florence, KY: Taylor & Frances/Routledge.

Horton, R. S. (2003). Similarity and Attractiveness in Social Perception: Differentiating Between Biases for the Self and the Beautiful . Self and Identity, 2(2), 137-152.

Horton, R. S., & Montoya, R. M. (2004). The relationship between implied information and interpersonal attraction. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Hosoda, M., Stone-Romero, E. F., & Coats, G. (2003). The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Personnel Psychology, 56(2), 431-462.

Jackson, L. A., Hunter, J. E., & Hodge, C. N. (1995). Physical attractiveness and intellectual competence: A meta-analytic review. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 108-122.

141

Jacobson, B. (2003). The Social Psychology of the Creation of a Sports Fan Identity: A Theoretical Review of the Literature. Athletic Insight: The Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 5(2). Retrieved from http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol5Iss2/FanDevelopment.htm.

James, J. D. (2001). The Role of Cognitive Development and Socialization in the Initial Development of Team Loyalty. Leisure Sciences, 23, 233–261.

Jenkins, R. (1996). Social Identity. New York: Routeledge.

Johnston, D. D. (1995). Adolescents' motivations for viewing graphic horror. Human Communication Research, 21(4), 522-552.

Jones, W. H., Hansson, R. O., & Phillips, A. L. (1978). Physical attractiveness and judgments of psychopathology. Journal of Social Psychology, 105, 79-84.

Kagan, J. (1958). The concept of identification. Psychological Review, 65, 296-305.

Kimble, C. E., & Cooper, B. P. (1992). Association and dissociation by football fans. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75(1), 303-309.

Kinnally, W., Tuzunkan, F., Fitzgerald, M., & Smith, J. (2004). The Role of Religion in the Formation of Dispositions in Sports News. Paper presented at the International Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.

Kleck, R., & Rubenstein, C. (1975). Physical attractiveness, perceived attitude similarity, and interpersonal attraction in an opposite-sex encounter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 107-114.

Klohnen, E. C., & Luo, S. (2003). Interpersonal Attraction and Personality: What is Attractive -Self Similarity, Ideal Similarity, Complementarity, or Attachment Security? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(4), 709-722.

Kolbe, R.H., & James, J.D. (2003). The internalization process among team followers: Implications for team loyalty. International Journal of Sport Management, 4(1), 25–43.

Krcmar, M., & Greene, K. (1999). Predicting exposure to and uses of television violence. Journal of Communication, 49(3), 24-45.

Lang, P. J. (1985). The Cognitive Psychophysiology of Emotion: Anxiety and the Anxiety Disorders. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 390-423.

142

LaPrelle, J. H., Hoyle, R. H., Insko, C. A. Bernthal, P.. (1990). Interpersonal attraction and descriptions of the traits of others: Ideal similarity, self similarity, and liking. Journal of Research in Personality, 24(2), 216-240.

LeCroy, C. W., & Daley, J. (2001). Empowering Adolescent Girls: Examining the Present and Building Skills for the Future with the "Go Girls" Program New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

Madrigal, R. (1995). Cognitive and Affective Determinants of Fan Satisfaction with Sporting Event Attendance. Journal of Leisure Research, 27, 205-227.

Madrigal, R. (2000). The influence of social alliances with sports teams on intentions to purchase corporate sponsors' products. Journal of Advertising, 29(4), 13 24.

Madrigal, R. (2003). Investigating an evolving leisure experience: Antecedents and consequences of spectator affect during a live sporting event. Journal of Leisure Research, 35(1), 23-48.

Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (2001). Identification in work, war, sports, and religion: Contrasting the benefits and risks. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31(2), 197-222.

Maruyama, G., & Miller, N. (1981). Physical attractiveness and personality. In B. Mahrer (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research (Vol. 10), pp. 203-280. New York: Academic Press.

Mazella, R., & Feingold, A. (1994). The effects of physical attractiveness, race, socioeconomic status, and gender of defendants and victims on judgments of mock jurors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1315–1344.

Mazur, A. (1986). U. S. trends in feminine beauty and overadaptation. The Journal of Sex Research, 22(3), 281-303.

McCall, M. (1997). The effects of physical attractiveness on gaining access to alcohol: When social policy meets social decision making. Addiction, 92(5), 597-600.

McCroskey, J. C., & Mccain, T. A. (1974). The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech Monographs, 41, 261-266.

Miller, A. G. (1970). Role of physical attractiveness in impression formation. Psychonomic Science, 19, 241-243.

Mlicki, P., & Ellemers, N. (1996). Being different or being better? National stereotypes

143

and identifications of Polish and Dutch students. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 97-114.

Montoya, R. M., & Horton, R. S. (2004). On the Importance of Cognitive Evaluation as a Determinant of Interpersonal Attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 696-712.

Montoya, R. M., Horton, R. S., & Kirchner, J. (2004). Does similarity in relationships really cause attraction? A quantitative research synthesis of the similarity effect. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Morse, S. J., & Gruzen, J. (1976). The eye of the beholder: A neglected variable in the study of physical attractiveness? Journal of Personality, 44(2), 209-225.

Murstein, B. I., & Beck, G. D. (1972). Person perception, marriage adjustment, and social desirability. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 39, 396 403.

Nabi, R. L., & Krcmar, M. (2004). Conceptualizing media enjoyment as attitude: Implications for mass media effects research. Communication Theory, 14(4), 288-310.

Newcomb, T. M., & Svehla, G. (1937). Intra-Family Relationships in Attitudes. Sociometry, 1, 180-205

Nielsen, J. P., & Kernaleguen, A. (1976). Influence of clothing and physical attractiveness in person perception. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 42(3, Pt 1), 775-780.

Novak, D. W., & Lerner, M. J. (1968). Rejection as a consequence of perceived similarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2, PT. 1), 147-152.

Oliver, M. B. (1993). Exploring the paradox of the enjoyment of sad films. Human Communication Research, 19(3), 315-342.

Owens, J. W., & Bryant, J. (1998). The effects of a hometown ("Homer") announcer and color commentator on audience perspectives and enjoyment of a sports contest. Paper presented at the International Communication Association, Jerusalem, Israel.

Patzer, G. L. (1985). The Physical Attractiveness Phenomena. New York: Plenum Press.

Peterson, J. L., & Miller, C. (1980). Physical attractiveness and marriage adjustment in older American couples. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 105(2), 247-252.

144

Raney, A. A. (2002). Moral judgment as a predictor of enjoyment of crime drama. Media Psychology, 4(4), 305-322.

Raney, A. A. (2003). Dispositon-based theories of enjoyment. In J. Bryant, & D. Roskos-Ewoldsen (Eds.), Communication and emotion: Essays in honor of Dolf Zillmann. LEA's communication series (pp. 61-84). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Raney, A. A. (2004). Expanding disposition theory: Reconsidering character liking, moral evaluations, and enjoyment. Communication Theory, 14(4), 348-369.

Raney, A. A. (2006). The psychology of disposition-based theories of media enjoyment. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp. 137-150). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Raney, A. A., & Bryant, J. (2002). Moral judgment and crime drama: An integrated theory of enjoyment. Journal of Communication, 52(2), 402-415.

Rinehart, R. (1998). Inside of the outside: pecking orders within alternative sport at ESPN's 1995 "The EXtreme Games". Journal of sport and social issues, 22(4), 398-415.

Ritts, V., Patterson, M. L., & Tubbs, M. E. (1992). Expectations, Impressions, and Judgments of Physically Attractive Students: A Review. Review of Educational Research, 62(4), 413-426.

Romano, S., & Bordieri, J. E. (1989). Physical attractiveness stereotypes and students' perception of college professors. Psychological Reports, 64(3), 1099-1102.

Russell, R. J., & Wells, P. A. (1991). Personality similarity and quality of marriage. Personality and Individual Differences, 12(5), 407-412.

Sapolsky, B. S. (1980). The effect of spectator disposition and suspense on the enjoyment of sport contests. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 11(1), 1-10.

Schiller, B. (1932). A quantitative analysis of marriage selection in a small group. Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 297-319.

Sherry, J. L. (2004). Flow and media enjoyment. Communication Theory, 14(4), 328-347.

Sigall, H., & Ostrove, N. (1975). Beautiful but dangerous: Effects of offender attractiveness and nature of the crime on juridic judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(3), 410-414.

145

Smith, E. R., & Henry, S. (1996). An in-group becomes part of the self: Response time evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 635-642.

Snyder, C., Lassegard, M., & Ford, C. (1986). Distancing After Group Success and Failure: Basking in Reflected Glory and Cutting off Reflective Failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 382-388.

Steger, C. (2006, January 6). University President Charles Steger Statement on Marcus Vick. Retrieved May 18, 2006 from Virginia Tech, University Relations/Virginia Tech Athletics Web site: http://www.hokiesports.com/football/recaps/2006016aaa.html

Stephan, C. W., & Langlois, J. H. (1984). Baby beautiful: Adult attributions of infant competence as a function of infant attractiveness. Child Development, 55(2), 576-585.

Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 224-237.

Stevens, G., Owens, D., & Schaefer, E. C. (1990). Education and attractiveness in marriage choices Social Psychology Quarterly, 53(1), 62-70.

Stevenson, C. L. (1974). Sport as a contemporary social phenomenon: A functional explanation. International Journal of Physical Education, 11, 8-13.

Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: A socio-structural version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.

Sunnafrank, M. (1992). On debunking the attitude similarity myth. Communication Monographs, 59(2), 164-179.

Sutton, W. A., McDonald, M. A., & Milne, G. R. (1997). Creating and fostering fan identification in professional sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 6(1), 15 - 22.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole Publ.

Tamborini, R., & Stiff, J. (1987). Predictors of horror film attendance and appeal: An analysis of the audience for frightening films. Communication Research, 14(4), 415-436.

Taruiri, R. (1954). Person perception. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. II). Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

146

Touhey, J. C. (1974). Situated Identities, Similarity and Interpersonal Attraction. Sociometry, 37(3), 363-374.

Turner, J. C. (1988). Comments on Doise's individual and social identities in intergroup relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(2), 113-116.

Udry, J. R. (1965). Structural Correlates of Feminine Beauty Preferences in Britain and the United States: A Comparison. Sociology and Social Research, 49(3), 330-342.

Underwood, R., Bond, E., & Baer, R. (2001). Building service brands via social identity: Lessons from the sports marketplace. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 9, 1-13.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Cantor, J. (2000). Children's likes and dislikes of entertainment programs. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeal (Vol. xi, pp. 135-152). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Vorderer, P. (2000). Interactive Entertainment and Beyond. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Media Entertainment: The Psychology of its Appeal. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication Theory, 14(4), 388-408.

Vrij, A., & Firmin, H. R. (2001). Beautiful thus innocent? The impact of defendants' and victims' physical attractiveness and participants' rape beliefs on impression formation in alleged rape cases. International Review of Victimology, 8(3), 245-255.

Wann, D. L. (1997). Sport Psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

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). The Causes and Consequences of Sport Team Identification. In A. A. Raney & J. Bryant (Eds.), Handbook of Sports and Media (pp. 331-352). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1990). Die-hard and fair-weather fans: Effects of identification on BIRGing and CORFing tendencies. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 14,103-117.

147

Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1992). Emotional responses to the sports page. Journal of Sport and Social Issues,16, 49-64.

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

Wann, D. L., Culver, Z., Akanda, R., Daglar, M., De Divitiis, 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(3), 282-294.

Wann, D. L., Hamlet, M. A., Wilson, T. M., & Hodges, J. A. (1995). Basking in reflected glory, cutting off reflected failure, and cutting off future failure: The importance of group identification. Social Behavior and Personality, 23(4), 377-388.

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 Press.

Wann, D. L., Roberts, A., & Tindall, J. (1999). Role of team performance, team identification and self-esteem in sport spectators' game preferences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89(3), 945-950.

Wann, D. L., Royalty, J., & Roberts, A. (2000). The self-presentation of sport fans: investigating the importance of team identification and self-esteem. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23(2), 198-201.

Wann, D. L., Schinner, J., & Keenan, B. L. (2001). Males’ impressions of female fans and nonfans: There really is “Something About Mary.” North American Journal of Psychology, 3, 183-192.

Wann, D. L., Schrader, M. P., & Adamson, D. R. (1998). The cognitive and somatic anxiety of sport spectators. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21(3), 322-337.

Wann, D. L., Tucker, K. B., & Schrader, M. P. (1996). An exploratory examination of the factors influencing the origination, continuation and cessation of identification with sports teams. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82(3), 9951001.

Weaver, J. B. (1991). Exploring the links between personality and media preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 12(12), 1293-1299.

Wegner, D. M., & Vallacher, R. R. (1977). Implicit psychology: An introduction to social cognition. New York: Oxford University Press.

148

Wetzel, C. G., & Insko, C. A. (1982). The similarity-attraction relationship: Is there an ideal one? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 253-276.

White, G. L. (1980). Physical attractiveness and courtship progress Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(4), 660-668.

Wolff, H. A., Smith, C. E.., & Murray, H. A. (1934). The psychology of humor. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 28, 341-365.

Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 341-352.

Zillmann, D. (1988). Mood management: Using entertainment to full advantage. In L. E. Donohew, H. E. Sypher & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Communication, social cognition, and affect. Communication (pp. 147-171). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Zillmann, D. (1991). Empathy: Affect from bearing witness to the emotions of others. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes (135-167). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Zillmann, D. (1998). The psychology of the appeal of portrayals of violence. In J. H. Goldstein (Ed.), Why we watch: The attractions of violent entertainment (pp. 179-211). New York: Oxford University Press.

Zillmann, D. (2000). Humor and comedy. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeal. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1975). Viewer's moral sanction of retribution in the appreciation of dramatic presentations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11(6), 572-582.

Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1994). Entertainment as media effect. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann(Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 437– 461). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zillmann, D., Bryant, J., & Sapolsky, B. S. (1989). Enjoyment from sports spectatorship:. In J. H. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games, and play: Social and psychological viewpoints (2nd ed., pp. 241-278). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zillmann, D., & Cantor, L. (1972). Directionality of transitory dominance as a communication variable affecting humor appreciation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 191-198.

149

Zillmann, D., & Cantor, L. (1977). Affective Responses to the Emotions of a Protagonist. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(2), 155-165.

Zillmann, D., & Cantor, J. R. (1976). A disposition theory of humour and mirth. Humor and laughter: Theory, research, and applications. New Brunswick, NJ, US: Transaction Publishers.

Zillmann, D., & Paulus, P.B. (1993). Spectators: Reactions to sports events and effects on athletic performance. In R. N. Singer, M. Murphey & L. K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Sport Psychology (pp. 600-619). New York, NY: McMillan.

150

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Firat Tuzunkan was born in Nicosia, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, in August 1977. He received his BA degree in Radio-TV-Film from Eastern Mediterranean University in 1998. He also obtained an MS degree in digital media from Abilene Christian University in 2002, and a Ph.D. degree in mass communication from Florida State University in 2007. His research interests include media effects, entertainment theory, new media, uses and effects of Internet technologies, advertising and persuasion, and news effects and social issues.

151