Investigating the negative behaviors of a branded collegiate basketball student section

Brian S. Gordon1 Jeremy Arney2

1University of Kansas 2University of Wisconsin – La Crosse

Branded collegiate student sections (e.g., the Cameron Crazies at Duke University) have been identified as the most committed supporters of the team. The marketing benefits of these groups have been documented yet the potential negative consequences have gone unexplored in the literature. This study aimed to understand what types of behavior fans in this context engaged in, why they engaged in these actions, and attempts to link some of these observations to relevant theory on fan violence. A multiple method design was employed in order to obtain both breadth and depth of the phenomenon as well as for data triangulation. Ten members of a large, collegiate basketball fan group participated in in-depth, semi-structured interviews and extensive fieldwork of the fan group was conducted over the course of a season. Finally, 197 members of the same fan group responded to a survey questionnaire. The results of this study indicated there are negative consequences linked to the behavior of members of the branded student section. University officials should be aware of the potential danger of these branded student sections and strengthen relations and authority over these groups to minimize the likelihood of negative fan behavior.

ccording to the National Summit on a universally agreed-upon definition of the Civil Disturbances (2005), sporting phenomenon (Spaaij, 2014). Negative A events account for over 25% of fan behavior encompasses more than just convivial event disturbances on college physical acts of harm toward other fans and campuses. Even more, previous research players as well. It has been well- that has focused on fan violence has lacked documented, and glorified under the auspice

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 1 of “,” that acts of verbal Numerous psychological theories have been aggression directed at opposing players and applied to the group context to explain fans are a common aspect of sporting collective violence. Social identity theory events (Burgers, Beukeboom, Kelder, & (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) explains how the Peeters, 2014; Grove, Pickett, Jones, & group dimension installs itself in the minds Dorsch 2012; Wann, Carlson, & Schrader, of individuals and influences and shapes fan 1999; Wann, Schrader, & Carlson, 2000). behavior. An individual’s social identity is Thus, the aim of this study is to use an the self-perception that is derived from their immersive multiple methods approach to membership within a particular group and more holistically examine the construct of this perception leads the individual to negative sport fan behavior. discriminate in favor of their group in The authors relied on a broader, more comparison to a rival group (Tajfel & inclusive conceptualization of negative fan Turner, 1986). Individuals have a strong behavior to frame this inquiry. The desire to maintain a positive social identity conceptualization proposed by Branscombe as well as a high level of self-esteem and this and Wann (1992) that encompasses both is reflected in the types of comments fans aspects of negative fan behavior was used as make about behaviors by in-and out-group a baseline definition in developing interview members (Burgers et.al, 2014; Wann, 1993). and observation guides. Branscombe and As Wright (2009) stated, Wann (1992) viewed spectator aggression The psychological study of collective as, “the motive to harm another who does action has been dominated by an not wish to be treated in such a manner” (p. interest in determining when and why 1015). Further, we were drawn to Young’s individuals will (and will not) engage in (2012) description of crowd violence collective action…A group member whereas it was described as “acts of verbal engages in collective action any time she or physical aggression (threatened or actual), or he acts as a representative of the perpetrated by partisan fans at, or away group and where the action is directed from, the sports arena that may result in at improving the conditions of the injury to persons or damage to property” (p. group as a whole. (p. 860) 42). While this may sound simplistic, this In all, the behaviors and actions of definition emphasizes a more holistic participants in this study were viewed approach to aggression and can be through this broadly defined lens of interpreted to include both physical and aggression and collective action outcomes. verbal instances of aggression. Before the relevant theory is discussed, In addition to spectator aggression, this it is imperative to understand the current study also wishes to expand on the social climate surrounding fan violence. As an psychological notion of collective action. example, The National Collegiate Athletic

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 2 Association (NCAA) has formed special Finally, the University of Michigan’s committees, enacted legislation, and Athletic Director released an open letter convened a summit of academicians and urging fans to avoid “thoughtless practitioners in 2003 to address this issue. comments” after a punting mistake cost Furthermore, many incidents of violence Michigan the October 17, 2015, game have been committed by fans in response to against Michigan State (mmc-news.com, the outcome—win or loss—of a sporting 2015). event. These incidents have caused As an indication of the importance of considerable property damage, led to this issue, the NCAA has taken several steps countless arrests, and taken innocent lives as to better understand fan violence and has a result. also initiated policy in an effort to prevent Recently, Kansas State basketball fan future occurrences. In response to fan Nathan Power was issued a summons to violence concerns, the NCAA has offered appear in court for a disorderly conduct sportsmanship seminars at its annual charge after he rammed into University of convention. Additionally, it has proactively Kansas player Jamari Traylor after a home encouraged its respective institutions to upset win of the Jayhawks (KSN TV, 2015). draft uniform guidelines and standards Power apologized to KU admitting to regarding negative fan behavior. Finally, it letting “my emotions get the best of me in has offered leadership conferences for all of the chaos”, and Kansas State student-athletes in an effort to set an University president Kirk Schulz sent out a example for younger fans (“NCAA letter to everyone on the campus reminding President”, 2006). At the conference level, them of the importance of making a better steps have been taken to ensure fan safety in impression of the “Wildcat Way” than what response to incidents of fan violence. In the was nationally witnessed on television by Big Ten, the University of Wisconsin and thousands of viewers across the country University of Minnesota have increased (KSN TV, 2015). In addition, 31 people security and installed immovable barriers were arrested in close proximity to the that prevent students from storming the University of Kentucky campus for field. This is in response to an incident at disorderly conduct and public intoxication the Madison campus that critically injured after mass rioting broke out in response to six students and sent 73 to the hospital. In the Wildcats loss in the Final Four to the accordance with NCAA recommendations, University of Wisconsin last spring. Police the University of Minnesota has installed in riot gear fired pepper balls and employed collapsible field goal posts to prevent rowdy a street sweeper to break up the crowd of fans from tearing them down (Gruca, 2005). over 1,500 fans who gathered to protest the These administrative reactions illustrate stunning loss (The Associated Press, 2015). some of the outcomes that negative fan

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 3 behavior can have on sporting events. The circumstances (Branscombe & Wann, 1992; consequences of fan violence and Goldstein, 1989; Mann, 1979; Mustonen, subsequent actions taken by the NCAA Arms, & Russell, 1996; Wann & Dolan, demonstrate the significance of this issue in 1994). There are many theories of collective intercollegiate athletics. Furthermore, it is behavior that attempt to explain how the essential to understand the theoretical various notions of “group-think” affect explanations of fan violence in order to individuals who comprise these groups study the problem more thoroughly. (Hart 1998; Janis 1972). For example, Contagion Theory, first introduced by Review of Literature French theorist Gustav Le Bon (1895), Previous Fan Behavior Frameworks explains that behaviors and attitudes may be Prior studies of crowds at sporting disseminated and unanimously accepted by events have highlighted numerous a crowd and this creates a chain reaction of characteristics of the crowd composition elevated arousal throughout the group as a that may contribute to the precipitation of whole. In essence, Le Bon asserted that fan violence. According to Simons and emotions such as fear and hate are Taylor’s (1992) Psychosocial Model of Fan contagious in crowds because people Behavior, de-individuation—which is experience a decline in personal related to anonymity—can lead to an responsibility and do things collectively that “abandonment of personal responsibility they would never do when acting alone. and a weakening of personal and social For example, an individual’s arousal level restraints that normally guard against may be raised by a precipitating event (bad socially unacceptable behavior” (p. 216). In call; taunts from rival fans) and this the realm of a sport stadium, a feeling of individual affects others within the group anonymity can lead an individual to believe thus raising the arousal level of the group as that his or her actions will not result in a whole. Because of this, “crowd behavior social or legal repercussions. However, the is volatile and spontaneous” (Schweinberger idea of anonymity has been challenged by & Wohlstein, 2005, p. 144). Nonetheless, research showing that people in crowds the persistent problem of relying upon typically assemble with friends or family, Contagion Theory as an explanation of and therefore, people who come in groups crowd behavior is the fact that there has are more likely to act collectively than as never been a systematic study documenting anonymous individuals (McPhail, 1991; the “collective mind.” Schweingruber & Wohlstein, 2005). Convergence Theory, which rejects Nevertheless, previous research has shown Contagion Theory’s explanation of the that individuals tend to act differently in the crowd transforming individual members, confines of a group as opposed to normal argues instead that people in a crowd act

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 4 similarly because of their predispositions— coordinate their with others, similar values and beliefs—that brought indicating they do not wish to boo alone. In them together (McKee 1969; Simons and addition, according to Emergent Norm Taylor 1992). Due to these similarities, Theory, once a crowd reaches some deviant group behavior may be accepted agreement on the norms, the collectivity is without critical thought by individuals and supposed to adhere to them. If crowd transferred indiscriminately throughout the members develop a norm that condones entire group. However, McPhail (1991) has booing or verbally taunting others, they will pointed out that similar to Contagion proceed to cheer for those who conform Theory, Convergence Theory assumes and and ridicule those who are unwilling to attempts to explain crowd behavior by abide by the collectivity’s new norms. convincing the reader “that everyone in the crowd was continuously engaged in Perception Control Theory unanimous or mutually inclusive behavior— The previous theoretical frameworks which is weak in supportive studies” (p. 71). used to depict crowd disorders focus solely Unlike Contagion and Convergence on the group’s behavior, and alleged “mass Theories, Emergent Norm Theory consciousness” of the crowd. Whereas emphasizes the importance of social norms McPhail’s (1994) perception control in shaping crowd behavior. Drawing upon framework allows us to look at both levels the Symbolic-Interactionist perspective of (and units) of analysis via the theoretical sociology, Turner and Killian (1972) concepts of outcome violence (group asserted that crowds develop their own behavior) and intended violence (acts definition of a situation and establishes specific to an individual and/or instigating norms for behavior that fit the occasion. leaders of the group). Therefore, Perception Emergent norms occur when people define Control Theory is a much more holistic and a situation as highly unusual or see a informative theoretical framework than the longstanding situation in a new light. previous ones we briefly outlined in our Sociologists using the Emergent Norm literature review and offers an alternative approach seek to determine how individuals “processual” explanation throughout. within given collectivity develop an According to McPhail (1994), when understanding of what is going on, how violence occurs in riots and other they construe these activities, and what gatherings, it may take one or more of types of norms are involved. For example, several forms including vandalism, looting, in a study of audience participation, arson and assault. Perception Control Clayman (1993) found that members of an Theory suggests two ways in which audience listening to a speech applaud individual or collective violence could promptly and independently but wait to develop.

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 5 Outcome Violence. The first, which they are often coached in violence by “outcome violence”, occurs when an parents, older siblings and by peers to individual or group of individuals have a become skilled in violent actions and to nonviolent goal such as getting together to enjoy the successful practice of violence throw a large party. The idea is that they will which the British often call “aggro.” do anything to achieve this goal, including Further, McPhail (1994) has explained the defying the authorities if the authorities target of this aggression by stating: attempt to squelch their party plans. When Hooligans’ targets are typically the they encounter resistance or disturbance, supporters of rival football teams but they attempt to circumvent, overcome, can be anyone who talks or looks or oppose or eliminate that disturbance—but it acts “different.” It is a matter of “we” frequently persists, as do their efforts to versus “them” not unlike the overcome the disturbance. In the ensuing stereotypical categorization of members struggle between disturbance and purposive of one racial, language, or religious resistance, the outcome is violent even community by members of another though the original purposes were not. (McPhail, 1994, p. 23). Intended Violence. The second path, Furthermore, in his article concerning according to McPhail, is “intended football violence, Finn (1994) has pointed violence”, in which an individual’s to the “flow (or peak) experiences” of those intentions are violent from the beginning fans that attend soccer games, as well as and they match their perceptions of the those who participate in hooligan activities situation to achieve this violent end. An outside of the venue. Reflecting on his own example of this would be British soccer research, he stated, “in studies of optimal or hooligans who go to games intent on peak experiences individuals reported their beating someone or those who participate in subjective experiences that the activity was celebratory riots and from the beginning rewarding in and of itself: they experienced have the objective of vandalizing and ‘flow’; they were at one with the action” burning property. They act to make their (Finn, 1994, p. 106). In Finn’s discussion of perceptions match their goal of violating— Scotland’s soccer “casuals” (sharply dressed intimidating, assaulting, injuring or killing— hooligans), the pursuit of the another human being. McPhail mentions “carnivalesque” has led some supporters to the research of Dunning, Murphy and abandon the game and its outcome, and Williams (1986; 1988) who make a focus more on creating their own flow (or persuasive argument that these working peak) experiences (Finn, 1994). More class males grow up in families in which recently, Cleland and Cashmore (2016) they witness physical violence, in which they point out how modern technology has are recipients of physical violence, indeed in allowed for the creation of hooligan-

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 6 operated websites that help “expand and groups to determine the extent to which the facilitate informal and transitional networks above-mentioned theoretical frameworks by glorifying violence through either videos, apply in this situation. Consequently, a pictures, or a narrative description of violent qualitative inquiry in a specific sport context engagement…enhancing the adrenaline rush would fill this considerable gap in the and emotional arousal experienced by the literature. Therefore, the results of such a hooligans” (p. 132). This is similar to what study could make a considerable other North American scholars (Eitzen, contribution to a larger study of fan 1981; Lang, 1981; Lewis, 1972) have written violence. This study is primarily focused on referencing to sport taking place in a addressing the following question: “carnival-like” atmosphere. Eitzen (1981) R1: What type of collective behaviors do wrote, “festivals allow the individual to participants in a student-led section participate in relatively unstructured and engage in and how do these observations relate spontaneous behaviors. At sporting events, to either intended or outcome violence as spectators can deviate from society’s norms purported in Perception Control Theory? (within reasonable limits) without ” (p. 401). Nonetheless, recent attacks on Methods English football fans by well-organized This case study employed a multiple ultra-violent Russian hooligans led to the methods approach to examine fan behavior. possibility of penalizing both the English According to Yin (2009), the case study is a and Russian soccer federations with most appropriate method to use when expulsion from the 2016 European asking “how” and “why” research Championships by UEFA because of their questions. Case studies are also fan-based violence (Ough, Morgan, & advantageous to a qualitative researcher Criddle, 2016). when they have the ability to directly Additionally, the majority of studies observe contemporary events unfolding, regarding this topic have been conceptual in and the ability to gain access to the actors nature. Numerous theories and models have immersed in such events (Yin, 2009). The been proposed in an attempt to understand Institutional Review Board at Author One’s the complexity of fan violence. Additionally, university granted approval for this study in the realm of sport literature, many of the and the multiple methods of data collection. research endeavors have examined the First, Author One acted as an observer as relationship between a specific variable (i.e. participant (Gold, 1958) of a branded team identification) and its impact on student fan group at a major Southeastern individual’s likelihood to commit acts of university during six home men’s basketball aggression. However, the literature is nearly games. The purpose of the observation was devoid of in-depth examinations of these both direct data collection and to inform

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 7 the questions asked in the subsequent interviewee responses were similar. Eight interviews and open-ended questionnaires. males and two females were interviewed, During observation, Author One noted which included two freshman, two both the presence and void (based on past sophomores, four juniors, and two seniors. literature) of behaviors and characteristics The protocol for the interviews was semi- by means of field notes. The access structured using an interview guide garnered allowed for observations to occur (Johnson & Christensen, 2008) with at multiple locations within the arena, questions derived from previous literature including directly within the group and from and the aforementioned observations (see adjoining sections. These multiple Appendix A for interview protocol). With perspectives allowed for a more rich this approach, “the researcher adopts a description of the orientation and behavior flexible approach to data collection, and can of the member students in the section. In alter the sequence of questions or probe for fact, relying on a “triangulation” of research more information with subsidiary methods is an important foundation for questions” (Gratton & Jones, 2004, p. 141). when a researcher is staking their claims As an example, one series of questions based on studying only one case (Yin, 2009). focused on the level of group solidarity that In all, the primary location of the was present among student group members. observation was in the vicinity of the Previous theories of collective behavior student group to allow for the verbal have suggested that the more members of a behavior to be documented. group identify with each other and feel a The second method of data collection shared connection, the higher likelihood involved face-to-face interviews which were that group action directed towards an out- audio recorded with 10 members of the group may be initiated. A second question branded collegiate student group. The use line examined the explicit physical and of these ten respondents was deemed verbal behaviors that were witnessed and acceptable due to the small membership in initiated by group members. Additionally, the branded student cheering section and questions were asked surrounding the the achievement of data saturation. Data organizational characteristics of the student saturation is the point “where any further section. In many cases, this information did data collection will not provide any different not directly relate to their behaviors at information from what you already have, games. Rather, the degree of organization is that is you are not learning anything new” related to the strength of connection or (Gratton & Jones, 2004, p. 153). To further level of “group think” that may be present this point, the authors could have among members. interviewed more student fan group The last method of data collection members yet deemed it unnecessary since occurred through open-ended

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 8 questionnaires emailed to the roughly 1,200- categorizing the various chunks, so the student group member list (n=198). researcher can quickly find, pull out, Prompts included, “Why did you choose to and cluster the segments relating to a become a member of the [student fan particular hypothesis and/or construct group]?” and, “Please describe the types of relevant to the study. Clustering and cheering you do. What kinds of things do displaying the condensed chunks sets you say to the players and opposing team?” the stage for drawing conclusions (p. Additionally, descriptive survey questions 57). were included gauging the respondents’ In regards to reliability and validity, the five frequency of attendance, interest in the team verification strategies posited by Morse, and sport, and general views on Barrett, Mayan, Olson, and Spiers (2002) sportsmanship by both players and fans. were utilized: (1) methodological coherence, (2) appropriate sample population, (3) Data Analysis collecting and analyzing concurrently, (4) Authors One and Two transcribed the thinking theoretically, and (5) theory responses from the interviews and field development. In the following results notes. Open coding (Corbin & Strauss, section, the reader will find summarized 2008) was employed where the utilization of results paired with verbatim responses to a deductive, or using the established theory, account for both the voice of the approach was used to identify themes from researchers and participants. This is in the three data sources. First, both the response to Corbin and Strauss’s (2008) authors independently coded responses and assertion that, “though we break data apart, observations, based on the a priori themes and identify concepts to stand for the data, used to develop the interview guide. Within we also have to put it back together again by the deductively identified groupings, relating those concepts” (p. 198). emergent themes were proposed based on the responses and observations that differed Results from previous theory. When disagreements Based on an analysis of interview in coding appeared they were discussed transcriptions, email communication among between both of the authors until consensus group members, field notes constructed was reached. According to Miles and from six observations, and open-ended Huberman (1994): survey responses, the results were Codes are the mechanisms used to constructed and are presented in this retrieve and organize these chunks from section. The results of the open coding data gathered, say from transcribed process generally fell into one of six notes of an interview. The organization categories: (1) intent of fan behavior, (2) of chunks entails some system for group communication among fan group

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 9 members and “cheer sheets” as evidence of name] has been posing as a groupie of intended violence, (3) dehumanizing the [opposing player name] and has opponent, (4) “blasting” referees/rival pretended to be a girl. He has gotten players/rival fans as evidence of outcome some good information out of violence, (5) the importance of perceived [opposing player name] and we can use anonymity, and (6) the important role this information against [opposing leaders play in organizing and initiating player name] at the game tomorrow. negative fan behavior. Results are organized The “dirt” gathered about opposing players below according to theme. Representative is compiled by the student group’s quotes are presented in verbatim form. researcher and put into cheer sheets that are disseminated to the entire membership via Evidence of Intended Violence email and at the event site as well. It was The most salient theme from an clear no topic was off limits in regards to examination of interview transcriptions, the information utilized against opposing email communication among group players, and star players are typically the members and an examination of “cheer targets. A member of the student fan group sheets” was the pre-disposition of many shed some light on what information is group members to engage in acts of non- collected and used against opposing players: physical (verbal) violence. They came across Some members were talking to clearly through an examination of group [opposing player name] of [opposing member emails as well as interview school]. His father was [opposing responses. The student fan group has a player’s father name] who was a former designated researcher who is responsible for MLB player and drug addict. The digging up “dirt” on opposing players and people that run it [student fan group] disseminating this information to fan group were calling him “crack baby” because members for the intent of using it against of his father’s past…..another time, we him or her during the game. The following were playing [school name] and the email communication from the fan group members focused on a [school name] leaders to the members clearly illustrates player because he was Cuban….also, this: the girls team too…There is a [student Many of you know [student fan group fan group name] for women’s basketball researcher name], if we do a chant or a too. Some people will make comments sign about a player on the other team, it about the opposing team looking like is often due to [researcher name’s] monsters, beasts, and even lesbians. stellar research. For the game Beyond the advanced communication to tomorrow, [opposing player name] is group members and the construction of returning from injury. [Researcher cheer sheets, many student fan group

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 10 members also indicated that the purpose of example, fan group members may have the fan group was to “get inside the flocked to the arena with the intentions of opponent’s head” as well as provide a simply enjoying the game, supporting their hostile environment and home court team in a positive manner and advantage for the team. They provided commiserating with their fellow fan group specific examples of games where they felt members. Further, many respondents like their relentless heckling and taunting indicated very benign intentions (i.e. impacted the final score, illustrating the support the team, get better seats, meet new presence of a “collective efficacy” (Bandura, people, get a free t-shirt, fun) for joining the 2000). Further, they provided examples of student fan group as well as defining the specific players that incurred their wrath overall purpose of the group. However, (usually a star player) and suffered from a their behavior turned abusive (verbally) in poor performance as a result. This indicates response to occurrences at the event site. that these members joined the group with This was a reoccurring theme in the the expressed intent of engaging in negative interviews as well as the open-ended survey fan behavior and view the group as the responses such as: conduit to achieve this goal. Student group I’ve crossed the line a couple times. Just leadership furthered this purpose through get caught up in the emotion of it, so its group emails and cheer sheets that just like I yell something but I think perpetuated this notion that the group had like, this is really irritating to me, I say an impact on the outcome and this outcome something to the effect of you are a should be achieved by any means necessary. fucking idiot, get the hell out of here, To further reinforce the role that the fan get back to the locker room….I try to group plays, the university itself branded keep myself composed I think I just get this group “the 6th man” and recognized too caught up in what is going on them before every home game. during the game and in the stands……this goes back to what I said Evidence of Outcome Violence earlier about the mob mentality, the us From an examination of the interview versus them and we need to beat them. transcripts as well as extensive fieldwork, You know, I get caught up in it fan group members showed a proclivity for sometimes. “acting in the moment” in response to Another indication of outcome violence external stimuli in the environment (i.e. bad came from the open-ended survey call by a referee, taunting by opposing fans, responses. The degree to which fan group dehumanizing an opposing player who is members discussed the referees, opposing having success in the game) or a players, and rival fans as specific targets of “precipitating event” (Smelser, 1963). For their taunting and heckling was apparent. A

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 11 good representation of their dehumanizing provided a situation, some conceded that out-group members can be discerned from they would “blast” an out-group in response these statements: to a “trigger” in the environment. There are time we will call the other Finally, in a related fashion, fan group opposing fans faggots, other times we members also indicated they were engaging will criticize the refs, say horrible things in this negative behavior due to their like “FU” or I hope you die, stuff like participation in this group context. This was that…People will threaten the refs like I best illustrated with the following comment: will be waiting for you after the I probably would not do any of it if I game….things like that. It is part of the did not have any other people around game. me doing it. I don't want to be singled It happens all the time, I mean there is out, that is just not my personality, I the “FU” chant, the “bullshit” chant don't think and if there is no one else and don't forget about the around me, I would probably not cheer refs…sometimes they say things about or yell at the refs and opposing their mothers, its usually who they take players….I would probably fall back their anger out on. and be a pretty terrible fan (if not for It is important to note the context of some the group membership). of these comments as well. Although in There were many similar comments in this some cases fan group members intended to vein. There seemed to be a faction of group target these individuals going into the game members who indicated that they would not (which would reinforce the tenets of engage in the yelling or taunting if not for intended violence), there was a theme that their membership in the group and the emerged regarding how their behavior was context overall. So, in some respects, it is in response to the actions of one of the not just a precipitating event on the court aforementioned groups. For example, (bad call or opposing star players’ actions) numerous fan group members described or in the stands (response to rival fans) that how they taunted and threatened rival fans leads to outcome violence by some of the at the event site as a retaliatory behavior to fan group members but a response among comments made earlier or in response to the individual group member to the reaction what was happening on the court. Further, of the group they reside in as a whole. to reinforce the lack of intent in regards to some of this negative fan behavior, some of Evidence of Leaders and Followers the fan group members had initially Through fieldwork, group email indicated that they did not engage in communication, and interviews, it was negative fan behavior or verbal violence. evident that the student fan group under However, when pressed in the interview or examination had a hierarchical structure that

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 12 took various forms depending on the itself. Typically, the most ardent supporters context. The “formal” structure of the of the team and of the group would be group included board members who have located in the front row, centered for all clearly defined roles, regular meetings, and group members to see on event day. It was were active in organizing and managing the also likely that they would be dressed in over 1,200 fan group members. Beyond the eclectic outfits as a way to further day-to-day operations of the group, the differentiate themselves from the group as presence of a leadership structure impacted well as to be highly identifiable. Often, they the behavior of the overall group as well. As would be directing uniform chants and previously noted, one member had the role cheers (some very benign and support those of “researcher” for the group. The that were offensive and threatening) as researcher dug up information about mentioned here: opposing players that would be used against Usually, my friend, [friend’s name] who them at the live event. During interviews stands next to me will start them….he and observations, the “dirt” that was starts a lot of them and another kid, uncovered included the names of family [kid’s name] will do that as well; they’re members, significant others, any previous usually the instigators that everyone else legal infractions, or even the racial/ethnic follow…but that’s kind of the way it background. Further, the researcher would works, we don't do any like random try to uncover campus contact information people to start it. or cell phone numbers in an effort to harass Not only does the group context have an the player daily through phone calls to their impact on each individual member of the dormitory room or personal phone. Finally, fan group but also the results here suggest in some cases, the researcher would be an that some individual group members play a “imposter” (or a groupie as the researcher significant role in the behavior of the overall called it) on social media and attempt to group. A number of group members extract information through this rouse. The discussed how their fan behavior at the most common approach was for the event was significantly impacted by their researcher to pretend to be a female membership in the group. This theme takes admirer. All of this effort culminated in the it even a step further in that it is not only construction of personal information to use the group that instills itself in the individual against the star player on game day and it but also individuals within the group who was deliberately collected and disseminated help drive and dictate the overall group to group members by the leadership of the behavior. group. Another theme regarding the presence Concept of Anonymity of leaders and followers was at the event

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 13 The idea that student fan group other, they were in a sense anonymous to members are “anonymous” among the the groups that they were “blasting”. This is throng of people in their section did not best evidence by the following observation: manifest itself in the manner as previous Yeah definitely…the power of research on collective behavior would numbers. If you say something and all suggest. Many of the student fan group these guys have your back, you feel like members know each other, travel in packs you can say anything to a six ten guy, to the facility for the game, and sit by one 295 pound dude, jacked as can be…if another. Further, from interviews and the we are all saying the same thing, its not open-ended questionnaires, meeting new like he will single one person out, you people and building lasting social feel like there is nothing he can do relationships was considered the main about it. It’s not like you have to worry benefit of joining the student fan group by a about the guy waiting in the parking lot lion’s share of the respondents. Therefore, it for you after the game. can be deduced that it is likely that those There is the notion that around 1,200 fans sitting in the fan group section are familiar have your back and emboldens individuals with each other and more than likely, know to act in a manner that they normally would each other and are friends. These not. The second part of the quote really observations contradict the traditional hammers home the way anonymity notion of “anonymity” or the “anonymous” manifested itself in this setting. As crowd. previously mentioned, it is not as if the However, the concept of anonymity crowd members are anonymous actors manifested itself through a different amongst each other. However, the crowd mechanism. Student fan group members members feel a level of anonymity in indicated that they could verbally berate or regards to the out-groups that they are even threaten out-group members “blasting” and event/security personnel (opposing players, rival fans, referees) who may punish them for their acts of without the fear of negative reprisal from verbal violence and threats. the out-group members as well as from Beyond the lack of fear of negative event personnel. A recurring observation reprisal, another anonymity-related theme from student fan group members was that dealt with how the group behavior or group nobody from the fan group section had ever “think” influences the individual actor. been ejected from the facility for negative Some respondents indicated that they were fan behavior. This fueled the belief that willing to engage in behavior in the group individuals could blend into the crowd and context that they would not normally do if not be singled out by the aforementioned they attended the game, not representing groups. While not anonymous to each and commiserating with members of the

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 14 student fan group. That can best be collective behavior participants were illustrated here: “transformed by the crowd into irrational Just being in the group, everyone is pawns of suggestion and contagion…that yelling and you do not want to be the they were riffraff of society or otherwise only one not yelling or being involved in perverted personalities predisposed to it if I tried to think about it. I wouldn't participate in social movements” (McPhail, be at a game by myself just standing on 1994, p. 13). Further, collective crowd the side yelling this stuff. behavior has been argued to be This ties into the idea that student fan group “spontaneous, unorganized, undirected, and members in this context have lost their unjustifiable” (Simons & Taylor, 1992, p. sense of independence, their sense of self, 212). Alternatively, our results suggest that and have surrendered themselves to the collective behavior falls within the other actions of the crowd, open to the guided common discourse. Collective behavior is behavior of the overall group. characterized by rational actors who are goal-oriented, participants who are not Discussion driven by economic deprivation, and The following section includes a organized through a complex social network discussion of how the results in this context and coordinated communication where relate to previous work on fan violence as participants could be recruited with a well as how it contributes independently to purpose (McPhail, 1994). the existing literature. Implications for sport There were many markers of intended administrators from the results of this study violence found among student fan group are included as well as practical suggestions members. First, this organization of about for how to curb negative fan violence in 1,200 students had a formal board and similar contexts is provided. Finally, a leadership structure that disseminated discussion of future research avenues based information regularly to its members. This on the findings is included. information included “cheer” sheets that From extensive fieldwork and a provided instructions for collective action thorough examination of the interview data, among its members at the event site. the most prevalent and reoccurring theme Further, these sheets contained in-depth centered on the tenets of perception control information, or “dirt,” about opposing theory. There has been a considerable players and coaches. The “dirt” included debate in the field of sociology (more mother and father’s names, girlfriends’ specifically, in the area of collective names, details of arrest records, campus behavior) about the nature of convivial contact information, and even a famous gatherings, urban riots, and social father of one athlete who had a recurring movements. One common conception is drug problem. This information was

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 15 compiled, disseminated, and used against student group members felt a connection the target to “rattle” them on and around with other group members and shared a event day. It went so far as to even identify “oneness” in with the group in some where opposing players’ parents were sitting instances. Therefore, to understand and direct coordinated comments at the outcome violence, it is important to realize parents during the event. These that when the group feels a threat to their observations are evidence of the, own collective self-concept, the reaction “intrapersonal processes of individual and typically is to derogate the target out-group collective actions as well as the complex and to reinforce their own self-concept structures of how action is built, elaborated, (Lott & Lott, 1965; McPhail, 1994; Tajfel & and transformed” (McPhail, 1994, p. 16). Turner, 1979). Strong support for the Further, it is an apt illustration of Harrison’s processual approach to collective behavior (1974) observation that certain individuals was evidenced here as well as the central attend sporting events for the express role of perception control among student reason of acting out their aggressive fan group members. tendencies. Two related and recurring themes in There was also ample evidence to previous psychosocial literature are the suggest that student fan group members importance of a leader in directing and also engaged in acts of verbal violence in driving collective behavior as well as the reaction to environmental stimuli. There “mobilization of participants” as stated by were several instances where respondents Smelser (1963). In this particular student fan indicated that they joined the group with a group, there were a variety of nonviolent goal in mind (support the team, “protagonists” that directed and stoked make friends, good seats, student section t- collective behavior, both at the event site as shirt). While they began with an innocent well as through communication channels. goal, they ended engaging in negative fan Through observation, it was evident that behavior at the event site in reaction to a one or two student fan group members triggering event (opposing player has acted as leaders that were directing crowd success, referee makes a bad call, rival fans behavior at the event site. Whether it was become a threat). These are ideal examples positive, group chants to support the team of what McPhail (1994) would categorize as and implore for better performance or outcome violence. Stated differently, “In the negative chants (such as bullshit or “FU”), ensuing struggle between disturbance and the same group members directed the purposive resistance, the outcome is violent cheering at all six observations. Even more even though the original purpose were not” interesting was the leadership and direction (McPhail, 1994, p. 22). The fieldwork and that occurred before the event. Especially interviews also reinforced the fact that during high profile and rivalry games, there

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 16 was a structured, concerted effort to two ways. First, there was a lack of fear that construct negative information about the they would be confronted physically by the opponent for utilization of game day. Not out-group member that they were only was it accepted by the official board threatening due to this strength in numbers. (leadership) for the student fan group but it Next, they did not feel as though they was also praised repeatedly from an would be identified or singled out of the examination of group communication as crowd if they did engage in negative well as during the interviews. The conduct behavior. This was reinforced by the fact of the “group researcher” was a tale told that no group member during that season over and over again by respondents. By was removed from the premises for means of social media, official university inappropriate or threatening behavior. The records, and police reports among other sense that the crowd would have their back sources, personal information of opposing physically and the fact that they could blend players was compiled and used as a tool to in clearly led to more aggressive behavior on humiliate the student-athlete on a regular behalf of the individual attendee. basis, not only on game day but also during Another theoretical lens through which the week of the game. All of this behavior the results can be viewed is by means of sanctioned and praised by the group’s emergent norms theory (Turner & Killian, leadership. The impact of various leaders on 1972). As Turner and Killian (1972) the collective behavior of the group cannot contend: be understated in this context. Some shared redefinition of right and The results also suggest very strong wrong in a situation supplies the support for the concept of justification and coordinates the action “deindividuation”, the idea that when you in collective behavior. People do what are in the presence of a group with a strong they would not otherwise have done connection, individuals may be susceptible when they participate collectively, when to abandoning personal responsibility as they riot, when they engage in civic well as losing a sense of self and social disobedience, or when they launch restraint (Simons & Taylor, 1992). While it terrorist campaigns, because they find is important to note that fan group social support for that and what they members did not feel a sense of anonymity are doing is the right thing to do in the within the section that they sat in, it was situation. (p. 12) evident that they felt emboldened to This notion that “right and wrong” threaten opposing players or fans and behavior is not only coordinated by the antagonize the referees due to the false group but also is accepted (not by all group confidence they obtained through being in a members in this context) was evident in the large group setting. This manifested itself in interviews as well as observations.

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 17 Respondents indicated that their behavior Theory, Convergence Theory assumes and mirrored that of their peers in the group so attempts to explain crowd behavior by as to not stand out as an outlier or to feel as convincing the reader “that everyone in the part of a whole. Further, many respondents crowd was continuously engaged in were willing to commit acts of negative fan unanimous or mutually inclusive behavior— behavior due to the fact that they were in which is weak in supportive studies” (p.71). the group context and it was an expectation We tend to agree with this assertion based of what you should do as a member of the on the results of this study. group. Interestingly, some respondents Beyond the lack of support for indicated that some of the behavior of the Convergence and Contagion Theories, we group crossed the line of right and wrong did not find support for a well-established yet they were able to rationalize it because it “situational” characteristic that has garnered was “part of the game” or necessary to much support from previous conceptual achieve the group’s overall purpose which research as well as the popular press. The was to “get inside the opponent’s head” or role of alcohol in influencing crowd create a hostile environment. behavior in this particular setting was As important as it is to detail what the significantly minimized based on interviews authors found, there is much value in and extensive fieldwork. Interestingly, understanding what we did not observe or because the facility was off-campus, alcohol find was present. First, in this context, the was sold on the premises yet there was notion of explaining our results through the nothing to suggest that alcohol played a lens of convergence theory (McKee, 1969) major role in influencing fan group was highly unlikely. From the interviews and behavior. Understandably so, this might open-ended questionnaire, it was evident have been a contextual finding and further that student fan group members joined for a work needs to be done to understand the variety of reasons. Further, and more impact of alcohol on negative fan behavior. importantly, when asked about the purpose Limitations and Directions for Future of the fan group, there was a wide variation Research of responses. This notion that “birds of a There were a few limitations of the feather flock together” was clearly not current study. First, this study only demonstrated in this context. While their examined negative fan behavior among motives for group membership, attending members of one collegiate branded student the events, and the overall purpose of the section. Further, utilizing case study fan group varied, they still engaged in many methodology, the generalizability of our of the same negative (and positive) fan results to a broader population may be behaviors. Hence, McPhail (1991) has limited. As noted by Yin (2009), critics pointed out that similar to Contagion often question the representativeness of a

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 18 single case study to a particular theory or against a historically strong opponent conceptual framework. These critics are and/or highly ranked opponent) should be implicitly contrasting the context of a single examined further in regards to how it case study to survey research where a influences negative fan behavior. The sample is intended to generalize to a degree to which intended violence was broader population. As Yin (2009) points present was more likely during high profile out, “this analogy to samples and universes matchups or rivalry games. Specifically, it is incorrect when dealing with case was clear that the “cheer” sheets contained studies…survey research relies on statistical much more “dirt” for games of this nature. generalization whereas case studies rely on Further, the vulgarity and use of analytic generalization” (p. 43). With analytic dehumanization was much more prevalent generalization, the investigator is looking to in this context. Finally, while the use of generalize a specific set of results to some alcohol was not a prevalent factor in this broader theory. Second, this particular context (as evidenced by the interviews, sample comes from a school that is not observations, and survey questionnaire) regarded as a traditional “basketball school”. scholars such as Ostrowsky (2014) and In fact, the basketball program is positioned Scholes-Balog, Hemphill, Kremer, and in the shadow of an internationally regarded Toumbourou (2016) have posited the football program. It stands to reason that importance of examining this situational the results could be different when looking factor and its role in spurring negative fan at a “basketball powerhouse” where their behavior. student fan group may be more organized, There is a very rich knowledge base more avid, and the game environment may regarding the impact of team identification be more emotionally charged. Finally, the on the likelihood to engage in a range of exploratory nature of our study provides negative fan behavior (see Wann et al., 2005 prefatory findings that should be viewed in for an extensive literature review on this context rather than drawing conclusive topic). While this area is well developed, the denouements. impact of fan community identification From the fieldwork and interviews, a (Yoshida, Gordon, Heere, & James, 2015) number of avenues for future research were on the likelihood to engage in a range of evident. First, as Simons and Taylor (1992) negative fan behavior deserves further described in their psychosocial model of fan consideration. A very strong undercurrent violence, there are a number of “situational” of support for this relationship was characteristics that warrant further uncovered in the results of this study. Fan attention. For example, the presence of a group members indicated a connection to rivalry game as well as a high profile other members, a “consciousness of kind” matchup (in this case, nationally televised (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001) due to the fact

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 19 that they shared membership in the same identity theory and team identification may group, wore the same apparel to games, not be adequate explanations for the believed they had similar goals, and were on occurrences of fan violence in North the same email mailing list. Respondents America. Instead, Wakefield and Wann indicated that they were more likely to (2006) posited that “identification with the engage in negative fan behavior due to the team is not the differentiating factor “backing” of other group members as well predicting anti-social behavior…..anti-social as the perceived social pressure placed upon behavior seems to be a characteristic or them by other group members at the event pattern of behavior of the individual site. Further, this feeling of group solidarity dysfunctional fan” (p. 179). For example, can be amplified when a threat (perceived or the issue of fan violence has really only been real) to the groups’ goals or objectives is examined from the male perspective. identified (Lott & Lott, 1965). The results Hooligan scholars have mainly focused on indicated that this “threat” might come the disruptive behavior of young adult from opposing star players, referees, or rival males between the ages of 18-25, framing fans. While the sport marketing literature this behavior as young men acting out their has viewed fan community identification male-specific “aggro” tendencies (Dunning, through a positive lens in regards to the Murphy, & Williams, 1986; 1988; Finn, benefits to the organization, it stands to 1994; McPhail, 1994). Studies in North reason based on the results that this type of America have largely focused on male sport identification may have a “dark side”. fans thus a significant gap exists in the Finally, in response to Wakefield and literature regarding how (or if) this applies Wann’s (2006) call for more research into to female fans. Taken as a whole, there is individual factors, the findings here do pose much more that we do not know about why some interesting avenues that need further fans engage in negative behavior than what examination. For instance, what makes previous literature tells us. Thus, this area of some individuals more prone to engage in research would benefit from a revitalization intended violence than others? Further, why of examination as well as more empirical do some feel that hostile and/or work where researchers are looking at the instrumental aggression by fans towards an behavior as it unfolds in the native context. out-group is “part of the game”? Essentially, how are these fans different from a Conclusions psychosocial standpoint? Wakefield and The sport marketing literature as well as Wann (2006) in response to that call most popular press articles considers examined fan violence from the perspective enhancing fans’ identification toward the of the individual instead of the group team a positive endeavor for sport explanation. Their results suggest that social organizations. Specifically, the construction

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 20 of branded, student-led cheering sections increase in physiological arousal (as well as has long been identified as the most frustration) as well as the proclivity for out- committed and rabid supporters of the group derogation (Branscombe & Wann, team. Most of these groups can be 1992). Given the characteristics of the distinguished by a catchy nickname and student-led cheering section, if a matching apparel. Universities have precipitating event (Smelser, 1963) was to attempted to capitalize on these groups occur (such as a negative call or negative through coordinated marketing activities outcome), the chance of negative fan such as selling apparel with the group’s behavior among this group might be more brand name on it (“Schools Cheer New likely. Branding Effort”, 2007). These activities As a result, sport administrators need to have added a new revenue stream for the be armed with this knowledge when these university as well as strengthening the ties groups are present on their campus and between fans and the university. The attend athletic events. They should consider benefits these groups bring to the university having direct oversight over the group as have been well documented and some of well as access to the communication they the groups have become recognized student disseminate. Some universities are doing organizations on their respective campuses. this by designating these student fan groups However, the potential negative as recognized student organizations (RSO’s) consequences due to the formation of these or delegating the marketing department groups have gone largely unexplored in the personnel to have direct oversight over the literature. As the results of this study group. Either way, these student fan groups indicate, the formation of these groups should not be left to their own devices and brings together a collection of passionate allowed to operate without proper oversight fans that share a mutual connection through including from game day personnel at the group membership. Furthermore, these event site. individuals are grouped together in the same --- section of the arena in close proximity of one another and have a feeling of anonymity as well as the lack of fear of negative reprisal. Finally, they are armed with “dirt” on opposing players that they will use against them when the game commences and are directed by leaders who have the intent of creating a “hostile” environment. When these elements are combined, the results can lead to an

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 21 References Dunning, E., Murphy, P., & Williams, J. A summit on best practices in responding to (1986). Spectator violence at football developing and ongoing civil disturbances in matches. British Journal of Sociology, 37, college communities (2005, November 221-244. 10). Retrieved December 2, 2007, Dunning, E., Murphy, P., & Williams, J. from (1988). The roots of football : www.dps.iastate.edu/nspcd/index.ht An historical and sociological study. ml London, England: Routledge & Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human Kegan Paul. agency through collective efficacy. Eitzen, S. D. (1981). Sport And Deviance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, In George Sage and Gunther 9(3), 75-78. Luschen (Eds.), Handbook of Social Branscombe, N.R., & Wann, D.L. (1992). Science of Sport. Champaign, IL: Stipes Role of identification with a group, Publishing Company. arousal, categorization processes, and Finn, G. (1994). Football Violence: A self-esteem in sports spectator societal psychological perspective. In aggression. Human Relations, 45(10), Giulianotti, R., Bonney, N., and 1013-1029. Hepworth M. (Eds.), Football, Burgers, C., Beukeboom, C.J., Kelder, M. & Violence, and Social Identity. New York: Peeters, M.M.E. (2015). How sports Routledge. fans forge intergroup competition Gold, R. L. (1958). Roles in sociological through language: The case for verbal field observations. Social forces, 217- irony. Human Communication Research, 223. 41, 435-457. Goldstein, J.H. (1989). . Clayman, S.E.(1993). Booing: The anatomy In J.H. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games, of a disaffiliative response, American and play: Social and psychological Sociological Review , 58 (1): 110-131. viewpoints (pp. 279-297) (2nd ed.) Cleland, J. & Cashmore, E. (2016). Football Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum fans’ views of violence in British Associates. football: Evidence of a sanitized and Gratton, C., & Jones, I. (2004). Research gentrified culture. Journal of Sport and methods for sport studies. New York: Social Issues, 40(2), 124-142. Routledge. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Grove, S.J., Pickett, G.M., Jones, S.A. & qualitative research: Techniques and Dorsch, M.J. (2012). Spectator rage procedures for developing grounded theory. as the dark side of engaging sport (3rd Ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage. fans: Implications for services

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 22 marketers. Journal of Service Research, Le Bon, G. (1960, originally published in 15(1), 3-20. 1895). The Crowd: A Study of the Gruca, T. (2005, October 24). NCAA looks Popular Mind. New York: Viking. at collapsible goal posts. Retrieved Lewis, J.M. (1972). A study of the Kent December 2, 2007, from State incident using Smelser's theory http://wcco.com/topstories/goal.po of collective behavior." Sociological sts.football.2.352267.html Inquiry, 42 (2): 87-96. Harrison, P. (1974). Soccer’s tribal wars. Lott, A.J., & Lott, B.E. (1965). Group New Society, 29, 602-604. cohesiveness and interpersonal Hart, P. (1998). Preventing groupthink attraction: A review of relationships revisited: Evaluating and reforming with antecedents and consequence groups in government. Organizational variables. Psychological Bulletin, 64, 259- Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 309. 73(2/3), 306-326. Mann, L. (1979). Sports crowds viewed Janis, I.L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: a from the perspective of collective psychological study of foreign-policy decisions behavior. In J.H. Goldstein (Ed.), and fiascoes. Oxford, England: Sports, games, and play: Social & Houghton Mifflin. psychological viewpoints (pp.337-368) (2nd Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Educational research. Thousand Oaks, Erlbaum Associates. CA: Sage. McPhail, C. (1991). The myth of the madding KSN Television. (2015, February 25). K- crowd. New York, NY: Aldine De State police announce action for Gruyter Publishing Company. student who bumped KU’s Jamari McPhail, C. (1994). The Dark Side of Traylor. KSN Television. Retrieved Purpose: Individual and Collective from Violence in Riots. Sociological http://ksn.com/2015/02/25/k- Quarterly, 35(1):1-32. state-police-announce-action-for- Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). student-who-bumped-kus-jamari- Qualitative data analysis: An expanded traylor/. sourcebook. New York, NY: Sage Lang, G. E. (1981). Riotous outbursts at Publications. sports events. In George Sage and mmc-news.com (2015, October 17). Gunther Luschen (Eds.), Handbook of Michigan punter’s social media Social Science of Sport . Champaign, IL: threats prompt response by AD. Stipes Publishing Company. Retrieved from http://mmc- news.com/news-michigan-punter-

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 23 and-8217;s-social-media-threats- Scholes-Balog, K.E., Hemphill, S.A., prompt-response-by-ad-274937.dbv. Kremer, P.J., & Toumbourou, J.W. Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, (2016). Relationships between sport K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification participation, problem alcohol use, strategies for establishing reliability and violence: A longitudinal study of and validity in qualitative research. young adults in Australia. Journal of International Journal of Qualitative Interpersonal Violence, 31(8), 1501-1530. Methods, 1(2), 1-19. Schweingruber, D., & Wohlstein, R.T. Muñiz, A.M., & O’Guinn, T.C. (2001). (2005). The madding crowd goes to Brand community. Journal of Consumer school: Myths about crowds in Research, 27(4), 412-432. introductory sociology textbooks. Mustonen, A., Arms, R.L., & Russell, G.W. Teaching Sociology, 33(2), 136-153. (1996). Predictors of sports Simons, Y., & Taylor, J. (1992). A spectators’ proclivity for riotous psychosocial model of fan violence in behavior in Finland and Canada. sports. International Journal of Sports Personal Individual Differences, 21(4), Psychology, 23, 207-226. 519-525. Smelser, N.J. (1963). Theory of collective NCAA president: instilling sportsmanship rests behavior. New York: Free Press. with schools. (2006, October 20). Spaaij, R. (2014). Sports crowd violence: An Retrieved December 2, 2007, from interdisciplinary synthesis. Aggression http://www.cstv.com/sports/m- and Violent Behavior, 19, 146-155. footbl/stories/102006adb.html Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. C. (1986). The Ostrowsky, M.K. (2014). The social social identity theory of inter-group psychology of alcohol use and violent behavior. In S. Worchel and L. W. behavior among sport spectators. Austin (eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19, 303- Relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall 310. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1979). An Ough, T., Morgan, T., & Criddle, C. (2016). integrative theory of intergroup Euro 2016: UEFA threatens to conflict. In W.G. Austin & S. disqualify England and Russia amid Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of German and Ukraine violence in intergroup relations. Monterey, CA: Lille. Retrieved June 13, 2016 from Brooks/Cole. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football The Associated Press (2015). Kentucky fans /2016/06/12/euro-2016-uefa- riot, light fires after Final Four loss to investigate-violence-between- Wisconsin. Retrieved from england-and-russia-f/. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 24 /college/kentucky-fans-riot-final- Wann, D.L., Culver, Z., Akanda, R., Daglar, loss-wisconsin-article-1.2174167. M., Divitiis, C., & Smith, A. (2005). Turner, R.H., & Killian, L.M. (1972). The The effects of team identification and field of collective behavior. (2nd Ed.) game outcomes on willingness to Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: The consider anonymous acts of hostile Free Press. aggression. Journal of Sport Behavior, Wann, D.L. (1993). Aggression among 28(3), 282-294. highly identified spectators as a Wright, S.C. (2009). The next generation of function of their need to maintain collective action research. Journal of positive social identity. Journal of Sport Social Issues, 65(4), 859-879. and Social Issues, 17(2), 134-143. Yoshida, M., Gordon, G., Heere, B., & Wann, D.L., & Dolan, T.J. (1994). James, J.D. (2015). Fan community Spectators’ evaluations of rival and identification: An empirical fellow fans. The Psychological Record, examination of its outcomes in 44, 351-358. Japanese professional sport. Sport Wann, D.L., Carlson, J.D., & Schrader, M.P. Marketing Quarterly, 24(2), 105-119. (1999). The impact of team Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design identification on the hostile and and methods. (4th Ed.) Thousand Oaks, instrumental verbal aggression of CA: Sage. sport spectators. Journal of Social Young, K. (2012). Sport, violence, and society. Behavior and Personality, 14(2), 279-286. New York: Routledge. Wann, D.L., Schrader, M.P., & Carlson, J.D. (2000). The verbal aggression of sport spectators: A comparison of hostile and instrumental motives. International Sports Journal, 4, 56-63. Wann, D.L., Hunter, J.L., Ryan, J.A., & Wright, L.A. (2001). The relationship between team identification and willingness of sports fans to consider illegally assisting their team. Social Behavior and Personality, 29(6), 531-536. 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.

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 25

Appendix

Appendix A: Semi-structured Interview Protocol

1. Why did you choose to become a member of the [fan group name]?

2. Why did you decided to maintain your membership with the [fan group name]?

3. Any other reason for why you enjoy being a member of the [fan group name]?

4. How often do you attend the basketball games?

5. How organized is the [fan group name], do you have meetings or anything like

that?

6. What do you believe is the purpose of the [fan group name]?

7. Have you ever been a member or are you currently a member of any other fan

groups?

8. Can you describe the types of cheering you do at games?

9. Would you personally make any kinds of derogatory comments to the opposing

team?

10. Are there any other members of the [fan group name] that are, make more

mean-spirited remarks?

11. Is there any types of cheering that you do in the [fan group name] that you

wouldn’t do by yourself?

12. For some of those big games like [team name] where you have some of the

students make some of the more abusive kind of remarks, what is your reaction

to it?

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 26

13. Do many of the [fan group name] members drink alcohol?

14. Do you notice much drinking that goes on before the game?

15. Do you feel that being a member of the [fan group name] has impacted the way

you cheer at games? Is your cheering different now than how it was before?

16. Are you seated or standing during games?

17. Does your experience at those events differ from your experience in the [fan

group name]?

Journal of Amateur Sport In Press Gordon & Arney, 2016 27