1. Introduction
[1.1] The study of rivalry in sport is an area receiving more attention in the sport management, business, politics, and psychology literatures (note 1). Research conducted on the phenomenon is important for a myriad of reasons and publics. First, furthering understanding about what causes rivalry and the outcomes of rivalry is important to researchers investigating group and individual behavior. Important findings and implications for future research will help craft the understanding of behavior, both inside and outside of the sport arena. Rivalry research is also very important to practitioners as understanding the phenomenon can help prepare for contests involving rival teams and groups. My goals here are to introduce the readership of Transformative Works and Cultures to research being conducted on sport rivalry and its impact on sport fandom, and to encourage research on the phenomenon outside of the sport management field.
2. What is rivalry in sport?
[2.1] An attempt to understand the phenomenon begins with social identity theory (Tajfel 1974), which asserts that sports fans, much like fans in other arenas, seek membership in groups that will positively reflect on their self and public image. For example, people who believe they have a strong work ethic, or people who want to believe and have others believe that they have a strong work ethic, will follow a sport team associated with these qualities. For examle, the Pittsburgh Steelers are commonly perceived as a blue-collar team with a strong work ethic. People may also follow a sports team on the basis of family ties or location (Wann et al. 2001). When joining a group, fans can begin to take on the characteristics of the team they follow, thereby accepting the collective identity of the team or group of supporters (Crocker and Luhtanen 1990).
[2.2] Rivalry in sport has been defined as "a fluctuating adversarial relationship existing between two teams, players, or groups of fans, gaining significance through on-field competition, on-field or off-field incidences, proximity, demographic makeup, and/or historical occurrences" (Havard et al. 2013, 51). Tyler and Cobbs (2015) define a rival group as "a highly salient out-group that poses an acute threat to the identity of the in-group or to in-group members' ability to make positive comparisons between their group and the out-group" (230). Research has identified characteristics such as history, proximity, closeness of competition, and perceived similarities and differences as important antecedents that lead to people and teams experiencing rivalry toward another group. Within sport, rivalry can offer positive benefits such as the feeling of uniqueness and excitement for upcoming contests. Rivalry can also encourage people to consume the sport product, whether involving a favorite and rival team or a rival team against a third neutral team (note 2).
[2.3] To properly gauge fan perceptions of rival teams, the Sport Rivalry Fan Perception Scale (SRFPS) was developed and validated (Havard et al. 2013). The SRFPS measures perceptions of rival teams and groups by asking fans to report (1) their willingness to support the rival team play against another team (i.e., not the favorite team), (2) their perceptions of the prestige, either academic or city/region, of the rival team, (3) their evaluation of rival fan behavior, and (4) their sense of satisfaction experienced when their favorite team beats the rival in direct competition. The SRFPS has been providen to measure fan perceptions at the collegiate (Havard, Reams, and Gray 2013) and professional (Havard and Hutchinson 2017; Wann et al. 2016) levels, as well as in international sport settings (Havard, Wann, and Ryan 2018). The twelve-item scale has also been used as a control variable to test fan behavior (Nichols, Cobbs, and Raska 2016).
3. What influences rivalry?
[3.1] Several characteristics and variables influence rivalry and the way people feel toward out-groups. For example, sport fans can identify multiple teams as rivals (Wann et al. 2016) and can vary in their perceptions of those teams (Havard and Reams 2018; Tyler and Cobbs 2017). In college athletics, the conference realignment from 2010 to 2013 influenced how fans felt toward their rival teams. For example, before conference realignment, fans of teams that were changing athletic conferences were more negative and more likely to consider committing anonymous acts of aggression against the current rival (i.e., in the same conference) than against the anticipated rival (Havard, Wann, and Ryan 2013). Follow-up research found that after the teams had competed in their new conferences for four seasons, fans reported greater negativity toward their current rival for out-of-competition characteristics such as academic prestige and fan behavior; however, they were less likely to support the former rival against another team, experienced greater sense of satisfaction from beating the former rival, and reported a higher likelihood of considering anonymous acts of aggression against the former rival (Havard, Wann, and Ryan 2017). So in that way, fans were trying to move forward and direct their hostility toward the new rival but still reported stronger negative feelings toward the former rival when it came to in-competition settings. These findings support the importance of history and historical competition as characteristics of rivalry (Kilduff, Elfenbein, and Staw 2010; Tyler and Cobbs 2015).
[3.2] Several recent experiments have shown variables that influence rivalry, such as messaging surrounding rival games (Berendt and Uhrich 2018) and exposure to titles and logos meant to promote a rivalry game (Havard, Wann, and Grieve 2018). Berendt and Uhrich (2018) found that acknowledging rather than downplaying a rivalry caused decreased animosity among rival fans. Havard, Wann, and Grieve (2018) exposed fans to either a neutral (e.g., using the word rivalry) or a negative (e.g., using the word hate) title and logo, and found that people exposed to the negative title rated the rival fan behavior more poorly; those exposed to the neutral title were less likely to support their rival against another team. These findings are important for practitioners because acknowledging a rivalry can actually lead to decreased animosity (Berendt and Uhrich 2018), and using a negative word like hate in a promotional message may increase animosity or negativity toward a rival but may decrease actual feelings of rivalry (Havard et al. 2018). Therefore, it behooves practitioners to acknowledge rivalries and use neutral rather than negative words when promoting competitions.
4. Rivalry and fan behavior
[4.1] The presence of a rival can elicit several outcomes from participants and fans. For example, college students reported feeling a closer bond to classmates leading up to a rivalry game (Smith and Schwartz 2003), and rivalry can lead participants to increase their preparation and enhance their performance (Kilduff 2014) while also encouraging unethical behavior as a way to favorably compare to the opponent (Kilduff et al. 2016). Rivalry also influences the way in which fans consume the sport product (Havard, Eddy, and Ryan 2017), and it can cause attendees to pay higher price premiums to attend a game (Sanford and Scott 2016). Watching a game between rival teams also affects the physiological reactions of fans. For example, Hillman et al. (2004) found that fans' physical reactions were different when their favorite team was successful than when their rival team was successful. Fans also react differently to sponsors of favorite and rival teams. Fans of NASCAR displayed strong loyalty toward the brands that sponsor their favorite driver and strong dislike of rival driver sponsors (Dalakas and Levin 2005). Additionally, fans reported being wary of companies that sponsor both favorite and rival sport teams (Davies, Veloutsou, and Costa 2006).
[4.2] Heider (1958) asserts that people celebrate the failure of others as a way to compare favorably to the individual or out-group, and the disposition of mirth theory (Zillmann and Cantor 1976) indicates that people rejoice when someone they like (i.e., a favorite team) is successful and someone they dislike (i.e., a rival team) is unsuccessful. Schadenfreude has been visible in sport fans' reactions to a rival team's failures. In particular, fans of major league baseball (Cikara, Botvinick, and Fiske 2011) and European football (Leach et al. 2003) have displayed schadenfreude when a rival loses to a third, neutral team (i.e., not the favorite team). Dalakas and Melancon (2012) developed a scale to measure fan likelihood to experience schadenfreude toward rival teams.
[4.3] Glory Out of Reflected Failure (GORFing), or a fan celebrating a rival team's loss to another team, is similar to schadenfreude, with a few differences (Havard 2014). Where someone can experience schadenfreude against a disliked individual (e.g., classmate, workmate) or group (e.g., sports team, activist group), the individual or group of focus does not have to be a rival. In other words, a person could experience schadenfreude if a classmate with a better grade fails at something, or a sports fan could rejoice when the New York Yankees lose a game, without identifying either as a rival. In order for the response to be identified as GORFing, the individual or team has to be considered a rival (Havard, Wann, and Ryan 2018). Using our example, it is schadenfreude if someone does not view the successful classmate or the New York Yankees as a rival; however, it is GORFing if the individual believes that the classmate is a rival or is a fan of the Boston Red Sox (longtime rival to the Yankees). Additionally, people have to believe the rival's failure reflects positively on themselves and on their favorite team in order to activate GORFing. Recently a scale was developed to measure GORFing (Havard and Hutchinson 2017), which is statistically unique from the schadenfreude scale (Dalakas and Melancon 2012; Havard, Wann, and Ryan 2018).
[4.4] Rivalry can also increase animosity between fans and teams. The previously discussed impact of a negative title to promote a rivalry causing fans to evaluate rival fan behavior poorly is an example (Havard, Wann, and Grieve 2018). Further, rivalry can cause fans to rate rival fan behavior poorly (Wann and Grieve 2005) and player performance negatively (Wann et al. 2006); it can also influence whether someone will help others in emergency situations (Levine et al. 2005) (note 3). Fans who have a high level of identification with their favorite team also reported being significantly more likely to consider committing acts of anonymous aggression toward rival players, coaches, and fans than those with lower levels of favorite team identification (Wann et al. 1999; Wann and Waddill 2013).
[4.5] Because rivalry can increase feelings of animosity, it is important that researchers, particularly practitioners, are aware of and plan for such incidents. Unfortunately, stories of rival fans getting into arguments or physical confrontations have become all too common. Look no further than the case of Brian Stow to see how rivalry can cause fans to behave in negative ways. Referring to the findings on fan willingness to consider anonymous aggression, roughly 1 to 2 percent of fans have consistently reported they would definitely be willing to consider committing the most heinous acts of aggression, such as physically harming or murdering rival players, coaches, or fans, if they would not get into trouble (note 4). If we accept the conservative estimate of 1 percent of fans, that means that about 100 fans in a venue that seats 10,000, or 1,000 fans in a stadium with a capacity of 100,000 (i.e., some college football stadiums) have reported that they would definitely be willing to consider either physically harming or murdering a star player, coach, or fan of the rival team. This statistic should be alarming to practitioners and should encourage taking action to help control these negative behaviors.
[4.6] What can be done about rivalry and negative fan behavior? First, organizations and practitioners have to better understand their role in cultivating a welcoming and safe fan environment. Beyond the moral obligation that an organization has to provide safe entertainment for their customers, significant legal and financial burdens can come from deviant fan behavior. Therefore, organizations should show caution when promoting opposing or rival teams. For the vast majority of people in attendance, seeing a skit where the favorite team's mascot throws confetti or sprays Silly String on someone dressed in an opposing team's shirt is silly and maybe fun, but it is definitely not something they would consider doing. However, to 1 to 2 percent of fans in attendance, those skits may validate their feelings and potential behaviors toward an opposing or rival team.
5. Where to go from here
[5.1] As stated earlier, the study of rivalry in sport is beginning to receive more attention (note 5), but it still needs investigation and perspectives from researchers in and out of the sport management, psychology, political, and business fields. For example, the sport management literature is lacking observational investigation into the phenomenon. Future avenues of research related to rivalry could also include more research on perceived differences between groups of individuals or supporters of brands outside of sport. For example, does the rivalry between Disney and Universal extend to consumers and fans of each brand (Gennawey 2014), or does the race to one-up the other benefit everyone? Do fans of Marvel Comics pay money to watch movies produced in the DC Comics universe, and vice versa? How do fans of different television shows or written stories relate to each other? There have been examinations of some of these questions, and some are definitely ongoing, but using the concept of rivalry and the knowledge obtained in the sport literature may help extend our understanding of the phenomenon. Additional perspectives from outside the sport management field will also obviously help to shape understanding of rivalry and fan behavior, as well as help sport investigators and practitioners move forward in research and planning within the field. There is still much to learn about rivalry, both in and out of the sport setting, and we hope this essay can serve as a catalyst to further understanding of and encouraging more research into this important phenomenon.