Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
sustainability
Article
The Relationships among Leisure Involvement,
Organizational Commitment and Well-Being:
Viewpoints from Sport Fans in Asia
Su-Lan Pan 1ID , Homer C. Wu 2, Alastair M. Morrison 3,*ID , Min-Tzu Huang 4
and Wen-Shiung Huang 5ID
1School of Tourism & Hospitality Management and Institute for Development of Cross-strait Small and
Medium Enterprises, Hubei University of Economics, Wuhan 430205, China; sandypan2015@163.com
2Graduate Program of Sustainable Tourism and Recreation Management,
National Taichung University of Education, Taichung 40306, Taiwan; hcwu@mail.ntcu.edu.tw
3National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
4Hualien Sun Dance High School, Hualien 97367, Taiwan; wendy75328@gmail.com
5Department of Tourism and Leisure Management, Ling Tung University, Taichung 40852, Taiwan;
didon@mail.uma.org.tw
*Correspondence: alastair@belletourism.com
Received: 18 February 2018; Accepted: 28 February 2018; Published: 8 March 2018
Abstract:
Baseball spectating is one of the most popular leisure activities in Asia. Leisure participants
with high well-being levels usually demonstrate loyal behavior to the teams they follow. Previous
research indicates that professional sport fans are serious leisure participants and their participation
has career qualities. The goal of this research was to investigate the relationship of leisure involvement
with the well-being of professional sport fans and the possible mediating effect of organizational
commitment, a career-related characteristic, on well-being. Some 406 fans of the Brother Elephants
Baseball Team in Taiwan were surveyed. The results showed that leisure involvement positively
and significantly influenced fans’ well-being and organizational commitment partially mediated
the influence of leisure involvement on well-being. This study pioneers the integration of leisure
involvement, well-being and organizational commitment in the context of a Professional Baseball
League team within Asia. Implications and future research directions are presented.
Keywords:
leisure involvement; organizational commitment; serious leisure; professional sport fans;
well-being
1. Introduction
In Asia, professional sport is not yet as vibrant as in the USA and Europe and the current
population of sport fans is smaller. Since 1970, Taiwan
'
s Little League Baseball, Junior League Baseball
and Senior League Baseball teams have repeatedly won international competitions. The Chinese
Professional Baseball League (CPBL) began in Taiwan in 1989 and is the sixth professional baseball
league in the world. The total attendance reached 10 million in 1997 [
1
] but the population of Taiwan
is only 23 million. These statistics indicate that baseball spectating is a favorite leisure activity that has
blended into the lifestyles of Taiwanese.
The success of professional sports is derived from fans’ support and developing a loyal fan base
is a fundamental aim of professional sport organizations [
2
]. Each CPBL team is managed by an
enterprise. Usually, loyal fans travel to baseball fields around Taiwan to support their teams [
3
,
4
].
Hence fostering loyal fans is very important to every CPBL team. Fans benefit in many ways from the
association with teams, just as do the loyal customers of other companies. Much previous academic
Sustainability 2018,10, 740; doi:10.3390/su10030740 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 2 of 18
research has focused on sport fans’ loyalty. Some researchers assessed the attitudinal or behavioral
loyalty of sport fans [
5
–
10
]. Others analyzed fans’ sponsoring or consumption intentions [
11
–
13
].
However, if fans cannot obtain happiness or well-being from watching sports or participating in
sport activities, the relationship between fans and their teams will not be sustainable. Well-being
or happiness has positive affect and motivations that encourage people to pursue certain activities
and communicate favorable word of mouth about them [
14
]. For example, Chiu, Cheng, Huang and
Chen investigated users’ experiences with social network sites, showing that subjective well-being
positively influenced loyalty toward SNSs [
15
]. However, studies on well-being generated by sport
remain scarce [16].
In Taiwan, baseball spectating is a favorite leisure activity and baseball fans represent a
large community. The relationship between community well-being and community development
intersect; good community development fosters community well-being [
17
]. Hence, considering
the well-being of baseball fans contributes to a better understanding of community well-being and
community development.
The concept of serious leisure emerged through the work of Stebbins, which he defined as “the
systematic pursuit of an amateur, hobbyist, or volunteer activity that is sufficiently substantial and
interesting for the participant to find a career there in the acquisition and expression of its special
skills and knowledge” (p3) [
18
]. According to Jones [
19
], quoting Stebbins [
18
], one of the six distinct
qualities of serious leisure is the delivery of significant benefits to individual participants. The normal
assumption is that these benefits outweigh the costs. However, Jones found that English professional
football fans engaged with the sport as serious leisure but continuously participated in unrewarding
activities [
19
]. Lamont, Kennelly and Moyle concluded that despite the costs and disappointment
of event cancellations, serious ironman triathlon participants persisted with their careers as amateur
athletes in this sport [
20
]. Previous research on outdoor activities has shown that well-being has a
positive effect on participants’ loyalty [
21
,
22
]. Thus, enhancing the well-being of sport fans could
increase their loyalty.
Leisure activities play a buffering role against stress [
23
–
25
] and assist with the effective
management of life stressors [
26
,
27
]. They have been found to reduce depression [
28
]; and enhance life
satisfaction [
27
,
29
,
30
] and well-being [
31
–
34
]. Researchers have demonstrated that increased levels of
leisure involvement have a positive impact on well-being [35–38].
Empirical research on company employees suggests that organizational commitment is positively
associated with well-being [
39
–
41
]. Likewise, serious leisure participants involved with professional
sport may have high levels of organizational commitment to their favorite clubs and this can influence
their well-being. Based on this assumption, the main goal of this research was to explore the influence
of professional sport fans’ leisure involvement on their well-being and to determine the mediating
effect of organizational commitment. The specific research objectives were to:
1. Test the effect of leisure involvement on well-being.
2. Test the effect of leisure involvement on organizational commitment.
3. Test the effect of organizational commitment on well-being.
4.
Examine the mediating role of organizational commitment between leisure involvement
and well-being.
This research examined the causal relationships among these three variables to provide a reference
for professional baseball teams in enhancing the well-being of their fans. Furthermore, the results could
assist the sport agencies of governments of other Asian communities in promoting the sustainable
development of professional baseball leagues.
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 3 of 18
2. Literature Review
2.1. Leisure Involvement and Well-Being
The concept of involvement originated from psychology. Havitz and Dimanche consider
involvement as “undetected motivation, incentive, or interest toward a certain leisure activity or
related products, often elicited by a specific stimuli or situation.” In other words, “leisure involvement
refers to how we consider our leisure and how leisure influences our behavior” (p. 246) [
42
].
Therefore, to understand leisure involvement means to realize the leisure meaning for life and related
leisure behavior.
Many scholars divide measurement methods of leisure involvement into behavioral and
psychological involvement [
27
,
36
,
43
]. Behavioral involvement refers to the time and energy individuals
put into specific activities [
44
], measured in terms of participation frequency, time spent, related
resources available, etc. [
45
,
46
]. Psychological involvement refers to an individual’s internal
psychological process that prompts them to participate in leisure activities. Attraction, self-expression
and centrality are the most widely used constructs for psychological involvement [
43
,
47
–
49
]. Attraction
is the extent of a person’s connection to a specific situation after being stimulated by an activity;
the activity has importance and significance to the individual. Self-expression refers to a person’s
need to pursue self-realization, characterized by free self-expression and recognition for the activity,
which prompts the individual to convince others to participate in the activity. Centrality refers to a
person’s lifestyle or social network, the degree of integration with the activity in which the individual
participates and the central role the activity plays. In this research, the concept of McIntyre and Pigram
was adopted to identify suitable leisure involvement-related questions. Attraction, self-expression and
centrality served as the observed variables of leisure involvement [50].
Studies of well-being originated from three fields: mental health, quality of life and social
gerontology [
51
]. Diener believes that subjective well-being positively reflects a person’s overall life and
consists of high life satisfaction and positive feelings, along with minimal negative feelings [
52
]. Diener,
Emmons, Larsen and Griffin compiled the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), using assessments of
overall life to measure the degree of life satisfaction [
53
]. Diener and Emmons used eight affective
words to measure positive and negative affects [
54
]. Watson, Clark and Tellegen designed the Positive
and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), including 20 questions each for the positive and negative
dimensions [
55
]. Positive and negative affective responses and overall life satisfaction were adopted in
this research to represent well-being.
Previous researchers have shown that when participating consistently in a specific activity,
individuals experience less stress and a stronger sense of well-being [
38
,
56
,
57
]. In two studies of college
students, it was concluded that leisure involvement had a positive effect on well-being [
58
,
59
]. A study
of seniors showed that behavioral and socio-psychological involvement affected well-being [
60
].
Huang found that leisure involvement of serious leisure participants had a positive impact on
well-being [
61
]. Huang also pointed out that leisure involvement of baseball fans had a positive
influence on well-being [62]. Therefore, the first hypothesis of this research was:
Hypothesis 1. Leisure involvement has positive and significant effects on well-being.
2.2. Serious Leisure
Serious leisure has six distinguishing characteristics; perseverance, career, significant personal
effort, durable benefits, unique ethos and tendency to identify strongly. Serious leisure participation
is usually profound and long-lasting. Participants have strong skills, knowledge or experience with
the activities and they generally get no remuneration [
63
,
64
]. They gain various social and personal
benefits from the activities [
65
]. Sport fans usually have more knowledge and watch games in person,
online or on TV. In general, they do not receive any remuneration but derive various benefits from the
sport. Therefore, the researchers regard sport fans as serious leisure participants.
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 4 of 18
Many studies have shown that well-being positively correlates with different kinds of leisure
activities, including visiting family and friends, playing sport games, watching television and taking
trips [
66
–
68
]. Cheng found that those engaged in serious leisure activities received the highest
satisfaction, while casual leisure participants experienced moderate satisfaction [
69
]. Liu also reported
greater well-being when participants were engaging in a serious and committed leisure activity [
70
].
Therefore, it appears that serious leisure participants usually derive a higher level of well-being.
Before leaving this discussion of serious leisure, some criticism of the concept must be noted and
acknowledged. Veal, for example, assessed the serious leisure perspective (SLP) and challenged its
status as a theory and a three-level typology (casual, serious and project-based leisure). He argued
that SLP theory had been untested in forms other than serious leisure and that serious leisure was a
continuum rather than being represented by three discrete categories [71].
2.3. Organizational Commitment
The concept of organizational commitment originated from the side-bet theory of Becker [
72
].
Robbins believes that organizational commitment is members’ loyalty toward the organization,
recognition for the organization and degree of participation in organizational events [
73
]. Some
authors summarized previous research measurements of organizational commitment, dividing these
into personal affection, perceived costs and risks and social relations into affective, continuance
and normative commitment. Affective commitment is an individual’s degree of attachment to an
organization; continuance commitment refers to perceived costs and risks for leaving the existing
organization; and normative commitment is a type of moral commitment, deeming organizational
loyalty essential [
74
,
75
]. Some studies have used these three dimensions of organizational commitment
developed by Allen and Meyer [
74
] to analyze work commitment [
76
] and consumer commitment [
77
].
Lee, Allen, Meyer and Rhee used the three dimensions to measure the organizational commitment of
nurses and industrial hygiene technicians in South Korea [78].
Baseball spectating is a process that satisfies individuals’ subjective feelings and stimulates their
passion while creating a better quality of life [
79
]. When participants are involved in leisure activities,
as time goes by, they become committed to leisure service providers [
42
,
76
,
80
,
81
]. Research by Kyle and
Mowen showed that some variables of leisure involvement have a positive impact on organizational
commitment [
48
]. The paper of Wu, Pan and Huang indicated that if sport fans have more leisure
involvement, they will have more commitment to the organization [
82
], thus, the second hypothesis
was framed as:
Hypothesis 2. Leisure involvement has positive and significant effects on organizational commitment.
Organizational identification is a specific type of social identification [
83
]. However, the research
is inconsistent on the relationship between organizational identity and commitment. Some suggest
that organizational commitment is part of the organizational identity construct [
84
], whereas others
consider organizational identity to be an element of organizational commitment [
85
]. Still other
scholars believe that organizational identity leads to organizational commitment [
86
]. Ashforth and
Mael argued that organizational commitment and identification are different but organizational
identity is an important reference for organizational commitment [
83
]. Some past research has
found organizational identification to be closely related to organizational commitment [
39
,
87
].
Stinglhamber et al. explored the relationship between employee organizational identity and affective
organizational commitment [
88
]. The results showed organizational identification to be an antecedent
of organizational commitment.
In sport fans’ perceptions, organizational identification is close to team identification. Sport
fans who highly identify with their teams, maintain memberships in related social networks and this
enhances their social identity [
89
,
90
]. Wann, Melnick, Russell and Pease found that identification
with a team was positively associated with personal self-esteem and positive emotions and was
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 5 of 18
negatively correlated with depression and negative affection [
91
]. Team identification is associated
with higher levels of social self-esteem [
92
,
93
] and more frequent positive emotions [
94
]. Wann [
95
] and
Wann, Waddill, Polk and Weaver [
96
] found a positive relationship between sports team identification
and well-being.
Panaccio and Vandenberghe explored the correlations among organizational support,
organizational commitment (emotions, norms, perceived sacrificed leaving and perceived lack of
alternatives) and subjective well-being perceived by members. Their findings showed that the higher
the respondents’ attachment to an organization, the greater their well-being [
97
]. Galais and Moser
conducted a survey targeting temporary agency workers from 2000 to 2002. Temporary agency
employees’ commitment to the client organization had positive effects on individuals’ well-being [
98
].
Jamal and Khan revealed there is a positive relationship between survivors’ organizational commitment
and psychological well-being after the downsizing process [
41
]. Harris and Cameron indicated that
various dimensions of attachment to the organization (normative, affective, continuance commitment)
are important positive predictors of the well-being of employees [
39
]. Hence, employees’ organizational
commitment positively influences their well-being. Sport fans’ organizational identification positively
affects their well-being. There are stronger relationships between organizational identification and
organizational commitment. According to Stebbins’ serious leisure concept, sport fans are regarded
as serious leisure participants with career qualities [19]. Cuskelly, Harrington and Stebbins indicated
that participants in serious leisure activities identify positively with the organization and have more
commitment to it [
99
]. The study showed that organizational commitment of baseball fans has a
positive impact on their well-being [
82
]. Therefore, this research examined the mediating effect of
organizational commitment on the leisure involvement and well-being of sport fans. The third and
fourth hypotheses were posited as follows:
Hypothesis 3. Organizational commitment has positive and significant effects on well-being.
Hypothesis 4. Organizational commitment mediates the influence of leisure involvement on well-being.
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Research Framework and Instrument
Based on these four hypotheses, structural equation modeling was applied to determine
the influential effects among leisure involvement, organizational commitment and well-being.
The mediating effect of organizational commitment on leisure involvement and well-being was
also measured.
Brother Elephants Baseball Team is one of the founding members of the CPBL. Since its foundation
in 1990 through 2013, the team set the record for winning the Taiwan Series for three consecutive years,
in 1992–1994 and 2001–2003 respectively, making it the first to have achieved three consecutive wins
twice in the history of the League. Brother Elephants Baseball Team also has most fans in Taiwan.
This team’s fans were selected as the focus for this research. The conceptual model proposed is shown
in Figure 1.
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 6 of 18
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17
Well-being was the fans’ perceived emotions and life satisfaction. The SWLS scale of Diener et
al. [53] and the questions of Diener and Emmons [54] served as references and revisions were made,
including three dimensions, namely life satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect, consisting of
10 questions. A 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) was applied. Thus,
the higher the degree of life satisfaction and positive affect, the higher the well-being; the higher the
perceived negative affect, the lower the well-being.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model. Note: Means directly affects Means indirectly affects.
3.2. Sampling and Research Tools
The original questionnaire was in English and was translated into Chinese. To ensure that it was
translated appropriately, the instrument was reviewed by six professors specializing in leisure, sport
and tourism. Before conducting the survey, this research was approved by five professors (Review
Committee) at the Graduate Institute of Sustainable Tourism and Recreation Management, National
Taichung University of Education.
The researchers went to the stadium to survey the fans of Brother Elephants. Before
administering the survey, interviewees were asked whether they were Brother Elephants’ fans. Upon
confirmation, respondents completed the questionnaires. The sampling method was purposive. The
questionnaire was distributed before the break time in games, without unnecessarily disturbing the
respondents. The sampling period was from 23 September to 23 October 2010. A total of 450
questionnaires were distributed and 406 valid copies were received, indicating a response rate of
90.2%. The researchers did not offer any incentives to participate in the study. The average number
of home game spectators for the Brother Elephants Team was 4730 in the past 20 years, which is the
highest among the four teams. This is 1.35 times greater than the second team (LaNew).
The probability value of the questionnaire content validity was 0.83. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of leisure involvement was 0.921 and the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of organizational
commitment was 0.955. Well-being had Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.857. All the reliability
coefficients were at satisfactory levels.
3.3. Reliability and Validity Analysis
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to verify whether the observed variables could
be used to measure the latent variables. The factor loading of all the questions of leisure involvement
were between 0.56 and 0.86; the composition reliability (CR value) was 0.93 and the Average
Variances Extracted (AVE) was 0.53 (Table 1). For organizational commitment, the factor loadings
were between 0.66 and 0.92; the CR value was 0.95 and the AVE value was 0.63 (Table 2). For well-
being, the factor loadings were between 0.63 and 0.94; the CR value was 0.96 and the AVE value was
0.72 (Table 3). Raines-Eudy pointed out that composite reliability values of over 0.5 were acceptable
[101]. Fornell and Larcker believed that AVE values over 0.5 indicated that the scale possessed
convergent validity [102].
Leisure
Involvement
Organizational
Commitment
Well-Being
H1
H2 H3
H4 H4
Figure 1. Conceptual Model. Note:
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17
Well-being was the fans’ perceived emotions and life satisfaction. The SWLS scale of Diener et
al. [53] and the questions of Diener and Emmons [54] served as references and revisions were made,
including three dimensions, namely life satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect, consisting of
10 questions. A 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) was applied. Thus,
the higher the degree of life satisfaction and positive affect, the higher the well-being; the higher the
perceived negative affect, the lower the well-being.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model. Note: Means directly affects Means indirectly affects.
3.2. Sampling and Research Tools
The original questionnaire was in English and was translated into Chinese. To ensure that it was
translated appropriately, the instrument was reviewed by six professors specializing in leisure, sport
and tourism. Before conducting the survey, this research was approved by five professors (Review
Committee) at the Graduate Institute of Sustainable Tourism and Recreation Management, National
Taichung University of Education.
The researchers went to the stadium to survey the fans of Brother Elephants. Before
administering the survey, interviewees were asked whether they were Brother Elephants’ fans. Upon
confirmation, respondents completed the questionnaires. The sampling method was purposive. The
questionnaire was distributed before the break time in games, without unnecessarily disturbing the
respondents. The sampling period was from 23 September to 23 October 2010. A total of 450
questionnaires were distributed and 406 valid copies were received, indicating a response rate of
90.2%. The researchers did not offer any incentives to participate in the study. The average number
of home game spectators for the Brother Elephants Team was 4730 in the past 20 years, which is the
highest among the four teams. This is 1.35 times greater than the second team (LaNew).
The probability value of the questionnaire content validity was 0.83. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of leisure involvement was 0.921 and the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of organizational
commitment was 0.955. Well-being had Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.857. All the reliability
coefficients were at satisfactory levels.
3.3. Reliability and Validity Analysis
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to verify whether the observed variables could
be used to measure the latent variables. The factor loading of all the questions of leisure involvement
were between 0.56 and 0.86; the composition reliability (CR value) was 0.93 and the Average
Variances Extracted (AVE) was 0.53 (Table 1). For organizational commitment, the factor loadings
were between 0.66 and 0.92; the CR value was 0.95 and the AVE value was 0.63 (Table 2). For well-
being, the factor loadings were between 0.63 and 0.94; the CR value was 0.96 and the AVE value was
0.72 (Table 3). Raines-Eudy pointed out that composite reliability values of over 0.5 were acceptable
[101]. Fornell and Larcker believed that AVE values over 0.5 indicated that the scale possessed
convergent validity [102].
Leisure
Involvement
Organizational
Commitment
Well-Being
H1
H2
H3
H4
H4
Means directly affects
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17
Well-being was the fans’ perceived emotions and life satisfaction. The SWLS scale of Diener et
al. [53] and the questions of Diener and Emmons [54] served as references and revisions were made,
including three dimensions, namely life satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect, consisting of
10 questions. A 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) was applied. Thus,
the higher the degree of life satisfaction and positive affect, the higher the well-being; the higher the
perceived negative affect, the lower the well-being.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model. Note: Means directly affects Means indirectly affects.
3.2. Sampling and Research Tools
The original questionnaire was in English and was translated into Chinese. To ensure that it was
translated appropriately, the instrument was reviewed by six professors specializing in leisure, sport
and tourism. Before conducting the survey, this research was approved by five professors (Review
Committee) at the Graduate Institute of Sustainable Tourism and Recreation Management, National
Taichung University of Education.
The researchers went to the stadium to survey the fans of Brother Elephants. Before
administering the survey, interviewees were asked whether they were Brother Elephants’ fans. Upon
confirmation, respondents completed the questionnaires. The sampling method was purposive. The
questionnaire was distributed before the break time in games, without unnecessarily disturbing the
respondents. The sampling period was from 23 September to 23 October 2010. A total of 450
questionnaires were distributed and 406 valid copies were received, indicating a response rate of
90.2%. The researchers did not offer any incentives to participate in the study. The average number
of home game spectators for the Brother Elephants Team was 4730 in the past 20 years, which is the
highest among the four teams. This is 1.35 times greater than the second team (LaNew).
The probability value of the questionnaire content validity was 0.83. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of leisure involvement was 0.921 and the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of organizational
commitment was 0.955. Well-being had Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.857. All the reliability
coefficients were at satisfactory levels.
3.3. Reliability and Validity Analysis
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to verify whether the observed variables could
be used to measure the latent variables. The factor loading of all the questions of leisure involvement
were between 0.56 and 0.86; the composition reliability (CR value) was 0.93 and the Average
Variances Extracted (AVE) was 0.53 (Table 1). For organizational commitment, the factor loadings
were between 0.66 and 0.92; the CR value was 0.95 and the AVE value was 0.63 (Table 2). For well-
being, the factor loadings were between 0.63 and 0.94; the CR value was 0.96 and the AVE value was
0.72 (Table 3). Raines-Eudy pointed out that composite reliability values of over 0.5 were acceptable
[101]. Fornell and Larcker believed that AVE values over 0.5 indicated that the scale possessed
convergent validity [102].
Leisure
Involvement
Organizational
Commitment
Well-Being
H1
H2
H3
H4
H4
Means indirectly affects.
Leisure involvement was defined as the affective input, motivation, excitement and other
psychological states of a fan toward professional baseball games. The scales of McIntyre and
Pigram [
50
] and Kyle et al. [
43
] were used. The contents included three dimensions: attraction,
self-expression and centrality, consisting of 12 positive questions. A 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly
disagree to 5 = strongly agree) was adopted for measurement.
Organizational commitment was defined as the identity of a fan’s recognition, loyalty and
participation toward a baseball team. The scale of Lee et al. [
78
] was used combining the dimensions
of Meyer and Allen [
75
] and Meyer, Allen & Smith [
100
]. The questions were then revised where
appropriate to measure the organizational commitment toward Brother Elephants Baseball Team.
Three dimensions, namely affective, continuance and normative commitment were included, with a
total of 12 questions. A 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) was applied.
Well-being was the fans’ perceived emotions and life satisfaction. The SWLS scale of
Diener et al. [53]
and the questions of Diener and Emmons [
54
] served as references and revisions
were made, including three dimensions, namely life satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect,
consisting of 10 questions. A 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) was
applied. Thus, the higher the degree of life satisfaction and positive affect, the higher the well-being;
the higher the perceived negative affect, the lower the well-being.
3.2. Sampling and Research Tools
The original questionnaire was in English and was translated into Chinese. To ensure that it
was translated appropriately, the instrument was reviewed by six professors specializing in leisure,
sport and tourism. Before conducting the survey, this research was approved by five professors
(Review Committee) at the Graduate Institute of Sustainable Tourism and Recreation Management,
National Taichung University of Education.
The researchers went to the stadium to survey the fans of Brother Elephants. Before administering
the survey, interviewees were asked whether they were Brother Elephants’ fans. Upon confirmation,
respondents completed the questionnaires. The sampling method was purposive. The questionnaire
was distributed before the break time in games, without unnecessarily disturbing the respondents.
The sampling period was from 23 September to 23 October 2010. A total of 450 questionnaires were
distributed and 406 valid copies were received, indicating a response rate of 90.2%. The researchers
did not offer any incentives to participate in the study. The average number of home game spectators
for the Brother Elephants Team was 4730 in the past 20 years, which is the highest among the four
teams. This is 1.35 times greater than the second team (LaNew).
The probability value of the questionnaire content validity was 0.83. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of leisure involvement was 0.921 and the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of organizational
commitment was 0.955. Well-being had Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.857. All the reliability
coefficients were at satisfactory levels.
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 7 of 18
3.3. Reliability and Validity Analysis
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to verify whether the observed variables could be
used to measure the latent variables. The factor loading of all the questions of leisure involvement
were between 0.56 and 0.86; the composition reliability (CR value) was 0.93 and the Average Variances
Extracted (AVE) was 0.53 (Table 1). For organizational commitment, the factor loadings were between
0.66 and 0.92; the CR value was 0.95 and the AVE value was 0.63 (Table 2). For well-being, the factor
loadings were between 0.63 and 0.94; the CR value was 0.96 and the AVE value was 0.72 (Table 3).
Raines-Eudy pointed out that composite reliability values of over 0.5 were acceptable [
101
]. Fornell and
Larcker believed that AVE values over 0.5 indicated that the scale possessed convergent validity [
102
].
Table 1. Statistical Analysis of Leisure Involvement.
Variables and Dimensions Mean Standard Deviation Factor Loading CR AVE
Leisure Involvement 3.99 0.58 0.93 0.53
Attraction 4.40 0.60 0.88 0.65
I am interested in watching
professional baseball. 4.58 0.62 0.76
It is important for me to watch
professional baseball. 4.25 0.78 0.86
To me, watching professional
baseball is one of the most
pleasurable things to do.
4.46 0.65 0.74
I really enjoy watching
professional baseball. 4.45 0.71 0.84
Self-Expression 4.01 0.64 0.75 0.43
Watching professional baseball
helps me relieve stress in life. 4.28 0.75 0.68
To me, watching professional
baseball allows me to truly
express myself.
3.91 0.84 0.72
I am mastering knowledge about
professional baseball watching. 3.96 0.82 0.60
I expect others to share the same
views on professional baseball
watching as mine.
3.90 0.91 0.62
Centrality 3.57 0.71 0.82 0.53
My life is centered on watching
professional baseball. 3.45 0.99 0.82
I met most of my friends through
professional baseball watching. 2.74 0.99 0.56
I am very willing to share
everything about professional
baseball watching with friends.
4.00 0.79 0.71
I derive higher satisfaction from
professional baseball watching
than I do in regular activities.
3.85 0.93 0.79
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 8 of 18
Table 2. Statistical Analysis of Organizational Commitment.
Variables and Dimensions Mean Standard Deviation Factor Loading CR AVE
Organizational Commitment 5.49 1.11 0.95 0.63
Affective Commitment 5.59 1.15 0.92 0.70
Problems faced by Brother
Elephants Baseball Team are like my
problems.
4.98 1.48 0.66
I feel a strong sense of
belongingness toward Brother
Elephants Baseball Team.
5.87 1.25 0.89
I have strong emotional attachment
to Brother Elephants Baseball Team.
5.71 1.29 0.92
Brother Elephants Baseball Team is
like family to me. 5.54 1.33 0.86
Brother Elephants Baseball Team
means a lot to me. 5.87 1.24 0.85
Continuance Commitment 5.57 1.17 0.85 0.59
If I don’t support brother Elephants
Baseball Team, I may never be able
to find a team to support.
5.86 1.43 0.68
To me, the cost of not supporting
Brother Elephants Baseball Team is
far higher than the benefits.
5.02 1.48 0.72
I will not stop supporting Brother
Elephants Baseball Team; otherwise,
I might lose my stand.
5.64 1.42 0.85
My life will be affected if I decide to
no longer support Brother
Elephants Baseball Team.
4.97 1.66 0.81
Normative Commitment 5.30 1.25 0.79 0.56
I feel obligated to continue
supporting Brother Elephants
Baseball Team.
5.63 1.45 0.82
Even if there is a better baseball
team to choose. I will still support
Brother Elephants Baseball Team.
6.04 1.28 0.71
If I stop supporting Brother
Elephants Baseball Team, I am a
person with no credibility.
4.35 1.84 0.71
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 9 of 18
Table 3. Statistical Analysis of Well-Being.
Variables and Dimensions Mean Standard Deviation Factor Loading CR AVE
Well-Being 4.95 0.85 0.96 0.72
Life Satisfaction 4.78 1.10 0.87 0.63
In general, my life is close to my
ideal. 4.96 1.20 0.77
My living condition is good. 5.41 1.09 0.83
I am quite satisfied with my life.
5.16 1.20 0.91
So far, I have acquired things
important to me in my life. 4.40 1.63 0.63
Positive Affect 5.49 1.02 0.94 0.84
I feel pleasurable 5.54 1.05 0.91
I feel satisfied 5.42 1.13 0.94
I feel enjoyable 5.45 1.08 0.91
Negative Affect 3.41 1.43 0.90 0.74
I feel depressed 3.42 1.34 0.84
I feel angry 3.24 1.50 0.87
I feel worried 3.67 1.29 0.87
4. Results
Among the research participants, 66.2% were males, 33.8% were female and 57.9% were aged
21–30. Most of the respondents (51.2%) had university educations. The highest proportions were whose
length of time engaged in baseball watching was 6–10 years (33.8%) and who had been supporting
Brother Elephants Baseball League for 6–10 years (33.3%).
4.1. Test of Hypothesis 1
The researchers determined whether leisure involvement had a positive effect on well-being.
The statistics for goodness of fit were
χ2
= 28.50 (p= 0.00), Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.98, Adjusted
Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) = 0.94,
Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = 0.04
,
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.08
, Non-normed Fit Index (NNFI) = 0.96,
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.98,
χ2
/df = 3.56. It was concluded that the proposed model had a good
fit (Table 4). According to the path analysis results, the direct effect of baseball fans’ leisure involvement
on their well-being was significant, accounting for 0.47 (p< 0.01) (Figure 2). The relationship of leisure
involvement to well-being was positive and significant. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported.
Table 4. Goodness-of-fit Test for Leisure Involvement and Well-Being.
Indices Model fit Criteria
χ2/df 3.56
GFI 0.98 >0.90
AGFI 0.94 >0.90
SRMR 0.04 <0.05
RMSEA 0.08 <0.08
NNFI 0.96 >0.90
CFI 0.98 >0.90
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 10 of 18
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17
Table 4. Goodness-of-fit Test for Leisure Involvement and Well-Being.
Indices Model fit Criteria
χ
2
/df 3.56
GFI 0.98 >0.90
AGFI 0.94 >0.90
SRMR 0.04 <0.05
RMSEA 0.08 <0.08
NNFI 0.96 >0.90
CFI 0.98 >0.90
Figure 2. The effect of leisure involvement on well-being. Note: ** p < 0.01.
4.2. Tests of Hypotheses 2 and 3
The relationships among leisure involvement, organizational commitment and well-being were
examined. A mediating model was developed (Figure 3). The fit statistics of the model were as
follows: χ
2
=88.21 (p = 0.00), GFI = 0.95, AGFI = 0.91, SRMR = 0.04, RMSEA = 0.08, NNFI = 0.97, CFI =
0.98 and χ
2
/df = 3.70. Overall, the mediating model had good fit (Table 5). Moreover, the path analysis
results showed that the direct effect of leisure involvement on organizational commitment was
positive and significant at 0.77 (p < 0.01) and the direct effect of organizational commitment on well-
being was positive and significant at 0.39 (p < 0.01). In other words, the higher fans’ leisure
involvement, the higher was their organizational commitment; the higher fans’ organizational
commitment, the higher was their well-being. Thus, Hypothesis 2 and 3 were supported. It was found
that leisure involvement indirectly affected well-being through organizational commitment, the
indirect effect was 0.30 (0.77 × 0.39) (p < 0.01).
Figure 3. The test for the mediating model of organizational commitment. Note: ** p < 0.01 * p < 0.05.
Leisure
Involvement Well-Being
0.47**
0.87*
Leisure
Involvement
Organizational
Commitment
Well-Being
Affective
Commitment
Continuance
Commitment
Normative
Commitment
Self-
expression
Attraction
Centrality to
lifestyle Negative
Affect
0.39
0.23
0.38
0.71
0.25 0.19 0.27
0.77** 0.39**
0.18*
0.78*
0.88*
0.78* 0.54*
0.41
0.70
Positive
Affect
0.33
0.85*0.90*
Life
Satisfaction 0.49
0.82*
0.71*
Figure 2. The effect of leisure involvement on well-being. Note: ** p< 0.01.
4.2. Tests of Hypotheses 2 and 3
The relationships among leisure involvement, organizational commitment and well-being were
examined. A mediating model was developed (Figure 3). The fit statistics of the model were as follows:
χ2
=88.21 (p= 0.00), GFI = 0.95, AGFI = 0.91, SRMR = 0.04, RMSEA = 0.08, NNFI = 0.97, CFI = 0.98 and
χ2
/df = 3.70. Overall, the mediating model had good fit (Table 5). Moreover, the path analysis results
showed that the direct effect of leisure involvement on organizational commitment was positive and
significant at 0.77 (p< 0.01) and the direct effect of organizational commitment on well-being was
positive and significant at 0.39 (p< 0.01). In other words, the higher fans’ leisure involvement, the higher
was their organizational commitment; the higher fans’ organizational commitment, the higher was their
well-being. Thus, Hypothesis 2 and 3 were supported. It was found that leisure involvement indirectly
affected well-being through organizational commitment, the indirect effect was 0.30 (
0.77 ×0.39
)
(p< 0.01).
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17
Table 4. Goodness-of-fit Test for Leisure Involvement and Well-Being.
Indices Model fit Criteria
χ
2
/df 3.56
GFI 0.98 >0.90
AGFI 0.94 >0.90
SRMR 0.04 <0.05
RMSEA 0.08 <0.08
NNFI 0.96 >0.90
CFI 0.98 >0.90
Figure 2. The effect of leisure involvement on well-being. Note: ** p < 0.01.
4.2. Tests of Hypotheses 2 and 3
The relationships among leisure involvement, organizational commitment and well-being were
examined. A mediating model was developed (Figure 3). The fit statistics of the model were as
follows: χ
2
=88.21 (p = 0.00), GFI = 0.95, AGFI = 0.91, SRMR = 0.04, RMSEA = 0.08, NNFI = 0.97, CFI =
0.98 and χ
2
/df = 3.70. Overall, the mediating model had good fit (Table 5). Moreover, the path analysis
results showed that the direct effect of leisure involvement on organizational commitment was
positive and significant at 0.77 (p < 0.01) and the direct effect of organizational commitment on well-
being was positive and significant at 0.39 (p < 0.01). In other words, the higher fans’ leisure
involvement, the higher was their organizational commitment; the higher fans’ organizational
commitment, the higher was their well-being. Thus, Hypothesis 2 and 3 were supported. It was found
that leisure involvement indirectly affected well-being through organizational commitment, the
indirect effect was 0.30 (0.77 × 0.39) (p < 0.01).
Figure 3. The test for the mediating model of organizational commitment. Note: ** p < 0.01 * p < 0.05.
Leisure
Involvement Well-Being
0.47**
0.87*
Leisure
Involvement
Organizational
Commitment
Well-Being
Affective
Commitment
Continuance
Commitment
Normative
Commitment
Self-
expression
Attraction
Centrality to
lifestyle Negative
Affect
0.39
0.23
0.38
0.71
0.25 0.19 0.27
0.77** 0.39**
0.18*
0.78*
0.88*
0.78* 0.54*
0.41
0.70
Positive
Affect
0.33
0.85*0.90*
Life
Satisfaction 0.49
0.82*
0.71*
Figure 3. The test for the mediating model of organizational commitment. Note: ** p< 0.01 * p< 0.05.
Table 5. Goodness-of-fit Test for the Mediating Model.
Indices Model Fit Criteria
χ2/df 3.70
GFI 0.95 >0.90
AGFI 0.91 >0.90
SRMR 0.04 <0.05
RMSEA 0.08 <0.08
NNFI 0.97 >0.90
CFI 0.98 >0.90
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 11 of 18
4.3. Test of Hypothesis 4
Fans’ leisure involvement had a positive and significant effect on well-being, with a direct effect
of 0.47 (p< 0.01) (Figure 2). When organizational commitment was included in the model (Figure 3),
leisure involvement also had a significant effect on well-being but with a weak direct effect of 0.18
(
p< 0.05
). In the mediating model, leisure involvement had a significant effect on well-being through
organizational commitment and the indirect effect was 0.30. Thus, the total effect of leisure involvement
on well-being was 0.48 (0.18 + 0.30). The indirect effect value of leisure involvement through the effect
of organizational commitment accounted for 62.5% of the total effects (0.30/0.48), thus indicating
organizational commitment is a mediating variable of leisure involvement and well-being. Thus,
for Hypothesis 4, organizational commitment partially mediated the influence of leisure involvement
on well-being and it was supported.
The findings showed that the Brother Elephants Team fans’ performance was above average in
three respects: leisure involvement, organizational commitment and well-being. The average value of
the leisure involvement was 3.99 and the standard deviation was 0.58, thus indicating these baseball
fans’ positive leisure involvement. The concept with the most profound leisure involvement was
attraction, with an average value of 4.40, followed by self-expression (4.01) and centrality (3.57) (Table 1).
The average value of overall organizational commitment was 5.49 with a standard deviation of 1.11.
The concept with the highest value was affective commitment at 5.59. Continuance commitment
followed with the value of 5.57. Finally, normative commitment had an average value of 5.30 (Table 2).
For well-being, the overall average value was 4.95 with a standard deviation of 0.85. The concept with
the highest average value was positive affect (5.49), followed by life satisfaction (4.78) and negative
affect (3.41) (Table 3).
The results indicated that attraction, self-expression and centrality were representations of sport
fans’ leisure involvement, of which self-expression had the highest factor load (0.88), followed by
attraction (0.78) and centrality (0.78). The organizational commitment of baseball fans can be reflected
in affective, continuance and normative commitment, of which continuance commitment had the
highest factor load (0.90), followed by affective commitment (0.87) and normative commitment (0.85).
As for well-being, it was reflected by life satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect, of which
positive affect had the highest factor load (0.82), followed by life satisfaction (0.71) and negative
affect (0.54).
5. Discussion
The overall goal of this research was to explore the influence of the leisure involvement of sport
fans on their well-being and the mediating effect of organizational commitment. The findings revealed
that the leisure involvement of baseball fans has a positive impact on their well-being. This finding
coincides with the research results of Lu and Hu [
59
], Dai et al. [
103
], Huang [
62
] and Doerksen et
al. [
58
]. Huang indicated the leisure involvement of sport volunteers had a positive impact on their
well-being [
62
]. Doerksen et al. not only suggested that leisure activity related to well-being but also
indicated that participating in specific activities (including social activities and volunteering) readily
enhanced well-being [
58
]. This analysis found that the leisure involvement of sport fans positively
influenced their well-being.
In this research, the sport fans with career-like qualities were assumed to be serious leisure
participants. Related studies of enterprises found that the higher the employees’ organizational
commitment, the higher the level of their well-being. Hence, the mediating effect of organizational
commitment on sport fans’ leisure involvement and well-being was explored. Indeed, the results
confirmed that organizational commitment possesses a partial mediating effect. The sport fans
with higher leisure involvement had higher organizational commitment. In other words, the
higher the involvement of the fans in watching baseball games, the more likely it was for them
to develop commitment to the baseball team. This result is comparable to previous research
findings [48,80,81]
. When the fans developed commitment to the baseball team they support, it
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 12 of 18
enhanced their well-being, as confirmed in previous studies [
39
,
41
,
97
,
98
]. Some previous studies
found organizational commitment to be an important positive predictor of the well-being of
employees [
39
,
41
,
98
]. This research investigated the effect of organizational commitment on the
well-being of sport fans and showed that organizational commitment was also a positive predictor
of fan well-being. Additionally, it demonstrated that the most effective way to promote well-being is
by simultaneously increasing fans’ leisure involvement and their organizational commitment. Since
community well-being interacts with community development [
18
], increasing the well-being of sport
fans will enhance community well-being and community development in teams’ locations.
6. Conclusions and Implications
6.1. Conclusions
This research explored the relationship between the leisure involvement and well-being of baseball
fans. The results are exploratory and provide initial support for the mediating role of organizational
commitment for sport fans. The leisure involvement of baseball fans had a positive impact on
their well-being and organizational commitment partially mediated between leisure involvement
and well-being.
Leisure involvement positively and significantly affected organizational commitment. That is,
the greater the extent of baseball fans’ involvement in the leisure activity, the more likely it is for
them to accumulate commitment to the baseball team. Furthermore, organizational commitment
also positively and significantly affected their well-being. When baseball fans are committed to the
sport team organization, their perceived emotions and life satisfaction are affected. Finally, leisure
involvement positively and significantly affects well-being, while organizational commitment enhances
the effect of leisure involvement on well-being.
These findings indicate that for baseball fans to enhance their well-being, in addition to their
involvement in watching professional baseball games (leisure involvement); they must also have a
commitment with the ball team organization to attain a higher-level well-being. The findings showed
that the baseball fans’ performance was above average regarding leisure involvement, organizational
commitment and well-being. Among the leisure involvement variables, attraction was the highest,
while centrality was the lowest. In organizational commitment, affective commitment was highest,
while normative commitment was the lowest. For well-being, positive affect was higher, while negative
affect was lower. After revising the model, it was found that the three dimensions of attraction,
self-expression and centrality sufficed as representations of the baseball fans’ leisure involvement.
Among them, the reflection of self-expression was more evident than attraction and centrality. Affective,
continuance and normative commitment were representative of the baseball fans’ commitment to
the baseball team organization. In particular, continuance commitment reflected more evident effects
compared to affective commitment and normative commitment. Life satisfaction, positive affect and
negative affect represented baseball fans’ well-being, of which positive affect showed the highest
reflection, followed by life satisfaction and negative affect.
There is insufficient research on the relationships among sport fans’ leisure involvement,
organizational commitment and well-being. This study regards fans as serious leisure participants
to understand the impact of their leisure involvement on well-being. Because of serious leisure
participants have career characteristics, this research explored whether organizational commitment
mediates the influence of leisure involvement on well-being. The results showed that the fans’ leisure
involvement will affect the sense of well-being and organizational commitment partially mediates the
influence of leisure involvement on well-being. This study extends the previous research and uses
the concept of organizational commitment to explore the relationships for sport fans among leisure
involvement, organizational commitment and well-being. Sport organizations may benefit from the
enhancement of sport fans’ well-being. Furthermore, increasing sport fans’ well-being may improve
sport community well-being and community development.
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 13 of 18
6.2. Implications, Limitations and Future Research Directions
Professional sport promotion not only encourages the public to take part in such activities. Also,
if participation in spectating activities promotes people’s psychological satisfaction (well-being), the
activities are said to be worthy of receiving promotion. The results showed that leisure involvement
and organizational commitment are influential in enhancing baseball fans’ well-being, Therefore, to
increase fans’ well-being, in addition to attracting sport fans to more frequently watch games, proper
sport fan management is a strategic option. These initiatives include organizing sport fan gatherings to
share baseball knowledge, making friends, exchanging ideas after watching games, giving baseball fans
face-to-face encounters with players, to link living, friend-making and baseball-spectating. Baseball
fans often choose to continue to support a baseball team because the main players stay on the side.
It is suggested that baseball teams sign multi-year contracts with players to ensure fans continue to
be supportive of the team. To have “hot” game topics to discuss and make games worth watching,
baseball teams may recruit domestic and foreign professionals who are experienced in international
games. Furthermore, territorialism, court adoption and so on may be increased to strengthen audience
cohesion and foster fan commitment to the team. Once the relationship is strengthened, well-being
will improve as well.
This research only sampled the sport fans of Taiwan’s Brother Elephants’ Baseball Team as the
subjects. Although the research results had good reliability and validity, this does not mean that
different samples still possess stable results or can be used to make inferences on the fans of other
baseball teams. Thus, it is recommended that the fans of other baseball teams be targeted as research
participants in future studies to further test the applicability of “the sport fans’ model of leisure
involvement, organizational commitment and well-being.” Furthermore, it is suggested that sport
fans for other sports be targeted for surveys, such as professional basketball, soccer and American
football, to examine the validity extension of the model. While most of the literature discusses the
relationship between two of the above three constructs [
41
,
48
,
58
,
59
], integrating all three constructs for
a Professional Baseball League has not yet been attempted. This study of Asian perspectives might
be considered as a pioneering research effort. The findings show that organizational commitment
indeed affects sport fans’ well-being. Therefore, it is advisable that future studies explore the effect
of enterprise organizational influential factors, such as organizational identification, organizational
loyalty and so on, on the well-being of sport fans.
The authors also acknowledge that there are other variables influencing sport fans’ commitment
and loyalty to specific clubs and that significant related research exists but was not extensively
covered in this analysis. Some of these variables can be controlled by the professional sport club
management and others cannot. These include, among others, branded online communities [
104
];
fan club membership [105]; and corporate social responsibility (CSR) [106].
Acknowledgments:
This article is based on a paper presented at the 13th ApacCHRIE Conference in conjunction
with 14th Asia Pacific Forum Conference. Thanks for the comments from reviewers and audience of the conference.
Part of this research was supported by the National Science Council (now Ministry of Science and Technology) of
Taiwan, under project number NSC 100-2628-H-142-003 and NSC 99-2410-H-142-025-SSS.
Author Contributions:
Su-lan Pan revised the introduction, literature review, discussion and performed statistical
analysis. Homer C. Wu is the supervisor of this project and proposed the idea of the research framework.
Alastair M. Morrison revised the discussion and wrote the conclusion. He also coordinated the whole manuscript.
Min-Tzu Huang developed the instruments, collected the data and wrote the results. Wen-Shiung Huang
participated in the research discussion and offered statistical advice.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 14 of 18
References
1.
League, C.P.B. Brief History of CPBL. Available online: http://www.cpbl.com.tw/eng/history (accessed on
19 January 2018).
2.
Dwyer, B.; Greenhalgh, G.P.; LeCrom, C.W. Exploring fan behavior: Developing a scale to measure sport
eFANgelism. J. Sport Manag. 2015,29, 642–656. [CrossRef]
3.
Wang, R.T.; Zhang, J.J.; Tsuji, Y. Examining fan motives and loyalty for the Chinese Professional Baseball
League of Taiwan. Sport Manag. Rev. 2011,14, 347–360. [CrossRef]
4.
Wang, M.C.H.; Tang, Y.Y. Examining the antecedents of sport team brand equity: A dual-identification
perspective. Sport Manag. Rev. 2017. [CrossRef]
5.
Bauer, H.H.; Stokburger-Sauer, N.E.; Exler, S. Brand image and fan loyalty in professional team sport:
A refined model and empirical assessment. J. Sport Manag. 2008,22, 205–226. [CrossRef]
6.
Bee, C.C.; Havitz, M.E. Exploring the relationship between involvement, fan attraction, psychological
commitment and behavioural loyalty in a sports spectator context. Int. J. Sports Mark. Spons.
2010
,11,
140–157. [CrossRef]
7.
Dwyer, B. Divided loyalty? An analysis of fantasy football involvement and fan loyalty to individual
National Football League (NFL) teams. J. Sport Manag. 2011,25, 445–457. [CrossRef]
8.
Funk, D.C.; James, J.D. Consumer loyalty: The meaning of attachment in the development of sport team
allegiance. J. Sport Manag. 2006,20, 189–217. [CrossRef]
9.
Stevens, S.; Rosenberger, P.J. The influence of involvement, following sport and fan identification on fan
loyalty: An Australian perspective. Int. J. Sports Mark. Spons. 2012,13, 57–71. [CrossRef]
10.
Yoshida, M.; Heere, B.; Gordon, B. Predicting behavioral loyalty through community: Why other fans are
more important than our own intentions, our satisfaction, and the team itself. J. Sport Manag.
2015
,29,
318–333. [CrossRef]
11.
Chavanat, N.; Martinent, G.; Ferrand, A. Sponsor and sponsees interactions: Effects on consumers’
perceptions of brand image, brand attachment, and purchasing intention. J. Sport Manag.
2009
,23, 644–670.
[CrossRef]
12.
Hong, J. Sport fans’ sponsorship evaluation based on their perceived relationship value with a sport property.
Int. J. Sport Manag. Mark. 2011,9, 116–131. [CrossRef]
13.
Schlesinger, T.; Güngerich, M. Analysing sport sponsorship effectiveness–The influence of fan identification,
credibility and product-involvement. Int. J. Sport Manag. Mark. 2011,9, 54–74. [CrossRef]
14.
Deci, E.L.; Ryan, R.M. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior; Plenum Press: New York,
NY, USA, 1985; p. 371.
15.
Chiu, C.M.; Cheng, H.L.; Huang, H.Y.; Chen, C.F. Exploring individuals
'
subjective well-being and loyalty
towards social network sites from the perspective of network externalities: The Facebook case. Int. J.
Inf. Manag. 2013,33, 539–552. [CrossRef]
16.
Morris, E.A. Should we all just stay home? Travel, out-of-home activities, and life satisfaction. Transp. Res.
Part A 2015,78, 519–536. [CrossRef]
17.
Lee, S.J.; Kim, Y.; Phillips, R. Exploring the Intersection of Community Well-Being and Community
Development. In Community Well-Being and Community Development: Conceptions and Applications; Lee, S.J.,
Kim, Y., Phillips, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 1–7.
18.
Stebbins, R.A. Amateurs, Professionals and Serious Leisure; McGill Queen’s University Press: Montreal, QC,
Canada, 1992.
19.
Jones, I. A model of serious leisure identification: The case of football fandom. Leis. Stud.
2000
,19, 283–298.
[CrossRef]
20.
Lamont, M.; Kennelly, M.; Moyle, B. Costs and perseverance in serious leisure careers. Leis. Sci.
2014
,36,
144–160. [CrossRef]
21.
Lee, D.J.; Kruger, S.; Whang, M.J.; Uysal, M.; Sirgy, M.J. Validating a customer well-being index related to
natural wildlife tourism. Tour. Manag. 2014,45, 171–180. [CrossRef]
22.
Okello, M.M.; Yerian, S. Tourist satisfaction in relation to attractions and implications for conservation in the
protected areas of the Northern Circuit, Tanzania. J. Sustain. Tour. 2009,17, 605–625. [CrossRef]
23.
Coleman, D. Leisure based social support, leisure dispositions and health. J. Leis. Res.
1993
,25, 350–361.
[CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 15 of 18
24.
Winefield, A.H.; Tiggemann, M.; Winefield, H.R. Spare time use and psychological well-being in employed
and unemployed young people. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 1992,65, 307–313. [CrossRef]
25. Frey, B.S.; Stutzer, A. Happiness and Economics; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2002.
26.
Kim, J.; Kim, M.; Henderson, K.A.; Han, A.; Park, S.H. Serious engagement in sport and health benefits
among Korean immigrants in the USA. Int. J. Qual. Studies Health Well-Being
2016
,11. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27.
Heo, J.; Stebbins, R.; Kim, J.; Lee, I. Serious Leisure, Life Satisfaction, and Health of Older Adults. Leis. Sci.
2013,35, 16–32. [CrossRef]
28.
Ku, P.W.; Fox, K.R.; Chen, L.J.; Chou, P. Physical activity and depressive symptoms in older adults: 11-year
follow-up. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2012,42, 355–362. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29.
Griffin, J.; McKenna, K. Influences on leisure and life satisfaction of elderly people. Phys. Occup. Ther. Geriatr.
1999,15, 1–16. [CrossRef]
30.
Nimrod, G. Expanding, reducing, concentrating and diffusing: Post retirement leisure behavior and life
satisfaction. Leis. Sci. 2007,29, 91–111. [CrossRef]
31.
Brajsa-Zganec, A.; Merkas, M.; Sverko, I. Quality of life and leisure activities: How do leisure activities
contribute to subjective well-being? Soc. Indic. Res. 2011,102, 81–91. [CrossRef]
32.
Hughes-Hassell, S.; Rodge, P. The leisure reading habits of urban adolescents. J. Adolesc. Adult Lit.
2007
,51,
22–33. [CrossRef]
33.
Lloyd, K.; Little, D.E. Self-determination theory as a framework for understanding women’s psychological
well-being outcomes from leisure-time physical activity. Leis. Sci. 2010,32, 369–385. [CrossRef]
34.
Sacker, A.; Cable, N. Do adolescent leisure-time physical activities foster health and well-being in adulthood?
Evidence from two British birth cohorts. Eur. J. Public Health 2006,16, 332–336. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Godbey, G. Leisure in Your Life: An Exploration, 6th ed.; Venture Pub: State College, PA, USA, 2003; p. 417.
36.
Havitz, M.E.; Mannell, R.C. Enduring involvement, situational involvement, and flow in leisure and
non-leisure activities. J. Leis. Res. 2005,37, 152–177. [CrossRef]
37.
Yang, W.C.; Chen, K.C.; Hsueh, Y.S.; Tan, C.P.; Chang, C.M. The relationship between leisure and well-being
in Taiwanese college students. Soc. Behav. Personal. 2012,40, 1245–1254. [CrossRef]
38.
Coghlan, A.; Filo, K. Bringing personal character strengths into the production of the leisure experience. Leis.
Sci. 2016,38, 100–117. [CrossRef]
39.
Harris, G.E.; Cameron, J.E. Multiple dimensions of organizational identification and commitment as
predictors of turnover intentions and psychological well-being. Can. J. Behav. Sci.
2005
,37, 159–169.
[CrossRef]
40.
Burgess, J.; Harrison, C.M.; Filius, P. Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental
citizenship. Environ. Plan. A 1998,30, 1445–1460. [CrossRef]
41.
Jamal, F.Q.; Khan, A.M. Association of downsizing with survivor’s organizational commitment, work
motivation and psychological well-being in secondary and tertiary sectors of economy of Pakistan. J. Behav.
Sci. 2013,23, 1–25.
42.
Havitz, M.E.; Dimanche, F. Leisure involvement revisited: Conceptual conundrums and measurement
advances. J. Leis. Res. 1997,29, 245–278. [CrossRef]
43.
Kyle, G.; Graefe, A.; Manning, R.; Bacon, J. An examination of the relationship between leisure activity
involvement and place attachment among hikers along the Appalachian Trail. J. Leis. Res.
2003
,35, 249–273.
[CrossRef]
44. Stone, R.N. The Marketing Characteristics of Involvement. Adv. Consum. Res. 1984,11, 210–215.
45. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2000.
46.
Kim, S.S.; Scott, D.; Crompton, J.L. An exploration of the relationships among social psychological
involvement, behavioral involvement, commitment, and future intentions in the context of birdwatching.
J. Leis. Res. 1997,29, 320–341. [CrossRef]
47.
McIntyre, N. The personal meaning of participation: Enduring involvement. J. Leis. Res.
1989
,21, 167–179.
[CrossRef]
48.
Kyle, G.T.; Mowen, A.J. An examination of the leisure involvement—Agency commitment relationship.
J. Leis. Res. 2005,37, 342–363. [CrossRef]
49.
Wiley, C.G.E.; Shaw, S.M.; Havitz, M.E. Men’s and women’s involvement in sports: An examination of the
gendered aspects of leisure involvement. Leis. Sci. 2000,22, 19–31.
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 16 of 18
50.
McIntyre, N.; Pigram, J.J. Recreation specialization reexamined: The case of vehicle-based campers. Leis. Sci.
1992,14, 3–15. [CrossRef]
51.
Robinson, J.P.; Shaver, P.R.; Wrightsman, L.S.; Andrews, F.M. Measures of Personality and Social Psychological
Attitudes; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1991.
52. Diener, E. Subjective well-being. Psychol. Bull. 1984,95, 542–575. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
53.
Diener, E.D.; Emmons, R.A.; Larsen, R.J.; Griffin, S. The satisfaction with life scale. J. Personal. Assess.
1985
,
49, 71–75. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54.
Diener, E.; Emmons, R.A. The independence of positive and negative affect. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.
1984
,47,
1105–1117. [CrossRef]
55.
Watson, D.; Clark, L.A.; Tellegen, A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative
affect: The PANAS scales. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1988,54, 1063–1070. [CrossRef]
56. Fredricks, J.A.; Eccles, J.S. Is extracurricular participation associated with beneficial outcomes? Concurrent
and longitudinal relations. Dev. Psychol. 2006,42, 698–713. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
57.
Ruuskanen, J.M.; Ruoppila, I. Physical activity and psychological well-being among people aged 65 to 84
years. Age Ageing 1995,24, 292–296. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
58.
Doerksen, S.E.; Elavsky, S.; Rebar, A.L.; Conroy, D.E. Weekly Fluctuations in College Student Leisure
Activities and Well-Being. Leis. Sci. 2014,36, 14–34. [CrossRef]
59.
Lu, L.; Hu, C.H. Personality, leisure experiences and happiness. J. Happiness Stud.
2005
,6, 325–342. [CrossRef]
60.
Beck, S.H.; Page, J.W. Involvement in activities and the psychological well-being of retired men.
Act. Adapt. Aging 1988,11, 31–47. [CrossRef]
61.
Huang, Y.T. A study on the relationships between leisure activity involvement, well-being, the benefits of
serious leisure activity, and sports volunteer self-actualization in the Changhua National Games. J. Hum.
Resour. Adult Learn. 2013,9, 12–25.
62.
Huang, M.T. Research on the Relationships among Chinese Professional Baseball League Fans’ Leisure
Involvement, Organizational Commitment and Well-Being: A Case of the Brother Elephants Club.
Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Taichung University of Education, Taichung, Taiwan, 2011.
63. Stebbins, R.A. Serious Leisure. Society 2001,38, 53–57. [CrossRef]
64.
Stebbins, R.A. Serious Leisure: A Perspective for Our Time; Transaction Publishers: New Brunswick, NJ,
USA, 2008.
65.
Stebbins, R.A.; Elkington, S. The Serious Leisure Perspective: An Introduction; Routledge: Milton Park,
Abingdon, UK, 2014.
66.
Mitas, O. Positive Emotions in Mature Adults’ Leisure Travel Experiences. Ph.D. Thesis, Pennsylvania State
University, State College, PA, USA, 2010.
67.
Menec, V.H.; Chipperfield, J.G. Remaining active in later life: The role of locus of control in seniors’ leisure
activity participation, health, and life satisfaction. J. Aging Health 1997,9, 105–125. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
68.
Yarnal, C.M.; Chick, G.; Kerstetter, D.L. I did not have time to play growing up
. . .
so this is my play time.
It’s the best thing I have ever done for myself: What is play to older women? Leis. Sci.
2008
,30, 235–252.
[CrossRef]
69.
Cheng, H.P. Serious Leisure, Leisure Satisfaction and Gardening by Older Adults. Ph.D. Thesis, University
of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, 2010.
70.
Liu, H. Personality, leisure satisfaction, and subjective well-being of serious leisure participants.
Soc. Behav. Personal. 2014,42, 1117–1125. [CrossRef]
71.
Veal, A.J. The serious leisure perspective and the experience of leisure. Leis. Sci.
2017
,39, 205–223. [CrossRef]
72. Becker, H.S. Notes on the concept of commitment. Am. J. Sociol. 1960,66, 32–40. [CrossRef]
73.
Robbins, S.P. Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies, and Applications; Prentice Hall: Tornto, ON,
Canada, 2001.
74.
Allen, N.J.; Meyer, J.P. The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative
commitment to the organization. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 1990,63, 1–18. [CrossRef]
75.
Meyer, J.P.; Allen, N.J. Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application; Sage Publications:
Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1997.
76.
Meyer, J.P.; Herscovitch, L. Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Hum. Resour.
Manag. Rev. 2001,11, 299–326. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 17 of 18
77.
Vandenberghe, C.; Bentein, K.; Michon, R.; Chebat, J.C.; Tremblay, M.; Fils, J.F. An examination of the role of
perceived support and employee commitment in employee-customer encounters. J. Appl. Psychol. 2007,92,
1177–1187. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
78.
Lee, K.; Allen, N.J.; Meyer, J.P.; Rhee, K.Y. The three-component model of organisational commitment:
An application to South Korea. Appl. Psychol. 2001,50, 596–614. [CrossRef]
79.
Plunkett, J.W. Plunkett
'
s Sports Industry Almanac 2008: Sports Industry Market. Research, Statistics, Trends &
Leading Companies, 2008 ed.; Plunkett Research: Houston, TX, USA, 2007; p. 490.
80.
Iwasaki, Y.; Havitz, M.E. A path analytic model of the relationships between involvement, psychological
commitment, and loyalty. J. Leis. Res. 1998,30, 256–280. [CrossRef]
81.
Iwasaki, Y.; Havitz, M.E. Examining relationships between leisure involvement, psychological commitment
and loyalty to a recreation agency. J. Leis. Res. 2004,36, 45–72. [CrossRef]
82.
Wu, H.C.; Pan, S.L.; Huang, M.T. A study of the relationship among leisure involvement, organizational
commitment, and well-being: Viewpoints from fans of a professional baseball team in Taiwan. Presented
at the 13th APacCHRIE Conference in conjunction with 14th Asia Pacific Forum Conference, Auckland,
New Zealand, 10–13 June 2015.
83. Ashforth, B.E.; Mael, F. Social identity theory and the organization. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989,14, 20–39.
84.
Ellemers, N.; De Gilder, D.; Haslam, S.A. Motivating individuals and groups at work: A social identity
perspective on leadership and group performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2004,29, 459–478.
85.
O’Reilly, C.A.; Chatman, J. Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of
compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. J. Appl. Psychol.
1986
,71, 492–499.
[CrossRef]
86.
Meyer, J.P.; Becker, T.E. Vandenberghe, C. Employee commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis
and integrative model. J. Appl. Psychol. 2004,89, 991–1007. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
87.
Mael, F.A.; Tetrick, L.E. Identifying organizational identification. Educ. Psychol. Meas.
1992
,52, 813–824.
[CrossRef]
88.
Stinglhamber, F.; Marique, G.; Caesens, G.; Desmette, D.; Hansez, I.; Hanin, D.; Bertrand, F. Employees’
organizational identification and affective organizational commitment: An integrative approach. PLoS ONE
2015,10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
89.
Abrams, D.E.; Hogg, M.A. Social motivation, self-esteem, and social identity. In Social Identity Theory:
Constructive and Critical Advances; Springer-Verlag Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 1990.
90.
Wann, D.; Pierce, S. Measuring Sport Team Identification and Commitment: An Empirical Comparison of
the Sport Spectator Identification Scale and the Psychological Commitment to Team Scale. N. Am. J. Psychol.
2003,5, 365–372.
91.
Wann, D.L.; Melnick, M.J.; Russell, G.W.; Pease, D.G. Sport Fans: The Psychology and Social Impact of Spectators;
Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2001.
92.
Wann, D.L. The “noble” sports fan: The relationships between team identification, self-esteem, and
aggression. Percept. Mot. Skills 1994,78, 864–866. [PubMed]
93.
Wann, D.L.; Pierce, S. The Relationship between Sport Team Identification and Social Well-being: Additional
Evidence Supporting the Team Identification-Social Psychological Health Model. N. Am. J. Psychol.
2005
,7,
117–124.
94.
Wann, D.L.; Inman, S.; Ensor, C.L.; Gates, R.D.; Caldwell, D.S. Assessing the psychological well-being of
sport fans using the Profile of Mood States: The importance of team identification. Int. Sports J.
1999
,3,
81–90.
95.
Wann, D.L. Understanding the positive social psychological benefits of sport team identification: The team
identification-social psychological health model. Group Dyn. Theory Res. Pract.
2006
,10, 272–296. [CrossRef]
96.
Wann, D.L.; Waddill, P.J.; Polk, J.; Weaver, S. The team identification–social psychological health model:
Sport fans gaining connections to others via sport team identification. Group Dyn. Theory Res. Pract.
2011
,15,
75–89. [CrossRef]
97.
Panaccio, A.; Vandenberghe, C. Perceived organizational support, organizational commitment and
psychological well-being: A longitudinal study. J. Vocat. Behav. 2009,75, 224–236. [CrossRef]
98.
Galais, N.; Moser, K. Organizational commitment and the well-being of temporary agency workers:
A longitudinal study. Hum. Relat. 2009,62, 589–620. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018,10, 740 18 of 18
99.
Cuskelly, G.; Harrington, M.; Stebbins, R. Changing levels of organizational commitment amongst sport
volunteers: A serious leisure approach. Leisure/Loisir 2002,27, 191–212. [CrossRef]
100.
Meyer, J.P.; Allen, N.J.; Smith, C.A. Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a
three-component conceptualization. J. Appl. Psychol. 1993,78, 538–551. [CrossRef]
101.
Raines-Eudy, R. Using structural equation modeling to test for differential reliability and validity:
An empirical demonstration. Struct. Equ. Model. 2000,7, 124–141. [CrossRef]
102.
Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981,18, 39–50. [CrossRef]
103.
Dai, Y.D.; Hsu, H.L.; Chi, C.S. Relationships among leisure involvement, leisure benefits, and well-being
for elders whom participated in mountain hiking: A Study of suburban mountains hiking in Kaohsiung.
In Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Conference of Chinese Tourism Management Association, Taipei, Taiwan,
19 December 2008.
104.
Popp, B.; Woratschek, H. Introducing branded communities in sport for building strong brand relations in
social media. Sport Manag. Rev. 2016,19, 183–197. [CrossRef]
105.
Biscaia, R.; Ross, S.; Yoshida, M.; Correia, A.; Rosado, A.; Marôco, J. Investigating the role of fan club
membership on perceptions of team brand equity in football. Sport Manag. Rev.
2016
,19, 157–170. [CrossRef]
106.
Nyadzayo, M.W.; Leckie, C.; McDonald, H. CSR, relationship quality, loyalty and psychological connection
in sports. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2016,34, 883–898. [CrossRef]
©
2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
