No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Identity-based rivalry: A common identity across competitors leads to rivalry perceptions and better performance
Abstract
Researchers in psychology and management have recently examined what leads competitors to perceive that they are in a rivalry (e.g., repeated competitions) and what the consequences of rivalry are (e.g., better performance). Other researchers have long focused on the importance of social identity for how people evaluate themselves and others. In two studies, we connect and extend this past work by examining whether having the same identity as an opponent (specifically, gender or nationality) produces rivalry effects. In an online experiment, we found that sport competitors are more likely to perceive their same-gender opponents as rivals than their different-gender opponents (and this was especially the case for men). These stronger rivalry perceptions were predicted by competitors’ greater similarity, greater frequency of past competitions, and greater competitiveness with their same-gender opponents. Then, in an analysis of data from Major League Baseball (MLB), we found that batters from the Dominican Republic and the United States hit better when a same-nationality catcher was behind the plate. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of identity-based rivalry.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Decades of negotiations research has emphasized the importance of having alternatives. Negotiators with high-value outside offers tend to have greater power and claim higher values in the focal negotiation. We extend this line of work by proposing that the source of alternatives—that is, who negotiators receive an alternative offer from—can significantly shape their negotiation behavior and outcomes. Specifically, we examine how negotiators’ behavior changes when they face a counterpart who has an offer from their rival. Four studies demonstrate that this situation enhances negotiators’ motivation to outperform their counterpart’s alternative by reaching an agreement with the counterpart. This in turn leads the focal negotiator to make less aspirational first offers and eventually claim less value in final agreements. Our findings highlight the importance of considering the existing relationships among actors directly and indirectly involved in a negotiation, reveal a novel motive that can guide negotiators’ behavior and outcomes, and uncover a previously unexplored negotiation strategy.
Self-confidence is a common research topic, and most applied textbooks include interventions designed to enhance athlete confidence. Our purpose was to quantify the self-confidence and sport performance literature using meta-analytic techniques. We also examined potential risk of bias indicators, and the moderation effects of study quality, sport characteristics, timing of confidence measurement, and individual differences among participants. Following a review of two past meta-analyses, a systematic search of APA PsycArticles, ERIC, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, PsychINFO, and SPORTDiscus within the EBSCOhost platform, and some hand searching, 41 articles published between 1986 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria. Collectively, the included studies investigated 3711 athletes from 15 countries across 24 sports. The overall random effects estimate of the relationship (expressed as r) between self-confidence and performance was 0.25 (95% CI 0.19, 0.30), with little evidence of publication bias. The summed total risk of the individual study bias score did not moderate the confidence–performance relationship, whereas significant moderator effects emerged for individual sports (0.29) compared with team sports (0.14), objective (0.29) compared to subjective (0.14) performance measures, and 100% male (0.35) compared to 100% female (0.07) samples. In conclusion, the confidence–performance relationship is small in magnitude, nearly free of bias, and moderated by sport type, performance objectivity, and athlete sex.
More than ever before, institutions of higher education are seeking to increase the racial and social class diversity of their student bodies. Given these efforts, the present research asks two broad questions. First, how frequently do intergroup interactions occur across the lines of race and social class, and to what extent do these interactions reflect the diversity of a setting? Second, when cross-race and cross-class interactions occur, how do individuals experience them and what consequences do they have for their outcomes in these settings? Leveraging a longitudinal design and daily diary methods, we conducted the first large study (Ninteractions = 11,460) which tracks the frequency, experience, and consequences of meaningful cross-race and cross-class interactions. We found that students reported far fewer cross-race and cross-class interactions than would occur at chance given the racial and social class diversity of their student bodies. Furthermore, students experienced less satisfaction and perspective-taking in cross-race and cross-class interactions compared to same-race and same-class interactions, respectively. Nevertheless, these cross-group interactions predicted better academic performance for underrepresented racial minority students and students from working and lower class backgrounds. They did so, in part, by increasing students’ feelings of inclusion (i.e., increased belonging and reduced social identity threat). Together, these findings suggest that the mere presence of diversity is not enough to foster meaningful intergroup interactions. Furthermore, fostering intergroup interactions may be one important pathway toward reducing racial and social class disparities.
Rivalry, a relational competition, is known to increase motivation and performance. However, a systematic review and meta-analysis that examines the effect sizes is lacking. Further, most research on this topic has not considered the type of rivalry (individual versus collective) and the research field as potential moderators. We conducted a wide-scale search, looking for rivalry and performance studies, which yielded 22 papers (k = 35) with 27,771 observations that were systematically reviewed. Eighteen papers (k = 28) were eligible for a further meta-analysis, including a total of 26,215 observations. The systematic review indicated that rivalry is usually positively related to performance. Results of the meta-analysis revealed that this effect is significant and that the relationship between rivalry and performance is more robust for individual rivalry compared to group rivalry. Further analyses indicated that for group rivalry, correlations are positive and significant only in the domains of sports and donation-raising.
Student outcomes are influenced by different types of motivation that stem from external incentives, ego-involvement, personal value, and intrinsic interest. These types of motivation as described in self-determination theory each co-occur to different degrees and should lead to different consequences. These associations with outcomes are in part due to unique characteristics and in part to the degree of autonomy each entails. In the current meta-analysis, we examine these different types of motivation in 344 samples (223,209 participants) as they relate to 26 performance, well-being, goal orientation, and persistence-related student outcomes. Findings highlight that intrinsic motivation is related to student success and well-being, whereas personal value (identified regulation) is particularly highly related to persistence. Ego-involved motives (introjected regulation) were positively related to persistence and performance goals, but also positively related with indicators of ill-being. Motivation driven by a desire to obtain rewards or avoid punishment (external regulation) was not associated to performance or persistence but was associated with decreased well-being. Finally, amotivation was related to poor outcomes. Relative weights analysis further estimates the degree to which motivation types uniquely predict outcomes, highlighting that identified regulation and intrinsic motivation are likely key factors for school adjustment.
In this paper we present three studies that address the difference between physical and psychological groups, the conditions that create a transformation from the one into the other, and the psychological processes underlying this transformation. In Study 1 we demonstrate correlations between shared social identity, desired physical proximity to others, and positive emotions in the company of others. Study 2, employing a between-subjects design, finds that an event that creates shared fate, such as the breakdown of a train, leads to greater comfort in social interactions (e.g., ease of conversation) and comfort in sensual interactions (e.g., tolerance of physical touch) with other passengers, and that this occurs through an increase in shared social identity but not through social identification. Study 3 obtains similar findings using a within-subjects design. In combination, these studies provide consistent evidence for the role of shared social identity in the emergence of psychological groups from physical groups.
Past research demonstrates that people prefer to affiliate with others who resemble them demographically. However, we posit that when competing for scarce opportunities, strategic considerations moderate the strength of this tendency toward homophily. Across six experiments, we find that anticipated competition weakens people’s desire to join groups that include similar others. When expecting to compete against fellow group members, women are more willing to join all-male groups and Black participants are more willing to join all-White groups than in the absence of competition. We show that this effect is mediated by the belief that being distinct will lead your performance to stand out. Our findings offer a new perspective to enrich past research on homophily, shedding light on the instances when minorities are more likely to join groups in which they will be underrepresented.
A large body of studies demonstrates that women continue to receive less media coverage than men do. Some attribute this difference to gender bias in media reporting—a systematic inclination toward male subjects. We propose that in order to establish the presence of media bias, one has to demonstrate that the news coverage of men is disproportional even after accounting for occupational inequalities and differences in public interest. We examine the coverage of more than 20,000 successful women and men from various social and occupational domains in more than 2,000 news sources as well as web searches for these individuals as a behavioral measure of interest. We find that when compared with similar-aged men from the same occupational strata, women enjoy greater public interest yet receive less media coverage.
Previous research on the stereotype threat phenomenon has shown that inducing a negative stereotype toward a group debilitates motor performance despite the increase in motivation. Most of the studies focused on tasks requiring technical skills. However, what happens when the task does not require technical skills but focuses on energy expenditure? To examine this question, 34 male and female participants were assigned to a negative stereotype toward women and a nullified-stereotype condition and performed 20 min of self-paced cycling exercise. The authors hypothesized better performances when participants were assigned to the negative stereotype toward women condition than when assigned to the nullified-stereotype condition. As predicted, men and women increased their performances, accompanied by increases in heart rate. Concerning women, this result provides support for the notion that the effect of inducing a negative stereotype is task dependent, but further research is needed to more deeply investigate the mechanisms involved.
More than 1,400 Latin American professional baseball players, age 16-21, are employed by 30 Major League Baseball (MLB) academies in the Dominican Republic. The popular press has highlighted scandals related to professional youth baseball player recruitment, selection, and exploitation in the academies, but little attention has been given to the academy experiences of youth baseball players from the perspective of the players themselves. For this research, 11 professional baseball players residing at an MLB Academy in the Dominican Republic participated in semi-structured interviews. Players described their transitions into the baseball academy system, their experiences in the academy, and their perceptions and expectations upon leaving or being released from the academy. Themes that emerged from the data included athletes’ hopes and dreams, stress, faith, and career transitions. Clinical implications of these findings for sport psychology practitioners are discussed.
Those seeking help systematically underestimate the likelihood that strangers will help them (Bohns, 2016). However, it is not known whether this same error persists when requesting help from people with whom we interact regularly. In three experiments (the last of which was pre-registered), participants (N = 310) predicted the likelihood that either their friends or strangers would agree to a request for help. Participants then approached members of one of these two groups (i.e., friends or strangers) with this request (N = 953). We confirmed our predictions that (1) overall help-seekers would underestimate the likelihood that those they approached for help would agree to their requests and that (2) this underestimation error would be smaller for participants making requests of friends. We also found that (3) the underestimation effect persists even for those making requests of friends and (4) help-seekers expected the rate of helping between the two groups to vary more than it did. We discuss and test several mechanisms that might account for these effects. These findings suggest people may over-rely on their friends, and discount the role of strangers, when seeking help.
Master athletes maintain high physical activity levels and have better health than age-matched non-athletes. World records show accelerated declines after age 70 in swimming, long-distance running and sprint performance. However, less is known about age-related performance declines in the general master athlete population and whether decline rates differ between disciplines and genders. We interrogated a dataset including all track and field athletes of North Rhine from 2001 to 2014 to assess age-related changes in performance. 27,088 results of athletes between 11 and 89 years of age in 12 disciplines were analyzed by regression statistics. The analyses showed an accelerated decline beyond the age of 70 in sprint, middle- and long-distance running, while in throwing and jumping disciplines the performance continued a linear decline. Patterns of decline differed between men and women. The steepest declines were observed in javelin throw and 400 m (women), and in pole vault and 800 m (men). In conclusion, performance declines in aging depend more on the specific profile of requirements than previously assumed.
Research has established that competing head to head against a rival boosts motivation and performance. The present research investigated whether rivalry can affect performance over time and in contests without rivals. We examined the long-term effects of rivalry through archival analyses of postseason performance in multiple high-stakes sports contexts: National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I Men’s Basketball and the major U.S. professional sports leagues: National Basketball Association (NBA), National Football League (NFL), Major League Baseball (MLB), and National Hockey League (NHL). Econometric analyses revealed that postseason performance of a focal team’s rival in year N predicted that focal team’s postseason performance in year N + 1. Follow-up analyses suggested that the performance boost was especially pronounced when one’s rival won the previous tournament. These results establish that rivalry has a long shadow: A rival team’s success exerts such a powerful motivational force that it drives performance outside of direct competition with one’s rival and even after a significant delay.
As individuals from different nations increasingly interact with each other, research on national in-group favoritism becomes particularly vital. In a cross-national, large-scale study (N = 915) including representative samples from four Latin American nations (Chile, Peru, Colombia, Venezuela) and the USA, we explore differences regarding nationality-based in-group favoritism. In-group favoritism is assessed through differences in prosocial behavior toward persons from the own nation as compared to persons from other nations in fully incentivized one-shot dictator games. We find strong evidence for national in-group favoritism for the overall sample, but also significant differences among national subsamples. Latin Americans show more national in-group favoritism compared to US Americans (interacting with Latin Americans). While US Americans mainly follow an equal split norm(for both in- and out-group interactions), Latin Americans do so only in in-group interactions. The magnitude of in-group favoritism increases with social distance toward the out-group. © 2018. The authors license this article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Risk taking is fundamental to organizational decision making. Extending prior work that has identified individual and situational antecedents of risk taking, we explore a significant relational antecedent: rivalry. In both a field setting and a laboratory experiment, we explore how a competitor's identity and relationship with the decision maker influences risk taking. We analyze play-by-play archival data from the National Football League and find that interactions with rival (versus nonrival) partners increases risky behavior. In a laboratory experiment involving face-to-face competition, we demonstrate that rivalry increases risk taking via two pathways: increased promotion focus and physiological arousal. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating relational characteristics to understand risk taking. Our findings also advance our understanding of when and why competition promotes risk taking, and underscore the importance of identity and relationships in the psychology and physiology of competitive decision making in organizations.
Trash-talking increases the psychological stakes of competition and motivates targets to outperform their opponents. In Studies 1 and 2, participants in a competition who were targets of trash-talking outperformed participants who faced the same economic incentives, but were not targets of trash-talking. Perceptions of rivalry mediate the relationship between trash-talking and effort-based performance. In Study 3, we find that targets of trash-talking were particularly motivated to punish their opponents and see them lose. In Study 4, we identify a boundary condition, and show that trash-talking increases effort in competitive interactions, but incivility decreases effort in cooperative interactions. In Study 5, we find that targets of trash-talking were more likely to cheat in a competition than were participants who received neutral messages. In Study 6, we demonstrate that trash-talking harms performance when the performance task involves creativity. Taken together, our findings reveal that trash-talking is a common workplace behavior that can foster rivalry and motivate both constructive and destructive behavior.
Rivalry is prevalent across many competitive environments and differs in important ways from non-rival competition. Here, we draw upon research on significant relationships, relational schemas, and automatic goals to explore whether mere exposure to or recall of a rival can be sufficient to increase individuals' Machiavellianism and unethical behavior, even in contexts where their rivals are not present. Across four experiments, we found that activation of the rivalry relational schema led to increased Machiavellianism (Experiments 1 and 2), false inflation of performance (Experiment 3), and deception of an online counterpart for self-gain (Experiment 4). In Experiment 4 we also observed an interaction between rivalry and moral identity such that when the rivalry relational schema was activated, moral identity no longer safeguarded against unethical behavior. This finding suggests that a rivalry mindset crowds out moral identity as a guide to behavior. Overall, the current research depicts rivalry as an important relationship that activates a unique mindset and has a more widespread influence on behavior than prior research has suggested.
This research investigates the link between rivalry and unethical behavior. We propose that people will bemore likely to engage in unethical behavior when competing against their rivals than when competing against non-rival competitors. Across an archival study and a series of experiments, we found that rivalry was associated with increased unsporting behavior, use of deception, and willingness to employ unethical negotiation tactics. We also explore the psychological underpinnings of rivalry in order to illuminate how it differs from general competition and why it increases unethical behavior. The data reveal a serialmediation pathway whereby rivalry heightens the psychological stakes of competition (by increasing actors' contingency of self-worth and status concerns), which leads to the adoption of a stronger performance-Approach orientation, which then increases unethical behavior. These findings highlight the importance of rivalry as a widespread, powerful, yet largely unstudied phenomenon with significant organizational implications. They also help to inform when and why unethical behavior occurs within organizations, and demonstrate that the effects of competition are dependent upon relationships and prior interactions between actors.
Researchers interested in testing mediation often use designs where participants are measured on a dependent variable Y and a mediator M in both of 2 different circumstances. The dominant approach to assessing mediation in such a design, proposed by Judd, Kenny, and McClelland (2001), relies on a series of hypothesis tests about components of the mediation model and is not based on an estimate of or formal inference about the indirect effect. In this article we recast Judd et al.'s approach in the path-analytic framework that is now commonly used in between-participant mediation analysis. By so doing, it is apparent how to estimate the indirect effect of a within-participant manipulation on some outcome through a mediator as the product of paths of influence. This path-analytic approach eliminates the need for discrete hypothesis tests about components of the model to support a claim of mediation, as Judd et al.'s method requires, because it relies only on an inference about the product of paths-the indirect effect. We generalize methods of inference for the indirect effect widely used in between-participant designs to this within-participant version of mediation analysis, including bootstrap confidence intervals and Monte Carlo confidence intervals. Using this path-analytic approach, we extend the method to models with multiple mediators operating in parallel and serially and discuss the comparison of indirect effects in these more complex models. We offer macros and code for SPSS, SAS, and Mplus that conduct these analyses. (PsycINFO Database Record
Research on the effects of intergroup competition has relied on various conceptual approaches and has produced inconsistent findings. Following a review of the intergroup competition literature, we propose a framework which emphasizes that the influence of intergroup competition varies primarily according to participants’ construal of potentially competitive events. We assess this via two variables: competitive intergroup perceptions (CIP), the perception that one’s ingroup and another group(s) in the current situation are attempting to gain a reward at each other’s expense; and competitive intergroup motivations (CIM), the individual desire for one’s group to do better or acquire more of a reward than the other group(s). In four studies that presented participants with an ambiguously competitive intergroup setting and administered CIP and CIM scales adapted for the context, both variables were empirically nonredundant (Studies 1–4) and showed unique relations with intergroup outcomes: CIM, rather than CIP, was directly associated with greater intergroup bias (Studies 2–4), discriminatory intentions (Study 3), and discriminatory behavior (Study 4). CIP consistently registered an indirect effect on intergroup bias and behavior through CIM. Our results suggest that in ambiguous group contexts, CIM facilitates the pursuit of goals for the ingroup, which may involve expressing intergroup bias and more antisocial outgroup behavior, and that these tendencies are quite sensitive to corresponding changes in CIP. The current framework offers more precise insights into the influence of competitive group dynamics, and can easily be integrated with other research paradigms to determine how and when intergroup competition produces intergroup bias and discrimination.
Will the creation of coed teams help mitigate issues of perceived sex discrimination in sports, or will equity among male and female athletes come from better enforcement of the "separate but equal" ideal? This book examines this highly charged issue, specifically challenging the effectiveness of Title IX and arguing that it be ousted in favor of sex integration. This is the first book to present both legal and social arguments for the elimination of sex segregation in sports and provide tangible solutions to address this issue.
Authors Adrienne N. Milner and Jomills Henry Braddock II lay out the potential benefits of comingling male and female athletes, illustrating how this process may translate to greater sex equality in social, economic, and political contexts. In addition, this forward-thinking work offers specific recommendations for facilitating the integration of sexes in sports and discusses the importance of changing attitudes and ideology within the sports community and the general public to achieve this goal.
*A free preview of the book is available at: https://www.amazon.com/Sex-Segregation-Sports-Separate-Equal/dp/1440838100?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0
Human beings are responsive to fairness violations. People reject unfair offers and go out of their way to punish those who behave unfairly. However, little is known regarding when unfair treatment can either help or harm performance. We found that basketball players were more likely to make free throws after being awarded a foul specific to unfair treatment (Study 1). Similarly, hockey players were more likely to score during a penalty shot compared to a shootout (Study 2). A laboratory experiment showed that participants were more accurate at golf putting after a previous attempt had been unfairly nullified (Study 3). However, a final experiment revealed that when the task was more demanding, unfair treatment resulted in worse performance (Study 4). Moreover, this effect was mediated by feelings of anger and frustration. These results suggest that performance is sensitive to perceptions of fairness and justice.
The aim of this study was to examine the impact of a tennis player's body language and clothing (general vs. sport-specific) on the impressions observers form of them. Forty male tennis players viewed videos of a target tennis player warming up. Each participant viewed the target player displaying one of four combinations of body language and clothing (positive body language/ tennis-specific clothing; positive body language/general sportswear; negative body language/tennis-specific clothing; negative body language/general sportswear). After viewing the target player, participants rated their impressions of the model's episodic states and dispositions and gave their perceptions of the likely outcome of a tennis match with the target player. Analyses of variance revealed that positive body language led to favorable episodic impressions and low outcome expectations. Analysis also indicated that clothing and body language had an interactive effect on dispositional judgments. The study supports the contention that nonverbal communication can influence sporting interactions.
Seven studies converge to show that prompting people to think about a rival versus a nonrival competitor causes them to view current competitions as more connected to past ones, to be more concerned with long-term legacy, and to pursue personal goals in a more eager, less cautious manner. These results are consistent with a social-cognitive view of rivalry that defines it as a competitive relational schema. A preliminary analysis revealed that people were more likely to appeal to past competitions to explain the importance of current rivalry than nonrivalry contests. Experiment 1 showed that people view rivalry versus nonrivalry competitions as more embedded in an ongoing competitive narrative and that this perception increases legacy concerns. The next 2 experiments used a causal chain approach to examine the possibility of legacy concerns acting as a mediator between rivalry and eagerness. Experiment 2a demonstrated that longer (vs. shorter) competitive histories are associated with increased legacy concerns. Experiment 2b manipulated legacy concerns and found that this shifted regulatory focus toward eagerness. Finally, 3 experiments tested the direct effect of thinking about a rival on eager strategy selection: Thinking about rivals (vs. nonrivals) led people to be more interested in offensive than defensive strategies (Experiment 3), to initiate rather than delay their goal pursuit (Experiment 4), and to rely on spontaneous rather than deliberative reasoning (Experiment 5). We suggest that rivalries affect how people view their goals and the strategies they use for pursuing them, and that these effects are at least partially attributable to the shared history between individuals and their rivals. (PsycINFO Database Record
Abstract We investigate the psychological phenomenon of rivalry, and propose a view of competition as inherently relational, thus extending the literatures on competition between individuals, groups, and firms. Specifically, we argue that the relationships between competitors – as captured by their proximity, relative attributes and prior competitive interactions – can influence the subjective intensity of rivalry between them, which in turn can affect their competitive behavior. Initial tests of these ideas within NCAA basketball indicate that (1) dyadic relationships between teams are highly influential in determining perceptions of rivalry (2) similarity between teams and their histories of prior interactions are systematically predictive of
This article investigates the phenomenon of interindividual rivalry and its consequences for motivation and task performance. Two studies of adults from the general population found that rivalry, as compared to nonrival competition, was associated with increased motivation and performance, controlling for tangible stakes, dislike, and other factors. Then, a large-scale archival study of long-distance running found that runners ran faster in races featuring their rivals, which were identified through empirical observation of demographics and prior race interactions. This research extends existing theory on competition and motivation and represents a first exploration into the consequences of rivalry between individuals.
We report on two studies investigating the motivations (ingroup love and outgroup hate) underlying individual participation in intergroup conflict between natural groups (fans of football clubs, supporters of political parties), by using the Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma Maximizing-Difference game (IPD-MD), in which group members can contribute to the ingroup and benefit ingroup members with or without harming members of the outgroup. Additionally, we devise a novel version of the IPD-MD in which the choice is between contribution to the ingroup with or without helping members of the outgroup. Our results show an overall reluctance to display outgroup hate by actively harming outgroup members, except when the outgroup was morality-based. Stronger enmity between groups induced more outgroup hate only when it was operationalized as refraining from help.
The purpose of this study was to ascertain if positional segregation continues at the quarterback position in college football. To determine its existence, we examined differences in run and pass plays executed by African American and White quarterbacks over four different seasons in the NCAA DI-FBS (N = 548). Results revealed significant differences such that African American quarterbacks rushed the ball more and averaged fewer pass attempts than their White counterparts. Likewise, the percentage of rush attempts made by African Americans nearly doubled that of Whites, while White quarterbacks passed the ball 12% more often than their African American counterparts. We argue that these findings support that a new form of discrimination and positional segregation, one we define as racial tasking, may exist.
To examine social interdependence theory dynamically, we develop a theory of structural adaptation based on "asymmetric adaptability." We suggest that it is more difficult for teams to shift from competitive to cooperative reward structures than from cooperative to competitive structures. We show that teams that switch from competitive to cooperative reward structures demonstrate "cutthroat cooperation." In their performance, marked by lower team decision accuracy and higher speed, they resemble competitive teams more than cooperative teams. Information sharing, also lower for cutthroat cooperation teams than for other cooperative teams, partially mediates the relationship between reward structure and accuracy.
Research question:
Despite pervasive attention to the concept of rivalry, there is neither uniform definition nor universal understanding. The purpose of this paper is to explore sport rivalry and derby matches from the fan perspective and identify the most influential elements that characterize rivalry.
Research methods:
This work employs a sequential exploratory mixed method design. Study 1 engaged 38 fans through open-ended questions to explicate antecedents to 76 rivalries. Study 2 used an exploratory factor analysis based on survey responses (n=429) that measured a broader sampling of rivalries to quantify the importance of the rivalry elements identified in Study 1.
Results and findings:
We define a rival group as a highly salient outgroup that poses an acute threat to the identity of the ingroup or to ingroup members’ ability to make positive comparisons between their group and the outgroup. Study 1 identified 11 recurring elements of rivalry: frequency of competition, defining moment, recent parity, historical parity, star factors, geography, relative dominance, competition for personnel, cultural similarity, cultural difference, and unfairness. Study 2 confirmed these elements within three primary dimensions: Conflict, Peer, and Bias.
Implications:
Our findings expand rivalry research by recognizing core rivalry antecedents useful for scholars investigating topics such as ticket demand, promotions, and sponsorship strategy. From a managerial perspective, these findings provide guidance to sport entities seeking to leverage rivalry to increase fan interest; conversely, when animosity surrounding a rivalry becomes overheated or violent, better understanding rivalry’s underpinnings can help managers de-emphasize the rivalry’s most salient contributors.
Brands often make references to competitors in their public communications. Yet not all competitors are equal—over time, certain pairs of brands may develop special rivalry relationships. This research examines whether these relationships can alter the effects of interbrand communications. Drawing on rivalry theory (Kilduff, Elfenbein and Staw 2010), the authors distinguish between brand rivalry, a special competitive relationship between brands based in a shared history, and competition, a situation where brands merely have currently opposing goals. A series of studies using complementary methods (two archival studies using large-scale Twitter data and three pre-registered experiments) provide evidence for the “rivalry reference effect”, across multiple brands and product categories. That is, referencing a rival (vs. a non-rival) competitor in a public brand message increases consumer engagement. The effect is mediated by increased story embeddedness, defined as the perception that the reference is embedded within an ongoing story. The authors also show positive downstream effects on purchase intentions, and test two moderators: brand preference (loyal vs. neutral consumers) and message valence (negative vs. positive). This research highlights the potential appeal of brand rivalry to consumers, illustrating how and under what conditions brands can use their rivalries to their advantage.
This article aims to understand how Latino Minor League Baseball (MiLB) players describe their cultural transitions to life in the United States (US) while pursuing baseball professionally. Moreover, through the lens of social identity theory (SIT), this article investigates how these players primarily identify themselves. To better understand the experiences these players have gone through to pursue their lifelong goals of being professional players, 24 current Latino MiLB players and one coach, who recently retired as a player, were interviewed. Interview questions asked about their early transitions, the main cultural differences between their home countries and the US, and how they identify themselves while in the US. It was concluded from the interviews that, while there were difficulties, the majority of their transitions were positive. It was also found that players primarily identify themselves in terms of personality traits and nationality.
I estimate the effects of collaborative and adversarial intergroup contact. I randomly assigned Indian men from different castes to participate in cricket leagues or to serve as a control group. League players faced variation in collaborative contact, through random assignment to homogeneous-caste or mixed-caste teams, and adversarial contact, through random assignment of opponents. Collaborative contact increases cross-caste friendships and efficiency in trade, and reduces own-caste favoritism. In contrast, adversarial contact generally reduces cross-caste interaction and efficiency. League participation reduces intergroup differences, suggesting that the positive aspects of intergroup contact more than offset the negative aspects in this setting. (JEL C93, D83, D91, J15, O15, Z13, Z21)
The current research set out to understand the stereotypes individuals hold about occupations, and to examine how occupational segregation is related to incongruences between demographic and occupational stereotypes. In Study 1, we applied the Stereotype Content Model (SCM) to develop a novel classification of occupational stereotypes based on the dimensions of warmth and competence. We found evidence that occupations are reliably stereotyped along the dimensions of warmth and competence, and that raters agreed more on certain occupational stereotypes than others. In Study 2, we mapped the occupational stereotype classification onto demographic stereotypes from the SCM to predict occupational segregation in the United States. Supporting an occupational stereotype incongruence hypothesis, women were more represented in occupations characterized by high warmth and low competence; Asian people were more represented in occupations characterized by high competence; and Black and Hispanic workers were more represented in occupations characterized by low competence. This work contributes to the understanding of how individuals perceive occupations in society, provides researchers with a means for systematically comparing occupational stereotypes and demographic stereotypes by applying the same descriptive dimensions, and highlights the importance of occupational stereotypes for understanding and potentially alleviating occupational segregation.
Researchers have long argued that ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation are separable phenomena that occur in different, meaningful combinations. Statistical methods for testing this thesis, however, have been underutilized. We address this oversight by using latent profile analysis (LPA) to investigate distinct profiles of group bias derived from ingroup and outgroup warmth ratings. Using a national probability sample of Māori (the indigenous people of New Zealand; N = 2,289) and Europeans (N = 13,647), we identify a distinct profile reflecting ingroup favoritism/outgroup derogation (Type III in Brewer’s typology of ingroup bias) in both groups (6.7% of Māori, 10.3% of Europeans). The factors associated with this type, however, differed between groups. Whereas ethnic identity centrality predicted membership for Type III for Māori, social dominance orientation predicted this type for Europeans. Thus, although both groups may express the same kind of bias pattern, the motivation underlying this bias varies by status.
Fueled by socioeconomic trends that changed the composition of organizational workforces, the term workforce diversity was coined in the 1990s. Since then, both researchers and practitioners have strived (and struggled) to understand the concept, its effects in and on organizations, and strategies for managing such effects. In this article, I provide an overview and interpretation of the current literature to examine its purpose, progress, and direction. Highlighting key conceptualizations of the construct, theoretical foundations, and empirical findings on diversity and diversity management, I discuss the evolution and current state of the field and synthesize this information to propose a future research agenda. In doing so, I seek to identify theoretical, empirical, and practice areas of opportunity for advancing scientific knowledge about the meaning, substance, and outcomes of diversity as well as the implementation of diversity science in organizations. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior Volume 6 is January 21, 2019. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
Recent attempts to improve on the quality of psychological research focus on good practices required for statistical significance testing. The scrutiny of theoretical reasoning, though superordinate, is largely neglected, as exemplified here in a common misunderstanding of mediation analysis. Although a test of a mediation model X ➔ Z ➔ Y is conditional on the premise that the model applies, alternative mediators Z′, Z″, Z‴ etc. remain untested, and other causal models could underlie the correlation between X, Y, Z, researchers infer from a single significant mediation test that they have identified the true mediator. A literature search of all mediation analyses published in 2015 in Sciencedirect shows that the vast majority of studies neither consider alternative causal models nor alternative mediator candidates. Ignoring that mediation analysis is conditional on the truth of the focal mediation model, they pretend to have demonstrated that Z mediates the influence of X on Y. Recommendations are provided for how to overcome this dissatisfying state of affairs.
Sport rivalries have been shown to increase the emotional intensity of fans, which not only can lead to higher levels of interest and involvement but can also escalate negative fan behaviors based on in-group/out-group distinctions. This study represents the first use of an experimental economics approach in sport management to understand the behaviors of rival sports fans. Specifically, the classic behavioral economics experiment, the ultimatum game, was used to test the willingness of rival fans to make their out-group counterparts worse off. Using a $10 stake, proposers offered approximately 8.7% less to rival fans than to in-group fans, while the probability that a responder accepted an offer-holding constant offer size-was approximately 7% lower when the proposer was a rival. Team identification had no effect on offers or acceptances. Implications for understanding rivalry in sport are discussed, and advantages of behavioral economics for sport management research are noted.
Much research suggests that ingroup positivity is more central than outgroup negativity. We argue that this conclusion is incomplete as a description of the totality of intergroup emotions. In 4 studies, we use a novel measure of willingness to pay for intergroup gains and losses to examine the intergroup emotions of fans of the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees. Results indicate that pleasure from a powerful rival’s losses can outstrip that from gains of one’s own group (Studies 1–2), and these patterns extend into domains not immediately relevant to the competition (Studies 3–4). A reversal in the competitive position of the two teams in the 2012–2013 season allowed us to examine whether fluctuations in competitive status moderated this pattern (Studies 3–4). Indeed, fans of the rival teams frequently valued outgroup losses more than ingroup gains, and this effect was particularly strong when one’s own team was behind in the rivalry.
There is strong evidence of racial bias in organizations but little understanding of how it changes with repeated interaction. This study proposes that repeated interaction has the potential to reduce racial bias, but its moderating effects may be limited to the treatment of individuals rather than of entire racial groups. Using data from 2,360 National Basketball Association (NBA) players and 163 coaches from 1955 to 2000, I find that players receive more playing time under coaches of the same race, even though there is no difference in their performance. This racial bias is greatly reduced, however, as the player and the coach spend more time on the same team, suggesting that repeated interaction minimizes coaches’ biases toward their players. But it does not reduce coaches’ racial biases in general. Even after years of coaching other-race players, coaches still exhibit the same levels of racial bias as they did upon first entering the league. These results suggest that repeated workplace interaction is effective in reducing racial bias toward individuals but not toward groups, making an important contribution to the literature on organizational inequality.
Occupational segregation by race and gender, though less common now than in the past, continues to be the norm rather than the exception in the sport industry. The purpose of this study was twofold. First, occupational segregation on the baseball playing field, often referred to as stacking, was discussed in light of human capital and social closure theories. Second, an attempt was made to replicate and extend a multivariate analysis of stacking by Margolis and Piliavin (1999) that challenges the dominant social science paradigm for explaining stacking. The present study uses more recent data than the Margolis and Piliavin study, as well as multinomial logistic regression analysis. The results reveal that stacking persists in Major League Baseball. They also reveal that the effect of race/ethnicity on assignments to playing positions is reduced when one controls for skills and physical characteristics such as speed and power hitting. The implications of this finding for sport management are examined.
The effort to increase Web organ donation registrations in Michigan by enhancing 2 types of university campaigns with social media strategies informed by social identity theory is the focus of this research. The two campaigns focused on either ingroup or rivalry outgroup social identification, and each was enhanced with individually focused social media in the first year of the campaign and with electronic word of mouth in Year 2 of the campaign. Results indicated that individually focused social media such as Facebook ads worked well in rivalry campaigns (in which registrations increased two times over baseline) but not in ingroup identification campaigns (in which registrations decreased significantly over baseline when ads were introduced in the first year of each type of campaign). Electronic word-of-mouth strategies worked well in both ingroup identification campaigns (in which registrations increased two times over baseline) and rivalry campaigns (in which registrations rose almost eight times over baseline, when strategies were introduced in the second year of each type of campaign).
This paper examines the overlap between competition and friendship in networks, an instance of multiplexity that we call the grand duality. We show that managers differ systematically in whether they perceive their friends as competitors. Structure matters, in that managers are more likely to see friends who are the same sex, in the same work unit, of the same rank, and share many common friends, as competitors. Recognition of the grand duality matters for networkers, as those who see more competitor friends at work gain more useful information for better performance and report higher job satisfaction.
Social comparison-the tendency to self-evaluate by comparing ourselves to others-is an important source of competitive behavior. We propose a new model that distinguishes between individual and situational factors that increase social comparison and thus lead to a range of competitive attitudes and behavior. Individual factors are those that vary from person to person: the relevance of the performance dimension, the similarity of rivals, and their relationship closeness to the individual, as well as the various individual differences variables relating to social comparison more generally. Situational factors, conversely, are those factors on the social comparison landscape that affect similarly situated individuals: proximity to a standard (i.e., near the number 1 ranking vs. far away), the number of competitors (i.e., few vs. many), social category fault lines (i.e., disputes across vs. within social categories), and more. The distinction between individual and situational factors also helps chart future directions for social comparison research and generates new vistas across psychology and related disciplines.
© The Author(s) 2013.
A solution is suggested for an old unresolved social psychological problem.
We assembled National Basketball Association and Major League Baseball player performance data from recent years, tracking 3 year periods in players’ careers: pre-contract year (baseline), contract year (CY; salient external incentive present), and post-contract year (salient external incentive removed). In both sports, we examined both individual scoring statistics (points scored, batting average) and non-scoring statistics (e.g. blocked shots, fielding percentage) over the 3 years. Using extrinsic motivation theories, we predicted and found a boost in some scoring statistics during the CY (relative to the pre-CY), but no change in non-scoring statistics. Using intrinsic motivation theories, we predicted and found an undermining of many statistics in the post-CY, relative to both the CY and the pre-CY baseline. Boosted CY scoring performance predicted post-CY salary raises in both sports, but salary raises were largely unrelated to post-CY performance. The CY performance boost is real, but team managers should know that it might be followed by a performance crash—the CY “syndrome.”
The ability to communicate with others is one of the most important human social functions, yet communication is not always investigated from a social perspective. This research examined the role that shared social identity plays in communication effectiveness using a minimal group paradigm. In two experiments, participants constructed a model using instructions that were said to be created by an ingroup or an outgroup member. Participants made models of objectively better quality when working from communications ostensibly created by an ingroup member (Experiments 1 and 2). However, this effect was attenuated when participants were made aware of a shared superordinate identity that included both the ingroup and the outgroup (Experiment 2). These findings point to the importance of shared social identity for effective communication and provide novel insights into the social psychology of communication.
© 2014 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.