Consumer Loyalty: The Meaning of Attachment in the Development of Sport Team Allegiance

Transcription

1 Journal of Sport Management, 2006, 20, Human Kinetics, Inc. Consumer Loyalty: The Meaning of Attachment in the Development of Sport Team Allegiance Daniel C. Funk Griffith University Jeffrey D. James Florida State University Prior research has demonstrated a direct relationship between loyalty and reasons for liking a particular sport team. The current study replicates and extends this line of inquiry by examining the mediating role of attachment, a process by which an individual moves from merely liking a team (attraction) to becoming loyal to a team (allegiance). Data (Collegiate N = 194; Collegiate and Professional N = 402, Favorite Sport Team N = 808) were collected to examine 13 benefits and attributes associated with liking a sport team, 3 attitude formation properties, and allegiance. A three-stage test of mediation using MLR revealed that attachment mediated the relationship between allegiance and Vicarious Achievement, Nostalgia, Star Player, Escape, Success, and Peer Group Acceptance. Results demonstrate that allegiance is the outcome of a process by which individuals develop stronger emotional reactions to, more functional knowledge about, and greater symbolic value for benefits and attributes associated with a sport team. Consumer research on spectators and fans of competitive sport teams seeks to understand consumer attitudes and behaviors towards teams and sporting events in order to enable sport managers to effectively package and deliver the sport product. Prior studies have examined attendance at games (Zhang, Pease, Hui, & Michaud, 1995), television viewing of Olympic Games (McDaniel, 2002), interest in supporting a team or attending a sporting event (Funk, Mahony, & Ridinger, 2002), and mental associations formed toward sports teams (Gladden & Funk, 2002). Previous work has also focused on developing instruments to measure various motives of sport consumers (McDonald, Milne, & Hong, 2002; Trail & James, 2001; Wann, 1995) and loyalty towards a team or player (Gahwilder & Havitz, 1998; Trail, Robinson, Dick, & Gillentine, 2003). Despite these advances, we still Funk is with the Griffith Business School, Gold Coast Campus, Griffith University, PMB 50 Gold Coast Mail Centre, Queensland 9726, Australia; James is with Florida State University, Department of Sport Management, Recreation Management, and Physical Education, 110 Tully Gym, Tallahassee, FL. 189

2 190 Funk and James do not understand how initial attraction to a sport team develops over time into allegiance. The work reported here addresses that matter. Review of the Literature The words loyalty and allegiance are often used interchangeably. Loyalty can be described as the steadfast allegiance to a person or cause (Pritchard, Havitz, & Howard, 1999). For consistency of discussion, the term allegiance will be used throughout the paper where appropriate rather than loyalty. In the context of sport teams, allegiance can be characterized as a commitment to a specific team that is persistent, resistant to change, and influences cognitive thoughts and behavior (Funk & Pastore, 2000). Although research has documented the value of allegiance (e.g., Depken, 2000; 2001; Smith, Patterson, Williams & Hogg, 1981; Wakefield & Sloan, 1995), prior work has not examined the processes by which individuals become allegiant fans. Research has identified a number of social factors that influence an individual s initial relationship with a sport team. Efforts have generally focused on what a sport organization does to promote new or maintain existing relationships with fans and spectators (e.g., Mahony, Madrigal, & Howard, 1999; Sutton, McDonald, Milne, & Cimperman, 1997). Wann, Tucker, and Schrader (1996) observed that people began and continued their support of a sport team due to the success of the team, its geographical location, and peer group support for the team. Kolbe and James (2000) reported that the initial decision to become a fan was based upon the importance of family, friends, attending games, and tailgating. James (2001) later observed that socializing factors (i.e., parents, media, and peers) influence the initial development of team preference among children. Funk and colleagues utilized an alternative approach by focusing on individual factors instead of social situational factors. Allegiance was viewed as the outcome of strongly formed attitudes toward a sport team. This body of work investigated attitude formation and its relationship to individual factors thought to have been derived from social situational factors (Funk, Haugtvedt, & Howard, 2000; Funk & Pastore, 2000; Gladden & Funk, 2002). Funk, Haugtvedt, and Howard (2000) conceptualized the structure and stability of allegiance in the context of attitude strength theory. Funk and colleagues proposed that allegiance is characterized by distinct attitude properties such as importance, direct experience, intensity, and personal relevance. Taken together, this research indicates that both personal and social factors play prominent roles in the development of allegiance. Funk et al. s (2000) work on individual factors and James s (2001) work on social factors were subsequently incorporated within Psychological Continuum Model (PCM) (Funk & James, 2001). The PCM is intended as a framework to synthesize a diverse body of literature about fans psychological connection with a sport object. The Psychological Continuum Model Research and writing from a number of disciplines (e.g., consumer behavior, marketing, sociology, and psychology) was integrated into four general hierarchical areas or stages: Awareness, Attraction, Attachment, and Allegiance. The lowest stage

3 Role of Attachment 191 of Awareness describes when an individual knows that a sport team exists but s/he is not interested in following that particular team. The ideas used to explain Awareness were drawn primarily from the sport socialization literature that describes the means through which knowledge about, but not necessarily preference for, a sport team may be created. The second stage Attraction describes when distinct interest or initial attitude formation toward a sport team has developed. Sport consumer behavior studies that examined motivations for attending games, watching games, and for thinking of a particular team as one s favorite served as the literature base supporting this area. Interest in a particular team is based on social factors (I like a team because my father/spouse/friend likes the team), hedonic motives (watching a team is entertaining; attending games is an escape from one s daily routine), and/or situational factors (special promotions; price discounts; novelty of a new venue). The final two stages Attachment and Allegiance reflect a stronger individualteam relationship due to individual process and less emphasis on hedonic motives and social-situational features. Attachment describes the point at which the individual has formed a meaningful psychological connection that is supported by various attitude properties. Research from social psychology on attitude formation and change was used to illustrate an individual s meaningful psychological connection to objects. The final stage of Allegiance describes when this connection becomes resistant, persistent, biased cognition and influences behavior. Literature on brand loyalty, commitment, and attitude strength was integrated to support this connection. The Psychological Continuum Model provides a useful framework for conceptualizing four different psychological outcomes related to a sport object but has one major limitation. The model does not adequately address how individuals progress between Awareness, Attraction, Attachment, and Allegiance. Beyond references to the socialization process, Funk and James (2001) offered limited discussion on how individual processes create distinct outcomes as one moves up the hierarchy. Currently, the PCM fails to explain the developmental progression of Allegiance, and is better understood as a framework than a model. Hence, revisions are needed to improve the conceptual basis for the PCM in order to account for both processes and stage-based hierarchical outcomes. Conceptual Development for a Revised PCM In the tradition of process models from organizational theory such as Equity Theory (Adams, 1963), Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964) and Model of Motivation (Porter & Lawler, 1968), the revised Psychological Continuum Model (PCM) should include processes to explain the stage-based outcomes. This revision provides a means to deconstruct the complexity of the individual-object relationship into inputs, processes, and outputs. As depicted in Figure 1, we propose that three processes labeled Awareness, Attraction, and Attachment operate within and between four outcomes: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Allegiance. Since individual processes are expected to be adaptable to changes in the environment (Chelladurai, 2001), the revised PCM suggests that sociological and psychological processes combine to create unique stage-based hierarchical outcomes. The Awareness process is believed to occur primarily through socialization. Sport socialization produces Level 1 outcomes such as realization and knowledge

4 192 Funk and James that a team exists. James (2001), as well as the general literature on socialization, provides direction for understanding this process through the influence of socializing agents or catalysts such as media, advertisements, parents, and peers. The Attraction process describes how Level 1 outcomes interact with hedonic motives, dispositional needs, and social situational factors to create Level 2 outcomes. Level 2 outcomes reflect initial attitude formation, usage of the team to fulfill social and individual needs, and the creation of beliefs about the team. Hedonic motives stimulate pleasure-based interests such as entertainment needs. Dispositional needs represent psychological needs, personality traits, and individual attributes that serve to initiate interest in a sport object. Such needs serve as catalysts and motivate people to connect with sport objects (e.g., sport, team, or athlete) because the connection allows the individual to express important characteristics or traits and satisfy particular needs. For example, supporting a local team may satisfy an individual s need for belonging and provide opportunities (e.g., attending games or talking at work) for social interaction with other community residents (Funk, Mahony, & Ridinger, 2002). In a similar fashion, the individual seeking to satisfy a need for belonging in a new community may be attracted to a local team because it promotes community solidarity. The attraction process describes how hedonic and dispositional needs are realized, social-situational factors become less influential, and preference activates a liking for the team. The psychological connection strengthens and outcomes become more contingent upon individual than sociological processes as movement occurs from Level 2 to Level 3. Research in experimental psychology has shown that a sense of attachment reflects affective, cognitive, and conative components of the attitude (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001). The Attachment process describes how Level 2 outcomes take on functional, symbolic and emotional meaning, interact with ideas of self and identity construction, and link to existing core values. Level 3 outcomes reflect the degree of attitude formation, level of identification, and the decreased likelihood of replacing the team with another object (cf. Dick & Basu, 1994; Kahle, Duncan, Dalakas, & Aiken, 2001; Madrigal, 2003). The transition from Level 2 to Level 3 reflects how a sentiment such as I like the Cowboys evolves into a meaningful connection such as I am a Cowboys fan, that is dynamic, multifaceted, and possesses a degree of strength (e.g., Kleine & Baker, 2004). The double-headed arrow between the Attachment process and Level 3 outcomes indicates the presence of a feedback loop that contributes to the development of Allegiance. As depicted in Figure 1, the Attachment process creates both Level 3 and Allegiance outcomes. Level 3 represents an intermediate end state distinct from Allegiance. This approach is consistent with the general agreement that allegiance is a multi-dimensional construct including behavioral and attitudinal components (Day, 1969; Jacoby & Chestnut, 1978). The attitudinal component is conceptualized and measured as representing psychological commitment (Crosby & Taylor, 1983; Pritchard et al., 1999), which is distinct from attitudinal outcomes conceptualized and measured with reference to the formation among attitude properties (e.g., Basilli, 1996; Dick & Basu, 1994). In other words, a distinction is made between attitude properties and related outcomes, such as commitment and behaviors (e.g., Bassili, 1996; Krosnick, Boninger, Chuang, Berent, & Carnot, 1993). In sport consumer behavior literature, attitude formation, identification, and values are considered outcomes of a process but are also conceptualized and

5 Role of Attachment 193 Figure 1 The Revised Psychological Continum Model (PCM) operationalized as distinct from psychological commitment (Funk & Pastore, 2000; Kahle, 1996; Mahony, Madrigal, & Howard, 2000; Sutton et al., 1997). The Attachment process, as positioned within the revised PCM, describes how Level 3 outcomes form, continue to strengthen, and feed back into the process that creates psychological commitment (e.g., Dimanche, Havitz, & Howard, 1993; Shamai, 1991). For example, the feedback loop describes how attitudinal evaluations may fluctuate (Kahle, 1996) and become inputs that are evaluated

6 194 Funk and James in terms of information complexity, position involvement, core values, the self, and volitional choice (e.g., Pritchard, Havitz, & Howard, 1999). Allegiance outcomes would then reflect the relative durability (i.e., resistance and persistence) and impact (i.e., impact on cognitive thoughts and behavior) of Attachment outcomes that have strengthened and collectively operate to influence the Attachment process. The revised Psychological Continuum Model now reflects an individual systems perspective with sociological and psychological subsystems. This system s approach provides a comprehensive overview of how Allegiance develops and offers direction on how to explore inputs, structural processes, and multilevel outcomes in a systematic manner. The revised PCM can now be used to characterize each person s unique trajectory towards allegiance. Empirical work is therefore needed in order to test and further develop the model and its propositions. Due to the complexity of the PCM, simultaneously exploring all three processes and four outcome levels can be difficult. Attachment provides an advantageous point to initiate an examination of specific inputs, processes, and outputs to test the revised model. An examination of Attachment also extends previous research by clarifying the sometimes ambiguous links between Level 2 outcomes related to team brand association and Allegiance (Gladden & Funk, 2001; Funk, 2002). A detailed discussion is now presented as the basis for development of three hypotheses to test the Attachment process as outlined by the revised PCM. The Link Between Level 2 Outcomes and Allegiance. Level 2 reflects a number of outcomes, including team brand associations. Brand associations represent anything in a consumer s memory linked to a specific brand (Aaker, 1996). Team brand associations are the thoughts, images, and ideas evoked when an individual thinks of a particular sport team (i.e., outcomes). Keller s (1993) classification of consumer-based associations in brand management was utilized to conceptualize sport team associations as representing three facets: attributes, benefits, and attitudes (Gladden, Milne, & Sutton, 1998). Drawing upon this framework, Gladden and Funk (2001) developed the Team Association Scale (TAS) to measure thirteen attributes and benefits that consumers associate with a sport team. Gladden and Funk (2001) also examined whether there was a relationship between the team brand associations and allegiance to professional sport teams. Seven of the thirteen associations identification, nostalgia, peer group acceptance, escape, tradition, product delivery, and star player were related to allegiance. Moreover, the relationship between Level 2 outcomes and allegiance was further examined by Funk (2002). Funk utilized the Team Association Scale to examine the link between the thirteen associations and allegiance among a general population of sport enthusiasts. Results indicated that respondents could be classified into three allegiance segments: casual, moderate, and loyal with 74.3% accuracy by collecting information related to identification, nostalgia, escape, product delivery, and star player. The research by Gladden and Funk (2001) and Funk (2002) demonstrated a relationship between team brand associations and allegiance. This evidence suggests that allegiant individuals hold specific associations in their minds relative to a sport team. In line with this perspective, we offer Hypothesis 1: H1: There is a significant relationship between Allegiance and Level 2 outcomes related to team brand association.

7 Role of Attachment 195 Level 2 outcomes related to attributes and benefits associated with a sport team will be significantly related to Allegiance outcomes. Within the revised Psychological Continuum Model (PCM), Level 2 outcomes represent team brand associations derived from hedonic motives, dispositional needs, and social situational factors. This perspective supports the notion that sport consumers have associations based upon peripheral and psychological motives (e.g., Funk, Ridinger, & Moorman, 2003). Peripheral motives are motives not directly related to the actual consumer such as stadium capacity, geographic location, weather, and win-loss records while psychological motives examine factors related to individual fan perceptions, preferences, and expectations. However, support for H1 does not explain how allegiance develops from a person holding specific mental associations about a team. The process through which thoughts, images and ideas continue on toward allegiance remains unexplored. The Link Between Level 2 and Level 3 Outcomes. Gladden and Funk (2002) partially addressed this issue as they extended their work on team brand associations. The authors incorporated contemporary attitude theory to gauge the strength of the associations (Funk et al., 2000). The original Team Association Scale which included thirteen association measures was extended to include three attitude properties to clarify earlier writings and definitional issues related to the attitude component of brand association (e.g., Aaker, 1996; Keller, 1993). Three attitude properties were utilized to assess the strength of the associations elicited by a sport team: a) importance (i.e., symbolic meaning and value of the team), b) knowledge (i.e., functional information), and c) affect (i.e., emotions evoked by the team). Gladden and Funk (2002) provided empirical evidence that associations were comprised of sixteen unique factors that represented three higher order constructs: attributes, benefits, and attitudes. However, Gladden and Funk (2002) noted that Keller s framework failed to adequately explain how the attitude dimension serves as a catalyst for attributes and benefits becoming more intrinsically meaningful. The authors indicated that future research should conceptualize the attitude dimension as a distinct construct that operates at a more abstract level. The work on team brand associations (Funk, 2002; Gladden & Funk, 2001, 2002) is consistent with the revised Psychological Continuum Model. Allegiance should develop as Level 2 outcomes related the attributes and benefits associated with a sport team take on greater psychological meaning. This meaning will be reflected in the strength of attitude formation toward the team found within Level 3. Hence, we offer Hypothesis 2: H2: There is a significant relationship between Level 2 outcomes related to team brand associations and Level 3 outcomes related to attitude strength properties. Level 2 outcomes related to attribute and benefits will be significantly related to attitude properties importance, knowledge and affect within Level 3. These associations will take on emotional, symbolic, and functional meaning. A test of mediation requires Level 2 outcomes to be significantly related to both Level 3 and Allegiance outcomes. Once these linkages have been established, support for the Attachment process can be acquired through a mediational proposition. The

8 196 Funk and James following section provides a detailed discussion of the conceptual basis for the Attachment process. The Attachment Process. Previous writing suggests that there is a developmental progression for attachment. The progression stems from linkages created from social-structural and individual psychological processes. Wallendorf and Arnould (1988) observed that attachment was symbolic of a personal connection to a favorite object, and enhanced the liking of the object as the object assumed deeper meaning. Schultz, Kleine and Kernan (1989) noted that attachment to a favorite possession represented a property of association generated from self-developmental tasks of individuation (i.e., differentiation of self from others), integration (i.e., integration of self with others), and temporal orientation (i.e., self changes from situation to situation). Gibson, Willming, and Holdnak (2002) reported that a collegiate football team provided individuals an opportunity to express an identity (individuation) and a sense of belongingness (integration) on football Saturdays throughout the season (temporal orientation). Attachment has been studied in a number of contexts. These include place attachment for recreation spending (Kyle, Absher, & Graefe, 2003), attachment to a multinational corporation (Reade, 2001), attachment to a work team (Korsgaard, Schweiger, & Sapienza, 1995), and employee attachment to a youth and recreation service organization s mission (Brown & Yoshioka, 2003). Kleine and Baker (2004) recently defined attachment as a multi-faceted property of the relationship between an individual and a specific object that has been psychologically appropriated, decommodified, and singularized through person-object interaction, but did not consider attachment as a process. We define attachment as a process that occurs when an individual assigns emotional, functional, and symbolic meaning to ideas, thoughts, and images related to a sport object (e.g., team). Based upon this definition, Attachment represents a dynamic, emotionally complex internal process. This process describes how a sport team elicits stronger attitudinal evaluations (Funk et al., 2000), reflects a type of self extension (Belk, 1988), and becomes congruent with fundamental core values developed from life and consumption experiences (Kahle et al., 2001). Attachment helps explain the relationship previously observed between allegiance and team brand associations (Gladden & Funk, 2001). Positive thoughts, ideas, and images (i.e., Level 2 outcomes) contribute to allegiance when collectively these associations serve as inputs and take on meaning that is symbolic, functional, and emotional. The following section describes the relationship between Level 3 and allegiance outcomes to clarify how the psychological connection progresses. Allegiance Outcomes. Allegiance has traditionally been characterized as a multi-dimensional construct including behavioral and attitudinal components (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001; Day, 1969; Jacoby, 1971; Jacoby & Kyner, 1973; Jacoby & Chestnut, 1978). The behavioral component examines responses such as repeat purchasing made by an individual over time with respect to a product. The regularity with which an individual attends a team s games and purchases merchandise would be used to represent the behavioral component. The attitudinal component reflects an individual s psychological commitment to a sport team and explains why a team is valued and considered meaningful.

9 Role of Attachment 197 Funk, Haugtvedt, and Howard (2000) suggested that the development of allegiance could be examined through the study of attitude formation and change. This approach recommended measuring various strength-related attitude properties. Funk and Pastore (2000) reported that allegiance to a professional baseball team was supported by nine attitude properties and observed that knowledge, affect, and importance were central components. Although limited attention has been given to understanding the link between attitude formation and allegiance in sport, a great deal of empirical research has linked attitude properties to components of allegiance, particularly resistance to change (cf. Krosnick & Abelson, 1992; Krosnick & Petty, 1995). Consumer commitment has often been conceptualized as a psychological construct and equated to the attitudinal component of brand loyalty (Day, 1969; Jacoby & Kyner, 1973). Consumer theorists have suggested that resistance to change may represent the general underlying factor contributing to consumer commitment (e.g., Crosby & Taylor, 1983; Haugtvedt & Petty, 1992). Resistance to changing one s evaluation of an object or issue is thought to reflect attitude properties that are stable, reflect consistency, withstand counter persuasive attempts, and are predictive of behavior (e.g., Petty, Haugtvedt, & Smith, 1995). Links between commitment and attitude formation have been suggested within the leisure literature. Iwasaki and Havitz (1998) conceptualized commitment to a leisure activity as stemming from greater attitude formation. In research examining patrons commitment to specific travel services, Pritchard, Havitz, and Howard (1999) demonstrated that information complexity, position involvement and volitional choice contributed to resistance to change. In terms of attitude terminology, these antecedents of resistance can generally be referred to as representing strength-related attitude properties (e.g., Krosnick & Petty, 1995). For example, information complexity refers to attitude properties that reflect a network of associated links connected to other cognitive elements (e.g., knowledge) while position involvement and volitional choice represent links to subjective properties (e.g., importance, affect). Based upon this literature, attempts to understand the individual processes that govern the development of allegiance would benefit from utilizing an attitude strength framework. The integration of attitude strength into the revised PCM provides insight into the complexity of allegiance. Attitude properties such as importance, knowledge and affect may individually or collectively contribute to allegiance outcomes. Research has linked various attitude properties to durability outcomes and impact (for a review, see: Krosnick & Petty, 1995). The attitude strength framework helps clarify the multi-dimensional nature of allegiance. Backman and Crompton (1991) proposed a 2 2 model in which consumers are thought to have high, spurious, low, or latent allegiance based on an individual s intensity of behavior and psychological attachment. A person characterized by high allegiance would demonstrate repeat consumption (continued participation in an activity) based on the symbolic value of the activity, the amount of relevant knowledge, and the positive emotional response. An individual characterized by spurious allegiance may demonstrate repeat consumption, but have weak or ambivalent levels with respect to the meaning attached to the activity. Repeat consumption could be the result of price incentives. Frequent

10 198 Funk and James participation or repeat consumption in the absence of a strong psychological connection could also be a function of habit or lack of knowledge regarding other alternatives. The revised PCM brings together work connecting allegiance to team brand associations. Individuals characterized by spurious allegiance would demonstrate a positive relationship between Level 2 outcomes and Allegiance. However, the strength of the relationship would probably be tenuous and not considered part of the extended self. Individuals characterized by high allegiance would possess well formed attitude properties in Level 3 that reflect the degree of collective meaning prescribed to the attributes and benefits associated with a team. We suggest the attachment process accounts for associations becoming emotionally, functionally, and/or symbolically meaningful to the individual. The current study investigates the extent to which the team associations take on internal meaning and mediate the development of allegiance. This leads to the following hypothesis: H3: The relationship between allegiance and Level 2 outcomes related team brand associations is mediated by the attachment process. Allegiance is hypothesized to develop from an internal process that occurs when ideas, thoughts, and images associated with a sport team assume emotional, functional, and symbolic meaning. The developmental progression to allegiance is governed by the extent to which Level 2 outcomes take on a heightened level of personal meaning and reflect the strength of attitude formation within Level 3. To test this mediational progression, a descriptive study was conducted to acquire empirical evidence to support mediation as proposed by the revised PCM. Method Three studies were utilized to test attachment s mediational role. Respondents in three samples completed the Team Association Scale (TAS) (Gladden & Funk, 2002) which utilizes 48-items to measures 16 latent constructs which include 13 benefits and attributes and 3 attitude properties (see Appendix A). Each latent construct has three manifest variables. The TAS was selected because it provides a means to operationalize Level 2 outcomes using 13 attributes and benefits. The TAS also provides a means to gauge Level 3 outcomes via attitude formation using three attitude properties: a) functional meaning (i.e., knowledge), symbolic meaning (i.e., importance), and emotional meaning (i.e., affect). The TAS also incorporates four items measuring psychological commitment to a sport team and four items measuring self-reported behavior related to a team (games attended, games watched on television, frequency of media usage and direct experience with the team). These eight items were combined to create composite score to assess Allegiance outcomes. The psychometric properties of the TAS have been tested in separate data collection efforts and results have demonstrated strong internal reliability with good discriminant and predictive validity (see Gladden & Funk, 2001, 2002; Funk 2002).

11 Role of Attachment 199 Table 1 Correlation Matrix for Allegiance, Attachment Properties, and Attraction Features: Convenience Sample of University Students (N = 194) LOY IMP KNW AFF SUC HC STP MGT PD LOG VEN TRD ESC NOS PGA PP VIC LOY 1 IMP KNW AFF SUC HC STP MGT PD LOG VEN TRD ESC NOS PGA PIP VIC

12 200 Funk and James Samples Data for Sample 1 were generated from a convenience sample of two hundred and five graduate and undergraduate students at a large mid-western university (N = 205). The TAS was modified to have students focus specifically on their university football team. The number of usable questionnaires collected was 194. The construct mean scores, standard deviations, and reliability measures are reported in Appendix B. The correlation matrix is reported in Table 1. The mean scores for each construct ranged from M = 1.91 to M = Alpha levels for each construct ranged from α =.67 to α =.87. The correlations between the constructs ranged from r =.03 to r =.88. Data from Sample 2 were generated from consumers whose addresses were purchased from the Marketing Systems Group and generated by Carroll Wright Marketing Services. Fourteen hundred mailing labels were procured based upon a specified metropolitan area and whether respondents had indicated a prior interest in sport. Information regarding the type of sport, level of sport interest, or specific team interest was unknown. Study 2 included two versions of the TAS; the respective versions had respondents focus on either a specific National Football League team or a NCAA Division I-A collegiate football team located in the specified metropolitan area. Participants were randomly selected to receive either the NCAA or the NFL version of the TAS questionnaire (700 Pro and 700 NCAA). Questionnaires were sent to 1,400 individuals residing in the metropolitan area followed by a reminder post card 5 days later. The number of usable NCAA questionnaires was 178 and the number of usable NFL questionnaires was 226. The overall sample for Study 2 was N = 402, providing a response rate of 29%. The construct mean scores, standard deviations, and reliability measures are reported in Appendix B. The correlation matrix is reported in Table 2. The mean scores for each construct ranged from M = 2.53 to M = Alpha levels for each construct ranged from α =.75 to α =.95. The correlations among the constructs ranged from r =.03 to r =.79. Data for Sample 3 were generated from a nationally recognized sport magazine subscription list. Questionnaires were mailed to three thousand randomly selected subscribers. Three mailings were conducted including a pre-notification post card one week prior to the survey, the Team Association Scale (TAS) questionnaire, and a follow-up post card one week following the mailing of the questionnaire. Twentythree of the questionnaires were returned due to a change of or incorrect address; 808 valid questionnaires were received for a response rate of 27%. Respondents indicated their favorite professional sport team and then completed the TAS. The construct mean scores, standard deviations, and reliability measures are reported in Appendix B. The correlation matrix is reported in Table 3. The mean scores for each construct ranged from M = 1.93 to M = Alpha levels for each construct ranged from α =.68 to α =.94. The correlations among the constructs ranged from r =.01 to r =.68. Statistical Analysis Data from the three samples were combined (N = 1,404) to strengthen the generalizability of the results to the general population (e.g., Calder, Phillips,

13 Role of Attachment 201 Table 2 Correlation Matrix for Allegiance, Attachment Properties, and Attraction Features: General Sport Enthusiast (N = 404) LOY IMP KNW AFF SUC HC STP MGT PD LOG VEN TRD ESC NOS PGA PP VIC LOY 1 IMP KNW AFF SUC HC STP MGT PD LOG VEN TRD ESC NOS PGA PIP VIC

14 202 Funk and James Table 3 Correlation Matrix for Allegiance, Attachment Properties and Attraction Features: Subscribers to Sport Magazine (N = 808) LOY 1 LOY IMP KNW AFF SUC HC STP MGT PD LOG VEN TRD ESC NOS PGA PP VIC IMP KNW AFF SUC HC STP MGT PD LOG VEN TRD ESC NOS PGA PIP VIC

15 Role of Attachment 203 & Tybout, 1981; Wells, 1993). No adjustments to construct scores were made. The three samples contained university students, general sport enthusiasts, and a random sample of readers subscribing to a national sport magazine. In addition, the three samples assessed different sport objects including collegiate football, collegiate and professional football, and any professional sport team. As a result of combining the samples, the theoretical test of mediation could be applied to a more naturalistic setting creating a more rigorous examination of sport consumer behavior theory (e.g., Funk, Mahony, & Havitz, 2003). A Level 3 composite score was also created from the mean scores of the attitude properties knowledge, importance and affect to represent functional, symbolic, and emotional meaning. A composite allegiance score was created from the four commitment items and four behavioral items (Day, 1969). Consistent with the recommendations of Barron and Kenny (1986), a threestep test of mediation was conducted using multiple linear regressions (MLR) to examine the three hypotheses. Step 1 tested H2 as Level 3 were regressed on Level 2 outcomes. Step 2 tested H1 as Allegiance was regressed on Level 2 outcomes. The third and final step tested H3 as Allegiance was regressed on both Level 2 and Level 3 outcomes simultaneously. Results The mediation tests are reported in Table 4. Results from Step 1 provided partial support for H2 in that the relationship between nine (9) of thirteen associations and attitude formation in Level 3 were significant (p <.05). The combined variance explained in Level 3 by the attributes and benefits was R 2 =.92. Inspection of the standard beta weights for the 13 attributes and benefits indicated that Vicarious Achievement, Nostalgia, Product Delivery, Head Coach, Escape, Star Player, Success, and Management were positively related to attitude formation. The sign associated with the beta weight for Peer Group Acceptance indicated a negative relationship with attitude formation. It is important to note that the Vicarious Achievement dimension utilized in the three studies is labeled Team Identification in the TAS. A determination was made based upon a review of the wording of the items that each item reflects the construct of Vicarious Achievement and should be classified as a benefit that is related to Attraction. The items reflect the perceived ego enhancement and/or opportunities to experience vicarious achievement provided by an individual s perceived (or felt) connection with a sport team (e.g., Cialdini et al., 1976; Hirt et al., 1993; Madrigal, 2003; Sloan, 1989). This perspective draws support from a number of studies that defined team identification as a person s attachment to a sport team (Harada & Matsuoka, 1999; Murrell & Dietz, 1992; Wakefield, 1995), whereas vicarious achievement represents a person s desire for social prestige, self-esteem and sense of empowerment through affiliation with a sport team (Fink, Trail, & Anderson, 2002; Mahony, Madrigal, & Howard, 2000). The results in Table 4 provided partial support for H1 and revealed that in Step 2 the relationship between allegiance and eight (8) of the thirteen associations in Level 2 was significant (p <.05). The variance explained in Allegiance by the attributes and benefits was R 2 =.55. The beta weights for Vicarious Achievement,

16 204 Funk and James Table 4 Testing of Mediation Effect (N = 1,404) Level 2 Outcomes Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Level 3 Outcomes Allegiance Outcomes Allegiance Outcomes Interpretation Achievement Partial Mediation Nostalgia Partial Mediation Product Delivery.24 Head Coach.09 Escape Full Mediation Star Player Partial Mediation Success Full Mediation Peer Group Full Mediation Management.06 Logo Design Tradition Venue Pride in Place Level 3 Outcomes.55 Mediator F R 2 Adjusted.92 Note: Standardized Regression Coefficient given if significant at.05 or less.55 No mediation exists if regression coefficient in Step 1 or Step 2 is not significant. No mediation exists if regression coefficient in Step 3 is not significant. Partial mediation exists if regression coefficient in Step 1 and Step 3 is significant. Full mediation exists if a regression coefficient in Step 1 is significant but not in Step 3. Nostalgia, Escape, Star Player, and Success were positively related to team allegiance. The beta weights for Peer Group Acceptance, Logo Design and Tradition were negatively related to allegiance. The data also provided support for H3 (see Table 4). The Attachment process accounted for the direction and strength of the relationship between Allegiance and six (6) of the Level 2 attribute and benefit outcomes. The non-significant beta weights in Step 3 revealed that Level 3 attitude formation fully mediated the relationship between allegiance and Level 2 outcomes of Escape, Success, and Peer Group Acceptance. The data also revealed that Level 3 partially mediated the relationship between allegiance and Vicarious Achievement, Nostalgia and Star Player (p <.05). The amount of variance explained in allegiance by Level 3 and Level 2 outcomes was R 2 = Discussion The development of allegiance represents a dynamic, emotionally complex process. The present study provides evidence of an internalization process that governs this development within a team sport context. The relationship between

17 Role of Attachment 205 thoughts, images, and ideas linked to a sport team and allegiance was mediated by the functional, symbolic, and emotional meaning attached to the team. Empirical support was also offered for the assertion drawn from the revised Psychological Continuum Model that the extent to which the attributes and benefits associated with a team collectively become psychologically important (or assume internal meaning), determines the level of psychological connection. The following sections examine each hypothesis, and then integrate the results with previous research. H1: Attraction to Allegiance. These data provide partial support for Hypothesis 1 in that eight of the thirteen attraction features explained 55% of the variance in Allegiance. The beta signs related to Vicarious Achievement, Nostalgia, Escape, Star Player, and Success indicated that allegiant individuals were likely to agree that these five attributes and benefits were important features of the team. The beta signs related to Peer Group Acceptance, Logo Design, and Tradition indicated that allegiant individuals did not agree that these three attributes and benefits were important features of the team. In general, these results replicate previous research that has established links between attributes and benefits associated with a sporting event and allegiance to a sport/event/team (Funk, 2002; Funk, Ridinger, & Moorman, 2003; Gladden & Funk, 2001; Hill & Green 2000; McDonald, Milne, & Hong, 2002; Trail & James, 2001; Trail, Anderson, & Fink, 2002; Wakefield & Sloan, 1995). Since the focus of the present study was to explore the developmental process that accounts for the linkage, discussion of the particular findings will be conducted in the following section. H2: Attraction to Attachment. The results provide partial support for Hypothesis 2 in that a significant relationship was found between attachment and nine of the associations. Consumer-based associations related to Product Delivery, Vicarious Achievement, Nostalgia, Success, Head Coach, Escape, Star Player, Management, and Peer Group Acceptance explained 92% of the variance in the Level 3 outcomes. The beta signs related to the features were all positive with the exception of Peer Group Acceptance. These data indicated that individuals that placed greater functional, symbolic, and emotional meaning on a sport team were more likely to have these eight associations related to a team. Although the variance explained is unusually high for social science research, the nominal beta weight values (range.03 to.24) support the uniqueness of the two outcomes. In addition, the variance explained support Gladden and Funk s (2002) notion that ideas, thoughts and images are closely linked to attitude properties but should be conceptualized as distinct components of consumer-based team associations. The independence of each association and attitude property is a concern but the moderate correlations among the constructs were expected with distinct yet interrelated dimensions (e.g., much like the relationship between height and weight). Furthermore, from Tables 1-3 only two coefficients were above the r =.80 threshold minimizing the possibility of multicollinearity (Kline, 1998); in both instances the high correlations were between vicarious achievement and importance. The beta weights of Step 1 (reported in Table 4) indicated that product delivery, vicarious achievement, and nostalgia were relatively robust in explaining variations in Level 3. An individual whose entertainment expectations are satisfied and who feels a sense of trust toward management is more likely to be an allegiant customer (e.g., Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Wann, 1995). Prior research has demonstrated

18 206 Funk and James that a person s desire for self-esteem and sense of belonging to a group through affiliation and success of the team can lead to commitment and consistent behavior (Fink et al., 2002; Mahony et al., 2000; Wann & Branscombe, 1993). Experiential benefits received from a sport team such as longing for the past and escaping daily routines have been linked to allegiance (Gladden & Funk, 2001). Level 2 outcomes such as star player and head coach related to the team have also been studied to assess their contribution to commitment or behavior (Trail et al., 2003). Collectively, these data provide insight into previous research by exploring the nexus between Level 3 outcomes and Allegiance. H3: Attachment Process. The results provide support for Hypothesis 3 because attitude formation was observed to mediate the development of allegiance from six Level 2 outcomes: Escape, Success, Peer Group Acceptance, Vicarious Achievement, Nostalgia, and Star Player. The beta weights and level of significance from Step 3 (see Table 4) indicated that the level of psychological significance attached to the team based upon attributes and benefits accounted for the strength and direction of development. The strength of attitude formation in Level 3 was observed to fully mediate the development of allegiance when considering Escape, Success, and Peer Group Acceptance. The results indicated that an individual may be attracted to a sport team because of the opportunity to escape from every day life and the success of the team. However, allegiance will not develop until these thoughts take on functional, symbolic, and emotional meaning in relationship to the team. For example, an individual who was originally attracted to a sport team because it provided a chance to escape will become allegiant only when that individual begins to place greater meaning on creating an alternate mental world supported by functional knowledge (e.g., statistics, game schedules) and a pleasant reaction to the experience (e.g., Belk & Costa, 1998; Wann & Branscombe, 1995). The success of a franchise is considered an important attribute of a sport team, but winning by itself is not sufficient to develop allegiance. A number of studies have documented the positive outcomes of success (e.g., Branvold, Pan, & Gabert, 1997; Porter & Scully, 1982) and negative outcomes of failure (Hirt et al., 1992). Hence, once success has attracted the individual to the team, the franchise must leverage this association to foster a relationship in which the team takes on greater personal meaning to the individual that lasts through periods when a team is not winning. In contrast, an individual who is attracted to a sport team to cultivate general acceptance among peers would likely never develop allegiance because only a small amount of functional knowledge, emotion, and symbolic meaning would be placed on the team (e.g., Wakefield, 1995). The beta weights and level of significance from Step 3 in Table 4 indicate that Level 3 partially mediates the relationship between Allegiance and Level 2 outcomes of Vicarious Achievement, Nostalgia and Star Player. The results indicate that a person s thoughts related to self-esteem benefits, longing for the past, and having a favorite player contributed to both Level 3 attitude formation and Allegiance outcomes. These three associations should be considered more important predictors than the previous three associations that have full mediation (e.g., Barron & Kenny, 1986). Allegiance among the respondents appears to have developed through a process of placing more functional, emotional, and symbolic meaning on a team based upon a collective set of associations related to escape, success, peer group acceptance, vicarious achievement, nostalgia, and star player.