Rivalry Effects Across Sports 1

Cobbs, J., Sparks, B. D., Tyler, B. D. (2017). Comparing Rivalry Effects Across Professional Sports:
National Football League Fans Exhibit Most Animosity. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 26 (4), 235-
246.

Comparing Rivalry Effects Across Professional Sports:

National Football League Fans Exhibit Most Animosity

Joe Cobbs*, PhD, Northern Kentucky University, Associate Professor, cobbsj1@nku.edu

Haile/US Bank College of Business, 1 Nunn Dr., Highland Heights, KY 41099
Phone: (859) 572-7960; Fax: (859) 572-6177

B. Daniel Sparks, Northern Kentucky University, Alumnus, sparks.daniel22@gmail.com

B. David Tyler, PhD, Western Carolina University, Associate Professor, dtyler@wcu.edu

*Corresponding author

Electroniccopy
Electronic copyavailable
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547
Rivalry Effects Across Sports 2

Comparing Rivalry Effects Across Professional Sports:

National Football League Fans Exhibit Most Animosity

Abstract

Previous research on sports rivalry has emphasized fans’ social identity and the threat posed by
rivals. Much of this scholarship is based on intercollegiate sports, where many fans, such as
students and alumni, have a formally defined identity with the university. In this study, fans (N =
4,828) across five major professional leagues—MLB, MLS, NBA, NFL, and NHL—are
surveyed to compare their animosity toward rivals based on four variables: schadenfreude,
disidentification, prejudice, and relationship discrimination against rivals. The results
consistently demonstrate that NFL fans harbor significantly greater animosity toward rivals than
their counterparts in other leagues. Apart from the NFL, fans of NHL teams generally exhibit
more animosity compared to other leagues, and NBA fans exhibit the least. While fan
identification is relatively consistent across leagues, highly identified fans react more adversely
to rivals. These differences in rivalry reactions have implications for promotional planning and
event security protocol.

Keywords: rivalry, derby, league differences, schadenfreude, identification, discrimination

Electroniccopy
Electronic copyavailable
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547
Rivalry Effects Across Sports 3

Comparing Rivalry Effects Across Professional Sports:

National Football League Fans Exhibit Most Animosity

Rivalry is a term commonly used in sports by fans, members of the media, marketers,
administrators and players to reference important games and certain opponents on a team’s
schedule. The concept of rivalry is likely as old as competitive sport, but until recently, sports
rivalry has been neglected as a specific domain of scholarly research. Over the last several years,
rivalry has become an increasingly popular topic of interest for researchers and sports leagues
due in part to the escalating business implications (Palmer, 2013). Accordingly, rivalry is
commonly used as a variable in prediction models to forecast demand (e.g., McDonald &
Rascher, 2000; Tainsky & Jasielec, 2014), which allows organizations to more effectively price
their tickets, sell advertising, sponsorships, and schedule media broadcasts (Borland &
MacDonald, 2003). These areas of sports marketing are vital revenue streams, and better
understanding the rivalry phenomenon can help organizations maximize profits through
sponsored promotional campaigns such as Rivalry Week (e.g., McGee, 2016; MLS, 2017, NBA,
2005).

Conversely, perceptions of rivalry can also lead to heightened aggression and the
propensity for violence by certain fans (Havard, Wann, & Ryan, 2013; Wann, Haynes, McLean,
& Pullen, 2003; Wann, Peterson, Cothran, & Dykes, 1999). As a result, accurately gauging fans’
perceptions of rivalry is not only a revenue consideration for marketers, but also an issue of fan
safety for event managers. While the study of rivalry has gained momentum, many issues
relevant to sport marketers, sponsors, broadcasters and event managers remain open questions.
One such avenue of inquiry is if fans’ perceptions of rivals are consistent across sports and, if
not, how fans’ reactions to rival teams differ between various leagues and sporting contexts.
These particular questions have implications for event managers planning security precautions,
marketers considering cross-promotional opportunities with opponents, and sponsors of multiple
competing teams. For example, several opposing teams in both collegiate and professional sports
have collaborated to brand their rivalry (e.g., Civil War Series, Territorial Cup, and Battle Line
Rivalry) and co-promote the game, associated events, and merchandise (Brunious, 2014). Is such
a cross-promotional strategy wise for marketers of opposing teams? Or does it risk alienating
fans of each side, or worse, inciting violence between rival fans? The basis of these questions
may well depend on the level of animosity toward rivals within a particular sporting context. The
purpose of this study is to assess and compare the animosity of fans toward rivals across different
professional sports in North America.

The investigation begins by reviewing previous research on rivalry, including proposed

definitions based on social identity theory and how rivalry may influence relationships with
others. Next, this paper outlines past work that demonstrates fans’ motivations for consumption
of sport and how reactions differ across various sports. Following the review of literature is a
discussion of the study’s methodology and associated data analysis. Then empirical results are
presented to answer the research question and derive implications for the sports marketing field.
The paper concludes by recognizing limitations as well as associated opportunities for future
research to further enhance the understanding of rivalry across different sporting contexts.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 4

Literature review

Recognizing rivalry

While numerous studies of the demand for spectator sports have included rivalry as a
covariate (see Tyler & Cobbs, 2017, for a review), scholars have only recently taken a broader
interest in sports rivalry as a focal topic of investigation. Kilduff, Elfenbein, and Staw (2010)
studied college basketball to understand the psychological factors that contribute to rivalry. In
doing so, they described rivalry as “a subjective competitive relationship that a focal actor has
with another actor which increases the focal actor’s psychological involvement and stakes of
competition independent of the objective characteristics of the situation” (p. 945). Highlighting
potential components of rivalry, Havard, Gray, Gould, Sharp, and Schaffer (2013) suggest
rivalry is "a fluctuating adversarial relationship existing between two teams, players, or groups of
fans, gaining significance through on-field competition, on-field or off-field incidences,
proximity, demographic makeup, and/or historical occurrences” (p. 10-11). In a mixed methods
study, Tyler and Cobbs (2015) expanded the antecedents of rivalry into three dimensions that
include a total of 11 elements therein. The first dimension is Conflict, consisting of defining
moments, frequency of competition, recent and historical parity, and star factor. The second is
Peer, consisting of geography, competition for personnel, and cultural similarities. The third and
final dimension is Bias, consisting of cultural differences, relative dominance of one team, and
perceived unfairness. These initial scholarly conceptualizations of rivalry in sports encompass
multiple viewpoints that include samples of fans, players, and media reporters; yet each
recognition of rivalry includes competition of elevated significance against another.

Foundation of rivalry: Social identity theory

To better understand competitive group dynamics in a spectator sports context, one must
understand what motivates fans to identify with a favorite team. Social identity theory explains
that people associate with others perceived to be similar to the self in order to reinforce their own
self-image (Tajfel, 1974; Turner, 1975). Specifically, humans have a natural need to perceive
themselves in a positive light through comparison with other individuals (Festinger, 1954) while
also being accepted by others (Heider, 1958). These social needs manifest in people with
common traits forming groups of likeminded individuals (Tajfel, 1969). When people perceive a
connection with others based on a similarity or join to create social groups, they form real or
imagined in-groups. Simultaneously, they mentally establish out-groups that distinguish oneself
from others who are perceived as different (Ashmore, Deaux, & McLaughlin, 2004; Stets &
Burke, 2000). Individuals’ use of group affiliations to formulate self-identity is a foundation of
sports rivalry, where a rival is defined as "a highly salient outgroup that poses an acute threat to
the identity of the in-group or to in-group members' ability to make positive comparisons
between their group and the out-group" (Tyler & Cobbs, 2015, p. 230).

In-group bias describes the tendency to favor people within one’s own group and
discriminate against those outside the salient in-group (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Consequently,
fans of the same team view each other more positively than they view fans of an opponent whom
they often denigrate through inter-group bias (Maass, Arcuri, Salvi, & Semin, 1989; Wann &
Dolan, 1994). In that way, social identity builds relationships within groups while also seeding

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 5

negative bias or prejudice against dissimilar others (Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995). When certain
others pose a particularly acute threat in the presence of related factors (Tyler & Cobbs, 2015),
fans perceive rivalry and may react with enhanced negative affect or behavior.

Animosity toward rivals

The propensity for animosity toward rivals is rooted in humans' neural responses to
intergroup competition. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, Cikara and colleagues
(2011) demonstrated that fans of the Yankees and Red Sox had heightened brain activity
associated with aggression and pleasure when viewing their team’s game action against each
other (i.e., the rival) compared to play against another divisional opponent. Such mental
reactions toward specific outgroups can manifest in several ways, such as the joy in another’s
failure characterized by schadenfreude (Dalakas & Melancon, 2012; Heider, 1958). Fans' feeling
of glory when their rival team loses is aligned with schadenfreude and irrespective of their own
team’s performance, as illustrated in the collegiate sports context by Havard (2014). In other
words, fans enjoy glory from the reflected failure of their rival’s defeat even when it does not
come directly at the hands of their own team.

Closely related to schadenfreude is the concept of disidentification, where one’s self-

concept goes beyond in-group memberships to include opposition to certain out-groups (Elsbach
& Bhattacharya, 2001). Where disidentification exists, the failures of outgroups enhance one’s
own self-esteem (Havard, 2014). Consequently, schadenfreude and rival disidentification
encourage animosity and prejudice against rivals because rivals’ misfortune is directly related to
one's own self-enhancement.

Disidentification and the associated prejudice (i.e., negative bias) against outgroups lead
some fans to directly facilitate adverse outcomes for rivals by partaking in anti-social behaviors
(Lee, 1985). While less commonly documented in North America, interpersonal violence based
on fan identities has been the subject of extensive ethnographic and historical research in
European and South American soccer (e.g., Giulianotti, Bonney, & Hepworth, 2005). In the
United States, studies in intercollegiate athletics have suggested that certain fans are prone to
consider aggressive actions against rival players, fans, and coaches, particularly if granted
anonymity (e.g., Havard, Wann, & Ryan, 2013; Wann et al., 1999; Wann et al., 2003).

A subtler manifestation of prejudice against outgroups is relationship discrimination,

where one is negatively disposed to social relationships with others bearing a particular trait or
identity characteristic (Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995). Yet, relationship discrimination based on
sports fan identification has yet to attract researchers’ attention beyond the bystander effect,
where for example, Levine and colleagues (2005) demonstrated English soccer fans’ resistance
to helping a stranger in rival apparel. A few other studies have demonstrated fans’ willingness to
discriminate against sponsors of rivals in various sporting contexts such as intercollegiate
athletics, European soccer, and NASCAR (Bee & Dalakas, 2015; Bergkvist, 2012; Dalakas &
Levin, 2005). Despite the mounting evidence for a range of negative outcomes associated with
rivalry in sports, how fans’ reaction to rivals might differ across various sports is relatively
unknown.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 6

Sport Variation

To date, rivalry research in North America has been highly concentrated on

intercollegiate sports with a few exceptions (cf., Cikara et al., 2011; Kilduff, 2014). Likewise,
the only comparison of fans’ rivalry perceptions between sports is in the context of college
football and basketball. Havard, Reams, and Gray (2013) found that college football fans
perceived the rival school to have lower academic prestige compared to the perceptions of
college basketball fans; yet no difference between the sports’ fans was found when comparing
their impressions of the rival’s performance in indirect competition (i.e., games against teams
other than the fan’s favorite team), nor sportsmanship or sense of satisfaction when the fan’s
favorite team defeated the rival.

Although the previous rivalry work in intercollegiate athletics is both interesting and
informative, several key differences to professional sport warrant more direct rivalry research
within this context. Most obvious is that collegiate players are ‘amateurs’ and generally limited
to four years with a particular team, which means the entire roster turns over much more
frequently in college sports compared to professional teams. Given that several rivalry
antecedents are aligned with players (e.g., star power, defining moments, competition for
personnel; Tyler & Cobbs, 2015), this extreme difference in the labor market may influence how
fans of the two sporting contexts perceive and react to rivalry. Secondly, many fans of college
sports—specifically students, alumni, faculty and university staff—have a more defined identity
as related to the broader organization (i.e., university) compared to North American professional
sports, where fans’ identity as a connection to the team is less formal. With rivalry being defined
as a threat to one’s identity (Tyler & Cobbs, 2015), this difference in the formality of role
identity between college and professional sports fans necessitates investigation of rivalry across
both sporting contexts.

While comparisons of rivalry by sport are sparse, or nonexistent in professional sports,

fans of different sports have been known to harbor divergent motivations as well as reactions
while spectating. For example, in a study of consumer acceptance of advertising during sporting
events, NASCAR fans were significantly more receptive than American football fans to
commercialization (Levin, Cobbs, Beasley, & Manolis, 2013). Wann, Grieve, Zapalac, and Pease
(2008) studied variations in fans’ motivation for following professional baseball, football,
hockey, basketball, wrestling, figure skating, gymnastics, boxing, auto racing, tennis, golf, and
college basketball and football. The authors segmented these sports’ fans into three different
categorical comparisons: individual versus team, aggressive versus nonaggressive, and stylistic
versus non-stylistic. The study found that fans of team sports were more motivated by group
affiliation and self-esteem when compared to fans of individual sports, but these identity
motivations did not generally differ between team sports. However, the study’s results did
indicate differences in the group affiliation and self-esteem motivations between aggressive and
non-aggressive sports, with football and hockey—among other sports—categorized as
aggressive, and basketball and baseball considered non-aggressive. These findings are aligned
with prior research that suggests a positive relationship between a sport’s aggression and fans’
physiological arousal in situations where social identity is salient (Branscombe & Wann, 1992).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 7

As pointed out by Wann and colleagues (2003), application of the framework for
affective aggression (Anderson, Anderson, & Deuser, 1996) to the sporting context provides a
theoretical frame for the relationships among identity, aggression, and reactions to rivalry.
Within the theory, input variables such as personal traits (e.g., team identification) influence
physiological arousal and accessible cognitions such as aggression scripts in violent sports,
which then magnify the immediate appraisal of threat. Given that perceived threat is central to
rivalry (Tyler & Cobbs, 2015), aggressive sports—such as football and hockey—seem more
likely to spark especially antagonistic responses from fans. Furthermore, the fans most likely to
be aroused by the perceived threat of a rival are those who share a high degree of identification
with their favorite team as a personal trait (Wann et al., 2003). Accordingly, we offer two
hypotheses regarding acrimonious reactions to rivals in professional sports based on affective
aggression; the first of which (H1) has yet to be tested until now, and the second of which (H2) is
supported by results in another sporting context (i.e., college sports).

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Within North American professional sports, animosity toward rivals
in relatively aggressive sports (e.g., the NFL and NHL) will be more severe than in
less aggressive sports (e.g., MLB, MLS, and NBA).

Hypothesis 2 (H2): Within North American professional sports, animosity toward rivals
is more severe for fans with a comparatively higher level of identification with their
favorite team.

Method

To compare fans’ reactions to rivals across sports, we composed five versions of an

online Qualtrics survey matching the five major professional leagues in North America: Major
League Baseball (MLB), Major League Soccer (MLS), the National Basketball Association
(NBA), the National Football League (NFL), and the National Hockey League (NHL). Apart
from the teams included for each league, the surveys were identical. To recruit a diverse range of
fans by team affiliation, messages were posted to online fan message boards for each team in
each of the five leagues, similar to the procedure employed by Havard, Wann, and Ryan (2013)
and Tyler and Cobbs (2017). A total of 4,828 usable surveys were submitted with the highest
proportion from the NFL (N = 1566) and the least from the NBA (N = 436). A vast majority of
respondents were male (91.5%) and had attained some college education (74.2%); one in five
respondents had engaged in graduate level education (19.8%). The mean age of survey
respondents was 27.8 years (SD = 8.7).

Following participant consent per IRB protocol, respondents were asked to select their
favorite team, complete a measure of fan identification (Mael & Ashforth, 1992; M = 4.90/7.00,
SD = 1.10; α = .77), and name their favorite team’s top rival. Subsequently, the rival’s name was
piped into question sets that followed. Using previously validated 7-point scales ranging from
strongly disagree to strongly agree (Dalakas & Melancon, 2012; Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001;
Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995), we measured schadenfreude (M = 3.46, SD = 1.72) and
disidentification (M = 3.86, SD = 1.60) toward the top rival of the respondent’s favorite team, as
well as prejudice (M = 4.93, SD = 1.55) and relationship discrimination (M = 3.13, SD = 1.32)
against the rival team’s fans. The measure of schadenfreude contained four items (α = .87), such

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 8

as ‘I will feel joy if the [rival team] stadium suffers damage.’ The measure of disidentification
contained three items (α = .85), such as ‘When someone praises the [rival] team, it feels like a
personal insult.’ The measure of prejudice contained four items (α = .88), such as ‘[rival team]’s
fans are more obnoxious than the fans of a typical team.’ Finally, the measure of relationship
discrimination contained seven items (α = .87), such as ‘I would be less likely to marry a(n)
[rival team] fan than a fan of a typical team.’ The full list of items can be found in Appendix A,
and correlations between the measured variables are listed in Table 1. Descriptive statistics by
league can be found in Table 2 and charted in Figure 1. To manage survey length, the scales for
schadenfreude, prejudice, and discrimination were randomly presented to respondents so that
each respondent was only asked to complete two of the three blocks of items.

Table 1

Correlation matrix

Disidentification Prejudice Discrimination Identification^

Schadenfreude 0.52 0.44 0.54 0.27

Disidentification 0.47 0.49 0.52

Prejudice 0.47 0.30

Discrimination 0.30

^ Identification with favorite team

Note. All correlations significant, p < .01

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 9

Table 2

Descriptive statistics by league

Schadenfreude Disidentification Prejudice Discrimination

N Mean (SD) N Mean (SD) N Mean (SD) N Mean (SD)

NFL 997 3.85 (1.72) 1424 4.11 (1.58) 984 5.10 (1.50) 980 3.33 (1.35)

NHL 964 3.25** (1.66) 1403 3.87** (1.55) 965 5.12 (1.46) 951 3.12** (1.28)

MLB 537 3.29** (1.63) 781 3.71** (1.61) 544 4.78** (1.63) 530 3.01** (1.29)

NBA 277 3.00** (1.76) 390 3.53** (1.68) 266 4.60** (1.62) 268 2.78** (1.25)

MLS 310 3.54* (1.73) 442 3.63** (1.59) 305 4.30** (1.60) 297 2.99** (1.37)

Statistical difference comparisons to the NFL, * p < .05, ** p < .01

Figure 1

Acrimonious reactions to rival by league

Mean (7-point scale)

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 10

Results

The results reveal a strong pattern of greater animosity toward rivals among NFL fans
compared with fans of other leagues. Across three of the four measures of rivalry outcomes, fans
of NFL teams scored the highest mean compared to fans of teams in other sports. Only in their
prejudice toward rivals did fans of one other league (NHL) match NFL fans’ distain. A
multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) demonstrated statistical differences among the
leagues on each of the four outcome measures (F = 12.84 to 24.08, all p < .01). Further details of
fans’ differing reactions to rivals by league were uncovered using the Bonferroni procedure for
multiple comparisons. Results of statistical comparison tests to the NFL can be found in Table 2.

Schadenfreude

As displayed in Table 2, NFL fans exhibit significantly higher schadenfreude toward

rivals when compared to fans of teams in all other professional leagues. In other words, NFL
fans take more joy in their rival’s misfortune than do fans in other sports. Interestingly, the fans
closest in schadenfreude to those in the NFL were MLS fans, where their level of schadenfreude
was significantly greater than fans in the NBA (p < .01) and marginally greater than NHL fans (p
= .07). There was no statistical difference in schadenfreude between fans of MLS and MLB
teams, nor a difference in schadenfreude between MLB teams’ fans and those in the NHL or
NBA. Fans of teams in the NBA recorded the lowest levels of schadenfreude, though only
significantly different (i.e., lower) from NFL and MLS teams’ fans.

Disidentification

Recall that disidentification is a measurement of the degree to which a fan’s identity is

related to opposition to a particular outgroup (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001). As with
schadenfreude, NFL fans exhibited significantly greater disidentification with their team’s top
rival when compared to fans in all four other major professional leagues. Fans of NHL teams
revealed the next most disidentification with rivals, with the difference to both NBA and MLS
fans being statistically significant (p ≤ .05). Fans of MLB teams reported the third highest
disidentification but their difference to fans in other leagues was only significant versus the NFL
(i.e., less than NFL fans). Again, as with schadenfreude, NBA fans displayed the lowest level of
disidentification when compared to fans of other professional sports, though the difference was
only significant versus NFL and NHL fans.

Prejudice against rival fans

Prejudice against rival fans is the only one of four outcome variables where NFL fans did
not score higher than fans in all other leagues. In this measure of negative judgment against rival
fans, NHL and NFL fans recorded means that were statistically identical (5.12 and 5.10,
respectively, with no significant difference). Fans in both the NHL and NFL indicated prejudice
toward rival fans that was significantly greater than that of fans in the other three professional
leagues (i.e., MLB, MLS, and NBA). Once again, baseball fans scored in the middle of the five
leagues with a mean prejudice significantly greater than MLS fans but no difference to NBA
fans. For prejudice against rivals, fans of MLS teams scored the lowest, with significant

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 11

differences to each leagues’ fans except the NBA. This particular finding for MLS is surprising
in light of their fans’ second highest score in schadenfreude toward rivals and the overall
correlation between prejudice and schadenfreude (r = .44).

Prejudice against rival fans was also the strongest of the four measures of animosity
within this study, and the only measure with an overall mean (M = 4.93, SD = 1.55) above the
scale midpoint of four. Considering the sizeable standard deviation, a substantial proportion of
fans agree (somewhat to strongly) with prejudice statements regarding rivals. Specifically,
between 23% (MLS) and 39% (NFL, NHL) of leagues’ fans had average prejudice scores in the
agreeable scale range (i.e., 5-7).

Relationship discrimination

The fourth and final acrimonious rivalry outcome measured was discrimination in
interpersonal relationships (Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995). Once again, NFL fans recorded
significantly higher results than each of the four other professional leagues. Also following the
pattern for schadenfreude and disidentification, fans of NBA teams demonstrated the lowest
mean level of discrimination in their potential relationships with rival fans. However, only the
difference in discrimination compared to NHL fans—the league with the second highest
discrimination—was statistically significant. In other words, no significant difference in
discrimination toward rivals was found when comparing fans of teams in MLB, MLS, and the
NBA.

Relationship discrimination was the weakest of the four measures of animosity employed
in this study. The overall mean (M = 3.13, SD = 1.32) was between the scale points of
‘somewhat disagree’ and ‘neither agree nor disagree.’ Although a considerable proportion of
fans hold prejudice toward rivals, relatively few seem willing to discriminate—or at least admit
discrimination—in their relationships based on professional sports rivalry.

As related to H1, the comprehensive results support that animosity toward rivals in the
NFL is greater than in other professional sports leagues; however, the results are somewhat
mixed for the NHL. While professional hockey fans scored either first or second (behind the
NFL) within the five leagues in rival animosity on three of the four measures, the difference to
other leagues was only consistently significant versus NBA fans, who generally registered the
lowest rivalry animosity. Consequently, H1 is partially supported.

Identification with favorite team

While the focus of this study is primarily on the variation in fans’ animosity toward rivals
across North American professional leagues, several previous studies have demonstrated a
relationship between perceptions of rivalry and fan identification, defined by the psychological
connection to a team (Havard, Eddy, & Ryan, 2016; Wann et al., 2003). Accordingly, the current
study also included a measure of fan identification with respondents’ favorite team (Mael &
Ashforth, 1992). Although a strong correlation existed in the overall sample between fans’
identification with their favorite team and the four measures of fans’ animosity toward rivals (r =

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 12

.27 to .52; see Table 1 for full correlation matrix), the differences in identification by league
were not as stark as those found in the four outcome measures of rivalry animosity.

Fans of NFL teams did record the highest mean level of identification with their favorite
team, but the difference by league was only significant when compared to fans of MLB teams,
who scored the lowest in favorite team identification. That single difference was the only
comparison of fan identification by league that demonstrated statistical significance. In other
words, there was no difference in fans’ mean identification with their favorite team among the
NFL (4.98, SD = 1.07), NBA (4.92, SD = 1.09), NHL (4.88, SD = 1.12), and MLS (4.87, SD =
1.04), nor among the NBA, NHL, MLS, and MLB (4.79, SD = 1.14).

To examine H2, which predicted animosity would be more severe among highly
identified fans, we created two fan identification groups (i.e., low, high) through a median split
of the full sample by respondents’ fan identification score (median = 5.0; low identification
group < 5.0, high identification group ≥ 5.0). Doing so allowed us to test H2 by comparing fans
with lower identification (M = 3.95) to fans with higher identification (M = 5.71) based on their
acrimonious reactions to rivals. As expected given prior research and the variables’ strong
correlation, the comparison of high versus low fan identification groups (MANOVA)
demonstrated that highly identified fans harbor significantly greater animosity toward rivals
(Havard et al., 2016; Wann et al., 1999; Wann et al., 2003), as measured here by schadenfreude
(F [1, 3084] = 144.37), disidentification (F [1, 4439] = 877.08), prejudice (F [1, 3063] = 109.06),
and discrimination (F [1, 3024] = 154.12). When dissecting the sample by league, the same
significant differences on all four rivalry outcomes between fans of lower and higher team
identification were substantiated within each of the five professional leagues. In other words, H2
was supported overall and separately within each league. Regardless of sporting context, fan
identification appears to have a strong positive relationship to rivalry animosity. Yet, fan
identification seems to vary much less across leagues than does the acrimonious reactions to
rivals.

Discussion and Implications

The results of this study of rivalry effects across five professional sports offer four fairly
robust findings for scholars, sport marketers, and event managers. First, fans of NFL teams hold
more animosity toward their top rival than fans of any other major sports league in North
America. Second, fans of NBA teams generally harbor less animosity toward their rival
compared to other professional sports context. Third, while some fans hold clear prejudice
toward rivals, overall many fans do not express high levels of acrimony directed at rivals. Fourth,
fan identification is positively related to fans’ reactions to rivalry across all sports studied. These
results support the notion that while fan identification is relatively universal in sports, certain fan
phenomena vary by sporting context (Wann et al., 2008). Therefore, marketers should be
cautious in generalizing assumptions of rivalry effects across sports, as there are in fact
differences in how fans of different leagues respond to rivalry.

The conclusions that fans of NFL teams exhibit more rival animosity and fans of NBA
teams generally exhibit less compared to other professional leagues are represented in the bar
chart of Figure 1. The chart visually demonstrates NFL fans’ considerably higher scores on three

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 13

of the four measures of rivalry animosity, as well as NBA fans’ lower scores on three of the four
measures. The highest marks of NFL fans coupled with the generally high marks of NHL fans
implies some support for the affective aggression framework applied to sports (Anderson et al.,
1996; Wann et al., 2003), as well as associated suggestions in the literature that a sport’s
aggressiveness is positively related to fans’ psychological arousal (Branscombe & Wann, 1992).
While our study admittedly does not measure perceptions of a sport’s aggressiveness or fans’
psychological state, past research has labeled football and hockey as more aggressive than other
team sports (Wann et al., 2008), and rivalry has been conceptualized as an acute psychological
threat to fans’ social identity (Havard, 2014; Tyler & Cobbs, 2015). Therefore, sports or perhaps
even teams with more aggressive styles might expect enhanced animosity amongst rival fans due
to heightened perceptions of threat. Such a relationship warrants further research and testing, but
the results of this study provide preliminary support for the hypothesis.

These findings are instructive for marketers of American football, and to a lesser extent,
ice hockey. While the violence of a sport may draw attention, marketers should be cautious when
utilizing imagery of vicious hits or other extra aggressive play in promotional materials,
particularly when the opposition within the imagery is a rival team or when the target for such
advertising is highly identified fans. Attributes of the sport beyond violence, such as speed,
grace, precision, tradition, or the events’ entertainment and socialization value may be more
appropriate source material for promotional campaigns that include a top rival in the NFL or
NHL. Furthermore, within these relatively violent sports it is worthwhile to consider
promotional messaging that models appropriate sportsmanlike attitudes and behavior toward
rivals.

The finding that fans of NBA teams generally harbor less animosity toward rivals than
fans in other professional leagues provides a potentially fruitful avenue for future research.
While NBA fans’ scores on three of the four rivalry outcome measures were indeed lower than
all other leagues, the statistical differences were not as definitive as NFL fans on the higher side
of animosity. As a result, more research is needed to dismiss the ambiguity and fully substantiate
this study’s evidence that suggests less animosity toward rivals in the NBA. Furthermore,
uncovering why professional basketball fans might be less hostile toward rivals compared to
other sports could help sport administrators better moderate negative outcomes of rivalry. One
possibility is the assertion that the NBA is a star driven league (Berri & Schmidt, 2006), and star
power is one of the least acrimonious antecedents to rivalry. Although Tyler and Cobbs (2015)
included star power as one of 11 rivalry antecedents, no study has yet been undertaken to
examine the relationship between rivalry’s potential antecedents and associated outcomes.
Conducting such a study could shed light on rivalries in the NBA as well as precipitating factors
to the other differences in negative outcomes between leagues uncovered in this study.

For the NBA, the findings within this study suggest the league and team marketers can
more overtly promote team rivalries with less concern for fan acrimony compared to other
leagues. Professional basketball fans seem less inclined to react negatively to their favorite
team’s rival. Unfortunately, we do not yet know if NBA fans also exhibit less of the positive
influences of rivalry (i.e., increased demand) compared to other leagues because no such
comparison study has been initiated. If the league—perhaps because of basketball’s less violent
nature—can realize the benefits of rivalry without the potential drawbacks, marketers would be

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 14

wise to strategically enhance rivalries within the NBA. To do so, the league might consider
reviving Rivalry Week as an annual tradition at a specified point in the season (NBA, 2005),
similar to those regularly occurring in MLS and college football (McGee, 2016). The MLS
version has engaged beer-brand Heineken as a league-wide sponsor to help further promote the
event (MLS, 2017). Another tactic subtly utilized in the past by the NBA that could be revived
and made more overt as related to rivalry is the back-to-back scheduling of rival teams (versus
other opponents) as part of a broadcast doubleheader (Nathan, 2010). This suggestion aligns
directly with Havard’s (2014) research on fans’ tendency to glorify their rival’s failure and
associated interest in watching the rival team in indirect competition.

The inclusion of four different but related measures of fans’ reactions toward rivals in
this investigation enables a more robust conclusion on the comparison of rivalry outcomes across
professional sports. By examining four measures, not only do patterns among sports leagues
emerge, but we can also compare the propensity for certain rivalry outcomes, given each was
measured on a 7-point, disagree-agree scale. While certain fans in each league were agreeable to
schadenfreude, disidentification, prejudice, and discrimination against rivals, the majority of fans
across professional leagues were either neutral or disagreed with such animosity toward rivals. It
is important to note that football and—to a lesser extent—hockey fans were particularly likely to
agree compared to their counterparts following teams in other sports, but it is equally important
to realize that such animosity is limited to a subset of fans. This finding aligns with the results of
Wann et al.'s (2003) and Havard et al.'s (2013) studies of fans’ willingness to commit aggressive
acts toward rivals. Both of these studies found the vast majority of fans to be unwilling to
commit aggressive acts against rivals. However, each study also demonstrated that a minority
subset of fans would indeed entertain actions such as tripping, breaking the leg, or even
murdering (in two cases; Wann et al., 2003) a rival coach or player.

The less drastic measures of animosity in the current study were reflected by higher mean
scores compared to Havard et al. (2013) and Wann et al. (2003), but the mean of three of the four
animosity measures employed here were still below the scale midpoint. Only prejudice toward
rivals registered an overall mean in the agreeable range of the scale. This result provides some
evidence that fans will negatively prejudge their rival’s fans (e.g., as obnoxious, of questionable
character, and intolerant), and to a lesser extent fans will admit identity enhancement/derogation
with rival’s failure/success (i.e., disidentification). However, fans are less inclined to admit joy
in rival’s misfortune (i.e., schadenfreude) or overtly discriminate in potential relationships with
rival fans. Given this result, future researchers might further investigate how prejudice against
rival fans may, or may not, influence social life outside of the sports arena. Accordingly, the
evidence for some degree of both disidentification and schadenfreude related to rivalry—
particularly in the NFL—support the theory of GORFing, where fans feel glory out of the
reflected failure of a rival (Havard, 2014). As mentioned above in relation to the NBA, sport
marketers may be able to capitalize on such emotions by encouraging their fans’ consumption of
the rival’s games, even when the rival is not competing against their own team. However, on
such occasions where fans could be interacting with rival fans, it is important to note the
potential for adverse reactions exposed in this study, particularly in the context of relatively
violent sports. In such cases, event planners should give attention to security protocol, a clear
communication of the social expectation of sportsmanship, and perhaps even a structured plan

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 15

for intergroup contact that produces personalized interaction, which is known to reduce prejudice
(Dovidio & Gaertner, 1999).

This study’s results on fan identification clearly support past research that suggested
highly identified fans are more prone to negative rivalry outcomes (Wann et al., 1999; Wann et
al., 2003, Wann et al., 2016). While this finding is not unexpected nor novel, the further
substantiation of this relationship in the broad professional sports context of this study provides
confidence to future researchers, marketers, and event managers that regardless of sporting
context, there is a potential downside to highly identified fans in terms of rival animosity. Much
of the focus of sports marketing in practice has been to develop and encourage fan identification,
which manifests in several positive business outcomes (e.g., Gwinner & Swanson, 2003; Havard
et al., 2016). However, Europe and South America in particular experience the drawbacks to
over-identified fans that react with hostility when their fan identity and associated status is
threatened (Giulianotti et al., 2005). Consequently, sport administrators need to be cognizant of
the conditions under which certain fans may resort to violence or otherwise anti-social behavior.
The findings of this study demonstrate that although negative reactions to rivals are mostly
moderate across a wide sample of professional sports fans, feelings of prejudice against rivals are
worth considering in several leagues, and football fans are particularly prone to adverse
responses to rivalry.

Limitations

While this study has several limitations, perhaps the most notable are the exclusive focus
on rival teams and US and Canadian professional sports. We only make comparisons of
animosity toward rivals in different sports, and we do not compare animosity of rivals to
animosity toward non-rival opponents. While the affective aggression framework suggests
violent sports, such as football and ice hockey, may contribute to fan acrimony even without the
presence of a rival, it also implies that both heightened fan identification and the threat posed by
a rival opponent contribute additional sparks to such acrimony. Our current study was not
designed to make the comparison in animosity toward rivals versus non-rival teams. Moreover,
several other potential moderating effects to animosity beyond sporting context and fan
identification are worthwhile considerations for future researchers but were not included here;
examples include the progression of the season, favorite or rival team success, and media
attention.

This study represents one of the broadest samples in the current rivalry literature, still no
comparison among leagues would be complete without mention of the need for future research in
other prominent professional sports contexts outside of the US and Canada. Specifically, soccer
in Europe and South America has provided numerous anecdotal instances of intense rivalry (e.g.,
Benkwitz & Molnar, 2012; Dmowski, 2013). Yet, the evidence and conclusions drawn from this
study are bound by the sporting histories and fan experiences in North American sport, which
differs in many important facets from other sporting cultures.

Conceivably just as limiting as the geographical and cultural boundaries of this study is
the gender disparity within the study’s sample. Although recruiting respondents from team
message boards provides an opportunity to construct a diverse sample in terms of representation

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 16

from all teams within a league, such a strategy also entails diversity limitations in representing
female fans. Given research that has demonstrated some differences in rivalry consumption
patterns between male and female fans (Havard et al., 2016), an important caveat to the research
findings in this paper is the highly male sample. Our supplemental analysis found no gender
differences in the results reported here, but a less skewed sample of each league’s fans would be
more ideal to properly represent female fans’ animosity toward rivals.

Finally, while four different measures of fans’ reaction to rivals provides a degree of
robustness to the study’s findings, each of the measures employed here were self-reported
impressions and not observations of actual fan behavior or interaction with rivals. Self-reported
measures provide a degree of research expediency and can be informative in a nascent field such
as rivalry. However, self-reported data is clearly subjective to the fan’s own interpretation, as
well as focus and honesty in completing the survey instrument. Ultimately, observation or other
measures of actual fan behavior might provide a more accurate and objective picture of rivalry
responses in professional sports. Furthermore, our collective measures of animosity were not
designed specifically to distinguish between rival team members and fans as the object of
animosity. Related to future measures or observations of actual fan behavior, researchers may
consider noting in more detail the object of such behavior.

Conclusion

The purpose of this paper was to explore the differences between professional sports
leagues as related to rivalry and the animosity their fans feel toward rivals. To do so, we
surveyed almost five thousand fans across five leagues in the US and Canada. Using a series of
statistical comparison tests, we found that NFL fans exhibit significantly higher animosity
toward rivals than fans of teams in the NHL, MLB, MLS, and NBA. Accordingly, the theorized
connection between a sport’s level of aggression and fans’ reaction to rivals warrants continued
consideration. This research also supports previous studies on fan identification, where highly
identified fans are more prone to acrimonious responses to rivals than are lower identified fans
across all five league contexts. Future research should still be conducted to substantiate whether
fans of NBA teams actually harbor less animosity toward rivals, as was generally implied by this
study’s results. Scholars should also extend these findings comparing North American leagues to
examinations of rivalries in professional sports on other continents. Doing so might begin to
uncover whether animosity towards rivals differs based on cultural context, sporting history, or
another element influential to rivalry.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 17

References

Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., & McLaughlin-Volpe, T. (2004). An organizing framework for
collective identity: Articulation and significance of multidimensionality. Psychological
Bulletin, 130, 80-114.

Bee, C., & Dalakas, V. (2015). Rivalries and sponsor affiliation: Examining the effects of social
identity and argument strength on responses to sponsorship-related advertising messages.
Journal of Marketing Communications, 21, 408-424.

Benkwitz, A., & G. Molnar (2012). Interpreting and exploring football fan rivalries: An
overview. Soccer & Society, 13(4), 479-494.

Bergkvist, L. (2012). The flipside of the sponsorship coin: Do you still buy the beer when the
brewer underwrites a rival team? Journal of Advertising Research, 52(1), 65-73.

Berri, D. J., & Schmidt, M. B. (2006). On the road with the National Basketball Association’s
superstar externality. Journal of Sports Economics, 7(4), 347–358.

Borland, J., & MacDonald, R. (2003). Demand for sport. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19,
478-502.

Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1992). Physiological arousal and reactions to outgroup
members during competitions that implicate an important social identity. Aggressive
Behavior, 18(2), 85–93.

Brunious, C. (2014, November 28). Rivalry games offer sponsors a unique opportunity. The
Fields of Green. Retrieved from http://thefieldsofgreen.com/2014/11/28/rivalry-games-
offer-sponsors-a-unique-opportunity/

Cikara, M., Botvinick, M. M., & Fiske, S. T. (2011). Us versus them: Social identity shapes
neural responses to intergroup competition and harm. Psychological Science, 22(3), 306-
313.

Dalakas, V., & Levin, A. M. (2005). The balance theory domino: How sponsorships may elicit
negative consumer attitudes. Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 91-97.

Dalakas, V., & Melancon, J. P. (2012). Fan identification, schadenfreude toward hated rivals,
and the mediating effects of importance of winning index. Journal of Services Marketing,
26(1), 51-59.

Dmowski, S. (2013). Geographical typology of European football rivalries. Soccer & Society,
14(3), 331-343.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 18

Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1999). Reducing prejudice: Combating intergroup biases.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(4), 101-105.

Elsbach, K. D., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Defining who you are by what you’re not:
Organizational disidentification and the National Rifle Association. Organization
Science, 12(4), 393–413.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison process, Human Relations, 7, 114-140.

Guilianotti, R., Bonney, N., & Hepworth, M. (Eds.). (2005). Football, violence and social
identity. New York: Routledge.

Gwinner, K., & Swanson, S. R. (2003). A model of fan identification: Antecedents and
sponsorship outcomes. Journal of Services Marketing, 17(3), 275-294.

Havard, C. T. (2014). Glory out of reflected failure: The examination of how rivalry affects sport
fans. Sport Management Review, 17, 243-253.

Havard, C. T., Eddy, T. W., & Ryan, T. D. (2016). Examining the impact of team identification
and gender on rival perceptions and consumption intentions of intercollegiate athletics
fans. Journal of Applied Sport Management, 8(2), 33–49.

Havard, C. T., Gray, D. P., Gould, J., Sharp, L. A., & Schaffer, J. J. (2013). Development and
validation of the Sport Rivalry Fan Perception Scale (SRFPS). Journal of Sport Behavior,
36(1), 45-65.

Havard, C. T., Wann, D. L., & Ryan, T. D. (2013). Investigating the impact of conference
realignment on rivalry in intercollegiate athletics, Sport Marketing Quarterly, 22(4), 224-
234.

Heider, F. (1958) The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley

Kilduff, G. J. (2014). Driven to win: Rivalry, motivation, and performance. Social Psychological
and Personality Science, 5(8), 944-952.

Kilduff, G., Elfenbein, H., & Staw, B. (2010). The psychology of rivalry: A relationally
dependent analysis of competition, Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 943-969.

Lee, M. J. (1985). From rivalry to hostility among sport fans. Quest, 37(1) 38-49.

Levin, A., Cobbs, J., Beasley, F., & Manolis, C. (2013). Ad nauseam? Sports fans' acceptance of
commercial messages during televised sporting events. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 22(4)
193-202.

Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Reicher, S. (2005). Identity and emergency intervention:
How social group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shape helping
behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(4), 443-453.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 19

Maass, A., Salvi, D., Arcuri, L., & Semin, G. (1989). Language use in intergroup contexts: The
linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 981-993.

Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the
reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 13(2), 103-123.

McDonald, M., & Rascher, D. A. (2000). Does bat day make cents?: The effect of promotions on
the demand for baseball. Journal of Sport Management, 14, 8-27.

McGee, R. (2016, November 21). Ready for rivalry week? We thought so. ESPN. Retrieved from
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18099122/rivalry-week-here-again

MLS (2017). Heineken rivalry week. MLSsoccer.com. Retrieved from

https://www.mlssoccer.com/rivalry-week

Nathan, D. (2010). We were about winning: Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, and the rivalry that
remade the NBA. In D. K. Wiggins & R. P. Rodgers (Eds.), Rivals: Legendary matchups
that made sports history (pp. 69-107). Fayetteville, AR: The University of Arkansas
Press.

NBA, 2005. The Rivalries Heat Up. NBA.com. Retrieved from

http://www.nba.com/features/rivalryweek_050220.html

Palmer, B. (2013, August 2). How much is a sports rivalry worth? Slate. Retrieved from
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/rivalries/2013/08/sports_rivalries_the_economics_
of_crosstown_hatred.html

Pettigrew, T. F., & Meertens, R. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in western Europe.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57-75.

Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 63, 224–237.

Tainsky, S., & Jasielec, M. (2014). Television viewership of out-of-market games in league
markets: Traditional demand shifters and local team influence. Journal of Sport
Management, 28, 94-108.

Tajfel, H. (1969). Cognitive aspects of prejudice, Journal of Social Issues, 25(4), 75-97.

Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behavior. Social Science Information, 13(2), 65-
93.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin &
S. Worchel (eds.). The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-48). Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth, Inc.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 20

Turner, J. C. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup
behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 5-34.

Tyler, B. D., & Cobbs, J. (2015). Rival conceptions of rivalry: Why some competitions mean
more than others. European Sport Management Quarterly, 15(2), 227-248.

Tyler, B. D., & Cobbs, J. (2017). All Rivals Are Not Equal: Clarifying Misrepresentations and
Discerning Three Core Properties of Rivalry. Journal of Sport Management, 31(1), 1-14.

Wann, D. L., & Dolan, T. J. (1994). Attributions of highly identified sports spectators. Journal of
Social Psychology, 134(6), 783-792.

Wann, D. L., Grieve G. F., Zapalac K. R., & Peace G. D. (2008). Motivational profiles of sport
fans of different sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 17(1), 6-19.

Wann, D. L., Havard, C. T., Grieve, F. G., Lanter, J. R., Partridge, J. A., & Zapalac, R. K.
(2016). Investigating sport rivals: Number, evaluations and relationship with team
identification. The Journal of Fandom Studies, 4(1), 71–88.

Wann, D. L., Haynes, G., McLean, B., & Pullen, P. (2003). Sport team identification and
willingness to consider anonymous acts of hostile aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 29,
406-413.

Wann, D.L., Peterson, R. R., Cothran, C., & Dykes, M. (1999). Sport fan aggression and
anonymity: The importance of team identification. Behavior and Personality: An
International Journal, 27(6), 567-602.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547

Rivalry Effects Across Sports 21

Appendix A

Items used to measure animosity toward the rival (7-point scale; strongly disagree to strongly
agree); top rival team name (as indicated by each respondent) piped into each item, and items
were presented in randomized order within blocks.

Schadenfreude (α = .87)
I will feel joy if a company that sponsors the [top rival] team goes out of business.
I will feel joy if the [top rival] coach faces legal troubles.
I will feel joy if a player from the [top rival] team gets suspended for a year, even if the
suspension was not completely deserved.
I will feel joy if the [top rival] stadium suffers damage.

Disidentification (α = .85)
When someone criticizes the [top rival] team, it feels like a personal compliment.
When the [top rival] team fails, it feels like a personal success.
When someone praises the [top rival] team, it feels like a personal insult.

Prejudice (α = .88)
I feel [top rival]'s fans are intolerant of other fans.
[Top rival]'s fans are more arrogant than the fans of a typical team.
A(n) [top rival] fan’s character is more questionable/suspect than the character of a typical fan in
the league.
[Top rival]’s fans are more obnoxious than the fans of a typical team.

Discrimination (α = .87)
[Favorite team] fans and [top rival] fans can never be really comfortable with each other, even if
they are friends.
I would not mind if a(n) [top rival] fan were appointed as my boss, assuming he/she were
suitably qualified.
I would be just as likely to hire a(n) [top rival] fan as a fan of a typical team, assuming the
candidates were equally qualified.
Assuming I were single, I would be willing to have an intimate relationship with a(n) [top rival]
fan.
I would be less likely to marry a(n) [top rival] fan than a fan of a typical team.
I would not mind if my child became a(n) [top rival] fan.
I would not mind if a(n) [top rival] fan joined my close family by marriage.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3158547