Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Rivalität (3)
- Gruppenidentität (2)
- Sportfan (2)
- identity threat (2)
- Aggressivität (1)
- Eigengruppe (1)
- Fremdgruppe (1)
- Hilfeleistung (1)
- Identitätsentwicklung (1)
- Konflikt (1)
Institute
Marketing, get ready to rumble — How rivalry promotes distinctiveness for brands and consumers
(2018)
Scholars typically advise brands to stay away from public conflict with competitors as research has focused on negative consequences - e.g., price wars, escalating hostilities, and derogation. This research distinguishes between rivalry between firms (inter-firm brand rivalry) and rivalry between consumers (inter-consumer brand rivalry). Four studies and six samples show both types of rivalry can have positive consequences for both firms and consumers. Inter-firm brand rivalry boosts perceived distinctiveness of competing brands independent of consumption, attitude, familiarity, and involvement. Inter-consumer brand rivalry increases consumer group distinctiveness, an effect mediated by brand identification and rival brand disidentification. We extend social identity theory by demonstrating that: 1) outside actors like firms can promote inter-consumer rivalry through inter-firm rivalry and 2) promoting such conflict can actually provide benefits to consumers as well as firms. The paper challenges the axiom “never knock the competition,” deriving a counter-intuitive way to accomplish one of marketing's premier objectives.
Research question: In order to reduce fan aggression surrounding rivalry games, team sport organizations often try to placate fans by downplaying the importance of the game (e.g. ‘the derby is not a war’). Drawing on the intergroup conflict literature, this research derives dual identity statements and examines their effectiveness in reducing fan aggressiveness compared to the managerial practice of downplaying rivalry.
Research methods: Three field experimental studies (one face-to-face survey and two online surveys) tested the hypotheses. Established rivalries in the German soccer league Bundesliga served as the empirical setting of the studies. The data were analyzed using ANCOVA and linear regression analyses.
Results and findings: Dual identity statements reduce fan aggressiveness compared to both downplay statements and a no-statement control condition, independent of team identification and trait aggression. Importantly, the managerial practice of downplaying rivalry appears to be counterproductive. It produces even higher levels of fan aggressiveness than making no statement, an effect caused by psychological reactance.
Implications: Sport organizations should not alienate their fan base by attempting to play down the importance of rivalry, which is an integral part of fan identity. Instead, they should strengthen the supporters’ unique identity (as fans of a particular team) while at the same time facilitating identification with the rival at a superordinate level (e.g. as joint fans of a region).
Research question: Rivalries in team sports are commonly conceptualized as a threat to the fans’ identity. Therefore, past research has mainly focused on the negative consequences. However, theoretical arguments and empirical evidence suggest that rivalry has both negative and positive effects on fans’ self-concept. This research develops and empirically tests a model which captures and integrates these dual effects of rivalry.
Research methods: Data were collected via an on-site survey at home games of eight German Bundesliga football teams (N = 571). Structural equation modeling provides strong support for the proposed model.
Results and findings: In line with previous research, the results show that rivalry threatens fans’ identity as reflected in lower public collective self-esteem in relation to supporters of the rival team. However, the results also show that there are crucial positive consequences, such as higher perceptions of public collective self-esteem in relation to supporters of non-rival opponents, perceived ingroup distinctiveness and ingroup cohesion. These positive effects are mediated through increases in disidentification with the rival and perceived reciprocity of rivalry.
Implications: We contribute to the literature by providing a more balanced view of one of team sports’ key phenomena. Our results indicate that the prevalent conceptualization of rivalry as an identity threat should be amended by the positive consequences. Our research also offers guidance for the promotion of rivalries, where the managerial focus should be on creating a perception that a rivalry is reciprocal.
Social comparison theories suggest that ingroups are strengthened whenever important outgroups are weakened (e.g., by losing status or power). It follows that ingroups have little reason to help outgroups facing an existential threat. We challenge this notion by showing that ingroups can also be weakened when relevant comparison outgroups are weakened, which can motivate ingroups to strategically offer help to ensure the outgroups' survival as a highly relevant comparison target. In three preregistered studies, we showed that an existential threat to an outgroup with high (vs. low) identity relevance affected strategic outgroup helping via two opposing mechanisms. The potential demise of a highly relevant outgroup increased participants’ perceptions of ingroup identity threat, which was positively related to helping. At the same time, the outgroup’s misery evoked schadenfreude, which was negatively related to helping. Our research exemplifies a group's secret desire for strong outgroups by underlining their importance for identity formation.
