Newswise — As the annual ritual known as the NCAA's "March Madness" approaches, American sports fandom will soon reach a pinnacle as even the most disinterested may fill out their tournament bracket predictions. Social psychologist and sports fan David G. Myers now tries to explain why anyone should care—aside from the money they could potentially win from office pools.
The John Dirk Werkman Professor of Psychology at Hope College in Holland, Mich., Myers has studied the psychology of rivalries and fandom. He is the author of 13 books on social psychology topics—including INTUITION: Its Powers and Perils, which includes reports on sports intuitions.
According to Myers, theory and evidence indicate that the roots of rivalry run deep.
"There's something primal at work when the crowd erupts as the two rivals take the field. There's something tribal at work during the ensuing hours of passion, all in response to the ups and downs of a mere ball," he says. "Our ancestors, living in a world where neighboring tribes occasionally raided and pillaged one another's camps, knew that there was safety in solidarity—and those who didn't band together left fewer descendants. Whether hunting, defending, or attacking, ten hands were better than two. Dividing the world into 'us' and 'them' entails significant costs, such as racism and war, but also provides the benefits of communal solidarity. To identify us and them, our ancestors'—not so far removed from today's rabid fans'—dressed or painted themselves in group-specific costumes and colors."
As social animals, Myers reports that we humans define ourselves by our groups. "Our self-concept—our sense of who we are—consists not only of our personal attributes and attitudes, but also of our social identity," he says.
"Lacking a positive identity, many youths find pride, power, and identity in gangs. Many superpatriots define themselves by their national identities. Many 'cheese heads' find added identity in their association with the Packers. The group definition of who we are also implies who we are not. Many social psychological experiments reveal that being formed into groups, even arbitrary groups, promotes 'in-group bias'—even in children."
Just as after September 11 Americans experienced an extreme rise in patriotism, group solidarity soars when people face a common enemy " and psychological research has found that competition creates enemies, according to Myers.
"Fueled by competition and unleashed by the anonymity of a crowd, such passions can culminate in sport's worst moments—such as fans taunting opponents, screaming at umpires, even pelting referees with beer bottles," he says. "Group identification soars further with success. Fans find self-respect by their personal achievements, but also, in at least small measure, by their association with the victorious athletes who represent them. When our team wins, 'we' win. Queried after a big football victory, university students commonly report that 'we won.' Asked the outcome after a defeat, students more often reply that 'they lost.'"
Myers believes that fan identification with teams affects biology and beliefs as well. He reports that the late James Dabbs, a Georgia State University psychologist, found that male fans' testosterone levels rise with victory and drop with defeat, much as do male animals' testosterone levels after a fight over a desired mate. In studying rabid fans after Indiana University basketball games, psychologist Edward Hirt also found that fans' self-concepts also rise with victory and fall with defeat. After a loss, the fans offered bleaker assessments of their own likely performance at throwing darts, solving anagrams, and getting a date.
"When our team triumphs, we're cool," says Myers. "When things aren't going our way, it may seem as though nothing will."
And by the end of the NCAA Tournament, one group of Americans will consider themselves to be "the coolest" because of the victory by "their" team, while others will simply try to retreat home to come to grips with their defeat.
RSS