Translation and Initial Validation of the Portuguese Version of the Sport Spectator Identification Scale

Sport scientists have shown an increased interest in the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of sport fans in recent years (Wann, Melnick, Russell, & Pease, 2001). For instance, investigators have facilitated our understanding of attendance decisions (Williamson, Zhang, Pease, & Gaa, 2003; Zhang, Smith, Pease, & Lam, 1998), coping strategies (Wann & Grieve, 2008; Wann, Grieve, Waddill, & Martin, 2008), psychological well-being (Wann, 2006b), and motivation of sport fans (Funk, Mahony, & Ridinger, 2002; Wann, Grieve, Zapalac, & Pease, 2008; Wann, Schrader, & Wilson, 1999). However, perhaps the greatest advances have come in our understanding of the role of team identification in fan attitudes and behaviors. Team identification concerns the extent to which a fan feels a psychological connection to a team (Wann & Branscombe, 1993), that is, the extent to which the fan believes that the role of team follower is a central component of his or her social identity. A number of researchers have examined the causes and consequences of sport team identification. In terms of antecedents of team identification, Wann's (2006a) review of the literature led him to conclude that there are three general categories of causes of identification: psychological, environmental, and team-related. Psychological consequences include the need for belonging and affiliation (Gwinner & Swanson, 2003; Sutton, McDonald, Milne, & Cimperman, 1997) and distinctiveness (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). In terms of environmental causes, research suggests that the socialization process (Crawford, 2003; James, 2001) and the salience of rival teams can impact team identification (Ashforth & Mael, Wann & Pool, 2007). Finally, team-related causes include organizational characteristics such as the image and tradition of the team (Sutton et al., 1997; Underwood, Bond, & Baer, 2001), team success (Fisher & Wakefield, 1998; Wann, Tucker, & Schrader, 1996), and player attributes such as attractiveness (Fisher & Wakefield, 1998). Researchers have also identified a number of consequences that are impacted by the fan's level of team identification (Deitz-Uhler & Lanter, 2008). For instance, research indicates that team identification is a strong predictor of attendance (Fisher & Wakefield, 1998). Further, higher levels of aggression have been found among persons with high levels of team identification (Lanter, 2000; Wann, Carlson, & Schrader, 1999). And finally, research indicates that level of team identification is a significant predictor of positive and negative postgame affect (Madrigal, 2003; Wann, Dolan, McGeorge, & Allison, 1994). Because of the importance of team identification to sport fandom, researchers have attempted to develop valid and reliable measures of assessing this variable. Although several different measures have been constructed (e.g., Dimmock, Grove, & Eklund, 2005; Mahony, Madrigal, & Howard, 2000; Trail & James, 2001), the most widely utilized instrument appears to be the Sport Spectator Identification Scale developed by Wann and Branscombe (1993). This seven-item Likertscale has strong reliability and validity (see Wann & Branscombe, 1993), and has been used in dozens of studies (Wann et al., 2001). Recently, investigators have begun to expand the usability of the Sport Spectator Identification Scale by translating the original scale into different languages, including Greek (Theodorakis, Vlachopoulos, Wann, Afthinos, & Nassis, 2006), German (Straub, 1995), Japanese (Uemukai, Takenouchi, Okuda, Matsumoto, & Yamanaka, 1995), and Dutch (Melnick & Wann, 2004). There are a number of advantages to having multiple translations of a particular scale. For instance, this allows for greater generalizability of the instrument. Further, researchers can conduct cross-cultural research on team identification in different environments (Melnick & Wann, 2004; Theodorakis & Wann, 2008). …