Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction among participants in health-affiliated charity sport events

Abstract

PurposeUnderstanding factors that enhance participants' satisfaction has become critical to developing effective donor retention strategies for charity sport events (CSEs). However, there is a lack of empirical research on participants' satisfaction with CSEs. The purpose of this study is to examine the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction among CSE participants and to empirically test the relationships between the proposed constructs.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 238 participants from four Relay For Life (RFL) events organized by the American Cancer Society, North Central Region in the USA. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling were conducted to analyze the measurement model and the structural model.FindingsThe results of the structural model indicated that perceived prosocial impact, sense of community and trust in CSE had significant positive effects on CSE satisfaction, while venue quality, knowledge attainment and entertainment value did not positively influence CSE satisfaction. CSE satisfaction had a positive direct effect on participant loyalty to CSE, which had a significant contribution to future participant intent.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study provide CSE directors and marketers with valuable insights into the process of how to build long-term relationships with participants by identifying factors that influence participants' satisfaction and its consequences.Originality/valueBy measuring the mediating role of CSE satisfaction, this study provides a deeper understanding of the causal pathways from the antecedents to participant loyalty through CSE satisfaction.

Why do self-identity and efficacy matter for enjoying participation in charity sports events? The role of the warm glow feeling

“…Achieving hedonic satisfaction, that is, a sufficient emotional connection known as a warm glow, leads to repeat participation, which reflects participants' loyalty to an event (Tsai, 2020). This is consistent with the findings of Park et al (2021), who found that participants' perceptions of the prosocial impact, sense of belonging and trust in charity sports events all had a strong positive impact on how satisfied they felt about the activities, which in turn led to loyalty. Helping others can further promote consumers' awareness of the social value, creating a warm glow and enhancing the consumer experience, leading to the return of consumers in the future (Hartmann et al , 2017).…”

“…A charity sports event is a specially organized charity that connects sports and causes. Activities at these events primarily include endurance sports such as cycling, running, or swimming, which are organized to raise money through registration fees to help with causes such as education, health and the environment (Palmer and Dwyer, 2020; Park et al , 2021). The most popular charity-affiliated sports event has been the charity run (Zouni et al , 2021).…”

Do Charity or Non-Charity Sporting Events Have a Greater Influence on Participants’ Warm Glow?: An Experimental Survey

“…It is suggested that if a person has set goals to help with social issues and they know that the donations from an event have been used to support the issues, they will feel more satisfied because it confirms that the good deed has been successfully undertaken [14,51]. It also results in participants experiencing increased warm glow [52].…”

Experienced vs. Novice Participants Perception of Overall Quality and Intention to Join in Future Sport Trials: Case European Duathlon Championship

“…Several instruments are used to try to explain it by considering different dimensions: SERVQUAL [ 34 ], a model by Rust and Oliver [ 35 ], and sub-dimensions [ 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Specific models are used in the field of sports management: SPORTSERV [ 40 ], EVENQUAL) [ 41 ], SEQSS [ 38 ], EPOD, and EPOD2 [ 42 , 43 ], which also introduce dimensions specific to each sporting event or service [ 25 , 27 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 ]. Furthermore, taking into account that perception may vary from spectators to participants [ 31 ], some analyses focus on spectators [ 14 , 44 , 48 , 49 , 50 ], and others on participants [ 13 , 17 , 30 , 51 , 52 , 53 ].…”

“…This represents the main reason why the analysis of the quality of sporting events is increasingly considered in related scientific studies. Research on the connection between perceived quality (PQ) and perceived value (PV), general satisfaction (GS), and loyalty has almost always been addressed from the point of view of the sports viewer [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 ], but fewer studies address it from the perspective of the athlete [ 13 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 ], who is also a co-creator of value and quality of the event with their participation [ 28 , 29 ]. These studies analyze quality in a static way without considering that the perception of the athlete may vary with experience and over time.…”