Changing the Image Repair Equation

Abstract

Utilizing a 2 (race) × 2 (sex) × 3 (response strategy) factorial experiment, this study interrogates the extent to which an athlete's race and gender impacts the image repair process, specifically within the hypermediated realm of athlete transgressions. Using a national sample of 287 participants, results supported for the effectiveness of the mortification strategy above reducing offensiveness and evading responsibility strategies. Moreover, regardless of the transgression response, Black athletes were consistently rated more positively than their White athletic counterparts, deviating from the majority of prior research. Discussion of the role of the Black athlete is offered in light of the unexpected findings, with explanations postulated based on expectancy violation theory and the principle of covariance.

The role of trust in sports organization crisis communication: the case of the Houston Astros' sign-stealing scandal

“…The focus of previous studies applying and testing IRT (e.g. Brown et al, 2018;Brown, 2016;Brown et al, 2015b) centered on examining the impact of crisis response strategies on an athlete's image repair, especially within the realm of athlete transgressions.…”

How Do Moral Values and Crisis Response Strategies Influence Individuals’ Evaluations and Support of Sports Organizations Post-Crisis?

“…They found that mortification was the most effective strategy compared to reducing offensiveness and evading responsibility after controlling for athletes' demographics (K. A. Brown, Billings, & Devlin, 2016;K. A.…”

“…Evading responsibility only works when the accused cannot deny the accusation and only helps to reduce the blame (K. A. Brown et al, 2015). Mortification is the most effective in image repair as the accused shows a sincere admittance of guilt.…”

Everyone Hates the NCAA: The Role of Identity in the Evaluations of Amateurism Transgressions: A Case Study of the Chase Young Loan Scandal

“…Brown, 2000), which aid in classifying individuals as either in-group (i.e., those with shared group membership or “us”) or out-group members (i.e., those in an opposed group or “them”) (Tajfel et al, 1971, p. 151). Within the realm of sports, such distinctions are made based upon shared (i.e., in-group) or dissimilar (i.e., out-group) rooting interests (Giles & Stohl, 2017), which are identifiable on social media via photos, banners, bios, and the use of hashtags (Brown & Billings, 2013; N. A.…”