Spectator Sport and Population Health: A Consultation with U.S. College Athletics Employees

Abstract

A growing number of studies have been published to understand how spectator sport may influence the health of a population. However, it is unknown if these studies address research questions relevant to professionals engaging in the promotion of spectator sport. We conducted a web-based survey with 136 practitioners employed in U.S. college athletics to identify their research priorities and needs regarding spectator sport's influence on population health. The combination of qualitative and quantitative analyses show that future research needs to be focused particularly on one of the following research themes: (a) social psychological benefits of sport spectatorship and (b) psychological impact of sport spectatorship. The findings further suggest the integration of environmental well-being and eudaimonic well-being into the domain of population health. Based on these findings, we propose future research directions as informed and guided by the practitioners' perspectives.

“Sport is Double-Edged”: A Delphi Study of Spectator Sport and Population Health

“…Coincidently, these three themes were the most frequently examined themes based on Inoue et al's (2019) follow-up review of articles that were published in premier sport management journals from 2014 to 2018, pointing to convergence between the interests of sport management practitioners and those of researchers. However, the results also revealed some divergence: the theme of "event's impact on physical impairment and mortality," which was the most researched theme according to Inoue, Berg, et al's (2015, p. 712) scoping review, was deemed least important by college athletics employees (Inoue et al, 2019). Second, employees' qualitative responses indicated that they defined the concept of population health more broadly than the conventional definition above (Inoue et al, 2019).…”

“…The ability for the field to evolve is recognized as necessary for sport management's continued advancement, relevance, and prospects for interdisciplinary collaboration (Chalip, 2006;Chalip et al, 2010;Costa, 2005;Doherty, 2012). For instance, the role sport may have in promoting the health of the population, or population health, has been widely examined by sport management scholars (Berg et al, 2015;Chalip, 2006;Edwards & Rowe, 2019;Inoue et al, 2019;Inoue, Berg et al, 2015;Rowe et al, 2013). One significant subtopic within the sport and population health discourse is understanding the relationship between spectator sport-sport and athletic events provided as entertainment for consumers (Chelladurai, 2014)-and population health.…”

“…Within and outside the sport management field, scholars have increasingly examined how spectator sport may influence various dimensions of population health (e.g., Inoue, Berg, et al, 2015;Inoue et al, 2017Inoue et al, , 2019Taks et al, 2016). In order for the field to accurately inform public policy discourse, the non-economic value of spectator sport must be established to benefit population health decisions, such as resource allocations or promotional messages for leisuretime use.…”

“…Hence, one way to determine common research priorities is to understand and reflect practitioner insights on key issues and challenges in establishing the link between spectator sport and population health. Inoue et al (2019) sought to achieve this by undertaking a consultation exercise with 136 employees of U.S. intercollegiate athletic departments. By analyzing quantitative and qualitative data obtained from these employees through an online survey, the researchers reported two main findings.…”

Grand Challenges, Covid‐19 and the Future of Organizational Scholarship

“…Calls for addressing grand challenges in organizational and management research have strongly resonated. Research under the label has proliferated – from topics we would expect like climate change, pollution, and inequality (e.g., Mair et al, 2016; Porter et al, 2020; Wright and Nyberg, 2017), to less expected ones like sport and population health (Inoue et al, 2019). With this explosion of activity, organizational scholars have used the grand challenges label in different ways, which some argue risks ‘conflat[ing] qualitatively distinct types of phenomena, levels of analysis, and scales/scopes of issues’, potentially lessening the work’s impact (Brammer et al, 2019, p. 518).…”