During the past 30 years, NCAA Division I athletic administrators have chosen to engage in a profit maximization model that has resulted in program eliminations for non-revenue, Olympic sport programs (Ridpath, Yiamouyiannis, Lawrence, & Galles, 2008). With “lack of spectator interest” identified as a significant criterion for program elimination (Gray & Petzer, 1995), there is a strong need for the development of marketing plans that improve non-revenue consumer interests at the local, regional, and national levels. Thus, the purpose of the research was to examine the motivational preferences of consumers at NCAA wrestling events (N = 975). In addition to demonstrating consistent trends in cumulative motivational preferences (e.g., individual match-ups, achievement, and wrestling loyalist), the results illustrated that consumers had unique reasons for attending the different types of wrestling events.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmstrongK. L. (2002). Race and sport consumption motivations: A preliminaryinvestigation of a Black Consumers’ Sport Motivation Scale. Journal of Sport Behavior, 25(4), 309–330.
2.
BettmanJ. R., FrancesLuces M., & PayneJ. W. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 187–217.
3.
BettmanJ. R. (1979). An information processing theory of consumer choice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
4.
ChelladuraiH., HaradaP., & MatsuokaM. (2003). Direct and interaction effects of team identification and satisfaction on intention to attend games. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(4), 244–253.
5.
CialdiniR. B., BordenR. J., ThorneA., WalkerM. R., FreemanS., & SloanL. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 366–375.
6.
CooperC. G. (2009a). An “all-star” initiative: Maximizing consumer interest at premier college wrestling events. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 2, 64–75.
7.
CooperC. G. (2009b). Team segmentation at the Big Ten Wrestling Championships. Team Performance Management, 15(3/4), 117–127.
8.
CooperC. G., & SouthallR. (2010). The pursuit of sustainability: Examining the motivational consumption preferences for online consumers of college wrestling. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(1), 1–11.
FeldmanJ. M., & LynchJ. G. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(August), 421–435.
11.
FunkD. C., MahonyD. F., RidingerL. L. (2002). Characterizing consumer motivation as individual difference factors: Augmenting the sport interest inventory (SII) to explain level of spectator support. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 11(1), 33–43.
12.
GrayG. R., & PelzerJ. A. (1995). The impact of Title IX on the discontinuation of NCAA Division I wrestling programs. Journal of Legal Aspects of Sport, 5(2), 17–122.
13.
HallJ., & O'MahonyB. (2006). An empirical analysis of gender differences in sports attendance motives. International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 7(4), 334–346.
14.
HowardJ. A., & ShethJ. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15.
JamesJ., & RidingerL. (2002). Female and male sport fans: A comparison of sport consumption motives. Journal of Sport Behavior, 25(3), 1–19.
16.
JamesJ., & RossS. (2004). Comparing sport consumer motivations across multiple sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13(1), 17–25.
17.
KahnL. M. (2007). Markets: Cartel behavior and amateurism in college sports. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(1), 209–226.
18.
KwonH., & TrailG. (2001). Sport fan motivation: A comparison of American students and international students. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 10(2), 147–152.
19.
MarburgerD. R., & Hogshead-MakarN. (2003). Is Title IX really to blame for the decline in intercollegiate men's non-revenue sports?Marquette Sport Law Review (14), Rev. 65.
20.
McFaddenD. (1986). The choice theory approach to market research. Marketing Science, 5(4), 275–297.
21.
MullinB. J., HardyS., & SuttonW. A. (2007). Sport marketing (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
RidpathB. D., YiamouyiannisA., LawrenceH., & GallesK. (2008). Changing sides: The failure of the wrestling community's challenges to Title IX and new strategies for saving NCAA sport teams. Journal of Intercollegiate Sports, 1(2), 255–283.
24.
SloanL. R. (1989). The motives of sports fans. In GoldsteinJ. H. (Ed.), Sports games and play: Social and psychological viewpoints (2nd ed., pp. 175–240). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25.
TrailG. T., FinkJ. S., & AndersonD. F. (2003). Sport spectator consumption behavior. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12, 8–16.
26.
TrailG. T., & JamesJ. D. (2001). The motivation scale for sport consumption: Assessment of the scale's psychometric properties. Journal of Sport Behavior, 24(1), 108–127.
27.
TrailG. T., RobinsonM. J., DickR. J., & GillentineA. J. (2003). Motives and points of attachment: Fans versus spectators in intercollegiate athletics. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(4), 217–227.
28.
WannD. L. (1995). Preliminary validation of the sport fan motivation scale. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 19(4), 377–396.
29.
WeightE. A. (2009). The role of the entrepreneurial coach: Non-revenue sport survival within big-time intercollegiate athletics. International Journal of Sport Management, 10, 1–15.
30.
WilliamsonS. C. (1983). The ranking of reasons for discontinuing intercollegiate athletic sports as determined by athletic directors at institutions which have discontinued sports. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Northern Colorado, 1983).University Microfilms International.
31.
WonJ., & KitamuraK. (2007). Comparative analysis of sport consumer motivations between South Korea and Japan. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 16(2), 93–105.
32.
ZimbalistA. (2003). What to do about Title IX. Gender Issues, 21(2), 55–59.
