Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Because maximizing stadium attendance demand is of utmost importance, for both sports economists and sport management researchers, understanding the potential determinants of such demand better has become a priority in the last decades. Here, conducting a systematic scoping review, we map this previous research in terms of its characteristics, its nature, and its volume, thus offering a concise perspective on what has been previously explored, and, more importantly, what remains to be analyzed in the future. Intriguingly, we observe a lack of studies exploring data generated in both niche and women’s sports, as well as in most emerging markets. Further, the field has not yet established the use of disaggregated stadium attendance data, despite notable potential methodological pitfalls.

Keywords

attendance demand football/soccer major league baseball (MLB)major league soccer (MLS)national basketball association (NBA)national football league (NFL)national hockey league (NHL)outcome uncertainty spectator sports

For executives operating in the field of professional sports, maximizing stadium attendance demand is of utmost importance. On the one hand, generating revenue from ticket sales and subsequent catering and parking fees contributes to the financial resources necessary for investing in talent and, thus, keeping up with the competition. For major European professional football clubs, for instance, matchday income still corresponds to roughly 15% of the clubs’ total annual turnover (Deloitte, 2021), despite an increasingly important role of media income.¹ On the other hand, as stadium spectators, applauding, booing, and chanting, are an integral part of the product offered to other customers (cf., Morrow, 1999), a high(er) number of stadium attendances caters to the direct needs of a sporting club’s many external stakeholders, including broadcasters, corporate sponsors, and also those customers in the hospitality section, all of whom benefit from an enhanced stadium atmosphere (e.g., McDonald, 2010). Similarly, an underutilized stadium is likely to reduce future visiting intentions among potential spectators, watching a match from their home (e.g., Oh et al., 2017). On the field, maximizing the number of attending home fans, in turn, might help the host to generate a significant home advantage (e.g., Reade et al., 2020a). Further, off the field, an underutilized stadium might not only lead to inefficient staffing but also to lower merchandising sales. As football clubs are increasingly interested in diversifying their income sources (cf., Schmidt & Holzmayer, 2018), some clubs might also benefit from auxiliary revenues generated through, for example, hotel stays, museum visits, and stadium tour bookings if attendance demand increases. Therefore, it is not surprising that information on stadium attendance demand is considered an approximation for a sporting club’s reputation by investors, thus influencing the club’s stock market price (e.g., Gimet & Montchaud, 2016).

For both sports economists and sport management researchers, understanding the potential determinants of stadium attendance demand better has, therefore, become a priority in the last decade(s). Rottenberg (1956), in his pioneering article on the baseball players’ labor market, was first to offer a detailed demand specification (cf., Fort, 2005), including already factors as diverse as the ticket price, potential substitutes, and, perhaps most controversially, competitive balance and the resulting match outcome uncertainty. Since then, sports economists, in particular, have extended and tested this original demand specification in various markets, and, as a consequence, today, there already exists a massive, continuously growing body of empirical literature on those factors potentially shaping consumer interest in professional sports. Somewhat surprisingly, though, there has been made no recent attempt to survey this previous work.

Here, conducting a systematic scoping review, we map this previous empirical research on stadium attendance demand in terms of its characteristics, nature, and volume (cf., Arksey & O’Malley, 2005), thus offering a concise perspective on what has been previously explored, and, more importantly, what remains to be analyzed in the future. While there already exist important literature reviews on the determinants of stadium attendance demand (e.g., Borland & Macdonald, 2003; Cairns et al., 1986; Downward et al., 2009), to the best of our knowledge, the last comprehensive review was published over a decade ago (e.g., Villar & Guerrero, 2009). Further, these early reviews, despite their evident merits, have all been limited in scope, as they typically tend to focus on summarizing the robustness of some previously observed effects rather than to present a more holistic overview across the two disciplines. Intriguingly, conducting such a scoping review is still relatively rare in sports economics and/or management research (e.g., Dowling et al., 2018), despite its growth in popularity in loosely related fields such as public health and health care services research.²

In sum, we observe that most authors, concentrating primarily on established sports such as baseball and football, have so far refrained from exploring numerous sporting environments, perhaps most notable niche and women’s sports, both of which are likely to benefit significantly from understanding those factors shaping stadium attendance demand better. Further, we find that the field has not yet established the use of disaggregated stadium attendance data, despite potential methodological pitfalls (cf., Forrest et al., 2005). We believe that addressing these important issues offers an exciting path for future research exploring the robustness of previous findings across alternative settings.

Methodological Approach

In emerging research fields such as the economics of sports, conducting a scoping review is helpful in identifying, locating, and, then, synthesizing the existing knowledge (e.g., McKinstry et al., 2014; Tricco et al., 2016, 2018). In line with most such previous reviews, here, our objective is not only to explore the extent, range, and characteristics of the existing literature, thus presenting a concise overview of current key themes, but, more importantly though, to also identify the remaining knowledge gaps within. In contrast, and somewhat different to systematic literature reviews, we refrain from assessing research quality per se (cf., Dowling et al., 2018).

The broader empirical stadium attendance literature is quite heterogeneous. That is, not only in terms of the many objects under investigation, that is, the many sports in the various markets, and the thematic themes in focus during these investigations, but also the different methodological approaches.

To map the resulting stadium attendance demand research landscape, here, we conduct a scoping review by loosely adopting to the well-established Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) approach developed by Tricco et al. (2018). More specifically, in the following, we, first, clarify our search approach; second, present our eligibility criteria; third, explain our study selection; and, forth, give an overview on both our data charting process, as well as the resulting data items.

Information Sources and Search

To identify an eligible set of articles on stadium attendance demand, on January 20, 2020, we conducted a search in three multidisciplinary databases, the Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and SPORTDiscus. We derived our search string primarily based on our previous reading of the existing stadium attendance demand research.³ Then, we performed a search on manuscript title, abstract, and, where existing, author keywords. Initially, this resulted in a total of 1,015 documents: 222 in the WoS, 416 in Scopus, and another 377 in SPORTDiscus. We extracted these results and compiled a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, where we, using an existing function, removed 262 duplicates. Because we had chosen a relatively broad search string, we then conducted a systematic screening of both the titles and the abstracts of all the remaining 753 manuscripts, thereby eliminating literature that was obviously not focusing on stadium attendance demand research. After this step, our data set contained 277 manuscripts, that is, we had excluded 476 documents.

Eligibility Criteria and Study Selection

In an initial screening round of these 277 manuscripts, we excluded 19 items. More specifically, we excluded nine manuscripts because they were missing/not available to us, seven articles because they were conference proceedings, and three articles because they were not written in the English language.

We, then, screened the remaining 258 manuscripts according to three exclusion criteria intended to help us identify those empirical studies modeling the stadium attendance demand on matchday. First, as the use of survey data is often criticized for lacking explanatory power of actual behavior (e.g., Katz et al., 2019), we not only excluded 16 studies without an empirical contribution but also those 109 studies based on either qualitative interviews or employing survey data modeling various dependent variables including season ticket holder retention intention (e.g., Lee et al., 2020), spectator preferences (e.g., Wang et al., 2018) or sport event attendance motives (e.g., Funk et al., 2009). Second, to ensure that those studies in our data set were highly comparable, we only considered contributions from authors who proxied stadium attendance demand using the number of tickets distributed by a professional sporting club,⁴ thus excluding more recent attempts to move towards behavioral stadium attendance demand by exploring, for example, data on stadium admission (e.g., Sacheti et al., 2016; Schreyer et al., 2016, 2018) or spectator no-show behavior (e.g., Frevel & Schreyer, 2020; Schreyer, 2019; Schreyer et al., 2019).⁵ Similarly, we also excluded studies exploring the descendants of stadium attendances such as the potential economic impact (e.g., Roberts et al., 2016), the home advantage (e.g., Harris & Roebber, 2019), the willingness-to-pay (e.g., Sanford & Scott, 2016), and studies examining alternative proxies for demand such as TV audiences (e.g., Caruso et al., 2019; Humphreys & Perez, 2019; Schreyer et al., 2017). In sum, in this second step, we excluded another 33 manuscripts. Third, to further increase study design conformity, we excluded all 24 studies that were not modeling matchday demand.⁶ As such, after the exclusion of a total of 182 manuscripts, our temporary data set contained 76 studies modeling stadium attendance demand on the primary market as proxied by behavioral intentions to attend a particular match; that is, by analyzing stated rather than revealed preferences (e.g., Singleton et al., 2021).

Then, to not ignore any relevant literature, we performed both backward and forward citation search, thus screening both citations and reference lists of those 76 articles and identified 88 additional peer-reviewed articles that would fit our eligibility criteria. While the number of additional references seems rather high and, thus, might cast doubt on our initial identification strategy, there’s an easy explanation for that. That is, in fact, we would have been able to identify a fair share of these 88 manuscripts while using “attendance” as a keyword in our initial search but refrained from doing so, as this would also have given back an almost unmanageable amount of unrelated publications referring to, for example, church attendance (e.g., Azzi & Ehrenberg, 1975), student attendance (e.g., Epstein & Sheldon, 2002), and, perhaps most prominently, work/employee attendance (e.g., Steers & Rhodes, 1978).

Finally, we cross-checked our already comprehensive data set against the prominent earlier literature reviews from Borland and Macdonald (2003), Cairns et al. (1986), Downward et al. (2009), and Villar and Guerrero (2009), and also against a short, more recent book chapter on the economics of attendance published in the SAGE Handbook of Sports Economics (cf., Rodríguez, 2019). In this last step, we found six additional manuscripts that met our selection criteria and, then, also scanned available Google scholar profiles of the most active authors in our temporary sample (cf., Table 1),⁷ identifying another 10 articles. Further, we added five either rather recent or surprisingly little cited studies, Cairns (1984), Feng et al. (2018), Gitter (2017), Goller and Krumer (2020), and Krumer (2020), that we were aware of from previous research projects, but that, for some reasons, did not emerge from our exhaustive identification approach. Because a quick keyword screening in the Journal of Sports Economics (JSE), the International Journal of Sports Finance (IJSF), Applied Economics (AE), Applied Economics Letters (AEL), European Sport Management Quarterly (ESMQ), Managerial and Decision Economics (MDE), and Sport, Business and Management (SBM), the seven international, peer-reviewed journals with the highest share of manuscripts in our temporary sample, did only result in the addition of ten more manuscripts, four of which were published online first after our initial search (i.e., Gasparetto & Barajas, 2020; Jung et al., 2020; Kelley, 2020; Mueller, 2020), we decided to end the identification process in early August 2020.

Table 1.

Most Productive Authors in Our Sample.

#	Author	Contributions (Single)	Preferred sport(s),	…market(s),	…and theme(s)^a
1	Paul, R.	18 (1)	Baseball (10), Hockey (7)	USA (15)	Fighting, promotions, winning
2	Buraimo, B.	11 (3)	Football/Soccer (11)	England (8)	None, i.e., attendance modeling
	Simmons, R.	11 (0)	Football/Soccer (10)	England (9)	Match outcome uncertainty
	Weinbach, A.	11 (0)	Baseball (6), Hockey (4)	USA (9)	Fighting, promotions, winning
5	Humphreys, B.	9 (0)	None, four different sports	USA (9)	Match outcome uncertainty
6	Rascher, D.	6 (1)	None, four different sports	USA (6)	None, i.e., multiple questions
	Watanabe, N.	6 (1)	None, three different sports	China (3), USA (3)	None, i.e., multiple questions
8	Coates, D.	5 (0)	None, four different sports	USA (4)	Match outcome uncertainty
	Forrest, D.	5 (0)	Football/Soccer (5)	England (5)	None, i.e., multiple questions
	Thomas, D.	5 (0)	Football/Soccer (3)	England (4)	Match outcome uncertainty
	DeSchriver, T.	5 (1)	Football/Soccer (4)	USA (5)	None, i.e., multiple questions

Note. Authors with a minimum of five empirical contributions to our sample; ^a In alphabetical order, theme based on title analysis.

In sum, our data set contains 195 published manuscripts on 2,918 pages.⁸ However, as some authors (e.g., Paul et al., 2016; Pawlowski & Nalbantis, 2015; Tyler et al., 2017), modeled the attendances of more than one league,⁹ we decided to include these studies separately if authors had made separate regressions available for these different leagues. Therefore, to be more precise, our final data set contains 235 empirical contributions/studies in 195 manuscripts.¹⁰ In Figure 1, we summarize our complete search process by providing a detailed flow chart.

Figure 1.

Flow diagram of the systematic literature search process.

Data Collection Process, Resulting Data Items and Synthesis of Results

For all these 195 manuscripts, we read the title, the abstract, and the methodological section in the necessary detail and extracted several data points. In addition, as we will describe below, in all these manuscripts, we ran multiple searches for a wide range of specific keywords.

In sum, we initially extracted 13 different data points, which we grouped as follows: First, the number, names and gender of all authors as mentioned on the title page;¹¹ second, the title of the manuscript; third, the name of the journal that had published the manuscript, including the year of publication in print;¹² fourth, the sport(s), league(s), and market(s) explored by the authors;¹³ fifth, the observation period, including the total number of matches/observations; sixth, the page count; and seventh, whether the manuscript’s title page offered author keywords.

In addition, at a later stage of the data collection process, we also extracted more detailed methodological information. Primarily, we collected information on the dependent variable(s), including information on its composition, for example, whether the authors discussed and/or addressed limitations arising from the distribution of free and/or season tickets, and also the methodological approach. More specifically, we were interested in whether, and if so how, the authors addressed the problem of capacity constraints in markets where demand frequently (or occasionally) exceeds supply.

After this initial data collection process, we added only few supplementary information to the data set. First, for all manuscripts exploring European football, for instance, we added information on whether a study explored cup or league football, along with the respective information on the observed level of the football pyramid. Here, those studies exploring English Premier League data, for example, were labeled as “football league” on level “1” of the English football pyramid. In this respect, Spanish La Liga, German Bundesliga, Italian Serie A and French Ligue 1 are all coded the same, while a study analyzing stadium attendance demand for English Championship football would be labeled as “football league” on level “2”. In contrast, those manuscripts exploring data from either domestic or international tournaments were not coded as analyzing a football league. Second, to gain an understanding on the most influential manuscripts, we also added information of the total accumulated citation as of August 31, 2020, using Google Scholar.

Results and Discussion

Influential Authors, Well-Cited Manuscripts, and Potential Target Journals: A Matthews Effect?¹⁴

In Table 1, we first provide an overview of the 11 most productive authors operating in the field of stadium attendance research, that is, according to our scope. In sum, our database contains 297 different authors, most of which, about 80%, however only contributed one manuscript to this particular literature stream. Interestingly, as can also be seen from this table, most of these authors seem to have developed both a specific profile, that is, an interest in some key sports and markets, sometimes even particular research questions, and, not shown in the table, an established set of natural co-authors over time (e.g., Paul/Weinbach: 11; Buraimo/Simmons: 6; Watanabe/Soebbing: 4).

Intriguingly, these 11 authors contributed to 64 different manuscripts and, thus, generated a total of 3,577 citations. As such, these highly productive authors, being responsible for about one third of all manuscripts in our sample, account for roughly 35% of all accumulated citations. It is, however, worth noting that only about 11 out of the 25 most-cited manuscripts stem from this particular group of authors, most probably because a fair share of 17 of these 64 contributions were published rather recently, that is, between 2016 and 2020. In fact, as can be seen from Table 2, among the most frequently cited publications in our data set, only two manuscripts were published later than in 2010 (Coates et al., 2014; Pawlowski & Anders, 2012), while eleven, that is, almost half of them, were published before the year 2000.¹⁵

Table 2.

Most Frequently Cited Manuscripts in Our Database.

#	Author	Year	Short title	Journal	Citations	Citations/Year	Citations/Total citations
1	García/Rodríguez	2002	The determinants of football match attendance revisited	JSE	393	21	3.87%
2	Forrest/Simmons	2002	Outcome uncertainty and attendance demand in sport	JRSSD	377	20	3.71%
3	Baimbridge et al.	1996	Satellite television and the demand for football	SJPE	336	13	3.31%
4	Szymanski	2001	Income inequality, competitive balance and the attractiveness of team sports	EJ	335	17	3.30%
5	Knowles et al.	1992	The demand for Major League Baseball	TAE	300	10	2.95%
6	Jennett	1984	Attendances, uncertainty of outcome and policy in Scottish league football	SJPE	281	8	2.77%
7	Czarnitzki/Stadtmann	2002	Uncertainty of outcome versus reputation	EE	257	14	2.53%
8	Peel/Thomas	1992	The demand for football	EE	246	8	2.42%
9	Peel/Thomas	1988	Outcome uncertainty and the demand for football	SJPE	245	7	2.41%
10	McDonald/Rascher	2000	Does bat day make cents?	JSM	218	10	2.15%
11	Forrest/Simmons	2006	New issues in attendance demand	JSE	180	12	1.77%
12	Buraimo/Simmons	2008	Do sports fans really value uncertainty of outcome?	IJSF	180	14	1.77%
13	Borland/Lye	1992	Attendance at Australian Rules football	AE	171	6	1.68%
14	Hart et al.	1975	A statistical analysis of association football attendances	JRSSC	170	4	1.67%
15	Buraimo/Simmons	2009b	A tale of two audiences	JEB	166	14	1.63%
16	Falter/Perignon	2000	Demand for football and intramatch winning probability	AE	164	8	1.61%
17	Buraimo	2008	Stadium attendance and television audience demand in English league Football	MDE	158	12	1.56%
18	Hill et al.	1982	The short run demand for Major League Baseball	AEJ	156	4	1.54%
19	DeSchriver/Jensen	2002	Determinants of spectator attendance at NCAA Division II football contests	JSM	154	8	1.52%
20	Pawlowski/Anders	2012	Stadium attendance in German professional football	AEL	152	17	1.50%
21	Marcum/Greenstein	1985	Factors affecting attendance of major league baseball	SSJ	150	4	1.48%
22	Cairns	1987	Evaluating changes in league structure	AE	148	4	1.46%
23	Forrest et al.	2004	Broadcasting, attendance and the inefficiency of cartels	RIO	148	9	1.46%
24	Rascher	1999	A test of the optimal positive production network externality in Major League Baseball	Book	136	6	1.34%
25	Coates et al.	2014	Reference-dependent preferences, loss aversion, and live game attendance	EI	130	19	1.28%

Note. In sum, we count 33 manuscripts with a minimum of 100 citations, that is, according to Google Scholar. All numbers are rounded. AE/L = Applied Economics/Letters; AEJ = Atlantic Economic Journal; Book = Book chapter; EI = Economic Inquiry; EJ = Economic Journal; EE = Empirical Economics; IJSF = International Journal of Sport Finance; JEB = Journal of Economics and Business; JSM = Journal of Sport Management; JSE = Journal of Sports Economics; JRSSC/D = Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C/D; MDE = Managerial and Decision Economics; RIO = Review of Industrial Organization; SJPE = Scottish Journal of Political Economy; SSJ = Sociology of Sport Journal; TAE = The American Economist.

What is more, we observe a notable absence of female authors from this group of highly productive authors. Somewhat similarly, broadening our scope beyond this particular group, only roughly 15% of all those authors included in our data set are female, most of which, 40 out of 44, have only contributed to the literature once. As such, the vast majority of all 195 contributions, about 78%, lack a female contribution, some might even argue perspective, which, at least to a certain degree, might help to understand the somewhat limited scope in the previous research better.¹⁶

In Table 2, we present an overview of the most frequently cited publications in our data set. Intriguingly, these 25 publications alone account for about 53% of all counted citations. In fact, we observe that there seem to exist a few, apparently well-known manuscripts that are, on average, cited much more frequently than others. That is, while all 195 manuscripts in our database were, on average, cited about four times per year, the work of six author teams accumulated, on average, more than 15 citations per year (e.g., García & Rodríguez, 2002; Forrest & Simmons, 2002; Cox, 2018; Coates et al., 2014; Pawlowski & Anders, 2012; Szymanski, 2001), three of them for a period of about 20 years.¹⁷ In contrast, we count a total of 47 manuscripts, roughly a quarter of all manuscripts, that were, on average, cited once per year at most since their publication in print.

As indicated earlier, for those authors exploring the potential determinants of stadium attendance demand there seem to exist a handful of preferred publication outlets. In fact, we observe that 75 out of all 195 manuscripts, that is, about 38% of our sample, were published in only four journals: The JSE (31 manuscripts) and the IJSF (18), that is, the two journals dedicated to publishing research in the field of sports economics, AE (15), and AEL (11). Further, we observe that a significant number of manuscripts were published in ESMQ (6), MDE (6), and, somewhat surprisingly, also in the form of a book chapter (9; e.g., Buraimo, 2014). Two dedicated sport management journals, SBM (5) and the Journal of Sport Management (5), take the next two places.¹⁸ In all 76 different outlets,¹⁹ the average page count was 15 pages, though this is naturally also dependent on journal formatting. In this regard, we observe no significant trend in the number of pages per contribution per year, recently; that is, even when excluding the one journal, AEL, exclusively publishing short letters.

Dominant and Emerging Markets of Investigation: European Football Dominates Our Sample, No Previous Interest in Modeling Niche Sport Demand

In Figure 2, we present an overview of the development of stadium attendance demand publications over time. As can be easily seen from that figure, research interest in empirical studies analyzing matchday demand has gradually increased in recent years.

Figure 2.

Development of study frequency over time.

Naturally, as can be inferred from Figure 2, this gradual increase in the number of publications on stadium attendance demand research is closely associated with the foundation of the JSE in 2000, which, over time, became a natural home for authors exploring the determinants of stadium attendance demand. In fact, according to our database, since 2006, the journal has had at least one such manuscript in print per year, sometimes even three (e.g., in 2012: Beckmann et al., 2012; Coates & Humphreys, 2012; Leeds & Sakata, 2012) or more (e.g., in 2018: Cox, 2018; Gropper & Anderson, 2018; Lewis & Yoon, 2018; Martins & Cró, 2018). Accordingly, between 2000 and August 2020, about every fifth empirical study modeling stadium attendance demand was published in the JSE.

Interestingly, the authors of roughly every second study explored spectator demand in the US market (112), followed by the United Kingdom (47), Germany (8), Australia, France, and Scotland (6). In addition, 22 countries are represented at least once, while we also observe four manuscripts featuring data from international tournaments (e.g., Chiang & Jane, 2013; Krumer, 2020; Valenti et al., 2020), and one manuscript in which the authors analyzed aggregated data generated in multiple countries/leagues (Serrano et al., 2015).

In Table 3, we present a concise overview of all competitions in our data set. In sum, we note 195 manuscripts featuring a total of 235 studies on competitions in 13 different sports, including Hockey (e.g., Coates & Humphreys, 2012), Ultimate Fighting (e.g., Watanabe, 2015), Handball (Storm et al., 2018), NASCAR racing (Berkowitz et al., 2011) and Tennis (Chmait et al., 2020), amongst others. Despite this apparent diversity, it is, however, interesting that there seems still to exist no manuscript exploring the spectator demand for such otherwise popular sports as Athletics, Badminton, Boxing, Cycling, Golf, Field hockey, Formula 1 racing, Gymnastics, Skiing, Snooker, Swimming, and Volleyball.²⁰ As most of those associations managing the aforementioned sports are still heavily dependent on generating matchday income, this observation is not only a bit surprising but it also offers an interesting path for future stadium attendance demand research. Further, to the best of our knowledge, there as yet exists no study on stadium, or perhaps better hall/venue, attendance demand for electronic sports, including League of Legends, Defense of the Ancients (Dota) 2, and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, despite an increasing global interest in these emerging sports, in particular among the youth.

Table 3.

Dominant Sports and Sport Leagues in Stadium Attendance Demand Research.

Sport	#	Tier	#	Exemplary Keyword(s)	#	Exemplary Associated Reference
Football/Soccer	107	First	76	English Premier League	17	Hart et al. (1975)
				Major League Soccer	9	Sung/Mills (2018)
				French Ligue 1	6	Falter et al. (2008)
				German Bundesliga	6	Pawlowski/Anders (2012)
				Chinese Super League	5	Watanabe/Soebbing (2015)
				Spanish La Liga	5	Buraimo/Simmons (2009b)
				Scottish Premier League	5	Cairns (1984)
				Italian Serie A	5	Di Domizio/Caruso (2015)
				Remaining	18	Pawlowski/Nalbantis (2015)
		Second	10	English Championship	9	Forrest/Simmons (2006)
				Irish First Division	1	Jena/Reilly (2016)
		Third	5	English Football League One	5	Peel/Thomas (1988)
		Fourth	6	English Football League Two	5	Peel/Thomas (1992)
				German Regionalliga	1	Wallrafen et al. (2019)
		Fifth	1	English National League	1	Buraimo (2014)
		Multiple (aggregated)	5			Serrano et al. (2015)
		Cup	4			Baimbridge (1997)
Baseball	64			Major League Baseball	32	Coates et al. (2014)
				Minor League Baseball	23	Paul/Weinbach (2013)
				Other leagues	9	Gitter (2017)
American Football	22			National Football League	5	Watanabe/Cunningham (2020)
				College Football	17	Falls/Natke (2014)
Hockey	19			National Hockey League	8	Coates/Humphreys (2012)
				Remaining	11	Paul et al. (2016)
Basketball	7			National Basketball Association	6	Jane (2016)
				College Basketball	1	McEvoy and Morse (2007)
Rugby	5			Super League	3	Baimbridge et al. (1996)
				Remaining	2	Hogan et al. (2017)
Other ^a	11			Diverse	11	Watanabe (2015)

^a Category subsumes manuscripts on Australian Rules Football (3), Cricket (2), Handball (1), Horse racing (1), NASCAR Racing (1), Tennis (1), and Ultimate Fighting (2).

As can be easily seen from that table, about half of all 235 studies centered on stadium attendance demand for European football. Only three more sports, Baseball (64) and, already far behind, American Football (22) and Hockey (19), attracted notable interest from the group of authors analyzing stadium attendance demand. Apparently, as we show in Figure 3, this gap is likely to widen in the future, as the field’s interest in studying football stadium attendances appears to be increasing successively, and has only peaked recently; that is, in 2018.

Figure 3.

Development of study frequency by sport over time.

Interestingly, in European football, most authors have chosen to explore English football data. More specifically, we counted a total of 42 studies,²¹ most of which used data generated in either the English Premier League (17 studies), including its predecessors, or the English Football League (EFL) Championship (9). In contrast, only a few authors explored data from the EFL One (5), the EFL Two (5) or even the National League (1). It is worth noting, however, that these three lower-tier leagues never rise beyond a mere supporting role in those manuscripts featuring them, as they are, without any exception, merely added as a supplement to the initial analysis of the two top-tier leagues in the country. Further, in this particular environment, manuscripts that center around domestic (1; Szymanski, 2001) or international tournaments (1; Baimbridge, 1997) are still scarce, as are manuscripts exploring women’s football demand (0).

Surprisingly, the narrow analytical interest of those authors modeling English football stadium attendance demand (e.g., Cox, 2018; Jewell, 2011; Walker, 1986) is largely representative for what we observe among the work of those authors analyzing the remaining football markets. That is, in all football markets represented in our sample, we note a lack of studies modeling spectator demand for domestic cup competitions, lower-tier football, including amateur football, women’s sports, and also youth football.²² Here, Wallrafen et al. (2019), modeling fourth-tier stadium attendances in Germany, as well as both Meier et al. (2016) and LeFeuvre et al. (2013), modeling stadium attendance demand for women’s football in Germany and France, respectively, are notable exceptions that all prove this rule.

While most authors have explored English Premier League data, in general, we observe a keen interest in European first-tier football leagues, as well as in both Major League Soccer (MLS) and the Chinese Super League. More specifically, we note a strong interest in analyzing stadium attendance demand for the MLS (9 manuscripts), the German Bundesliga and the French Ligue 1 (6), the Chinese Super League, the Italian Serie A, the Scottish Premier League, and the Spanish La Liga (5). Further, reflecting the many different facets of the previous research, there already exist empirical studies on markets as diverse as Austria (Pawlowski & Nalbantis, 2015), Brazil (e.g., Madalozzo & Berber Villar, 2009), Denmark (Nielsen et al., 2019), Finland (Iho & Heikkilä, 2010), Malaysia (Wilson & Sim, 1995), Peru (Buraimo et al., 2018), and Russia (Coates et al., 2017). In contrast, evidence from emerging football markets such as Colombia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Morocco and the Philippines are currently largely missing from the English-language literature.²³ Also, there’s still no manuscript on football stadium attendance demand in smaller European markets such as Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Portugal and Romania, and also on future FIFA World Cup hosts such as Qatar, Mexico and Canada.

Dominant and Emerging Manuscript Themes: Outcome Uncertainty, Star Power, and…Air Pollution

To understand the existence of both dominant and emerging themes in the already rich stadium attendance demand literature better, we performed a systematic manuscript title analysis. More specifically, we first went through all 195 manuscript titles and, based on the information presented in these titles, decided whether (or not) authors of a given manuscript were focusing on one or more specific determinant(s).²⁴ Then, second, whenever we observed such an author focus, we extracted the appropriate keywords. This somewhat cumbersome procedure was necessary because the use of keywords is a relatively recent development, the JSE, for example, only introduced the use of keywords in 2003, and even today, still not all publishers have decided to implement them. Having extracted a total of 189 keywords, we categorized all of them based on whether the determinants were proxying consumer preferences (e.g., club characteristics, habit persistence, and exogenous shocks such as a public health crisis), economic factors (e.g., macroeconomic factors, market characteristics, and the ticket price), the quality of viewing (e.g., promotions, quality of seating and the timing of the contest), or the sporting contest (i.e., the quality of the contest and, in particular, the role of competitive balance and the resulting match outcome uncertainty) – as such, here, our approach closely resembles that of Borland and Macdonald (2003). Further, to increase the robustness of the chosen approach, in Figure 4, we also provide two word-clouds generated from both the title and the abstract of the 195 manuscripts in our data set.

Figure 4.

Dominant themes in stadium attendance demand research. Note. We generated these two word-clouds from the title (left) and the abstract (right) of the 195 manuscripts in our data set using the services from monkeylearn.com because it automatically detects multiword keywords. Here, string size corresponds to string frequency.

In Table 4, we present both the descriptive information on the distribution of the extracted keywords and illustrative examples. Interestingly, we observe that the authors of about three out of four studies seem to have drafted their manuscripts with a specific theme in mind. More specifically, most authors focused on the potential role of the sporting contest characteristics, most notably match outcome uncertainty, in shaping stadium attendance demand. That is, we observe that the titles of roughly every fourth study include a reference to the concept of competitive balance and the resulting match outcome uncertainty. Interestingly enough, these references are surprisingly diverse, and include, for example, championship uncertainty (e.g., Pawlowski & Nalbantis, 2015), competitive intensity (e.g., Bond & Addesa, 2020), loss aversion (e.g., Besters et al., 2019), outcome uncertainty (e.g., Martins & Cró, 2018), uncertainty (e.g., Serrano et al., 2015), uncertainty of outcome (e.g., Hogan et al., 2017), and uncertainty of results (e.g., Cox, 2018).²⁵ Further, as the debate on the validity of Rottenberg’s (1956) so-called uncertainty of outcome hypothesis has not yet been laid to a final rest, we note a relatively consistent output of such studies in the last decade; that is, in 2010 (3), 2011 (1), 2012 (4), 2013 (4), 2014 (2), 2015 (4), 2016 (2), 2017 (1), 2018 (4), 2019 (2), and 2020 (3). Somewhat similarly, we observe a continuous interest in the potential role of stars, including, for example, local heroes (Yamamura, 2011), marquee players (Jewell, 2017), star pitchers (Ormiston, 2014), and top-drafted rookies (Kelley, 2020), in modeling stadium attendance demand. In contrast, we only count a few studies that concentrate on team success (e.g., Paul et al., 2019; Pinnuck & Potter, 2006; Watanabe & Soebbing, 2017) and contest significance.

Table 4.

Dominant Themes in Stadium Attendance Demand Research.

Manuscript theme	#	#	#	Exemplary Keyword(s)	Exemplary Associated Reference
Manuscripts with specific themes	143
Consumer preferences		16
Exogenous shocks			8	H1N1	Gitter (2017)
Club characteristics			5	Reputation	Czarnitzki/Stadtmann (2002)
Habit formation, persistence			3	Habit formation	Ge et al. (2020)
Economic factors		36
Availability of substitutes			14	Substitution	Wallrafen et al. (2019)
Market composition, size			10	Market size	Buraimo/Simmons (2009a)
Economic impact, legacy			4	World cup effect	LeFeuvre et al. (2013)
Macro-economic factors			3	Economic crisis	Hong et al. (2013)
Ticket price			3	Pricing	Watanabe/Soebbing (2017)
Travel cost			2	Fan travel	Humphreys/Miceli (2020)
Quality of viewing		30
Quality of stadium			20	Promotions	Cebula et al. (2009)
Timing of the contest			9	Weather	Cairns (1984)
				Kick-off times	Krumer (2020)
				Air Pollution	Watanabe et al. (2019)
Quality of seating			2	Soccer-specific stadiums	DeSchriver et al. (2016)
Characteristics of the sporting contest		82
Uncertainty of outcome			45	Outcome uncertainty	Peel/Thomas (1988)
				Competitive balance	Coates/Humphreys (2010)
				Competitive intensity	Scelles et al. (2013)
Quality of the contest			30	Superstars	Humphreys/Johnson (2020)
				Rivalries	Wooten (2018)
				Violence	Jones et al. (1993)
Success of competing teams			16	Team success	Davis (2009)
Significance of the contest			4	Interleague play	Butler (2002)
Manuscripts without specific themes	52

Note. Manuscript categorization is based exclusively on the manuscript title. Multiple allocations are allowed.

Although most authors centered their manuscripts around sporting event characteristics, some authors have emphasized the potential role of economic factors, the quality of viewing, and also emerging consumer preferences in explaining the variance in stadium attendance demand. As such, there already exists a significant body of literature on the question of whether television broadcasts serve as a substitute for stadium attendance (e.g., S. Allan, 2004; Baimbridge et al., 1996; Barajas et al., 2019; Kringstad et al., 2018; Nielsen et al., 2019), whether promotions such as bobblehead giveaways, fireworks, and even marching bands, are effective in increasing stadium attendance demand (e.g., Boyd & Krehbiel, 2003; Kappe et al., 2014; McDonald & Rascher, 2000; Natke & Thomas, 2019; Paul et al., 2013), and whether consumer preferences alter in the aftermath of exogenous shocks as diverse as a corruption scandal (Buraimo et al., 2016), an influenza virus outbreak (Gitter, 2017), college football player protests (Watanabe et al., 2019), increasing terror alert levels (Kalist, 2010), or the announcement of performance-enhancing drug violations (Cisyk & Courty, 2017). Interestingly, though frequently included as control variables, only a few authors have centered their study on the potential effects of match fixtures/scheduling (Goller & Krumer, 2020; Krumer, 2020; Paul et al., 2004) or both environmental effects and the weather (e.g., Cairns, 1984; Ge et al., 2020; Ito et al., 2016). Among the latter, Watanabe et al. (2019), for instance, explored the potential role of air pollution in shaping stadium attendance demand in the Chinese Super League, thus paving an interesting new way towards a better understanding of how spectators respond to potential health threats on matchday – a theme that will certainly gain more importance in the future (e.g., Reade et al., 2020b).

Methodological Challenges: A Logarithmic, Aggregated Dependent Variable and Tobit Models

As is evident in the literature, those authors modeling stadium attendance demand face several methodological challenges. Forrest et al. (2005), for example, noted two such challenges potentially leading to biased estimates: first, the existence of capacity constraints in leagues that are permanent in high demand, such as the English Premier League, and, second, the use of aggregated data across different spectator groups (e.g., matchday ticket holders and season ticket holders; Dobson & Goddard, 2011). However, these aggregated data typically subsume two different subsequent decisions from multiple stakeholder groups, including not only paying customers but also owners of free tickets, whose determinants might differ significantly: first, an individual’s decision whether to accept/purchase a ticket for a match; and second, the ticket holder’s subsequent decision whether to attend this particular match (e.g., Schreyer et al., 2016).²⁶ Below, we summarize how previous authors have addressed these two potential limitations.

In general, most authors explored aggregated attendance data, preferably in log form (e.g., Chupp et al., 2007; Martins & Cró, 2018; Storm et al., 2018; Watanabe & Soebbing, 2015; Yamamura, 2011). In fact, only a few authors were primarily interested in analyzing alternative attendance demand proxies such as the stadium utilization (i.e., the ratio of distributed tickets to the existing stadium capacity; e.g. Hong et al., 2013; Jane, 2016; Lawson et al., 2008) or a rather simple sellout-dummy (e.g., Brandes et al., 2013), although some authors used the former information to present an additional robustness check (e.g., Paul et al., 2016).

Despite the early criticism from Forrest et al. (2005), only a few authors have explored disaggregated attendance information. In fact, somewhat surprisingly, the authors of only about 30 manuscripts discussed, often briefly, the potential limitations that may arise from the use of such data generated across both matchday ticket holders and season ticket holders (e.g., Barajas et al., 2019; Buraimo et al., 2018; Paul et al., 2019). As such, it is perhaps not surprising that the authors of only about a handful of manuscripts explicitly explored the behavioral intentions of matchday ticket holders (e.g., Allan & Roy, 2008; Benz et al., 2009; Bond & Addesa, 2020), that is, by analyzing attendance data after having subtracted season ticket holder data, or added such season ticket holder data as an explanatory variable (e.g., Chmait et al., 2020).²⁷ Perhaps one potential reason for this is that most authors still wrongly consider season ticket holders to be behavioral loyal (e.g., Schreyer et al., 2018). Somewhat similarly, only a few authors either have excluded (e.g., Chmait et al., 2020) or added information on free tickets (e.g., Anthony et al., 2014), and even fewer considered this a limitation of their study (e.g., Besters et al., 2019).

In this particular context, it is interesting to see that there seems to exist only very little research modeling the stadium attendance demand for different stadium sections (e.g., Dobson & Goddard, 1992), including, for example, home and away sections and, economically more important, also business seats in the hospitality sections; that is, those seats that, at least in European professional football, currently account for about 62% of the ticket revenues (ESSMA, 2019). While such disaggregated data, that is, information on the number of season ticket holders, the distribution of free/complimentary tickets, and/or sectoral differences, are, and will still be, usually hard to obtain (e.g., Kringstad et al., 2018), we believe that the field would benefit from a more detailed discussion of both the nature of the dependent variable, typically proxying behavioral intentions to attend, and its potential limitations in the future.

While only a few authors have explored disaggregated data, most authors explicitly addressed (and discussed) the potential problems arising from stadium capacity constraints.²⁸ More precisely, we count that about 60% of all authors/author teams addressed this important methodological issue, some even although it is, according to their own statement, not an urgent issue in their specific environment (e.g., Forrest & Simmons, 2006; Reilly, 2015; Watanabe, 2015); for example, because frequent sellouts are less likely in developing markets and lower tiers. Those authors that, however, observed a fair share of right-censored observations typically employ a tobit model (e.g., Besters et al., 2019; Bond & Addesa, 2020; Cox, 2018), either primarily or as an additional robustness check, although we also observe an increasing use of censored regression (e.g., Hong et al., 2013; Meehan et al., 2007; Ormiston, 2014), or the exclusion of potentially truncated cases (e.g., Denaux et al., 2011), among others. In fact, only a few authors discussed capacity constraints as a limitation without taking any methodological action against it.

On a side note, it is, perhaps, interesting that the explored period of investigation has significantly increased over time, most likely due to improved data availability. In this context, we observe, on average, a period of investigation of about 5.50 seasons/years per study, ranging from a minimum of one (e.g., Hill et al., 1982) to a maximum of 48 (Fullerton & Miller, 2017). However, about 80% of all manuscripts in our data set feature a study exploring data of a maximum of five years/seasons, most of them, about 43%, even of only one. On the other hand, we only count ten manuscripts exploring data sets containing 20 or more years/seasons. Further, and perhaps unsurprisingly, we observe a strong, positive and significant correlation between the period of observation and the number of total, that is, aggregated, analyzed matches in the data. In general, authors explored data sets containing, on average, roughly 3,619 matches, though this mean is somewhat artificially inflated by those authors exploring data generated in the two rather long league tournaments, that is, in Major League Baseball (M = 11,077, SD = 17,694) and in the NBA (M = 14,065, SD = 16,349). It is, therefore, not surprising that the former competition is the focus of the manuscript with the largest data set, an ultimate sample size of 88,825 matches (c.f., Ormiston, 2014), in our sample.²⁹

A Note on Stadium Attendance Demand Research in the Journal of Sports Economics

As a cornerstone of the more recent stadium attendance demand research, the JSE, according to our data, has published a total of 31 manuscripts modeling stadium attendances. In general, and perhaps not surprisingly, these articles are largely reflective of the discipline’s scope, as indicated above. For instance, we observe a strong tendency to explore empirical data generated in the US market (18; e.g., Berkowitz et al., 2011; Butler, 2002; Humphreys & Johnson, 2020), and also Europe (10; e.g., Falter et al., 2008, García & Rodríguez, 2002; Martins & Cró, 2018), but almost no evidence from Africa, Asia, or South America. Somewhat similarly, about 84% of all manuscripts, analyzed data from baseball and football/soccer (13 manuscripts each), with only a handful of manuscripts exploring other sports; for instance, basketball (e.g., Jane, 2016), hockey (Coates & Humphreys, 2012), and racing (Berkowitz et al., 2011). As such, currently, about every third stadium attendance demand study published in the JSE marks an exploration of the US baseball market (e.g., Ge et al., 2020; Lemke & Tlhokwane, 2010; Ormiston, 2014).

Despite the apparent preference for analyzing MLB attendances, it is, however, important to note that JSE has continuously published manuscripts broadening the discipline’s previous scope. For instance, according to our sample, LeFeuvre et al. (2013), analyzing the potential effect of the 2011 FIFA Women’s World Cup on Women’s Professional Soccer attendance, were the first to explore stadium attendance demand for women’s football. Wallrafen et al. (2019), primarily interested in understanding substitution effects in sports better, were among the few authors modeling stadium attendance demand for amateur football and the first to do so outside of the English football market. In fact, many football markets, including Brazil (Madalozzo & Berber Villar, 2009), Finland (Iho & Heikkila, 2010), and Portugal (Martins & Cró, 2018), in particular, were explored first in the JSE.

In terms of dominant themes, we note that most JSE authors, roughly three out of four, seem to have drafted their manuscript with a specific theme in mind, a third of them explicitly referring to the concept of competitive balance/intensity and the resulting match outcome uncertainty (e.g., Andreff & Scelles, 2015; Cox, 2018; Meehan et al., 2007). Therefore, it is perhaps not surprising that most manuscripts published in the JSE center around the effect of sporting characteristics on spectator interest, with only a few manuscript titles explicitly referring to consumer preferences (e.g., Cisyk & Courty, 2017), economic factors (e.g., Wallrafen et al., 2019), and the quality of viewing (e.g., Ge et al., 2020).

Methodologically, in the JSE, we observe a similar preference for exploring aggregated attendance data across different spectator groups, preferably in the log form. As such, only a handful of authors excluded season tickets from their sample (e.g., Bond & Addesa, 2020; Falter et al., 2008; García & Rodríguez, 2002), while the potential existence of complementary/free tickets is typically not discussed. In contrast, and once more in line with the field’s general scope, the vast majority of all authors discussed (and addressed) the potential problems arising from stadium capacity constraints.

Conclusions, Limitations, and Potential Future Research Avenues

Throughout our analysis of the empirical literature modeling the behavioral intentions to attend a sporting event in a stadium (or a hall/venue), we have noted several emerging patterns that may serve as a starting point for future stadium attendance research. Below we summarize these patterns.

First, we observed that, despite an already rich and continually growing body of empirical literature modeling the determinants of stadium attendance research, there are numerous sports that, for unclear reason(s), have so far been neglected from a proper analysis. That is, while most authors have explored data generated in American football, baseball, European football and hockey, there as yet exists no research on regional quite popular niche sports, including badminton, field hockey, and volleyball. Further, perhaps due to data availability issues, our understanding of what shapes the interest for such popular sporting events as cycling (e.g., the Tour de France), golf (e.g., the PGA tour) and Formula 1 racing is literally non-existent in the literature, as it is the case for emerging sports such as the increasingly popular Kabaddi, Lacrosse, and also electronic sports that regularly attract large crowds.³⁰

For those sports that have, however, previously generated the field’s regular attention, our understanding of the overall robustness of the observed effects is rather limited, as previous research has primarily explored only a few domestic competitions, typically top-tier leagues, within only a few markets. As such, we believe that future stadium attendance demand research should profit tremendously from widening its narrow focus to consider a significantly more diverse set of objects of investigation. In particular, this is true for studies exploring data generated in both domestic and international cup competitions (e.g., the UEFA Champions League), lower-tier competitions, and, last but by no means least, women’s sports, despite some notable first attempts (e.g., Valenti et al., 2020). Naturally, it would, for instance, be highly interesting to see whether there are significant differences between the effectiveness of certain determinants (e.g., match outcome uncertainty, player talent/stars, and the weather) across not only men’s and women’s sports but also across different tournament formats.

On a related note, we believe it’s about time to explore African, Asian, and South American competitions in more detail. While exploring these environments can certainly help us improving our understanding of the robustness of previously explored determinants, thus increasing confidence in the generalizability of mechanisms across different cultures, analyzing such alternative markets might also help mitigate the methodological problems discussed earlier. Accordingly, few authors have already begun exploring data from South American leagues, which, unlike their European counterparts, often still refrain from distributing season tickets to fans (e.g., Buraimo et al., 2018; cf. section 3.4). However, analyzing the stadium attendance demand in leagues with frequently altering calendars and/or league formats such as the Argentine Primera División over time might also offer additional insights for questions relating to effective tournament design.

Second, concerning the manuscript focus, we noted a strong interest on studies exploring the specific characteristics of the sporting events, particularly the role of varying competitive balance and the resulting match outcome uncertainty. In contrast, only a few manuscripts centered around exogenous shocks (e.g., health emergencies, terrorism), macroeconomic factors, and, somewhat surprisingly, also the ticket price (e.g., Watanabe & Soebbing, 2017). While the former aspects are typically rare and only offer limited managerial implications for the top management,³¹ the latter, in particular, might become more prominent as disaggregated, that is, individual, data become available in the future. In fact, although we observe several notable attempts to approximate the ticket price in the literature (e.g., revenue divided by attendance), endogeneity concerns still remain, among others, which, in turn, ultimately affect our understanding of the price elasticity of stadium attendance demand.³² Somewhat similarly, employing such individual data seems imperative to correctly estimate the effect of such standard attendance explanatory variables as income in the future, which has previously often been approximated by employing annual data, despite some notable exceptions (c.f., Hong et al., 2013).

Third, we observed that the field has previously refrained from exploring disaggregated data, despite the early criticism from Forrest et al. (2005). While this practice is not only common in the literature, and primarily driven by limited data availability, but also historically grown, we believe that future research might profit from excluding season ticket holder information and, perhaps even the number of free tickets, from the dependent variable while discussing the potential pitfalls in more detail if the former is not possible. Alternatively, as technological progress allows for generating better information, exploring behavioral stadium attendance demand, that is, the actual matchday turnout, might be a profitable approach (e.g., Schreyer et al., 2016; Schreyer & Torgler, 2021).

While we believe that our systematic approach, that is, excluding both those manuscripts whose authors explored behavioral data and data containing annual/average information, as well as survey data, results in a comprehensive scoping of the existing literature modeling behavioral intentions to attend a sporting event, naturally, there are a number of limitations to our approach. For example, although we have taken great care while selecting the 195 manuscripts in our data set, the sheer volume of the existing literature in combination with our manual approach might lead to the omission of a few manuscripts; for example, those that, in abstract, keywords or the title, are not explicitly linked to stadium attendance research. However, while such a potential omission might slightly alter the effective results provided above, we believe that our comprehensive approach allows summarizing key tendencies, nevertheless. Further, as discussed earlier in this section, our self-limitation on those studies modeling matchday demand might, to some degree, underestimate the field’s interest in factors that are stable across one or multiple season(s) and, therefore, more likely to be explored using annual attendance data (e.g., the stadium quality). Finally, as it is common when conducting scoping reviews, we largely refrain from an in-depth analysis of all effect sizes and preferably present existing (and emerging) themes. As such, future research might benefit from additional literature reviews focusing on specific aspects in stadium attendance research, for example, the relationship between the football interest and the weather, or even meta-analyses.

Footnotes

Author’s Note

Payam Ansari is now affiliated with DCU Business School, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Dominik Schreyer

Payam Ansari

Notes

References

Allan

Roy

(2008). Does television crowd out spectators? New evidence from the Scottish Premier League. Journal of Sports Economics, 9(6), 592–605.

Allan

(2004). Satellite television and football attendance: The not so super effect. Applied Economics Letters, 11(2), 123–125.

Alvarado-Vargas

M. J.

Zou

(2019). The importance of good behavior in college football teams in the USA. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 20(3), 430–445.

Andreff

Scelles

(2015). Walter C. Neale 50 years after: Beyond competitive balance, the league standing effect tested with French football data. Journal of Sports Economics, 16(8), 819–834.

Anthony

Kahn

Madison

Paul

R. J.

Weinbach

(2014). Similarities in fan preferences for minor-league baseball across the American Southeast. Journal of Economics and Finance, 38(1), 150–163.

Arksey

O’Malley

(2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.

Azzi

Ehrenberg

(1975). Household allocation of time and church attendance. Journal of Political Economy, 83(1), 27–56.

Baimbridge

(1997). Match attendance at Euro 96: Was the crowd waving or drowning? Applied Economics Letters, 4(9), 555–558.

Baimbridge

Cameron

Dawson

(1996). Satellite television and the demand for football: A whole new ball game? Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 43(3), 317–333.

10.

Barajas

Shakina

Gasparetto

(2019). At the stadium or at home: The effect of broadcasting matches. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 9(5), 495–505.

11.

Beckman

E. M.

Cai

Esrock

R. M.

Lemke

R. J.

(2012). Explaining game-to-game ticket sales for Major League Baseball games over time. Journal of Sports Economics, 13(5), 536–553.

12.

Benz

M. A.

Brandes

Franck

(2009). Do soccer associations really spend on a good thing? Empirical evidence on heterogeneity in the consumer response to match uncertainty of outcome. Contemporary Economic Policy, 27(2), 216–235.

13.

Berkowitz

J. P.

Depken

C. A.

Wilson

D. P.

(2011). When going in circles is going backward: Outcome uncertainty in NASCAR. Journal of Sports Economics, 12(3), 253–283.

14.

Besters

L. M.

van Ours

J. C.

van Tuijl

M. A.

(2019). How outcome uncertainty, loss aversion and team quality affect stadium attendance in Dutch professional football. Journal of Economic Psychology, 72, 117–127.

15.

Bond

A. J.

Addesa

(2020). Competitive intensity, fans’ expectations, and match-day tickets sold in the Italian football series A, 2012-2015. Journal of Sports Economics, 21(1), 20–43.

16.

Borland

Lye

(1992). Attendance at Australian rules football: A panel study. Applied Economics, 24(9), 1053–1058.

17.

Borland

Macdonald

(2003). Demand for sport. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19(4), 478–502.

18.

Boyd

T. C.

Krehbiel

T. C.

(2003). Promotion timing in Major League Baseball and the stacking effects of factors that increase game attractiveness. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(3), 173–183.

19.

Brandes

Franck

Theiler

(2013). The group size and loyalty of football fans: A two-stage estimation procedure to compare customer potentials across teams. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 176(2), 347–369.

20.

Buraimo

(2008). Stadium attendance and television audience demand in English league football. Managerial and Decision Economics, 29(6), 513–523.

21.

Buraimo

(2014). “Spectator demand and attendances in English league football”, in Goddard

Sloane

(Eds), Handbook on the economics of professional football, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 60–72.

22.

Buraimo

Migali

Simmons

(2016). An analysis of consumer response to corruption: Italy’s Calciopoli scandal. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 78(1), 22–41.

23.

Buraimo

Simmons

(2008). Do sports fans really value uncertainty of outcome? Evidence from the English Premier League. International Journal of Sport Finance, 3(3).

24.

Buraimo

Simmons

(2009a). Market size and attendance in English Premier League football. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 6(2), 200–214.

25.

Buraimo

Simmons

(2009b). A tale of two audiences: Spectators, television viewers and outcome uncertainty in Spanish football. Journal of economics and business, 61(4), 326–338.

26.

Buraimo

Tena

J. D.

de la Piedra

J. D.

(2018). Attendance demand in a developing football market: The case of the Peruvian first division. European Sport Management Quarterly, 18(5), 671–686.

27.

Butler

M. R.

(2002). Interleague play and baseball attendance. Journal of Sports Economics, 3(4), 320–334.

28.

Cairns

J. A.

(1984). The effect of weather on football attendances. Weather, 39(3), 87–90.

29.

Cairns

J. A.

(1987). Evaluating changes in league structure: the reorganization of the Scottish Football League. Applied Economics, 19(2), 259–275.

30.

Cairns

Jennett

Sloane

P. J.

(1986). The economics of professional team sports: A survey of theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Studies, 13(1), 3–80.

31.

Caruso

Addesa

Di Domizio

(2019). The determinants of the TV demand for soccer: Empirical evidence on Italian Series A for the period 2008–2015. Journal of Sports Economics, 20(1), 25–49.

32.

Cebula

R. J.

Toma

Carmichael

(2009). Attendance and promotions in minor league baseball: The Carolina League. Applied Economics, 41(25), 3209–3214.

33.

Chiang

Y. H.

Jane

W. J.

(2013). The effects of outcome uncertainties, patriotism, and Asian regionalism in the World Baseball Classic. Journal of Media Economics, 26(3), 148–161.

34.

Chmait

Robertson

Westerbeek

Eime

Sellitto

Reid

(2020). Tennis superstars: The relationship between star status and demand for tickets. Sport Management Review, 23(2), 330–347.

35.

Chupp

Stephenson

E. F.

Taylor

(2007). Stadium alcohol availability and baseball attendance: Evidence from a natural experiment. International Journal of Sport Finance, 2(2), 36–44.

36.

Cisyk

Courty

(2017). Do fans care about compliance to doping regulations in sports? The impact of PED suspension in baseball. Journal of Sports Economics, 18(4), 323–350.

37.

Clapp

C. M.

Hakes

J. K.

(2005). How long a honeymoon? The effect of new stadiums on attendance in Major League Baseball. Journal of Sports Economics, 6(3), 237–263.

38.

Coates

Humphreys

B. R.

(2010). Week to week attendance and competitive balance in the National Football League. International Journal of Sport Finance, 5(4), 239–252.

39.

Coates

Humphreys

B. R.

(2012). Game attendance and outcome uncertainty in the National Hockey League. Journal of Sports Economics, 13(4), 364–377.

40.

Coates

Humphreys

B. R.

Zhou

(2014). Reference-dependent preferences, loss aversion, and live game attendance. Economic Inquiry, 52(3), 959–973.

41.

Coates

Naidenova

Parshakov

(2017). Determinants of Russian Football Club Brands. International Journal of Sport Finance, 12(4), 321–341.

42.

Cox

(2018). Spectator demand, uncertainty of results, and public interest: Evidence from the English Premier League. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(1), 3–30.

43.

Czarnitzki

Stadtmann

(2002). Uncertainty of outcome versus reputation: Empirical evidence for the First German Football Division. Empirical Economics, 27(1), 101–112.

44.

Davis

M. C.

(2009). Analyzing the relationship between team success and MLB attendance with GARCH effects. Journal of Sports Economics, 10(1), 44–58.

45.

Deloitte. (2021). Deloitte Football Money League 2021. Manchester, United Kingdom: Deloitte.

46.

Denaux

Z. S.

Denaux

D. A.

Yalcin

(2011). Factors affecting attendance of major league baseball: Revisited. Atlantic Economic Journal, 39(2), 117–127.

47.

DeSchriver

T. D.

Jensen

P. E.

(2002). Determinants of spectator attendance at NCAA Division II football contests. Journal of Sport Management, 16(4), 311–330.

48.

DeSchriver

T. D.

Rascher

D. A.

Shapiro

S. L.

(2016). If we build it, will they come? Examining the effect of expansion teams and soccer-specific stadiums on Major League Soccer attendance. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 6(2), 205–227.

49.

Dobson

S. M.

Goddard

J. A.

(1992). The demand for standing and seated viewing accommodation in the English Football League. Applied Economics, 24(10), 1155–1163.

50.

Dobson

Goddard

J. A.

(2011). The economics of football. Cambridge University Press.

51.

Domizio

M. D.

Caruso

(2015). Hooliganism and demand for football in Italy: Attendance and counterviolence policy evaluation. German Economic Review, 16(2), 123–137.

52.

Dowling

Leopkey

Smith

(2018). Governance in sport: A scoping review. Journal of Sport Management, 32(5), 438–451.

53.

Downward

Dawson

Dejonghe

(2009). Sports economics: Theory, evidence and policy. Routledge.

54.

Epstein

J. L.

Sheldon

S. B.

(2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student attendance through family and community involvement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(5), 308–318.

55.

European Stadium & Safety Management Association. (2019). Hospitality benchmark. ESSMA VZW.

56.

Falls

G. A.

Natke

P. A.

(2014). College football attendance: A panel study of the Football Bowl Subdivision. Applied Economics, 46(10), 1093–1107.

57.

Falter

J. M.

Pérignon

(2000). Demand for football and intramatch winning probability: an essay on the glorious uncertainty of sports. Applied Economics, 32(13), 1757–1765.

58.

Falter

J. M.

Pérignon

Vercruysse

(2008). Impact of overwhelming joy on consumer demand: The case of a Soccer World Cup victory. Journal of Sports Economics, 9(1), 20–42.

59.

Feddersen

Maennig

(2009). Arenas versus multifunctional stadiums: Which do spectators prefer? Journal of Sports Economics, 10(2), 180–191.

60.

Feng

Yoon

(2018). Impact of international sports events on the attendance of domestic sports league games using Chinese Super League data. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 19(3), 258–275.

61.

Forrest

Simmons

Szymanski

(2004). Broadcasting, attendance and the inefficiency of cartels. Review of Industrial Organization, 24(3), 243–265.

62.

Forrest

Beaumont

Goddard

Simmons

(2005). Home advantage and the debate about competitive balance in professional sports leagues. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(4), 439–445.

63.

Forrest

Simmons

(2002). Outcome uncertainty and attendance demand in sport: The case of English soccer. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 51(2), 229–241.

64.

Forrest

Simmons

(2006). New issues in attendance demand: The case of the English football league. Journal of Sports Economics, 7(3), 247–266.

65.

Forrest

Simmons

Buraimo

(2005). Outcome uncertainty and the couch potato audience. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 52(4), 641–661.

66.

Fort

(2005). The golden anniversary of “The baseball players’ labor market.” Journal of Sports Economics, 6(4), 347–358.

67.

Frevel

Schreyer

(2020). Behavioral responses to terrorist attacks: Empirical evidence from professional football. Applied Economics Letters, 27(3), 244–247.

68.

Fullerton

T. M.

Jr Miller

W. A.

(2017). Rivalries, tradition, and recession proof collegiate football attendance in El Paso. Journal of Sports Economics & Management, 7(2), 58–77.

69.

Funk

D. C.

Filo

Beaton

A. A.

Pritchard

(2009). Measuring the motives of sport event attendance: Bridging the academic-practitioner divide to understanding behavior. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 18(3), 126.

70.

García

Rodríguez

(2002). The determinants of football match attendance revisited: Empirical evidence from the Spanish football league. Journal of Sports Economics, 3(1), 18–38.

71.

Gasparetto

Barajas

(2020). Management in a complex scenario: World Cup, alternative stadiums and demand for tickets. Managerial and Decision Economics, 41(6), 1071–1083.

72.

Humphreys

B. R.

Zhou

(2020). Are fair weather fans affected by weather? Rainfall, habit formation, and live game attendance. Journal of Sports Economics, 21(3), 304–322.

73.

Gimet

Montchaud

(2016). What drives European football clubs’ stock returns and volatility? International Journal of the Economics of Business, 23(3), 351–390.

74.

Gitter

S. R.

(2017). The H1N1 Virus and Mexican Baseball Attendance. Athens Journal of Sports, 4(4), 263–275.

75.

Goller

Krumer

(2020). Let’s meet as usual: Do games played on non-frequent days differ? Evidence from top European soccer leagues. European Journal of Operational Research, 286(2), 740–754.

76.

Griffith

D. A.

(2010). An analytical perspective on sporting events attendance: The 2007–2008 US NCAA college bowl games. Applied Geography, 30(2), 203–209.

77.

Gropper

C. C.

Anderson

B. C.

(2018). Sellout, blackout, or get out: The impacts of the 2012 policy change on TV blackouts and attendance in the NFL. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(4), 522–561.

78.

Harris

A. R.

Roebber

P. J.

(2019). NBA team home advantage: Identifying key factors using an artificial neural network. PLoS ONE, 14(7), e0220630.

79.

Hart

R. A.

Hutton

Sharot

(1975). A statistical analysis of association football attendances. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 24(1), 17–27.

80.

Hill

J. R.

Madura

Zuber

R. A.

(1982). The short run demand for major league baseball. Atlantic Economic Journal, 10(2), 31–35.

81.

Hogan

Massey

(2017). Analysing match attendance in the European Rugby Cup: Does uncertainty of outcome matter in a multinational tournament? European Sport Management Quarterly, 17(3), 312–330.

82.

Hong

Mondello

Coates

(2013). An examination of the effects of the recent economic crisis on major league baseball attendance demand. International Journal of Sport Finance, 8(2), 140–156.

83.

Horky

(2020). No sports, no spectators–no media, no money? The importance of spectators and broadcasting for professional sports during COVID-19. Soccer & Society, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660970.2020.1790358

84.

Humphreys

B. R.

Johnson

(2020). The effect of superstars on game attendance: Evidence From the NBA. Journal of Sports Economics, 21(2), 152–175.

85.

Humphreys

B. R.

Miceli

T. J.

(2020). Outcome uncertainty, fan travel, and aggregate attendance. Economic Inquiry, 58(1), 462–473.

86.

Humphreys

B. R.

Pérez

(2019). Loss aversion, upset preference, and sports television viewing audience size. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 78, 61–67.

87.

Iho

Heikkilä

(2010). Impact of advance ticket sales on attendance in the Finnish football league. Journal of Sports Economics, 11(2), 214–226.

88.

Ito

Ozawa

(2016). Managing weather risks: The case of J. League soccer teams in Japan. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 83(4), 877–912.

89.

Jane

W. J.

(2016). The effect of star quality on attendance demand: The case of the National Basketball Association. Journal of Sports Economics, 17(4), 396–417.

90.

Jena

Reilly

(2016). Testing the uncertainty outcome hypothesis using data from second tier soccer in Ireland. Applied Economics Letters, 23(18), 1257–1260.

91.

Jennett

(1984). Attendances, uncertainty of outcome and policy in Scottish league football. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 31(2), 176–198.

92.

Jewell

R. T.

(2011). Aggressive play and demand for English Premier League Football. In Violence and aggression in sporting contests (pp. 113–131). Springer.

93.

Jewell

R. T.

(2017). The effect of marquee players on sports demand: The case of US Major League Soccer. Journal of Sports Economics, 18(3), 239–252.

94.

Jones

J. C. H.

Ferguson

D. G.

Stewart

K. G.

(1993). Blood sports and cherry pie: Some economics of violence in the National Hockey League. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 52(1), 63–78.

95.

Jung

Moon

C. G.

Sung

Y. T.

(2020). Outcome uncertainty and demand for Baseball: A single-game approach in the Korean Professional Baseball League. International Journal of Sport Finance, 15(1), 39–52.

96.

Kalist

D. E.

(2010). Terror alert levels and major league baseball attendance. International Journal of Sport Finance, 5(3), 181.

97.

Kappe

Stadler Blank

Desarbo

W. S.

(2014). A general multiple distributed lag framework for estimating the dynamic effects of promotions. Management Science, 60(6), 1489–1510.

98.

Katz

Heere

Melton

E. N.

(2019). Predicting fan behavior through egocentric network analysis: Examining season-ticket holder renewal. Journal of Sport Management, 1(aop), 1–12.

99.

Kelley

E. J.

(2020). Buying the hype? Assessing the impact of top-drafted rookies on spectator attendance in the NBA. Applied Economics Letters. https://doi.org/0.1080/13504851.2020.1809628

100.

Knowles

Sherony

Haupert

(1992). The demand for Major League Baseball: A test of the uncertainty of outcome hypothesis. The American Economist, 36(2), 72–80.

101.

Kringstad

Solberg

H. A.

Jakobsen

T. G.

(2018). Does live broadcasting reduce stadium attendance? The case of Norwegian football. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 8(1), 67–81.

102.

Krumer

(2020). Testing the effect of kick-off time in the UEFA Europa League. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(2), 225–238.

103.

Lawson

R. A.

Sheehan

Stephenson

E. F.

(2008). Vend it like Beckham: David Beckham’s effect on MLS Ticket Sales. International Journal of Sport Finance, 3(4), 189–195.

104.

Leadley

J. C.

Zygmont

Z. X.

(2005). When is the honeymoon over? National Basketball Association attendance 1971-2000. Journal of Sports Economics, 6(2), 203–221.

105.

Lee

M. A.

Kunkel

Funk

D. C.

Karg

McDonald

(2020). Built to last: relationship quality management for season ticket holders. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(3), 364–384.

106.

Lee

Y. H.

(2018). Common factors in Major League Baseball game attendance. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(4), 583–598.

107.

Leeds

M. A.

Sakata

(2012). Take me out to the Yakyushiai: Determinants of attendance at Nippon Professional Baseball games. Journal of Sports Economics, 13(1), 34–52.

108.

LeFeuvre

A. D.

Stephenson

E. F.

Walcott

S. M.

(2013). Football frenzy: The effect of the 2011 world cup on women’s professional soccer league attendance. Journal of Sports Economics, 14(4), 440–448.

109.

Lemke

R. J.

Leonard

Tlhokwane

(2010). Estimating attendance at Major League Baseball games for the 2007 season. Journal of Sports Economics, 11(3), 316–348.

110.

Lewis

Yoon

(2018). An empirical examination of the development and impact of star power in Major League Baseball. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(2), 155–187.

111.

Madalozzo

Berber Villar

(2009). Brazilian football: What brings fans to the game? Journal of Sports Economics, 10(6), 639–650.

112.

Marcum

J. P.

Greenstein

T. N.

(1985). Factors affecting attendance of Major League Baseball: II. A within-season analysis. Sociology of Sport Journal, 2(4), 314–322.

113.

Martins

A. M.

Cró

(2018). The demand for football in Portugal: New insights on outcome uncertainty. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(4), 473–497.

114.

McDonald

(2010). The factors influencing churn rates among season ticket holders: An empirical analysis. Journal of Sport Management, 24(6), 676–701.

115.

McDonald

Rascher

(2000). Does bat day make cents? The effect of promotions on the demand for Major League Baseball. Journal of Sport Management, 14(1), 8–27.

116.

McEvoy

C. D.

Morse

A. L.

(2007). An investigation of the relationship between television broadcasting and game attendance. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 2(3), 222–235.

117.

McKinstry

Brown

Gustafsson

(2014). Scoping reviews in occupational therapy: The what, why, and how to. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 61(2), 58–66.

118.

Meehan

J. W.

Jr Nelson

R. A.

Richardson

T. V.

(2007). Competitive balance and game attendance in Major League Baseball. Journal of Sports Economics, 8(6), 563–580.

119.

Meier

H. E.

Konjer

Leinwather

(2016). The demand for women’s league soccer in Germany. European Sport Management Quarterly, 16(1), 1–19.

120.

Merton

R. K.

(1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159 (3810), 56–63.

121.

Mills

B. M.

Fort

(2018). Team-level time series analysis in MLB, the NBA, and the NHL: Attendance and outcome uncertainty. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(7), 911–933.

122.

Morley

Thomas

(2007). Attendance demand and core support: Evidence from limited-overs cricket. Applied Economics, 39(16), 2085–2097.

123.

Morrow

(1999). The new business of football. Macmillan.

124.

Mueller

S. Q.

(2020). Pre-and within-season attendance forecasting in Major League Baseball: A random forest approach. Applied Economics, 1–18.

125.

MuggleNet (2020). Quidditch Celebrated 15th Anniversary. bit.ly/3dA6IYQ.

126.

Narayan

P. K.

Smyth

(2003). Attendance and pricing at sporting events: Empirical results from Granger causality tests for the Melbourne Cup. Applied Economics, 35(15), 1649–1657.

127.

Natke

P. A.

Thomas

E. A.

(2019). Does a marching band impact college Football game attendance? A panel study of Division II. Applied Economics Letters, 26(16), 1354–1357.

128.

Nielsen

C. G.

Storm

R. K.

Jakobsen

T. G.

(2019). The impact of English Premier League broadcasts on Danish spectator demand: A small league perspective. Journal of Business Economics, 89(6), 633–653.

129.

Sung

Kwon

K. D.

(2017). Effect of the stadium occupancy rate on perceived game quality and visit intention. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 18(2), 166–179.

130.

Ormiston

(2014). Attendance effects of star pitchers in major league baseball. Journal of Sports Economics, 15(4), 338–364.

131.

Owen

P. D.

Weatherston

C. R.

(2004). Uncertainty of outcome and super 12 rugby union attendance: Application of a general-to-specific modeling strategy. Journal of Sports Economics, 5(4), 347–370.

132.

Paul

R. J.

Conetta

Losak

(2016). Betting market prices, outcome uncertainty, and hockey attendance in Russia, Sweden, and Finland. Managerial Finance. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-01-2016-0016

133.

Paul

R. J.

Ehrlich

J. A.

Losak

(2020). Expanding upon the weather: Cloud cover and barometric pressure as determinants of attendance for NFL games. Managerial Finance. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-06-2020-0295

134.

Paul

R. J.

Weinbach

A. P.

(2013). Fireworks saturation and attendance in minor league baseball. International Journal of Sport Finance, 8(4), 312.

135.

Paul

R. J.

Weinbach

A. P.

Melvin

(2004). The Yankee effect: The impact of interleague play and the unbalanced schedule on major league baseball attendance. New York Economic Review, 35(1), 3–15.

136.

Paul

R. J.

Weinbach

A. P.

Riccardi

(2019). Attendance in the Canadian Hockey League: The impact of winning, fighting, uncertainty of outcome, and weather on junior hockey attendance. International Journal of Financial Studies, 7(1), 12.

137.

Paul

R. J.

Weinbach

A. P.

Robbins

(2013). American Hockey League attendance: A study of fan preferences for fighting, team performance, and promotions. International Journal of Sport Finance, 8(1), 21–38.

138.

Pawlowski

Anders

(2012). Stadium attendance in German professional football–The (un) importance of uncertainty of outcome reconsidered. Applied Economics Letters, 19(16), 1553–1556.

139.

Pawlowski

Nalbantis

(2015). Competition format, championship uncertainty and stadium attendance in European football–a small league perspective. Applied Economics, 47(38), 4128–4139.

140.

Peel

D. A.

Thomas

D. A.

(1988). Outcome uncertainty and the demand for football: An analysis of match attendances in the English football league. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 35(3), 242–249.

141.

Peel

D. A.

Thomas

D. A.

(1992). The demand for football: Some evidence on outcome uncertainty. Empirical Economics, 17(2), 323–331.

142.

Peel

Thomas

(1996). Attendance demand: An investigation of repeat fixtures. Applied Economics Letters, 3(6), 391–394.

143.

Pinnuck

Potter

(2006). Impact of on-field football success on the off-field financial performance of AFL football clubs. Accounting & Finance, 46(3), 499–517.

144.

Rascher

D. A.

(1999). A test of the optimal positive production network externality in Major League Baseball, in Fizel

J. L.

Gustafson

Hadley

(Eds), Sports economics: Current research, Praeger Publishers, pp. 27–48.

145.

Reade

J. J.

(2020). Football attendance over the centuries (No. em-dp2020-08 ). Henley Business School, Reading University.

146.

Reade

J. J.

Schreyer

Singleton

(2020a). Eliminating supportive crowds reduces referee bias. SSRN Electronic Journal (3743972). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3743972

147.

Reade

J. J.

Schreyer

Singleton

(2020b). Stadium attendance demand during the Covid-19 crisis: Early empirical evidence from Belarus. Applied Economics Letters. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2020.1830933

148.

Reade

J. J.

Singleton

(2020). Demand for Public Events in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of European Football. European Sport Management Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2020.1841261

149.

Reilly

(2015). The demand for league of Ireland football. The Economic and Social Review, 46(4, Winter), 485–509.

150.

Roberts

Roche

Jones

Munday

(2016). What is the value of a Premier League football club to a regional economy? European Sport Management Quarterly, 16(5), 575–591.

151.

Rodríguez

(2019). Economics of attendance. The Sage Handbook of Sports Economics. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526470447.n17

152.

Rottenberg

(1956). The baseball players’ labor market. Journal of Political Economy, 64(3), 242–258.

153.

Sacheti

Gregory-Smith

Paton

(2014). Uncertainty of outcome or strengths of teams: An economic analysis of attendance demand for international cricket. Applied Economics, 46(17), 2034–2046.

154.

Sacheti

Paton

Gregory-Smith

(2016). An economic analysis of attendance demand for one day international cricket. Economic Record, 92(296), 121–136.

155.

Sanford

Scott

(2016). Assessing the intensity of sports rivalries using data from secondary market transactions. Journal of Sports Economics, 17(2), 159–174.

156.

Scelles

Durand

Bonnal

Goyeau

Andreff

(2013). Competitive balance versus competitive intensity before a match: Is one of these two concepts more relevant in explaining attendance? The case of the French football Ligue 1 over the period 2008–2011. Applied Economics, 45(29), 4184–4192.

157.

Schmidt

M. B.

(2012). Demand, attendance and censoring: Utilization rates in the National Football League. Oxford handbook of sports economics, 2, 190–200. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195387780.013.0011

158.

Schmidt

S. L.

Holzmayer

(2018). “A framework for diversification decisions in professional football”, in Chadwick

Parnel

Widdop

Anagnostopoulos

(Eds), Routledge Handbook of Football Business and Management, Routledge, London, pp. 3–19.

159.

Schreyer

(2019). Football spectator no-show behaviour in the German Bundesliga. Applied Economics, 51(45), 4882–4901.

160.

Schreyer

Däuper

(2018). Determinants of spectator no-show behaviour: First empirical evidence from the German Bundesliga. Applied Economics Letters, 25(21), 1475–1480.

161.

Schreyer

Schmidt

S. L.

Torgler

(2016). Against all odds? Exploring the role of game outcome uncertainty in season ticket holders’ stadium attendance demand. Journal of Economic Psychology, 56, 192–217.

162.

Schreyer

Schmidt

S. L.

Torgler

(2017). Game outcome uncertainty and the demand for international football games: Evidence from the German TV market. Journal of Media Economics, 30(1), 31–45.

163.

Schreyer

Schmidt

S. L.

Torgler

(2018). Predicting season ticket holder loyalty using geographical information. Applied Economics Letters, 25(4), 272–277.

164.

Schreyer

Schmidt

S. L.

Torgler

(2019). Football spectator no-show behavior. Journal of Sports Economics, 20(4), 580–602.

165.

Schreyer

Torgler

(2021). Football spectator no-show behavior in Switzerland: Empirical evidence from season ticket holder behavior. SSRN Electronic Journal (3782997). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3782997

166.

Serrano

García-Bernal

Fernández-Olmos

Espitia-Escuer

M. A.

(2015). Expected quality in European football attendance: Market value and uncertainty reconsidered. Applied Economics Letters, 22(13), 1051–1054.

167.

Singleton

Bryson

Dolton

Reade

Schreyer

(2021). What can we learn about economics from Sport during Covid-19? SSRN Electronic Journal (3770193). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3770193

168.

Steers

R. M.

Rhodes

S. R.

(1978). Major influences on employee attendance: A process model. Journal of applied Psychology, 63(4), 391–407.

169.

Storm

R. K.

Nielsen

C. G.

Jakobsen

T. G.

(2018). The complex challenge of spectator demand: Attendance drivers in the Danish men’s handball league. European Sport Management Quarterly, 18(5), 652–670.

170.

Sung

Mills

B. M.

(2018). Estimation of game-level attendance in major league soccer: Outcome uncertainty and absolute quality considerations. Sport Management Review, 21(5), 519–532.

171.

Szymanski

(2001). Income inequality, competitive balance and the attractiveness of team sports: Some evidence and a natural experiment from English soccer. The Economic Journal, 111(469), F69–F84.

172.

Tainsky

Winfree

J. A.

(2010). Short-run demand and uncertainty of outcome in Major League Baseball. Review of Industrial Organization, 37(3), 197–214.

173.

Tricco

A. C.

Lillie

Zarin

O’Brien

K. K.

Colquhoun

Kastner

Levac

Sharpe

J. P.

Wilson

Kenny

Warren

Wilson

Stelfox

H. T.

Straus

S. E.

(2016). A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16(1), 15.

174.

Tricco

A. C.

Lillie

Zarin

O’Brien

K. K.

Colquhoun

Levac

Moher

Peters

M. D. J.

Horsley

Weeks

Hempel

Akl

E. A.

Chang

McGowan

Stewart

Hartling

Aldcroft

Wilson

M. G.

Garritty

… Straus

S. E.

(2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473.

175.

Tyler

B. D.

Morehead

C. A.

Cobbs

DeSchriver

T. D.

(2017). What is rivalry? Old and new approaches to specifying rivalry in demand estimations of spectator sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 26(4), 204–222.

176.

Valenti

Scelles

Morrow

(2020). The determinants of stadium attendance in elite women’s football: Evidence from the UEFA Women’s Champions League. Sport Management Review, 23(3), 509–520.

177.

Villar

J. G.

Guerrero

P. R.

(2009). Sports attendance: A survey of the literature 1973-2007. Rivista di Diritto e di Economia dello Sport, 5(2), 112–151.

178.

Walker

(1986). The demand for professional league football and the success of football league teams: Some city size effects. Urban Studies, 23(3), 209–219.

179.

Wallrafen

Deutscher

Pawlowski

(2020). The impact of live broadcasting on stadium attendance reconsidered: Some evidence from 3rd division football in Germany. European Sport Management Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2020.1828967

180.

Wallrafen

Pawlowski

Deutscher

(2019). Substitution in sports: The case of lower division football attendance. Journal of Sports Economics, 20(3), 319–343.

181.

Wang

Goossens

Vandebroek

(2018). The impact of the soccer schedule on TV viewership and stadium attendance: Evidence from the Belgian Pro League. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(1), 82–112.

182.

Watanabe

N. M.

(2015). Sources of direct demand: An examination of demand for the Ultimate Fighting Championship. International Journal of Sport Finance, 10(1), 26–41.

183.

Watanabe

N. M.

Cunningham

G. B.

(2020). The impact of race relations on NFL attendance: An econometric analysis. PLoS ONE, 15(1), e0226938.

184.

Watanabe

N. M.

Soebbing

B. P.

(2015). Ticket price behavior and attendance demand in Chinese professional soccer. In The sports business in the Pacific Rim (pp. 139–157). Springer.

185.

Watanabe

N. M.

Yan

Soebbing

B. P.

(2019). Market disruption as a regime for athlete activism: An economic analysis of college football player protests. Sport Management Review, 22(5), 600–612.

186.

Watanabe

N. M.

Yan

Soebbing

B. P.

(2019). Air pollution and attendance in the Chinese Super League: Environmental economics and the demand for sport. Journal of Sport Management, 33(4), 289–302.

187.

Watanabe

Soebbing

(2017). Chinese Super League: Attendance, pricing, and team performance. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 7(2), 157–174.

188.

Wilson

Sim

(1995). The demand for semi-pro league football in Malaysia 1989–91: A panel data approach. Applied Economics, 27(1), 131–138.

189.

Wooten

J. J.

(2018). Rivalries in US Professional Soccer. International Journal of Sport Finance, 13(2), 105–118.

190.

Yamamura

(2011). Game information, local heroes, and their effect on attendance: The case of the Japanese Baseball League. Journal of Sports Economics, 12(1), 20–35.

Stadium Attendance Demand Research: A Scoping Review

Abstract

Keywords

Methodological Approach

Information Sources and Search

Eligibility Criteria and Study Selection

Data Collection Process, Resulting Data Items and Synthesis of Results

Results and Discussion

Influential Authors, Well-Cited Manuscripts, and Potential Target Journals: A Matthews Effect? 14

Dominant and Emerging Markets of Investigation: European Football Dominates Our Sample, No Previous Interest in Modeling Niche Sport Demand

Dominant and Emerging Manuscript Themes: Outcome Uncertainty, Star Power, and…Air Pollution

Methodological Challenges: A Logarithmic, Aggregated Dependent Variable and Tobit Models

A Note on Stadium Attendance Demand Research in the Journal of Sports Economics

Conclusions, Limitations, and Potential Future Research Avenues

Footnotes

Author’s Note

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Notes

References

Influential Authors, Well-Cited Manuscripts, and Potential Target Journals: A Matthews Effect?¹⁴