Public Shaming of Professional Athletes on Social Media

Ellen Alexandra MacPherson

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Graduate Department of Kinesiology

University of Toronto

Public Shaming of Professional Athletes on Social Media

Ellen Alexandra MacPherson

Doctor of Philosophy (2021)

Graduate Department of Kinesiology

University of Toronto

Abstract

The overarching purpose of this dissertation was to explore the nature and extent of

public shaming of professional athletes on social media in response to perceived legal, social,

and sport-specific norm violations and the potential reasons that fans engage with athletes in this

manner on social media. The methods employed were two-fold: for studies one and two, a

qualitative content analysis of 7,700 fan comments on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram directed

at eleven male and female professional athletes from six different sports was conducted. To

analyse these data, I implemented methodological pluralism by engaging in a semantic and

subsequent latent thematic content analyses. For study three, guided by a narrative methodology,

I conducted five semi-structured in-depth interviews with sport fans (three males, two females)

who engaged regularly with professional athletes and teams on Twitter, Facebook, and

Instagram. Findings cumulatively revealed that fans engage in public shaming of male and

female professional athletes in response to the athletes’ perceived legal, social, and sport-specific

violations. Public shaming on social media was evident with each athlete violation I examined,

regardless of sport or experience level, and occurred across all platforms (Twitter, Facebook, and

Instagram). Acts of shaming were illustrated by fans’ explicit withdrawals of support and

descriptions of desired physical, psychosocial and career-related consequences for the athletes.

In addition, there were undercurrents of gender and sexism observed across fans’ public

iii

shaming, which were exemplified through fans’ objectification of females, promotion of hyper-

masculinity, and victim blaming. Fans proposed that public shaming acts occur in response to the

threats that norm violations pose to fans’ sense of identification and belonging that have been

cultivated through fandom and enhanced through the relationships perceived to be developed

with athletes via social media. Specifically, fans suggested public shaming might be provoked

when the integrity of fan-athlete relationships are challenged by legal, social, or sport-specific

norm violations. Based on the collective findings, I explained the theoretical, methodological,

and applied contributions of this dissertation to the existing literature, proposed ethical

considerations for research of this nature, and discussed recommendations for future directions in

this area of scholarship.

Acknowledgments

I would like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to those who have made

this dissertation possible. First, thank you to the sport fans who participated in this study. Thank

you for sharing your time with me and being open about your experiences as passionate fans in

the online and offline world.

I would like to acknowledge my sincere appreciation for my supervisory committee

members, Dr. John Wallace, Dr. Katherine Tamminen, and Dr. Alan Smith. Thank you for your

innovative perspectives, ongoing encouragement, and commitment to ensuring a rigorous and

meaningful dissertation. My graduate experience was made significantly richer by your expertise

and engagement with my work. Thank you.

To my supervisor, Dr. Gretchen Kerr, I express my deepest gratitude. Gretchen, you have

an innate gift for mentorship, and I am forever grateful that I was brought into your sphere nearly

ten years ago. Thank you for your guidance, unwavering support, and genuine kindness. Most

importantly, thank you for creating and fostering an environment where I was consistently

inspired to strive for my highest personal and professional potential.

Finally, my sincere thanks and appreciation to my family and friends for their support,

enthusiasm, and belief in me throughout my graduate studies. A special thanks to my mom, dad,

and sister who have been on this journey with me every step of the way. Throughout my life, you

have instilled a love of learning, nurtured my curiosity, and encouraged me to pursue my dreams.

Above all, you have taught me that in every situation there is always an opportunity to make a

positive difference – find it and embrace it. Thank you.

Organization of Dissertation

My dissertation is prepared and organized as a “sandwich” PhD dissertation, which is in

part comprised of three research papers (i.e., “study one”, “study two” and “study three”) that

have been published during the course of my PhD program. Each of the research papers was

undertaken specifically for the purpose of my PhD dissertation and contain all elements of a

completed peer-reviewed paper, including, a literature review, research question(s),

methodology, methods, data collection and analysis, results, discussion, and a reference list. To

ensure my dissertation flows appropriately and tells an overarching story about public shaming

of professional athletes on social media, I will preface the three research papers with a

cumulative introduction and literature review, and follow the three research papers with a

cumulative discussion and proposed directions for future research.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... iv

Organization of Dissertation ........................................................................................................... v

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... vi

List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................... xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

Personal Reflection ......................................................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................. 7

Societal Norms ............................................................................................................................ 7

Types of Norms....................................................................................................................... 9

Enforcement of Norms .......................................................................................................... 11

The Process of Shaming ........................................................................................................... 12

Purposes of Public Shaming ................................................................................................. 14

The Role of Shame in Public Shaming Practices.................................................................. 16

Historical Background of Public Shaming ........................................................................... 18

Rise of Social Media ................................................................................................................. 20

Creating a Social Media Account ......................................................................................... 20

Functions of Social Media .................................................................................................... 22

Historical Beginning of Social Media ................................................................................... 24

Outcomes of Social Media Use............................................................................................. 25

Public Shaming on Social Media Sites ................................................................................. 26

Online Disinhibition.............................................................................................................. 30

vii

Alternative Terms to Describe Negative Interactions Online ............................................... 32

Social Media in the Professional Sport Environment ............................................................... 34

General Use of Social Media in the Sport Industry .............................................................. 34

Social Media Use by Professional Athletes .......................................................................... 34

Fans in the Professional Sport Context ................................................................................. 37

Overarching Purpose for the Dissertation ................................................................................. 46

CHAPTER THREE: STUDY 1 .................................................................................................... 48

Sport fans’ responses on social media to professional athletes’ norm violations ......................... 48

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 49

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 50

Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 54

Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 55

Professional Athletes’ Norm Violations ............................................................................... 58

Description of Participants .................................................................................................... 58

Data Analysis, Ethics, and Rigour ............................................................................................ 61

Results ........................................................................................................................................... 63

General Reactions to Norm Violations ..................................................................................... 64

Offer and Withdrawal of Support ............................................................................................. 65

Desired or Expected Consequences .......................................................................................... 67

Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 69

Revisiting Braithwaite’s Theory ............................................................................................... 70

Influences on Public Shaming Practices ................................................................................... 71

Future Directions ...................................................................................................................... 74

viii

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 75

References ..................................................................................................................................... 77

CHAPTER FOUR: STUDY 2 ...................................................................................................... 88

Online public shaming of professional athletes: Gender matters ................................................. 88

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 89

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 90

Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 95

Philosophical Approach ............................................................................................................ 95

Methodological Overview: Pluralistic Data Analysis .............................................................. 96

Data Collection ..................................................................................................................... 97

Professional Athletes’ Norm Violations ............................................................................... 99

Inclusion Criteria. ................................................................................................................. 99

Description of Athlete Violations. ........................................................................................ 99

Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 100

Ethics ...................................................................................................................................... 102

Results ......................................................................................................................................... 102

Objectification of Females ...................................................................................................... 103

Hyper-masculinity/Hegemonic Masculinity ........................................................................... 105

Victim Blaming ....................................................................................................................... 106

Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 109

Interpreting Gendered Discourse ............................................................................................ 109

Rape Culture in Sport ............................................................................................................. 112

Societal Implications of Rape Culture .................................................................................... 113

Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................................ 114

Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................. 115

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 116

References ................................................................................................................................... 118

CHAPTER FIVE: STUDY 3 ...................................................................................................... 129

Sport fans’ perspectives of public shaming of professional athletes on social media ................ 129

Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... 130

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 131

Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 135

Methods....................................................................................................................................... 136

Recruitment ............................................................................................................................. 136

Data Collection ....................................................................................................................... 137

Participants .............................................................................................................................. 138

Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 141

Ethics ...................................................................................................................................... 142

Assessment of Rigour ............................................................................................................. 142

Results ......................................................................................................................................... 143

Developing a Sense of Identification and Belonging Through Fandom ................................ 144

Connecting with Professional Athletes on Social Media ........................................................ 147

Public Shaming as a Response to Identification Threats ........................................................ 150

Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 153

Fan Identification, Parasocial Relationships, and a Sense of Belonging ................................ 154

Parasocial Breakups and Public Shaming ............................................................................... 159

Future Directions .................................................................................................................... 160

References ................................................................................................................................... 162

CHAPTER SIX: CUMULATIVE DISCUSSION ...................................................................... 171

Dissertation Summary ............................................................................................................. 171

General Contributions to Extant Research .............................................................................. 176

Theoretical Contributions ....................................................................................................... 177

Methodological Contributions ................................................................................................ 180

Applied Contributions ............................................................................................................. 183

Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................................ 185

Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 189

Future Directions .................................................................................................................... 190

CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ 195

References ................................................................................................................................... 199

Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 241

Appendix A: Letter of Information and Consent for Sport Fans ............................................ 241

Appendix B: Sport Fan Interview Guide ................................................................................ 243

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Letter of Information and Consent for Sport Fans

Appendix B: Sport Fan Interview Guide

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

According to Hambrick (2012), the use of social media networks has grown

exponentially in the context of professional sport in recent years. Sport-related companies,

professional leagues, teams, and athletes have created accounts to enhance their brand by

advertising products, circulating news or information, and assisting or conversing with sport fans

(Hambrick, 2012). For professional athletes specifically, social media accounts are typically used

as a way to connect with fans in real time on an individual basis (Hambrick, 2012; Seo & Green,

2008). While there are potential benefits that may be gleaned through this new communication

channel with professional athletes (e.g., increased financial support from fans), little is known

about the potential harm that could result from fan-athlete interactions on social network sites.

However, other fields of scholarship (e.g., law, media studies) have explored negative

interactions on social network sites more broadly and cited the detrimental effects to those

involved (e.g., Cheung, 2014; Ferrara, 2015). Among these examples are instances of public

shaming, which has been the subject of significant research attention across various academic

disciplines for many years (e.g., Braithwaite, 1989; Harris, 2009; Jacquet, 2015; Massaro, 1997;

Whitman, 1988) but has experienced a significant resurgence with the rise of online social

networks, such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram (Cheung, 2014; De Vries, 2015; Goldman,

2015; Rowbottom, 2013). Public shaming is considered a social act that involves a formal or

informal sanction enforced to express disapproval when an individual behaves in a way that

violates perceived norms (Braithwaite, 1989; Cheung, 2014; De Vries, 2015; Harris, 2009;

Massaro, 1997). These practices on social media are unique in comparison to traditional in-

person shaming practices as the latter are typically enforced by a select few (i.e., legal

authorities, journalists), whereas the former may be facilitated by any individual who possesses a

social media account, which significantly enhances the potential scope of these practices

(Cheung, 2014; Rowbottom, 2013). Other unique factors that contribute to shaming practices on

social media include the perceived anonymity that can be assumed by the perpetrators (Joinson,

2001; Postmes, Spears, Sakhel, & De Groot, 2001; Surler, 2004), potential for exposure of

misconducts to reach millions of social media users (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Ellison, Lampe, &

Steinfeld, 2009; Ferrara, 2015; Goldman, 2015), and the enhanced accessibility to view

misconducts or participate in shaming practices via social media over time and from most social

and geographic locations (Bennett, 2003). As suggested by Ronson (2015), experiences of public

shaming on social network sites may have significant adverse personal and/or professional

consequences for the recipient.

Therefore, the purpose of this dissertation was to explore the public shaming of

professional athletes through social media. Specifically, this study investigated the nature and

extent of these practices on social network sites and fans’ perspectives on the reasons sport fans

engage with professional athletes on social media, including, public shaming of professional

athletes following social, legal, and sport-specific norm violations.

Personal Reflection

My personal experiences as an athlete, coach, and professional sport fan have an

important influence on my academic interests. My passion for sport began at the age of three

when I was enrolled in a local t-ball organization. Throughout the course of my athletic

experience, I competed in local, provincial, national and international tournaments in fastball and

played for a number of local and regional ringette teams. Aside from these competitive

experiences, I was also involved with many high school sport teams, including field hockey,

soccer, track and field, volleyball, and basketball. While I enjoyed the competitive aspect of

sport, it was the positive relationships I developed with my teammates that I cherished most

about these experiences. These relationships facilitated my personal development in important

ways, including enhancement of my communication and leadership skills. The fun and light-

hearted environment created by my teammates also allowed an opportunity to be more outgoing

and highlight my unique personality traits. The relationships I developed as a youth athlete

remain some of my closest friendships to date.

This initial love for sport is what led me to pursue a Bachelor’s degree in physical and

health education at the University of Toronto. During my undergraduate degree, my professor,

Dr. Gretchen Kerr, introduced me to a book titled, “Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of

Adolescent Girls”. This book detailed the challenges of identity development for female

adolescents and sparked my interest in sport as a potential environment to confront these

challenges and facilitate this development. Supported by the existing literature and influenced by

my personal experiences as an athlete, I completed a master’s thesis that explored the influence

of peer groups in organized sport on female adolescents’ identity development. For the young

athletes in this study, peers in sport assisted in the development of psychological characteristics

(e.g., commitment, drive, intelligence, confidence), social characteristics (e.g., honesty,

competitiveness, supportiveness) and positive body image. In addition to the positive

characteristics, however, some athletes highlighted the challenges they encountered with peers

on their sport teams, such as rumour spreading, mean comments, cliques, and struggles to find

one’s place within a peer group on a new team. These accounts piqued my interest in some of the

potential negative peer interactions that may occur in an organized sport environment.

At the same time that I was completing my master’s degree, I accepted a position as the

head coach of a competitive youth swim team. The swim team was composed of sixty-five male

and female athletes of all abilities aged five to fifteen. As someone who had never swam

competitively, I expected the greatest challenges to be administrative or educational in nature,

such as designing effective practices, monitoring progress of all the athletes, teaching proper

technique for each swimming stroke, and keeping track of all sixty-five athletes when we

traveled and competed at swim meets. However, as my time with the team progressed, I realized

that the majority of my attention was devoted to ensuring each athlete felt included, valued, and

enjoyed each practice and competitive meet. An influential part of achieving these objectives

was providing an environment that fostered positive peer interactions amongst all members of

the team. Despite an emphasis on positive peer interactions, there were circumstances when

negative peer interactions occurred. For instance, when announcing relay teams for upcoming

meets to the young athletes on the team, some athletes reacted outwardly negative (e.g.,

complained, rolled eyes) to the inclusion of certain peers on their relay team due to their skill

level. In these instances, the peer(s) who received the negative reaction or comment may have

felt excluded by their fellow athletes. Although I had not personally experienced negative peer

interactions as an athlete, my experiences as a coach provided me with a new perspective on the

challenges associated with facilitating positive interactions at all times amongst youth of all skill

levels and ages.

The data that emerged from my master’s thesis and my personal experiences as a coach

were influential in shifting the broad academic focus of my PhD to exploring negative

interactions that occur in the sport environment.

Outside of my involvement in organized sport as an athlete and coach, I am an avid fan of

professional sport and enjoy attending sport events, as well as, keeping active on social network

sites for news or information about my favourite teams, the Toronto Maple Leafs and the

Toronto Blue Jays. As a fan of Toronto sport teams, I am aware of the significant media attention

these teams receive and have interacted with or observed a passionate fan base that is ignited by

the success of their teams but can be outspoken critics when these teams experience failure. For

instance, during a losing streak near the end of the Toronto Maple Leafs’ 2014-2015 season,

numerous fans tossed their hundred-dollar jerseys on the ice to demonstrate their disapproval of

the team’s competitive play. During these periods of struggle for my favourite teams, I became

aware of the abundance of negative comments directed at professional athletes via social

network sites through articles I read in the media, as well as, browsing the social media accounts

of athletes within the professional sport leagues. In one specific instance, I browsed the social

media account of a professional athlete who publicly archived (i.e., “favourited”) over one

hundred ill-intended tweets that were directed at him on Twitter. As I scrolled through this

athlete’s list of archived tweets, I was alarmed and disturbed by the content of the tweets, which

included name-calling (e.g., “loser”, “washed up”, “band-aid”, “heartless”, “gimp”, “an

embarrassment”) and negative reactions about injuries sustained during competitive play. In

another example, I read a media article about a former professional athlete in Toronto who

shared that he felt too embarrassed at times to leave his home during periods of poor competitive

play and received numerous negative comments from fans on social media. As a supporter of

professional sport and a student of sport psychology, examples of negative interactions directed

at professional athletes on social media are very unsettling for me, particularly because I view

professional athletes as ordinary individuals with a unique occupation. In many other

occupations, employees may have a poor day at work without the potential to be ridiculed

publicly on social network sites by colleagues, superiors, or those outside of their occupation.

However, in the context of professional sport, these may be common and normalized practices.

In addition to these instances, I also observed examples of public shaming via social network

sites that occurred outside of the context of professional sport highlighted in the media, which

furthered my interest in these interactions.

While I too have felt disappointed by the behaviour or competitive play of my favourite

athletes or teams at times, I have not felt the desire to publicly share my disappointment with

them through negative comments on social media. These observations on social network sites

and discussions in the media led me to pose some initial questions about these experiences,

including the specific athlete behaviours that elicit negative reactions from fans, the nature of the

comments professional athletes receive from fans, the perceived purpose of these comments, the

ways in which the athletes interpret these comments, and the psychosocial effects of these

experiences for the athletes.

Influenced by my personal experiences in sport as an athlete, fan, coach, and researcher

and guided by these broad questions related to negative interactions amongst fans and athletes,

my dissertation explored experiences of public shaming through social media within the

professional sport environment.

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

The following section contains a review the extant literature related to public shaming

practices on social network sites. I will begin this review of the literature with an overview of

societal norms and the ways in which these norms influence behaviour. Then, I will address the

process of public shaming as a result of perceived societal norm violations. Within this

discussion, I will explain the conceptual foundation of public shaming, review the historical uses

of these practices, highlight the role of shame in this process, and examine the potential for these

practices to occur in social media contexts. Next, the focus will shift to social media, in which I

will discuss the emergence of social network sites, the functions they serve, and the features of

these platforms that help facilitate public shaming practices. Finally, the presence of social

network sites in the professional sport environment will be discussed, including their use by

those within the professional sport context, the ways in which these platforms contribute to the

fan experience, as well as, the existing sport studies related to this topic.

Societal Norms

As stated by Cialdini and Trost (1998), “the social influence process is an undeniably

central component of social interaction” (p.180). Through this social process, individuals

endeavour to influence and be influenced by those with whom they interact in various personal

and social contexts (Cialdini & Trost, 1998). One of the constructs integral to the process of

social influence is a “norm” (Cialdini & Trost, 1998). Extensive scholarship dedicated to

“norms” – in progress since the late nineteenth century – exists in a wide range of social science

disciplines, including, sociology, psychology, international relations, law, and political science

(Hechter & Opp, 2001). Norms are broadly considered a psychological construct and cultural

phenomena that seek to guide, interpret, and explain the complex behaviour of humans (Berger

& Luckmann, 1966; Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Hechter & Opp, 2001; Lapinski & Rimal, 2005;

Pepitone, 1976). More specifically, norms can be conceptualized as a set of negotiated rules

characteristic of a particular group that prescribe and govern social behaviour (e.g., Hechter &

Opp, 2001; Pepitone, 1976; Sherif, 1936; Triandis, 1994). Examples of norms can range from the

ways in which one acts at the family dinner table, to the ways in which one performs in a

corporate environment (Posner & Rasmusen, 1999). These social rules tend to be created and

demonstrated at a collective level (e.g., within peer groups, sport teams, large communities), and

interpreted at the individual level (e.g., one’s personal understanding of a norm; Arrow & Burns,

2004; Lapinski & Rimal, 2005). Due to the largely unwritten nature of collective norms,

interpretation at the individual level can be diverse amongst members of the same community or

social group (Cruz, Henningsen, & Williams, 2000; Lapinski & Rimal, 2005).

The content that composes a norm is typically neutral – neither essentially good or bad –

and its influence is largely dependent upon its acceptance amongst members of a community

(Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszcznski, 1991). The process of norm

acceptance typically begins with an individual’s engagement in specific activities or behaviours

that are followed by praise or reinforcement from one’s social network, such as parents or peers

(Berger & Luckmann, 1966; Cialdini & Trost, 2001; Horne, 2001; Opp, 1982). Over time, these

activities or behaviours become expected standards due to the positive response received from

others in the community (Lapinski & Rimal, 2005). Once norms are established, behaviours

aligning with the group norms continue to be rewarded, while behaviours that deviate from them

are discouraged, condemned, or sanctioned (Lapinski & Rimal, 2005). Members of a community

may learn about the group’s norms in a variety of ways, including, deliberate teaching (e.g.,

formal lessons or presentations, sharing of stories), nonverbal behaviours, modelling, or

observations of others (Allison, 1992; Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren, 1990; Cialdini & Trost, 1998;

Lumsden, 1988). The intensity of these norms within communities tends to be influenced by the

relevance of the norm to the community, the degree of social cohesion amongst members, and

the available opportunities for interaction between members of the community to share and

transfer these norms (Cialdini & Trost, 1998).

Types of Norms

Broadly, there are two different types of norms that tend to regulate societal behaviour:

legal and social norms (Hechter & Opp, 2001). Legal norms are characterized as formal rules

associated with specific sanctions devised purposefully by the state and enforced by a distinct

group of people, such as law enforcement personnel (Hechter & Opp, 2001). These norms are

often documented carefully within designated handbooks, texts, or legislation (Hechter & Opp,

2001). In contrast, social norms are considered implied expectations of sometimes vague origin

that tend to be determined and enacted by individuals belonging to a particular group (Cialdini &

Trost, 1998; Hechter & Opp, 2001). These norms are based on a wide spectrum of societal, peer,

and personal expectations, as well as observations of the behaviour of others (Cialdini, Reno, &

Kallgren, 1990; Fishbein & Azjen, 1975; Schwartz, 1977) and are most often enforced

informally by members of one’s social sphere (Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Hechter & Opp, 2001).

As a result, the repercussions for those who deviate from social norms are not prescribed or

explicit (Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Hechter & Opp, 2001).

Social norms are further differentiated into descriptive and injunctive norms; descriptive

norms are dictated through the observation of others’ behaviour in a specific scenario or context

(Cialdini & Trost, 1993; Reno, Cialdini, & Kallgren, 1993). These norms are most applicable to

individuals who are attempting to enhance the suitability of their behaviour in a new or

unfamiliar situation, such as, job interview, funeral, wedding, when meeting someone for the

first time (Cialdini, Kallgren, & Reno, 1991; Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren,

1990; Sherif, 1936). Descriptive norms help individuals assess the suitability of their actions in a

particular situation by determining what is considered “normal” behaviour (i.e., behaviour of the

majority) and judging their behaviour against this standard (Gilbert, 1995; Schultz, Nolan,

Cialdini, Goldstein, & Griskevicius, 2007; Stiff, 1994). For example, when an individual is

invited to a group interview for employment, the individual might observe the common

behaviours of other candidates, such as note taking, raising one’s hand to respond to interview

questions, or appropriate manners for addressing the interviewer and alter personal behaviour to

reflect these observations. Typically, individuals do not receive repercussions if they choose to

ignore the descriptive norm cues in a social situation (Lapinski & Rimal, 2005).

In contrast, injunctive norms are often considered social behaviours that are supported or

disapproved of within a community (Allison, 1992; Opp, 1982; Reno, Cialdini, & Kallgren,

1993). Injunctive norms centre on behaviour driven by moral imperative, or expectations for

“what ought to be done” in a social context and may lead an individual to feel increased pressure

to conform to the behavioural standards (Lapinski & Rimal, 2005). The key feature that

distinguishes injunctive norms from descriptive norms are that individuals may face sanctions

from members of their community if they choose not to conform (Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren,

1990; Kallgren, Reno, & Cialdini, 2000; Lapinski & Rimal, 2005). In many situations, however,

there may be congruence between descriptive and injunctive norms (Lapinski & Rimal, 2005).

For instance, an individual may observe that the majority of his/her colleagues arrive at work at a

particular time in the morning, dressed in a certain manner (i.e., descriptive norms), however, the

individual may also incur sanctions from the employer if he/she is not punctual or following the

dress code (i.e., injunctive norms; Lapinski & Rimal, 2005).

For the purpose of this dissertation – and, in addition to the broader societal legal and

social norms – I am interested in the community-specific social norms developed in the sport

context. Previous research has explored the group norms that tend to be prominent in sport and

found that the common norms in this context include: competition norms (e.g., professional

demeanour, game preparedness, reflection on results); practice norms (e.g., adherence to

training, strong work ethic, commitment); off-season norms (e.g., maintenance of fitness, regular

social contact in off-season, scheduled appearances); and sport-specific social norms, such as,

compliance of dress code, support and respect for teammates, communication skills, appropriate

socializing outside the sport environment, and attendance at events (Munroe, Estabrooks,

Dennis, & Carron, 1999; Prapavessis & Carron, 1997).

Enforcement of Norms

Although some norms are adhered to as a result of their perceived value, the importance

of external mechanisms to enforce behavioural standards outlined by legal and social norms is

well-recognized in the existing literature (Coleman, 1990; Horne, 2001). There are many

examples of external mechanisms to enforce norms; some are exclusively used to sanction legal

norm violations (e.g., monetary fines, prison sentences), while others are predominantly used to

sanction social norms violations (e.g., ostracism). However, the use of public shaming in

particular has been commonly implemented over time as a sanction for both legal and social

norm violations (Coleman, 1990; Hechter, 1984; Homans, 1961; Noussair & Tucker, 2005;

Posner & Rasmusen, 1999). As a result of its widespread use, public shaming has received

significant attention in previous literature across various academic disciplines (Massaro, 1997).

The Process of Shaming

Public shaming refers to the external process by which an individual or group of

individuals express contempt or disapproval towards another person as a result of that person’s

perceived deviation from a norm (Cheung, 2014; Harris, 2009; Jacquet, 2015; Massaro, 1997;

Whitman, 1998). Examples of shaming sanctions include, engagement in hostile behaviours

directed at the victim, exposure of personal details about the victim, or disclosure of misconduct

to a public audience in person or online (Cheung, 2014; Jacquet, 2015). Shaming practices are

utilized in a variety of contexts and typically serve to regulate behaviour through encouraging

conformity to perceived norms relevant to a particular group or community (Kahan & Posner,

1999, p. 368; Massaro, 1997; Rowbottom, 2013; Scheff, 1988). According to Braithwaite (1989)

shaming can be implemented for the purpose of reintegration (i.e., shaming an individual to

reinforce his/her belonging in a community and reaffirm integrity in him/her) or stigmatization

(i.e., shaming an individual to exclude him/her from a community with minimal intention for

forgiveness). Reintegrative shaming makes a distinction between the person and the behaviour,

whereas stigmatized shaming emphasizes perceived poor behaviour as part of one’s identity and

seeks to ostracize the individual from the community (Braithwaite, 1993). Most communities

that employ reintegrative shaming sanctions have pre-determined processes for integrating the

offender back into the community following the sanction (Massaro, 1997). In these

circumstances, shaming sanctions do not serve to permanently banish the offender from his/her

community (Massaro, 1997). An example of reintegrative shaming can be illustrated in a social

context such as sport, wherein an athlete may make a mistake that deviates from a social norm of

the team (e.g., engaging in unsportsmanlike behaviour on the field); the coach may respond to

this behaviour by denouncing the athlete’s mistake in front of the team and benching the athlete

in the next game; following this public display of disapproval, the coach may offer an

opportunity for the athlete to repent his/her mistake (e.g., issuing a formal apology to his/her

team) and reintegrate the athlete into team play. Modern shaming practices, however, often

represent stigmatized shaming in that those who enforce shaming practices are perceived to be

part of the “proper community” and the recipients of these practices are not (Massaro, 1997).

Massaro (1997) suggested that these practices may actually isolate the offenders instead of

modify their behaviour and re-establish their place in the community. Using the same example of

the athlete who demonstrates poor behaviour, stigmatized shaming would encourage the coach to

publicly remove the player from the team in a permanent manner without an opportunity for

forgiveness.

Central to the shaming process is the perceived presence of an audience to witness the

shaming of an individual’s misconduct (Braithwaite, 1989; Jacquet, 2015). According to

Braithwaite (1989), shaming sanctions tend to be most effective when an individual or

community that is relevant to the individual enforces the sanction. In this regard, shaming

sanctions would be most effective when enforced by a community in which the individual shares

a strong connection, commitment, and sense of duty or responsibility (Harris, 2009, p.390). In

addition, an audience is a significant factor in shaming practices as those who demonstrate their

moral disagreements with another through shaming often expect that individuals in the

community who witness these practices will react with comparable social condemnation (Skeel,

2001).

For shaming sanctions to be effective in a particular community, an adequate

understanding of the dynamic cultural and subcultural norms, the meanings attached to status

(e.g., individualistic or collectivist communities), and the ways in which these intersect with the

process of shaming, is required (Massaro, 1997; Wallbott & Scherer, 1995). For instance, if

meaningful employment is a valued social norm in a particular culture, individuals who do not

seek meaningful employment might be publicly shamed as a result (Massaro, 1997, p. 673). In

contrast, it would not be relevant to enforce shaming sanctions in a community where

meaningful employment was not a valued norm (Massaro, 1997). It is important to note that

identifying the important norms in cultures and subcultures is a significant challenge, as they

tend to be ambiguous, consistently evolving, and influenced by multiple factors in multicultural

communities (Massaro, 1997). In sum, the effectiveness of shaming sanctions tends to depend on

interactions between the person who is being shamed and the conduct which he/she is being

shamed for, the person or group who employs the process of shaming, the details of the

experience, and the audience who interprets and reinforces it (Massaro, 1997).

Purposes of Public Shaming

Three aims often underlie instances of shaming, including: shaming for the purpose of

punishment, informing others, and/or criticizing others (Rowbottom, 2013). First, instances of

public shaming can serve as a form of punishment through formal sanctions enforced by public

authorities (Rowbottom, 2013). Shaming sanctions carried out by public authorities may damage

one’s reputation or facilitate a loss of social status and/or social opportunities, which may

discourage the victim from engaging in the violation again (Petley, 2013). In addition, these

sanctions intend to deter the general public from engagement in similar behaviours (Rowbottom,

2013; Von Hirsch, 1993). As a result, public shaming as a form of punishment is most often used

in a criminal context when there is a violation of legal norms, and includes practices such as

state-approved publication of the names of convicted drunk drivers (McDonald, 2009).

Second, instances of public shaming can be used as a source of information for others

(Rowbottom, 2013). Shaming for the purpose of providing information intends to assist others in

making decisions in circumstances wherein one has previous experience or knowledge

(Rowbottom, 2013). When an individual provides information to others, he/she does so with the

intention to influence the decisions of the audience, however, the audience has the ability to

accept or decline the advice (Rowbottom, 2013). For example, an individual can provide

information to others about a politician’s poor budgeting or unreasonable expenses claims, but

still allow the receiver of information to make a personal choice to vote for the politician in light

of this information (Rowbottom, 2013). This purpose of shaming differs from shaming for the

purpose of punishment, as the latter must provoke a widespread response from others (e.g.,

deterrence of behaviour) to be considered successful (Rowbottom, 2013).

Third, public shaming practices can be used for the purpose of criticizing the conduct of

others (Rowbottom, 2013). Shaming in this manner is often based on one’s moral or ethical

disagreement with the actions of others and tends to be implemented by ordinary individuals who

are sharing their personal opinions with others (Rowbottom, 2013). In these instances, the

criticism is not information essential to public knowledge, but information used to communicate

one’s perspective on a topic or situation (Rowbottom, 2013). Examples of shaming for the

purpose of criticizing others includes, informal shaming of athletes or celebrities who commit

adultery, businesses who treat employees poorly, health professionals who support controversial

procedures, or politicians with whom one disagrees (Rowbottom, 2013).

Benefits and Drawbacks of Public Shaming

Scholars have broadly identified some positive aspects of employing shaming sanctions

within various contexts (e.g., criminal or other), such as being cost-efficient compared to other

sanctions, keeping individuals away from institutions that may foster further misconduct,

addressing moral misconduct, and dictating the social consequences of particular behaviours to a

diverse audience (Goldman, 2015; Kahan, 1996; Massaro, 1991; Skeel, 2001; Sunstein, 1996).

However, scholars have also expressed significant concerns about the application of shaming

sanctions, such as: potential lack of effectiveness; the inhumane nature of the sanctions (e.g.,

being publicly humiliated); unknown behavioural or psychosocial repercussions of these

experiences; the inability to manage the ways in which the audience will react (e.g., severity and

duration of reaction), which can lead to a response disproportionate to the misconduct; and a lack

of opportunity to sufficiently defend oneself (e.g., Billingham & Parr, 2020; Goldman, 2015;

Kahan & Posner, 1999; Massaro, 1991; Massaro, 1997; Skeel, 2001; Whitman, 1998). As

Massaro (1997) asserts, it is critical to consider if the process of shaming in response to

perceived misconducts (e.g., moral, ethical, criminal, or other) undermines other significant

societal norms, such as, fair treatment, respect for others, and tolerance of individual differences.

For instance, where is the line between shaming practices that are appropriate and serve a pre-

determined outcome (e.g., prevent reoccurrence of the behaviour) and shaming practices that are

inappropriate, hurtful, disproportionate or damaging? And, in what ways are these lines

negotiated or considered by those engaging in public shaming practices, if at all?

The Role of Shame in Public Shaming Practices

While the process of shaming is considered an external action to enforce sanctions on

those who deviate from norms, the emotion of shame is often the intended internal experience for

the recipient (Cheung, 2014; Goldman, 2015; Massaro, 1997; Skeel, 2001). From a broad

perspective, the emotion of shame can be referred to as feelings that tend to arise when there is

an exposed discrepancy between how an individual wishes to be perceived by others (e.g.,

behaviours, attitudes, ideas, ambitions) and who he/she is portrayed as (Loader, 1998; Scheff,

2000; Tangney & Fischer, 1995; Wurmser, 1987). Feelings of shame can serve as a response to

or protection against actions that threaten to expose shortcomings in valued facets of one’s sense

of self (Massaro, 1997; Wurmser, 1981). In addition, feelings of shame often relate to

circumstances in which a social bond between individuals is threatened or challenged (Scheff,

2000). Physical indicators, such as, averting eye contact, downcast eyes, dropping one’s head or

drooping of the upper body, may reveal one’s personal feelings of shame (Massaro, 1997).

Shame plays a significant role in constructing and regulating societies as the anticipation

and/or actual feelings of the emotion serve as a tool for self-monitoring that facilitates the

reinforcement of norms, promotes unity, and encourages societal obedience (Braithwaite, 1989;

Goffman, 1967; Scheff, 1988; Scheff, 2000; Williams, 1993). It is important to note that shaming

sanctions do not always induce or intend to induce feelings of shame; instead, these sanctions

may provoke a wide array of other emotions, such as guilt, anxiety, pride, depression,

embarrassment, or anger (Billingham & Parr, 2020; Loader, 1998; Massaro, 1997).

While reasonable exposure to or anticipation of shame can facilitate acceptable

behaviour, excessive feelings of shame can have a debilitating effect on one’s sense of self

(Loader, 1998). As a result, individuals often employ various strategies to protect themselves

from feelings of shame, such as, self-deprecation, perfectionism, exercising power or acting

superior over others, withdrawal, or dismissal (Loader, 1998). If these strategies are ineffective,

individuals often react to feelings of shame by making light of what has occurred, blaming

behaviours or actions on someone else, expressing anger, denying shameful feelings, or

experiencing learned helplessness (Loader, 1998; Massaro, 1997). When considering the

usefulness of shaming practices, it is important to note that anticipation of shame in response to

personal behaviour does not always dissuade individuals from engaging in those behaviours

(Massaro, 1997).

Historical Background of Public Shaming

From a historical perspective, some of the earliest forms of public shaming, such as being

repeatedly lashed at a whipping post or burning at a stake, were demonstrated in the Middle

Ages in Europe and during the early periods of colonialism in the United States (Hess & Waller,

2014; Litowitz, 1997). These instances of public shaming were very common and served as a

psychological tactic to dissuade citizens from misconduct by demonstrating the consequences of

specific actions or behaviours (Friedman, 1993; Hess & Waller, 2014; Kahan, 1996). The

rationale for engagement in these tactics was drawn from the perspective that those who violate

norms were inherently evil (Massaro, 1997). Other examples of shaming sanctions used during

this period included, constraining one’s limbs to a wooden stock or restraining one’s head in a

pillory and allowing others to toss garbage or hurl rocks at the recipient (Hess & Waller, 2014;

Hirsch, 1992; Massaro, 1997; Whitman, 1998); forcing an individual to wear a sign around

his/her neck that detailed the misconduct committed (Hess & Waller, 2014; Massaro, 1991);

maiming or permanently branding an individual by imprinting a symbol with a hot iron on

his/her body (Hirsch, 1982); or harnessing a mask to an individual’s head as a sanction for

gossiping with others or speaking too much (Hess & Waller, 2014). Evidently, early forms of

shaming sanctions addressed a wide range of perceived social and legal violations and the

severity of these sanctions significantly varied.

As time progressed, the use of shaming sanctions in most western societies was scaled

back in favour of imprisoning those who violated legal norms, however, shaming remained

common practice for emotional development and social obedience in some cultures (e.g., Asian,

Mediterranean; Goldman, 2015; Li, Wang, & Fischer, 2004). This shift away from shaming

sanctions in most western societies was likely due to the social and political transformations that

occurred during the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century, including the growth of

urban neighbourhoods and decrease of tight-knit communities (Hall, Wiecek, & Finkelman,

1996). Much of the success of shaming sanctions in colonial America can be attributed to the

socially intimate nature of the community, which fostered inclusion and enhanced anxieties

about engagement in misconduct for fear of disappointing fellow members of the community

(Hirsch, 1982; Massaro, 1997). Thus, development of more impersonal urban neighbourhoods

was not considered an environment conducive to effective shaming practices (Braithwaite, 1989;

Hirsch, 1992; Morton, 2001). As a result, prison sentences became the manner through which

society demonstrated condemnation for a citizen’s misconduct (Kahan, 1996).

Despite a shift towards incarceration, modern public shaming sanctions continue to occur

in a variety of ways. For example, in a legal context, alleged offenders are sometimes required to

complete a “perpetrator walk”, which involves the individual walking in handcuffs from the

police headquarters to the courthouse for trial (Boudana, 2014). In the traditional forms of media,

shaming sanctions can also be exercised through the reporting on and publishing of one’s social

or legal misconduct in print or on television (Goldman, 2015; Rowbottom, 2013). In other

contexts, such as youth sport environments, shaming sanctions can be exhibited when a

significant adult (i.e., coach, trainer) belittles an athlete publicly for not reaching a standard or

expectation determined by the significant adult (Kays & Schlabig, 2013). Most recently, a new

vehicle of enforcement for these sanctions has emerged: public shaming in the social media era

(Cheung, 2014).

Rise of Social Media

Social media has been recognized as “a phenomenon that has transformed the interaction

and communication of individuals throughout the world” (Edosomwan, Prakasan, Kouame,

Watson, & Seymour, 2011, p.79). As stated by Kietzmann and colleagues (2011), the popularity

of the social media phenomenon has created a fresh landscape for communication consisting of

“mobile and web-based technologies that create highly interactive platforms via which

individuals and communities share, co-create, discuss, and modify user-generated content” (p.

241). This new form of communication facilitates invariable connection and availability, which

is “transforming relations of time, space, transmission and reception, giving rise to an accelerated

information order in which immediacy, instantaneity, and immanence are constitutive of social

experience” (Hutchins, 2011, p.241; Redhead, 2007).

Social network sites emerged in the late 1990s and the popularity of these sites has grown

considerably with millions of users logging onto sites daily and integrating their use in personal

and professional capacities (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Edosomwan et al., 2011; Ellison, Lampe, &

Steinfield, 2009; Ferrara, 2015; Goldman, 2015). In general, these social network sites have been

used as an essential device for communication, with hundreds of sites created to meet diverse or

niche interests, passions, or routines (e.g., Boyd & Ellison, 2007; De Meo, Ferrara, Fiumara, &

Provetti, 2014; Edosomwan et al., 2011; Ferrara et al., 2013; Gemmill & Peterson, 2006; Gilbert

& Karahalios, 2009; Subrahmanyam & Greenfield, 2008).

Creating a Social Media Account

Upon registration to the social network site, users are prompted to develop a public or

private personal profile, which contains some information about oneself (e.g., photograph, age,

geographical area, interests), and then users are encouraged to build an online network with

others (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009). This created network

typically consists of “friends” (i.e., those whom one shares a reciprocal connection) and “fans”

or “followers” (i.e., connection does not have to be reciprocal; Boyd & Ellison, 2007). Networks

can be conceived through pre-existing connections with others and/or new connections with

strangers based on like-minded perspectives and identities, such as, political views,

entertainment preferences, fandoms, or religious practices (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). In the latter

context, social networking sites serve to link users with others with whom they might not have

otherwise connected with in an offline setting (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Ellison, Lampe, &

Steinfield, 2009). Connecting with strangers who share similar interests on social network sites

can also promote problem solving and social action efforts (e.g., activism, humanitarian

assistance in times of crisis) by acting as a platform for cost-effective organized meetings or

information sharing (Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009).

Within these networks, users are able to compose direct public or private messages to

members of their network, browse user profiles, read or write comments in response to

information displayed by friends or followers, see communication between users in one’s

network, share photographs or videos with others, engage with virtual reality, blog, or instant

message (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009; Subrahmanyam, Reich,

Waechter, & Epinoza, 2008). Through these methods, individuals are able to post updates to

their profile, such as significant life events or daily activities, and monitor these events and

activities on others’ profiles, which functions as a method of “lightweight social surveillance”

(Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009). This form of social surveillance helps to sustain ongoing

awareness of those within an individual’s social network (Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009,

p.7). In addition to these features, social network sites are differentiated from other websites or

technologies (e.g., e-mail) through the ability to digitally demonstrate one’s personal and

professional interests and connections (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield,

2009). The demonstration of social connections can be a benefit in that the connections might

assist individuals in enhancement or validation of the personal identity content displayed in their

profiles (Ellison & Boyd, 2007). For example, an individual may interact with a particular

business frequently but it is only when that individual shares information or links with that

website via social networking that the interest or connection is articulated for others.

Functions of Social Media

From a broad perspective, social media platforms have been recognized as spaces where

conversations and debate about social and cultural values take place (Antunovic, 2014; Brock,

2012; Schmittel & Sanderson, 2015). As a result, social media often functions as an information

hub where personal understandings of social or cultural issues are developed, shaped, and

disseminated (Zaleski, Gundersen, Baes, Estupinian, & Vergara, 2016). While there may be

benefits to the use of social media in this manner, many scholars recognize the risk in using

social media as a space for open communication and debate, as it may provide an opportunity for

users to promote hegemonic or misogynistic dialogue, reinforce established relations of power

and oppression, and strengthen contentious views on significant and topical sociocultural

concerns (Ash, Sanderson, Kumanyika, & Gramlich, 2017; Demirhan & Cakir-Demirhan, 2015).

For example, expression of problematic views about specific social identities such as, gender,

race, faith, sexuality, political views, and nationality are increasingly common on social media

and individuals are often targeted online based on these identities (Jane, 2014a; Nakayama,

2017).

On a more personal level, Kietzmann and colleagues (2011) have identified more specific

functions that engagement on these sites may offer, which include: identity (i.e., ability to

display age, gender, occupation, goals, likes or dislikes); conversations (i.e., encourage diverse

communications between individuals or groups, associations, or businesses); sharing (i.e.,

partake in exchange of information); presence (i.e., displays an individual’s physical or online

accessibility, such as online/offline status updates or geographical check-ins); relationships (i.e.,

degree of formal or informal relations between friends or followers, such as, common interests,

responsibilities, or occupation); reputation (i.e., the ability to determine an individual’s status,

through aspects such as, trustworthiness, value of content, volume of friends or followers); and

groups (i.e., the ability to develop online communities with particular purposes or goals;

Kietzmann et al., 2011). These seven blocks are not considered mutually exclusive and each

social networking site tends to emphasize three to four of these blocks as a foundation to meet

particular needs (Kietzmann et al., 2011). For instance, LinkedIn centers on identity,

relationships, and reputation, while YouTube focuses on sharing, conversations, groups, and

reputation (Kietzmann et al., 2011). Importantly, some aspects of these sites or the sites

themselves are transient, as they tend to continually innovate and create new features to enhance

users’ experiences (Subrahmanyam et al., 2008). Other researchers have categorized the

functions of social media use more broadly and suggested that social media accounts can serve

strategic (e.g., mechanism for businesses to build relationships and promote brands in an

accessible manner), operational (e.g., communicate up-to-date information) or user-centered

purposes, such as, a mechanism for social interaction, entertainment, fandom or news (e.g., Filo,

Lock, & Karg, 2014; Hambrick et al., 2013; Hatch & Schultz, 2010; Sanderson & Hambrick,

2012).

Historical Beginning of Social Media

The popularity of social networking sites gained significant traction at the turn of the 21

century – particularly with the emergence of MySpace in 2003 – and garnered significant

international media coverage (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Edosomwan et al., 2011). MySpace

allowed individuals to login and create an interactive profile that showcased personal

information, photographs, and links to music or video content to share with other MySpace users

(Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Edosomwan et al., 2011). In 2008, at the height of MySpace’s

popularity, the social network site had 75.9 million users visiting the site per month in the United

States alone (Gillette, 2011). The popularity of MySpace was later challenged by the

development of Facebook, which originally functioned as an interactive social network site

reserved for post-secondary students at Harvard University to share personal information and

content (Cassidy, 2006; Edosomwan et al., 2011). Rules regarding the use of Facebook were

eventually expanded to include access for all individuals over thirteen years of age (Cassidy,

2006; Edosomwan et al., 2011). Facebook currently attracts 1.55 billion users per month and

reached a milestone of 1 billion users logging into the social network site on the same day for the

first time on August 27

, 2015 (Facebook, 2015). One billion users logging onto Facebook in

one day is equivalent to one in seven people worldwide accessing the social network site in a 24-

hour span (Facebook, 2015). As of 2020, Facebook averages 2.6 billion users per month

(Zephoria, 2020).

Other popular social network sites currently offered include: YouTube, which

predominantly serves as a platform for professional and amateur user-created videos (e.g.,

advertisements, music videos, television, video blogs) and boasts over 1 billion users worldwide

(Edosomwan et al., 2011; YouTube, 2015); Twitter, which has 330 million monthly users and

differs from other popular social network sites in that it offers micro-blogging (i.e., short

messages limited to 140 characters) known as “tweets” and is often used by celebrities, athletes,

and journalists (Hambrick, 2012; Hutchins, 2011; Twitter, 2015); LinkedIn, which serves 660

million professionals worldwide and functions as a social network site for professionals seeking

to connect with, maintain ties, or be referred to other members of the workforce (Kietzmann et

al., 2011; LinkedIn, 2015); and Instagram, which also has over one billion users worldwide and

acts as a platform for sharing, editing, and viewing photographs and video content, as well as,

commenting on the content created by others (Instagram, 2020). Clearly, there are numerous

popular platforms available to serve a variety of needs for a wide range of users.

Outcomes of Social Media Use

Several scholars have suggested positive outcomes associated with the use of social

networking sites, such as, increased connection with others (De Meo et al., 2014; Ellison,

Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007), enhanced self-esteem (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Raacke

& Bonds-Raacke, 2008), maintenance of larger social networks (Donath & Boyd, 2004; Resnick,

2001; Wellman, Haase, Witte, & Hampton, 2001), increased social awareness through access to

international current events and educational health information (Centola, 2011; Ferrara et al.,

2013; Kwak, Lee, Park, & Moon, 2010), improved mobilization in humanitarian crises (Hughes

& Palen, 2009; Sakaki, Okazaki, & Matsuo, 2010; Yates & Paquette, 2011), increased ability to

demonstrate support for sport teams or athlete icons (Hur, Ko, & Valacich, 2007; Seo & Green,

2008), and enhanced democracy through increased election participation (Bond et al., 2012). In

contrast, scholarly attention has begun to suggest potential negative outcomes associated with the

use of social network sites, such as, strong reinforcement of singular perspectives, as

perspectives that differ from one’s viewpoint can be purposefully hidden or completely excluded

from one’s social network site (Sunstein, 2001), as well as, misuse of personal information, such

as stalking, theft of personal identity, cyber bullying, privacy concerns and public shaming by

members within one’s network or outsiders who are able to access content on public profiles

(Cheung, 2014; Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009; Rowbottom, 2013).

Public Shaming on Social Media Sites

Despite a paucity of empirical attention on shaming via social network sites (De Vries,

2015), many people who use social media have observed personal details of a particular

individual be revealed and distributed across these platforms with the intent to shame that

individual for his/her social or legal behaviour (Cheung, 2014). Similar to public shaming in

person, shaming via social media functions to sanction individuals who are perceived to have

violated social or legal norms (Cheung, 2014; Whitman, 1988). As defined by Cheung (2014),

public shaming practices in this new context are considered personal attacks that involve

individuals hurling callous comments towards the recipient and/or exposing his/her personal

information in a public online setting. These acts are carried out in response to different types of

norm violations for the purpose of humiliation, social denouncement, and public punishment

(Cheung, 2014; Kitchin, Paramio-Salcines, & Walters, 2019). In comparison to offline shaming

practices, the scope of perceived social norm violations is often expanded in online contexts to

include shaming individuals for minor or insignificant misconducts (Rowbottom, 2013). In

addition, the details available regarding perceived norm violations are increasingly accessible

over various technological, social and geographic landscapes and across time (Bennett, 2003).

Further, shaming practices may be particularly effective in the context of social networking sites

due to the common goal of creating close communities on these sites based on mutual

professional or personal interests (Goldman, 2015).

Public shaming through an online context is particularly troubling as an individual’s

personal information or activities (e.g., status updates, photographs or video sharing) on social

networking sites can be manipulated by others (e.g., copied, altered, re-posted) and revealed to a

wider audience than intended by the originator (Rowbottom, 2013; Wesch, 2009). Manipulation

and/or sharing of personal information or activities of others can be applied to harmless tweets,

posts, or photographs, and/or instances in which an individual may have violated perceived legal

or social norms of an online community (Rowbottom, 2013). The publishing of social violations

as a sanction for misconduct was previously reserved for journalists; however, due to the

widespread access to information on social networking sites and the ability to publicly distribute

it, engagement in the process of shaming is possible for most individuals or groups on these sites

(Rowbottom, 2013). This newfound ability to directly engage in the process of shaming via

online platforms grants a form of power to ordinary individuals who are often unknown to the

victim; this may lead those who engage in the process of shaming to respond with harsher insults

or increased aggression (Cheung, 2014; Rowbottom, 2013). As a result, the individual who has

violated the perceived norm is subject to condemnation from those within his/her social network

as well as an anonymous audience online (Cheung, 2014). For example, in 2013, an American

publicist sent out several tweets to her 170 Twitter followers prior to embarking on an

international flight. The final message in the string of satirically intended tweets posted by the

publicist to her account stated, “Going to Africa. Hope I don’t get AIDS. Just kidding. I’m

white!” (Ronson, 2015). While the publicist was aboard the flight, her tweet garnered worldwide

attention and she received thousands of critical and harsh messages from Twitter users

condemning her for the tweet (Ronson, 2015). Messages stated that the publicist’s tweet was

“disgusting”, “racist”, “outrageous” and “offensive”, encouraged geographically-close users to

go to the airport to publicly document her arrival, and called for her dismissal from the company

that employed her (Ronson, 2015). In addition to the messages on Twitter, the publicist was told

that employees of the accommodation she had secured for her holiday would strike if she

checked-in to her hotel and that her safety was in question (Ronson, 2015). When she returned to

the United States, she was relieved of her duties at her place of employment, received significant

attention in the news media, and was followed by photographers for an extended period of time

(Ronson, 2015). In this case, a tweet intended for a small group of Twitter followers was able to

reach and be interpreted by thousands of individuals worldwide and produce substantially

harmful effects to the publicist’s personal and professional life. In response to the worldwide

reaction to this situation, Ronson (2015) stated, “the furor over [the publicist’s] tweet had

become not just an ideological crusade against her perceived bigotry but also a form of idle

entertainment” (p.1). Expanding on this notion of idle entertainment, scholars have also

suggested individuals participate in public shaming practices on social media for the purpose of

excitement, seeking attention, evoking a reaction, and elevating their ‘own moral purity’

(Blackford, 2016, p.6; Jane, 2014a). From a broader perspective, Cheung (2014) has critiqued

increased engagement in digital communication by stating that it has resulted in:

…An increasing popularity and fascination with capturing others’ images, exposing

others’ wrongdoing, and bringing the people concerned to a brand of online justice in the

form of a manhunt which, in both the cyber and real world, can easily and quickly spin

out of control… (p.319-320).

A critical aspect that facilitates public shaming online is the rapid spread of information

made possible by social media (Weng, Menczer, & Ahn, 2013, 2014), which allows information

to reach larger audiences and influence an online mob mentality (Cheung, 2014). This mentality

may promote widespread moral outrage amongst a large group of people in response to

perceived norm violations (Rowbottom, 2013). Importantly, individuals may participate in online

shaming of another individual even if they are not “friends” (i.e., reciprocal connection on social

network site) or “followers” (i.e., connection does not have to be reciprocal) of the person being

shamed through a social network site. Online mobs are particularly concerning because

individuals who engage in the shaming of others in response to moral outrage often justify their

actions as freedom of expression (Cheung, 2014). Jacquet (2015) suggested that the ability for

ordinary individuals to engage in shaming sanctions could increase the significance of shame in

daily life more than ever. Further, engagement in the process of shaming on social network sites

has the potential to cause long-lasting harm to an individual’s reputation on an international stage

as the perceived misconduct for which the individual is being shamed can be accessed worldwide

in perpetuity through the Internet (Rowbottom, 2013). In this context, removal of the content for

which the individual is being shamed (e.g., a tweet, a video, a documented behaviour) is

difficult, if not impossible, once it has been digitally circulated (Rowbottom, 2013). For instance,

when an Australian woman who consumed several alcoholic beverages at a professional rugby

match urinated in public, an individual near her observed the perceived social norm violation,

recorded the incident and posted the video to YouTube (Hess & Waller, 2014). Within hours,

this video went viral and was viewed by almost 30,000 people worldwide before its removal

(Hess & Waller, 2014). Despite the video’s removal from YouTube, the video remains digitally

archived and can be very easily accessed by typing the woman’s name into Google (Hess &

Waller, 2014).

Online Disinhibition

The rise of social networking sites has provided a unique platform for shaming practices

to occur (Cheung, 2014), as individuals often engage in behaviours and/or communicate with

others online in a way that they would not during face-to-face interactions (Joinson, 2001;

Postmes, Spears, Sakhel, & De Groot, 2001; Suler, 2004). This phenomenon, referred to as

online disinhibition, is facilitated through the perceived anonymity possessed by social media

users, which can assist them in lowering behaviour inhibitions and detaching actions online from

conduct in everyday life (e.g., Dyer, Green, Pitts, & Millward, 1995; Joinson, 2003, 2007; Suler,

2004). For instance, Kiesler, Siegel, and McGuire (1984) found that participants who were

engaged in an argument over a moral issue with another individual online exhibited more

flaming behaviour (e.g., hostile aggression, threats, inappropriate name-calling; Dyer et al.,

1995) than those who shared a moral disagreement offline in a face-to-face environment.

Less accountability for one’s actions can lead to two different types of online

disinhibition: benign and toxic (Suler, 2004). Benign disinhibition is considered an individual’s

increased disclosure of very personal details of their lives (e.g., aspirations, secrets, anxieties)

that he/she would not typically disclose to a large audience (Joinson, 1998, 2001; Suler, 2004).

In contrast, toxic disinhibition is referred to as the inclination for individuals to explore interests

that may not be socially acceptable in everyday life (e.g., crime, violence), and/or use

inappropriate language, engage in contentious criticisms, or verbally attack and threaten others

online (Joinson, 1998, 2001; Suler, 2004). While benign disinhibition can be a vehicle for

personal development, addressing and coping with emotional or interpersonal issues, or

expanding one’s identity (Suler, 2002), toxic disinhibition is more inclined to be an opportunity

for an individual to act in a distasteful manner (Suler, 1999; Suler & Phillips, 1998). At times,

the difference between toxic and benign disinhibition can be muddled due to the wide variety of

online subcultures and the distinct social rules that govern each group (Suler, 2004).

Perceived anonymity online is a cornerstone of the disinhibition effect (Joinson, 1998,

2001, 2007; Lapidot-Lefler & Barak, 2012; Spears, Lea, & Postmes, 2007; Suler, 2004).

Anonymity can be established using alternative namesakes on social network profiles or altering

and/or concealing the personal information shared on profiles to ensure an individual is

unidentifiable (Suler, 2004). In these instances, the personal profile created online can function

as a compartmentalized aspect of the self and purposefully separate an individual from his/her

online behaviour (Lapidot-Lefler & Barak, 2012; Suler, 2004).

For those who do not seek online anonymity through pseudonyms or altered profiles, the

disinhibition effect can still function through the physical distance an individual possesses online

(Suler, 2004). Those who act in a contentious manner online typically do not have to witness

communication cues, such as, physical disapproval (e.g., rolling eyes, shaking head) or

emotional responses (e.g., tears, frown, sadness) from the individuals with whom they

communicate, which are significant factors in guiding face-to-face interactions (Lapidot-Lefler

& Barak, 2012; Suler, 2004). As a result, the ability to circumvent an individual’s response to

one’s own actions serves as a disinhibitor to online behaviour (Suler, 2004). As Suler (2004)

states, “moment-by-moment responses from the other powerfully shapes the ongoing flow of

self-disclosure and behavioural expression, usually in the direction of conforming to social

norms” (p.323). Other factors that can facilitate online disinhibition include, asynchronicity (i.e.,

communications may not occur in real time), textuality, and particular personality traits (Joinson,

2003, 2007; Suler, 2004). Further, many social network sites provide an opportunity for power

dynamics to be minimized, which allows individuals to express themselves irrespective of their

various identities (e.g., ethnic, physical, gender) or socioeconomic status (Suler, 2004). As a

result, individuals may be more empowered to engage in objectionable behaviour (Suler, 2004).

Alternative Terms to Describe Negative Interactions Online

While the focus of this dissertation is public shaming, it is important to recognize other

terms used in the existing literature to describe harmful interactions that occur in the online

environment. These terms include, cyber abuse (i.e., the use of social networks or cellular phones

to engage in harmful acts, such as bullying, making explicit sexual comments, using

inappropriate language, stalking, or displaying hateful remarks), cyber violence (i.e., harassment,

degradation, cyber stalking, and online contact/offline harm), online harassment, and

cyberbullying (Hanewald, 2009). Of these terms, cyberbullying seems to be one of the most

frequently used in the existing literature. There are a number of definitions used for the term

cyberbullying, which range from very broad to specific criteria (Patchin & Hinduja, 2012).

Typically, definitions of cyberbullying include the necessary conditions of intent to harm,

repetition of the behaviour, potential power dynamic between the aggressor and victim, and

potential negative outcomes for the victim (Patchin & Hinduja, 2012; Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho,

Fisher, Russell, & Tippett, 2008). It should be noted that repetition and power imbalances as

criteria for cyberbullying are contested in the existing literature, as these criteria are often

irrelevant in online environments (Slonje, Smith, & Frisén, 2012).

In an attempt to resolve definitional issues of cyberbullying, Willard (2006) generated

classifications based on the content of cyberbullying behaviours online. These seven

classifications included: flaming (i.e., sending of hateful or inappropriate messages to an

individual or group), online harassment (i.e., repetitive inappropriate messages to an individual

or group), cyberstalking (i.e., repetitive inappropriate messages that include threats), denigration

(i.e., rumour spreading or gossip), masquerade (i.e., acting under someone else’s identity), outing

(i.e., prompting an individual to send confidential or embarrassing details for the purpose of

distribution) and exclusion. Other words emerging in the literature to describe specific online

behaviours include, sexting (i.e., discussions or images of a sexual nature that are distributed

without consent), trolling (i.e., constant comments of a critical nature directed at an individual or

group), and griefing (i.e., harmful behaviours engaged in during an online game; Slonje, Smith,

& Frisén, 2012). As evidenced, a lack of clarity and interchangeable use of terms to describe

harmful behaviours that occur in online contexts can be a source of confusion and may prevent

academic dialogue (Hanewald, 2009).

Although online shaming and cyberbullying may share some similarities in terms of the

nature of behaviours displayed by the perpetrators (e.g., inappropriate and personal attacks), the

platform for delivery (i.e., social networks online), and the potential for a widespread audience

(Smith, 2012), the two terms do possess some key differences. Specifically, public shaming

centres on an individual or group’s perceived norm violation with the purpose of expressing

disapproval of these actions or behaviours (De Vries, 2015) and serves to reintegrate or

stigmatize the victim from a group or community (e.g., Braithwaite, 1989; Kahan & Posner,

1999; Massaro, 1997; Rowbottom, 2013; Scheff, 1988). In contrast, cyberbullying tends to be

more ambiguous, as these practices may target personal traits of an individual (De Vries, 2015)

and/or may be motivated by broader factors that do not necessarily relate to particular traits or

actions of the victim, such as, a bully’s boredom, need for revenge, ability to act anonymously

and lack consequences, jealously, or desire to experiment with a new persona (Varjas, Talley,

Meyers, Parris, & Cutts, 2010). Preliminary research conducted by De Vries (2015) also suggests

that online public shaming tends to be a stimulated by a singular event, while cyberbullying

typically occurs over an extended period of time.

Social Media in the Professional Sport Environment

General Use of Social Media in the Sport Industry

Online social networks have flourished particularly in the realm of professional sport,

with sport-related companies (e.g., Gatorade), organizations, professional leagues (e.g., Major

League Baseball), teams, and individual athletes creating social media accounts for a variety of

purposes (Hambrick, 2012). The emergence of social media accounts within this industry has

contributed to a transformation of sport communications and consumption (Hambrick, Simmons,

Greenhalgh, & Greenwell, 2010; Kavanagh & Jones, 2016). From a broad perspective,

stakeholders aim to enhance their accessibility and visibility to the public and take advantage of

the worldwide scope of connection made possible on these platforms (Hambrick et al., 2010).

With enhanced connections, these accounts are generally used as a method of distributing

information, such as details about competitive events or team-related activities, as well as,

advertising goods and services (Hambrick, 2012; Hambrick et al., 2010; Kassing & Sanderson,

2010). In addition, some accounts provide up-to-date statistics or footage, such as photographs or

videos from competitive or social events as they happen (Hambrick, 2012; Hambrick &

Mahoney, 2011; Hambrick et al., 2010).

Social Media Use by Professional Athletes

For professional athletes in particular, social media accounts are reshaping the fan-athlete

relationship (Kassing & Sanderson, 2010). Research by Hambrick and colleagues (2010)

examined professional athletes’ use of Twitter through six broad categorizations: interactivity

(i.e., direct communication with other social media users through private messaging or responses

to posted content); diversion (i.e., posted communications unrelated to sport); information

sharing (i.e., posted communications regarding sport-related activities); content (i.e., attachments

to photographs, video footage, or other links important to the athlete); fanship (i.e.,

communications about sports or athletes outside of their team/teammates); and promotional (i.e.,

advertising of personal or team sponsors, products, or services). These six categorizations were

adapted from previous studies regarding motivations for users of online forums related to sport

(Clavio, 2008; Seo & Green, 2008). Hambrick and colleagues’ (2010) findings demonstrated that

professional athletes use social media predominantly as a method for interactivity, which centres

on broad discussions (e.g., sharing opinions) with fans or direct communication on an individual

basis (Hambrick, 2012; Sanderson, 2010; Seo & Green, 2008). For instance, athletes may hold a

question-and-answer period on social media where they receive fan questions and respond

directly (Hambrick et al., 2010). Another example of interactivity includes the ability for sport

fans to view interactions between the professional athlete and others online (e.g., professional

athletes, celebrities, media; Hambrick et al., 2010). This style of free and open communication is

a departure from traditional relationships (e.g., fan-athlete, athlete-media, athlete-athlete) as

professional athletes formerly communicated most often through a public relations representative

(Hambrick et al., 2010). As a result, these platforms provide sport fans with “unprecedented

access to professional athletes and their personal and social lives” in an intimate and unfiltered

manner (Hambrick et al., 2010, p.455).

The second most common categorization for use of social media is diversion through

posting of non-sport information, which includes athletes sending tweets about meals,

experiences, or entertainment that they enjoyed (Hambrick et al., 2010). The use of interactivity

and diversion provide sport fans with an alternative or more in-depth depiction of their favourite

athletes (Hambrick et al., 2010). In addition, an emphasis on interactivity and diversion, as well

as, the widespread accessibility of social media, allows fans to access information about

professional athletes of all abilities (e.g., those within and outside of the starting line-up) instead

of the common focus of traditional media on the personal stories of the most skilled or popular

players within high profile sports (Hambrick et al., 2010).

The least common categorizations for use of social media by athletes were information

sharing (e.g., tweets about training regimen), content (e.g., links to other blogs or websites),

promotional (e.g., communications about appearances or sponsors), and fanship regarding other

sports or athletes (Hambrick et al., 2010). It is important to note that previous studies regarding

athletes’ engagement on social media have primarily focused on Twitter use; however, there is a

strong presence of athlete accounts on other social networking sites, such as Facebook and

Instagram that warrant research attention.

Benefits and Drawbacks of Professional Athletes’ Social Media Use. Enhanced access

to individuals’ favourite athletes can have many benefits, such as, promoting interpersonal

relationships (Kassing & Sanderson, 2010), augmenting team identification (Sutton, McDonald,

Milne, & Cimperman, 1997), which may result in heightened support for the team (e.g., long-

term commitment, increase in game attendance, charitable donations, or purchasing of

merchandise; Dees, Bennett, & Villegas, 2008; Gwinner & Swanson, 2003; Platow et al., 1999;

Wann & Branscombe, 1993) and enrichment of overall sport experiences for fans (Kassing &

Sanderson, 2010). As stated by Gwinner and Swanson (2003), increased opportunities for people

to interact with individual athletes or sports teams will likely lead to sustained identification with

those teams or athletes over time. This access may also prompt users of social network sites who

follow athletes to perceive they know the athlete on a personal level in ways that may not be

reached through traditional media coverage (e.g., in-game or post-game interviews; Hambrick et

al., 2010). Despite these benefits, the potential detriments of fan-athlete interactions on social

media remain unknown (Kavanagh & Jones, 2014). Further, disputes amongst athletes and fans

have recently become more common on online social networks (Sanderson & Kassing, 2011),

and are increasingly challenging to monitor or patrol due to the instantaneous and anonymous

nature of these networks (Kavanagh & Jones, 2016). Therefore, it is integral to explore these fan-

athlete interactions on social network sites and question the perceived detriments for professional

athletes.

Fans in the Professional Sport Context

Sport fans have received minimal attention with regards to social network sites in the

professional sport realm as the majority of research has emphasized the experiences of athletes

and organizations or teams (Frederick, Lim, Clavio, & Walsh, 2012). However, Clavio and Kian

(2010) have urged researchers to address the perspective of fans who engage on social network

sites, as they are an important part of the professional sport environment and have a key role in

the athlete-fan relationship.

Fans are considered members of a mass culture audience that “produces social

communities, personal identities, and cultural artefacts” (Kelly, 2015, p.313). These social

communities, referred to as fandoms, encourage shared practices and behaviours amongst

members of the group (Kelly, 2015). The embodiment of sport fandom may be considered across

a wide spectrum of behaviours, from the diverse preferences for consumption of sport-related

information (e.g., watch on television, listen to the radio, engage on social media, read news

articles), to the degree of commitment to sport fanship, ranging from a nonchalant or inattentive

sports fan to an ardent, long-term, knowledgeable sports fan (Kelly, 2015). A predominant

measure to express this fandom is exemplified through fans’ propensity to seek and demonstrate

a personal connection with the sport team or athlete with whom they follow or support (Kelly,

2015). This desire for intimate connection and enhanced knowledge is likely an influential factor

that leads fans to connect with athletes on social network sites, which have facilitated

development of larger fan bases and more personal interactions with professional athletes that

are accessible to fans worldwide (Kelly, 2015). Interestingly, the enhanced and personal

connection individuals establish with a sports team and/or athlete can encourage fans to become

both increasingly loyal supporters and very sharp critics (Kelly, 2015).

To uncover a more nuanced understanding of fandom, Wann (1995) explored the factors

that tend to motivate individuals to develop fan affiliations. The findings established eight

motivating factors – supported by subsequent fan studies – including: group affiliation (e.g.,

opportunity to engage with others), aesthetic, family (e.g., spend time with loved ones), self-

esteem, entertainment, escape, economic, and eustress (Gantz & Wenner, 1995; Hur, Ko, &

Valacich, 2007; Melnick, 1993; Pegoraro, 2013; Seo & Green, 2008; Wann, 1995). Other factors

that play a role in one’s affiliation with particular sports teams or athletes include psychological

components (e.g., internal desires), environmental components (e.g., fan affiliations encouraged

by significant others), and team-related components, such as current abilities and successes,

historical traditions, or previous accomplishments (End, Dietz-Uhler, Harrick, & Jacquemotte,

2002; Funk & James, 2001; Sutton, McDonald, Milne & Cimperman, 1997; Underwood, Bond,

& Baer, 2001; Wann, 2006).

Fan Identification. Fan “identification” centres on the psychological connection that one

establishes with a team and/or athlete (Wann, Hunter, Ryan, & Wright, 2001). This

psychological connection is considered the degree to which an individual perceives his/her

fanship for a particular team or athlete as an extension of his/her sense of self (Wann, Hunter,

Ryan, & Wright, 2001). Previous research on the connection between fan identification and

psychosocial outcomes indicate the many positive benefits possible for highly identified fans,

including: enhanced sense of inclusion within a group (Gibson, Willming, & Holdnak, 2002),

increased self-esteem and social welfare (Lanter & Blackburn, 2004; Wann & Pierce, 2005), and

higher frequency of positive affect and decreased frequency of negative affect, such as, sadness,

loneliness, or anger (Branscombe & Wann, 1991; Wann, Dimmock, & Grove, 2003; Wann,

Inman, Ensor, Gates, & Caldwell, 1999; Wann, 2006). It is important to note that deriving

positive psychosocial outcomes from fan identification is contingent upon feeling a sense of

belonging and interaction with the sports team or athletes and other fans (Baumeister & Leary,

1995; Wann, 2006). Thus, an individual who is considered a nonchalant or less identified fan

may not be as likely to derive positive outcomes from fan affiliations (Branscombe, Ellemers,

Spears, & Doosje, 1999; Wann, 2006).

Although there are a number of positive psychosocial outcomes for fans who possess

high identification with sports teams or athletes, previous research has also shed light on some of

the harmful behaviours associated with high identification (Wann, 2006), such as, increased

anxiety (Branscombe & Wann, 1992), hostile and instrumental aggression (e.g., Lanter, 2003;

Wann, Carlson, & Schrader, 1999; Wann, Haynes, McLean, & Pullen, 2003; Wann, Peterson,

Cothran, & Dykes, 1999), riots (Lanter, 2000), willingness to aid sports teams or individual

athletes with cheating tactics (Wann et al., 2001), excessive obsession with athletes or sports

teams (Quirk, 1997), and violence amongst groups of fans (Wann, 2001).

There are a number of factors that may provoke perceived identity threats for fans that

result in the negative behaviours previously listed. For example, fans’ identities may be

threatened by poor competitive results by the sports team or athletes with whom they align and

support, a lack of acceptance from other fans of the team or athlete, and/or an inability to fulfill

the following needs: labeled-distinctiveness (i.e., the need for a fan to perceive the professional

athlete or team that he/she supports as exceptional in comparison to others); value-competence

(i.e., the need to perceive one’s favourite athlete or team to be more accomplished in comparison

to others); and value-morality (i.e., perceiving that one’s favourite athlete or team exemplifies

higher moral standards in comparison to others; Wann, 2006). Evidently, all of the factors

previously listed may be impacted in instances of professional athletes’ legal, social, or sport-

specific norm violations. Thus, it is plausible to suggest that athlete norm violations may provoke

harmful fan behaviour.

It should be noted that the existing literature in this area tends to focus on behaviours

that typically occur in-person and have yet to address the potentially harmful online behaviour of

highly identified fans. In addition, previous research suggests that professional athletes may be

particularly vulnerable to harmful behaviour on social media due to the tendency for their lives

to be highly scrutinized (Coombs & Holladay, 2012). In fact, some researchers suggest that

professional athletes are more susceptible to public shaming than individuals in other high-

profile domains, perhaps due to the propensity for athletes to be criticized for behaviour both on

and off the field (Billings, Coombs, & Brown, 2018; Boyle & Haynes, 2018; Kitchin, Paramio-

Salcines, & Walters, 2019). Further, although the explicit connection between athlete norm

violations and harmful online sport fan behaviour has not been explored to date, it is a valuable

area to investigate given research emerging in other domains related to norm violations and

public shaming on social media (e.g., Cheung, 2014; Detel, 2013; Harris, 2009; Jacquet, 2015;

Ronson, 2015; Rowbottom, 2013). As a result, it is critical to determine whether negative online

behaviours expressed by fans are provoked by an athlete’s deviation from perceived social, legal,

or sport-specific norm.

Related Sport Studies on Fan-Athlete Online Interactions. While public shaming in

the era of social media is a novel area of research inquiry (particularly in sport research), recent

sport studies have begun to investigate negative interactions amongst fans and professional

athletes or sports teams on social media. From a broad perspective, Kavanagh, Jones and

Sheppard-Marks (2016) were some of the first sport researchers to lay the foundation for

research in this area by developing a typology based on observation of negative fan-athlete

interactions – termed “virtual maltreatment” by the authors – on Twitter. To generate the

typology, Kavanagh and colleagues’ (2016) began with searching Twitter for instances of virtual

maltreatment. The authors located potentially negative tweets by searching the platform for key

terms such as “tennis ugly” and “football stalk”. Then, the authors performed an expanded search

of the Internet through a general search engine to locate media articles related to sport regarding

“twitter abuse.” In consideration of their findings, Kavanagh and colleagues (2016) defined

virtual maltreatment as:

Direct or indirect online communication that is stated in an aggressive, exploitative,

manipulating, threatening, or lewd manner and is designed to elicit fear, emotional and

psychological upset, distress, alarm, or feelings of inferiority. (p.9).

Virtual maltreatment is further differentiated into virtual physical maltreatment, virtual sexual

maltreatment, virtual emotional maltreatment, and virtual discriminatory maltreatment and can

vary in degree of severity from harassment to abuse. Virtual physical maltreatment refers to

“threats of physical violence and/or focus toward an individual’s physical attributes” (Kavanagh

et al., 2016, p.9). An example used to demonstrate this form of maltreatment included a tweet

directed to an Olympic gymnast named Beth Tweddle: “@SkySportsNews #Sportswomen Beth

Tweddle on a scale of 1/10 how pig ugly would you class yourself?” Another example of virtual

physical maltreatment detailed by the authors included a tweet directed at NFL quarterback Mark

Sanchez: “@mark_sanchez kill yo self tonight! Or imma do it for you Wednesday at practice.”

Finally, a third example provided by the authors was a tweet about Tennis athlete Serena

Williams: “Test Serena Williams. No way is she clean. Looks way too much like a man.”

Virtual sexual maltreatment is referred to as “threats of rape and sexual assault or sexual

acts to which the adult would not consent or comments regarding sexual behaviour with or of an

individual” (Kavanagh et al., 2016, p.10). According to Kavanagh and colleagues (2016), tweets

of this nature were typically aimed at female athletes. Examples of tweets categorized as virtual

sexual maltreatment included tweets about two different tennis athletes competing in

Wimbledon: “Bartoli wouldn’t get raped let alone fucked #wimbledon” and “Sabine Lisicki – I’d

definitely let her sit on my face. Not a great face but those legs are amaze, body ain’t too shabby

either #wimbledon.”

Virtual emotional maltreatment is considered “comments designed to elicit a negative

emotional and/or psychological reaction and can include rumour spreading, ridiculing,

terrorizing, humiliating, isolating, belittling, and scapegoating” (Kavanagh et al., 2016, p.10).

Instances of virtual emotional maltreatment were exemplified by the following tweets:

“@TomDaley you let your dad down I hope you know that” referring to an athlete whose father

passed away prior to the Olympic Games; and “I hope Mark Halsey gets cancer again and dies”

directed toward a professional soccer referee who had recently overcome health challenges.

Finally, virtual discriminatory maltreatment is referred to as “comments that negatively

refer to an individual’s membership of a particular social group based on gender, race, religion,

nationality, disability and/or sexual orientation” (Kavanagh et al., 2016, p.11). Due to the

multifaceted nature of this categorization, there were several examples provided by the authors to

demonstrate this category, including: a tweet aimed at Danica Patrick, a female auto racer in a

predominantly male sport, that stated, “@DanicaPatrick you will never win a race they only got

you in the sport because you look good now go back to the kitchen”; a tweet directed toward

Marion Bartoli about her sexuality during a Wimbledon match that said, “I hate Bartoli already

fucking dyke come on Lisicki u sexy thing”; and a racist tweet about soccer player Louis Saha

that stated, “@louissaha08 go back to France ya fuckin [expletive]” (Kavanagh et al., 2016).

The work of Kavanagh and colleagues (2016) is important for raising awareness and

laying the groundwork in sport research about the nature of negative fan-athlete interactions that

occur on social media. The social media messages written by fans and directed at athletes in

Kavanagh and colleagues’ (2016) work highlight new dimensions of fan-athlete interactions that

are shocking, troubling and require scholarly attention.

In addition to Kavanagh and colleagues (2016), a few key studies related to negative fan-

athlete interactions on social media have emerged in the literature. Among these studies is a

qualitative thematic analysis of negative interactions on Twitter that were directed at an

American collegiate athlete in response to his team’s loss in a meaningful game. Findings

revealed fans’ comments belittled, mocked, and threatened the athlete for his poor performance

in the game (Sanderson & Truax, 2014). In another study, Sanderson and Emmons (2014)

conducted a qualitative case study exploring fans’ propensity to offer or deny forgiveness to a

professional athlete following his relapse with substance abuse. Results indicated that fans

extended support in the online forum through praise, encouragement, and empathy for the

athlete, as well as, engaged in efforts to humanize the athlete and rationalize his behaviours

(Sanderson & Emmons, 2014). Despite some fans’ praise for the athlete, other fans criticized

him for his norm violation and characterized his relapse as a character flaw (Sanderson &

Emmons, 2014). For instance, some fan comments accused the athlete of a lack of willpower and

desire for media attention (Sanderson & Emmons, 2014). Both studies directed future research to

investigate a larger sample of athletes who have engaged in similar misconducts and/or scandals

(Sanderson & Emmons, 2014; Sanderson & Truax, 2014). In addition, Frederick and colleagues

(2016) investigated fans’ Facebook responses directed at a NASCAR athlete following his first

public statement after a fatal accident involving another driver. A key finding of this study was

that fans do not restrict online attacks to the athlete who engaged in the norm violation; instead,

fans’ comments can also shift from the athlete’s specific violation to personal attacks on other

fans, especially in circumstances where perspectives on the incident differed (Frederick et al.,

2016). The tendency for attacks to become personalized online is consistent with Kavanagh and

colleagues’ (2016) study that examined negative fan-athlete interactions more generally on social

media. The findings of this research revealed that fans often communicate with professional

athletes in a controversial, threatening, or vulgar way, exemplified by discriminatory comments

founded on gender, race, sexual orientation, religion and/or disability, irrespective of athlete

behaviour (p. 789). Using a similar approach, Kavanagh, Litchfield and Osborne (2019)

examined fan interactions with the top-five ranked female professional tennis players during the

Wimbledon Tennis Championships. Results showed that the top-five ranked players were subject

to hateful and misogynistic language, sexualization, and threats of sexual violence through

comments on social media. Further, Litchfield, Kavanagh, Osborne and Jones (2018) found that

Serena Williams, in particular, was exposed to extensive disparaging online comments that had

racist undertones and focused on her physicality, posed questions about her gender, and accused

her of performance enhancing drug use. These preliminary studies clearly demonstrate the

potential for professional athletes to be the recipients of derogatory, hateful, and sometimes

discriminatory messages from fans on social media.

In addition to the empirical literature, there is also extensive anecdotal evidence in the

Canadian context reported by media outlets that suggests that several professional athletes have

deactivated their accounts or quit sport permanently due to the harsh criticism and/or threats

received by individuals on social media (CBC Sports, 2013; Ross, 2013). These reports suggest

that the nature of criticism received by professional athletes is often personal and may be centred

on sport-related social norm violations, such as poor performance (Addley, 2015; Goss, 2012;

Rush, 2014). For instance, former Toronto Blue Jays catcher J.P. Arencibia deleted his Twitter

account in 2013 during his tenure with the team due to the hateful comments he received on

social media (CBC Sports, 2013). Another example includes the experience of Canadian tennis

player Rebecca Marino who walked away from her professional tennis career partially due to the

comments she received on social media, such as “burn in hell” and comments of blame about

losing money for those who gambled on her matches (Girard, 2013). Sometimes, negative

interactions online have extended to the family members of professional athletes, such as former

Toronto Maple Leafs player James Reimer’s wife, who was the victim of negative comments

about her husband’s hockey ability likely due to the fact her husband did not have a Twitter

account (Rush, 2014). Comments such as, “tell your husband thanks for costing the leafs another

game and maybe the playoffs. He’s garbage. He must be cut,” and calls for her to divorce her

husband were directed toward her via social media (Rush, 2014). These instances represent a few

of many examples that exist regarding professional athletes and negative interactions with fans

online. Thus, it is critical to expand the research in this area to understand the nature of public

shaming of professional athletes online for perceived violations of norms within and outside the

professional sport environment.

Overarching Purpose for the Dissertation

Overall, the rise in use of social networking sites in the professional sport domain has

enabled fans to connect with professional athletes or sports teams in a new and unprecedented

way (Hambrick et al., 2010; Kassing & Sanderson, 2010), which may heighten the vulnerability

of professional athletes. Through these social interactions, fans have the opportunity to provide

their favourite professional athletes or sports teams with words of encouragement,

demonstrations of support and appreciation, suggestions or tips, and consolation when

confronted with failures or challenges (Kassing & Sanderson, 2010). In accordance with

preliminary sport studies on fan-athlete online interactions, as well as social media research

conducted in other domains, it is also possible that social networking sites may provide

opportunities for engagement in harmful, disparaging, and discriminatory shaming practices

when athletes deviate from expected behavioural standards. The time to develop a more in-depth

and nuanced understanding of these interactions is now, as researchers have suggested that the

boldness and immediacy of fans’ messages directed at athletes through social media continues to

escalate (Browning & Sanderson, 2012). Informed by Braithwaite’s (1989) theory of shame and

reintegration, the overarching purpose of this dissertation is to explore the nature and extent of

public shaming of professional athletes on social media in response to perceived legal, social,

and sport-specific norm violations and the potential reasons fans engage in these practices. To

achieve this purpose, I will conduct three studies with separate research objectives related to the

overall purpose. Specifically, study one will investigate: 1) The extent to which sport fans

engage in public shaming of professional athletes through Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

following athlete norm violations; and, 2) explore the content of the public shaming messages

directed at professional athletes by fans in response to the athletes’ norm violations. Building on

the knowledge developed in study one, study two will explore two key research questions: 1) Are

fans’ public shaming practices on social media in response to professional athletes’ legal, social,

and sport-specific norm violations influenced by gender?; 2) And, if so, what do these practices

look like? Finally, the third study will explore fans’ perspectives on potential reasons sport fans

engage with professional athletes on social media, including, the public shaming of professional

athletes following legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations.

CHAPTER THREE: STUDY 1

Sport fans’ responses on social media to professional athletes’ norm violations

This chapter has been published. MacPherson, E., & Kerr. G. (2019). Sport fans’ responses on

social media to professional athletes’ norm violations. International Journal of Sport and

Exercise Psychology, 1-18. 10.1080/1612197X.2019.1623283. Reprinted by permission of the

publisher Taylor & Francis: https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/copyright-and-you/.

Contributions by first author: Conceptualization of study (75%); Data collection (100%);

Data analyses (90%); Writing of first draft (100%); Revisions before manuscript submissions

(80%); Revisions after peer-review process (75%).

Abstract

The growth of social media has provided sports fans with unprecedented access to

information about celebrity athletes’ personal and professional lives and the means to

communicate to them. To date, fan-athlete interactions on social media have often been viewed

as positive, with cited benefits of heightened interpersonal relationships and team support

(Gwinner & Swanson, 2003; Kassing & Sanderson, 2010). Potential negative consequences of

interactions on social media, especially when professional athletes’ personal and professional

norm violations are exposed, are not well-understood. Based upon the notion that public shaming

practices are often used for the purposes of ensuring that individuals adhere to expected

behavioural norms (Braithwaite, 1989), this study sought to explore the presence and nature of

public shaming of professional athletes through social media in response to athletes’ norm

violations. A qualitative content analysis of 7,700 fans’ comments on Facebook, Twitter, and

Instagram directed at eleven male and female professional athletes from six different sports and

the organizations that employed them were collected. Findings demonstrated fans engage in

public shaming of athletes following norm violations, as illustrated through fans’ offers or

withdrawals of support, and descriptions of desired physical, psychosocial and career-related

consequences for the athletes. Findings are interpreted in light of Braithwaite’s Theory and the

influences within and outside of the professional sport environment contributing to public

shaming practices are discussed.

Keywords: social media; public shaming; athlete norm violations; professional athletes; fan-

athlete interactions

Introduction

From a broad perspective, social media is recognized as a platform that has transformed

human interactions worldwide (Edosomwan, Prakasan, Kouame, Watson, & Seymour, 2011).

The use of these platforms gained significant traction at the turn of the 21

century (Boyd &

Ellison, 2007; Edosomwan et al., 2011) and the most popular sites now attract millions of users

worldwide, including Facebook (2 billion), Twitter (328 million), and Instagram (600 million;

Constine, 2017). Growth in popularity of these sites has resulted in a ubiquitous influence of

interactive media and information in our daily lives (Couldry & Hepp, 2013). While there are a

host of positive benefits gleaned from social media use, enhanced connections on these social

network sites may also facilitate negative interactions, including cyberbullying, harassment and

most recently, public shaming online (Cheung, 2014; Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009;

Rowbottom, 2013; Sunstein, 2001).

Public shaming, the focus of the current study, refers to the external process by which an

individual or group expresses contempt or disapproval towards another person as a result of that

person’s perceived violation of a norm (e.g., Braithwaite, 1989; Cheung, 2014; Harris, 2009;

Massaro, 1997). Norms are considered expectations for behaviour that are shared amongst a

group or community; they encourage conformity and thus play important roles in influencing

social order and control (e.g., Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Hechter & Opp, 2001; Lapinski & Rimal,

2005).

According to Braithwaite (1989), public shaming aims to moralize another person’s

behaviours or actions and reinforce the norms of the community. Public shaming may be

implemented for the purpose of reintegration (i.e., shaming an individual to reinforce his/her

belonging in a community and reaffirm integrity in him/her) or stigmatization (i.e., shaming an

individual to exclude him/her from a community). Reintegrative shaming makes a distinction

between the person and his/her behaviour and maintains his/her inherent positive character,

whereas stigmatization emphasizes the behaviour as part of one’s identity and seeks to ostracize

the offender (Braithwaite, 1989; Hay, 2001). From this perspective, emphasis is on the process of

public shaming, instead of the outcomes of these actions, such as evoking feelings of shame in

the offender (Scheff & Retzinger, 1991). Expressions of social disapproval through the shaming

process may materialize in various forms within different contexts, including personal

conversations, judicial environments, or mass media (Braithwaite, 1989; Murphy & Harris,

2007; Russell, 1998).

Central to the public shaming process is the perceived presence of an audience to witness

the shaming (Braithwaite, 1989; Jacquet, 2015). A perceived audience is particularly impactful

when the individual shares a strong connection, commitment, or sense of duty to the audience

(Harris, 2009), as may be the case with professional athletes and sport fans. Public shaming

through social network sites is unique from offline shaming in several ways: it tends to involve

broader engagement and a wider audience; there is enhanced accessibility over various

technological, social and geographic landscapes in perpetuity; and given the lack of control over

online environments, there is a greater tendency for people to be shamed for minor violations

(Bennett, 2003; Rowbottom, 2013; Wesch, 2009). As described by Cheung (2014), enhanced

engagement in digital communication has resulted in:

…An increasing popularity and fascination with capturing others’ images, exposing

others’ wrongdoing, and bringing the people concerned to a brand of online justice in the

form of a manhunt which, in both the cyber and real world, can easily and quickly spin

out of control… (p. 319-320)

For numerous reasons, the sport context is rife with opportunities for the public shaming

of professional athletes. Online social networks have flourished in the professional sport realm,

with sport-related companies, professional leagues, teams, and individual athletes creating social

media accounts for a variety of purposes (Hambrick, 2012), including enhanced accessibility and

visibility to the public, distribution of information, and promotion of goods or services

(Hambrick, 2012; Hambrick et al., 2010; Kassing & Sanderson, 2010). For professional athletes

in particular, social media accounts are reshaping the fan-athlete relationship through increased

interactivity (Hambrick et al., 2010; Kassing & Sanderson, 2010), providing sport fans with

“unprecedented access to professional athletes and their personal and social lives” in an intimate

and unfiltered manner (Hambrick et al., 2010, p. 455) and the means to communicate to

professional athletes.

Preliminary research investigating the nature of fan-athlete interactions online has shown

fans’ propensity to send harmful comments of a sexual, physical, emotional, or discriminatory

nature directly to athletes (Kavanagh et al., 2016) and has suggested that disputes between

athletes and fans have become more common (Sanderson & Kassing, 2011). Sanderson and

Emmons (2014) conducted a qualitative case study investigating fans’ inclination to offer or

deny forgiveness on an online forum to a professional athlete following his substance abuse

relapse. Results indicated that fans extended support through praise, encouragement, and

empathy for the athlete, and demonstrated efforts to humanize the athlete and justify his

behaviour (Sanderson & Emmons, 2014). However, fans also criticized the athlete’s norm

violation as a character flaw, including comments related to the athlete’s lack of willpower and

desire for media attention (Sanderson & Emmons, 2014). In a related study, Sanderson and

Truax (2014) thematically analyzed fans’ negative interactions on Twitter directed at a collegiate

athlete following his team’s loss in an important game. Findings revealed fans’ comments

belittled, mocked, and threatened the athlete for his poor performance (Sanderson & Truax,

2014). Both studies directed future research to investigate a larger sample of athletes who have

engaged in similar misconducts and/or scandals (Sanderson & Emmons, 2014; Sanderson &

Truax, 2014). A variety of terms have been used to define the online behaviours explored in

these studies, including, maladaptive interactions (Sanderson & Truax, 2014) and virtual

maltreatment (Kavanagh et al., 2016). For this study, however, we chose the term “public

shaming” as it is grounded in Braithwaite’s (1989) shaming theory and makes a specific

connection between individuals’ norm violations and response from the public.

In summary, the heightened celebrity status of professional athletes, increased media

attention to athletes’ conduct that violates norms, and the tendency of the media to sensationalize

behavioural norm violations, all contribute to the vulnerability of professional athletes to public

shaming through social media (Osborne, Sherry, & Nicholson, 2016; Smith, Stavros, Westberg,

Wilson, & Boyle, 2014; Turner, 2010). Numerous examples exist of professional athletes’ norm

violations within and outside of the sport environment receiving significant media attention, such

as, performance-enhancing drug use, substance abuse, social violations, driving under the

influence, sexual misconduct and violent incidents (Smith et al., 2014; Wilson, Stavros, &

Westberg, 2008). To-date, however, limited research has examined the nature of public shaming

practices on social media. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the presence

and nature of public shaming of professional athletes on social media by exploring fans’

responses to athletes’ norm violations. Key research objectives included: 1) To investigate the

extent to which sport fans engage in public shaming of professional athletes through Facebook,

Twitter, or Instagram following an athlete’s norm violation; and 2) To explore the content of the

public shaming messages directed at professional athletes by fans in response to the athlete’s

norm violation.

Methodology

This research was conducted from a social constructivist paradigm, which views

knowledge and reality as subjective, dynamic, values-based and context-specific (Creswell,

2013; Daly, 2007; Sparkes & Smith, 2014). From this perspective, individuals create meaning

through personal interpretations of objects and others, which are often influenced by historical

perspectives and social experiences (Creswell, 2013; Daly, 2007; Sparkes & Smith, 2014). In

addition, the ways in which the media (e.g., social media, news) shape and evolve individuals’

knowing and help articulate their social and cultural realities is an important consideration of

social constructivism (Schrader, 2015). Further, this paradigm requires the researcher to play an

active and significant role in the co-construction of meaning and development of knowledge with

the participant (Kim, 2014). Adopting a social constructivist approach was important in this

study as we did not engage in dyadic interactions with the participants (i.e., social media users)

and therefore, active involvement in the meaning-making process was critical for interpreting

fans’ social media comments in the context of shaming.

An inductive thematic content analysis of the tweets and comments on Facebook,

Instagram, and Twitter directed at professional athletes in response to norm violations was

conducted. In general, thematic analysis was employed to identify, analyze and describe the

patterns that existed across the dataset (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Specifically, this approach was

chosen for the purpose of concept development (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005), as it draws on

connections between the content of the text and the context in which it is written (White &

Marsh, 2006) and is frequently used as a method to explore online environments (e.g., Wallace,

Wilson, & Miloch, 2011). We employed a semantic thematic analysis, which interprets the direct

messages conveyed in the comments, instead of the broader or underlying meanings from the

text (Sparkes & Smith, 2014). This approach was selected as an appropriate first step in

exploring and building a conceptual understanding of online shaming practices in response to

professional athletes’ norm violations. The overall aim of the thematic analysis was to

demonstrate the patterns in content across the full data set in rich detail (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

In alignment with our social constructivist paradigm, the thematic analysis was grounded

in a contextualist method, which is located between an essentialist and constructionist

perspective of thematic analyses (Braun & Clarke, 2006). This method considers both individual

and social influences on the interpretation and meaning-making of events, realities, and

experiences as part of the analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In this case, thematic analysis is

employed to reflect personal realities, as well as, acknowledge the social influence embedded

within those realities (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

Data Collection

Data collection began by purposefully sampling examples of athlete behaviour that

demonstrated perceived norm violations within and outside of the professional sport context.

Professional athletes were chosen as the focus because the celebrity status of these athletes

garners significant attention and thus more activity on social media.

Data collection focused on legal, social and sport-specific norm violations of professional

athletes. These categories were determined by the existing literature and definitional criteria

were as follows: legal norms are formal rules devised and enforced by the state; social norms are

implied expectations enforced by members of one’s social sphere; and sport-specific norms

include competitive (e.g., game preparedness, results), practice (e.g., training, commitment), off-

season (e.g., fitness, regular contact, scheduled appearances), and social (e.g., compliance of

dress code, respect for teammates, appropriate socializing) expectations of conduct (e.g., Cialdini

& Trost, 1998; Hechter & Opp, 2001; Lapinski & Rimal, 2005; Munroe, Estabrooks, Dennis, &

Carron, 1999).

The first step of data collection involved conducting a Google search to gather

information via the media about professional athletes’ misconduct within the last five years

related to each norm. To generate this information, we searched broad terms, including

“professional athlete – misconduct” and “professional athlete – poor behaviour”, as well as,

specific terms related to each norm, such as “professional athlete – legal issue”, “professional

athlete – poor performance”, “professional athlete – social issue” or “professional athlete –

missed practice.” At the culmination of this step, we endeavoured to have a variety of violations

of each norm (e.g., social, legal, sport-specific), a range in severity of perceived misconduct (i.e.,

poor athletic performance to criminal behaviour) and inclusion of male and female professional

athletes. Once these examples were determined, verified social media accounts of the athletes

and the organizations or leagues that employed them were identified. Verified accounts ensure

the authenticity of the user and are indicated by a white checkmark within a blue circle attached

to the account’s username (Twitter, 2019). At this point, athletes who’s social media accounts

were not currently verified were excluded from the study. The pool of potential athlete norm

violations were narrowed further by excluding athletes playing professional sport outside of

North America and/or norm violations which lacked depth and breadth of social media

comments from fans to athletes. This phase concluded with four legal, four sport-specific and

three social norm violations that were used in the next steps of data collection listed below.

Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram comments written by fans to the athlete or organization

in response to the athlete’s perceived violation were manually collected by the first author and

compiled into an individual document for each athlete. To focus the content collection, we

centered on fans’ replies to social media content (e.g., tweets, photographs) posted by the athlete

or organization closest to the date of the incident (athletes rarely posted social media content that

responded directly to the incident).

To provide context for the scope of reach of professional athletes and the

organizations/leagues that employ them, the most followed athlete in this study was professional

tennis player Maria Sharapova who had a following of 26.9 million followers across Twitter,

Facebook and Instagram and the least followed athlete was professional baseball player Chris

Colabello who had a following of 110.9 thousand followers at the time of data collection.

Further, the Women’s Tennis Association had 3.42 million followers and the Toronto Blue Jays

had 4.97 million across Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. It must be noted that these numbers

fluctuate on an ongoing basis and one does not have to follow an athlete or organization directly

to view and contribute comments on these social media pages.

We collected data from social media between August 2016 and February 2017. Social

media comments were already posted by users at the time of collection and not collected in their

entirety; instead, they were collected until data saturation was reached, which was determined

when new themes were no longer identified and a rich thematic description of the nature of

shaming practices on social media was possible. This approach resulted in the analysis of 7,700

comments directed at professional athletes through social media in response to athletes’ legal,

social and sport-specific norm violations.

Professional Athletes’ Norm Violations

Once approval from the institution’s Research Ethics Board was obtained, relevant

content was identified. Content was purposively sampled to represent the shaming practices

engaged in by social media users in response to perceived violations from norms by professional

athletes within or outside of the professional sport environment in the past five years. Comments

that were not directly (i.e., on athlete’s page, tags to athlete) or indirectly (i.e., hashtags related to

athlete) connected to the athlete were not included. Violations that did not garner a response

from fans on social media were also excluded. Further, all athletes included in this study

belonged to North American professional sport leagues at the time of the norm violation.

Description of Participants

In total, eleven violations from norms – four legal, four sport-specific, and three social –

engaged in by eight male and three female professional athletes were included. Athletes’ norm

violations were selected based on definitional characteristics of legal, social, and sport-specific

norms described in the existing literature and connection of these characteristics with athlete

behaviours. It was challenging to achieve gender parity, likely due to a larger scope of

professional sports for men and heightened media attention on male athletes. Athletes sampled

were 21 to 36 years old and the length of their careers ranged from 1 to 16 years of experience in

the highest professional league of their respective sports. Athletes from the following leagues

were included: National Hockey League (NHL), National Basketball Association (NBA),

National Football League (NFL), Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), Major League Baseball

(MLB), and the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL).

Legal Norm Violations. The following athletes engaged in perceived violations from

legal norms: Patrick Kane, Johnny Manziel, Adrian Peterson, and Hope Solo. Patrick Kane, a

player on the Chicago Blackhawks (NHL), was accused of rape on August 2

, 2015 (Associated

Press, 2015). The investigation continued for several months but prosecutors officially dropped

charges in November 2015 (Associated Press, 2015). Kane has played ten seasons in the NHL.

Johnny Manziel, a member of the Cleveland Browns (NFL) at the time of the incident,

was accused of engaging in domestic violence during a conflict with his girlfriend on January

, 2016 (Bonesteel, 2016). The charges were eventually dropped in exchange for Manziel

completing counselling and treatment (Bonesteel, 2016). He has played two seasons in the NFL.

Adrian Peterson was a member of the Minnesota Vikings (NFL) when he was accused of

physically abusing his four-year-old son with a tree branch on September 12

, 2014 (Boren,

2014). He caused significant injuries to his son and was indicted on charges of “reckless or

negligent injury to a child” (Boren, 2014). Peterson has played ten seasons in the NFL.

Hope Solo, a goalkeeper for the Seattle Reign (NWSL), was accused of two counts of

domestic violence with her seventeen-year-old nephew on June 21

, 2014 (Baxter, 2016).

Following her arrest, her case was dismissed but was successfully appealed by prosecutors and

will be tried in court (Baxter, 2016). Solo has played fourteen seasons of professional soccer.

Sport-specific Norm Violations. The following athletes engaged in perceived violations

from sport-specific norms: Eugenie Bouchard, Maria Sharapova, Evander Kane and Chris

Colabello. Eugenie Bouchard is a tennis player on the WTA and in 2014, she experienced a

breakthrough season in which she achieved success in Grand Slams (i.e., appearances in semi-

finals and finals), won WTA awards, and reached the highest ranking of her career at World

No.5 (WTA Tour, Inc., 2017). She entered the 2015 season with high expectations for

performance but her play was criticized as she was ousted by the 2

round of 9 tournaments

(WTA Tour, Inc., 2017). On June 30

, 2015 in the 1

round of Wimbledon – a tournament in

which she reached the final in the previous year – Bouchard lost in straight sets to an unranked

player who had never defeated a player ranked in the top 50 (Trollope, 2015). In light of her

successful 2014 season, her loss at Wimbledon is considered a violation of the competitive

aspect of sport-specific norms (e.g., match preparedness, competitive results). Bouchard has

played four seasons on the WTA Tour.

Chris Colabello, a member of the Toronto Blue Jays (MLB) at the time, tested positive

for an anabolic steroid on March 13

, 2016. The use of this steroid, which enhances athletes’ rate

of recovery, resulted in an 80 game suspension (Canadian Press, 2016). His use of this steroid

constitutes a violation of the competitive (e.g., professional demeanour) and practice (e.g.,

training, work ethic) aspects of sport-specific norms. He has played four seasons in the MLB.

Evander Kane is a player for the Buffalo Sabres (NHL) and on February 14

, 2016, he

attended the NBA All-Star Game and missed team practice the following day (Associated Press,

2016). As a result, his coach conveyed his disappointment publicly and removed him from the

line-up for the team’s next game (Associated Press, 2016). By missing practice, Kane broke a

team rule (Associated Press, 2016), which constitutes a violation of practice (e.g., adherence to

training) and social (e.g., appropriate socializing outside sport) aspects of sport-specific norms.

Kane has played eight seasons in the NHL.

Maria Sharapova is a tennis player in the WTA and on March 7

, 2016, she announced

that she tested positive for a performance-enhancing drug used by athletes to increase endurance

and recovery (Marcus, 2016). She served a 15-month suspension for her infraction and returned

to play in April 2017 (Stern, 2017). Her use of a performance-enhancing drug violated the

competitive (e.g., professional demeanour) and practice (e.g., training, work ethic) aspects of

sport-specific norms. She has played sixteen seasons on the WTA tour.

Social Norm Violations. The following athletes engaged in perceived social norm

violations: D’Angelo Russell, Yunel Escobar, and Colin Kaepernick. Russell is a member of the

Los Angeles Lakers (NBA), and on March 24, 2016, he video-recorded an interaction with a

teammate, in which the teammate described being unfaithful to his fiancé (ESPN, 2016). The

video was released on Twitter and circulated across the Internet, causing a perceived rift amongst

team members (ESPN, 2016). Russell has played two seasons in the NBA.

Yunel Escobar, a member of the Toronto Blue Jays at the time of the incident, entered an

MLB game on September 18, 2012 with a homophobic slur depicted in the eye black beneath his

eyes (Kennedy, 2012). The slur stated “tu ere maricón” in Spanish, which reportedly translates to

“you are a faggot” in English (Kennedy, 2012). Escobar has played thirteen seasons in the MLB.

Finally, while playing for the San Francisco 49ers (NFL) in 2016, Colin Kaepernick knelt

during the American anthem before games in protest of the injustices faced by minorities in the

United States (Wyche, 2016).

He has played six seasons in the NFL.

Data Analysis, Ethics, and Rigour

Data analysis began after an individual document for each athlete containing social media

comments in response to his/her norm violation was compiled. Fans’ social media content was

predominately text comments/posts and therefore, we excluded images, GIFs, videos, and

external links from this analysis. In this phase, both authors participated in an inductive thematic

analysis of the content, which functions to illustrate the essential characteristics of an abundant

data set and allows for similarities and differences to emerge (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005; Sparkes

& Smith, 2014).

Since Kaepernick’s protest, for which he was heavily criticized, there has been a growing

movement internationally amongst sport teams of all levels to protest the treatment of minorities.

Data were analyzed according to Braun and Clarke’s (2006) phases of thematic analysis.

To initiate the inductive thematic analysis, we each familiarized ourselves with the data by re-

reading content and documenting initial ideas. Next, we highlighted compelling data across the

set and developed primary codes based on these data. The primary codes were arranged into

broader themes to represent the data and themes were evaluated in relation to their content to

ensure agreement. Then, themes were reviewed and a thematic map of analyses with supporting

data from each of the professional athletes’ individual files was compiled into a comprehensive

Microsoft Excel document. The final step was to clarify and define the broad themes, select

examples to illustrate each theme, and “consider how the theme fits into the broader overall

‘story’ that is to be told about the data and in relation to the research question(s)” for the final

report (Sparkes & Smith, 2014, p. 125).

From an ethical standpoint, it has been suggested that researchers may proceed without

informed consent of all individuals who participate within the online community when the data

are public (Pfeil & Zaphiris, 2010; Webb et al., 2017). When users engage on the Internet in a

public manner, it should be anticipated that their posted content has the potential to reach a broad

audience (Pfeil & Zaphiris, 2010). In addition, those who do not wish to engage in a public

manner have the ability to restrict access to their personal profiles on social media. Regardless of

the absence of a requirement for informed consent in public online settings, it remains necessary

to engage in measures to respect the privacy of the individuals composing messages online,

including the de-identification of data (Townsend & Wallace, 2016; Webb et. al, 2017). As a

result, we have removed the usernames and identifiable features of the platform, as well as the

date of posting from comments depicted in the results.

In alignment with our chosen paradigm, the rigour and authenticity of this research is

grounded in a relativist approach (Sparkes & Smith, 2009, 2014). This approach conceptualizes

quality criteria as a socially constructed set of characteristics that may evolve or change

throughout the research process (Burke, 2016; Schinke et al., 2013; Smith & McGannon, 2018).

Instead of employing a universal set of quality criteria, a relativist approach tailors the criteria to

the specific purpose and features of each research study (Levitt et al., 2017). The following

quality criteria is suggested as standards to evaluate the authenticity of this research: worthiness

of the topic (e.g., relevant, topical, compelling), significance of contribution (e.g., new

knowledge and understanding of social life), and methodological integrity, including fidelity

(e.g., sufficiency in data from diverse sources) and utility (e.g., effectiveness and coherence in

design and process; Levitt et al., 2017; Tracy, 2010). In addition, the authors engaged a ‘critical

friend’ throughout the analysis phase to encourage reflection, offer constructive feedback and

discuss the authors’ assumptions and interpretations of the data set (Smith & McGannon, 2018).

Results

From a broad perspective, fans’ public shaming comments were most commonly directed

at professional athletes’ social norm violations (n=3,200), followed by legal violations

(n=2,550), and sport-specific violations (n=1,950). The vast majority of comments were derived

from Facebook and Twitter, with fewer collected from Instagram. The following section will

describe fans’ general reactions to athletes’ violations, as well as instances of public shaming

practices, including offers and withdrawal of support, and desired or expected consequences for

the athletes in response to their behaviour.

General Reactions to Norm Violations

The fans’ comments conveyed varying attributions for the athletes’ violations. First,

some fans expressed doubt about the athlete’s role and responsibility in the perceived violations

and instead, extended blame to external factors, despite imposed sanctions by the sport

organizations or criminal justice systems. Attributions of this nature are illustrated by fans’

responses to Sharapova and Colabello after each athlete tested positive for performance-

enhancing drug use, including “[the substance] was only banned this year. [Sharapova] had been

prescribed it for over a decade. This is WADA’s screw-up,” and:

Chris, you inspire me. You’re the best comeback story to come to the majors in decades,

not to mention your ethic on and off the field. I believe that drug test was a fluke and you

are clean. The drug you were suspended for isn’t even produced anymore. Keep training

Chris and we’ll see you in July!

Other responses implied that fans believed the athlete bore some responsibility for the

violation but deemed the behaviours or actions insignificant. In these instances, fans often

minimized or overlooked the behaviours contributing to the norm violation in light of the

athlete’s athletic prowess and celebrity status. For example, fans responded to Adrian Peterson

(accused of child abuse) and Patrick Kane (accused of sexual assault) by stating, “play great next

week, get my fantasy team a win and all is forgotten,” and “he may be a rapist but hes a f******

beast.” Further, the celebrity status of Hope Solo prompted a fan to downplay her domestic

violence charge by declaring, “girl, I’d let you assault me any day of the week.”

Finally, fans’ responses most often acknowledged the violation as legitimate and

conveyed the significance of the violation in messages directed at athletes. Broad examples of

this nature are exemplified by a fan’s response to Colabello’s sport-specific violation: “Your

f****** excuse is laughable. You got jacked up from steroids and did well last year because of

it. So, shut the f*** up with b*******.” Similarly, following Solo’s alleged domestic violence, a

fan said: “Assaulting a minor, criminal. Everyone praising you would be singing a different tune

if you weren’t famous. Shame on you, and more importantly, shame on them.”

In addition to recognizing the athlete’s behaviour as a violation, fans demonstrated the

significance of the violation through public shaming practices wherein they offered and

withdrew support for the athlete and expressed desired or expected consequences for the athlete

as a result of the violations. These themes are explored in the following sections and it is

important to note that these themes are not mutually exclusive.

Offer and Withdrawal of Support

This theme emerged from fans’ willingness or unwillingness to support the athlete

following his/her violation. In terms of offering support, there were typically three types of

support fans extended to an athlete following his/her behaviour: emotional support, informational

support, and instrumental support. Emotional support refers to fans’ desire to demonstrate

empathy for the athlete despite his/her violation, such as expressions of acceptance and

understanding of the athlete’s actions, messages of kindness, or forward-looking encouragement.

For instance, offers of emotional support through messages of kindness are exemplified by a

message received by Colabello (performance-enhancing drug use), which stated: “Sometimes

good people get caught in bad decisions. It doesn’t make them bad people. Can’t wait to see you

return.” Another offer of emotional support is demonstrated through acceptance and empathy of

Kaepernick’s anthem protest: “I respect your message, your position and your courage. Keep

your head up!” Finally, fans encouraged athletes with forward-looking messages, such as,

“looking forward to seeing you back at 100% kid #REDEMPTION,” sent to Bouchard following

her first-round loss at Wimbledon.

Informational support is characterized by fans’ desire to offer advice, directions, or

recommendations to the athletes that may be of use given the athletes’ violations. Examples of

informational support directed at Adrian Peterson (legal violation) and Eugenie Bouchard (sport-

specific violation) are illustrated by the following messages, “I’m a huge Adrian Peterson fan.

Please admit wrongdoing and seek counselling. The fans will forgive you and you can save your

career,” and:

Take some time away from the court. Get healthy, work on getting your game in line with

the new coach, and come back refreshed and ready to go. Don’t listen to the haters.

There’s no doubt your game will bounce back. Everyone goes through rough stretches,

no matter what they’re doing with their lives. Peaks and valleys. Keep your chin up!

Finally, instrumental support is defined as fans’ attempts to provide tangible support to

the athlete following engagement in a violation, such as offers to serve as a confidant or coach

for the athlete. For instance, one fan extended Johnny Manziel (accused of domestic violence) an

opportunity confide in him/her, by saying: “if you need a confiding ear who understands then

give me a shout. I can help!” Similarly, another fan offered to coach Eugenie Bouchard her poor

performance result: “I can tell you exactly what you need to improve your game beyond where it

was this time last year.”

While many fans expressed emotional, informational, and instrumental support for the

athlete in relation to his/her violation, there were also a plethora of fans who shamed the athletes

through expressions of withdrawal of support and fanship, including references to actions they

would take to demonstrate their disdain for the athlete’s actions or statements. Fans of Escobar,

who displayed a homophobic slur on his eye black, threatened to withdraw financial support for

the athlete and his team, stating: “As long as he wears [the team’s] jersey, [the team] can kiss my

money goodbye. Absolute joke of an organization.” Similarly, another fan recognized Manziel’s

(legal violation) privilege as a professional athlete and withdrew fanship by declaring: “What’s

wrong with you, bro? Shaking my head. You have things people will kill for and you have taken

it for granted. All bad! I WAS A HUGE FAN, NO MORE!” Finally, one fan’s message

withdrawing support for Solo (legal violation) recognized the repetitive nature of her actions and

the potential effect on future fans:

Some anger management and a much less conceited attitude would go a long way to

improving your life. Your repeated distasteful actions have caused you the loss of many

young, impressionable fans and have done nothing to further the sport.

Desired or Expected Consequences

Following a violation, fans also engaged in shaming practices directed towards the

athlete by expressing their desired or expected physical, psychosocial, or career-related

consequences for the athlete as a result of his/her misconduct.

Physical Consequences

Fans often expressed explicit wishes for the athlete to engage in physical harm to

him/herself or be physically harmed by others as a result of his/her misconduct. Specifically,

there were many examples of fans encouraging the athlete to “end it” or “die”, as well as,

experience serious life-altering physical injuries. Comments of this nature were observed

frequently across all violations, regardless of the severity of the incident. For instance, fans

expressed desired fatal consequences for Peterson (legal) and Bouchard (sport-specific),

including: “[Peterson]’s a shameful disgusting animal. I hope [Peterson] dies a painful death by

beating. Soon. He doesn’t deserve to have children,” and “[Bouchard] please just die.” In

response to Kaepernick’s anthem protest, one fan hoped Kaepernick would experience a serious

injury, suggesting: “No one wants [Kaepernick] to be healthy. I hope [Kaepernick] gets knocked

out cold into a non-terminal coma.” Finally, as a result of Manziel’s alleged domestic violence,

fans called for the athlete to engage in suicidal actions and speculated that nobody would care if

he perished: “Poor Manziel. Life hasn’t treated him fairly and now I read he has hit rock bottom.

Good for him. Hey loser, go ahead and put a gun in your mouth. 99% of the world won’t miss

you, moron.”

Psychosocial Consequences

Fans also expressed wishes for the athlete to endure psychological or social consequences

as a result of his/her violations. In these instances, fans shared a desire for the athlete to be the

recipient of actions or behaviours that are demeaning or humiliating and speculated that

engagement in the incident might have repercussions for the athlete’s social interactions with

others. For instance, in response to Escobar depicting a homophobic slur in his eye black, a fan

tweeted: “Yunel should come back from his suspension wearing eye black that says ‘Yo soy

tonta’, which translates to ‘I am Stupid.’” In addition, when Russell recorded and circulated his

colleague admitting to adultery, a fan suggested he should experience repercussions to his

personal relationships: “No one will ever respect you anymore. There’s snitching for a good

cause and then there is you.”

Career-related Consequences

Fans also displayed shaming practices through messages regarding desired or expected

career-related consequences. There were several different aspects of an athlete’s career that fans

targeted with their comments, including, encouragement for the athlete to retire or leave the

sport, demonstrated by the following message directed at Eugenie Bouchard following her poor

performance: “That b**** Bouchard plays like s***. She should retire from tennis. USELESS

PLAYER.” Fans also taunted athletes with suggestions that his/her career would be tarnished due

to his/her engagement in the violation, as demonstrated by the following message to Patrick

Kane (accused of sexual assault): “Patrick Kane is a rapist. Legacy = ruined.” Other forms of

career related consequences included wishes for the organization or league to trade, suspend or

release the athlete, exemplified by a fan’s message to Evander Kane (missed practice): “B.S.

This guy has shown he can’t grow up and respects nothing and no one. It’s all about him. Drop

the axe and send him packing.” Finally, some fans recommended the athlete be forced to return

the prize money or trophies won in his/her career following a norm violation, such as this fan’s

message directed at Maria Sharapova following her performance-enhancing drug use:

“DOPERPOVA, return the trophies, the money and leave… Druggie! No class, no morals and

not fit to compete in a fair way. No tears here.”

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to investigate sport fans’ responses on social network sites

to athletes involved in North American professional sport who violated social, legal, or sport-

specific norms. The findings suggest fans respond to professional athletes’ norm violations in a

variety of ways, including doubting the athlete’s responsibility for the violation, diminishing the

significance of the violation, and acknowledging the violation and its significance through public

shaming as exemplified by offers or withdrawal of fanship, as well as desired or expected

physical, psychosocial, or career-related consequences. These findings support previous research

by Sanderson and colleagues (2014) focused on fan-athlete interactions on social media,

specifically in reference to fans’ comments conveying encouragement and empathy, as well as,

threats of harm to athletes. The present study extends Sanderson and colleagues’ focus on the

intended outcomes of fans’ comments to a broader interest on the process of public shaming as

informed by Braithwaite’s (1989) theory. As a result, the present study broadened the scope of

athlete violations, thus encompassing a larger number of athletes and a wider range of possible

fan-athlete interactions following athlete violations. Further, the present study contributes to a

growing body of research that has utilized social media interactions to explore a variety of topics

related to sport and exercise, including, health promotion, physical activity participation in

motherhood, self-presentation, para-sport advocacy, sport sponsorship at major events, and

cultural conversations about race and gender (Ash, Sanderson, Kumanyika, & Gramlich, 2017;

Bundon & Hurd Clarke, 2015; Delia & Armstrong, 2017; Frederick, Pegoraro, & Burch, 2017;

Gonsalves, McGannon, Schinke, & Pegoraro, 2017; McGannon, McMahon, & Gonsalves, 2017).

Revisiting Braithwaite’s Theory

Findings suggest public shaming of professional athletes on social media may be either

reintegrative or stigmatizing in nature. Reintegrative shaming was exemplified through fans’

comments suggesting acceptance of the athlete’s perceived wrong-doing and expressing forward-

looking sentiments, such as messages conveying Bouchard’s opportunity for redemption

following her loss at Wimbledon, as well as, acknowledgment of Colabello’s use of performance

enhancing substances and appraisal of this behaviour as a bad decision with reaffirmation that

this decision did not make him a bad person. Both instances refer to the behaviour or action as a

singular event and imply disconnection from the athlete’s overall positive character.

Although the findings indicated examples of reintegrative public shaming, the fans’

comments representing stigmatization or generalization of the singular incident to the athlete’s

character predominated. Specifically, stigmatized shaming was demonstrated through fans’

messages conveying withdrawal of support for the athlete, references to the athlete’s personal

character (e.g., Hope Solo’s attitude and repeated distasteful actions, Sharapova as a druggie)

and explicit desires for ostracism from the sport community through physical (e.g., death threats)

and career-related measures (e.g., retirement, dismissal). Further, fans often amplified

stigmatized shaming by implying an athlete’s ostracism from the community and worthlessness

through messages such as, “no tears here” and “the world won’t miss you.” These findings are

consistent with Massaro’s (1997) assertion that modern shaming practices often represent

stigmatized shaming.

Influences on Public Shaming Practices

Within the professional sport context, fans’ willingness to engage in reintegrative or

stigmatized shaming following athletes’ violations may be influenced by hero-worshipping and

fan identification. Specifically, modern day athletes have received celebrity status due to the

commercialization and consumption of professional sport (Boyle & Haynes, 2009). With this

celebrity status, the focus on athletes’ behaviours and actions within and outside of the

professional sport environment intensifies, particularly in instances of behavioural misconduct

(Boyle & Haynes, 2009; Turner, 2010). However, the heightened celebrity of professional

athletes may also facilitate fans’ views of the athlete as a hero (Smith, 2016), which may

encourage fans to respond more positively to the athlete. As posited by Smith (2016), in cases of

misconduct, fans tend to remain supportive of professional athletes and/or have difficulties

viewing the athlete as responsible for the misconduct. This interpretation provides insight into

findings of fans’ willingness to overlook the athletes’ misconducts despite existing evidence and

instead, offer support to them.

Fan identification, considered the psychological connection that one establishes with a

team or athlete and the degree to which an individual perceives his/her fanship for a particular

team or athlete as an extension of his/her sense of self, may contribute to reintegrative or

stigmatized public shaming in response to norm violations (Wann, Hunter, Ryan, & Wright,

2001). As suggested by Kelly (2015), the intimate connection and enhanced knowledge that

individuals establish with a sports team and/or athlete can encourage fans to become both

increasingly loyal supporters and very sharp critics. Fans with enhanced identification need to

view their favourite athletes and/or teams as exceptional, as well as more accomplished and

skilled (Wann, 2006). In addition, fans desire athletes to be morally superior in comparison to

others and when these needs are unfulfilled (e.g., athlete’s engagement in legal, social, or sport-

specific misconduct) threats to fan identification may occur and fans may respond in a harmful

manner (Wann, 2006). Previous research has outlined negative outcomes of fan behaviour

derived from high fan identification, such as hostile and instrumental aggression (e.g., Wann,

Carlson, & Schrader, 1999; Wann, Haynes, McLean, & Pullen, 2003; Wann, Peterson, Cothran,

& Dykes, 1999), riots (Lanter, 2000), and violence amongst groups of fans (Wann, 2001). We

speculate that social media provides a new avenue for highly identified fans to express their

responses to athletes’ legal, social, or sport-specific violations. Further, fans tend to be part of a

larger social community (i.e., a fandom) that often encourages particular shared practices

amongst members of the group (Kelly, 2015), and which may embolden other members of the

community to join in the shaming of athletes on social media.

The nature of online environments may play a unique role in shaming practices directed

at athletes, as individuals often engage in behaviours and/or communicate with others online in

ways that they would not during face-to-face interactions (Cheung, 2014; Joinson, 2001;

Postmes, Spears, Sakhel, & De Groot, 2001; Suler, 2004). This phenomenon, referred to as

online disinhibition, is facilitated through the perceived anonymity possessed by social media

users, which can assist in lowering behavioural inhibitions and detaching actions online from

conduct in everyday life (e.g., Dyer, Green, Pitts, & Millward, 1995; Joinson, 2003, 2007; Suler,

2004). Examples of online disinhibition include increased use of inappropriate language,

engagement in contentious criticisms, or verbal attacks and threats to others online (Joinson,

2001; Suler, 2004). The findings of the current study reflect examples of behaviours facilitated

by online disinhibition, specifically in relation to fans’ desired or expected consequences for the

athletes as a result of their violations. Additional aspects that may promote online disinhibition

include the physical distance between fans and athletes, inability to see the effects of their

comments on the athlete, and the perceived power possessed by fans online that they may not

typically possess in relation to professional athletes (Suler, 2004).

In addition to online disinhibition, fans’ shaming practices may be enhanced through the

rapid spread of information on social media (Weng, Menczer, & Ahn, 2013), in which messages

online may reach larger audiences and facilitate an online mob mentality (Cheung, 2014). This

mentality may promote widespread moral outrage amongst a large group of people in response to

perceived norm violations (Rowbottom, 2013). Given the abundance of comments directed at

each individual athlete in response to his/her norm violation, it is suggested that mob mentality

may have encouraged some fans to contribute to the conversation, although further research is

needed to explore this proposition.

Finally, although the intent of this study was to explore the nature of the direct messages

conveyed in the online comments without an interpretation of underlying messages, the gendered

and racialized ways in which fans commented on athletes’ norm violations cannot be ignored.

The comments made about Sharapova, Bouchard, and Solo, with respect to physical appearance

and sexualisation, as well as, the use of specific language are problematically gendered. Fans’

comments that reflect rape culture are also illustrative of gendered and misogynistic viewpoints.

Further, race influenced the nature of the online comments as highlighted by fans’ reactions to

Kaepernick’s protest. Our understanding of fans’ online shaming of athletes would be advanced

through latent analyses which explore meanings and themes such as gender and race that

underlie the actual comments.

Future Directions

This study initiates a foundation for research related to public shaming on social media in

the context of professional sport. As a foundational study, there are a number of opportunities for

future research. First, Braithwaite’s (1989) theory has been critiqued for its lack of attention to

the relations of power and social contexts that influence shaming practices. The influence of

power and social contexts are critical to the development and reinforcement of norms, as well as,

the the ways in which acceptable and unacceptable behaviours or actions are differentiated

(Russell, 1998). Given the unique power relations in online contexts, these are important

considerations for future research. Adopting a sociocultural lens to interrogate relations of power

and broader cultural understandings and reinforcements of legal, social, and sport-specific norms

in the context of shaming of professional athletes is warranted. Consistent with a view to

relations of power, our understanding of public shaming in sport would be enhanced by

investigating the ways in which the nature of public shaming may be influenced by notions of

identity such as gender, sexuality, race, and religion, among others.

Second, this study interpreted findings in light of reintegrative and stigmatizing practices

based upon a thematic analysis of online content. It would be beneficial to qualitatively explore

the experiences of fans engaging in shaming practices on social media and investigate the

intended reintegrative or stigmatizing outcomes of their comments. In addition, the effects of

these practices should be explored by examining professional athletes’ and sport organizations’

experiences with and responses to online public shaming. Athletes’ and organizations’

perspectives are critical as experiences of public shaming on social media may have significant

adverse personal and/or professional consequences for the recipients (Ronson, 2015). We could

also learn more about the scope and breadth of these practices among professional sport fans

through quantitative or mixed method approaches to ascertain the demographics of the fans,

frequency of participation, reasons for engagement, and desired outcomes of these behaviours.

Further, the fixed period of data collection and subsequent results of this research represents a

snapshot in time; it is possible, if not likely, that public shaming comments of each athlete

continued beyond this period of time. Future research using quantitative methods may take a

longitudinal approach to learn more about the scope of these behaviours following athlete norm

violations.

Finally, norm violations included in this study were committed by athletes involved in

North American professional sport leagues. However, there are numerous examples of

international elite athletes violating legal, sport-specific and social norms (e.g., ball tampering by

Australian cricket team, Conor McGregor’s assault charges). Future research may address the

presence and nature of public shaming on social media directed at high profile athletes belonging

to professional or amateur sport leagues outside of North America.

Conclusion

In conclusion, guided by Braithwaite’s (1989) Reintegrative Shaming Theory, a content

analysis of the presence and nature of public shaming on social media by professional sport fans

in response to athletes’ legal, social and sport-specific norm violations was conducted. Results

indicated that reintegrative and stigmatized public shaming of professional athletes following

norm violations indeed occurs and is demonstrated by fans’ offers and withdrawal of support and

expressed desired or expected consequences for the athlete as a result of his/her behaviour.

Public shaming online may be influenced by sport-related factors, including hero-worshipping

and fan identification, as well as, factors unique to online settings, such as online disinhibition

and mob mentalities. This study contributes to the extant literature as it is the first to expose fans’

engagement in public shaming of professional athletes on social media through a theoretical

framework; it involved eleven instances of athlete misconduct, qualitatively explored over 7,700

fan responses across three social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, Twitter), and

included male and female professional athletes from a wide range of sports. In addition, the

findings demonstrate that fans’ public shaming of professional athletes spans all three categories

of perceived norm violations: legal, social, and sport-specific. Further, this study provides a

foundation for research on public shaming in the professional sport context, connects with

emerging research of this nature outside of sport (e.g., Cheung, 2014, De Vries, 2015), and sheds

light on a new challenge confronting athletes and sport organizations in the modern professional

sport context.

References

Ash, E., Sanderson, J., Kumanyika, C., & Gramlich, K. (2017). "Just goes to show how these

hoes try to tear men down": Investigating Twitter and cultural conversations on athletic

ability, race, and sexual assault. Journal of Sports Media, 12(1), 65-87.

10.1353/jsm.2017.0003

Associated Press. (2016, February 15). Evander Kane misses Sabres practice after NBA all-star

trip. CBC Sports. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/evander-kane-

scratched-from-sabres-game-1.3449010.

Associated Press. (2015, November 5). Patrick Kane won’t face charges after rape investigation.

CBC Sports. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/patrick-kane-no-

charges-1.3305339.

Baxter, K. (2016, June 8). Hope Solo loses bid to have domestic violence case thrown out. Los

Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-sn-hope-solo-

domestic-violence-20160608-snap-story.html.

Bennett, W. L. (2003). New media power: The Internet and global activism. In N. Couldry & J.

Curran (Eds.), Contesting media power: Alternative media in a networked world, (pp.17–

38). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.

Bonesteel, M. (2016, December 2). Prosecutors agree to drop domestic violence charges against

Johnny Manziel. The Washington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2016/12/02/prosecutors-agree-to-

drop-domestic-violence-charges-against-johnny-manziel/?utm_term=.8f07474ee7f4.

Boren, C. (2014, September 13). Adrian Peterson released on bond in child abuse case but NFL’s

problems continue. The Washington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2014/09/13/adrian-peterson-

released-on-bond-in-child-abuse-case-but-nfls-problems-continue/?utm_term=.1bbda44f5019.

Boyd, D.M., & Ellison, N.B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and

scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.

10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x

Boyle, R., & Haynes, R. (2009). Power play: Sport the media and popular culture (2nd ed.).

Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. 10.3366/Edinburgh/9780748635924.001.0001

Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511804618

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in

Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bundon, A., & Hurd Clarke, L. (2015). Honey or vinegar? Athletes with disabilities discuss

strategies for advocacy within the Paralympic movement. Journal of Sport and Social

Issues, 39(5), 351-370. 10.1177/0193723514557823

Burke, S. (2016). Rethinking ‘validity’ and ‘trustworthiness’ in qualitative inquiry: How might

we judge the quality of qualitative research in sport and exercise sciences? In B. Smith &

A. C. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise

(pp. 330–339). London, UK: Routledge.

Canadian Press. (2016, April 23). PED Chris Colabello tested positive for used mostly for

recovery. CBC Sports. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/baseball/mlb/ped-chris-

colabello-positive-used-recovery-1.3550023.

Cheung, A. S. (2014). Revisiting privacy and dignity: Online shaming in the global e-village.

Laws, 3(2), 301-326. 10.3390/laws3020301

Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influences: Social norms, conformity, and

compliance. In D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske, & L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology

ed.; pp.151-192). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Constine, J. (2017, June 27). Facebook now has 2 billion monthly users... and a responsibility.

Tech Crunch. Retrieved from https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/27/facebook-2-billion-users/.

Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2013). Conceptualizing mediatization: Contexts, traditions,

arguments. Communication Theory, 23(3), 191-202. 10.1111/comt.12019

Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches

ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Daly, K. (2007). Qualitative methods for family studies and human development. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Delia, E., & Armstrong, C. (2017). Sponsorship goes social: Analyzing Twitter users’ discussion

of French Open sponsors. In A. Bundon (Ed.), Digital Qualitative Research in Sport and

Physical Activity (pp.141-154). London, UK: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315304557-10

De Vries, A. (2015). The use of social media for shaming strangers: Young people's views.

System Sciences (HICSS), 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference, IEEE Computer

Society, 2053-2062. 10.1109/HICSS.2015.245

Dyer, R., Green, R., Pitts, M., & Millward, G. (1995). What’s the flaming problem?

CMC—deindividuating or disinhibiting? In M.A.R. Kirby, A.J. Dix, & J.E. Finlay (Eds.),

People and Computers X (pp. 289 –302). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Edosomwan, S., Prakasan, S. K., Kouame, D., Watson, J., & Seymour, T. (2011). The history

of social media and its impact on business. Journal of Applied Management and

Entrepreneurship, 16(3), 79-91.

Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., & Steinfield, C. (2009). Social network sites and society: Current

trends and future possibilities. Interactions, 16(1), 6-9. 10.1145/1456202.1456204

ESPN. (2016, March 31). D’Angelo Russell apologizes for Nick Young video fiasco. ESPN.

Retrieved from http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/15100584/dangelo-russell-los-angeles-

lakers-apologizes-recording-nick-young-conversation.

Frederick, E., Pegoraro, A., & Burch, L. M. (2017). Legends worthy of lament: An analysis of

self-presentation and user framing on the Legends Football League's Facebook page. Journal

of Sports Media, 12(1), 169-190. 10.1353/jsm.2017.0007

Gonsalves, C. A., McGannon, K. R., Schinke, R. J., & Pegoraro, A. (2017). Mass media

narratives of women’s cardiovascular disease: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Health

Psychology Review, 11(2), 164-178. 10.1080/17437199.2017.1281750

Gwinner, K., & Swanson, S. R. (2003). A model of fan identification: Antecedents and

sponsorship outcomes. Journal of Services Marketing, 17(3), 275-294.

10.1108/08876040310474828

Hambrick, M. E. (2012). Six degrees of information: Using social network analysis to explore

the spread of information within sport social networks. International Journal of Sport

Communication, 5(1), 16-34. 10.1123/ijsc.5.1.16

Hambrick, M. E., Simmons, J. M., Greenhalgh, G. P., & Greenwell, T. C. (2010). Understanding

professional athletes’ use of Twitter: A content analysis of athlete tweets. International

Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 454-471. 10.1123/ijsc.3.4.454

Harris, A. (2009). The role of power in shaming interactions: How social control is performed in

a juvenile court. Contemporary Justice Review, 12(4), 379-399. 10.1080/10282580903342854

Hay, C. (2001). An exploratory test of Braithwaite's reintegrative shaming theory. Journal of

Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38(2), 132-153. 10.1177/0022427801038002002

Hechter, M., & Opp, K-D. (2001). Social norms. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.

Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. 10.1177/1049732305276687

Jacquet, J. (2015). Is shame necessary? New uses for an old tool. New York, NY: Pantheon.

Joinson, A. N. (2007). Disinhibition and the internet. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.), Psychology and the

Internet: Intrapersonal, interpersonal and transpersonal implications (2nd ed.; pp. 76–92).

San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press. 10.1016/B978-012369425-6/50023-0

Joinson, A. N. (2003). Understanding the psychology of Internet behavior: Virtual worlds, real

lives. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-

awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), 177-192.

10.1002/ejsp.36

Kassing, J. W., & Sanderson, J. (2010). Fan–athlete interaction and Twitter tweeting through the

Giro: A case study. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(1), 113-128.

10.1123/ijsc.3.1.113

Kavanagh, E., Jones, I., & Sheppard-Marks, L. (2016). Towards typologies of virtual

maltreatment: Sport, digital cultures, & dark leisure. Leisure Studies, 35, 783-796.

10.1080/02614367.2016.1216581

Kelly, W.W. (2015). Sport fans and fandoms. In R. Giulianotti (Ed.), Routledge handbook of the

sociology of sport. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kennedy, B. (2012, September 18). Blue Jays’ Yunel Escobar played game with homophobic

slur written across eye black. The Toronto Star. Retrieved from

https://www.thestar.com/sports/baseball/2012/09/18/blue_jays_yunel_escobar_played_game_

with_homophobic_slur_written_across_eye_black.html.

Kim, M.S. (2014). Doing social constructivist research means making empathic and aesthetic

connections with participants. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 22(4),

538-553. 10.1080/1350293X.2014.947835

Lanter, J. R. (2000, November). Sport spectator identification and involvement in a

spontaneous sport victory celebration. Paper presented at the meeting of the North

American Society for the Sociology of Sport, Colorado Springs, CO.

Lapinski, M. K., & Rimal, R. N. (2005). An explication of social norms. Communication Theory,

15(2), 127-147. 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00329.x

Levitt, H. M., Motulsky, S. L., Wertz, F. J., Morrow, S. L., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2017).

Recommendations for designing and reviewing qualitative research in psychology: Promoting

methodological integrity. Qualitative Psychology, 4(1), 2-22. 10.1037/qup0000082

Marcus, M.B. (2016, March 7). What is meldonium? Maria Sharapova case spotlights banned

drug. CBS News. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-meldonium-

banned-drug-tennis-star-maria-sharapova-was-taking/.

Massaro, T.M. (1997). The meanings of shame: Implications for legal reform. Psychology,

Public Policy, and Law, 3(4), 645-704. 10.1037/1076-8971.3.4.645

McGannon, K. R., McMahon, J., & Gonsalves, C. A. (2017). Mother runners in the blogosphere:

A discursive psychological analysis of online recreational athlete identities. Psychology of

Sport and Exercise, 28, 125-135. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.11.002

Munroe, K., Estabrooks, P., Dennis, P., & Carron, A. (1999). A phenomenological analysis of

group norms in sport teams. Sport Psychologist, 13, 171-182. 10.1123/tsp.13.2.171

Murphy, K., & Harris, N. (2007). Shaming, shame and recidivism: A test of reintegrative

shaming theory in the white-collar crime context. The British Journal of

Criminology, 47(6), 900-917. 10.1093/bjc/azm037

Osborne, A., Sherry, E., & Nicholson, M. (2016). Celebrity, scandal and the male athlete: A

sport media analysis. European Sport Management Quarterly, 16(3), 255-273.

10.1080/16184742.2016.1164214

Pfeil, U., & Zaphiris, P. (2010). Applying qualitative content analysis to study online support

communities. Universal Access in the Information Society, 9(1), 1-16. 10.1007/s10209-009-

0154-3

Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., & De Groot, D. (2001). Social influence in computer-

mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(10), 1243-1254. 10.1177/01461672012710001

Ronson, J. (2015). So you've been publicly shamed. New York, NY: The Penguin Group.

Rowbottom, J. (2013). To punish, inform, and criticize: The goals of naming and shaming.

In J. Petley (Ed.), Media and public shaming: drawing the boundaries of disclosure. New

York, NY: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.

Russell, S. (1998). Reintegrative shaming and the 'frozen antithesis': Braithwaite and

Elias. Journal of Sociology, 34(3), 303-313. 10.1177/144078339803400306

Sanderson, J., & Emmons, B. (2014). Extending and withholding forgiveness to Josh Hamilton:

Exploring forgiveness within parasocial interaction. Communication & Sport, 2(1), 24-47.

10.1177/2167479513482306

Sanderson, J., & Kassing, J.W. (2011). Chapter 7: Tweets and blogs: Transformative,

adversarial, and integrative developments in sports media. In A.C. Billings (Ed.), Sports

media: Transformation, Integration, Consumption. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Sanderson, J., & Truax, C. (2014). “I hate you man!”: Exploring maladaptive parasocial

interaction expressions to college athletes via Twitter. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate

Athletics, 7, 333-351.

Scheff, T.J., & Retzinger, S.M. (1991). Emotions and violence: Shame and rage in

destructive conflicts. Lincoln, NE: Lexington Books.

Schinke, R. J., McGannon, K. R., & Smith, B. (2013). Expanding the sport and physical activity

research landscape through community scholarship: Introduction. Qualitative Research in

Sport, Exercise and Health, 5, 287–290. 10.1080/2159676X.2013.847477

Schrader, D.E. (2015). Constructivism and learning in the age of social media: Changing minds

and learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 144, 23-35.

10.1002/tl.20160

Smith, S.E. (2016). “Sportsfluenza”: The result of not holding athletes accountable for bad

behaviour. Law & Psychology Review, 40, 345-362.

Smith, B., & McGannon, K. R. (2018). Developing rigor in qualitative research: Problems and

opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and

Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 101-121. 10.1080/1750984X.2017.1317357

Smith, A. C., Stavros, C., Westberg, K., Wilson, B., & Boyle, C. (2014). Alcohol-related player

behavioral transgressions: Incidences, fan media responses, and a harm-reduction alternative.

International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 49(3-4), 400-416.

10.1177/1012690213515663

Sparkes, A., & Smith, B. (2014). Qualitative research methods in sport, exercise and health:

From process to product. New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203852187

Sparkes, A., & Smith, B. (2009). Judging the quality of qualitative inquiry: Criteriology and

relativism in action. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10(5), 491-497.

10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.02.006

Stern, C. (2017, March 17). Maria Sharapova ‘absolutely’ expects suspicion over doping to

cloud the rest of her tennis career as she gets set for the end of 15-month ban – but admits she

enjoyed time off to socialize, drink, and even date. Daily Mail. Retrieved from

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4324770/Maria-Sharapova-talks-tennis-

suspension-ending.html.

Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321- 326.

10.1089/1094931041291295

Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Townsend, L., & Wallace, C. (2016). Social media research: A guide to ethics. University of

Aberdeen, 1-16.

Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight ‘big-tent’ criteria for excellent qualitative research.

Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 837–851. 10.1177/1077800410383121

Trollope, M. (2015, June 30). Last year’s finalist Bouchard stunned by Duan. Wimbledon News.

Retrieved from http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/news/articles/2015-06-

30/last_years_finalist_bouchard_stunned_by_duan.html.

Turner, G. (2010). Approaching celebrity studies. Celebrity Studies, 1, 11–20.

10.1080/19392390903519024

Twitter. (2019). About Verified Accounts. Twitter.com. https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-

your-account/about-twitter-verified-accounts

Wallace, L., Wilson, J., & Miloch, K. (2011). Sporting Facebook: A content analysis of NCAA

organizational sport pages and Big 12 conference athletic department pages. International

Journal of Sport Communication, 4(4), 422-444. 10.1123/ijsc.4.4.422

Wann, D. L. (2006). The causes and consequences of sport team identification. In A. A. Raney &

J. Bryant (Eds.), Handbook of sports and media (pp. 331–352). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wann, D. L. (2001, June). Encouraging positive adult behavior at youth sporting events:

Changing to a culture of FUN. Invited address presented at the National Alliance for Youth

Sport Summit, Chicago.

Wann, D. L., Carlson, J. D., & Schrader, M. P. (1999). The impact of team identification on the

hostile and instrumental verbal aggression of sport spectators. Journal of Social Behavior

and Personality, 14, 279–286.

Wann, D. L., Haynes, G., McLean, B., & Pullen, P. (2003). Sport team identification and

willingness to consider anonymous acts of hostile aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 406–

413. 10.1002/ab.10046

Wann, D. L., Hunter, J. L., Ryan, J. A., & Wright, L. A. (2001). The relationship between team

identification and willingness of sport fans to illegally assist their team. Social Behavior and

Personality: An International Journal, 29, 531– 536. 10.2224/sbp.2001.29.6.531

Wann, D. L., Peterson, R. R., Cothran, C., & Dykes, M. (1999). Sport fan aggression and

anonymity: The importance of team identification. Social Behavior and Personality: An

International Journal, 27, 597–602. 10.2224/sbp.1999.27.6.597

Webb, H., Jirotka, M., Stahl, B.C., Housley, W., Edwards, A., Williams, M., Procter, R., Rana,

O., & Burnap, P. (2017, June). The ethical challenges of publishing Twitter data for research

dissemination. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Web Science Conference, 339-348. ACM:

New York, NY. 10.1145/3091478.3091489

Weng, L., Menczer, F., & Ahn, Y. (2013). Virality prediction and community structure in social

networks. Scientific Reports, 3(2522), 1-6. 10.1038/srep02522

Wesch, M. (2009). Youtube and you: Experiences of self-awareness in the context

collapse of the recording webcam. Explorations in Media Ecology, 8(2), 19-34.

White, M. D., & Marsh, E. E. (2006). Content analysis: A flexible methodology. Library

Trends, 55(1), 22-45. 10.1353/lib.2006.0053

Whitman, J. Q. (1998). What is wrong with inflicting shame sanctions?. Yale Law Journal, 1055-

1092. 10.2307/797205

Wilson, B., Stavros, C., & Westberg, K. (2008). Player transgressions and the management of

the sport sponsor relationship. Public Relations Review, 34(2), 99-107.

10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.03.012

WTA Tour, Inc. (2017). Eugenie Bouchard Profile. WTA.com.

http://www.wtatennis.com/players/player/316161/title/Eugenie-Bouchard-0

Wyche, S. (2016, August 27). Colin Kaepernick explains why he sat during national anthem.

NFL.com. Retrieved from http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000691077/article/colin-

kaepernick-explains-why-he-sat-during-national-anthem.

CHAPTER FOUR: STUDY 2

Online public shaming of professional athletes: Gender matters

This chapter has been published. MacPherson, E., & Kerr. G. (2020). Online public shaming of

professional athletes: Gender matters. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 51. 101782. Reprinted

by permission of the publisher Elsevier: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/copyright.

Contributions by first author: Conceptualization of study (75%); Data collection (100%); Data

analyses (90%); Writing of first draft (100%); Revisions before manuscript submissions (75%);

Revisions after peer-review process (75%).

Abstract

Public shaming – a common practice with historical roots – is defined as an individual’s

public communication of disapproval or contempt for the behaviour of another individual.

Previous research has explored fans’ engagement in public shaming of professional athletes in

response to athletes’ norm violations and found fans withdraw support and provide extensive

descriptions of their desired psychosocial, physical, and career-related consequences for the

athletes. The existing literature also questions the extent to which public shaming of professional

athletes online may be influenced by athletes’ social identities. Therefore, the purpose of the

present study was to explore the ways in which fans’ public shaming practices may be influenced

by the perceived gender of professional athletes. A social constructionist perspective guided our

qualitative thematic content analysis, which examined 7,700 comments by sport fans on

Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter directed at professional athletes in response to their legal,

social, and sport-specific norm violations. We implemented methodological pluralism to analyze

the dataset through a gendered lens. The findings suggest fans’ public shaming practices

illustrate contentious views on gender through explicit objectification of females, promotion of

hyper-masculinity, and victim blaming on social media. The findings are interpreted in light of

the extant literature related to rape culture in sport and the broader societal implications of fans’

online behaviours are discussed. Ethical issues embedded within research of this nature are also

explored and recommendations for future research are proposed.

Keywords: public shaming; social media; gender; methodological pluralism; fan-athlete

relationship

Introduction

From a broad perspective, there are a number of reasons individuals may be drawn to use

social media, including strategic (e.g., mechanism for businesses to build relationships and

promote brands in an accessible manner), operational (e.g., communicate up-to-date information)

or user-centered purposes, such as, a mechanism for social interaction, entertainment, fandom or

news (e.g., Filo, Lock, & Karg, 2014; Hambrick et al., 2013; Hatch & Schultz, 2010; Sanderson

& Hambrick, 2012). Previous research has reported positive outcomes associated with social

media use, such as, establishment of personal and professional connections, expansion and

fulfillment of diverse interests, enhanced self-esteem, as well as, increased social awareness and

mobilization in global crises (e.g., Boyd & Ellison, 2007; De Meo, Ferrara, Fiumara, & Provetti,

2014; Kietzmann et al., 2011; Raacke & Bonds-Raacke, 2008; Yates & Paquette, 2011). Despite

these potential positive outcomes, one of the key criticisms of social media is the opportunity it

provides ordinary people to engage freely in the public shaming of others. Public shaming refers

to the practices by which an individual or group communicates disapproval towards another

individual in response to that person’s violation of a norm (e.g., Braithwaite, 1989; Cheung,

2014; Harris, 2009; Massaro, 1997; Munroe, Estabrooks, Dennis, & Carron, 1999; Whitman,

1998). Norms generally refer to guiding psychological and cultural principles that inform

behaviour and may be legal, social, and community-related in nature, including, sport-specific

norm violations such as, missing practices, poor performance, doping, or misconduct in athletes’

personal lives (e.g., Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Hechter & Opp, 2001; Lapinski & Rimal, 2005).

Although public shaming practices are historically rooted (e.g., restraint in a pillory), the rise of

social media has significantly broadened the scope of these practices in contemporary society

(Cheung, 2014; De Vries, 2015; Goldman, 2015; Rowbottom, 2013). In the online realm, these

practices are exemplified by individuals hurling vicious words at a perceived offender online and

broadcasting the alleged norm violation and/or the offender’s personal information publicly

through social media. In this context, public shaming of individuals or organizations is often

carried out for the purpose of humiliation, social denouncement, and punishment (Cheung, 2014;

Kitchin, Paramio-Salcines, & Walters, 2019). Other factors contributing to individuals’

willingness or motivation to participate include, entertainment, excitement, evoking a reaction,

seeking attention, or elevating their ‘own moral purity’ (Blackford, 2016, p. 6; Jane, 2014a).

These factors have lead Jane (2014a) to coin this pervasive and negative online behaviour as

“recreational nastiness” (p.532). In addition, an important factor that differentiates online

shaming from these practices offline is the tendency for public shaming campaigns to occur in

instances that are not justified (Kitchin et al., 2019). In these circumstances, individuals may be

vilified, attacked, and suffer reputational damage for insignificant, minor, or non-existent norm

violations (Blackford, 2016).

Public shaming on social media is especially relevant in the professional sport world as

athletes’ lives are highly scrutinized (Coombs & Holladay, 2012). Athletes are particularly

vulnerable to scrutiny when they behave in ways that deviate from an expected norm, such as

driving under the influence, engaging in domestic violence, or performing poorly (Coombs &

Holladay, 2012). Previous research has suggested that public shaming of sport figures on social

media is more prominent than individuals in other high-profile domains, perhaps due to the

propensity for fans to shame athletes for their behaviours both on and off the field (Billings,

Coombs, & Brown, 2018; Boyle & Haynes, 2018; Kitchin et al., 2019). When public scrutiny

online is effective, athletes and organizations can suffer significant reputational damage

(Cheung, 2014; Ronson, 2015; Torrenzano & Davis, 2011). As a result, most scholarship

dedicated to athlete norm violations has been conducted from a business or sport administration

perspective, wherein the management of relationships and sponsorship, harm-reduction, and

image repair for the athletes and the organizations in which they belong are paramount (Boyle &

Haynes, 2018; Kitchen et al., 2019; Smith, Stavros, Westberg, Wilson, & Boyle, 2014). Given

this business-oriented focus, limited existing research explores fans’ perspectives of athlete norm

violations (Smith et al., 2014).

A recent study by MacPherson and Kerr (2019), however, used a qualitative content

analysis to investigate fans’ social media responses to eleven professional athletes who engaged

in legal, social, or sport-specific norm violations. Findings indicated that fans responded in a

number of ways to athlete misconduct, including expressed denial of the athlete’s involvement in

the norm violation, acknowledgment of the violation but minimization of its significance, and

recognition of the violation and its significance through engagement in public shaming practices.

Examples of public shaming practices depicted in this research were withdrawals of fanship, and

explicit expressions of desired or expected physical, psychosocial, or career-related

repercussions for the athlete. Other research that has explored negative fan-athlete interactions

on social media in response to athlete norm violations has exposed fans’ criticisms of an athlete’s

personal character (Sanderson & Emmons, 2014) and revealed fans’ attempts to humiliate,

ridicule, and threaten athletes (Sanderson & Truax, 2014). In addition, Frederick and colleagues

(2016) demonstrated that fans do not restrict online attacks to the athlete who engaged in the

norm violation; instead, fans’ comments often shift from the athlete’s specific violation to

personal attacks on other fans, particularly in instances where perspectives on the incident

differed (Frederick et al., 2016). The propensity for attacks to be personalized online is supported

by Kavanagh and colleagues’ (2016) research that examined negative fan-athlete interactions

more generally on social media. These authors reported that fans often attempted to

communicate with athletes in a contentious, threatening, or vulgar way, characterized by

discriminatory comments centred on gender, race, sexual orientation, religion and/or disability,

irrespective of athlete behaviour (p. 789). In another study, Kavanagh and colleagues (2019)

demonstrated female professional tennis players were subject to hateful language, sexualization,

and threats of sexual violence through comments on social media. Further, Litchfield, Kavanagh,

Osborne and Jones (2018) found that Serena Williams, in particular, was exposed to numerous

disparaging online comments that centred on her physicality and questioned her gender, accused

her of performance enhancing drug use, and possessed racist undertones. These findings serve as

a foundation for knowledge regarding fan-athlete interactions on social media and highlight the

potential for broader social and cultural implications of these online practices. In fact,

MacPherson and Kerr (2019) recommended that future research examine the nature of public

shaming from a sociocultural perspective as a means to recognize relations of power and

investigate the influences of social identities on public shaming of professional athletes.

Attention to public shaming on social media with this lens is critical, as these platforms

have often been considered spaces wherein social and cultural values may be shared, discussed,

debated and reinforced (Antunovic, 2014; Brock, 2012; Schmittel & Sanderson, 2015). As a

result, social media serves as an information hub for individuals where their personal

understandings of social or cultural issues are shaped and disseminated (Zaleski, Gundersen,

Baes, Estupinian, & Vergara, 2016). Some scholars, however, recognize the problematic aspects

of using social media as a space for open communication and debate, as it may provide an

opportunity for users to promote hegemonic dialogue, reinforce established relations of power

and oppression, and strengthen controversial perspectives on significant sociocultural concerns

(Ash, Sanderson, Kumanyika, & Gramlich, 2017; Demirhan & Cakir-Demirhan, 2015). For

example, expression of problematic views about specific social identities such as, gender, race,

faith, sexuality, political views, and nationality are increasingly common on social media and

individuals are often targeted based on these identities (Jane, 2014a; Nakayama, 2017). The

focus of the present study – gender – is particularly subjected to hostile online behaviour (Jane,

2014a). As Jane (2014a) suggested, misogynistic behaviour and views previously relegated to the

dark corners of the web now circulate openly with increasing prevalence through commonly

visited online spaces, such as social media. As a result, Jane (2014b) indicates a critical need to

investigate gendered discourse online as an increased focus would highlight the dominant nature

of this rhetoric online, showcase the hostility of the comments, and illustrate the degree to which

harmful views of gender remain present in our societal fabric.

Engagement and perpetuation of denigrating discourse about specific social identities is

able to flourish on social media because conceptualization and discussion of complex issues are

often made simplistic and require minimal effort, deliberation, or subsequent reflection online

(Kapko, 2016; Ott, 2017). As Jane (2014a) notes, expression of negative views is rarely about

providing coherent reasoning or engaging substantively with those with whom one disagrees,

and centres more prominently on attacking another’s character, appealing to prejudices, and

“out-shouting everyone else” (p.534) participating in the conversation. Given the perception of

social media as an information hub, negative discourses have the potential to – and in some cases

already have begun to – infuse public opinion beyond the online world (Zaleski et al., 2016). In

the case of gender, Jane (2014a) suggests that sexualized discourse has already become

normalized online. As a result, it is important to consider the significant risk for societal

repercussions resulting from these conversations online (Ott, 2017). This risk is further

magnified by virtue of perpetrators’ potential for anonymity, a lack of formal regulation, and the

ability to disperse controversial beliefs in an accelerated and vast manner on social media (Henry

& Powell, 2018). These challenges add an additional layer of complexity and importance to

understanding experiences of public shaming practices online.

Given the rise of social media as a vehicle for discussions about cultural values and social

identities and an instrument for fans to publicly shame professional athletes, as well as, the

existing research related to gendered discourse in online spaces, we endeavoured to explore two

key research questions: 1) Are fans’ public shaming practices on social media in response to

professional athletes’ legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations influenced by the

professional athletes’ gender? And, 2) If so, what do these public shaming practices look like?

Methodology

Philosophical Approach

This research was conducted from a social constructionist perspective, which

acknowledges and elucidates the ways in which individuals assign meaning to their surroundings

rooted in and influenced by historical, social, and cultural contexts (Pascale, 2011). From this

perspective, knowledge is considered subjective, conditional, historically and culturally situated,

and produced through social exchange (Busanich & McGannon, 2010; Busanich, McGannon, &

Schincke, 2012); and reality is a collective social process based upon interaction between

individuals, their world, and the social contexts in which their experiences take place (Crotty,

1998; Pascale, 2011). This philosophy also acknowledges the role of language in creating,

constructing, and reinforcing our realities over time (Gergen, 2001; McGannon & Mauws, 2000).

As Crotty (1998) notes, this philosophical approach “emphasizes the hold our culture has on us”

(p.58) and therefore, encourages critical analyses of cultural perspectives and/or practices that

inform one’s experience. This philosophical approach aligns well with the present study given

the focus on the process of public shaming and the potential for social media to expose

contentious views of gender.

Methodological Overview: Pluralistic Data Analysis

This research adopted a pluralistic approach to data analysis, which refers to the use of

multiple qualitative analytical methods within the same set of data (Clarke, Caddick, & Frost,

2016). Methodological pluralism assists in developing a deeper understanding of phenomena by

approaching phenomena from a variety of perspectives (Chamberlain, Cain, Sheridan, & Dupuis,

2011); this allows researchers to highlight the complex and multifaceted nature of their work,

explore alternative insights and represent various dimensions of data within their data set

(Clarke, Caddick, & Frost, 2016; Coyle, 2010; Frost, & Nolas, 2011). In addition, this approach

offers researchers an opportunity to communicate their findings to different audiences (Clarke,

Caddick, & Frost, 2016). The present study also acknowledges previous calls for the adoption of

methodological pluralism in sport and exercise sciences research (e.g., Culver, Gilbert, &

Sparkes, 2012; Giardina & Laurendeau, 2013).

We implemented methodological pluralism by employing two different analytical

approaches to the analysis of sport fans’ comments on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter directed

at professional athletes in response to their legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations. The

first approach to data analysis reflected a thematic content analysis with a semantic focus – an

approach used to generate themes based on the explicit meanings found within the text (Braun,

Clarke, & Weate, 2016) – to investigate fans’ responses to athlete’s singular norm violations;

these findings were reported in a previously published paper (see MacPherson & Kerr, 2019).

The present study, however, analyzed the same dataset with a latent focus, which seeks to reveal

the implicit notions that underpin the explicit messages in the text (Braun, Clarke, & Weate,

2016).

As Clarke, Caddick and Frost (2016) suggest, an important part of conducting a

pluralistic approach to data analysis is considering the ways in which the first study informs the

second study; in this case, the decision to pursue a second analysis of the same dataset with a

latent focus was guided by the extensive presence of broader messages about gender

underpinning fans’ explicit comments. Although the purpose of the first analysis was to explore

the explicit meaning of fans’ messages on social media, it was clear that fans’ responses to

athletes’ norm violations appeared to differ according to the gender of the athletes to whom they

were referring. As a result, the pluralistic analysis we conducted was sequential in nature

(Clarke, Caddick, & Frost, 2016).

Data Collection

Following Research Ethics Board (REB) approval, data collection began by identifying

instances of legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations engaged in by professional athletes

within and outside of the professional sport environment in North America. Examples of

athletes’ norm violations were sampled from a general search of Google for recent media stories

related to professional athletes’ behaviour or actions. Examples were identified by searching

broad terms, such as, “professional athlete – misconduct”, “professional athlete – poor

behaviour”, “professional athlete – legal issue”, “professional athlete – missed practice”, and

“professional athlete – social issue”. The intention of this step was to gather a diverse set of

athlete norm violations for each norm (i.e., legal, social, and sport-specific), a range in the

severity of norm violations (i.e., poor performance to criminal acts), and inclusion of male and

female professional athletes from different sports. Next, we completed a search of Facebook,

Twitter, and Instagram to identify the “verified” social media accounts (i.e., ensures the identity

of the account’s user) of the professional athletes who engaged in the norm violation and the

organization or league that employs the athletes, if available. It should be noted that Twitter,

Facebook, and Instagram were chosen for the present study as they were publicly accessible and

substantially popular platforms for text-based fan-athlete interactions at the time of data

collection (e.g., Maria Sharapova possessed 26.9 million followers across the three platforms)

and incorporation of three platforms extended previous sport research that focused exclusively

on Twitter. Our primary focus was on obtaining a sense of ‘what’ was said, as opposed to ‘who’

it was said by or the platform in which the comments resided. Once the verified accounts were

located, the scope of potential norm violations were reduced as athletes who did not possess a

verified social media account were excluded. Then, we minimized the scope of potential

violations further by excluding athletes who competed outside of the North American sport

context, as well as, norm violations that did not garner significant depth and breadth of fan

responses. With the information gleaned through these steps, four legal, three sport-specific and

two social norm violations were used for the remaining steps of data collection.

Next, fans’ comments delivered to athletes in response to their violations via the athletes’

social media accounts or the account of the organization that employs the athletes were collected

manually by the first author. The data collected were then organized into separate Excel

documents for each professional athlete. To narrow the search, we only collected fans’ replies to

the content (i.e., Facebook post, photographs) on the athlete and/or organization’s social media

accounts closest to the date of the athlete’s norm violation. In these cases, athletes rarely, if ever,

directly addressed their violations on social media.

All of the norm violations included in this study occurred prior to the beginning of data

collection, with the majority of violations happening between early 2015 and early 2016. Our

data collection process subsequently occurred from August 2016 to February 2017. We engaged

in this process until we were satisfied that our findings exemplified a comprehensive, rich and

nuanced representation of the nature of public shaming online demonstrated across all three

social media platforms. In total, we collected 7,700 fan comments directed at professional

athletes on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram in response to legal, social, and sport-specific norm

violations.

Professional Athletes’ Norm Violations

Inclusion Criteria. Fans’ comments on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram in response to

professional athletes’ legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations within and outside of the

context of sport were collected. Direct (e.g., comments present on athlete’s or organization’s

page or connected to their usernames) or indirect (i.e., use of hashtags relevant to violation)

connection with the athlete was required for inclusion in the sample.

Description of Athlete Violations. Data were comprised of nine examples of norm

violations engaged in by six male and three female professional athletes. It was difficult to

produce gender parity across the sample, likely due to the greater scope of media attention for

male athletes and male professional sport (Cooky, Messner, & Hextrum, 2013). Four legal, three

sport-specific, and two social violations were included in the content analysis and the athletes

ranged from 21 to 36 years, with careers spanning one to fourteen years in the highest

professional league of their respective sports at the time of collection. Athletes employed within

the National Hockey League (NHL), National Basketball Association (NBA), National Football

100

League (NFL), Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), and the National Women’s Soccer League

(NWSL) were included. Please see Table 1 for a description of each norm violation.

Data Analysis

Data analysis commenced once the data for each individual athlete were arranged into

separate Excel documents. The data collected were predominantly text-based; therefore, we

decided to exclude all other social media content from analysis, including GIFs, memes, videos,

or external links as they were not a prominent feature in our data collection.

Data were analyzed inductively, thematically, and collaboratively with contributions

from both authors. During thematic analysis, it is critical for researchers to acknowledge their

role in the production of knowledge and view subjectivity as a resource (Braun & Clarke, 2019;

Name of Athlete

Professional Sport

Category of

Violation

Description of Violation

Eugenie Bouchard

Women’s Tennis

Association

Sport-specific

Bouchard lost in straight sets to an unranked

player in the first round of Wimbledon after

being a finalist in the previous year.

Hope Solo

National Women’s

Soccer League

Legal

Solo was accused of engaging in domestic

violence during an incident with her nephew.

Maria Sharapova

Women’s Tennis

Association

Sport-specific

Sharapova tested positive for a banned substance

called meldonium and subsequently served a

suspension.

Johnny Manziel

National Football

League

Legal

Manziel was accused of engaging in domestic

violence during an incident with his former

partner.

Colin Kaepernick

National Football

League

Social

Kaepernick engaged in a perceived violation

when he knelt for the American anthem in

protest of the inequalities experienced by

persons of colour.

Evander Kane

National Hockey

League

Sport-specific

E. Kane missed practice the morning after

attending the NBA All-Star Game and was

suspended from the roster.

D’Angelo Russell

National Basketball

League

Social

Russell video-recorded a personal conversation

with a teammate who admitted to engaging in

adulterous behaviour. Russell posted the video

publicly online.

Patrick Kane

National Hockey

League

Legal

P. Kane was accused of engaging in sexual

assault.

Adrian Peterson

National Football

League

Legal

Peterson was accused of child abuse.

Table 1. Athlete Violations

101

Clarke & Braun, 2018). Therefore, we must recognize that as female authors, our analyses were

influenced by our lived experiences and prompted ongoing critical reflections about our

perspectives and assumptions of the differential and sexualized ways in which females are

represented through language, appearance and socially constructed expectations. With these

perspectives at the forefront, we used a three-phase process for thematic content analysis

informed by Braun, Clarke, and Weate (2016), which began with immersing ourselves in the

data, coding or labeling the data, and then arranging the coded data into themes. Themes refer to

patterns of shared meaning that are grounded in a core concept (i.e., gender; Braun & Clarke,

2019). After the initial coding of the data, each Excel document was categorized based on the

developing themes (Braun, Clarke, & Weate, 2016). Next, we reviewed all identified themes

across all of the Excel documents and compared, contrasted and modified them based on our

collaborative review. While completing this phase, we referred to Braun and colleagues’ (2016)

guiding criteria, which included verification that each theme corresponded with the central

underlying theme (i.e., gender), contemplation of the relations, interplay and limits of each

theme, and establishment of a meaningful story that directly connected to the purpose of

exploring fans’ public shaming practices through the lens of gender. Then, we refined each

theme and explored the ways in which the themes contributed to an overarching story or pattern

of shared meaning related to public shaming practices online (Braun & Clarke, 2019). We further

refined our understanding of the ways in which the gender of professional athletes influenced

these public shaming practices while we engaged in the research write-up. Throughout this

process, we approached our data analysis collaboratively with the intention of developing a

richer, more nuanced understanding of the dataset (Braun & Clarke, 2019).

102

It should be noted that none of the fans’ social media comments selected to illustrate the

themes in the present study were previously used to demonstrate themes in the first study (see

MacPherson & Kerr, 2019). Therefore, all findings presented in the present study are novel.

Ethics

In addition to REB standards, there are a number of practical considerations that must be

made to foster ethical online research, such as acknowledging one’s role in data collection,

informed consent, and confidentiality (Bundon, 2016). First, we approached this work as outside

observers and did not engage with online users in the data collection process. We selected this

approach as most public shaming comments were already posted at the time of data collection

and if there were still comments being delivered, we did not want to prompt behaviour change by

the participants (Bundon, 2016). Second, given the public nature of the data collected for this

study, we chose not to obtain informed consent, a practice supported by existing research (e.g.,

Pfeil & Zaphiris, 2010; Webb et al., 2017). However, from our perspective, it was critical to take

precautions to maintain the privacy of the individuals who engage in these online communities

during collection, analysis, and presentation of the research. Therefore, we de-identified all data

used in the present study, including, the removal of usernames, time/date stamps, photographs,

and identifiable features (e.g., name, font, colour scheme, logos) of each of the social media

platforms used.

Results

Findings indicated that fans’ online shaming practices in response to professional

athletes’ norm violations were gendered, as demonstrated by a propensity to engage in

objectification of females, promotion of hyper-masculinity, and victim blaming. These findings

revealed that fans possess contentious views on gender that should be considered within the

103

broader rape culture context. This cultural context is considered a systemic issue plaguing

contemporary society and refers to the tendency to express particular views on gender (e.g.,

roles, behaviours), normalize occurrences of sexual violence and aggression of males in sexual

relations, and transfer blame from a perpetrator to a victim (Herman, 1984; Maxwell, 2014;

Suran, 2014). Although the focus of the results predominantly centre on the different ways in

which females and males are shamed, we acknowledge that there may be similarities or shared

experiences. As an example, it is possible that female athletes can be exposed to hyper-masculine

language (e.g., see Litchfield et al., 2018) and males can be subject to sexualization,

objectification, and inequitable gender relations as indicated below. Further, we do not

presuppose that the contentious views displayed in the examples are generalized to all who

engage with professional athletes on social media. Instead, we intend to draw attention to the use

of social media as a vehicle for espousing controversial and at times, discriminatory and hateful

perspectives related to gender, in the context of professional athletes’ norm violations.

Objectification of Females

Comments directed at professional athletes on social media following norm violations

objectified females in several ways, including, efforts to sexualize the athlete, use of perceived

physical attractiveness as a point of forgiveness and/or consolation, and discussions of athletes’

specific physical attributes (e.g., body type, weight). Fans’ public shaming practices rarely, if

ever, referenced the physical appearance of male professional athletes in the same manner.

Efforts to sexualize female athletes following their norm violations were exemplified by fans’

requests for the athletes to pursue appearance-based occupations outside of sport, suggestions

that the athletes lacked characteristics necessary for a professional sport career (e.g., work ethic),

and inferences that their personal self-worth is contingent upon physical appearance. On a

104

broader level, these comments may also suggest that women do not belong as competitors in

professional sport.

Fans’ efforts to sexualize Eugenie Bouchard of the Women’s Tennis Association came

flooding onto her social media page following her loss in straight sets by an unranked player in

the first round of Wimbledon after being a finalist in the previous year. For example, one fan

responded, “To be frank, you are a piece of chicken shit. Stop tennis and go for modelling.

Tennis is meant for hard workers.” Similarly, another fan directed the following comment to

Bouchard: “You should retire from tennis and do porn. I bet people will start to enjoy watching

you then.”

Fans also used perceived physical attractiveness of the athlete as a point of forgiveness

and/or consolation for the athlete following engagement in the norm violation. Online messages

of this nature appeared to affirm support for the athlete based upon physical appearance and

presented as reassurance for the athlete that she is “still” perceived as attractive despite her

actions or behaviours. Comments of this nature are represented in response to Bouchard (i.e.,

sport-specific violation), with one fan stating, “Yo Genie, I know you fucked up but you’re still

hot [though]”. Another fan directed comments to Hope Solo, an athlete in the National Women’s

Soccer League who was accused of domestic violence, which said, “[Solo]’s an attractive

female… because I’d rattle her I’m willing to forgive her…” Finally, a fan of Maria Sharapova,

an athlete in the Women’s Tennis Association who served a suspension for the use of a banned

substance, wrote: “It’s okay, Maria! You are still beautiful… I always thought that you could just

be a model anyway!”

In addition, fans used the norm violations as an opportunity to discuss specific physical

attributes of the female athletes. For instance, fans speculated Bouchard’s diet might have

105

contributed to her Wimbledon loss after she posted photographs of French fries on social media

shortly after the violation occurred. As stated by one fan, “Maybe that’s why you’re not winning

anymore… I’ve noticed that you gained some weight and it doesn’t look much like muscle.”

Another fan wrote, “Maybe you should be eating a salad.” Finally, another fan taunted, “Keep

stuffing that down your fat face and watch your rankings and looks go down the pan. Idiot.”

Hyper-masculinity/Hegemonic Masculinity

An important aspect of the comments related to gender displayed throughout fans’

implicit messages was an emphasis on hyper-masculinity (i.e., the exaggeration of “typical”

characteristics of a man). Comments also emphasized the preservation of hegemonic masculinity

or practices and cultural standards that elevate and reinforce males in a position of power over

others. These practices were most commonly depicted through fans’ use of gendered language on

social media.

Language contributed to hyper- and hegemonic masculinity in two ways; first, specific

use of language served to shame male athletes for their norm violation by belittling or

diminishing their perceived hyper-masculine persona. To accomplish this, individuals often used

words to describe the athletes that tend to be demeaning to particular groups of people (e.g.,

women, LGBTQ+, persons with disabilities), such as “pussy”, “sissy”, “gay”, “lame”, “faggot”,

and “bitch.” For example, comments of this nature were directed at Johnny Manziel, an athlete in

the NFL who engaged in a legal norm violation when he was accused of domestic violence:

“Biggest pussy in the NFL. What a waste of human space.” In another example, Colin

Kaepernick, an NFL player who engaged in a social norm violation when he knelt for the

American anthem in protest of the inequalities experienced by persons of colour, received fan

messages such as, “Kneeling like a bitch because he has no respect.” In addition, a fan delivered

106

Evander Kane – an NHL player – the following message after he engaged in a sport-specific

norm violation when he missed practice after attending the NBA All-star Game and was

suspended from the roster: “If you can’t party with the boys and get up with the men, you

shouldn’t do it. What a sissy this dude is.” Finally, fans responded to a social norm violation by

NBA athlete D’Angelo Russell when he video-recorded and posted online a personal

conversation with a teammate who admitted his adulterous behaviour: “I don’t care if this

[expletive] averaged 30 points and 20 assists a game, I still wouldn’t want his lame, pussy, snitch

ass on my team.”

Second, views on gender were reinforced through the use of words that heightened or

preserved hyper-masculinity. In this context, the most common phrase used by fans was “bro

code”, which is a colloquial term used in popular North American culture to describe a set of

unwritten rules for male behaviour. Given the nature of Russell’s norm violation (i.e., exposing

infidelity of a teammate), comments about “bro code” were most often directed at him,

including: “Low blow making that video. Violation of privacy and the bro code”, “YOU BROKE

MAN CODE, YOUR CARD IS REVOKED PUNK!” and “You broke the man code you little

pussy.”

Emphasis on “bro code” being broken when Russell exposed a teammate’s infidelity also

indirectly suggests that it may be acceptable to behave in this manner, as long as the “bro code”

is upheld. Interestingly, most of the comments related to this incident centered on Russell’s

exposure of the incident, instead of his teammate’s infidelity.

Victim Blaming

A critical practice contributing to the perpetuation of rape culture and preservation of

hyper- and hegemonic masculinity was victim blaming. These practices were prominent in the

107

cases of Patrick Kane, an athlete in the NHL who allegedly violated a legal norm when he was

accused of sexual assault, Johnny Manziel who was accused of domestic violence, and to a lesser

extent, Adrian Peterson of the NFL who engaged in legal norm violation when he was accused of

child abuse. Fans engaged in victim blaming practices in a number of ways; first, fans absolved

male athletes of blame for the incidents and instead accused the females involved of fabricating

the story to acquire fame or financial gain. Examples illustrating these assumed motives are

shown by a fan’s message to Manziel (i.e., accused of domestic violence): “I know you didn’t hit

her. She’s just saying that so she can get famous or something. Just keep praying that you won’t

get suspended or anything worse and keep blocking out the haters man.”

In another example,

fans questioned whether potential financial gain motivated Patrick Kane’s alleged victim by

stating, “I think the girl just wants money!” and “Guys it’s just some crazy woman looking for

money. Kane didn’t do squat.” Finally, a fan of Peterson speculated: “Hmmm, this happened in

May. And it’s coming now, just after the new domestic violence rule. His ex-wife is trying to

take advantage of the situation.”

Second, fans often minimized the reported details of the situation, such as insinuating that

the victim involved was lying about the events that occurred, as exemplified by the following

messages directed at Manziel (i.e., legal violation): “I do not believe this drunk woman. Situation

sounds dubious,” and "So many people judging, nobody knows what’s going on. Her story

sounds fishy as hell and I hope somewhere else picks up J-Manziel so he can silence all the

haters.”

Finally, victim blaming was depicted by fans’ rationalization and/or denial of the events,

most evident in the case of Patrick Kane (i.e., accused of sexual assault). Practices of

rationalization and/or denial centered on the perceived view that Kane’s fame and stature as a

108

professional athlete – and thus, elevated position of power – enables him to be intimate with any

partner he chooses, thus countering any notion that assault is needed to experience sexual

activity. Examples to highlight rationalization and denial of events are demonstrated by fans’

blatant rejection through comments such as, “He did not rape. He could get any girl he wants.” In

another example, fans expressed doubt of the accusation and suggested reasons for why the

reported events were not possible, including, “[Patrick Kane] is a dog no doubt but NHLers

never have a problem wheeling broads. Why would he rape a girl? Highly doubtful

#golddiggers.”

And,

I’m not a Hawks fan but Kaner was dating a super model. I’ve seen pics of him at club

tables with flocks of women surrounding him. Chicks throw themselves at Kane, which is

why I can’t believe this bullshit for one second… Women often bring these cases to take

pro athletes money and get into the spotlight.

In a final example, another fan rationalized and denied the circumstances surrounding Patrick

Kane by stating the alleged victim was “Just another girl who cried wolf. She probably claimed

rape cause Kane rejected her.” This example epitomizes rape culture and victim blaming through

hints at the perceived scope of these experiences, as well as, perpetuates gender views in this

context by declaring the victim is “just another girl” who has brought forth a story of alleged

sexual assault. Further, this quote suggests that women alleging an experience of sexual assault

often possess ulterior motives and/or are dishonest about the details and circumstances involved

in these experiences.

It is important to consider the language used throughout these examples and the potential

contributions of this language to a broader narrative about gender and sexual assault or violence.

109

Phrases that reference females involved in alleged incidents of sexual or physical misconduct

such as, “crazy woman” and “drunk woman”, as well as, sexualized or demeaning terms

including, “wheeling broads” and “gold diggers” may also reinforce practices of victim blaming

and normalization.

Discussion

The present study sought to investigate whether the nature of shaming practices directed

towards professional athletes on social media following legal, social, and sport-specific norm

violations were influenced by professional athletes’ gender. Results of this analysis demonstrated

the implicit meaning in fans’ comments were often disparaging views on gender, evident in both

the content of the messages and the language used. This study makes an important contribution

to the extant literature by focusing on public shaming of male and female professional athletes

across multiple social media platforms and by adopting a gendered lens to interpret these

practices.

Interpreting Gendered Discourse

From a broad standpoint, the findings revealed that fans engaged in shaming practices

when professional athletes violated social, legal, and sport-specific norms and that these

practices differed according to the athlete’s gender. Traditionally, the process of socialization

imparts essentialist notions of gender, wherein the specific characteristics assigned to males and

females are rooted in biology (Fadnis, 2018). These particular characteristics then correspond

with expectations and behaviours for which males and females are rewarded in society (Aldoory

& Toth, 2002; Hardin & Shain, 2006; Ross, 2001). These basic views of gender suggest inherent

opposition between characteristics of males and females (Butler, 1993). On a more nuanced

level, the messages from fans in the present study contribute to the reinforcement of these

110

perspectives of gender by engaging in gender performativity throughout their public shaming

practices. Performativity refers to the “reiteration of norms which precede, constrain, and exceed

the performer” (Butler, 1993, p.234). As these norms are repetitively acted by the performer(s),

particular characteristics thought to comprise the female gender are reinforced (Bell, 1999). The

notion that gender is performative – as opposed to inherent and categorical – is particularly

apparent on social media, as traditional masculine features (e.g., physical strength, size) are not

often visible or present when interacting online (Moloney & Love, 2018). Therefore, online users

are prompted to refer to and perform gender through text, language, and visual cues, such as

photographs (Moloney & Love, 2018). Examples of gender performativity were clearly

exemplified throughout shaming practices through fans’ choices of explicit language and

corresponding connotations, as well as, efforts to sexualize the female athletes. These findings

are consistent with Jane’s (2014a) research, in which hostile online behaviour related to gender

was often exemplified through use of profane language and exaggerated sexualized and

sometimes violent or harmful imagery. Specific examples offered by Jane (2014a) included the

positioning of women as unintelligent, hysterical, and inviting sexual attention, coupled with

comments that described threats or sexual fantasies. Positioning women in this manner is a

common tactic employed to relinquish the autonomy of women, reduce females to sexualized

objects and serve to restore deeply entrenched views of masculinity, including strength,

dominance, intelligence, sexual prowess, and aggression (e.g., Katz, 2006; Johnson, 2014;

Moloney & Love, 2018; Morris, 2012).

Gender performativity was also highlighted in more nuanced ways, such as, fans’

enhanced focus on D’Angelo Russell’s exposure of his teammate’s infidelity, instead of a focus

on his teammate’s adulterous behaviour. In this instance, those engaging in the shaming practices

111

conveyed an underlying acceptance and normalization of the sexual promiscuity or prowess of

male athletes. A further example of gender performativity was illustrated when Evander Kane’s

masculinity was belittled, and he was called a ‘sissy’ for missing practice. As stated by Moloney

and Love (2018), language, comments, or connotations that are hyper-masculine, misogynistic,

homophobic or feminizing in nature – such as those previously listed – serve to reinforce ideas of

traditional actions, attitudes, and behaviours expected of men.

Given the breadth and extent of gendered discourse present in the public shaming

practices observed in this study, we suggest that there is a collective effort from fans online to

perform, reinforce, and maintain these limited views of gender (Bell, 1999). Specifically, the

hostile, sexualized, and sometimes hateful attitudes illustrated by fan comments in the present

study are likely rooted in socially constructed ideas about gender and sexuality (especially in

relation to the shame and stigma of victimhood), as well as, a means to restore the power and

control typically offered to males (Henry & Powell, 2018). As Jane (2014b) importantly notes,

targeted attacks online related to gender are more indicative of a broader societal issue with

gender equity than a personal attack on individuals, as illustrated by the shaming practices

directed at each professional athlete included in this study. In these circumstances, social media

serves as a vehicle to infuse public discourse with traditional notions of gender and sexuality

through comments that are potentially harmful or harassing in nature (Henry & Powell, 2018). A

critical risk of this behaviour is that it may further contribute to gendered social stratification or

the reinforcement of socioeconomic and relationship hierarchies based on power, resources, and

privileges, as well as, social reproduction or the actions and systems that influence multi-

generational social inequality (Bell, 1999; Doob, 2013, p. 2, 10). Thus, unfiltered online

behaviour may present significant barriers to our pursuit of gender equity.

112

Rape Culture in Sport

Issues regarding gender and sexism have been well documented in the existing sport

literature since the 1990s (Caudwell, 2017). One of the key issues highlighted in this body of

research is the infiltration of rape culture in sport. Specifically, sport has been identified as one

of several subcultures in which some of the common norms, rituals and/or idioms may

perpetuate this rape culture (McMahon, 2007; O’Toole, 1994). In professional sport contexts

particularly, there are a number of factors that contribute to the potential for sexual violence,

including, heightened celebrity status, aggression, sexualization of women and traditional

perspectives on roles for women in sport (Flood & Dyson, 2007; Grindstaff & West, 2011).

These characteristics were illustrated throughout the present study in the comments composed by

fans that glorified the fame and power afforded to male professional athletes, as well as,

attempted to dissuade the female professional athletes from competing by suggesting alternative

career options perceived by fans to be better suited for women (i.e., modelling). In addition,

perpetuation of rape culture is influenced by rape myths, which refer to “attitudes and beliefs that

are generally false but are widely and persistently held, and serve to deny and justify male sexual

aggression against women” (Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1994, p.134). For example, legitimization of

the accused’s behaviour and denigration of details of the alleged assault is a common rape myth

(Custers & McNallie, 2017) and reflected in the present study through fans’ messages directed at

Patrick Kane and Johnny Manziel.

Entrenchment of rape culture in sport and broader society is complicated by the

emergence of social media, which can function as a space that fosters patriarchal and hegemonic

discourse and may reinforce and expand the traditional relations of power that occur in offline

contexts (Demirhan & Cakir-Demirhan, 2015; Sills et al., 2016). Specifically, social media

113

platforms are rife with threats of rape directed towards women as a means to control or discipline

them (Cole, 2015) and engagement in victim blaming (Franiuk, Seefelt, Cepress, & Vandello,

2008; Zaleski et al., 2016), which was evidenced in the present study as fans’ shaming practices

often faulted victims for alleged sexual assault. In these instances, fans’ public shaming shifts

from shaming the athlete to shaming the victim. Our findings support previous sport research by

Ash and colleagues (2017) who investigated fans’ online responses to an American college

football player accused of sexual assault and revealed engagement in victim blaming practices,

such as, assumptions about the victim’s desire for personal benefits and accusations of lying. The

present study extends this work by exploring fans’ responses to multiple norm violations related

to sexual violence, in two different sports, across three social media platforms.

Societal Implications of Rape Culture

It is also important to consider the ways in which the performance of gender in social

media spaces influence the immediate and long-term social and political landscape (Butler,

1993). It has been suggested that negative interactions online, such as public shaming, may be

employed to generate deeper tensions regarding a broader topic of interest (Williams, 2012), may

be identity driven (e.g., gendered) and influenced by sociopolitical climates (Zaleski et al., 2016)

and vice versa. In our current climate, characterized by populism, sexism, racism and

xenophobia, as well as, the spread of misinformation, a contagion of negative interactions has

been sparked on social media and filtered into public discourse (Crilley & Gillespie, 2019; Ott,

2017). As a result, social media platforms have become spaces where the communication of

contentious social perspectives may be viewed as acceptable (Stein, 2016, p.29). These

comments may evoke and reinforce stereotypes and attitudes of difference of the social identities

at the forefront of conversation (Cisneros & Nakayama, 2015, p.118). As a result, we must pay

114

attention to actions on social media that maintain and advance rape culture as these behaviours

will – and perhaps already have begun to – influence broader societal attitudes towards sexual

violence, as well as, normalize sexist behaviour and objectification of women (Custers &

McNallie, 2017; Franiuk, Seefelt, Cepress, & Vandello, 2008; Zaleski et al., 2016). Engagement

of these behaviours on social media may be particularly dangerous as the platform provides a

free and widespread audience to view the actions or statements of the fans and an opportunity to

participate in the reinforcement of these controversial viewpoints. Although it is impossible to

verify the intentions of the fans contributing to shaming practices online, we must reflect upon

the nature of the performances produced by the fans, the audience viewing the performance, and

the potential messages that might be derived from these practices (Cisneros & Nakayama, 2015).

For instance, we may ask in what ways does the performativity of gender observed throughout

shaming practices on social media hinder progress towards gender equity in general and in sport

specifically? And, what is the path forward in the pursuit of gender equity in the modern age of

digital technologies?

Ethical Considerations

The discovery of disparaging and hateful online messages towards women raises ethical

questions for researchers and prompts us to think critically about the unique ethical complexities

that are pertinent to the study of online communications (Creswell, 2013; Jones, Torres, &

Arminio, 2014). For this study, it was important to consider the analysis, representation and

subsequent reproduction of the data given its discriminatory, derogatory and sometimes hateful

nature. Specifically, in the age of social media (including messages, photographs, memes and

videos), we are seeing a surge of marginalization and hate through sexism, racism, homophobia

and xenophobia, among others (Nakayama, 2017; Ott, 2017). Therefore, it was critical to

115

question whether the collection, analysis, and representation of these data might contribute to an

acceptance or normalization of these views displayed on social media. While cognizant of these

risks, we believed that generating awareness of these views may advance our understanding of

online conduct in the professional sport context and assist in designing and implementing future

measures to prevent and intervene in these incidences. This approach is supported by previous

scholarship that impresses upon researchers the ethical responsibility to shed light on online

behaviours of this nature, as these behaviours have the potential to normalize increasingly

harmful and divisive discourse and minimize important societal principles, including inclusion

and civility in online and offline contexts (Jane, 2014a).

Recommendations for Future Research

Research regarding fans’ public shaming practices on social media in response to

professional athletes’ norm violations is in its early stages, and therefore, there is significant

opportunity to learn more. A focus on understanding the psychosocial experiences of those

involved in public shaming practices online, including professional athletes, fans and sport

personnel (e.g., sport psychology consultants), as well as athletes’ families and significant others,

is warranted. In addition, it is critical to extend the focus on norm violations to other well-known

sport groups, including collegiate athletes and Olympians.

As the current study focused on professional athletes, all of whom were North American

except for Sharapova, future research might seek a sample of athletes from other countries.

Additionally, future research should address other aspects of social identities, such as race,

ethnicity, faith, sexual orientation, and socio-economic statuses, and make a concerted effort to

explore the ways in which intersectionalities of these social identities influence public shaming

practices. Research of this nature would build on the findings of the present study and further

116

develop understanding about the ways in which public shaming practices of professional athletes

on social media align, reflect, and/or challenge broader conversations about intersectional

identities in society and culture. As Karen and colleagues (2010) wrote: “sport represents a

unique slice of social life, which provides a distinctive lens through which we can observe

various aspects of the larger society” (p.1).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the findings of this research posit that the gender of professional athletes

influence the nature of shaming practices directed at athletes in response to their norm violations.

In addition, this research demonstrates the use of social media platforms as a vehicle to deliver

controversial and disparaging perspectives related to gender. The use of pluralistic analysis was

particularly valuable for this study as it allowed us to apply a sociocultural lens on a dataset

previously analyzed from a psychological perspective. This approach helped glean a more

interdisciplinary understanding of public shaming practices on social media, generate awareness

and knowledge of these practices with researchers in other domains, and ensure the extensive

dataset collected was utilized to the fullest.

As Caudwell (2017) suggests, the presence of social media platforms in the sport context

has extended attitudes and actions that encourage gender inequalities. Yet, scholars have also

declared that these entrenched gender norms should be viewed as dynamic constructs that may

be challenged to evolve and change over time (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). Therefore, as

researchers we must focus on the ways in which the use of social media can shift and progress

from a space that allows and perpetuates negative, divisive conversations to a platform that is

used to engage in thoughtful, productive, and respectful dialogue related to gender equity, as

117

well as, confront intolerance and promote the meaningful inclusion of all social identities into

our societal fabric (Ott, 2017).

118

References

Aldoory, L. & Toth, E. (2002). Gender discrepancies in a gendered profession: A developing

theory for public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(2), 103-126.

Antunovic, D. (2014). “A female in a man’s world:” New-media discourse around the first

female NFL referee. Journal of Sports Media, 9, 45–71.

Ash, E., Sanderson, J., Kumanyika, C., & Gramlich, K. (2017). “Just goes to show how these

hoes try to tear men down”: Investigating Twitter and cultural conversations on athletic

ability, race, and sexual assault. Journal of Sports Media, 12(1), 65-87.

Bell, V. (1999). Performativity and belonging: An introduction. Theory, Culture & Society,

16(2), 1-10.

Billings, A., Coombs, W., & Brown, K. (2018). Reputational challenges in sport: Theory and

application. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Blackford, R. (2016, May 3). The shame of public shaming. Retrieved from

https://theconversation.com/the-shame-of-public-shaming-57584

Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship.

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230

Boyle, R. & Haynes, R. (2018). Sport, the media and strategic communications management. In

D. Hassan (Ed.), Managing sport business: An introduction (2

ed.; pp. 478-501). Abingdon,

UK: Routledge.

Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press.

119

Bundon, A. (2016). The Web and digital qualitative methods. In B. Smith & A. Sparkes (Eds.)

Routledge Handbook of Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise (pp.355-367). London,

UK: Routledge.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research

in Sport, Exercise, and Health, 11(4), 589-597.

Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Weate, P. (2016). Using thematic analysis in sport and exercise

research (pp. 191-205). London: Routledge.

Brock, A. (2012). From the blackhand side: Twitter as a cultural conversation. Journal of

Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 529–549.

Busanich, R., & McGannon, K. (2010). Deconstructing disordered eating: a feminist

psychological approach to athletes’ body experiences. Quest, 62, 385-405.

Busanich, R., McGannon, K., & Schinke, R. (2012). Expanding understandings of body, food

and exercise relationship in distance runners: A narrative approach. Psychology of Sport and

Exercise, 12, 582-590.

Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. London, UK:

Routledge

Caudwell, J., 2017. Everyday sexisms: Exploring the scales of misogyny in sport. In D.

Kilvington & J. Price (Eds.), Sport and Discrimination (pp.61-76). London, UK: Routledge.

Chamberlain, K., Cain, T., Sheridan, J., & Dupuis, A. (2011). Pluralisms in qualitative research:

From multiple methods to integrated methods. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8(2), 151-

169.

Cheung, A. S. (2014). Revisiting privacy and dignity: Online shaming in the global e-village.

Laws, 3(2), 301-326.

120

Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influences: Social norms, conformity, and

compliance. In D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske, & L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology

ed., pp.151-192). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Cisneros, J. D., & Nakayama, T. K. (2015). New media, old racisms: Twitter, Miss America, and

cultural logics of race. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 8(2), 108-

127.

Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2018). Using thematic analysis in counselling and psychotherapy

research: A critical reflection. Social Inequalities and Psychological Care, 18(2), 107-110.

Clarke, N. J., Caddick, N., & Frost, N. (2016). Pluralistic data analysis: Theory and practice.

In B. Smith & A. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Qualitative Research in Sport and

Exercise (pp. 390-403). London, UK: Routledge.

Cole, K. (2015). ‘It’s like she’s eager to be verbally abused’: Twitter, trolls, and (en)gendering

disciplinary rhetoric. Feminist Media Studies, 15(2), 356-358.

Connell, R. & Messerschmidt, J. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the

concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829-859.

Cooky, C., Messner, M., & Hextrum, R. (2013). Women play sport but not on TV: A

longitudinal study of televised news media. Communication & Sport, 1-28.

Coombs, W. & Holladay, J. (2012). The paracrisis: The challenges created by publicly managing

crisis prevention. Public Relations Review, 38(3), 408-415.

Coyle, A. (2010). Qualitative research and anomalous experience: A call for interpretative

pluralism. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 7(1), 79-83.

Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches

ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

121

Crilley, R., & Gillespie, M. (2019). What to do about social media? Politics, populism and

journalism. Journalism, 20(1), 173-176.

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the

research process. London, UK: Sage Publications, Inc.

Culver, D., Gilbert, W., & Sparkes, A. (2012). Qualitative research in sport psychology journals:

The next decade 2000-2009 and beyond. The Sport Psychologist, 26(2), 261-281.

Custers, K., & McNallie, J. (2017). The relationship between television sports exposure and rape

myth acceptance: the mediating role of sexism and sexual objectification of women. Violence

against women, 23(7), 813-829.

De Meo, P., Ferrara, E., Fiumara, G., & Provetti, A. (2014). On Facebook, most ties are weak.

Communications of the ACM, 57(11), 78-84.

De Vries, A. (2015). The use of social media for shaming strangers: Young people's views.

System Sciences (HICSS), 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference, IEEE Computer

Society, 2053-2062.

Demirhan, K. & Çakir-Demirhan, D. (2015). Gender and politics: Patriarchal discourse on social

media. Public Relations Review, 41(2), 308-310.

Doob, C. (2013). Social inequality and social stratification in US society. New York, NY:

Pearson Education, Inc.

Fadnis, D. (2018). Uncovering rape culture: Patriarchal values guide Indian media’s rape- related

reporting. Journalism Studies, 19(12), 1750-1766.

Filo, K., Lock, D., & Karg, A. (2014). Sport and social media research: A review. Sport

Management Review, 18(2), 166-181.

122

Flood, M., & Dyson, S. (2007). Sport, athletes, and violence against women. Australian

Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University, republished in NTV

Journal, 4(3), 37-46.

Franiuk, R., Seefelt, J. L., Cepress, S. L., & Vandello, J. A. (2008). Prevalence and effects of

rape myths in print journalism: The Kobe Bryant case. Violence Against Women, 14(3), 287-

309.

Frederick, E., Stocz, M., & Pegoraro, A. (2016). Prayers, punishment, and perception: An

analysis of the response to the Tony Stewart – Kevin Ward Jr. incident on Facebook. Sport in

Society, 19(10), 1460-1477.

Frost, N. & Nolas, S-M. (2011). Exploring and expanding on pluralism in qualitative

research in psychology, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8(2), 115-119.

Gergen, M. (2001). Feminist reconstructions in psychology: Narrative, gender and performance.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Giardina, M., & Laurendeau, J. (2013). Evidence, knowledge, and research

practice. Sociology of Sport Journal, 30(3), 237-407.

Goldman, L. M. (2015). Trending now: The use of social media websites in public

shaming punishments. American Criminal Law Review, 52, 415-451.

Grindstaff, L., & West, E. (2011). Hegemonic masculinity on the sidelines of

sport. Sociology Compass, 5(10), 859-881.

Hambrick, M., Frederick, E., & Sanderson J. (2013). From yellow to blue: Exploring Lance

Armstrong’s image repair strategies across traditional and social media. Communication &

Sport, 3(2), 196-218.

Hardin, M. & Shain, S. (2006). ‘Feeling much smaller than you know you are’: The

123

fragmented professional identity of female sports journalists. Critical Studies in Media

Communication, 23(4), 322–338.

Harris, A. (2009). The role of power in shaming interactions: How social control is

performed in a juvenile court. Contemporary Justice Review, 12(4), 379-399.

Hatch, M., & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for

brand governance. Journal of Brand Management, 17, 590-604.

Hechter, M., & Opp, K-D. (2001). Social norms. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Henry, N., & Powell, A. (2018). Technology-facilitated sexual violence: A literature review of

empirical research. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 19(2), 195–208.

Herman, D. (1984). The rape culture. In J. Freeman (Ed.), Women: A feminist

perspective. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.

Jane, E. (2014a). ‘Your a ugly, whorish, slut’: Understanding e-bile. Feminist Media Studies,

14(4), 531-546.

Jane, E. (2014b). ‘Back to the kitchen, cunt’: Speaking the unspeakable about online misogyny.

Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 28(4), 558-570.

Johnson, A. (2014). The gender knot: Unraveling our patriarchal legacy (3

ed.). Philadelphia,

PA: Temple University Press.

Jones, S., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. (2014). Negotiating the complexities of qualitative research

in higher education fundamental elements and issues (2

Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Kapko, M. (2016, November 3). Twitter’s impact on 2016 presidential election is unmistakable.

CIO. Retrieved from http://www.cio.com/article/3137513/social-networking/twitters-impact-

on-2016-presidential-election-is-unmistakable.html.

Karen, D. & Washington, R.E. (2010). The sport and society reader. Abingdon, UK:

124

Routledge.

Katz, J. (2006). The macho paradox: Why some men hurt women and how all men can help.

Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks.

Kavanagh, E., Jones, I., & Sheppard-Marks, L. (2016). Towards typologies of virtual

maltreatment: sport, digital cultures, & dark leisure. Leisure Studies, 35, 783-796.

Kavanagh, E., Litchfield, C., & Osborne, J. (2019). Sporting women and social media:

Sexualization, misogyny, and gender-based violence in online spaces. International Journal

of Sport Communication, 12(4), 552-572.

Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get

serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons,

54(3), 241-251.

Kitchin, P., Paramio-Salcines, J., & Walters, G. (2019). Managing organizational reputation in

response to a public shaming campaign. Sport Management Review, 66-80.

Lapinski, M. K., & Rimal, R. N. (2005). An explication of social norms. Communication

Theory, 15(2), 127-147.

Litchfield, C., Kavanagh, E., Osborne, J., & Jones, I. (2018). Social media and the politics of

gender, race and identity: the case of Serena Williams. European Journal for Sport and

Society, 15(2), 154-170.

Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape myths. Psychology of Women

Quarterly, 18(2), 133-164.

MacPherson, E., & Kerr, G. (2019). Sport fans’ responses on social media to professional

athletes’ norm violations. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1-18.

125

Massaro, T.M. (1997). The meanings of shame: Implications for legal reform. Psychology,

Public Policy, and Law, 3(4), 645-704.

Maxwell, Z. (2014, March 27). Rape culture is real. Retrieved from http://time.com/

40110/rape-culture-is-real/.

McGannon, K., & Mauws, M. (2000). Discursive psychology: An alternative approach for

studying adherence to exercise and physical activity. Quest, 52, 148-165.

McMahon, S. (2007). Understanding community-specific rape myths: Exploring student athlete

culture. Affilia, 22(4), 357-370.

Moloney, M., & Love, T. (2018). Assessing online misogyny: Perspectives from sociology and

feminist media studies. Sociology Compass, 12, 1-12.

Morris, E. (2012). Learning the hard way: Masculinity, place, and the gender gap in education.

New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Munroe, K., Estabrooks, P., Dennis, P., & Carron, A. (1999). A phenomenological

analysis of group norms in sport teams. Sport Psychologist, 13, 171-182.

Nakayama, T. K. (2017). What’s next for whiteness and the Internet. Critical Studies in Media

Communication, 34(1), 68-72.

O’Toole, L. (1994). Subculture of rape revisited. In L. O’Toole & J. Schiffman (Eds.), Gender

violence: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 214-221). New York, NY: New York University

Press.

Ott, B. L. (2017). The age of Twitter: Donald J. Trump and the politics of debasement. Critical

Studies in Media Communication, 34(1), 59-68.

Pascale, C-M. (2011). Cartographies of knowledge: Exploring qualitative epistemologies.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

126

Pfeil, U., & Zaphiris, P. (2010). Applying qualitative content analysis to study online support

communities. Universal Access in the Information Society, 9(1), 1-16.

Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and

gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. CyberPsychology & Behavior,

11(2), 169-174.

Ronson, J. (2015). So you’ve been publicly shamed. London, UK: Pan Macmillan.

Ross, K. (2001). Women at Work: Journalism as En-Gendered Practice. Journalism

Studies, 2(4), 531–544.

Rowbottom, J. (2013) To punish, inform, and criticize: the goals of naming and shaming. In J.

Petley (Ed.), Media and public shaming: drawing the boundaries of disclosure. New York,

NY: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.

Sanderson, J., & Hambrick, M. (2012). Covering the scandal in 140 characters: A case study of

Twitter’s role in coverage of the Penn State saga. International Journal of Sport

Communication, 5, 384-402.

Sanderson, J., & Emmons, B. (2014). Extending and withholding forgiveness to Josh

Hamilton: Exploring forgiveness within parasocial interaction. Communication &

Sport, 2(1), 24-47.

Sanderson, J., & Truax, C. (2014). I hate you man!”: Exploring maladaptive parasocial

interaction expressions to college athletes via Twitter. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate

Athletics, 7, 333-351.

Schmittel, A., & Sanderson, J. (2015). Talking about Trayvon in 140 characters: Exploring NFL

players’ tweets about the George Zimmerman verdict. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 39,

332-345.

127

Sills, S., Pickens, C., Beach, K., Jones, L., Calder-Dawe, O., Benton-Greig, P., & Gavey, N.

(2016). Rape culture and social media: Young critics and a feminist counterpublic. Feminist

Media Studies, 16(6), 935-951.

Smith, A. C., Stavros, C., Westberg, K., Wilson, B., & Boyle, C. (2014). Alcohol-related player

behavioral transgressions: Incidences, fan media responses, and a harm- reduction alternative.

International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 49(3-4), 400-416.

Stein, J. (2016, August 29). Tyranny of the mob. Time, 26–32.

Suran, E. (2014). Title IX and social media: Going beyond the law. Michigan Journal of Gender

and Law, 21, 273-311.

Torrenzano, R., & Davis, M. (2011). Digital assassination. Protecting your reputation, brand, or

business against online attacks. New York, NY: San Martins Press.

Webb, H., Jirotka, M., Stahl, B.C., Housley, W., Edwards, A., Williams, M., Procter, R., Rana,

O., & Burnap, P. (2017, June). The ethical challenges of publishing Twitter data for research

dissemination. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Web Science Conference, 339-348. ACM:

New York, NY.

Whitman, J. Q. (1998). What is wrong with inflicting shame sanctions?. Yale Law

Journal, 1055-1092.

Williams, Z. (2012). The guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/ jun/12/what-

is-an-internet-troll.

Yates, D., & Paquette, S. (2011). Emergency knowledge management and social media

technologies: A case study of the 2010 Haitian earthquake. International Journal of

Information Management, 31(1), 6-13.

128

Zaleski, K. L., Gundersen, K. K., Baes, J., Estupinian, E., & Vergara, A. (2016). Exploring rape

culture in social media forums. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 922-927.

129

CHAPTER FIVE: STUDY 3

Sport fans’ perspectives of public shaming of professional athletes on social media

A version of this chapter has been published. MacPherson, E., & Kerr, G. (2020). Sport fans’

perspectives of public shaming of professional athletes on social media. Qualitative Research

in Sport, Exercise, and Health, 1-20.

Contributions by first author: Conceptualization of study (75%); Data collection (100%);

Data analyses (90%); Writing of first draft (100%); Revisions before manuscript submissions

(80%); Revisions after peer-review process (75%).

130

Abstract

Recent research has illustrated sport fans’ propensity to engage in public shaming

practices directed at professional athletes via social media in response to athletes’ perceived

norm violations (MacPherson & Kerr, 2019). Public shaming – considered the act of expressing

discontent for another’s behaviour – is demonstrated through fans’ expressed withdrawals of

support, and detailed depictions of desired psychosocial, physical, and career-related

consequences for the athletes (MacPherson & Kerr, 2019). While this research reveals what

these practices look like, little is known about what leads fans to engage in them. Therefore, the

purpose of this study was to explore fans’ perspectives on potential reasons sport fans engage

with professional athletes on social media, including, public shaming of professional athletes

following perceived social, legal, and sport-specific norm violations. Guided by a social

constructivist perspective, we utilised a narrative methodology to conduct semi-structured

interviews with five professional sport fans (three male, two female) who engaged regularly with

professional athletes and teams on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. Findings broadly revealed

that fans cultivate a sense of identification and belonging through fandom that is enhanced by

perceived relationships with professional athletes developed via social media. When these

perceived relationships are challenged by professional athletes’ norm violations, fans’ sense of

identification and belonging are threatened, which provokes public shaming on social media.

These findings are interpreted through the existing literature related to fan identification,

parasocial relationships, and belonging. Directions for future research are proposed.

Keywords: public shaming; social media; athlete behaviour; fan behaviour; fan-athlete

interactions

131

Introduction

Celebrity culture is an integral aspect of contemporary society (Driessens, 2013) and

influences many facets of our everyday lives, including, our perspectives, conduct, and self-

presentation (Cashmore, 2006). We possess an innate tendency to admire and ascribe greater

status and importance to individuals in the public eye who are well known to others, especially if

those individuals have been involved in public life for an extended period of time (De Backer,

2012). Enhanced status as a public figure is often a by-product – not an intended outcome – of

these individuals’ personal or professional achievements in fields such as sports, movies, or

music (De Backer, 2012). Achievement of greater status or public notoriety may be garnered in a

number of ways, including, inheritance (e.g., a famous relative) or possessing exceptional talent

(Rojek, 2001; De Backer, 2012). For professional athletes in particular, public notoriety is most

likely achieved through remarkable skill level in a given sport.

One of the essential components of celebrity culture is the passionate community of

people – referred to as fans – who are drawn to and engage with content related to public figures.

Developing fanship for a particular public figure or sport team is considered a standard part of

humans’ attraction, curiosity, and interaction with popular culture (Vinney, Dill-Shackleford,

Plante, & Bartsch, 2019). Cultivation of fanship and the development of an affinity for public

figures has become an increasingly common element of our social lives (Cerulo & Ruane, 2014).

In the sport context specifically, fans often seek personal connection with the sport team or

athlete with whom they follow or support (Kelly, 2015). In developing this connection, fans

come to recognise fanship as a component of their sense of self and therefore, demonstrates

behaviours and actions that reflect this component (Hunt, Bristol, & Bashaw, 1999), such as

learning about the team, attending games, or purchasing merchandise.

132

Recently, one of the ways in which fans are presumed to develop connection with public

figures is through social media. This pathway for connection is thought to be significantly

altering celebrity culture, especially with respect to the ways in which individuals relate to public

figures (Marwick & Boyd, 2011). More specifically, public figures’ engagement with fans has

shifted from controlled communication (e.g., through public relations) to less formal, active, and

direct interaction through social media (Alperstein, 2019; Marwick & Boyd, 2011). With this

new avenue of engagement, public figures are afforded the ability to create and sustain an

audience of fans through more relatable and authentic interactions (Marwick & Boyd, 2011). In

fact, much of the interest of connecting via social media is thought to be the potential for public

figures to share personal information, opinions, entertainment preferences, photographs, and to

interact with others (e.g., Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Frederick, Lim, Clavio, Pederson, & Burch,

2014; Marwick & Boyd, 2011). For fans of public figures, social media may provide a means to

interact directly with individuals with whom they might not have otherwise connected with in an

offline setting (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Ellison, Lampe, & Steinfield, 2009).

Research related to sport has also highlighted the critical importance of social media in

the sport communication field (Sanderson, 2011; Sanderson & Kassing, 2011). Much of the

existing research has been dedicated to the experiences of athletes, organizations, or teams

(Frederick, Lim, Clavio, & Walsh, 2012), including, the ways in which athletes use social media

platforms (e.g., Hambrick, Simmons, Greenhalgh, & Greenwell, 2010; Hambrick & Mahoney,

2011; Kassing & Sanderson, 2010), sport marketing (e.g., Parganas, Anagnostopoulos, &

Chadwick, 2015; Williams & Chinn, 2010), the influence of social media sites on creating and

consuming sport related media (e.g., Hutchins, 2011; Sanderson & Hambrick, 2012), and the

features of social media users who follow athletes (Clavio & Kian, 2010).

133

In addition, recent studies have also provided some insight into fans’ interactions with

sport figures on social media. Of particular interest to the current study are the potentially

negative interactions that occur in the context of social media between athletes and fans. In

general, this line of previous research has revealed that fans deliver critical, belittling, and

aggressive comments of a sexual, psychological, physical, discriminatory (e.g., misogynistic,

homophobic), and/or personal essence towards athletes or other sport figures (e.g., coaches) on

social media (e.g., Kavanagh et al., 2016; Sanderson, 2013; Sanderson & Emmons, 2014;

Sanderson & Truax, 2014). The majority of these existing studies utilised thematic analyses,

emphasised college athletics or single professional athletes (e.g., case studies), and focused

attention exclusively on the social media platform Twitter.

In conjunction with this research, an emerging area of scholarship related to fan-athlete

interactions on social media explores fans’ public shaming practices directed at professional

athletes. Public shaming is considered a process in which individuals express discontent and

criticism towards another individual as a result of that person’s perceived deviation from

expected social behaviour (e.g., Cheung, 2014; Harris, 2009; Hechter & Opp, 2001; Jacquet,

2015). These expected social behaviours, more broadly described as behavioural norms, may be

of a legal (e.g., formal rules devised by authorities), social (e.g., devised by members of one’s

social sphere), or sport-specific nature, including, expectations related to behaviour in

competitive, practice, off-season or social settings (Hechter & Opp, 2001; Munroe, Estabrooks,

Dennis, & Carron, 1999; Prapavessis & Carron, 1997). Examples of public shaming include,

engagement in hostile behaviours directed at the perceived norm violator and/or disclosure of

perceived misconduct to a public audience online (Cheung, 2014; Jacquet, 2015). Two recent

studies have explored public shaming of professional athletes on social media in response to

134

legal, social, and sport-specific norms through content analyses; the first study examined fans’

comments on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram directed at professional athletes and determined

fans publicly shamed athletes for perceived violations by expressed withdrawals of support, and

explicit explanations of desired physical, psychosocial, and career-related consequences for the

athletes (MacPherson & Kerr, 2019). In the second study, researchers analyzed the implicit

meanings delivered through fans’ social media responses to perceived violations by professional

athletes. The findings revealed that under the guise of public shaming practices for norm

violations, fans use social media as a vehicle to espouse controversial views on gender, such as,

objectification, victim blaming, and normalization of sexual assault (MacPherson & Kerr, in

press). Clearly, exploring fan-athlete interactions on social media are of critical importance,

especially in light of Browning and Sanderson’s (2012) suggestion that the boldness and

immediacy of fans’ messages directed at athletes through social media seems to be escalating.

Considering the existing literature shared in this review, we have devised two research

questions. First, given both the salience and influence of celebrity culture in our everyday lives,

particularly with the emergence of social media and the breadth of information shared through

these networks, we wonder, what leads fans to connect with certain professional athletes on

social media and why? Second, taking into account this enhanced ability to connect and the

range of negative commentary delivered to professional athletes once connected via social

media, we wondered if we could learn more about the nature of public shaming practices through

a deeper understanding of the fan-athlete relationship online. Taken together, the purpose of the

current study was to explore fans’ perspectives on potential reasons sport fans engage with

professional athletes on social media, including, public shaming of professional athletes

following social, legal, or sport-specific norm violations.

135

Methodology

This research is grounded in a social constructivist paradigm, which considers knowledge

and reality a social construction that is subjective, dynamic, influenced by personal experiences,

and co-created within the participant-researcher relationship. (Daly, 2007; Jones, Torres, &

Arminio, 2014).

In alignment with a social constructivist perspective, narrative inquiry served as the

guiding methodological approach for this study. As an umbrella term, narrative inquiry

emphasises the investigation of life experiences or a series of events through the telling of stories

or narratives (Chase, 2005; Chase, 2011; Pinnegar & Daynes, 2007; Smith & Sparkes, 2009).

Narrative inquiry is characterised as a process for ‘meaning making through the shaping or

ordering of experience, as a way of understanding one’s own or others’ actions, of organizing

events and objects into a meaningful whole, of connecting and seeing the consequences of

actions and events over time’ (Chase, 2011, p.421). With narrative inquiry, researchers have the

ability to capture a more complex understanding of participants’ individual, social, and cultural

selves (McGannon & Johnson, 2009), which is of critical importance for the present study.

A narrative approach aligns well with our chosen paradigm as this approach centres on

co-constructing the stories with participants, highlighting the unique aspects of participants’

stories, and considering the context from which their stories are expressed (Briggs, 2002; Denzin

& Lincoln, 2000). In addition, narrative emphasises investigation of the connections individuals

make with their social environment, including, personal connections (e.g., values, attitude,

emotions, aspirations) and external connections (e.g., environmental factors, relationships with

others), as well as, the place in which the experiences occur (e.g., social media; Clandinin &

Rosiek, 2007; Creswell, 2013).

136

Methods

Recruitment

Recruitment began following approval from the institution’s Research Ethics Board

(REB). Participants were recruited by word-of-mouth and through snowball sampling. Before

outlining the steps for recruitment, it should be noted that the first author conducted the

recruitment process and interviews. As such, some areas of this methods section will be written

from a first-person perspective.

To initiate the recruitment process, I identified acquaintances within my network who

possessed a social media profile and made an online connection (e.g., ‘liked’ or ‘followed’) with

a professional athlete or team. These individuals were then contacted via e-mail (when possible)

or social media (i.e., through a private message) and invited to participate in the study. The

invitation to participate included a description of the study and copies of the Letter of

Information and Consent. Through this process, I endeavoured to recruit individuals whom I

observed to engage in social media commentary publicly regarding current events in the media,

including professional sport, as well as, those who did not often engage in public commentary on

their social media pages. Individuals who expressed interest in participation were invited to ask

questions and receive more information about their participation. Interestingly, none of the

individuals that I recruited for this study were observed actively engaging in public shaming or

acknowledged personal engagement in these practices. It is possible that their willingness to

acknowledge past or current engagement in public shaming of professional athletes was

influenced by a social desirability bias. Regardless, the individuals who were recruited were

extensively immersed in a variety of social media channels and could offer a nuanced and well-

137

informed perspective that would attend to the purpose of the study. Each individual who agreed

to participate was required to read and sign a Letter of Information and Consent.

Data Collection

Data collection consisted of semi-structured interviews, which are typically considered

the primary method of data collection within a narrative approach (Armour & Chen, 2012;

Creswell, 2013; Jones, Torres, & Arminio, 2014). The intention of these semi-structured

interviews was to explore the experiences (e.g., perspectives, knowledge, feelings) of each

participant and develop an understanding of the participant’s perspectives of online public

shaming in a guided manner (Armour & Macdonald, 2012; Ennis & Chen, 2012; Holloway,

1997). Participants were invited to share stories and were probed about the personal beliefs or

social and cultural contexts that influence their understanding of public shaming online (Ennis &

Chen, 2012). Consistent with a social constructivist paradigm, participant accounts were not

viewed as objective and fact-based stories, but instead, as accounts of the ways in which each

participant interpreted personal experiences as a fan and the connection of these experiences to

one’s life story at this moment in time (Ennis & Chen, 2012).

Each interview was conducted in person with an average duration of two and a half

hours. The interviews began with a review and signing of the Letter of Information and Consent.

Prior to providing consent, participants were invited to pose questions about their voluntary

involvement. Each interview was digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim by the lead author.

Confidentiality was protected by keeping data on the lead author’s encrypted password-protected

computer, altering or deleting identifying information, and using pseudonyms.

To develop rapport and an initial understanding of each participant’s connection to

professional sport, broad questions were posed to invite participant narratives, including, ‘What

138

are some of the highlights or low points of your experiences as a professional sport fan?’ and,

‘Do you feel a connection with particular professional athletes or teams? If so, who and why?

Could you share specific stories that depict your connection to these athletes or teams?’ Then,

participants were asked to describe their use of social media as a fan of professional sport.

Questions included, ‘Who do you most often engage with on social media and why?’ and, ‘What

ways has social media contributed to your experiences as a fan?’ and, ‘What is the nature of your

interaction with professional athletes or teams on social media?’ As part of this segment of the

interview, fans were asked to share specific stories about any positive or negative interactions

that they have had or observed with a professional athlete or team on social media.

Following the broad questions related to sport, each participant was asked to speak more

specifically about their knowledge of public shaming of professional athletes on social media. To

provide context, this segment of the interview began by showing each participant raw data

examples of shaming practices directed toward professional athletes that were derived from the

first phase of this research (see MacPherson & Kerr, 2019). The examples depicted a variety of

examples of fans’ shaming practices, including, withdrawal of support and desired or expected

consequences for the athletes. Then, participants were asked to draw on the raw data reviewed or

reflect on their own participation or observations of shaming of professional athletes online.

Participants

Males and females sixteen years of age or older who met the following criteria were

eligible to participate: possessed at least one personal profile on Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram

and engaged on the chosen platform(s) at least once per week; had an online connection with one

or more professional athletes’ or professional sport organizations established by ‘liking’,

‘friending’, or ‘following’ the athlete or team’s verified Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram profiles;

139

and, provided written consent to participate in the study by signing the Letter of Information and

Consent prior to participation. It is important to note that individuals who were employed by a

media company (or through another formal opportunity) to discuss or report information about

professional sport on social network sites were not eligible to participate.

In total, three male and two female North American sport fans between the ages of

twenty-three and thirty years (M = 26.6) were included in this study. Participants had a range of

experiences with sport, as recreational and competitive Canadian athletes, as well as, North

American professional sport fans. In addition, participants reported extensive engagement on

social media that ranged from approximately 1.5-2.5 hours per day, or, nearly 17.5 hours per

week.

The following section will describe each participant and their relationship to professional

sport fandom. It is important to note that during the interviews, participants most often referred

to men’s professional sport when discussing favourite teams, memories, or high-profile norm

violations. This heightened focus on male athletes and teams may be a result of the prominence

of men’s professional sport in North America and the associated privileges afforded to male

professional athletes and teams, including media attention, prime television timeslots, financial

support, fame, etc.

Participant One

Olivia is a thirty-year old female and an avid long-standing fan of professional baseball,

hockey, and basketball. She supports her favourite professional teams by watching on television,

attending games in person, and engaging with professional athletes through Facebook and

Instagram. Olivia reported logging onto her social media accounts approximately fifteen times

per day and averaging one and a half to two hours on these sites throughout the day. In addition

140

to using social media to keep abreast of scores and game information, Olivia is primarily

interested in following professional athletes on social media to learn more about their personal

obstacles in pursuit of success and their activities or hobbies.

Participant Two

Adam is a twenty-three year old male who considers himself a lifelong fan of

professional hockey, tennis, football, and golf. Adam reported engaging with his favourite teams,

athletes, and broadcasters through Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram and estimated that he

checked his accounts approximately twenty to thirty times per day for an average of two and a

half hours total. Adam’s interest in social media content stems from a desire to learn and be

mentally stimulated by analyses of sport preparation and performance from different

perspectives (e.g., athletes, coaches, broadcasters).

Participant Three

Abby is a twenty-seven year old female who developed an interest in professional sport –

specifically baseball and hockey – in adulthood. She reported logging onto Facebook and

Instagram approximately ten times per day for an average total of one and a half hours. She

enjoys following professional athletes on social media primarily to observe their personal lives

and interests or hobbies beyond the field of play.

Participant Four

Drew is a twenty-five year old male who derives his love for professional sport from his

experiences as an amateur football athlete and watching his fellow teammates go on to succeed

at the professional level. In addition to football, Drew follows professional basketball. Through

Drew’s engagement on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, he believes he is able to directly

observe the evolution of popular culture as it happens. He checks his accounts twenty-five to

141

thirty times per day and spends approximately one and a half to two hours on social media in

total per day.

Participant Five

Jake is a twenty-eight year old male whose love for sport centres on the exceptional

physical prowess of individual athletes. His favourite professional sports are hockey and curling.

Jake engages on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram an average of ten times per day for a total of

approximately two hours. He reported following teams, broadcasters, and professional athletes

for a number of reasons, including, news, highlights, and the entertainment value provided by

gaining a glimpse into the wealthy lifestyle of professional athletes.

Data Analysis

Consistent with a narrative approach, data were analyzed using a thematic narrative

analysis, which emphasises the content of the stories (Sparkes & Smith, 2014). The process of

analysis, as described by Sparkes and Smith (2014), begins with immersion in the data and

documentation of initial impressions of the overarching story of one participant. This stage is

important for recognizing common expressions or reoccurring storylines, as well as, significant

actions, events, or people involved in the overarching story. Next, themes were identified by

examining the interactions between particular meanings constructed by the participant and the

points in the story in which these meanings tend to emerge. To facilitate conceptualization of

themes, Sparkes and Smith (2014) propose posing the following questions to your data set:

‘What is going on here?’, ‘What does this theme mean?’, ‘What conditions are likely to have

given rise to it?’, and ‘What is the overall story the different themes reveal about the topic?’

(p.133). Once the themes were identified, we located the context(s) of each theme as it appeared

throughout the overarching story. Then, we reviewed the contents that comprised each theme, the

142

interrelationships amongst the themes and the ways in which these themes contributed to an

understanding of the participant and the social and cultural contexts that informed the

participant’s experience of public shaming of professional athletes on social media. Finally, we

repeated this process for each participant and identified the most prominent themes across all

stories. The written report demonstrates these themes in a rich detail-oriented manner.

Ethics

In addition to REB approval, there were a few important ethical considerations for this

study. Namely, due to the perceived anonymity that often encourages individuals to behave in a

distasteful manner online, it is expected that participants may feel apprehensive or uncomfortable

discussing their actions or the actions of others online. The participants may feel at risk of being

judged or having their online behaviours made public in some way. Therefore, it was critical to

build rapport and trust with the participants and approach the interviews in a manner that

demonstrates openness to hearing their perspectives without judgment. Further, it was possible

that participation in the interviews may contextualise the online behaviour of the interviewees or

others depicted in the raw data (e.g., highlight the harmful nature of these experiences for

professional athletes), which may evoke an emotional reaction (e.g., feelings of sadness or guilt)

on behalf of the participants. In these circumstances, it was integral that the interviews were

approached in a sensitive manner, including, avoiding implication of blame on the participants or

others, providing the participants with time or space to cope with their emotions, and ensuring

the participants were aware of the voluntary nature of the interview.

Assessment of Rigour

Consistent with a social constructivist paradigm, a relativist approach to judging the

quality of this research should be adopted. With this approach, the following five criteria should

143

be utilised as assessment tools for rigour: worthy topic (e.g., relevant to current societal events,

timely, important), credibility (e.g., rich description, multiple and diverse opinions,

trustworthiness), resonance (e.g., influences or affects readers, relevant in other social contexts

or situations), significant contribution (e.g., uncovers or explores topical issues, initiates further

questions and interest), and meaningful coherence (e.g., appropriate approach to achieve study

goals; Tracy, 2010).

Results

The findings broadly indicate that public shaming on social media in response to

professional athletes’ social, legal, and sport-specific norm violations are rooted in fans’

perceived threats to their sense of identification and belonging. More specifically, this section

will illustrate the critical factors that may contribute to the public shaming of professional

athletes on social media: firstly, developing fan identification and sense of community through

fandom of particular athletes or teams; secondly, fans’ perceived development of personal

relationships with their favourite athletes via social media, which enhances a sense of

identification and belonging gained through fandom; and the perceived threat to one’s fan

identification or sense of belonging following athlete norm violations, which may lead to the

public shaming of athletes by fans. Each of these factors will be discussed in turn.

Although none of the participants reported personal engagement in public shaming of

professional athletes, a social desirability bias may account for a reluctance to disclose such

behaviours. Regardless, the extensive nature of the participants’ involvement in following

professional athletes on social media, participants’ descriptions of the ways in which their sense

of identification and belonging are influenced by being fans of professional sport, as well as,

144

positive and negative experiences as fans, help shape our understanding of public shaming in

response to professional athletes’ norm violations.

Developing a Sense of Identification and Belonging Through Fandom

The findings indicate that being a fan of a professional sport team and/or athlete

influences identification and helps build a sense of community with other fans, especially in

times of performance success for the athlete and/or team. Participants described a number of

ways that professional sport fandom fosters identification and sense of belonging, including,

building and strengthening personal relationships, enhancing affinity for geographic location

(e.g., city, country), and fostering positive feelings.

Building and Strengthening Personal Relationships

All of the participants described the way in which being a fan of professional sport helps

cultivate a sense of belonging with family, friends, and other fans. For Olivia, being a fan of

professional sport provided an opportunity to develop personal relationships with family

members from an early age:

My family has always watched professional sports together for as long as I can

remember. We stayed in on many Saturday nights to watch hockey. We created pretend

betting pools during the playoffs. We’d go to games together, my parents, my siblings

and I, and we’d make a full day of it. Even if the game wasn’t good, our team lost, or I

didn’t win the pool, it didn’t matter because we did these things as a family. And it’s an

amazing experience to look back on. We were so connected.

Olivia continued, ‘Now that I’m older, being a fan has provided my friends and I with a social

experience where we can get together, watch, and cheer as a group.’ Adam echoed the positive

influence of professional sport on relationship development:

145

I remember all of my favourite sports moments vividly – where I was, who I was with.

Most of them, I was with my family: my brother, my dad, my mom and me. I can

remember running around the house screaming with excitement for some of [the

moments] ...That’s how we bonded, especially my dad and I, over these incredible

highlights in sport.

Further, Adam recognised the importance of social media in helping him build relationships with

other fans, ‘When I’m at a bar watching games with friends, I’ll look at my phone to see what

[other fans] are saying and whether they’re feeling the way I’m feeling. Twitter makes it possible

to share that connection with others.’

Enhancing Affinity for Geographic Location

Participants also described the way in which being a fan of professional sport helps

facilitate connection to the geographic location in which they live. Jake described this

connection, by stating:

When our local hockey team was in the playoffs, it was so awesome. The city itself was

alive. The streets were just packed with people all the time. I live in the heart of the city

and it’s just a really fun time when you feel part of your city and all of a sudden swept up

in this enthusiastic community of people.

Adam extended this connection beyond the city to his country: ‘My city’s team is the only

Canadian team in the [North American] league, so you’re cheering for something the entire

country is cheering for, too. Everyone in Canada isn’t in my living room, but it feels like they

are.’ Further, Olivia suggested that connection to one’s geographic location through sport

fandom is important for establishing the social fabric of that community: ‘We’re a very

multicultural city and the professional teams here are bringing a lot of different people together

146

in a positive way. I think that’s really cool and it’s important to me as a Canadian and resident of

the city to be inclusive.’

Fostering Positive Feelings

Woven throughout fans’ stories of fandom and belonging are the positive feelings elicited

through these connections with others. For Abby, the end of a romantic relationship prompted

exploring of new interests – one of which became professional sports – and the positive feelings

gained from this new interest helped her manage a challenging period in her life. She said:

I would say in the last three or four years I’ve become a pretty passionate fan… I was in a

relationship for a very long time, and then, I wasn’t. Watching professional sport became

a way for me to keep my mind distracted and busy. It helped me adapt to the ‘new me.’

Around this time, a team that Abby closely followed made the playoffs, and she described the

enhanced sense of belonging she experienced at this time:

[When the playoffs started] everyone was watching, and it made it even more fun for me.

My friends and coworkers all started paying attention, too. We had the games on at work,

and we all wore our jerseys. To me, it didn’t matter if [her team] won; it was more about

the fun of watching them with everyone and being present for exciting moments. It was

something for me to look forward to every day, at a time when I wasn’t always looking

forward to my life.

Evidently, her experiences of community built through fandom elicited feelings of anticipation,

comfort, and kinship with her friends and colleagues. Similarly, Olivia described the positive

feelings derived from experiences of belonging with other fans: ‘When I think of my favourite

sport moments, it’s the moments I feel pride; I feel united; I feel so excited… I feel so together

with the team and the other fans.’

147

In addition to the personal feelings evoked by experiences as a fan, participants also

spoke broadly about the effect of fandom in creating a community and fulfilling a desire for

belonging with others. As stated by Drew:

There’s a unifying feeling sport can give. I think that’s a special thing. Sport can bring so

many people together. To me, it’s a glimpse into what humans are capable of, and how

connected we can be when we’re all thinking about and caring about the same thing. It’s

amazing the good feelings we can experience in those moments of togetherness.

Connecting with Professional Athletes on Social Media

Participants claimed that fans who have developed a sense of belonging and identification

through fandom often seek out their favourite athletes or teams on social media. By connecting

with the athletes online, participants discussed the potential to perceive a relationship with an

athlete, which was not possible prior to the advent of social media. According to the participants,

the development of a personal relationship with athletes via social media is enhanced by fans’

ability to identify similarities and shared values based on an athlete’s social media interactions

(e.g., pictures, posts).

Fostering a Perceived Relationship

Prior to social media, participants indicated that connection with an athlete was built

through more distant activities, such as watching on television, being in the arena for games, and

scheduled interviews. Now, an increasingly personal connection with an athlete is perceived to

be possible via social media. According to Olivia:

The nature of fandom now, with social media, is that you actually feel connected to the

athletes. Before social media was invented, you wanted a high five [from your favourite

148

athlete] if you were at the game. But now, with social media, you can look up almost any

athlete online and directly engage with them.

Participants viewed social media as a space where professional athletes can showcase

many different aspects of their lives, which reportedly provide fans with a more authentic

depiction of who their favourite athletes are as people. Drew said, ‘Social media is a place for

your thoughts, your feelings, your interests. It can be an aggregate of your personality… You can

get a fairly good idea of what a person is like based on their social media accounts.’ In addition,

Abby suggests that connecting with her favourite athlete via social media reveals a part of the

athlete’s personality that cannot be demonstrated simply from watching him perform on

television:

[My favourite athlete] seems so down to earth. I think his attitude is admirable. He’s

always trying to be positive… He posts motivational quotes and pictures on social media,

so I know he tries to find positives out of negative or difficult situations. Just from

watching him play on TV, I don’t think you would know very much [about him]. It’s

more from social media that I get a feel for what he’s really like.

As a result of this connection with athletes, participants perceive an enhanced awareness

of the athletes’ personal lives, as described by Olivia: ‘I like to know about what they’re doing in

their spare time. You know all about their personal lives, their wives, if they have kids, what

those kids are named. And I do really feel connected with them because of that.’ For Abby,

seeing athletes post pictures or videos of themselves engaging in common activities, such as

social events or time spent with their families, on social media makes them more relatable and

augments feelings of a personal relationship with them: ‘I feel like I know them a little bit when I

149

see what’s inside their head or what they’re up to on a daily basis. I feel like an acquaintance or a

friend, rather than just a fan.’

Enhancing Perceived Relationship Through Similarities and Shared Values

By examining the social media activities of professional athletes, participants reported

being able to determine which athletes they resonated with more deeply, and with whom they

perceived shared their personal values. In general, participants described an enhanced personal

relationship with athletes with whom they perceived to share similarities in personality. For

instance, Adam described his use of social media to discover the perceived commonalities

between him and his favourite athlete:

I feel like he’s me in many ways. I have him on social media and the things he posts, I

think, are indicative of his personality. He’s my age and has probably lived a similar life

as me. I’d say he’s quirky, like me. He’s a little awkward looking, like me. He

communicates his thoughts clearly and he expresses his emotions; I like that about him

because I’m the same. And because he’s my age and we grew up in the same socio-

economic environment, I think to myself, I could be him. You know, why aren’t I him?

What has he done differently? So, I idolise that aspect of him. If he posts on his social

media or an interview of him gets posted, I will one hundred percent pay attention.

For Olivia, Abby, and Drew, service to others in their communities is a personal value, and

therefore, an action that is admired in and expected of athletes. As stated by Drew:

It’s important to me that athletes are out doing things to better the community. They’re in

positions of privilege and it’s nice to see them give back… There’s an athlete I follow on

social media and he’s regularly posting photographs of him in the community, giving

shoes to kids in need and helping the less fortunate. It paints him as a wholesome guy,

150

who’s just doing his job and trying to give back. Like most of us. He’s not just another

flashy guy with a big ego.

Other personal values perceived to be shared by participants with athletes that were illustrated

through an athlete’s social media included, work ethic, optimism, and humility.

In sum, we suggest that a sense of identification and belonging is particularly salient

when fans share a perceived personal relationship with professional athletes conceived through

social media. This perceived relationship has significance when considering the potential reasons

for engagement in public shaming of professional athletes by fans following norm violations.

Public Shaming as a Response to Identification Threats

Participants indicated that athletes’ social, legal, or sport-related norm violations threaten

the sense of belonging and identification cultivated through fandom. These perceived threats

were described in two ways: firstly, fans’ sense of identification is threatened because the

behaviours or actions of the athlete challenge characteristics to which fans perceived to resonate

with deeply. Olivia claims:

The fans are obviously going to be upset… The athlete you care about did this action and

now he or she is going to be taken out of competition or face other consequences. But I

think it’s really just that the athlete is no longer the person that you thought he or she

was. And that hurts, you know?

Jake elaborated on this notion, stating: ‘Fans feel like they have this connection to athletes. They

look up to athletes. So, it’s really hard when you’re confronted with the reality that your

favourite athlete did something awful.’ In addition, participants suggested fans’ identities are

threatened when an athlete engages in behaviours or actions that contradict perceived shared

values. For instance, Drew states:

151

When you put someone up on a pedestal and idolise them, you obviously want to see

your own values reflected regularly, right? So, if I ever saw one of my favourite athletes

went against my values, or didn’t reflect them, it would completely affect the perception I

had of [the athlete] … I wouldn’t want to know the person I idolise did something ‘bad’.

It would hurt me and generate trust issues, you know? Who do I trust if this person I

really admire turns into someone I don’t like?

Drew acknowledged the role of the perceived personal relationship generated through social

media in contributing to fans’ appraisal of athletes’ behaviours or actions, by stating, ‘That’s the

scary thing, too, about social media. You make up these things in your mind about who [the

professional athlete] is as a person.’

Secondly, participants suggested fans’ sense of belonging and the associated positive

feelings may be threatened when athletes do not meet performance expectations, resulting in

tournament exits, culmination of playoff runs, etc. As described by Drew, ‘You inevitably get

swept up into those feelings [of belonging and togetherness] when your team is doing well and

then things don’t pan out as you expected or wanted them too; that’s a really low point as a fan.’

Similarly, Adam shared another example: ‘If you were really excited to watch an athlete and then

they lose in the first round of the tournament, of course, you’re going to be mad and feel like

you’re owed something.’

Participants supposed these perceived threats would conjure negative feelings for fans,

such as heartbreak, anger, and disappointment, and provoke public shaming online. As described

by Jake:

When the team plays poorly, or the athlete misbehaves, it’s disappointing … People

invest a lot of emotions into a team, an athlete, or a moment, and when it doesn’t go your

152

way, or how you wanted and expected, it’s heartbreaking… It’s hard not to get

emotional.

Jake elaborated:

I think a lot of the times what people say online is reactionary. A fan has been let down

by an athlete and engages in [shaming] for the purpose of catharsis – they’re getting their

feelings out in response to the athlete’s misbehaviour or poor play. I guess people might

feel good about taking part in it, especially in egregious circumstances… Public shaming

gives you a snapshot into fans’ mental states at a very specific point in time.

In addition to negative feelings of heartbreak, anger, and disappointment, participants

reported that fans’ public shaming was likely also influenced by the status and wealth of the

athlete. As reported by Drew:

To me, shaming also comes from feelings of jealousy from fans. This person you admire

makes millions of dollars and you hold them to a certain esteem in society. And then they

make a mistake, and it’s pretty easy to feel like you want to knock them down a couple

pegs because they’re rich and famous.

Abby furthers this notion, suggesting: ‘Fans probably wish they were the ones making the big

bucks with the swanky lifestyle, so they try to bring athletes down. They’re jealous people who

want to make themselves look good in comparison.’ Evidently, participants recognise the

importance of social comparison in the perceived relationship developed with athletes on social

media and subsequent shaming behaviours.

From a broader perspective, participants suggested that the use of public shaming to

express feelings related to athletes’ behaviours is a reflection of contemporary society.

According to Olivia:

153

Fans obviously find out about [athlete] behaviour that they dislike and public shaming is

the way our world is now; we just exploit everything that everyone does… I think we’ve

all had thoughts about people we don’t like, or when someone doesn’t make good

decisions, but there was a better filter about what you’d say about other people before

social media. It’s easier now to write things down and click enter.

Similarly, Drew recognises the instantaneous nature of public shaming in response to athletes’

violations, stating:

People make mistakes all the time and so many of the [athletes’ behaviours] are

accusations. But, the consequences are now so much heavier because there are so many

people who can get at the athletes directly. People are so quick to pass judgement, right?

And now there’s a forum that’s instant, so it’s easy to make judgments without thinking

about them.

Further, the accessibility of athletes and the perception of personal relationships with them via

social media magnify the vulnerability of athletes to public shaming from fans. As said by

Olivia, ‘Fans think they’re on the same level as athletes. Lines have been blurred and fans think

they can comment on everything and have a say in whatever is going on in the game or in [the

athletes’] personal lives.’

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to explore fans’ perspectives on potential reasons sport

fans engage with professional athletes on social media, including, engagement in public shaming

of professional athletes following social, legal, or sport-specific norm violations. The results

revealed that fans’ propensity to engage in public shaming practices may be influenced by threats

to fans’ sense of identification and belonging cultivated through enhanced personal relationships

154

with professional athletes via social media, as well as, family, friends, colleagues, and other fans

in person and online through fandom. With these findings, we propose that fans’ perceived

relationship with professional athletes developed through social media may be foundational and

a pre-requisite to the public shaming of athletes for legal, social, and sport-specific norm

violations online.

The present study contributes to an expanding area of research related to fan-athlete

interactions online (e.g., Hambrick, Simmons, Greenhalgh, & Greenwell, 2010; Kassing &

Sanderson, 2010; Kavanagh, Jones, & Sheppard-Marks, 2016; Sanderson & Emmons, 2014;

Sanderson & Truax, 2014), and specifically, public shaming of professional athletes on social

media (MacPherson & Kerr, 2019; MacPherson & Kerr, in press). The existing literature on fan

identification, parasocial relationships, and belonging, to be described below, is informative for

interpreting the findings from the present study.

Fan Identification, Parasocial Relationships, and a Sense of Belonging

One of the key findings of the present study was that fans desire to extend fan-athlete

interactions beyond the professional sport context (e.g., game, match, competition) by

strengthening their fan identification, and developing a perceived personal relationship with their

favourite athletes. From a broad perspective, participants described the psychological

connection, personal commitment, and emotional involvement that they established with their

favourite teams or athletes (Sun, 2010; Sutton, McDonald, Milne, & Cimperman, 1997; Wann,

Hunter, Ryan, & Wright, 2001). This concept, referred to as fan identification, is considered the

degree to which fans perceives their fanship for a particular team or athlete as an extension of

their sense of self (Wann, Hunter, Ryan, & Wright, 2001), and may influence fans to adopt

certain attitudes or beliefs shared by their favourite athletes or teams (Sun, 2010). There are

155

typically three antecedents for identification with a team or athlete, including, psychological

(e.g., the desire for belonging and affiliation), environmental (e.g., socialization into group, fan-

athlete interaction), and organizational (e.g., athlete attributes; Wann, 2006). Our participants

broadly discussed the development and evolution of this psychological connection through

stories of building and strengthening personal relationships through fandom, enhancing one’s

affinity for their geographic location, and pursuing online connections with athletes with whom

they resonate and share values.

The specific fan-athlete interactions that help facilitate fan identification – referred to as

parasocial interactions – are defined as one-sided fan-athlete interactions that occur within the

context of a single professional sport game, competition, or event (Horton & Wohl, 1956). When

these interactions prolong past a singular interaction to repeated encounters with the athlete

within (e.g., during the game) and outside (e.g., in conversation with others, on social media) of

the professional sport context, a parasocial relationship may be formed (Dibble, Hartmann, &

Rosaen, 2016; Hu, 2016). Fans perceive these relationships as intimate, genuine, reciprocal,

cross-situational and long-term, despite awareness that the relationship is not typically

bidirectional (Horton & Wohl, 1956; Hu, 2016; Liebers & Schramm, 2019; Schramm, 2008).

Parasocial relationships and fan identification work together to build a relationship with the

athlete (e.g., knowledge of the athlete’s personal life, likes and dislikes), and then foster a desire

to be like that athlete (e.g., adopt the athlete’s behaviours; Sun, 2010). In this regard, previous

research suggests parasocial interactions are a necessary condition for identification (Brown,

Basil, & Bocarnea, 2003). However, we suggest that the relationship between parasocial

interactions and identification may be perceived as bi-directional, as our participants described

initially identifying with a particular athlete or team through experiences as a fan (e.g., childhood

156

memories, family connections to the team, successful playoff runs) and then seeking out

professional athletes on social media to expand their parasocial interactions and develop a

relationship.

The findings of the present study also further our understanding of the ways in which

parasocial relationships between a professional athlete and fan progress, both relationally and

structurally. From a relational perspective, the findings suggest that social media provide fans

with an opportunity to develop and expand on the parasocial interactions previously established

with athletes through viewing television or in-person games. Specifically, once connected via

social media, fans are exposed to athletes’ self-disclosures and direct communication about their

personal lives (Frederick et al., 2014; Marshall, 2010; Pegoraro, 2010). As described by Kim and

Song (2016), the increased ability to interact with athletes directly and be privy to personal

information encourages fans to think they have ‘met’ and ‘know’ the athlete with whom they are

connecting (Kim & Song, 2016). The perception of attaining intimate knowledge through fan-

athlete parasocial relationships is illustrated by the present participants’ presumptions of

‘knowing what an athlete is really like’ and deducing the athlete’s ‘personality’ through social

media. Alperstein (2019) suggests that the intimate bonds created in parasocial relationships are

further fostered through the perceived authenticity of these interactions, which is demonstrated

by revealing one’s values and creating a community based on shared similarities. Participants in

the present study identified both of these traits as critical aspects for progression of their

parasocial relationships, particularly in circumstances where the athlete’s values and personal

characteristics aligned with participants’ own.

In addition, our results indicate that fanship contributes to fans’ sense of identification

and belonging, and parasocial relationships specifically, may serve as a relational facilitator to

157

establish deeper social bonds with those within that sport community (namely athletes). Broad

examples of feelings of belonging were exemplified through participants’ descriptions of the

unifying nature of sport and sense of community developed through fanship. Specifically related

to parasocial relationships, our findings suggest that enhanced self-disclosure by professional

athletes and subsequent understanding of their personal lives may lead participants to consider

relationships developed with professional athletes akin to a relationship with an acquaintance or

friend. These findings are supported by previous research, which suggests that parasocial

relationships may function as a practical option for fulfilling individuals’ social needs (e.g.,

Baek, Bae, & Jang, 2014; Cole & Leets, 1999; Giles, 2002; Greenwood & Long, 2009) and can

become a substitute for inadequate social interaction or bonds (Tsao, 1996). The latter notion

was particularly illustrated through Abby’s story of the role fanship – and subsequent connection

with her favourite athlete via social media – in helping her cope with the ending of a romantic

relationship.

Further, previous research posits that strong parasocial relationships and sense of

belonging may encourage fans to behave in a similar manner as one might with in-person

friends, including, increased willingness to self-disclose and demonstrate empathy (Knowles,

2007), as well as, progress towards one’s ideal sense of self (Derrick, Gabriel, & Tippin, 2008).

Collectively, these findings are of critical importance considering humans possess a fundamental

need to belong and desire to create social connections with others (Baumeister & Leary, 1995;

Iannone, McCarty, Branch, & Kelly, 2018).

From a structural perspective, fan-athlete parasocial relationships may progress via social

media for a number of reasons. In general, social media fosters the perception of possible

interaction, which incites and helps sustain parasocial relationships between fans and public

158

figures (Alperstein, 2019; Frederick et. al., 2012; Hartmann & Goldhoorn, 2011). More

specifically, the attribution of personal characteristics to professional athletes may make it seem

as though the professional athlete inhabits one’s physical space, and therefore, is a part of one’s

personal social network (Alperstein, 2019). As Hu (2016) explains, engaging with or invoking a

professional athlete outside of the parameters of the sport context facilitates integration of the

relationship into other facets of fans’ everyday lives (e.g., conversations with others, social

media). In addition, social media offers a greater opportunity for consistent, routine contact,

which allows fans to create expectations related to public figures’ behaviour and suppose the

ways in which the public figures will conduct themselves in future interactions (Alperstein,

2019; Burgoon & Walther, 1976). Further, Alperstein (2019) suggests the prominence of these

relationships in fans’ personal lives may be influenced by the ability to access social media via

cellular devices regardless of location, which means fans can oscillate between in-person and

parasocial relationships at any given moment. These structural features of the fan-athlete

relationship likely influence participants’ reflections related to the instantaneous nature of

interactions on social media with athletes and the perception of blurred lines in this relationship.

Participants recognised that instantaneity and lack of boundaries result in fans freely commenting

on athletes’ personal and professional lives. Interestingly, in some cases, participants grouped

seemingly trivial professional violations (e.g., losing games) in the same category as more

serious personal violations (e.g., alleged assault) when referring to public shaming behaviours as

a method to engage in social leveling with athletes, express emotions, pass judgment, or seek

catharsis. In these circumstances, participants implied that both perceived trivial and sufficiently

serious violations hold similar weight in provoking public shaming practices. The tendency to

group violations in this way is particularly relevant, as previous research by (MacPherson &

159

Kerr, 2019) demonstrated social, legal, and sport-specific violations garnered relatively similar

fan responses in quantity (i.e., 3200, 2550, and 1950 comments respectively) and quality (e.g.,

calls for physical or psychosocial harm to athletes) on social media.

In sum, findings from the current study and the extant literature describe the salience of

fan identification and parasocial relationships in fans’ lives, how these relationships progress and

the importance of these relationships for fulfilling the need to belong. So, what can be learned

from these relationships to help explain engagement in public shaming of one’s favourite athlete

for perceived norm violations?

Parasocial Breakups and Public Shaming

An interesting new area of research related to parasocial relationships explores what

happens when these relationships end (i.e., parasocial breakup) and may help us interpret public

shaming of professional athletes following social, legal, or sport-specific norm violations. The

term parasocial breakup refers to the termination of a parasocial relationship and the negative

emotional reactions experienced by fans throughout this process (Cohen, 2003; Eyal & Cohen,

2006; Hu, 2016). Preliminary research suggests that two of the key factors that influence

individuals to end their parasocial relationships are scandal (Hu, 2016) and moral, trust, and

social expectancy violations (Cohen, 2010). Scandal and expectancy violations are likely an

impetus for parasocial breakups or reduced relationships due to fans’ uncertainty related to their

favourite public figures’ behaviour, as well as, the failure to fulfill expectations fans held for

those individuals (Hu, 2016). Contravention of fans’ expected behaviour of public figures may

result in negative emotional reactions or aggression (Haden & Hojjat, 2006), a process described

by participants in the present study and suggested as a primary instigator for shaming.

160

Parasocial relationships may be particularly vulnerable to negative reactions as these

relationships may lack the motivation and necessary information (e.g., a friend’s personal

situation, face-to-face contact) to withstand violations of behavioural expectations or values (Tal-

Or & Papirman, 2007). In addition, in comparison to face-to-face relationships, the intimacy

cultivated through a parasocial relationship is less static; instead, fans’ feelings towards their

favourite athletes are vulnerable to fluctuation when confronted with athletes’ engagement in

norm violations (Cohen, 2010). Finally, Cohen (2010) suggests that norm violations may be

particularly challenging for fans to absorb as professional athletes are typically viewed as role

models, a notion supported by participants in the present study.

Overall, the findings from the present study posit negative emotional reactions and

potential aggression may be influenced by threats to fans’ identification and sense of belonging.

In fact, Greenwood and Long (2011) propose that our desire and fundamental need for belonging

has profound consequences for how we relate and interact with public figures in general. In this

context, we wonder if the public shaming of professional athletes may serve as a symptom,

precursor, or intermediary stage of a parasocial breakup.

Future Directions

There are a number of avenues for future research given the relative novelty of this area.

First, it is important to strengthen our understanding of parasocial relationships between athletes

and fans. For example, it would be fruitful to discern the ways in which parasocial relationships

may help shape one’s identity more broadly. In other words, in what ways does the fan-athlete

parasocial relationship contribute to a fan’s sense of self? It is also important to learn more about

the potential for psychosocially harmful behaviours to transpire in the fan-athlete relationship

and the outcomes of these behaviours for fans and professional athletes.

161

Second, we must learn more about public shaming in the context of fan-athlete parasocial

relationships on social media. For instance, it would be beneficial to engage fans who participate

in public shaming on social media to ascertain the specific motivations for these practices,

expand understanding of the feelings and emotions experienced by fans that lead to these

practices, and examine the potential fall-out or aftermath of these actions. For example, do fans

dissolve parasocial relationships following public shaming? If so, is the likelihood of parasocial

breakup influenced by the nature of the norm? And, how does it feel to end a parasocial

relationship, particularly when the relationship is with an athlete the fan idolises? Exploring

these questions will help to deepen our understanding of the nature of the relationship between

public shaming and parasocial breakups.

Third, it would be interesting for future research to explore the broader personal and

societal implications of parasocial relationships. For instance, in what ways do parasocial

relationships contribute to our everyday lives? Do we engage on social media to develop these

relationships or are these relationships a by-product of excessive social media use? How much

time and energy do we invest into these relationships? And, do parasocial relationships deepen

with increased investment? Further, in an era of technological advancement, what are the

benefits of parasocial versus in-person relationships? And, what implications may parasocial

relationships have on the future of interpersonal relationships and human connection?

Finally, Liebers and Schramm (2019) ascertain that only thirteen percent of the existing

research related to parasocial relationships, which spans multiple academic disciplines over sixty

years, has adopted a qualitative lens. Therefore, it is critical to approach future research with a

wider variety of research perspectives and corresponding methodologies to ensure a more

nuanced and comprehensive understanding of this phenomenon.

162

References

Alperstein, N. (2019). Celebrity and Mediated Social Connections: Fans, Friends and Followers

in the Digital Age. Baltimore, MD: Palgrave Macmillan.

Armour, K., & Chen, H.-h. (2012). Narrative research methods: Where the art of storytelling

meets the science of research. In K. Armour, & D. MacDonald (Eds.), Research Methods in

Physical Education and Youth Sport (pp. 237-250). New York, NY: Routledge.

Armour, K., & Macdonald, D. (Eds.). (2012). Research methods in physical education and youth

sport. New York, NY: Routledge.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal

attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.

Baek, Y., Bae, Y., & Jang, H. (2013). Social and parasocial relationships on social network sites

and their differential relationships with users' psychological well-being. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(7), 512-517.

Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and

scholarship. Journal of Computer

‐

mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.

Briggs, C. L. (2002). Interviewing, power/knowledge, and social inequality. In J. F. Gubrium &

J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 911-922).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brown, W. J., Basil, M. D., & Bocarnea, M. C. (2003). Social influence of an international

celebrity: Responses to the death of Princess Diana. Journal of communication, 53(4), 587-

605.

163

Browning, B., & Sanderson, J. (2012). The positives and negatives of Twitter: Exploring how

student-athletes use Twitter and respond to critical tweets. International Journal of Sport

Communication, 5(4), 503-521.

Cashmore, E. (2006). Celebrity culture. New York, NY: Routledge.

Cerulo, K., & Ruane, J. (2014). Apologies of the rich and famous: Cultural, cognitive, and social

explanations of why we care and why we forgive. Social Psychology Quarterly, 77(2), 123-

149.

Chase, S. E. (2005). Narrative inquiry: Multiple lenses, approaches, voices. In N. Denzin & Y.

Lincoln (Eds.), Sage handbook of qualitative research (3

ed.; pp. 651-679). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Chase, S. E. (2011). Narrative inquiry: Still a field in the making. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln

(Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research (4

ed.; pp.421-434). Los Angeles, CA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Cheung, A. S. (2014). Revisiting privacy and dignity: Online shaming in the global e-village.

Laws, 3(2), 301-326.

Clandinin, D. J., & Rosiek, J. (2006). Mapping a landscape of narrative inquiry: Borderland

spaces and tensions. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a

methodology (pp. 35-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Clavio, G., & Kian, T. M. (2010). Uses and gratifications of a retired female athlete’s Twitter

followers. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 485-500.

Cohen, E. L. (2010). Expectancy violations in relationships with friends and media

figures. Communication Research Reports, 27(2), 97-111.

164

Cohen, J. (2003). Parasocial breakups: Measuring individual differences in responses to the

dissolution of parasocial relationships. Mass Communication & Society, 6(2), 191-202.

Cole, T., & Leets, L. (1999). Attachment styles and intimate television viewing: Insecurely

forming relationships in a parasocial way. Journal of Social and Personal

Relationships, 16(4), 495-511.

Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches

ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Daly, K. (2007). Qualitative methods for family studies and human development. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

De Backer, C. (2012). Blinded by the starlight: An evolutionary framework for studying

celebrity culture and fandom. Review of General Psychology, 16(2), 144-151.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2

ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Derrick, J. L., Gabriel, S., & Tippin, B. (2008). Parasocial relationships and self‐discrepancies:

Faux relationships have benefits for low self‐esteem individuals. Personal

relationships, 15(2), 261-280.

Dibble, J. L., Hartmann, T., & Rosaen, S. F. (2016). Parasocial interaction and parasocial

relationship: Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of measures. Human

Communication Research, 42(1), 21-44.

Driessens, O. (2013). The Celebritization of Society and Culture: Understanding the Structural

Dynamics of Celebrity Culture. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 16(6), 641-657.

Ellison, N., Lampe, C., & Steinfield, C. (2009). Social network sites and society: Current trends

and future possibilities. Interactions, 16(1), 6-9.

165

Ennis, C. & Chen, S. (2012). Chapter 16: Interviews and focus groups. In K. Armour & D.

Macdonald (Eds.), Research Methods in Physical Education and Youth Sport (pp. 217-236).

New York, NY: Routledge.

Eyal, K., & Cohen, J. (2006). When good friends say goodbye: A parasocial breakup

study. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(3), 502-523.

Frederick, E., Lim, C., Clavio, G., Pedersen, P., & Burch, L. (2014). Choosing between the one-

way or two-way street: An exploration of relationship promotion by professional athletes on

Twitter. Communication & Sport, 2(1), 80-99.

Frederick, E. L., Lim, C. H., Clavio, G., & Walsh, P. (2012). Why we follow: An examination of

parasocial interaction and fan motivations for following athlete archetypes on

Twitter. International Journal of Sport Communication, 5(4), 481-502.

Giles, D. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future

research. Media psychology, 4(3), 279-305.

Greenwood, D., & Long, C. (2011). Attachment, belongingness needs, and relationship status

predict imagined intimacy with media figures. Communication Research, 38(2), 278-297.

Greenwood, D., & Long, C. (2009). Psychological predictors of media involvement: Solitude

experiences and the need to belong. Communication Research, 36(5), 637-654.

Haden, S. C., & Hojjat, M. (2006). Aggressive responses to betrayal: Type of relationship,

victim’s sex, and nature of aggression. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(1),

101-116.

Hambrick, M. E., & Mahoney, T. Q. (2011). 'It's incredible–trust me': exploring the role of

celebrity athletes as marketers in online social networks. International Journal of Sport

Management and Marketing, 10(3-4), 161-179.

166

Hambrick, M., Simmons, J., Greenhalgh, G., & Greenwell, T. (2010). Understanding

professional athletes’ use of Twitter: A content analysis of athlete tweets. International

Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 454-471.

Harris, A. (2009). The role of power in shaming interactions: How social control is performed in

a juvenile court. Contemporary Justice Review, 12(4), 379-399.

Hartmann, T., & Goldhoorn, C. (2011). Horton and Wohl revisited: Exploring viewers'

experience of parasocial interaction. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1104-1121.

Hechter, M., & Opp, K-D. (2001). Social norms. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Hoffner, C. (2008). Parasocial and online social relationships. In S. Calvert and B. Wilson (Eds.),

The Handbook of Children, Media and Development. Chichester, UK: Blackwell Publishing

Ltd.

Holloway, I. (1997). Basic concepts for qualitative research. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction. Psychiatry,

19, 215–229.

Hu, M. (2016). The influence of a scandal on parasocial relationship, parasocial interaction, and

parasocial breakup. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(3), 217-231.

Hunt, K., Bristol, T., & Bashaw, R. (1999). A conceptual approach to classifying sports

fans. Journal of Services Marketing, 13(6), 439-452.

Hutchins, B. (2011). The acceleration of media sport culture: Twitter, telepresence and online

messaging. Information, Communication & Society, 14(2), 237-257.

Iannone, N. E., McCarty, M. K., Branch, S. E., & Kelly, J. R. (2018). Connecting in the

Twitterverse: Using Twitter to satisfy unmet belonging needs. The Journal of social

psychology, 158(4), 491-495.

167

Jacquet, J. (2015). Is shame necessary? New uses for an old tool. New York, NY: Pantheon.

Jones, S., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. (2014). Negotiating the complexities of qualitative research

in higher education fundamental elements and issues (2

Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Kassing, J., & Sanderson, J. (2010). Fan–athlete interaction and Twitter tweeting through the

Giro: A case study. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(1), 113-128.

Kavanagh, E., Jones, I., & Sheppard-Marks, L. (2016). Towards typologies of virtual

maltreatment: Sport, digital cultures, & dark leisure. Leisure Studies, 35, 783-796.

Kelly, W.W. (2015). Sport fans and fandoms. In R. Giulianotti (Ed.), Routledge handbook of the

sociology of sport. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kim, J., & Song, H. (2016). Celebrity's self-disclosure on Twitter and parasocial relationships: A

mediating role of social presence. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 570-577.

Knowles, M. (2007). The nature of parasocial relationships (Doctoral dissertation). ProQuest

Dissertations Publishing. (3258551).

Liebers, N., & Schramm, H. (2019). Parasocial Interactions and Relationships with Media

Characters–An Inventory of 60 Years of Research. Communication Research Trends, 38(2),

4-31.

MacPherson, E., & Kerr, G. (2019). Sport fans’ responses on social media to professional

athletes’ norm violations. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1-18.

MacPherson, E. & Kerr, G. (in press). Online public shaming of professional athletes: Gender

matters. Psychology of Sport and Exercise.

Marshall, P. (2010). The promotion and presentation of the self: celebrity as marker of

presentational media. Celebrity studies, 1(1), 35-48.

168

Marwick, A., & Boyd, D. (2011). To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on

Twitter. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media

Technologies, 17(2), 139-158.

McGannon, K., & Johnson, C. (2009). Strategies for reflective cultural sport psychology

research. In R.J. Schinke & S.J. Hanrahan (Eds.), Cultural sport psychology: From theory to

practice (pp. 57-75). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Munroe, K., Estabrooks, P., Dennis, P., & Carron, A. (1999). A phenomenological analysis of

group norms in sport teams. Sport Psychologist, 13, 171-182.

Parganas, P., Anagnostopoulos, C., & Chadwick, S. (2015). ‘You’ll never tweet alone’:

Managing sports brands through social media. Journal of Brand Management, 22(7), 551-

568.

Pegoraro, A. (2010). Look who’s talking — Athletes on Twitter: A case study. International

journal of sport communication, 3(4), 501-514.

Pinnegar, S., & Daynes, J. G. (2007). Locating narrative inquiry historically: Thematics in the

turn to narrative. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a

methodology (pp. 3-34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Prapavessis, H., & Carron, A. V. (1997). Sacrifice, cohesion, and conformity to norms in sport

teams. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(3), 231-240.

Sanderson, J. (2011). It’s a whole new ballgame: How social media is changing sports. New

York, NY: Hampton Press.

Sanderson, J. (2013). From loving the hero to despising the villain: Sports fans, Facebook, and

social identity threats. Mass Communication and Society, 16(4), 487-509.

169

Sanderson, J., & Emmons, B. (2014). Extending and withholding forgiveness to Josh Hamilton:

Exploring forgiveness within parasocial interaction. Communication & Sport, 2(1), 24-47.

Sanderson, J., & Hambrick, M. E. (2012). Covering the scandal in 140 characters: A case study

of Twitter’s role in coverage of the Penn State saga. International Journal of Sport

Communication, 5(3), 384-402.

Sanderson, J., & Kassing, J. (2011). Chapter 7: Tweets and blogs: Transformative, adversarial,

and integrative developments in sports media. In A.C. Billings (Ed.), Sports media:

Transformation, Integration, Consumption. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Sanderson, J., & Truax, C. (2014). “I hate you man!”: Exploring maladaptive parasocial

interaction expressions to college athletes via Twitter. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate

Athletics, 7, 333-351.

Schramm, H. (2008). Parasocial interactions and relationships. In W. Donsbach (Ed.),

International Encyclopedia of Communication (pp. 3501- 3506). Oxford, UK: Blackwell

Publishing.

Smith, B. (2010). Narrative inquiry: ongoing conversations and questions for sport and exercise

psychology research. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 3(1), 87-107.

Smith, B., & Sparkes, A. (2009). Narrative inquiry in sport and exercise psychology: What can it

mean, and why might we do it?. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10(1), 1-11.

Sparkes, A., & Smith, B. (2014). Qualitative research methods in sport, exercise and health:

From process to product. New York, NY: Routledge.

Sun, T. (2010). Antecedents and consequences of parasocial interaction with sport athletes and

identification with sport teams. Journal of Sport Behavior, 33(2), 194-217.

170

Sutton, W., McDonald, M., Milne, G., & Cimperman, J. (1997). Creating and fostering fan

identification in professional sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 6, 15-22.

Tal-Or, N., & Papirman, Y. (2007). The fundamental attribution error in attributing fictional

figures' characteristics to the actors. Media psychology, 9(2), 331-345.

Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative

research. Qualitative inquiry, 16(10), 837-851.

Tsao, J. (1996). Compensatory media use: An exploration of two paradigms. Communication

Studies, 47, 89–109.

Vinney, C., Dill-Shackleford, K. E., Plante, C. N., & Bartsch, A. (2019). Development and

validation of a measure of popular media fan identity and its relationship to well-

being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8(3), 1-12.

Wann, D. L. (2006). Understanding the positive social psychological benefits of sport team

identification: The team identification-social psychological health model. Group Dynamics:

Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(4), 272-296.

Wann, D. L., Hunter, J. L., Ryan, J. A., & Wright, L. A. (2001). The relationship between team

identification and willingness of sport fans to consider illegally assisting their team. Social

behavior and personality: An international journal, 29(6), 531-536.

Williams, J., & Chinn, S. J. (2010). Meeting relationship-marketing goals through social media:

A conceptual model for sport marketers. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4),

422-437.

171

CHAPTER SIX: CUMULATIVE DISCUSSION

In the following section, I will discuss the contributions studies one, two, and three

collectively make to the existing literature. Prior to highlighting these contributions, I will

broadly summarize some of the key research areas that informed the overarching purpose of this

dissertation and briefly review each of the three studies carried out to achieve the purpose. Then,

I will address the general contributions of these studies to the extant literature, as well as, more

specific theoretical, methodological, and applied contributions. Finally, I will share important

ethical considerations and limitations associated with this work and suggest directions for future

research.

Dissertation Summary

This dissertation was grounded in previous research on public shaming explored in

several academic fields, including, media studies, criminology, and law. In this area of

scholarship, public shaming refers to the process by which an individual or group expresses

contempt towards another person as a result of that person’s perceived norm violation

(Braithwaite, 1989). These practices have long been implemented as a method for regulating

behaviour and encouraging compliance with societal norms and may be legal, social, or

community-based (e.g., sport-specific) in nature (e.g., Cheung, 2014; Harris, 2009; Jacquet,

2015; Massaro, 1997; Rowbottom, 2013; Whitman, 1998). Historically, public shaming

behaviours were enacted by regulated professionals, such as, law enforcement or published

journalists in offline settings (e.g., media outlets, court systems). However, with the rise of social

media sites – and subsequent transformation of human interactions worldwide – public shaming

has resurfaced and become more widely accessible since these practices are now possible on a

daily basis for anyone who interacts online (Edosomwan et al., 2011; Rowbottom, 2013). As a

172

result, research related to public shaming on social media has re-emerged in core academic

disciplines (e.g., media studies, criminology, law) and begun to receive research attention in new

domains, such as sport sciences. This new wave of research related to public shaming in

contemporary society piqued my curiosity and helped conceptualize my research questions about

public shaming, social media, and their potential connection to the fan-athlete relationship in

sport.

It is critical for sport researchers to investigate the rise of social media and the associated

behaviours occurring online because social media platforms have made it possible for fans to

connect directly with athletes and observe their personal and social lives in a manner that is

unprecedented (Hambrick et al., 2010). In addition, research has suggested that professional

athletes are particularly vulnerable online, given their heightened celebrity status, enhanced

focus on their behaviour inside and outside of sport, and the tendency for their behaviour to be

sensationalized in the public sphere (Osborne, Sherry, & Nicholson, 2016; Smith et al., 2014;

Turner, 2010). Although public shaming of professional athletes, specifically, remains a novel

area of research in sport, we have seen an emergence of scholarship focused more generally on

negative fan-athlete interactions on social media. Broadly, this research has exhibited the

tendency for fans to send harmful comments of a sexual, physical, emotional and discriminatory

nature directly to athletes (Kavanagh et al., 2016), and suggested an increase in disputes between

athletes and fans online (Sanderson & Kassing, 2011).

Taken together, the overarching purpose of this dissertation was to explore the nature and

extent of public shaming of professional athletes on social media in response to perceived legal,

social, and sport-specific norm violations and the potential reasons that fans engage with athletes

in this manner on social media. These particular norm categorizations were chosen in accordance

173

with previous research that suggests that the two broad types of norms that guide human

behaviour are legal (i.e., formal rules enforced by law) and social norms (i.e., behavioural

expectations influenced by one’s social sphere; Hector & Opp, 2001). Given the focus of this

dissertation, I devised a third category (i.e., sport-specific norms), guided by existing sport

research, to address the community-specific social norms present in the sport context (Munroe,

Estabrooks, Dennis, & Carron, 1999; Prapavessis & Carron, 1997).

To achieve the overarching purpose, I carried out three studies: for the first study, I

examined sport fans’ social media comments directed at professional athletes involved in North

American sport leagues who were perceived to have violated a legal, social, or sport-specific

norm. The key research objectives for this study included: 1) To investigate the extent to which

sport fans engage in public shaming of professional athletes through social media following

athletes’ norm violations; and 2) To explore the content of the public shaming messages directed

at professional athletes by fans. For this study, I conducted a qualitative semantic content

analysis of 7,700 fan comments on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram in response to eleven male

and female professional athletes’ legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations. The findings

revealed that fans generally reacted to athletes’ violations in three ways, including: expressed

doubt about the athletes’ roles and responsibilities in the perceived violations and blamed

external factors for athletes’ behaviours; recognized that the athletes bore some responsibility for

the violations but deemed the violations insignificant; and, predominantly, fans’ responses

acknowledged the violations as valid and conveyed the perceived significance of the violations

through messages directed at the professional athletes that publicly shamed them. In these

messages, fans extended or withdrew support for the athletes and expressed expected or desired

174

physical, psychosocial, and career-related consequences for the them, including, death threats,

humiliation, or being forced to retire or return trophies.

For the second study, I explored the ways in which fans’ public shaming practices

directed at professional athletes on social media may be influenced by the perceived gender of

the athletes. The key research objective for this study was to investigate the implicit messages

related to gender in the comments directed at professional athletes by fans in response to the

athletes’ norm violations. This study employed methodological pluralism and included a

qualitative latent content analysis of 7,700 comments on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram in

response to nine professional athletes’ legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations. The

entire dataset used for study two was the same dataset used in study one; however, the specific

data drawn from the dataset and subsequently analyzed and presented were not the same across

both studies. The findings illustrated that fans’ shaming practices on social media contained

contentious – and sometimes hateful – views of females that reflected the wider literature on rape

culture. Specifically, fans’ shaming practices objectified females, promoted hyper-masculinity,

and insinuated victim blaming by absolving athletes of any wrongdoing, minimizing reported

details of the violation, or providing a rationale or denial for the violation. The language

incorporated by fans in these public shaming practices offer an exemplary indicator of the

gendered nature of the comments. Specifically, fans used language that served to sexualize

females, heighten hyper-masculinity, or belittle males through the use of derogatory words

commonly associated with certain minority groups (e.g., LGBTQ+, women, persons with

disabilities).

Finally, for the third study, I examined the development of fan-athlete relationships,

particularly on social media, and the potential influence of these relationships on public shaming

175

practices. The key research questions for this study included: 1) What leads fans to connect with

certain professional athletes on social media and why? and; 2) Can we learn more about the

nature of public shaming practices through a deeper understanding of the fan-athlete relationship

online? For this study, I conducted five semi-structured in-depth interviews with male and

female professional sport fans. The findings revealed that fans connect with professional athletes

on social media for a number of reasons, including, the potential to develop perceived personal

relationships with the athletes and enhance a sense of belonging and identification fostered

through fandom. Subsequently, the findings also suggested that public shaming practices on

social media in response to professional athletes’ legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations

may be rooted in fans’ perceived threats to the sense of belonging, identification, and/or personal

relationships facilitated through social media.

Collectively, these studies provide a novel contribution and serve as a foundation for

future scholarship in three broad and important ways: first, this research demonstrates that public

shaming of professional athletes by sport fans does occur on social media; second, it illustrates

the nature and the extent of these behaviours, including, possible contextual influences that may

shape these experiences (i.e., gender); and third, it offers potential precipitating factors for public

shaming practices, such as, a threat to one’s sense of identity, belonging, and/or perceived

relationships.

In addition to these foundational contributions, this dissertation supports and bolsters the

extant literature and makes novel theoretical, methodological, and applied contributions to this

area of scholarship. Each of these areas will be discussed in turn.

176

General Contributions to Extant Research

In general, this dissertation supports and enhances the existing scholarship in several

areas. First, findings from studies one and two contribute to a growing body of research related

to negative fan-athlete interactions online that have exposed fans’ public criticism of athletes’

personal character (Sanderson & Emmons, 2014); displayed fans’ attempts to humiliate, ridicule,

and deliver threats of harm to athletes (Sanderson & Emmons, 2014; Sanderson & Truax, 2014);

revealed fans’ delivery of disparaging comments of a sexual, physical, emotional and

discriminatory nature directly to athletes (Kavanagh et al., 2016); and, demonstrated fans’

propensity to enact victim blaming behaviours in response to an athlete’s engagement in sexual

assault (Ash et al., 2017). In consideration of previous research and the present dissertation, I

further suggest that these findings together support and illustrate the concept of online

disinhibition, which asserts that individuals often behave or communicate in online spaces in

ways that they would not otherwise behave in face-to-face interactions due to the potential for

anonymity online (Cheung, 2014; Joinson, 2001; Surler, 2004). Specifically, I speculate that

many of the public shaming practices exemplified through fan comments in studies one and two

(e.g., desire for psychological and physical harm, death threats, and sexist comments) are

facilitated or influenced by online disinhibition and less likely to be delivered in face-to-face

interactions. This assertion also appeared to be confirmed by the participants in study three who

supposed that public shaming practices were encouraged by the unfiltered, instantaneous, and

accessible nature of social media.

Second, this dissertation contributes to an emerging body of scholarship that utilizes

social media as a site for research (Bundon & Hurd Clarke, 2015; Delia & Armstrong, 2017;

Frederick, Pegoraro & Burch, 2017; Gonsalves, McGannon, Schinke, & Pegoraro, 2017;

177

McGannon, McMahon, & Gonsalves, 2017) and provides examples to show the ways in which

these social media platforms foster debate, discussion, and reinforcement of social and cultural

values (Antunovic, 2014; Brock, 2012; Nakayama, 2017). Specifically, the present research

provides examples of problematic views being shared on social media (e.g., sexist language,

misogyny, victim blaming) and illustrates the power of simple but explicit words or sentences in

inciting a mob mentality that subsequently reinforces these disturbing perspectives. As a result,

this research raises the issue of whether social media poses a potential threat or barrier to gender

equity and equity for other minority populations more broadly, and begs the question of why

these contentious views of women seem to flourish and be accepted in online environments.

Specifically, I wonder if these behaviours are normalized, in part, because they are unchallenged

by other online users? And, if so, would these gendered practices persist if those engaging in the

behaviours were challenged on their views by others in the online environment? These questions

are of critical importance given research by scholars such as Crilley and Gillespie (2019) and Ott

(2017), who have suggested that identity-driven behaviour online (e.g., sexism, racism,

xenophobia) has begun to filter into and influence public discourse.

Theoretical Contributions

There are two key theoretical contributions that the present dissertation makes to the

existing literature: first, the present research is grounded in and guided by the wider process of

public shaming as detailed in Braithwaite’s (1989) theory and confirms his theoretical

assumption that individuals’ public shaming practices – on social media, in this case – represent

both reintegrative and stigmatized shaming. Reintegrative shaming was exemplified through

fans’ comments that suggested acceptance of athletes’ perceived misconduct and the expression

of forward-looking or encouraging statements. In these instances, it appeared that fans perceived

178

the athletes’ behaviours to be singular events that were disconnected from the athletes’ overall

positive character. In contrast, stigmatized shaming was demonstrated through fans’ comments

that communicated their withdrawals of support and desired consequences for the athletes. In

these cases, fans’ comments seemed to generalize the perceived misconduct to the athletes’

overall personal character. Stigmatized shaming was amplified in studies one and two through

fans’ comments that implied desired ostracism of the athlete from the sport context (e.g., calls for

the athlete to be fired, return prize money, or death threats). As described by fans in study three,

public shaming practices of a stigmatized nature are perceived to be reactionary, cathartic

experiences that may be provoked by fans’ negative feelings towards the athletes following norm

violations. Interestingly, my interpretation of stigmatized shaming as the predominant type

employed in the present studies supports Massaro’s (1997) previous supposition that modern day

shaming practices would be more likely to be stigmatized in nature. These findings and

Massaro’s (1997) prior assertion lead one to question why stigmatized shaming appears to be

more common in contemporary society, and, whether the propensity to engage in stigmatized

shaming in favour of reintegrative shaming is influenced, in part, by the nature of social media.

Second, the current research makes a theoretical contribution to Horton and Wohl’s

(1956) concept of parasocial interactions by expanding upon the relationship between parasocial

interactions and identification. Previously, relationships cultivated through parasocial

interactions were understood to be a necessary condition for fan identification with a person of

high status (Brown, Basil, & Bocarnea, 2003). However, the present research suggests that

parasocial interactions and identification may be bidirectional in nature as some of our

participants described the process of identifying with a specific athlete or team through

179

experiences as a fan and then seeking out the athlete on social media to heighten parasocial

interactions and subsequently develop a perceived parasocial relationship.

Along with this novel theoretical contribution related to Horton and Wohl’s (1956)

theory, findings from the present research also support the existing literature in this field, which

suggests fans may perceive parasocial relationships with high status individuals as intimate,

genuine, and reciprocal (Horton & Wohl, 1956; Hu, 2016; Liebers & Schramm, 2019; Schramm,

2008). As indicated by the fans interviewed in study three, engagement with professional athletes

through social media makes it seem like fans are privy to increasingly personal information

about the athletes. By receiving personal information, fans are encouraged to feel that they have

“met” and/or “know” the athlete on a personal level, regardless of whether the athlete engages

directly with them. The findings indicated that social media plays a vital role in helping fans

“meet” and/or “know” athletes on a personal level by serving as a tool to grow and build these

perceived fan-athlete relationships. More specifically, the present research highlights the

relational (e.g., ability to view photographs, conversations and disclosures, shared values,

similarities in character) and structural factors (e.g., routine contact, lack of boundaries,

instantaneity of interaction) of social media that may play an important role in the development

and sustainability of parasocial relationships between fans and athletes.

Finally, the present research contributes to the existing parasocial interaction literature by

preliminarily suggesting public shaming practices may be a potential vehicle for fans’

expressions of feelings associated with the end of a parasocial relationship. In these instances,

athletes’ legal, social, or sport-specific norm violations may be considered potential precursors to

parasocial breakups. This suggested connection between norm violations and parasocial

breakups is supported by existing literature, which indicates that parasocial breakups are

180

influenced by scandal, as well as, social, trust and moral expectancy violations (Cohen, 2010;

Hu, 2016).

Methodological Contributions

From a cumulative perspective, the present dissertation makes a few key methodological

contributions to the existing literature in sport and exercise sciences. First, all three studies

highlight the importance and value of employing a paradigmatic stance to research. Throughout

my PhD studies, I read and reflected regularly, as well as, asked critical questions of myself to

determine the paradigmatic stance that most resonated for me based on my perception of the

purpose of research, nature of truth and reality, ways in which knowledge is constructed,

influence of values in meaning-making and the relationship existing between a researcher and

participants. Through this critical reflection, it was clear that I resonate most with a social

constructivist perspective, with some elements of constructionism, wherein knowledge and

reality are viewed as subjective, dynamic, values-based and context-specific (Creswell, 2013;

Daly, 2007; Sparkes & Smith, 2014). An additional and important factor that draws me to social

constructivism is that the researcher and participant collaborate to co-construct meaning of

experiences (Creswell, 2013; Daly, 2007; Sparkes & Smith, 2014). By selecting a paradigmatic

stance, I was provided with a guiding framework to inform research decisions, help negotiate

issues as they arose, enhance rigour and ensure cohesion throughout phases of design, data

collection, interpretation, and written analysis. A few examples to illustrate the influence of a

social constructivist perspective on my research include: choosing to utilize fans’ social media

comments as data for studies one and two and embracing a significant role in knowledge co-

construction and meaning-making by connecting the content written by fans (e.g., shaming

practices) to the context in which it was written (e.g., norm violations); employing a pluralistic

181

analysis for studies one and two, which demonstrated that a dataset can and should be viewed

from multiple academic perspectives; and, selecting narrative inquiry for the third study to

facilitate participants’ in-depth exploration of their life experiences as fans and provide space in

the written analysis to represent the complex individual, social, and cultural selves of the

participants. Essentially, guidance from a paradigmatic stance allowed me to select and apply

various appropriate methods for data collection, analysis and representation that I felt would

achieve the purpose of the research but hold the same foundational views of knowledge

construction and reality. Finally, as a young scholar, the ongoing exploration of different

paradigms and eventual selection of one to guide the present dissertation was critical in helping

me build a philosophical connection to my research and facilitate an understanding of the value

and need for representation of different worldviews in research. Essentially, through the process

of exploring different worldviews and subsequent critical reflection, I began to find my place and

develop my voice as a researcher in sport scholarship.

Second, the use of methodological pluralism in studies one and two makes a significant

contribution to the existing literature. Broadly, this research responds to previous calls from

scholars who recognize the value of this methodological approach and encourage its use in sport

and exercise sciences (e.g., Culver, Gilbert, & Sparkes, 2012; Giardina & Laurendeau, 2013).

Practically, the use of methodological pluralism in studies one and two affirms previous research

that suggests this approach offers researchers an opportunity to communicate their findings to a

variety of audiences, generate potential research questions related to the phenomena in other

scholarly domains, and allows researchers to utilize the dataset to the fullest (e.g., Chamberlain

et al., 2011; Clarke, Caddick, & Frost, 2016). In my experience with implementing

182

methodological pluralism, it was helpful to have a diverse and large dataset to promote idea

generation and ensure the data used in the first study were not reproduced in the second study.

Finally, the present dissertation makes a novel and important contribution to scholarship

related to negative fan-athlete interactions online by utilizing three social media sites for data

collection (i.e., Twitter, Instagram, Facebook), employing multiple methods (i.e., content

analysis, interviews), investigating several norm violations (i.e., legal, social, sport-specific) and

diversifying the sample by including a variety of professional sports (i.e., six), experience levels,

and ages, as well as, both male and female professional athletes. As a result, I was able to

develop a more diverse understanding of public shaming practices online, demonstrate that these

interactions occur in response to a variety of perceived violations and show that these

interactions are pervasive across online spaces and professional sports.

Upon reflection, if I were to implement these studies again, I would reconsider one key

aspect related to methodology and methods, and that is the procedures for data collection.

Specifically, for the content analysis, I collected all 7,700 fan comments manually by completing

a screen shot image of each comment from the social media site, one at a time. Then, I inputted

the screen shot image into a Microsoft Excel sheet. From a practical perspective, this process

was time consuming and challenging as each social media account had to remain open at all

times for the extent of collection. For instance, if I was collecting data from Genie Bouchard’s

Twitter, I would locate her post closest to when the norm violation occurred, click on the post to

populate the fan comments, and then be required to leave the post open until all comments were

collected. In some cases, this process took several days or weeks because there were thousands

of comments populated in response to a single tweet or post. If closed, however, the site would

re-populate the responses on the tweet or post and I would have to navigate through every

183

comment to locate where I paused. In future studies, it would be beneficial to explore other

existing options for collecting data from social media to ensure the process is more efficient. In

addition, the original intention for creating screen shot images instead of directly quoting each

comment via typed words was to honour the authenticity of the comments from each fan.

However, through the publication process, it became apparent that the screen shot images

presented significant formatting challenges and journal reviewers and editors requested that the

comments were replaced with typed quotes in each manuscript. As a result, the screen shot

images were not used and transcription of the screen shot images had to be completed, which

further lengthened the time required to produce the research. Finally, it should be noted that in

consideration of an international audience and potential cultural sensitivities, some journal

editors/reviewers of this work requested that the explicit language present in many of the

comments be redacted or removed for publication. The process of editing the explicit language

present in the comments may have also diminished the authenticity of the data in some ways.

Thus, if others are endeavouring to publish research involving social media content, the ways in

which they intend to collect and present the information should be an important consideration in

the research design phase.

Applied Contributions

Since public shaming on social media is a relatively new domain of research, I speculate

that these studies’ findings will contribute to building a foundation for understanding this

phenomenon and helping to develop an awareness of the implications of these behaviours. This

research demonstrates that professional athletes directly receive disparaging comments over

social media that express withdrawal of support for them and desired physical, psychosocial and

career-related consequences, as well as, malicious comments about their perceived social

184

identities or the social identities of others. As a result, there may be many applied contributions

that could emerge alongside the continued scholarly development of this body of research. First,

there should be an increased focus related to public shaming on social media by policymakers,

particularly those who develop policies for social media companies and sport organizations from

grassroots to the professional level. Specifically, the present studies may help illustrate the

necessity and importance of social media companies enhancing rules and regulations on hateful

language online, as well as, the need for clearer standards and strategies for reporting and

blocking users on social media and/or removing content. In addition, the present research

regarding the nature and extent of these experiences may help to inform sport organizations’

internal policies and procedures, including, codes of behaviour and regulations for creating and

monitoring social media accounts to protect the welfare of athletes and their support networks.

Second, the present studies may make important contributions to the educational material

developed and used to prepare and support athletes, integrated support team members (e.g.,

doctors, physiotherapists, mental performance consultants), family members, and organizations

in the modern professional sport environment. Specifically, it is important to educate these

stakeholders on the nature and extent of these behaviours, vulnerability to public shaming, the

potential implications of these experiences (e.g., psychologically, socially, physically), measures

for prevention, potential crises interventions, and the need for open communication regarding

these issues. In addition, given the integration of social media in the lives of youth, it would be

beneficial to educate them from a young age about an array of topics related to internet use such

as power relations, appropriate behaviour online, online bystander interventions, and public

shaming and its consequences. Education of this nature would be facilitated with the intention of

185

preventing the occurrence of these behaviours over time and learning to use social media for

constructive or beneficial means.

Finally, given the recent proliferation of public shaming on social media, substantial

advocacy is required to generate awareness of these behaviours online and their consequences.

First, I speculate that public shaming practices online would benefit from advocacy efforts in the

form of counter-narratives produced by bystanders in the online environment. Counter-

narratives, such as opposing opinions or positive stories about the professional athletes involved,

as well as, comments that generate awareness of shaming practices, may help intervene and/or

slow the escalation of a mob mentality as it develops. Second, although focused on the context of

professional sport, the present dissertation demonstrated that public shaming on social media has

potential negative implications for contemporary society as a whole, including, threats to the

degree to which various social identities are respected, celebrated, and meaningfully included in

our social fabric. Therefore, advocacy should emphasize developing awareness of public

shaming on social media, creating more empathic online environments, and promoting positive

behaviours, wellness, and inclusion. Given the potential societal implications of shaming,

advocacy efforts should extend beyond members of the sport community, to other areas of social

life, including, schools, government, and not-for-profit or grassroots organizations.

Ethical Considerations

Ethics are the cornerstone of every research project and help guide the behaviour of

researchers throughout the course of the study. As Tracy (2010) writes, “ethics are not just a

means, but rather constitute a universal end goal of qualitative quality itself” (p. 846). A variety

of ethics were considered and negotiated throughout this dissertation, including, procedural,

186

relational, situational and exiting ethics. Each of these ethics and the corresponding challenges

and actions will be discussed in turn.

Procedural ethics refer to the universal requirements for all research studies dictated by

the institution (Tracy, 2010). These ethical considerations were foundational for the design and

execution of the present dissertation. There were several actions required to fulfill and uphold the

standards set out by University of Toronto. Namely, I had to design and implement a

comprehensive ethics protocol for the three studies approved through the Research Ethics Board

(REB). Within these ethics protocols, I outlined the ways in which I would obtain informed

consent, ensure participants knew their participation in the interviews were voluntary, detail the

benefits and potential consequences of participation (see Appendix A for reference), explain the

measures employed to ensure privacy and confidentiality (e.g., removal of identifying

information, use of pseudonyms), and outline the process for storing information.

Considerations for informed consent, as well as, privacy and confidentiality for studies

one and two presented the most significant challenges related to procedural ethics. In particular, I

was confronted with the question of whether it is ethical to utilize online data without consent

from the online users whose comments would be included in the studies. To assist in negotiating

the way forward, I relied upon the work of Pfeil and Zaphiris (2010), as well as, Webb and

colleagues (2017), who suggest that researchers are permitted to include data from those who opt

to participate publicly in online communities (e.g., social media sites). These researchers assert

that online users must assume that content posted publicly has the capacity to reach a wide

audience (Pfeil & Zaphiris, 2010; Webb et al., 2017). Afterall, social media users are provided

with the option to restrict public access to their profiles and posted content. Regardless, Pfeil and

Zaphiris (2010) indicate that it is important to protect the confidentiality of these online users. As

187

a result, I removed all identifying information from the data used in studies one and two,

including, the users’ names, the photographs associated with the accounts, and the time, date,

and location of the posted content.

Relational ethics encourage researchers to be aware and mindful of their character,

actions, and consequences on others, as well as, strive for mutual respect and connectedness with

their participants (Tracy, 2010). Efforts to foster relational ethics were particularly evident

throughout the course of participant interviews for study three. For instance, I attempted to act in

a relationally ethical manner by setting up a physical and emotional space that was comfortable

and open. I achieved this by meeting with participants in a mutually agreed upon space, inviting

participant questions throughout the interview process, reiterating my commitment to

confidentiality, and structuring the interview in a way that developed rapport upfront. In

addition, a key element of relational ethics is ensuring that engagement with participants is

reciprocal and participants are not selected for the sole purpose of creating a “great story”

(Tracy, 2010, p.847). An example to support this approach is represented in study one, wherein I

made a conscious effort to be balanced in my approach to data selection for the written analysis.

More specifically, I could have selected data that solely illustrated the negative fan comments

(e.g., withdrawal of support, desired consequences) to be increasingly impactful and build a

more dramatic story. However, I included numerous examples of positive fan comments to

provide a more accurate representation of the dataset that existed and an increasingly solid

foundation for future research.

Situational ethics are the unanticipated, understated, but ethically important moments that

occur throughout the course of a research project (Tracy, 2010). Situational ethics prompt

researchers to critically reflect on the methods employed, the data considered valuable to

188

explore, and whether the harms of the project outweigh the moral goals of the research (Tracy,

2010). There were two critical incidences of situational ethics that arose in the course of this

research: first, in studies one and two, it was necessary to consider and weigh the importance of

reproducing negative and often hateful rhetoric directed at the professional athletes following

their perceived norm violations. This was of particular consideration for study two wherein the

disparaging comments were most often related to individuals’ social identities, most notably,

gender. As I analysed the data and prepared for the written analysis, I considered whether

exposing these comments made an important contribution to the existing literature or if it would

serve to further normalize these behaviours. Ultimately, I decided to proceed with these data for

the purpose of generating awareness of these behaviours on social media. This approach is

consistent with previous research by Jane (2014a) who asserts the ethical responsibility of

researchers to illustrate online behaviours of this nature, as these behaviours have the potential to

normalize increasingly harmful and divisive dialogue and dissolve important societal values if

they are not exposed to elicit interventions. With enhanced awareness, it is my hope that

researchers and practitioners will collaborate to develop appropriate measures of prevention and

intervention of these harmful behaviours online. Second, situational ethics often arose during the

interview process in study three. Specifically, the sharing of public shaming samples derived

from studies one and two during the interview often incited an emotional reaction from the

participants, such as anger, sadness, or surprise. For many participants, reviewing the examples

contextualized these online behaviours for the first time, as most remarked that they did not

realize the severity and breadth of some of the comments dispersed in these social media spaces.

To be situationally ethical, I provided the participants with time and space, listened, and offered

breaks when necessary.

189

Finally, exiting ethics refer to the considerations made when researchers end the research

study and disseminate the results (Tracy, 2010). Along with the considerations listed above, I

maintained open communication with participants throughout data analysis, reflected their

experiences in an authentic manner in the write-up, and shared the written report with them upon

completion. Further, I incorporated a dedicated section to ethical considerations in each of the

three manuscripts submitted for publication to recognize the ethical challenges in my studies and

encourage other researchers to do the same.

Limitations

There are a few important limitations presented in this dissertation. First, studies one and

two are limited by the lack of dyadic interaction between the participants and me. As a result, it

was difficult to ascertain the intention, motivation, or context behind the individuals’ comments

from their personal perspectives and I was unable to pose questions, seek further reflections, or

challenge their views. If the online users and I had interacted in a more dyadic manner, my

interpretation of their comments may have been altered. In addition, the data collected for studies

one and two were confined to a singular comment from each user and relied on the word count

and/or space allotted for text on each of the social media platforms. Therefore, the data were

often limited to short quotes from each user engaging in public shaming practices.

Second, study three would have benefited from increased participant numbers and

enhanced diversity in the sample. Specifically, the sample was limited to well-educated,

Caucasian individuals who were within my network. The study would have been enhanced by

additional recruitment strategies to glean a wider and more varied sample of participants (e.g.,

socioeconomic status, gender expression, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity) from outside of my

network. In addition, despite attempting to recruit individuals who had publicly shamed

190

professional athletes for study three, all participants indicated that they did not engage in these

behaviours on social media. It is possible, however, that these participants had a social

desirability bias or agreed to participate in the interview because their behaviour online was more

favourable. Further, the study is limited by the reflective nature of the interviews. In many cases,

engagement in the interviews was at least one or more years since the occurrence of norm

violations recalled by the participants or provided for review (i.e., examples from studies one and

two). Therefore, over time, participants may have developed a more positive attribution to those

specific incidents than what may have been observed or felt in the moment.

Overall, I must recognize that the study design, implementation, and analyses represented

in this dissertation are limited to one interpretation of this phenomenon. As a result, it would be

beneficial for this study to be re-framed and rooted in other research paradigms, using different

research designs and therefore, gleaning alternative analyses and providing new insights. In

addition, although each of the three studies incorporated several different sport leagues, all of the

leagues included were North American. As a result, exploring professional sports outside of

North America would provide deeper understanding of this phenomenon. Finally, these studies

were grounded in Braithwaite’s (1989) theory of shaming, which does not address acts of

shaming on social media. Thus, new perspectives may be gained from emerging concepts that

directly theorize about public shaming in the digital world.

Future Directions

There are many opportunities for future research given the novelty of this area of

scholarship. From a shaming process-related perspective, all three studies revealed that there is a

powerful mob mentality that emerges when fans publicly shame professional athletes thus

pointing to the necessity of understanding this mentality in further depth. For instance, it is of

191

interest to investigate the ways in which the mob mentality is initiated, advanced, and sustained

across instances of public shaming. In addition, it would be beneficial to explore factors that

interrupt, slow, or halt the mob from engagement in shaming practices. For example, are public

shaming practices influenced by athlete behaviour prior to or following the violation? And, does

an athlete’s performance successes influence the severity of the mob mentality? Further, to what

extent are counter-narratives (e.g., opposing opinions, positive stories) produced by online users

in response to public shaming practices and what influence(s) do these counter-narratives have

on the nature of the mob mentality? Finally, given the suggestion from the present findings that

seemingly trivial athlete behaviours may spark similar public shaming responses to sufficiently

serious allegations, it would be valuable to investigate the relationship between public shaming

practices and specific norm violations in further depth.

In light of the results of study two, it would also be fruitful to explore the timing of and

ways in which social identities are introduced, escalated and challenged throughout shaming

practices. Specifically, it is important to understand whether the mob mentality becomes more

identity-driven and disparaging over time (e.g., more gendered, racialized, faith-driven). To

support this focus, an intersectional approach should be adopted with the purpose of examining

many different social identities. In addition, to determine the wider significance of this research,

it would be beneficial to explore the ways in which identity-driven public shaming in the sport

context reflects and/or contributes to the sociopolitical climate more broadly.

From a more person-centred perspective, it would be of interest to learn about the

outcomes and consequences of public shaming experiences for all involved. For instance, what

are the perceived benefits and potential harms of participating in public shaming practices? And,

what do individuals who engage in public shaming feel and experience emotionally before,

192

during, and after public shaming behaviours? By investigating these questions, perhaps

researchers may glean a deeper understanding of the nature of the experience for potential

perpetrators, particularly motivations for engagement, and therefore, develop earlier

interventions and/or educational material for prevention. In addition, it would be beneficial to

understand the perceived cost for recipients of shaming practices. For example, what are the

psychological, social, and physical outcomes for the professional athletes who experience public

shaming at their expense, as well as, their families, fellow team members, sport personnel and

fans? With this information, we may determine possible coping and support mechanisms to help

navigate these experiences.

From a theoretical perspective, there are also several avenues for future research.

Braithwaite’s (1989) theory – the grounding framework for this dissertation – is largely focused

on public shaming practices that occur in-person in offline contexts. It would be interesting to

explore the ways in which Braithwaite’s (1989) theory evolves, changes, or could be adapted to

the modern technological environment. For example, are there similarities and differences in the

ways public shaming may be conceptualized in an online and offline world? In what ways have

public shaming practices evolved online? And, do social media influence the ways in which

norms are developed, communicated, and reinforced? Braithwaite’s (1989) theory has also been

critiqued for the lack of attention to the relations of power and contexts that influence public

shaming practices. Therefore, it is also critical for future research to explore the ways in which

these factors influence norm development and reinforcement, and subsequently, public shaming

practices.

In addition, the results of study one were interpreted through the lens of reintegrative and

stigmatized shaming practices, and it appeared both types of shaming were employed by sport

193

fans. Future research should address the relationship between fans’ online behaviour and

reintegrative and stigmatized shaming in a more deliberate manner. Specifically, do fans intend

to reintegrate or stigmatize professional athletes by publicly shaming them for norm violations?

If so, why? And, are the intentions of shaming (i.e., reintegrative and stigmatized) influenced by

specific factors (e.g., nature of norm)? Further, what are the practical outcomes of both

reintegrative and stigmatized shaming in a sport setting and are these intended outcomes

realized? If so, in what ways and how do fans know? Investigating research questions related to

reintegrative and stigmatized shaming may assist in understanding why individuals engage in

these behaviours in the first place.

Additional research dedicated to parasocial relationships may also make significant

theoretical contributions to our understanding of public shaming on social media. From my

perspective, the key research question from which to launch others is: In what ways do

parasocial relationships influence public shaming? For instance, do fan-athlete parasocial

relationships influence the magnitude of public shaming practices? Are professional athletes with

an increasingly active online presence and vast number of followers shamed more intensely

when they violate norms? And, do fans who perceive to possess parasocial relationships with

athletes dissolve these relationships when athletes engage in norm violations? If so, what feelings

and emotions are associated with these experiences and how are they expressed?

Finally, there are several opportunities for methodological contributions in future

research. In particular, it is important for future work to employ other methods and

methodologies to explore public shaming of professional athletes. Varied methods will allow us

to learn more about the scope and breadth of these experiences, including, demographic

information, frequency of occurrence, reasons for engagement, desired outcomes, and mitigating

194

or protective factors, among others. It would also be interesting to analyze other forms of data

available on social media and employed during public shaming practices, such as, photographs,

videos, memes, and gifs. Further, it is important to investigate public shaming practices across a

more diverse sample, including but not limited to, other sport groups (e.g., elite amateur athletes,

junior professional athletes), nationalities, social identities, professional sports, sport leagues

outside of North America (e.g., European leagues), and different social media networks. By

exploring a more diverse sample, scholarship will achieve greater representation and a deeper

understanding of the ways in which various factors influence the nature and extent of public

shaming practices.

195

CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION

Research studies spanning many academic disciplines clearly demonstrate that negative

interactions on social media are becoming a critical issue with potentially dangerous personal

and societal consequences (e.g., Blackford, 2016; Jane, 2014a, 2014b; Kavanagh et al., 2016).

With the rise of social media and fan-athlete interactions, professional athletes have been

identified as particularly vulnerable to personal attacks online, given the intense public scrutiny

faced by athletes in relation to their personal and professional behaviour (Billings, Coombs, &

Brown, 2018; Boyle & Haynes, 2018; Coombs & Holladay, 2012; Kitchin, Paramio-Salcines, &

Walters, 2019). Personal attacks directed at athletes related to their personal or professional

behaviour is consistent with research emerging in other domains related to increased efforts to

publicly shame others for perceived wrongdoing via social media platforms (e.g., Cheung, 2014;

Goldman, 2015; Kitchin, Paramio-Salcines, & Walters, 2019; Rowbottom, 2013). However,

existing sport research has focused more generally on negative fan-athlete interactions on social

media (commonly centred on the Twitter platform), with a select few athletes examined (i.e.,

case studies), at times lacking theoretical grounding, and to-date minimal regard for the

perspectives of fans who engage or witness these interactions online. Given the prominence of

social media in the sport world, the scrutiny faced by professional athletes, as well as, the rise of

public shaming practices in other domains and the detrimental consequences of these behaviours,

it was necessary to understand the presence of these practices in sport. Therefore, the

overarching purpose of this study was to explore the nature and extent of public shaming of

professional athletes on social media in response to perceived legal, social, and sport-specific

norm violations and the potential reasons fans engage in these practices.

196

To address the overarching purpose, I employed a social constructivist philosophical

approach to highlight the dynamic, subjective, and co-created nature of knowledge and reality

(studies one and three), with elements of social constructionism to recognize the broader social

and cultural influence on making meaning of experience (study two). Consistent with the

adopted philosophical approaches, the methods I employed were two-fold: for studies one and

two, a qualitative content analysis of 7,700 fan comments on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

directed at eleven male and female professional athletes from six different sports was conducted.

To analyse these data, I implemented methodological pluralism by engaging in a semantic and

subsequent latent thematic content analyses. For study three, guided by a narrative methodology,

I conducted five semi-structured in-depth interviews with sport fans who engaged regularly with

professional athletes and teams on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. Ethical considerations

were made across all three studies and included an emphasis on negotiating issues of informed

consent (particularly in a public online environment), confidentiality, and the reproduction and

representation of contentious, discriminatory and sometimes hateful interactions.

Collectively, the findings were interpreted to suggest the presence of public shaming on

social media in response to athletes’ legal, social, and sport-specific norm violations.

Specifically, fans’ public shaming behaviours were evident with each athlete violation I

examined, regardless of sport, experience level, or type of norm violation and occurred across all

platforms (Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram). Acts of shaming were explicitly illustrated by

fans’ withdrawals of support and descriptions of desired physical, psychosocial and career-

related consequences for the athletes. In addition, there were contentious undercurrents of gender

discrimination and sexism observed across fans’ public shaming, which were exemplified

through fans’ objectification of females, promotion of hyper-masculinity, and victim blaming.

197

Fans who participated in the present dissertation proposed that public shaming acts occur in

response to the threats that norm violations pose to fans’ sense of identification and belonging

that have been cultivated through fandom and enhanced through the perceived relationships with

athletes via social media. Specifically, fans suggested public shaming might be provoked when

fan-athlete relationships are challenged or confronted by legal, social, or sport-specific norm

violations.

This dissertation contributes to the extant literature on public shaming and social media

in other domains, as it provides an in-depth view of the nature and extent of these behaviours,

confirms the occurrence of these practices across a wide range of potential violations, highlights

the influence of gender on these practices and empirically connects public shaming literature to

parasocial relationship theory. In relation to sport studies, this dissertation contributes to existing

research on negative fan-athlete interactions by grounding fan behaviour of this nature in a

theoretical framework (i.e., Brathwaite’s 1989 Theory of Shame and Reintegration) and

demonstrates the occurrence of public shaming practices across a diverse sample that included

various professional sports, three different categories of norm violations, multiple social media

platforms, as well as, male and female athletes. This research also addresses a significant gap in

the existing research about fans’ perspectives of social media use in the professional sport

context, as much of the extant literature has been dedicated to the experiences of athletes,

organizations, or teams. By obtaining fans’ perspectives, I was able to outline the relational (e.g.,

ability to view photographs, conversations and disclosures, shared values, similarities in

character) and structural factors (e.g., routine contact, lack of boundaries, instantaneity of

interaction) of social media that may play an important role in the development and sustainability

of fan-athlete relationships, which potentially provoke public shaming practices when norm

198

violations occur. In addition, although existing research has highlighted the many benefits of fan-

athlete interactions on social media, the present research clearly indicates the potential harms that

may result from this enhanced and unfiltered relationship. Further, the current fan literature tends

to focus on fan behaviours that typically occur in-person and has yet to sufficiently address the

potentially harmful online behaviour of highly identified fans. Therefore, the present dissertation

extends fan behaviour in offline contexts to the online realm.

In conclusion, this dissertation has broadly underscored the growing need for more

research on public shaming practices in response to norm violations in order to develop a deeper

understanding of the scope, motivations, goals, outcomes, and implications of these experiences.

With that knowledge, researchers and practitioners will be able to develop appropriate measures

of prevention, regulation, and intervention of these online practices. On a personal level,

conducting this research has opened my eyes to the ways in which we relate and interact with

public figures and each other, exposed me to diverse and often contentious perspectives

regarding important societal values, and strengthened my resolve to stand up and advocate for

more safe, inclusive and equitable environments online and offline in the modern sport world

and beyond.

199

References

Addley, E. (2015, July 1). Heather Watson defiantly slams ‘cowardly’ social media abuse. The

Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jul/01/heather-watson-

defiantly-slams-cowardly-social-media-abuse.

Aldoory, L. & Toth, E. (2002). Gender discrepancies in a gendered profession: A developing

theory for public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(2), 103-126.

Allison, P. D. (1992). The cultural evolution of beneficent norms. Social Forces, 71, 279- 301.

Alperstein, N. (2019). Celebrity and mediated social connections: Fans, friends and followers in

the digital age. Baltimore, MD: Palgrave Macmillan.

Antunovic, D. (2014). “A female in a man’s world”: New-media discourse around the first

female NFL referee. Journal of Sports Media, 9, 45–71.

Armour, K., & Chen, H.-h. (2012). Narrative research methods: Where the art of storytelling

meets the science of research. In K. Armour, & D. MacDonald (Eds.), Research methods in

physical education and youth sport (pp. 237-250). New York, NY: Routledge.

Armour, K., & Macdonald, D. (Eds.). (2012). Research methods in physical education and youth

sport. New York, NY: Routledge.

Arrow, H., & Burns, K.L. (2004). Self-organizing culture: How norms emerge in small groups.

In M. Schaller & C.S. Crandall (Eds.), The psychological foundations of culture. Mahwah,

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ash, E., Sanderson, J., Kumanyika, C., & Gramlich, K. (2017). "Just goes to show how these

hoes try to tear men down": Investigating Twitter and cultural conversations on athletic

ability, race, and sexual assault. Journal of Sports Media, 12(1), 65-87.

10.1353/jsm.2017.0003.

200

Associated Press. (2015, November 5). Patrick Kane won’t face charges after rape investigation.

CBC Sports. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/patrick-kane-no-charges-

1.3305339.

Associated Press. (2016, February 15). Evander Kane misses Sabres practice after NBA all-star

trip. CBC Sports. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/evander-kane-

scratched-from-sabres-game-1.3449010.

Badenhausen, K. (2014, June 11). Cristiano Ronaldo leads the biggest athletes on social media.

Forbes Business. Retrieved from

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2014/06/11/cristiano-ronaldo-leads-the-

biggest-athletes-on-social-media/#221117e25dfb

Baek, Y., Bae, Y., & Jang, H. (2013). Social and parasocial relationships on social network sites

and their differential relationships with users' psychological well-being. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(7), 512-517.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal

attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.

Baxter, K. (2016, June 8). Hope Solo loses bid to have domestic violence case thrown out. Los

Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-sn-hope-solo-domestic-

violence-20160608-snap-story.html.

Bell, V. (1999). Performativity and belonging: An introduction. Theory, Culture & Society,

16(2), 1-10.

Bennett, W. L. (2003). New media power: The Internet and global activism. In N. Couldry & J.

Curran (Eds.), Contesting media power: Alternative media in a networked world (pp.17–38).

Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.

201

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. Garden City, NY:

Doubleday.

Billingham, P., & Parr, T. (2020). Enforcing social norms: The morality of public shaming.

European Journal of Philosophy, 1-20.

Billings, A., Coombs, W., & Brown, K. (2018). Reputational challenges in sport: Theory and

application. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Blackford, R. (2016, May 3). The shame of public shaming. Retrieved from

https://theconversation.com/the-shame-of-public-shaming-57584

Bochner, A. P. (2001). Narrative’s virtues. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(2), 131-157.

Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H.

(2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization.

Nature, 489(7415), 295-298.

Bonesteel, M. (2016, December 2). Prosecutors agree to drop domestic violence charges against

Johnny Manziel. The Washington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2016/12/02/prosecutors-agree-to-drop-

domestic-violence-charges-against-johnny-manziel/?utm_term=.8f07474ee7f4.

Boren, C. (2014, September 13). Adrian Peterson released on bond in child abuse case but NFL’s

problems continue. The Washington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2014/09/13/adrian-peterson-released-

on-bond-in-child-abuse-case-but-nfls-problems-continue/?utm_term=.1bbda44f5019.

Boudana, S. (2014). Shaming rituals in the age of global media: How DSK’s perp walk

generated estrangement. European Journal of Communication, 29(1), 50-67.

202

Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship.

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230. 10.1111/j.1083-

6101.2007.00393.x

Boyle, R., & Haynes, R. (2009). Power play: Sport the media and popular culture (2nd ed.).

Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.

Boyle, R. & Haynes, R. (2018). Sport, the media and strategic communications management. In

D. Hassan (Ed.), Managing sport business: An introduction (2

ed.; pp. 478-501). Abingdon,

UK: Routledge.

Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511804618

Braithwaite, J. (1993). Shame and modernity. British Journal of Criminology, 33(1), 1-18.

Branscombe, N. R., Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1999). The context and content of

social identity threat. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje, (Eds.), Social identity (pp.35-

58). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1991). The positive social and self-concept consequences of

sports team identification. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 15(2), 115-127.

Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1992). Role of identification with a group, arousal,

categorization processes, and self-esteem in sports spectator aggression. Human Relations,

45(10), 1013-1033.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in

Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research

in Sport, Exercise, and Health, 11(4), 589-597.

203

Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Weate, P. (2016). Using thematic analysis in sport and exercise

research (pp. 191-205). London, UK: Routledge.

Briggs, C. L. (2002). Interviewing, power/knowledge, and social inequality. In J. F. Gubrium &

J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 911-922).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brock, A. (2012). From the blackhand side: Twitter as a cultural conversation. Journal of

Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 529–549.

Brown, W. J., Basil, M. D., & Bocarnea, M. C. (2003). Social influence of an international

celebrity: Responses to the death of Princess Diana. Journal of Communication, 53(4), 587-

605.

Browning, B., & Sanderson, J. (2012). The positives and negatives of Twitter: Exploring how

student-athletes use Twitter and respond to critical tweets. International Journal of Sport

Communication, 5(4), 503-521.

Bundon, A. (2016). The Web and digital qualitative methods. In B. Smith & A. Sparkes (Eds.)

Routledge Handbook of Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise (pp.355-367). London,

UK: Routledge.

Bundon, A., & Hurd Clarke, L. (2015). Honey or vinegar? Athletes with disabilities discuss

strategies for advocacy within the Paralympic movement. Journal of Sport and Social

Issues, 39(5), 351-370. 10.1177/0193723514557823.

Burke, S. (2016). Rethinking ‘validity’ and ‘trustworthiness’ in qualitative inquiry: How might

we judge the quality of qualitative research in sport and exercise sciences? In B. Smith &

A. C. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise

(pp. 330–339). London, UK: Routledge.

204

Busanich, R., & McGannon, K. (2010). Deconstructing disordered eating: a feminist

psychological approach to athletes’ body experiences. Quest, 62, 385-405.

Busanich, R., McGannon, K., & Schinke, R. (2012). Expanding understandings of body, food

and exercise relationship in distance runners: A narrative approach. Psychology of Sport and

Exercise, 12, 582-590.

Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. London, UK: Routledge.

Canadian Press. (2016, April 23). PED Chris Colabello tested positive for used mostly for

recovery. CBC Sports. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/baseball/mlb/ped-chris-

colabello-positive-used-recovery-1.3550023.

Cashmore, E. (2006). Celebrity culture. New York, NY: Routledge.

Cassidy, J. (2006, May 15). Me media: How hanging out on the Internet became big business.

The New Yorker, 82(13), 50.

Caudwell, J., 2017. Everyday sexisms: Exploring the scales of misogyny in sport. In D.

Kilvington & J. Price (Eds.), Sport and Discrimination (pp.61-76). London, UK: Routledge.

CBC Sports. (2013, July 23). Blue Jays’ J.P. Arencibia quits Twitter. The Associated Press.

Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/baseball/mlb/blue-jays-j-p-arencibia-quits-twitter-

1.1357538.

Centola, D. (2011). An experimental study of homophily in the adoption of health behaviour.

Science, 334, 1269-1272.

Cerulo, K., & Ruane, J. (2014). Apologies of the rich and famous: Cultural, cognitive, and social

explanations of why we care and why we forgive. Social Psychology Quarterly, 77(2), 123-

149.

205

Chamberlain, K., Cain, T., Sheridan, J., & Dupuis, A. (2011). Pluralisms in qualitative research:

From multiple methods to integrated methods. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8(2),

151-169.

Chase, S. E. (2005). Narrative inquiry: Multiple lenses, approaches, voices. In N. Denzin & Y.

Lincoln (Eds.), Sage handbook of qualitative research (3

ed., pp. 651-679). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Chase, S. E. (2011). Narrative inquiry: Still a field in the making. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln

(Eds.), Safe handbook of qualitative research (4

ed., pp.421-434). Los Angeles, CA: Sage

Publications, Inc.

Cheung, A. S. (2014). Revisiting privacy and dignity: Online shaming in the global e-village.

Laws, 3(2), 301-326. 10.3390/laws3020301

Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A

theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behaviour. Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 201-234.

Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct:

Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 58, 1015-1026.

Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influences: Social norms, conformity, and

compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of social

psychology (4

ed., pp.151-192). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Cisneros, J. D., & Nakayama, T. K. (2015). New media, old racisms: Twitter, Miss America, and

cultural logics of race. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 8(2), 108-

127.

206

Clandinin, D. J., & Rosiek, J. (2006). Mapping a landscape of narrative inquiry: Borderland

spaces and tensions. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a

methodology (pp. 35-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2018). Using thematic analysis in counselling and psychotherapy

research: A critical reflection. Social Inequalities and Psychological Care, 18(2), 107-110.

Clarke, N. J., Caddick, N., & Frost, N. (2016). Pluralistic data analysis: Theory and practice.

In B. Smith & A. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and

exercise (pp. 390-403). London, UK: Routledge.

Clavio, G. (2008). Uses and gratifications of Internet collegiate sport message board users.

Dissertation Abstracts International, 69(08).

Clavio, G., & Kian, T. M. (2010). Uses and gratifications of a retired female athlete’s Twitter

followers. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 485-500.

Cohen, E. L. (2010). Expectancy violations in relationships with friends and media

figures. Communication Research Reports, 27(2), 97-111.

Cohen, J. (2003). Parasocial breakups: Measuring individual differences in responses to the

dissolution of parasocial relationships. Mass Communication & Society, 6(2), 191-202.

Cole, K. (2015). ‘It’s like she’s eager to be verbally abused’: Twitter, trolls, and (en)gendering

disciplinary rhetoric. Feminist Media Studies, 15(2), 356-358.

Cole, T., & Leets, L. (1999). Attachment styles and intimate television viewing: Insecurely

forming relationships in a parasocial way. Journal of Social and Personal

Relationships, 16(4), 495-511.

Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

207

Connell, R. & Messerschmidt, J. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the

concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829-859.

Constine, J. (2017, June 27). Facebook now has 2 billion monthly users... and a responsibility.

Tech Crunch. Retrieved from https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/27/facebook-2-billion-users/.

Cooky, C., Messner, M., & Hextrum, R. (2013). Women play sport but not on TV: A

longitudinal study of televised news media. Communication & Sport, 1-28.

Coombs, W. & Holladay, J. (2012). The paracrisis: The challenges created by publicly managing

crisis prevention. Public Relations Review, 38(3), 408-415.

Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2013). Conceptualizing mediatization: Contexts, traditions,

arguments. Communication Theory, 23(3), 191-202. 10.1111/comt.12019

Coyle, A. (2010). Qualitative research and anomalous experience: A call for interpretative

pluralism. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 7(1), 79-83.

Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches

ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Crilley, R., & Gillespie, M. (2019). What to do about social media? Politics, populism and

journalism. Journalism, 20(1), 173-176.

Crooks, C. V., & Wolfe, D. A. (2007). Child abuse and neglect. Assessment of Childhood

Disorders, 4, 639-684.

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research

process. London, UK: Sage Publications, Inc.

Cruz, M. G., Henningsen, D. D., & Williams, M. L. M. (2000). The presence of norms in the

absence of groups? The impact of normative influence under hidden-profile conditions.

Human Communication Research, 26, 104-124.

208

Culver, D., Gilbert, W., & Sparkes, A. (2012). Qualitative research in sport psychology journals:

The next decade 2000-2009 and beyond. The Sport Psychologist, 26(2), 261-281.

Custers, K., & McNallie, J. (2017). The relationship between television sports exposure and rape

myth acceptance: the mediating role of sexism and sexual objectification of women. Violence

Against Women, 23(7), 813-829.

Daly, K. (2007). Qualitative methods for family studies and human development. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Delia, E., & Armstrong, C. (2017). Sponsorship goes social: Analyzing Twitter users’ discussion

of French Open sponsors. In A. Bundon (Ed.), Digital qualitative research in sport and

physical activity (pp.141-154). London, UK: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315304557-10

De Backer, C. (2012). Blinded by the starlight: An evolutionary framework for studying

celebrity culture and fandom. Review of General Psychology, 16(2), 144-151.

De Meo, P., Ferrara, E., Fiumara, G., & Provetti, A. (2014). On Facebook, most ties are weak.

Communications of the ACM, 57(11), 78-84.

De Vries, A. (2015). The use of social media for shaming strangers: Young people's views.

System Sciences (HICSS), 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference, IEEE Computer

Society, 2053-2062. 10.1109/HICSS.2015.245

Dees, W., Bennett, G., & Villegas, J. (2008). Measuring the effectiveness of sponsorship of an

elite intercollegiate football program. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 17(2), 79-89.

Demirhan, K. & Çakir-Demirhan, D. (2015). Gender and politics: Patriarchal discourse on social

media. Public Relations Review, 41(2), 308-310.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2

ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

209

Derrick, J. L., Gabriel, S., & Tippin, B. (2008). Parasocial relationships and self‐discrepancies:

Faux relationships have benefits for low self‐esteem individuals. Personal

Relationships, 15(2), 261-280.

Detel, H. (2013). Chapter 5: Disclosure and public shaming in the age of new visibility. In J.

Petley (Ed.), Media and public shaming: Drawing the boundaries of disclosure (pp.77-96),

New York, NY: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.

Dibble, J. L., Hartmann, T., & Rosaen, S. F. (2016). Parasocial interaction and parasocial

relationship: Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of measures. Human

Communication Research, 42(1), 21-44.

Donath, J., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71-

82.

Doob, C. (2013). Social inequality and social stratification in US society. New York, NY:

Pearson Education, Inc.

Driessens, O. (2013). The celebritization of society and culture: Understanding the structural

dynamics of celebrity culture. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 16(6), 641-657.

Dyer, R., Green, R., Pitts, M., & Millward, G. (1995). What’s the flaming problem? CMC—

Deindividuating or disinhibiting? In M. A. R. Kirby, A. J. Dix, & J. E. Finlay (Eds.), People

and computers x (pp. 289-302). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Edosomwan, S., Prakasan, S. K., Kouame, D., Watson, J., & Seymour, T. (2011). The history of

social media and its impact on business. Journal of Applied Management and

Entrepreneurship, 16(3), 79-91.

Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., & Steinfield, C. (2009). Social network sites and society: Current

trends and future possibilities. Interactions, 16(1), 6-9. 10.1145/1456202.1456204

210

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social

capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐

Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.

End, C. M., Dietz‐Uhler, B., Harrick, E. A., & Jacquemotte, L. (2002). Identifying with winners:

A reexamination of sport fans’ tendency to birg1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,

32(5), 1017-1030.

Ennis, C. & Chen, S. (2012). Chapter 16: Interviews and focus groups. In K. Armour & D.

Macdonald (Eds.), Research methods in physical education and youth sport (pp. 217-236).

New York, NY: Routledge.

ESPN. (2016, March 31). D’Angelo Russell apologizes for Nick Young video fiasco. ESPN.

Retrieved from http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/15100584/dangelo-russell-los-angeles-

lakers-apologizes-recording-nick-young-conversation.

Eyal, K., & Cohen, J. (2006). When good friends say goodbye: A parasocial breakup

study. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(3), 502-523.

Facebook (2015, November 4). Facebook reports third quarter 2015 results. Retrieved from

http://investor.fb.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=940609

Fadnis, D. (2018). Uncovering rape culture: Patriarchal values guide Indian media’s rape- related

reporting. Journalism Studies, 19(12), 1750-1766.

Ferrara, E. (2015). Manipulation and abuse on social media. Computer science social and

information networks position paper [Online]. http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.03752

Ferrara, E., Jafariasbagh, M., Varol, O., Qazvinian, V., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2013).

Clustering memes in social media. In 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on

Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, 548-555.

211

Filo, K., Lock, D., & Karg, A. (2014). Sport and social media research: A review. Sport

Management Review, 18(2), 166-181.

Fishbein, M., & Azjen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behaviour: An introduction to

theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Flood, M., & Dyson, S. (2007). Sport, athletes, and violence against women. Australian

Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University, republished in NTV

Journal, 4(3), 37-46.

Franiuk, R., Seefelt, J. L., Cepress, S. L., & Vandello, J. A. (2008). Prevalence and effects of

rape myths in print journalism: The Kobe Bryant case. Violence Against Women, 14(3), 287-

309.

Frankel, M. S., & Siang, S. (1999). Ethical and legal issues of human subjects research on the

internet - Report of an AAAS workshop. Washington, DC: American Association for the

Advancement of Science.

Frederick, E., Lim, C., Clavio, G., Pedersen, P., & Burch, L. (2014). Choosing between the one-

way or two-way street: An exploration of relationship promotion by professional athletes on

Twitter. Communication & Sport, 2(1), 80-99.

Frederick, E. L., Lim, C. H., Clavio, G., & Walsh, P. (2012). Why we follow: An examination of

parasocial interaction and fan motivations for following athlete archetypes on

Twitter. International Journal of Sport Communication, 5(4), 481-502.

Frederick, E., Pegoraro, A., & Burch, L. M. (2017). Legends worthy of lament: An analysis of

self-presentation and user framing on the Legends Football League's Facebook page. Journal

of Sports Media, 12(1), 169-190. 10.1353/jsm.2017.0007

212

Frederick, E., Stocz, M., & Pegoraro, A. (2016). Prayers, punishment, and perception: An

analysis of the response to the Tony Stewart – Kevin Ward Jr. incident on Facebook. Sport in

Society, 19(10), 1460-1477.

Friedman, L. M. (1993). Crime and punishment in American history. New York, NY: Basic

Books.

Frost, N. & Nolas, S-M. (2011). Exploring and expanding on pluralism in qualitative research in

psychology, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8(2), 115-119.

Funk, D. C., & James, J. (2001). The psychological continuum model: A conceptual framework

for understanding an individual's psychological connection to sport. Sport Management

Review, 4(2), 119-150.

Gantz, W., & Wenner, L. A. (1995). Fanship and the television sport viewing experience.

Sociology of Sport Journal, 12(1), 56-74.

Gemmill, E., & Peterson, M. (2006). Technology use among college students: Implications for

student affairs professionals. NASPA Journal, 43(2), 280-300.

Gergen, M. (2001). Feminist reconstructions in psychology: Narrative, gender and performance.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Giardina, M., & Laurendeau, J. (2013). Evidence, knowledge, and research practice. Sociology of

Sport Journal, 30(3), 237-407.

Gibson, H., Willming, C., & Holdnak, A. (2002). "We're gators... not just gator fans": Serious

leisure and university of Florida football. Journal of Leisure Research, 34(4), 397-425.

Gilbert, D.T. (1995). Attribution and interpersonal perception. In A. Tesser (Ed.), Advanced

social psychology (pp. 99-147). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

213

Gilbert, E., & Karahalios, K. (2009). Predicting tie strength with social media. In 27

SIGCHI

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 211-220.

Giles, D. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future

research. Media Psychology, 4(3), 279-305.

Gillette, F. (2011, June 22). The rise and inglorious fall of MySpace. Bloomberg Business.

Retrieved from

http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/magazine/content/11_27/b4235053917570.htm#p

Girard, D. (2013, February 20). Rebecca Marino quits tennis following cyberbullying incidents.

Toronto Star Sports. Retrieved from

http://www.thestar.com/sports/tennis/2013/02/20/rebecca_marino_quits_tennis_following_cy

berbullying_incidents.html

Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers. White Plains, NY:

Longman.

Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. New York, NY: Anchor.

Goldman, L. M. (2015). Trending now: The use of social media websites in public shaming

punishments. American Criminal Law Review, 52, 415-451.

Gonsalves, C. A., McGannon, K. R., Schinke, R. J., & Pegoraro, A. (2017). Mass media

narratives of women’s cardiovascular disease: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Health

Psychology Review, 11(2), 164-178. 10.1080/17437199.2017.1281750

Goss, N. (2012, April 26). NHL Playoffs 2012: Boston Bruins fans unleash racial slurs in

response to loss. Bleacher Report. Retrieved from

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1161561-nhl-playoffs-2012-bruins-fans-unleash-racial-

slurs-in-response-to-loss.

214

Greenwood, D., & Long, C. (2011). Attachment, belongingness needs, and relationship status

predict imagined intimacy with media figures. Communication Research, 38(2), 278-297.

Greenwood, D., & Long, C. (2009). Psychological predictors of media involvement: Solitude

experiences and the need to belong. Communication Research, 36(5), 637-654.

Grindstaff, L., & West, E. (2011). Hegemonic masculinity on the sidelines of sport. Sociology

Compass, 5(10), 859-881.

Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (2002). From the individual interview to the interview society.

In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and

method (pp. 3-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gwinner, K., & Swanson, S. R. (2003). A model of fan identification: Antecedents and

sponsorship outcomes. Journal of Services Marketing, 17(3), 275-294.

10.1108/08876040310474828

Haden, S. C., & Hojjat, M. (2006). Aggressive responses to betrayal: Type of relationship,

victim’s sex, and nature of aggression. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(1),

101-116.

Hall, K. L., Wiecek, W. M., & Finkelman, P. (1996). American legal history: Cases and

materials. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hambrick, M. E. (2012). Six degrees of information: Using social network analysis to explore

the spread of information within sport social networks. International Journal of Sport

Communication, 5(1), 16-34. 10.1123/ijsc.5.1.16

Hambrick, M., Frederick, E., & Sanderson J. (2013). From yellow to blue: Exploring Lance

Armstrong’s image repair strategies across traditional and social media. Communication &

Sport, 3(2), 196-218.

215

Hambrick, M. E., & Mahoney, T. Q. (2011). 'It's incredible–trust me': Exploring the role of

celebrity athletes as marketers in online social networks. International Journal of Sport

Management and Marketing, 10(3-4), 161-179.

Hambrick, M. E., Simmons, J. M., Greenhalgh, G. P., & Greenwell, T. C. (2010). Understanding

professional athletes’ use of Twitter: A content analysis of athlete tweets. International

Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 454-471. 10.1123/ijsc.3.4.454

Hanewald, R. (2009). Cyberbullying research: The current state. Journal of the Australian

Council for Computers in Education, 24(1), 10-15.

Hardin, M., & Shain, S. (2006). ‘Feeling much smaller than you know you are’: The

fragmented professional identity of female sports journalists. Critical Studies in Media

Communication, 23(4), 322–338.

Harris, A. (2009). The role of power in shaming interactions: How social control is performed in

a juvenile court. Contemporary Justice Review, 12(4), 379-399.

10.1080/10282580903342854

Hartmann, T., & Goldhoorn, C. (2011). Horton and Wohl revisited: Exploring viewers'

experience of parasocial interaction. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1104-1121.

Hastie, P., & Hay, P. (2012). Chapter seven: Qualitative approaches. In K. Armour & D.

Macdonald (Eds.), Research methods in physical education and youth sport (pp.79-95). New

York, NY: Routledge.

Hatch, M., & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for

brand governance. Journal of Brand Management, 17, 590-604.

Hay, C. (2001). An exploratory test of Braithwaite's reintegrative shaming theory. Journal of

Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38(2), 132-153. 10.1177/0022427801038002002

216

Hechter, M. (1984). When actors comply: Monitoring costs and the production of social order.

Acta Sociologica, 27(3), 161-183.

Hechter, M., & Opp, K-D. (2001). Social norms. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Henry, N., & Powell, A. (2018). Technology-facilitated sexual violence: A literature review of

empirical research. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 19(2), 195–208.

Herman, D. (1984). The rape culture. In J. Freeman (Ed.), Women: A feminist

perspective. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.

Herring, S. C. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural

perspectives. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Hess, K., & Waller, L. (2014). The digital pillory: Media shaming of ‘ordinary' people for minor

crimes. Continuum, 28(1), 101-111.

Hirsch, A. J. (1982). From pillory to penitentiary: The rise of criminal incarceration in early

Massachusetts. Michigan Law Review, 80(6), 1179-1269.

Hirsch, A. J. (1992). The rise of the penitentiary: Prisons and punishment in early America. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Hoffner, C. (2008). Parasocial and online social relationships. In S. Calvert & B. Wilson (Eds.),

The handbook of children, media and development. Chichester, UK: Blackwell Publishing

Ltd.

Holloway, I. (1997). Basic concepts for qualitative research. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Homans, G.C. (1961). Social behaviour: Its elementary forms. Oxford, UK: Harcourt.

Horne, C. (2001). Sociological perspectives on the emergence of social norms. In M. Hechter &

K-D Opp (Eds.), Social norms (pp. 3-35). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

217

Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction. Psychiatry,

19, 215–229.

Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.

Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. 10.1177/1049732305276687

Hu, M. (2016). The influence of a scandal on parasocial relationship, parasocial interaction, and

parasocial breakup. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(3), 217-231.

Huber, J., & Whelan, K. (1999). A marginal story as a place of possibility: Negotiating self on

the professional knowledge landscape. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(4), 381-396.

Hughes, A.L., & Palen, L. (2009). Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency

events. International Journal of Emergency Management, 6(3), 248-260.

Hunt, K., Bristol, T., & Bashaw, R. (1999). A conceptual approach to classifying sports

fans. Journal of Services Marketing, 13(6), 439-452.

Hur, Y., Ko, Y. J., & Valacich, J. (2007). Motivation and concerns for online sport consumption.

Journal of Sport Management, 21(4), 521-539.

Hutchins, B. (2011). The acceleration of media sport culture: Twitter, telepresence and online

messaging. Information, Communication & Society, 14(2), 237-257.

Iannone, N. E., McCarty, M. K., Branch, S. E., & Kelly, J. R. (2018). Connecting in the

Twitterverse: Using Twitter to satisfy unmet belonging needs. The Journal of Social

Psychology, 158(4), 491-495.

Instagram. (2015, September 22). Celebrating a community of 400 million. Retrieved from

http://blog.instagram.com/post/129662501137/150922-400million

Jacquet, J. (2015). Is shame necessary? New uses for an old tool. New York, NY: Pantheon.

218

Jane, E. (2014a). ‘Your a ugly, whorish, slut’: Understanding e-bile. Feminist Media Studies,

14(4), 531-546.

Jane, E. (2014b). ‘Back to the kitchen, cunt’: Speaking the unspeakable about online misogyny.

Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 28(4), 558-570.

Johnson, A. (2014). The gender knot: Unraveling our patriarchal legacy (3

ed.). Philadelphia,

PA: Temple University Press.

Joinson, A. (1998). Causes and implications of disinhibited behaviour on the Internet. In J.

Gackenbach (Ed.), Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and

transpersonal implications (pp. 43-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-

awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), 177-192.

10.1002/ejsp.36

Joinson, A. N. (2003). Understanding the psychology of Internet behavior: Virtual worlds, real

lives. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Joinson, A. N. (2007). Disinhibition and the internet. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.), Psychology and the

Internet: Intrapersonal, interpersonal and transpersonal implications (2nd ed., pp. 76–92).

San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press. 10.1016/B978-012369425-6/50023-0

Jones, S., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. (2014). Negotiating the complexities of qualitative research

in higher education fundamental elements and issues (2

ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Jovchelovitch, S., & Bauer, M. W. (2000). Narrative interviewing. In M. W. Bauer & G. Gaskell

(Eds.), Qualitative researching with text, image and sound (pp. 57-74). London, UK: Sage

Publications, Inc.

219

Kahan, D. M. (1996). What do alternative sanctions mean?. The University of Chicago Law

Review, 591-653.

Kahan, D. M., & Posner, E. A. (1999). Shaming white-collar criminals: A proposal for reform of

the federal sentencing guidelines. The Journal of Law and Economics, 42(S1), 365-392.

Kallgren, C.A., Reno, R.R., & Cialdini, R.B. (2000). A focus theory of normative conduct:

When norms do and do not affect behaviour. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26,

1002-1012.

Kapko, M. (2016, November 3). Twitter’s impact on 2016 presidential election is unmistakable.

CIO. Retrieved from http://www.cio.com/article/3137513/social-networking/twitters-impact-

on-2016-presidential-election-is-unmistakable.html.

Karen, D. & Washington, R.E. (2010). The sport and society reader. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Kassing, J. W., & Sanderson, J. (2010). Fan–athlete interaction and Twitter tweeting through the

Giro: A case study. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(1), 113-128.

10.1123/ijsc.3.1.113

Katz, J. (2006). The macho paradox: Why some men hurt women and how all men can help.

Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks.

Kavanagh, E. J., & Jones, I. (2014). #cyberviolence: Developing a typology for understanding

virtual maltreatment in sport. In D. Rhind & C. Brackenridge (Eds.), Researching and

enhancing athlete welfare (p. 34-43). London, UK: Brunel University Press.

Kavanagh, E.J., & Jones, I. (2016). Understanding Cyber-Enabled Abuse in Sport. In S.

Carnicelli, D. McGillivray, & G. McPherson (Eds.), Digital Leisure Cultures: Critical

Perspectives (p. 120-134). London, UK: Routledge.

220

Kavanagh, E., Jones, I., & Sheppard-Marks, L. (2016). Towards typologies of virtual

maltreatment: Sport, digital cultures, & dark leisure. Leisure Studies, 35, 783-796.

10.1080/02614367.2016.1216581

Kavanagh, E., Litchfield, C., & Osborne, J. (2019). Sporting women and social media:

Sexualization, misogyny, and gender-based violence in online spaces. International Journal

of Sport Communication, 12(4), 552-572.

Kays, T., & Schlabig, J. (2013). Stop the shame in youth sports. Athletic Mind Institute.

http://www.athleticmindinstitute.com/blog/stop-the-shame-in-youth-sports/

Kelly, W.W. (2015). Sport fans and fandoms. In R. Giulianotti (Ed.), Routledge handbook of the

sociology of sport. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kennedy, B. (2012, September 18). Blue Jays’ Yunel Escobar played game with homophobic

slur written across eye black. The Toronto Star. Retrieved from

https://www.thestar.com/sports/baseball/2012/09/18/blue_jays_yunel_escobar_played_game

_with_homophobic_slur_written_across_eye_black.html.

Kick It Out. (2015). Kick It Out unveils findings of research into football-related hate crime on

social media. http://www.kickitout.org/kick-it-out-unveils-findings-of-research-into-football-

related-hate-crime-on-social-media/

Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-

mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.

Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get

serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons,

54(3), 241-251.

221

Kim, M. S. (2014). Doing social constructivist research means making empathic and aesthetic

connections with participants. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal,

22(4), 538-553. 10.1080/1350293X.2014.947835

Kim, J., & Song, H. (2016). Celebrity's self-disclosure on Twitter and parasocial relationships: A

mediating role of social presence. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 570-577.

Kitchin, P., Paramio-Salcines, J., & Walters, G. (2019). Managing organizational reputation in

response to a public shaming campaign. Sport Management Review, 66-80.

Klemm, P., & Wheeler, E. (2005). Cancer caregivers online: Hope, emotional roller coaster, and

physical/emotional/psychological responses. Computers Informatics Nursing, 23(1), 38-45.

Knowles, M. (2007). The nature of parasocial relationships (Doctoral dissertation). ProQuest

Dissertations Publishing. (3258551).

Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010). What is Twitter, a social network or a news

media? In 19

International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 591-600.

Lanter, J. R. (2000, November). Sport spectator identification and involvement in a spontaneous

sport victory celebration. Paper presented at the meeting of the North American Society for

the Sociology of Sport, Colorado Springs, CO.

Lanter, J. R. (2003, October). Aggression and moral reasoning in the highly-identified sport

spectator. Poster session presented at the meeting of the Association for the Advancement of

Applied Sport Psychology, Philadelphia, PA.

Lanter, J. R., & Blackburn, J. Z. (2004, September). The championship effect on college

students’ identification and university affiliation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of

the Association for the Advancement of Applied Sport Psychology, Minneapolis, MN.

Lapidot-Lefler, N., & Barak, A. (2012). Effects of anonymity, invisibility, and lack of eye-

222

contact on toxic online disinhibition. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 434-443.

Lapinski, M. K., & Rimal, R. N. (2005). An explication of social norms. Communication Theory,

15(2), 127-147. 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00329.x

Lather, P. (1988). Feminist perspectives on empowering research methodologies. Women's

Studies International Forum, 11(6), 569-581.

Levitt, H. M., Motulsky, S. L., Wertz, F. J., Morrow, S. L., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2017).

Recommendations for designing and reviewing qualitative research in psychology:

Promoting methodological integrity. Qualitative Psychology, 4(1), 2-22.

10.1037/qup0000082

Li, J., Wang, L., & Fischer, K. W. (2004). The organization of Chinese shame concepts.

Cognition and Emotion, 18, 767-797.

Liebers, N., & Schramm, H. (2019). Parasocial interactions and relationships with media

characters – An inventory of 60 years of research. Communication Research Trends, 38(2),

4-31.

Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis,

and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Lincoln, Y. (1990). The making of a constructivist: A remembrance of transformations past. In

E. G. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm dialog (pp. 67-87). London, UK: Sage Publications, Inc.

Lindkvist, K. (1981). Approaches to textual analysis. Advances in Content Analysis, 9, 23-42.

LinkedIn. (2015, October 29). How LinkedIn’s 400 million members are helping build the

economic graph. Retrieved from http://blog.linkedin.com/2015/10/29/400-million-members

Litchfield, C., Kavanagh, E., Osborne, J., & Jones, I. (2018). Social media and the politics of

gender, race and identity: the case of Serena Williams. European Journal for Sport and

223

Society, 15(2), 154-170.

Litowitz, D. (1997). Trouble with scarlett letter punishments. Judicature, 81, 52-57.

Loader, P. (1998). Such a shame—A consideration of shame and shaming mechanisms in

families. Child Abuse Review, 7(1), 44-57.

Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape myths. Psychology of women quarterly, 18(2),

133-164.

Lumsden, C.J. (1988). Psychological development: Epigenetic rules and gene-culture

coevolution. In K. B. MacDonald (Ed.), Sociobiological perspectives on human development

(pp. 234-267). New York, NY: Springer.

MacPherson, E., & Kerr, G. (2019). Sport fans’ responses on social media to professional

athletes’ norm violations. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1-18.

MacPherson, E. & Kerr, G. (in press). Online public shaming of professional athletes: Gender

matters. Psychology of Sport and Exercise.

Marcus, M.B. (2016, March 7). What is meldonium? Maria Sharapova case spotlights banned

drug. CBS News. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-meldonium-

banned-drug-tennis-star-maria-sharapova-was-taking/.

Marsh, E. E., & White, M. D. (2003). A taxonomy of relationships between images and text.

Journal of Documentation, 59(6), 647-672.

Marshall, P. (2010). The promotion and presentation of the self: Celebrity as marker of

presentational media. Celebrity studies, 1(1), 35-48.

Marwick, A., & Boyd, D. (2011). To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on

Twitter. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media

Technologies, 17(2), 139-158.

224

Massaro, T. M. (1991). Shame, culture, and American criminal law. Michigan Law Review, 89,

1880-2301.

Massaro, T.M. (1997). The meanings of shame: Implications for legal reform. Psychology,

Public Policy, and Law, 3(4), 645-704. 10.1037/1076-8971.3.4.645

Maxwell, J. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interpretative approach. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications.

Maxwell, Z. (2014, March 27). Rape culture is real. Retrieved from http://time.com/40110/rape-

culture-is-real/.

McAlinden, A. M. (2005). The use of “shame” with sex offenders. British Journal of

Criminology, 45(3), 373-394.

McDonald, G. (2009). Privacy fears end “shame” lists. The Dominion Post.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2557493/Privacy-fears-end-shame-lists.

McGannon, K., & Johnson, C. (2009). Strategies for reflective cultural sport psychology

research. In R. J. Schinke & S. J. Hanrahan (Eds.), Cultural sport psychology: From theory

to practice (pp. 57-75). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

McGannon, K., & Mauws, M. (2000). Discursive psychology: An alternative approach for

studying adherence to exercise and physical activity. Quest, 52, 148-165.

McGannon, K. R., McMahon, J., & Gonsalves, C. A. (2017). Mother runners in the blogosphere:

A discursive psychological analysis of online recreational athlete identities. Psychology of

Sport and Exercise, 28, 125-135. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.11.002

McMahon, S. (2007). Understanding community-specific rape myths: Exploring student athlete

culture. Affilia, 22(4), 357-370.

225

Melnick, M. J. (1993). Searching for sociability in the stands: A theory of sports spectating.

Journal of Sport Management, 7, 44–60.

Moloney, M., & Love, T. (2018). Assessing online misogyny: Perspectives from sociology and

feminist media studies. Sociology Compass, 12, 1-12.

Morris, E. (2012). Learning the hard way: Masculinity, place, and the gender gap in education.

New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Morton, B.C. (2001). Bringing skeletons out of the closet and into the light - “Scarlet Letter”

sentencing can meet the goals of probation in modern America because it deprives offenders

of privacy. Suffolk U.L. Review, 97-103.

Munroe, K., Estabrooks, P., Dennis, P., & Carron, A. (1999). A phenomenological analysis of

group norms in sport teams. Sport Psychologist, 13, 171-182. 10.1123/tsp.13.2.171

Murphy, K., & Harris, N. (2007). Shaming, shame and recidivism: A test of reintegrative

shaming theory in the white-collar crime context. The British Journal of Criminology, 47(6),

900-917. 10.1093/bjc/azm037

Nakayama, T. K. (2017). What’s next for whiteness and the Internet. Critical Studies in Media

Communication, 34(1), 68-72.

Noussair, C., & Tucker, S. (2005). Combining monetary and social sanctions to promote

cooperation. Economic Inquiry, 43(3), 649-660.

O’Toole, L. (1994). Subculture of rape revisited. In L. O’Toole & J. Schiffman (Eds.), Gender

violence: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 214-221). New York, NY: New York University

Press.

Opp, K.D. (1982). The evolutionary emergence of norms. British Journal of Social Psychology,

21, 139-149.

226

Osborne, A., Sherry, E., & Nicholson, M. (2016). Celebrity, scandal and the male athlete: A

sport media analysis. European Sport Management Quarterly, 16(3), 255-273.

10.1080/16184742.2016.1164214

Ott, B. L. (2017). The age of Twitter: Donald J. Trump and the politics of debasement. Critical

Studies in Media Communication, 34(1), 59-68.

Pascale, C-M. (2011). Cartographies of knowledge: Exploring qualitative epistemologies.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Parganas, P., Anagnostopoulos, C., & Chadwick, S. (2015). ‘You’ll never tweet alone’:

Managing sports brands through social media. Journal of Brand Management, 22(7), 551-

568.

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2012). Cyberbullying: Neither an epidemic nor a rarity. European

Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(5), 539-543.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3

Ed.). Newbury Park, CA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Pegoraro, A. (2010). Look who’s talking – Athletes on Twitter: A case study. International

Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 501-514.

Pegoraro, A. (2013). Sport fandom in the digital world. In P. M. Pedersen (Ed.), Routledge

handbook of sport communication (pp. 248-258). New York, NY: Routledge.

Pepitone, A. (1976). Toward a normative and comparative biocultural social psychology.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 641-653.

Petley, J. (2013). Media and public shaming: Drawing the boundaries of disclosure. New York,

NY: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.

227

Pfeil, U., & Zaphiris, P. (2010). Applying qualitative content analysis to study online support

communities. Universal Access in the Information Society, 9(1), 1-16. 10.1007/s10209-009-

0154-3

Pinnegar, S., & Daynes, J. G. (2007). Locating narrative inquiry historically: Thematics in the

turn to narrative. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a

methodology (pp. 3-34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Platow, M. J., Durante, M., Williams, N., Garrett, M., Walshe, J., Cincotta, S., Lianos, G., &

Barutchu, A. (1999). The contribution of sport fan social identity to the production of

prosocial behavior. Group Dynamics, 3, 161– 169.

Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. International Journal

of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), 5-23.

Posner, R.A., & Rasmusen, E.B. (1999). Creating and enforcing norms, with special reference to

sanctions. International Review of Law and Economics, 19, 369-382.

Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., & De Groot, D. (2001). Social influence in computer-

mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(10), 1243-1254. 10.1177/01461672012710001

Prapavessis, H., & Carron, A. V. (1997). Sacrifice, cohesion, and conformity to norms in sport

teams. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(3), 231-240.

Quirk, K. (1997). Not now, honey, I’m watching the game. New York: Fireside.

Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and

gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. CyberPsychology & Behavior,

11(2), 169-174.

228

Redhead, S. (2007) ‘Those absent from the stadium are always right: accelerated culture, sport

media, and theory at the speed of light’. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 31(3), 226-241.

Reno, R.R., Cialdini, R.B., & Kallgren, C.A. (1993). The trans situational influence of social

norms. Journals of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(1), 104-112.

Resnick, P. (2001). Beyond bowling together: Sociotechnical capital. In J. Carroll (Ed.), HCI in

the new millennium (pp. 247–272). Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications, Inc.

Ronson, J. (2015). So you've been publicly shamed. New York, NY: The Penguin Group.

Ross, O. (2013, February 21). How cyber-bullies got inside Rebecca Marino’s head. The Toronto

Star. Retrieved from

http://www.thestar.com/sports/tennis/2013/02/21/how_cyberbullies_got_inside_rebecca_mar

inos_head.html

Ross, K. (2001). Women at Work: Journalism as En-Gendered Practice. Journalism Studies,

2(4), 531–544.

Rowbottom, J. (2013). To punish, inform, and criticize: The goals of naming and shaming. In J.

Petley (Ed.), Media and public shaming: drawing the boundaries of disclosure. New York,

NY: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.

Rush, C. (2014, March 24). April Reimer, wife of Maple Leaf James Reimer, attacked on

Twitter. The Toronto Star. Retrieved from

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/2014/03/24/april_reimer_wife_of_maple_leaf_james_

reimer_attacked_on_twitter.html

229

Russell, S. (1998). Reintegrative shaming and the 'frozen antithesis': Braithwaite and

Elias. Journal of Sociology, 34(3), 303-313. 10.1177/144078339803400306

Sakaki, T., Okazaki, M., & Matsuo, Y. (2010). Earthquake shakes Twitter users: real-time event

detection by social sensors. In 19

International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM,

851-860.

Sanderson, J. (2010). Framing Tiger’s troubles: Comparing traditional and social media.

International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 438-453.

Sanderson, J. (2011). It’s a whole new ballgame: How social media is changing sports. New

York, NY: Hampton Press.

Sanderson, J. (2013). From loving the hero to despising the villain: Sports fans, Facebook, and

social identity threats. Mass Communication and Society, 16(4), 487-509.

Sanderson, J., & Emmons, B. (2014). Extending and withholding forgiveness to Josh Hamilton:

Exploring forgiveness within parasocial interaction. Communication & Sport, 2(1), 24-47.

10.1177/2167479513482306

Sanderson, J., & Hambrick, M. E. (2012). Covering the scandal in 140 characters: A case study

of Twitter’s role in coverage of the Penn State saga. International Journal of Sport

Communication, 5(3), 384-402.

Sanderson, J., & Kassing, J. (2011). Chapter 7: Tweets and blogs: Transformative, adversarial,

and integrative developments in sports media. In A. C. Billings (Ed.), Sports media:

Transformation, Integration, Consumption. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Sanderson, J., & Truax, C. (2014). “I hate you man!”: Exploring maladaptive parasocial

interaction expressions to college athletes via Twitter. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate

Athletics, 7, 333-351.

230

Scheff, T. J. (2000). Shame and the social bond: A sociological theory. Sociological Theory,

18(1), 84-99.

Scheff, T. J. (1988). Shame and conformity: The deference-emotion system. American

Sociological Review, 395-406.

Scheff, T.J., & Retzinger, S.M. (1991). Emotions and violence: Shame and rage in destructive

conflicts. Lincoln, NE: Lexington Books.

Schinke, R. J., McGannon, K. R., & Smith, B. (2013). Expanding the sport and physical activity

research landscape through community scholarship: Introduction. Qualitative Research in

Sport, Exercise and Health, 5, 287–290. 10.1080/2159676X.2013.847477

Schmittel, A., & Sanderson, J. (2015). Talking about Trayvon in 140 characters: Exploring NFL

players’ tweets about the George Zimmerman verdict. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 39,

332-345.

Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007). The

constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science,

18(5), 429-434.

Schrader, D.E. (2015). Constructivism and learning in the age of social media: Changing minds

and learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 144, 23-35.

10.1002/tl.20160

Schramm, H. (2008). Parasocial interactions and relationships. In W. Donsbach (Ed.),

International Encyclopedia of Communication (pp. 3501- 3506). Oxford, UK: Blackwell

Publishing.

Schwandt, T. A. (1996). Farewell to criteriology. Qualitative Inquiry, 2(1), 58-72.

231

Schwartz, S.H. (1977). Normative influence on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in

experimental social psychology (pp. 221-279). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Seale, C. (1999). Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 465-478.

Seo, W. J., & Green, B. C. (2008). Development of the motivation scale for sport online

consumption. Journal of Sport Management, 22(1), 82-109.

Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New York, NY: Harper.

Sills, S., Pickens, C., Beach, K., Jones, L., Calder-Dawe, O., Benton-Greig, P., & Gavey, N.

(2016). Rape culture and social media: Young critics and a feminist counterpublic. Feminist

Media Studies, 16(6), 935-951.

Skeel, D.A. (2001). Shaming in Corporate Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 149(6),

1811-1868.

Slonje, R., Smith, P. K., & Frisén, A. (2012). Processes of cyberbullying, and feelings of remorse

by bullies: A pilot study. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(2), 244-259.

Smith, S.E. (2016). “Sportsfluenza”: The result of not holding athletes accountable for bad

behaviour. Law & Psychology Review, 40, 345-362.

Smith, J. K. (1989). The nature of social and educational Inquiry: Empiricism versus

interpretation. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Smith, B. (2010). Narrative inquiry: Ongoing conversations and questions for sport and exercise

psychology research. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 3(1), 87-107.

Smith, P. K. (2012). Cyberbullying and cyber aggression. In S. R. Jimerson, A. B. Nickerson, M.

J. Mayer, & M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of school violence and school safety:

International research and practice (pp. 93–103). New York, NY: Routledge.

232

Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., & Tippett, N. (2008).

Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child

Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(4), 376-385.