Investigating the existence of mixed emotions within a sport consumer behavior context is the purpose of this study. Two experimental studies with a 4 (game outcome) × 2 (response format) mixed model analysis of covariance were implemented. The authors tested concurrence of two opposite emotions in Study 1 by asking subjects to complete an online continuous measure of happiness/sadness. Subjects reported more mixed emotions while watching a conflicting game outcome, such as a disappointing win and relieving loss, than during a straight game outcome. In Study 2, real-time-based measures of sport consumer emotions appear to have greater validity than recall-based measures of sport consumer emotions. Subjects with real-time-based measures were less likely to report a straight loss as positive and a straight win as negative than those with the retrospective measure. This study provides evidence of mixed emotions; specifically, happiness and sadness can co-occur during sports consumption.
Jun Woo Kim, Marshall Magnusen and Hyun-Woo Lee
Jun Woo Kim, Marshall Magnusen and Yu Kyoum Kim
The purpose of this study is to provide a critical review of how consumer satisfaction research in the sport management and the nonsport literatures has developed over the past several decades, and, with that information, to propose a new comparison standard in the formation of sport consumer satisfaction. Though several alternative explanations of consumer satisfaction have been developed, expectancy-disconfirmation framework is the theoretical foundation most used in consumer satisfaction research. However, expectancy-disconfirmation theory does not allow researchers to fully assess the potential complexity of sport consumer satisfaction. Therefore, in addition to recommendations for improving the application of expectancy-disconfirmation, we also propose counterfactual thinking as an alternative comparison standard in determining sport consumer satisfaction. The proposed framework contributes to the literature on sport consumer behavior by illustrating how sport consumers use a “what might have been” rather than “what was” heuristic to explain satisfaction judgments with their sport consumption experiences.