Passionate hockey fans: Appraisals of, coping with, and attention paid to the 2012-2013 National Hockey League lockout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sports fans are often passionate for their favourite team, league, or sport. However, the quality of engagement in a passion depends greatly on whether the passion is more harmonious or obsessive (Vallerand et al., 2003). Research has examined how both passion types are related to components of the stress process (Schellenberg, Gaudreau, & Crocker, 2013), and the purpose of this research was to study how passionate fans had appraised and coped with a rare setback: the postponement of their favourite sport. We examined if harmonious and obsessive passion for watching hockey were differentially related to stress experiences during the 2012-2013 National Hockey League (NHL) lockout. During the lockout, cross-sectional data were collected from 256 undergraduate hockey fans. Participants completed online questionnaires measuring passion types, stress appraisals, coping, and how they attended to lockout-related information. Results revealed that obsessive passion was positively associated with stress appraisals, most types of coping, and with avoiding information about the lockout. Harmonious passion was unrelated to stress appraisals, showed few relationships with coping, and was positively related with monitoring lockout-related information. Structural equation modeling supported a model whereby threat appraisal mediated the relationship between obsessive passion and disengagement-oriented coping. This pattern of results suggests that the extent to which the lockout was perceived as a distressing situation, requiring one to regulate thoughts, emotions, and incoming lockout-related information, depended on the extent to which one’s passion for hockey was obsessive rather than harmonious.Acknowledgments: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.271 | 0.427 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".