Emotional sharing in football audiences

13Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The negative aim of this paper is to identify shortcomings in received theories. First, we criticize approaching audiences, and large gatherings more general, in categories revolving around the notion of the crowd. Second, we show how leading paradigms in emotion research restrict research on the social-relational dynamics of emotions by reducing them to physiological processes like emotional contagion or to cognitive processes like social appraisal. Our positive aim is to offer an alternative proposal for conceptualizing emotional dynamics in audiences. First, we offer a notion of emotional sharing for studying the social-relational dynamics of emotions. Second, we propose a working concept of audience as a dynamic and dispersed social collective. Finally, we bring these elements together in the description of two scenes of jubilation.

References Powered by Scopus

The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction

3249Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

What are emotions? and how can they be measured?

2811Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Relations Among Emotion, Appraisal, and Emotional Action Readiness

1791Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

How the characteristics of social media influencers and live content influence consumers' impulsive buying in live streaming commerce? The role of congruence and attachment

22Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Towards a Taxonomy of Collective Emotions

18Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Shared emotions and the body

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Thonhauser, G., & Wetzels, M. (2019). Emotional sharing in football audiences. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 46(2), 224–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2019.1613159

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

80%

Researcher 1

20%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Sports and Recreations 3

30%

Arts and Humanities 3

30%

Social Sciences 2

20%

Medicine and Dentistry 2

20%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free