Drew Kalil

First Year Writing Seminar

Rhetorical Source Analysis
11 March, 2015
A Closer Look at the Work Of Kirk Wakefield and Daniel Wann
An Examination of Dysfunctional Sports Fans: Method of Classification and
Relationships with Problem Behaviors is an enticing piece published in the Journal of Leisure
Research. Its authors, Kirk L. Wakefield and Daniel L. Wann make a compelling argument for a
new type of sports fan: the highly identified, dysfunctional sports fan. Wakefield is a professor in
Baylors school of business, and the Executive Director, Center for Sports Sponsorship & Sales
at Baylor. He has written several papers on business strategy, many of which, deal with appealing
to sports fans. The other author, Daniel Wann, is a professor at Murray State University and runs
a research group focused on the psychology of sports fandom. In the opinion of the authors,
previous studies on sports fans seems to miss this group of fans,providing a reason for Wakefield
and Wann to write their piece.
The text begins by talking about previous studies and their findings. What is apparent is
the positive spin on each of the previous studies. They seem to gloss over the negative aspects of
sports. By beginning this way, Wakefield and Wann give themselves a soap box to stand on.
They are calling for others to look more critically at the effect of sports, and that there are bad
things about following sports religiously. Although the entire text itself seems to be aimed
towards people who do not understand dysfunctional fans, the beginning seems to be directed
towards other researchers of the effect of sports. To appeal to the audience, Wakefield and Wann

set up their paper like a simple experiment. It begins with previous knowledge, followed by a
hypothesis given by the authors and a plan to conduct the research. Next are the results of the
experiment, and finally, the conclusions from that are drawn from the data.
The research conducted was very methodical and thorough. In short, surveys were
distributed in two manners, one by a flyer and one by email, to people attending a college
football game. Students were intentionally skipped because of their inherent bias. They received
four hundred fifty-two responses. To further justify the authenticity of the research, twenty eight
of the responses were discarded because their responses did not fit the profile of a highly
identified sports fan, and would have therefore skewed the results. It is important to realize the
scale of the research efforts. In order to get over four hundred responses, thousands of emails and
flyers had to be distributed because most people would not take the time to fill out the survey.
This shows the dedication of the researchers and makes the audience like them more.Their
methods also improve their credibility. Wakefield and Wann were transparent and explained each
one of their decisions. The results of the survey were very conclusive and supported the authors
hypothesis.
Wakefield and Wann cited the work of many of their colleagues in this text. On many
occasions, they decided to use someone elses definition before elaborating with their own ideas.
A good example of this is when they quote Per Bech, a clinical psychiatrist in Denmark, when he
links social dysfunction to aggressive behavior.
Social dysfunction often leads to other forms of aggressive behavior and violence (Bech,
1994), as has been evidenced at sporting events. In the sports context, dysfunctional fans
are no more highly identified with their team than other loyal fans who are not
dysfunctional, yet these persons are highly confrontational and tend to frequently

complain about a variety of components of the sporting environment (e.g., the decisions
of officials and coaches). (Wakefield and Wann, 170)
The authors beautifully intertwine Bechs 1994 quote into their own piece by forwarding
it to fit their piece about sports. The quote was a general thought about socially dysfunctional
people, then Wakefield and Wann made the connection to sport fans.
Later in the text, when presenting information about sports talk radio, Wakefield and
Wann synthesize two sources together wonderfully: By the late 1990s, it was estimated that
there were approximately 150 stations dedicated to 24-hour-a-day sport programming (Mariscal,
1999). Goldberg (1998, p. 213) referred to sport talk radio as the church of athletic selfopinion, (Wakefield and Wann, 171). The U.C. Irvine professor Jorge Mariscal provided the
statistic while D.T. Goldberg,the director of the Humanities Research Institute at the University
of California provided a strong opinion of sports radio. The authors were able to use two sources
and play them off each other. Having quotes, such as these scattered throughout the paper only
strengthens the rhetorical power of this piece. It demonstrates that Wakefield and Wann are not
the only people with this belief.
Another great example of using sources can be found in the sixth paragraph. Actually the
entire paragraph is a combination of synthesis and forwarding. It begins by synthesizing two
sources discussing the abilities of sports teams to integrate a community. Then Wakefield and
Wann provide six examples to forward the previous sources into their own piece. By working
with so many other sources, Wakefield and Wann are more convincing. With so many experts
followed the ability to add their own ideas and forward the text, Wakefield and Wann can appeal
to the reads thirst for evidence. Although Wakefield and Wann are the authors of this piece,

several other studies and expert opinions back up the findings even more. These are just three of
several examples of great rhetoric used in this text.
The authors of this text do a lot to appeal to the reader. First, Wakefield and Wann appeal
logically laying out their study step by step to the reader. Their argument is clearly laid out and
easy to follow and their tone makes them sound intelligent. Their credentials and methods speak
to the credibility of their work. The one level of connection that this piece was missing was the
emotional connection, however the nature of the text is a report style so it would not make much
sense for the authors to try and connect emotionally to the reader.
There are many uses for this text.The conclusion section would fit in well when writing
about the psychology of sports fans as it displays the results and described the actions of
different types of sports fans. The introduction of this text would be ideal for someone who does
not quite understand passionate sports fans to understand them a little bit more. There are many
examples of typical fan behavior. As far as limits go, this text has very few if any. The text does
such a good job covering the other side of the argument that it is tough to find a weak spot. The
only possible limit would be that some of the data could have been presented cleaner. Instead of
having to go to the last page, it would have been nice if the data tables were closer to the text
references. Overall, this text was written with great rhetoric by Wakefield and Wann and would
be a great source to include in a paper or report about the actions and psychology of sports fans.

Works Cited
"David Theo Goldberg." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2015.
"Daniel L. Wann, Ph.D." Daniel Wann. Murray State University, n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2015.
"Directory." HSB. Baylor University, n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2015.
Goldberg, D. T. (1998). Sports, talk radio, and the death of democracy. Journal of Sport &
Social Issues, 22, 212-223.
Mariscal, J. (1999). Chicanos and Latinos in the jungle of sports talk radio Journal of Sport &
Social Issues, 23, 111-117.

"Per Bech." Per Bech. Psychiatrists of Denmark, n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2015.
Wakefield, Kirk L., and Daniel L. Wann. "An Examination of Dysfunctional Sports Fans:
Method of Classification and Relationships with Problem Behaviors." Journal of Leisure
Research 38.2 (n.d.): 168-86. Http://people.uncw.edu/. Web. 8 Mar. 2015.