Ingroup Favoritism in Umpiring Decisions in Australian Football

Philip B Mohr · Kerry Larsen

53 citations0/0 files storedThe Journal of Social Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Sports Analytics and Performance Sport Psychology and Performance Sports, Gender, and Society

Abstract

In 171 Australian rules football matches over a period of 4 years, umpires' allocations of rewards to (a) teams from the same state (instate) as the central umpires and (b) teams from other states (outstate) were examined. The instate teams received significantly more rewards (free kicks) than the outstate teams did in matches between them. The extent of the instate adjudication advantage varied by year; it was significantly greater for matches on an instate home ground than for matches on an outstate home ground. The umpires manifested ingroup favoritism in rewards of low value-salience (obstruction of outgroup scoring opportunities) rather than in rewards of high value-salience (facilitation of ingroup scoring opportunities).

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 53 citations exist upstream.

References

1982Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations 1971Social categorization and intergroup behaviour 1978Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations.1947Value and need as organizing factors in perception.1954They saw a game; a case study.1948The Psychology of Rumor.1985The Psychology of Intergroup Attitudes and Behavior 1989Intergroup Relations

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.