<%BANNER%>

The Influence of an Athlete on Donation

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0043073/00001

Material Information

Title: The Influence of an Athlete on Donation The Role of Trust and Personal Involvement
Physical Description: 1 online resource (95 p.)
Language: english
Creator: KIM,MINHONG
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Tourism, Recreation, and Sport Management -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sport Management thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of an athlete on donor behavior and the mediating role of donors? level of trust. Further, the moderating role of personal involvement on the relationship between certain athlete-related factors (i.e., identification with an athlete and athlete image) and trust was examined. A conceptual framework based on previous research is proposed and tested. The findings suggest that identification with an athlete, athlete image, trust toward the athlete, and personal involvement with the cause positively influenced donor behavior. The results also suggest that the donors? level of trust mediates the relationship between athlete-related factors and donor behavior. As well, personal involvement moderates the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the athlete. The findings are discussed in terms of theory and practice, and suggestions for future research are forwarded.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by MINHONG KIM.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Walker, Matthew.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0043073:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0043073/00001

Material Information

Title: The Influence of an Athlete on Donation The Role of Trust and Personal Involvement
Physical Description: 1 online resource (95 p.)
Language: english
Creator: KIM,MINHONG
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Tourism, Recreation, and Sport Management -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sport Management thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of an athlete on donor behavior and the mediating role of donors? level of trust. Further, the moderating role of personal involvement on the relationship between certain athlete-related factors (i.e., identification with an athlete and athlete image) and trust was examined. A conceptual framework based on previous research is proposed and tested. The findings suggest that identification with an athlete, athlete image, trust toward the athlete, and personal involvement with the cause positively influenced donor behavior. The results also suggest that the donors? level of trust mediates the relationship between athlete-related factors and donor behavior. As well, personal involvement moderates the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the athlete. The findings are discussed in terms of theory and practice, and suggestions for future research are forwarded.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by MINHONG KIM.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Walker, Matthew.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0043073:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 THE INFLUENCE OF AN ATHLETE ON DONATION: THE ROLE OF TRUST AND PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT By MINHONG KIM A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE D EGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011

PAGE 2

2 2011 Minhong Kim

PAGE 3

3 To my family

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First of all, I would like to give many thanks to my advisor, Dr. Matthew Walker. I truly appreciate for his advice, encouragement, and tremendous supports he provided me for two years at the University of Florida. Next, I would like to give special thanks to Dr. May Kim. She has been friendly, caring, and supportive in many ways. I would also like to thank another committee member, Dr. S agas, who has been really supportive and encouraging. Most of all, I deeply thank my parents and brother Thanks to their support, I could overcome all the hurdles I have encountered during this rigorous and not always pleasant process. Finally, I wish to extend thanks to my friends (Youngmin, Minkil, Taeho, and many others) for the assistance and insight you provided, and t o my love for positive attitude and unyielding commitment to me.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMEN TS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 8 LIST OF TERMS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 11 Statement of Problem ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 14 Purpose of the Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 15 Hypothesis Development ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 15 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 20 Donor Behavior ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 20 Identity Theory ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 22 Identity Theory in the Sport rela ted Literature ................................ ............................... 23 Relationship between Identification and Trust ................................ ................................ 25 Image ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 27 Brand Image ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 28 Corporate Image ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 30 Athlete Image ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 30 Personal Involvemen t ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 3 2 Trust ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 34 3 METHOD ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 37 Sample and Procedures ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 37 Instruments ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 38 Identification with the Athlete ................................ ................................ ......................... 38 Athlete Image ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 38 Trust toward the Athlete ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 39 Personal Involvement ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 39 Donor Behavior ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 39 Demographics ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 40 Pilot Study ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 40 Data Analysis for Main Study ................................ ................................ ................................ 43

PAGE 6

6 Preliminary Analyses ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 43 Descriptive Statistics ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 44 Testing Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 44 4 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 48 Preliminary Analyses ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 48 Descriptive Analys e s ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 49 Demographics ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 50 Athlete related Factors ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 50 Personal Involvement ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 50 Trust toward the Athlete ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 51 Intention to Donate ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 51 Hypotheses Testing ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 51 Regression Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 52 Mediation Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 52 Moderation Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 53 5 DI SCUSSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 70 Instrumentations ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 70 Descriptive findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 71 Hypotheses Testin g ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 72 Implications ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 74 Limitation and Future Research ................................ ................................ .............................. 75 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 77 A PPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE ................................ ................................ ................................ 78 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 82 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 95

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 Means, Standard deviations, & Correlations for pilot study ................................ .............. 46 3 2 Summary result for reliability assessments & AVE ) ......................... 47 4 1 Correlation matrix for main study ................................ ................................ ...................... 56 4 2 Summary result fo r reliability assessments & AVE ) ......................... 57 4 3 Descriptive statistics for the demographic variables (n = 305 ) ................................ .......... 58 4 3 Descri ptive statistics for the demographic variables (continued) ................................ ...... 59 4 4 Descriptive statistics for athlete related factors (n = 305) ................................ ................. 60 4 5 Descriptive statistics for personal involvement (n = 305) ................................ ................. 61 4 6 Descriptive statistics for trust toward an athlete (n = 305) ................................ ................ 62 4 7 D escriptive statistics for intention to donate (n = 305) ................................ ...................... 63 4 8 Summary result for regression analysis ................................ ................................ ............. 64 4 9 Summary result for regres sion analysis ................................ ................................ ............. 65 4 10 Summary result for moderated regression analysis testing the effect of personal involvement on the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the a thlete ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 66 4 11 Summary result for moderated regression analysis testing the effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete image and trust toward the athlete ....... 67

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1 1 Conceptual Framework ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 19 4 1 Results of the test for mediation on the re lationship between identification and intention to donate ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 68 4 2 Results of the test for mediation on the relationship between image and intention to donate ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 69

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF TERMS Identification A n orientation of the self in regard to other objects including a person or group that results in feelings or sentiments of close attachment ( Trail, Anderson, & Fink 2000 ) Image T he mental construct developed by the consumer o n the basis of a few selected impressions among the flood of total impression ( Reynolds 1965 ) Involvement A values, and interests ( Zaichkowsky 1985) Trust A willingness to rely on an exchange partner in whom one has confidence ( Moorman, Zaltman, & Deshpande 1992 )

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of S cience THE INFLUENCE OF AN ATHLETE ON DONATION: THE ROLE OF TRUST AN D PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT By Minhong Kim M ay 2011 Chair: Matthew Walker Major: Sport Management The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of an athlete on donor behavior and on the relationship between certain athlete related factors (i.e., identification with an athlete and athlete image) and trust was examined. A conceptual fra mework based on previous research is proposed and tested. The findings suggest that identification with an athlete, athlete image, trust toward the athlete, and personal involvement with the cause positively influenced donor behavior. The results also sugg related factors and donor behavior. As well, personal involvement moderates the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the athlete. The findings are discussed in terms of theory and practice, and suggestions for future research are forwarded.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION A disastrous earthquake struck Haiti on January 12, 2010, which affected approximately 3 million people (i.e., more than 200,000 people died, 300,000 were injured, and 1 million became homeless; T HE W ASHINGTON P OST 2010; BBC 2010). Immediately following this event, rescue efforts began from all around the world. People in the United States donated more than $1 billion for relief efforts (CNN, 2010) Similarly, when Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast of the U.S. in 2005, and the Asian tsunami and an earthquake in Pakistan also occurred, American individuals, corporations, and foundations donated more than $7 billion for recovery (Giv ing USA Foundation 2010) Historically, charitable giving in the U. S. increases about one third as fast as the stock market and makes up about 2.2% of gross domestic product (GDP ; Giving USA Foundation 2009) Donating money to charitable organizations to support a cause the Independent Sector (2001), 89% of households in the U.S. participated in charitable giving in 2001 and the average annual donation was $1,620. The Giving USA Foundatio n (2009) also reported that individual donations for charitable causes in the U.S. totaled approximately $314 billion in 2007 and $308 billion in 2008. Not only individuals but also corporations, foundations, and nonprofit organizations play a significant role in charitable giving. According to the National Center for Charitable Statistics ( NCCS; 2009), more than 1.5 million nonprofit organizations currently exist in the U.S. (i.e., 997,579 public charities, 118,423 private foundations, and 453,570 other t ypes of nonprofit organizations, such as chambers of commerce, fraternal organizations, and civic leagues), which have more than 10 million employees, making up approximately 7% of the total U.S labor force.

PAGE 12

12 In sport, m any professional athletes have don ated money, raised funds, and volunteered through private and public charit able organizations or through programs developed by their respective leagues (e.g., NBA Cares, Baseball Tomorrow Fund, Hockey Fights Cancer, NFL Charities, etc.) Among these progra ms, the NBA Cares initiative is perhaps the most well known. In October 2005, the NBA Cares initiative was established by the teams, current and standing tradition of charitable work, the progr am seeks to address social needs in the U.S. and around the world. Since its players and teams have raised more than $115 million for charity, provided more than one million hours of hands on service, and built mor e than 460 places where kids and families can live, learn, or play (NBA, 2010) The Major league baseball (MLB) also launched a joint initiative with its players foster youth baseball in the U.S. The BTF provides an average of 40 grants per year and approximately $1.5 million annually to promote youth participation in baseball and softball through new field construction, coach training workshops, and uniform and eq uipment donations. Similarly, the National Football related medical research. As well, the National Hockey League (NHL) and its players association established a joint initiative to raise funds for cancer research, children's hospitals, player charities, and local cancer organizations. Many other organizations involved with various sports also serve their own communities (i.e., MLS W.O.R.K.S., WNBA Cares, etc.).

PAGE 13

13 Given this push for league wide corporate social responsibility (CSR), numerous athletes have followed suit. Many athletes participate in fundraising for causes to w hich they possess a high degree of affinity, or ones that are so visible (e.g., the earthquake in Haiti and Katrina relief) that their involvement could spur additional fundraising activities (Wilson, Glier, Kepner, & Shpigel, 2005). Following the Haiti an earthquake 96 nonprofit organizations raised more than $1 billion for recovery (USA T O DAY 2010). Among them, the NFL and its players union donated $500,000 to both the American Red Cross and the Partners in Health; the NBA (and its union) and the MLB con tributed $1 million, and the NHL donated $100,000 toward relief efforts (CBC, 2010). In terms of specific NBA stars, Kevin Garnett donated $1.2 million to Katrina victims (Krawczynski, 2005) Dwight Howard and Samuel Dalembert donated $100,000 for children in Haiti, and Tiger Woods provided $3 million to help the recovery (Gonzalez, 2010; USA T O DAY 2010). Other professional athletes also participated in similar efforst based on their interests (e.g., Gary Sheffield, Jason Giambi, Deion Sanders, Chris Duhon LeBron James). According to the USA T O DAY (2001), more than 350 public charities and private foundations are connected to professional teams or athletes. For example, Michael Jordan has been involved with several charities and many charitable organizati ons, including the Michael Jordan Charity International Golf Tournament, the James R. Jordan Boys and Girls Club, and the Family Life Center (White, 2006). Andre Agassi has been involved with community based programs that p rovide help for abused and neglec ted children through a variety of venues, including a shelter, an educational facility, and a Boys and Girls Club. College athletes also associate themselves with charitable organizations. Tim Tebow, former University of Florida (UF) star, also started a c funds for the the Shands Hospital Pediatric

PAGE 14

14 orga nizations and programs is one of the many ways in which they give back to their communities. F undraising donations and volunteering by these athletes probably encourages others to become interested in their causes and donate money because of the athletes community visibility and "high profile" stature. Statement of Problem Although numerous researchers (e.g., Billing, Holt, & Smith, 1985; Staurowsky, Parkhouse, & Sachs, 1996; Verner, Hecht, & Fansler, 1998; Mahony, Gladden, & Funk, 2003) have examined t he motives for charitable giving in sport limited research has been conducted to explore the effects of specific athletes on don or behavior. While research on donor behavior in sports began to take root a few decades ago and many valuable studies have bee n conducted, several areas of donor behavior research in sport management still need to be explored. First, previous donor behavior studies i n sport have yet to focus on the connection between athletes and donor behavior in comparison to other contexts, s uch as spectator sports, endorsements, and brand and team related intentions Since numerous athletes are involved with charitable giving and they possess the power to influence change, it will be useful for those who are planning t o establish a charitable organization or raise funds to examine the relationship between athletes and donor behavior. Second, previous donor behavior studies in sport have failed to examine the important issue of how trust among donors influences their giv ing behavior. Examining trust should enable researchers to establish a more comprehensive framework to explain sport related donor behavior. In addition, the impact of trust on donor behavior will assist directors of charitable organizations to better plan successful fundraising strategies. Third, there is limited empirical evidence indicating how athletes

PAGE 15

15 motives for charitable giving. Therefore, the empirical re search on the relationship between athletes and donor behavior in the sport context will enhance and expand the general knowledge of donor behavior. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to expand knowledge of donor behavior in sport by analyz ing several important factors such as identification with an athlete, athlete image, personal involvement, and trust. In particular, this study will explore how identification with an athlete and athlete image influence the level of trust and donor behavio r As well, the moderating role of personal involvement with the cause will be examined. To achieve this desired purpose, a conceptual framework is developed to answer the following research questions (Figure 1 1): 1. How does identification with an athlete i nfluence donor behavior with regard to athletes who participate in sport related charitable programs? 2. charitable organization or program? 3. Does personal involvement mode rate the relationship between athlete related factors and trust toward the athlete? 4. Does the level of trust toward an athlete matter when they plan to help others through a charitable organization represented by the athlete? Hypothesis Development Current ly, there is little research on how a professional athlete influences the attitudes, people perceive an athlete is an important issue in order to raise funds and pr omote future donations. Although researchers have addressed donor perceptions, motivations, and behaviors

PAGE 16

16 in various sport contexts (e.g., Leslie & Ramey, 1988 ; Mahony, Gladden, & Funk, 2003 ; Gladden, Mahony, & Apostolopoulou, 2005 ), donor behavior in prof essional sport is still lacking. Accordingly, to better understand and expand knowledge regarding donor behavior, different theories and approaches are essential for both academicians and practitioners to illuminate this phenomenon. According to identity identities (Stryker & Burke, 2000). Stryker (1980) explained that various social structures have mined the identity pr ocess a set of meanings applied to the self in a social role or situation defining what it means to be scholars better understand the influence of internal Previous research has revealed that athlete identification positively influences sport fan behavior such as attend i ng games, pay ing more for tickets, purchasing team related products endorsements, and behavioral intentions (e.g., Fink, Trail, & Anderson, 2002 ; Kamins, Brand, Hoeke, & Moe, 1989; Carlson & Donavan, 2008). Additionally, highly identified fans often evalu ate the performance or abilities of their teams or athletes favorably and positively (Branscombe & Wann, 1994), which is an antecedent of trustworthiness (Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). That is, an individual who is highly identified with an athlete wil l be more likely to think positively about the ability of the athlete In light of these works, the following is proposed: H1: toward the athlete.

PAGE 17

17 Dichter (1985) sugges ted that image has a significant impact on how people perceive certain characteristics. Researchers have found that brand image can positively influence consumer brand loyalty (e.g., Gladden & Funk, 2001; Bauer, Sauer, & Exler, 2005) and positive corporate image can lead to consumer trust (Flavian, Guinaliu, & Torres, 2005). In the advertising literature, since athlete endorsers have their own image, researchers have recognized that these individuals have a power to increase awareness of products, improve p roduct image, and ultimately bolster consumer purchase intentions (e.g., Ohanian, 1991; Till, 2001; Jowdy & McDonald, 2002). Along with previous research, the assumption can be made that athletes can make people change their perceptions, attitudes, and beh stature (i.e., image). This lead to the development of the second hypothesis: H2: athlete. an i 1985, p. 324) Numerous researchers have studied involvement in terms of their own interests, especially in consumer behavior and philanthropy ( e.g., Berens, van Riel, & van Bruggen, 2005; Barnes & McCarville, 2005; Bienstock & Stafford, 2006; Bennett, 2009) Previous findings suggest that involvement plays a critical role for people to make purchase decisions (e.g., Grau & Folse, 2007 ), and to become interested in philanthropy (e.g., Bennett, 2009 ). Additionally, researchers have found that those individuals who suffer from disease or are related to those who are suffering are more likely to donate than those with no association (e.g., Berens et al. 2005; Bruce 1998 ; Nichols 1991 ) Since involvement is an important predictor of affective, cognitive, and behavioral intentions, the

PAGE 18

18 current study argues that those who have high level of involvement will be more likely to show high level of trust. H3a: Personal involvement will moderate the relationship between identification with H3b: Personal involvement will moderate the relationship between athlete image toward an athlete (Moorman, Zaltman, & Deshpande, 1992, p.315). Numerous researchers suggest that trust is one of the most critical elements for relationships to be succes sful (Berry, 1995; Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Previous findings indicate that trust plays significant role both in interpersonal and interorganizational relationships (e.g., Crosby & Stephens, 1987; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999 ). For example, trust was found to be an important factor in the interaction and communication between buyer and seller ( Crosby & Stephens, 1987 have positive attitude toward the quality and reliability of products or services a company provides. Sev eral studies investigated the role of trust in the donor behavior dynamic, and found that trust had a significant influence on donor behavior ( Andaleeb & Basu 1995 ; Sargeant & Lee, 2004). For instance, people who have high level of trust are more likely t o donate more money to charitable causes (Bekkers, 2003), and major donors tend to have higher level of trust than regular donors (Waters, 2008). These findings imply that when an athlete is connected to philanthropy, trust should be a key element on such relationships. Based on previous findings, the following is proposed: H4: rust toward an athlete will positively influence donor behavior.

PAGE 19

19 H5: between athlete related factors and donor behavior. Figure 1 1 Conceptual Framework

PAGE 20

20 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW This review of literature begins with the definition, history, and consequences of several constructs included in the proposed conceptual framewo rk. Specifically, donor behavior, identification, image, trust, and personal involvement are discussed. Donor Behavior (Ciconte & Jacob, 2005, p. 566) Numerous studies have addressed donor perceptions, motivations, and behaviors in various contexts, including higher education ( e.g., Leslie & Ramey, 1988; Hunter, Jones, & Boger, 1999 ; Clotfelter, 2001 ), athletics ( e.g., Mahony, Gladden, & Funk, 2003 ; Gladden, Mahony, & Aposto lopoulou, 2005 ; Verner, Hecht, & Fansler, 1998 ; Ostlund & Brown, 1985 ), and religion (Jackson, Bachmeier, Wood, & Craft, 1995 ). For example, Clotfelter (2001) found that alumni who contributed large amounts to a college tended to have higher income, partic ipated in extracurricular activities, been mentored, and were satisfied with their undergraduate experience. Efforts to systematically understand the structure of donor behavior have also been made. The donor behavior studies in the sport literature stem from the athletic donor motivation research conducted by Billing, Holt and Smith (1985). These authors identified four key motives for donor motivation: (1) social (i.e., participating in sports with family and friends), (2) philanthropic (i.e., providing athletic scholarships), (3) success (i.e., the value associated with victories, and (4) benefits (i.e., tax deductions). Based on their findings, the authors developed an instrument (i.e., Athletic Contributions Questionnaire, ACQUIRE), to measure athletic donor motivation. Building on Billing et al., Staurowsky, Parkhouse, and Sachs (1996) revised and

PAGE 21

21 motivation. In addition, recognizing that the ACQUIRE lacked a theore tical basis, Staurowsky et al. combined donor behavior with motivation in building their theoretical model, the ACQUIRE II, which consists of Benefit, Philanthropic, Power, Social, Success 1, and Success 2. Based on social cognitive theory, Verner, Hech t, and Fansler (1998) developed the Motivation of Athletic Donors (MAD 1) scale to measure athletic donor motivation. Through an extensive review of literature and interviews with athletic donors, they identified twelve dimensions of athletic donor motivatio n (i.e., participating in secondary events, public recognition, giving of time and energy, inside information, priority treatment, philanthropy, collaboration, create, change, curiosity, power, and loyalty). More recently, Mahony, Gladden, and Funk (2003) developed the Donor Motivation Scale to explore the relative importance among donor relatred factors. They identified ten factors to predict motivation and found that success related factors, priority seating, and psychological commitment were among the st rongest motivations for athletic donors. General donor studies (not related to athletics) have also been conducted to account for the antecedents of donor behavior. For example, Lee, Piliavin, and Call (1999) sampled blood donors, charitable donors, and v olunteers finding that personal expectations, parental modeling, personal norms, past behavior, and role identy as a donor influnced donor intentions. Jackson, Bachmeier, Wood, and Craft (1995) tested the influence of religious and associational ties on vo lunteering and charitable giving. They revealed that people who are actively involved with religion or associational groups gave more time and money to charity programs. Further, Barnes and McCarville (2005) examined donor behavior in relation to non profi t organizations. Their results demonstrated that donors were more positively influenced by tangible benefits (i.e., monetary value), intangible benefits (i.e., feeling of belonging to a group, status, or socializing),

PAGE 22

22 and purposive incentives (i.e., philan thropic feeling) than by opportunity based factors (i.e., experience or financial benefits). Although previous studies have found key motives for donors, other factors that influence donor behavior are lacking. Since numerous professional athletes and tea ms initiate their own non profit organizations or participate in social responsibility programs for the causes in which they are interested, such as community development, youth health, and/or youth education, the influence of these athletes on donor behav ior and motivation has become more important. Identity Theory Mead (1934) wrote about social and social psychological issues, which fostered the beginnings of identity theory. He recognized that individuals act differently based on the identities they ass attracted considerable attention from researchers, identity theory has been divided into two categories: identity theory and social identity theory. Identity theory posits tha identities (Stryker & Burke, 2000) Stryker and Burke (2000) noted the following: (Identity) is composed of four central components: the identity standard, or the set of (culturally prescribed) meanings held by the individual which define his or her role identity in a situation; the person's perceptions of meanings within the situation, matched to the dimensions of meaning in the identity standard; the comparator or the mechanism that compares t he perceived situational meanings with those held in the identity standard; and the individual's behavior or activity, which is a function of the difference between perceptions and standard (p. 287). Similarly, Ervin and Stryker (2001) found that the mult iple role identities have different levels of positively influences future behavior. Tajfel and Turner (1986) expanded identity theory to social identity theory, which primarily focuses on the society where an individual belongs. The idea of social identity theory is

PAGE 23

23 based on social psychological theory of intergroup relationships that is a sense of belonging to a social category (e.g., race, nationality, or sp ort team). Social identity theory posits that a self concept consists of both a personal identity and a social identity. The personal identity is comprised of unique aspects of the person, such as abilities and interests, whereas social identity is compose d of distinct group categories, such as demographic (e.g., gender, race, nationality) or organizational membership (e.g., school, religion, sport team ; Turner, 1982) The basic assumptions of both identity theory and social identity theory are that people perceive themselves based on a structured society in which they belong. Although both theories focus on how people act, think, and feel in their societies, the purpose of identity theory is to explain how people perceive their roles when they face certain situations. Conversely, social identity theory emphasizes the behavior that is determined by the society to which a person is behavior. Similarly, Burke (1991) examined the identity process applied to the self in a social role or situation defining what it means to be who one is identi ty, such as stress or anxiety, whereas Stryker examined the external factors of identity. Consequently, these two tracks of the identity theory became unified, leading to a clearer understanding of how both internal and external factors influence the indiv idual belief system (Stryker & Burke, 2000) In other words, Stryker and Burke perceptions of situational meaning and, ultimately, behavior (Braunstein, 2006) Identity Theory in the Sport related Literature Several studies in marketing, business, advertising, sport related literatures have used port related

PAGE 24

24 literature, many scholars have applied identity theory to consumption behaviors, including team identification, fan identification, and identification with individual athletes (e.g., Fink, Trail, & Anderson, 2002 ; Trail, Anderson, & Fink, 2005 ; Kwon, Trail, & Lee, 2008 Branscombe & Wann, 1991 ; Wann & Branscombe 1995 ; Wann & Dolan, 1994 ; Sutton, McDonald, Milne, & Cimperman, 1997 ; Carlson & Donavan, 2008 ). More specifically, Fink et al. (2002) found that fans with strong team identification, w more likely to attend games, pay more for tickets, spend more money on team merchandise, be satisfied, and stay loyal to the team. Trail, Anderson, and Fink (2000) defined identification as tation of the self in regard to other objects including a person or group that results in 166). Based on this, Trail and James (2001) developed the Team Identification Index (TII) to measure an individual with the team. Trail et al. (2005) found that strong team identification leads to self esteem responses, which ultimately influences conative loyalty toward the team, and that an individual who shows high level of team identificati on is more likely to support the team. Team identification also (CORFing ; Kwon et al. ion disassociate from unsuccessful others ( e.g., Hunt, Bristol, & Bashaw, 1999; Snyder, Lassegard, & Ford, 1986). Those fans who have strong identification with a team are less likely to CORF and more likely to BIRG. Highly identified fans tend to have higher self esteem, less depression, and less alienation than those who have low identification with a team (Branscombe & Wann, 1991) Accordingly,

PAGE 25

25 team identification b oosts self esteem, decreases the level of depression, and is positively related to a positive expectation toward life, while it is negatively related to negative feelings. Wann and Branscombe (1995) also found that team identification had a positive influe nce on knowledge about the sport, players, and team history, and fans with high level of team identification showed positive attitudes toward others who support the same team. In addition, Wann and Dolan (1994) found that fans who identify strongly with a positively and to display a positive attitude toward the game itself. Sutton, McDonald, Milne, and Cimperman (1997) divided sports fans into three groups social fans, focused fans, and vested fans based on thei r level of team identification. They found that fans with a high level of team identification showed reduced price sensitivity and performance outcome sensitivity. Carlson and Donavan (2008) found that with a celebrity athlete has a positive influence on endorsement and brand and team related intentions. Relationship between Identification and Trust Researchers have found a relationship between identification and trust in numerous fields, including management (e.g., Ole Borgen, 2001 ; Fuller, Matzler, & Hoppe, 2008; Maguire & Phillips, 2008; Restubog, Hornsey, Bordia, & Esposo, 2008; Keh & Xie, 2009; Han & Harms, 2010) organizational behavior (e.g., Lee, 2004; Connaughton & Daly, 2004; Puusa & Tolvanen, 2006; Wang, Shieh, & Wang, 200 8) psychology (e.g., Voci, 2006) and sport related fields (e.g., Wann & Polk, 2007; Zhang & Won, 2010). Lewicki and Bunker (1996) classified trust into three different types of trust calculus based trust, knowledge based trust, and identification based t rust and found that, of the three, identification based trust is the highest level of trust since it is

PAGE 26

26 shares some of those same needs, choices, and preferences that strong identification allows an individual to think, feel, and respond like the other. In the management literature, Borgen (2001) found that strong identification with an organization plays a significant role in trust making operations, especially in cooperative organizations. Fuller, Matzler, and Hoppe (2008) found that identification with the community to which an individual belongs has a positive influence on trust. Their study revealed that identification with a car community had a positive influence on trust toward the brand of the car, (2008) found a relationship between identification with an organization and trust in a study of organization decreased after the merger because they no long felt a strong identification with the organization. In other words, vague identification of the identification, and weak identification undermined trust. More recently, Keh and Xie (2009) argued that companies should build a trustworthy identity because consumers are more likely to feel strong identification with trustwo rthy companies. Han and Harms (2010) also found that team identification plays critical role in reinforcing trust toward organization. Lee (2004) found that trust has a positive impact on continuous improvement efforts when employees feel a strong identif ication with the organization. Additionally, Connaughton and Daly (2004) found that identification with the team leader was positively related to trust toward that leader. Moreover, Puusa and Tolvanen (2006) studied the relationships among organizational i dentity, identification with organization, trust, and commitment. They found that of organizational

PAGE 27

27 identification which created trust toward the organization. In sum, they conclud level of trust affected their commitment to the organization. In sport, Wann and Polk (2007) found a relationship between team identification and trustworthiness. They also found that highly identified fans regarded, not only other fans of t heir team, but also all individuals as trustworthy. Zhang and Won (2010) noted a significant association between fan identification and trust in internet shopping. The results demonstratred that trust in internet shopping was correlated with psychological attachment (i.e., team identification), both of which are the antecedents of intention to purchase licenced sport merchandise (LSM). In this respect, an individual who identifies strongly with an athlete will be more likely to think and feel positively abo level of trust toward him or her. Image Beach and Mitchell (1987) proposed image theory as a way to determine how an individual makes decisions by regarding representation of the decision maker s goal. According to image theory, there are four different images: (1) self image, (2) trajectory image, (3) action image, and (4) projected image. Self personal beliefs, basic values, and ethics, which one re gards as clearly desirable and true. These principles are indispensable guides for an individual in setting goals and taking action. Trajectory im age, and guide the decision maker to make progress. Action image consists of an what will happen (events and states) if he or she adopts a specific plan or if continues to behave

PAGE 28

28 plans) to make, evaluating them before imp lementation, and setting rules for implementation. While image theory focuses on how people make decisions based on images, others have focused on image as a concept and identified how it relates to other research variables. Considerable attention has bee n devoted to this aspect in various fields including marketing (e.g., Dichter, 1985; Reynolds, 1965; Keller, 1993; Martin, 1996; Hatch & Schultz, 1997; Baker, Grewal, & Parasuraman, 1994 ), advertising (e.g., Ohanian, 1991; Kamins, 1990 ), psychology (e.g., Greenberg, 1983; Beach & Mitchell, 1987 ), general business (e.g., Dowling, 1988; Gotsi & Wilson, 2001; Bromley, 2000; Nguyen & Leblanc, 2001 ), and management (e.g., Gioia, Schultz, & Corley, 2000; Dutton & Dukerich, 1991 ). These scholars have also worked t o define image in regard to a brand (i.e., product), a store, or a corporation. In the marketing literature, for example, of a few selected impressions among the people perceive things. of the store. This literature support e d the idea that various images exis t and the following sections elucidate th e se additonal aspects. Brand Image Keller (1993) proposed a customer based brand equity model to determine how consumers react to a brand. According to the model, brand knowledge consists of brand awareness which i ncludes brand recognition and brand recall and brand image, which includes four different brand associations: type, favorability, strength, and uniqueness. Keller

PAGE 29

29 ld based brand equity is formed when a customer is familiar with the brand and has favorable, strong, and unique brand associations in his or her memory. Some have found a strong relationship between b beliefs, attitudes, and intentions (e.g., Reynolds, 1965; Graeff, 1997; Ferrand & Pages, 1999; Bauer, Sauer, & Schmitt, 2005). Specifically, Graeff (1997) found a relationship between brand image and consumers brand evaluation whi ch positively influenced consumer attitudes and purchase intentions. Ferrand and Pages (1999) a lso found that a positive brand image of a sport organization increased the financial value of the organization (e.g., sponsorship, ticket sales, and merchandise sales), and effected consumer behavior (e.g., season ticket sales). In the sport literature, brand image has been used primarily to examine the brand images of sports teams ( e.g., Gladden & Funk, 2001, 2002; Ross, 2006; Ross, James, & Vargas, 2006; Ross, Russell, & Bang, 2008). Gladden and Funk (2001, 2002) examined the relationship model, to understand brand management in sport. They found that the brand image of a team positively Ross (2006) explained brand image in a sport setting, finding that spectator base d brand equity, which consisted of the team, merchandise sales, ticket sales, and other factors. Later, Ross, James, and Vargas (2006) developed the Team Brand A ssociation Scale (TBAS) to measure professional sport team brand associations. The validity and psychometric properties of the scale was futher confirmed by Ross, Russell, and Bang (2008). Other researchers have found a strong association between the brand

PAGE 30

30 Sauer, & Exler, 2008). Corporate Image process by which the public compares and contrasts the 46). Kennedy (1977) argued that corporate image consists of two key factors: the functional component and the emotional component. While the functional component can be measured easily because of its tangible attibutes, the emotional component is hard to measure because it is psychological factors (Nguyen & Leblanc, 2001). Previous findings have revealed that corporate imag e positively influenced financial performance (Shapiro, 1982) and consumer attitude (Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998; de Ruyter & Wetzels, 2000; Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Nguyen & Leblanc, 2001). Shapiro (1982) found that companies with positive images are mo re likely to increase their achievements, such as product sales and market share. Nguyen and Leblanc (2001) also found a positive link between corporate image and consumer loyalty toward the firm. They revealed that customers tend to show high levels of lo yalty toward a company that has a favorable corporate image. In addition, Andreassen and Lindestad (1998) indicated that a positive corporate image leads to customer satisfaction, loyalty toward the company, and a high level of perceived quality and produc t value. Further, de Ruyter and Wetzels (2000) found that customers have a positive perceived quality of the products of a company for which they hold a positive image. Athlete Image In the advertising literature, numerous studies have dealt with matching celebrity

PAGE 31

31 the Source Attractiveness Model (McGuire, 1968) (2) the Image Transfer Model (McCracken, 1989) (3) the Source Credibility Model (Ohanian, 1990, 199 1), and (4) the Image Match Up Hypothesis (Kamins, 1990) According to the Source Credibility Model, celebrity message and any change in consumer attitude (Ohani an, 1990, 1991). The Image Transfer Model suggests that the ability to transfer the symbolic properties and cultural meanings of the celebrity to the product image is most important factor in the success of the endorser (McCracken, 1989) The Image Match U p Hypothesis focuses on the congruence between the image of the celebrity r endorsed. In other words, these studies assumed that an endorser (e.g., expert, celebrity, sports star, etc.) has his or her unique image which can influence people Using an athlete as an endorser can be effective in influencing not only consumer behavior, but also sport related consumption behaviors (e.g., Till, 2001; Jowdy & McDonald, 2002; Fink, Cunningham, & Kensicki, 2004; Carlson & D onavan, 2008). For example, Till (2001) found a strong relationship between an athlete endorser and the endorsed product, and Jowdy and McDonald (2002) found that an athlete endorser has the power to increase awareness of the product or brand, improve prod intention. More recently, studies have adapted the brand image to an individual or an athlete to perceptions towar d an athlete as a brand itself (see Thomson, 2006; Arai & Ko, 2010).

PAGE 32

32 Based on previous research findings, we may conclude that, because of the athletes' community visibility and "high profile" stature (i.e., image ), he or she can make people change their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors In other words, an athlete who has positive image can behavior. Personal Involvement Involvement is considered an import attitude, and behavior, especially in the literature on consumer behavior and philanthropy (Laurent & Kapferer, 1985; Berens, van Riel, & van Bruggen, 2005; Barnes & McCarville, 2005; Bienstock & Stafford, 2006; Grau & Folse, 2007; Bennett, 2009). Numerous researchers have defined involvement in terms of individual interests. For example, Zaichkowsky defined and reflecting the extent of personal relevance to the individual in terms of basic goals, values and self relevance of the cause to the individual According to Mowen (1995), involvement is a multi dimensional factor that has distinct characteristics: ( 1 ) self e xpressive importance, ( 2 ) hedonic importance, ( 3 ) practical relevance, and ( 4 measure this multi dimensional factor. The PII was initially developed as a 20 item scale to

PAGE 33

33 measure the involvement construct and, a decade later, Zaichkowsky (1994) revised the scale and reduced the 20 items to 10 that can be divided into two subscales ( i.e., cognitive and affective dimensions). While the PII focuses on the cognitive and affective dimensions of mportance, and probability of purchase error. Laurent and Kapferer (1985) argued that consumers tend to behave differently based on the five antecedents of involvement. pu rchase a product and/or participate in a philanthropic cause. In the advertising literature, involvement has a positive influence on cause related marketing (CRM) strategies. Grau and Folse (2007) noted that numerous companies used CRM campaigns to obtain positive outcomes because consumers who show high involvement with a cause tend to have postive attitudes and participation intentions. The results of their study showed that highly involved people are more likely to participate in campaigns than those who have low involvement. While consumers with argued that companies should focus on consumers with low involvement as well since these consumers can be influenced by messages that are positively framed by the CRM campaign. Specifically in donor behavior dynamics, involvement seems to influence frequency of contribution and amount of contribution (Tsiotsou, 1998, 2004). The frequency of contriution, especially to an ed ucational institution, is determined by involvement of alumni (Blakeley, 1974; Webb, 1989). In addition, according to Tsiotsou (1998, 2004), a donor who is highly involved with a university athletic program is more likely to make a large contribution to th at program. In

PAGE 34

34 distinguish donors who make large contributions from those who make small contributions. More recently, Bennett (2009) found that personal inv olvement with giving to charity is sites. The results of the study showed that typical impulsive donors share several charateristics, including prior knowledge o f hospices, regular donation to charities, and a sense of personal involvement with giving to charity. r) behavior towards a involvement has a moderating effect on the relationship between CSR and product attitude. In sum, based on these previous findings, we assume that personal involvement will moderate the relationship between athlete related factors and trust toward the athlete, which may in turn affect donor behavior. Trust In most cases, trust is an essential factor for successful relationships ( Moorman, Zaltman, & Deshpande, 1992 ; Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Berry, 1995; Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Sargeant & Lee, 2002) According to Moorman, Zaltman, and Deshpande (1992 ) s confidence" ( p. 315) The authors further argued that trust consists of a belief that is based on an indicates reliance on a partner. Morgan and Hunt (1994) also conceptualized trust as existing definitions emphasize the importance of confidence in developing trust.

PAGE 35

35 The idea of trust has drawn additional attention fr om the social exchange literature. For example, Berry (1995) argued that trust plays a critical role in relationship marketing, especially when building a service based relationship with customers because of intangible characteristics of service. Berry hig hlighted three factors as important to the development of trust: opening lines of communication, service guarantees, and a higher standard of conduct. Morgan and Hunt (1994) also found that trust was among the most important factors in successful relations hip marketing, noting that commitment and trust are key factors in relationship marketing, especially when cooperative relationships are required. While some researchers have focused on the concept of trust within interpersonal relationships (e.g., Crosby & Stephens, 1987; Crosby, Evans, & Cowles, 1990), others have focused on trust within interorganizational relationships (e.g., Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Gwinner, Gremler, & Bitner, 1998). Crosby a n d Stephens (1987) suggested that trust is a key factor in the interaction and communication between buyer and develop positive attitudes toward the quality and reliability of products or services the firm provides. I n terms of donor behavior, trust should play a significant role in the donor intentions dynamic. Indeed, Andaleeb and Basu (1995) indicated that the high level of trust that individuals have in blood banks positively influences don or behavior. Sargeant and Lee (2004) found that, although commitment mediated the relationship between trust and donor behavior, trust had a significant influence on donor behavior. Further, Bekkers (2003) suggested that people who have a high level of trust tend to donate more mo ney to charitable causes, and Waters (2008) revealed that major donors those who gave more than $5,000 per year showed higher level of trust toward the fund raising organization than other donors.

PAGE 36

36 l of trust toward a person or an organization has a significant and positive impact on their perceptions and behaviors. In line with those findings, it is reasonable to suggest that there is a strong association between donors level of trust toward an ath lete and donor behavior.

PAGE 37

37 CHAPTER 3 METHOD The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of an athlete on donor behavior, the athlete in such a relations hip. This chapter explains the quantitative methods and procedures that were used to analyze these relationships: (1) sampling and procedures, (2) instruments, (3) pilot study, and (4) data analysis for main study. Sample and Procedures The population con sisted of actual and potential donors, aged 18 or older, who donate or are willing to donate money to a nonprofit organization represented by Dwight Howard (i.e., the Dwight Howard Foundation). The sample comprised actual and potential donors living in Orl ando, Florida region of the U.S. and data were collected from attendees of the National Basketball Association ( NBA ) games during the 2010 2011 season. Generally, two sampling methods were used: (1) probability sampling and (2) non probability sampling. Wh ile probability sampling provides equal odds of being selected, non probability sampling does not. Those who actually donated and potential donors (who attended the games) formed the non probability samples and people living in Orlando belonged to the prob ability samples. After proposing this study, the requisite documents were sent to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) for data collection approval. The researcher traveled to Orlando, Florida, on game days and asked game attendees to participate in this survey. If people agreed to participate, the researcher briefly explained the purpose of the study. In addition, the researcher sent online survey questionnaires to people living in Orlando. The questionnaire required approximately 10 minutes to complete.

PAGE 38

38 Instruments The questionnaire was intended to examine the following: ( 1 ) identification with an athlete, ( 2 ) athlete image, ( 3 ) trust toward the athlete, ( 4 ) personal involvement, ( 5 ) donor behavior, and ( 6 ) demographics. Identification with the Athlete Based on two previous studies (Trail, Robinson, Dick, & Gillentine, 2003; Robinson, Trail, & Kwon, 2004), the points of attachment index (PAI) scale was used to measure identification with the athlete. The PAI consisted of seven subscales, which include id entification with ( 1 ) the players, ( 2 ) the team, ( 3 ) the coach, ( 4 ) the community, ( 5 ) the sport, ( 6 ) the university, and ( 7 ) level of sport. Each subscale contained three items with a 7 point Likert type scale ranging from 1 ( strongly disagree ) to 7 ( stro ngly agree ). For this study, one subscale from I Athlete Imag e Since a generally accepted scale to measure the image of an athlete does not exist, adopting the corporate image scale and modifying it was appropriate for the current study. To (which is us ed to measure corporate image) was employed. Their scale contains three items with a 7 point Likert type scale ranging from 1 ( strongly disagree ) to 7 ( strongly agree ). The three items needed to be modified from their original wording because the scale was developed to measure corporate image. The I have always had a good impression of opinion, (athlete) has a good image in the minds of people (both fans and non believe that (athlete) has a

PAGE 39

39 Trust toward the Athlete level of trust (Athlete) is an used a 5 point scale, the items in the current study were measured using a 7 point Likert scale ranging from 1 ( strongly disagree ) to 7 ( strongly agree ). Personal Involvement nal involvement with the cause. The PII was developed as a 20 item semantic differential scale but was later condensed into 10 items for validity and reliability reasons. The revised PII consisted of 10 semantic differential items scored on 7 point scales, including important/unimportant interesting/boring relevant/irrelevant exciting/unexciting means a lot to me/means nothing appealing/unappealing fascinating/mundane valuable/worthless involving/uninvolving and needed/not needed Donor Behavior D onor behavior was divided into two sections, one for potential donors who are willing to donate in the future and the other for actual donors who are currently participating in donation. Three items measuring behavioral intention from the theory of planned behavior, developed by Ajzen ( 1991 I will donate to determined to donate to (organizatio or actual donors differed I will donate to the (organization/foundation)

PAGE 40

40 determined t Demographics A demographic information section was included at the end of the questionnaire. Participants were classified by age, gender, ethnicity, occupation, income level, level of education, and previ ous experience with donation. In addition, at the beginning of the survey, participants were asked if they knew whether the athlete had his or her own foundation (or nonprofit organization). Pilot Study A pilot study was conducted before the main study t o test appropriateness of the items and factors, to determine the appropriate sample size, and to discover potential problems before using the proposed data analysis technique. Participants totaled 80 undergraduate students majoring in sport management at the University of Florida. Participants were asked to complete the questionnaire, which consisted of four main parts (i.e., athlete related factors, personal involvement, trust toward the athlete, and intention to donate) by following standard procedures i n accordance with the IRB protocols. Before testing the proposed framework, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using AMOS 18.0 to find which variables will be correlated with which factors, and which factors are correlated with one another. The hypothesized measurement model for independent variables (i.e., identification with an athlete, athlete image, personal involvement, and trust) and dependent variable (i.e., donor behavior) was supported by the CFA. The fit of the model to the data was ade quate with the chi square statistic ( 2 ( 199 N = 80 ) = 1.53 ), showing that the model is correct and acceptable. The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) also indicates an acceptable fit (.084; Brown & Cudeck, 1992). Additionally, the comparative fit index (.91)

PAGE 41

41 value was acceptable within the context of the model. Comparisons of squared correlations among constructs were employed for discriminate validity which should be less than .85 ( Kline 2005) The correlation matrix for th e model is presented in Table 3 1. For the internal con extracted (AVE) were examined. Although identification (.79) and image (.76) were less than the suggested cut off value of .80, other three factors were greater th an .80. All average variance extracted (AVE) values exceeded the recommended 0.50 cuto ff (Fornell & Larker, 1981; Table 3 2). To test the proposed conceptual framework, regression analyses were conducted using SPSS 18.0. The researcher used Baron and Kenn guideline to test the moderating effect of personal involvement. The influence of identification with an athle te on trust toward the athlete was significant ( = 56 p < .05 ), as was athlete image on trust toward the athlete ( = 71 p < .05 ). Trust toward the athlete also had a significant influence on intention to donate ( = 25 p < .05 ). The following is th e results for testing the mediating role of trust on the relationship between identification with an athlete and intention to The first analysis of mediation showed that the influence of ide ntification with an athlete on trust toward the athlete was significant ( = 56 p < .05 ), as it was on intention to donate ( = 24 p < .05 ). The second analysis showed that trust toward the athlete had a significant influence on intention to donate ( = 25 p < .05 ). The third analysis indicated that when trust toward the athlete was controlled, the influence of identification with an athlete on intention to

PAGE 42

42 donate was not significant ( = 17 p > .05 ). That is, trust toward the athlete mediates the relationship between identification with an athlete and intention to donat e. image and intention to donate is as follows: (1) the first analysis showed that the influence of = 71 p < .05 ) and on intention to donate ( = 28 p < .05 ) was significant, (2) the second analysis indicated that trust toward the athlete was significantly related to intention to donate ( = 25 p < .05 ), and (3) the third analysis revealed that when trust toward the intention to donate was not significant ( = 20 p > .05 ). In other words, trust toward the athlete To test the moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete related factors and trust toward the athlete, the researcher conducted a moderated regression analysis by following The first order effects (i .e., identification with an athlete and personal involvement) were entered in the first step; and the interaction term (i.e., identification with an athlete personal involvement) was entered in the second step. Since the influence of identification with an athlete personal involvement on trust toward the athlete was significant ( = 59 p < .05 ), there were moderating effects of personal involvement on the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the athlete. To test the mo derating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between the The first first step; personal involvement) was entered in the

PAGE 43

43 personal involvement on trust toward the athlete was not significant ( = 1 17 p > .05 ), there were no moderating effects of personal Data Analysis for Main Study The data gathered from the survey for the main study were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, v. 18.0). Data analyses were conducted in the following order. First, preliminary analyses (e.g., outliers, normality, CFA, and reliability) were employed. Second, descriptive statistics for the parti cipant were analyzed. Third, the conceptual framework level of trust toward the athlete on the relationship between athlete related constructs and donor beha vior was analyzed. Finally, the moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete related factors and donor behavior was analyzed. Preliminary Analyses Before analyzing the data for the main study, normality of the data were ex amined by the skewness and kurtosis values. Skewness is described as the degree to which a frequency distribution is asymmetrical (Glass & Hopkins, 1996). Kurtosis relates to the size of a latively large tails; those with the normal distribution (Glass & Hopkins, 1996). A CFA was conducted using AMOS 18.0 for optimally matching the observed and theoretical factor structures for a given data set to inter item reliability assessments of five instruments extracted (AV E) values were examined.

PAGE 44

44 Descriptive Statistics Various descriptive statistics were used with SPSS 18.0, including central tendency (i.e., mean, median, and mode) and measures of variability (e.g., standard deviation, range, etc.), to examine the basic ch aracteristics of the data. Testing Hypotheses To test the hypotheses, means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations were tested for all variables. To test the relationship between independent variables (i.e., identification with the athlete, athl a dependent variable (i.e., donor behavior), regression analysis was used. Generally, regression analysis is a statistical technique designed for modeling and analyzing s everal variables, specifically the relationship between one or more independent variables and a dependent variable. To test the mediating role of trust toward on the relationship between the athlete related post hoc analysis were used. According to these researchers, a variable serves as a mediator if it fulfills the following conditions: (1) the independent variable should have significant influence on both the m ediator and the dependent variable, (2) the mediator should have significant influence on the dependent variable, and (3) when the mediator is controlled, the independent variable should not have significant influence on the dependent variable. To test th e moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete related factors and trust toward the athlete, a moderated regression analysis was used. A moderator is a kind of interacting variable that should be analyzed in the following o rder: (1) the controls should be entered in the first step (excluded for this study because of non existence of controls); (2) the first order effects (i.e., identification with an athlete or athlete image with personal involvement) should be entered in th e second step; and (3) the interaction term (i.e.,

PAGE 45

45 identification with an athlete personal involvement or athlete image personal involvement) should be entered in the final step. To reduce the threat of multicollinearity, the independent variables and subsequent interaction term should be centered (Aiken & West, 1991). According to Aiken and West (1991), the interaction is supported if the final step is significant.

PAGE 46

46 Table 3 1. Means, Standard deviations, & Correlations for pilot study Variable Identification Image Trust Involvement Intention Identification 1 Image 543 ** 1 Trust 557 ** 709 ** 1 Involvement 297 358 ** 414 ** 1 Intention 242 278 252 555 ** 1 Mean 5.26 5.87 5.28 5.16 3.52 SD .997 .809 .814 .803 1. 366 Note. **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2 tailed).

PAGE 47

47 Table 3 2 Summary result for reliability assessments & AVE ) Factor Item AVE Identification I identify with (athlete) I consider myself a fan of (athlete) I consider myself a fan of (athlete) .48 .95 .94 .79 .67 Image I have always had a good impression of (athlete) In my opinion, (athlete) has a good image in the mind s of people I believe that (athlete) has a better image than other athletes .74 .77 .64 .76 .50 Personal Involvement Unimportant/Important Boring/Interesting Irrelevant/Relevant Unexciting/Exciting Means nothing/Means a lot to me Unappealing/Appealing Mundane/Fascinating Worthless/Valuable Uninvolving/Involving Not needed/Needed .77 .73 .74 .75 .58 .84 .77 .72 .72 .68 .92 .54 Trust Dwight Howard is an athlete that stands by his word I can rely on Dwight Howard to keep the promises he makes to his fa ns Dwight Howard is a sincere person .90 .59 .79 .81 .59 Intention to Donate I will donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation I intend to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation I am determined to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation .95 .98 .90 .96 .89

PAGE 48

48 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS This chapter contains the results of the data analyses conducted for the current study. Based on the results of the pilot study, data for the main study were collected using the previously described instruments. Specifically, five sca les were adapted from previous research to measure the athlete the NBA game attendees and people living in Orlando, Florida The res ults are discussed in the following order: (1) preliminary analyses, ( 2 ) descriptive analys e s, and ( 3 ) hypotheses testing. Preliminary Analyses Skewness and kurtosis values were examined to determine the normality of the data bef ore the main study. Although skewness values for almost all variables (except intention to donate which ranged from .005 to .156) were negative, they were in an acceptable range (ranging from 1.222 to .553). Negative skewness indicates that a small proba bility of a large loss is offset by a large probability of a small gain. Kurtosis values for all variables were also shown to have an acceptable range (from .923 to 1.364), representing that the data is normally distributed. A CFA was conducted using AMO S 18.0 to predict how well the items represent the proposed latent constructs As noted, a CFA is a theory testing model which is to by optimally matching the observed and theoretical factor is powerful because it provides explicit hypothesis testing for factor analytic and shoul d be the much more widely used

PAGE 49

49 Initially, t he hypothesized measurement model for the latent constructs (i.e., identification, image, involvement, trust, and intention to donate) was not supported by t he CFA. That is, the data was not within the parameters associated with a good fitting model, providing the basis for model trimming. The chi square statistic was 2 ( 199 N = 305 ) = 4.17 the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was .102, and the comparative fit index (CFI) was .93. However, when two personal involvement items were removed (i.e., important/unimportant and interesting/boring ), t he fit of t he model to the data was acceptable. The chi square statistic was 2 ( 179 N = 305 ) = 3.97 the RMSEA was .098, and the CFI was .94. Since personal involvement scale has ten items, it may be inflated the RMSEA value. Comparisons of squared correlations amon g constructs also were employed for discriminate validity. Kline (2005) suggested that discriminate validity can be established if correlations among constructs are less than .85. The correlation matrix is presented in Table 4 1. In order to assess inter i tem reliability for five instruments and average variance extracted (AVE) values for each factor were employed For items to be reliable, values should be greater than the suggested cut off value of 8 0 for internal consi stency ( Nunnally 19 78 ) and average variance extracted (AVE) values should greater than the recommended 0.50 cut off (Fornell & Larker, 1981). The values for and AVE for the main study were more than .80 and .50, respectively ( Table 4 2 ) Descriptive Analys e s In total, 324 questionnaires were obtained. Among them, 19 were returned incomplete (participants explained that they did not have enough time to complete the survey before going into the arena to see the game). Therefore, 305 usable q uestionnaires were used for the subsequent analyses.

PAGE 50

50 Demographics Demographic characteristics of resp ondents are provided in Table 4 3 The majority of the respondents were men (83.7%). The average age of the respondents was 39 (M = 39.13, SD = 12.45), an d 46.8% of respondents were Caucasian, 25.5% were Hispanic, 16.8% were African American, and 10.5% were Asian/Pacific Islander. Among the respondents, 56.4% had a college degree and 21.1% had a professional/graduate degree. Additionally, 60.2% of responden ts donated less than $100 in 2010 and 68.2% donated to other nonprofit organizations. Athlete related Factors A general summary of means and standard deviations of athlete related factors are presented in Table 4 4 The means of athlete related factors (i dentification with an athlete and athlete image) for Dwight Howard ranged from 4.78 to 5.50. Standard deviations ranged from 1.40 to 1.76. These scores indicated that most of respondents identified with Dwight Howard and e positively and favorably The items related to athlete image had a higher mean (M = 5.41, SD = 1.37) on the 7 point Likert type scale than the items Howard has a go Personal Involvement Table 4 5 presents the descriptive statistics for the personal involve ment construct. The means of all 10 items for the Dwight Howard Foundation were above 4 on the 7 point semantic differential scale and ranged from 4.78 to 5.43. Standard deviations ranged from 1.40 to 1.51. These scores reflected that most respondents felt strong involvement with the Dwight Howard

PAGE 51

51 1.44) among 10 personal involvemen t subscales. Trust toward the Athlete the athlete are shown in Table 4 6 5.00 on the 7 point Likert type sc ale, which indicated that the most respondents had a high level of trust toward Dwight Howard. The mean scores ranged from 5.04 to 5.19 and standard 1.37). Intention to Donate Table 4 7 presents the descriptive statistics for responden below 4.00 on the 7 point Likert type scale and ranged from 3.42 to 3.64. Standard deviations ranged from 1.72 to 1.77. These scores refle cted that only some of the respondents were willing donate to the Dwight H among three subscales for donors intention to donate Hypotheses Testing To test the hypotheses, regression analysis was employed. Regression analysis was used first to test the relationshi p between independent variables (i.e., identification with an athlete, athlete image, personal involvement, and trust toward the athlete) and dependent variable (i.e.,

PAGE 52

52 intention to donate), and then to test the mediating role of trust on the relationship b etween athlete related factors and intention to donate by Finally, a moderated regression analysis was used to test the moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete related factors and trust toward the athlete. Regression Analysis The regression analysis r esults are presented in Table 4 8 The results revealed significant influences of identification with an athlete ( = 41 p < 05 ) athlete image ( = 36 p < .05 ) personal involvement ( = 55 p < .05 ) and trust toward the athlete ( = 40, p < .05 ) on intention to donate. Hypothesis 1 predicted that identification with an athlete will positively f trust toward the athlete. The results indicated that identification with an athlete had a significant influence on trust toward the athlete ( = 87 p < .05 ), supporting hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 predicted that athlete image will positively influence t he image on trust toward the athlete was significant ( = 88 p < .05 ), supporting hypothesis 2. the athlete will positively influence donor behavior (i.e., intention to donate). Hypothesis 4 was supported by regression analysis as well ( = 40 p < .05 ; Tables 4 8 and 4 9 ). Mediation Analysis As noted earlier, to test the mediating role of trust t oward the athlete on the relationship between athlete related factors and intention to donate, the researcher followed Baron and Hypothesis 5 f trust toward the athlete would mediate the relationship between athlete related factors and donor behavior. To test mediation, three step regression

PAGE 53

53 analysis was conducted two times. The first three step test was conducted to find the mediating role of t rust on the relationship between identification with an athlete and intention to donate. The first step showed that the influence of identification with an athlete on trust toward the athlete was significant ( = 87 p < .05 ), as it was on intention to do nate ( = 41 p < .05 ). The second step showed that trust toward the athlete had a significant influence on intention to donate ( = 40 p < .05 ). The third step indicated that when trust toward the athlete was controlled, the influence of identification with an athlete on intention to donate was significant ( = 24 p < .05 ) but less significant than the relationship between identification with an athlete and intention to donate. In other words, although the influence of identification with an athlete w as not completely negated, it was significantly reduced. Thus, trust toward the athlete partially mediates the relationship between identification with an athle te and intention to donate ( Figure 4 1). The second mediation test of trust for the relationshi p between athlete image and intention to donate was as follows: ( 1 ) the first step showed that the influence of athlete image on trust toward the athlete ( = 88 p < .05 ) and on intention to donate ( = 36 p < .05 ) was significant; ( 2 ) the second step indicated that trust toward the athlete was significantly related to intention to donate ( = 40 p < .05 ); and ( 3 ) the third step revealed that when trus t toward the athlete was controlled, the influence of athlete image on intention to donate was not significant ( = 04 p > .05 ). Therefore, trust toward the athlete mediates the relationship between the ( Figure 4 2 ). Moderation Analysis To test hypotheses 3a and 3b, moderated regression analysis was conducted to find the moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete related factors and trust toward the athlete. Since a moderator is a kind of interacting variable, a variable serves as a moderator if the results of analysis are satisfied in the following order: (1) the controls should be

PAGE 54

54 entered in the first step (excluded because of non existence of controls); (2) the first order effe cts (i.e., identification with an athlete or athlete image with personal involvement) should be entered in the second step; and (3) the interaction term (i.e., identification with an athlete personal involvement or athlete image personal involvement) s hould be entered in the final step. To reduce the threat of multicollinearity, the independent variables and subsequent interaction term should be centered (Aiken & West, 1991). According to Aiken and West (1991), the interaction is supported if the final step is significant. The first moderated regression analysis was employed to find the moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the athlete. Following the guideline of Aiken and W est (1991), identification with an athlete and personal involvement were entered together in the first step; and the interaction of identification with an athlete personal involvement was entered in the second step. The results showed that the influence of identification with an athlete personal involvement on trust toward the athlete was significant ( = 35 p < .05 ). Therefore, personal involvement moderates the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the athlete. The s econd moderated regression analysis was conducted to find the moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete image and trust toward the athlete. The analysis also followed ted that the personal involvement on trust toward the athlete was not significant ( = 01 p > .05 ). Thus, there was no moderating effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete image and trust toward the athlete. The results of the moderating effect of trust indicate that h ighly involved people with a high level of identification with the athlete tend to have a strong level of trust toward the athlete compared to less involved people

PAGE 55

55 with a low level of identification with the athlete The results of the two moderated regression analyses are presented in Tables 4 10 and 4 11.

PAGE 56

56 Table 4 1. Correlation matrix for main study Variable Identification Image Trust Involvement Intention Identification 1 Image 833 ** 1 Trust 866 ** 881 ** 1 Involvement 623 ** 602 ** 633 ** 1 Intention 406 ** 360 ** 400 ** 551 ** 1 Note. **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2 tailed).

PAGE 57

57 Table 4 2 Summary result for reliability assessments & AVE ) Factor Item AVE Identification I identify with (athlete) I consider myself a fan of (athlete) I consider myself a fan of (athlete) .72 .95 .94 .89 .77 Image I have always had a good impression of (athlete) In my opinion, (athlete) has a good image in the mind s of people I believe that (athlete) has a better image than other athletes .92 .90 .84 .92 .79 Personal Involvement Unimportant/Important Boring/Interesting Irrelevant/Relevant Unexciting/Exciting Means nothing/Means a lot to me Unappealing/Appealing Mundane/Fascinating Worthless/Valuable Uninvolving/Involving Not needed/Needed .85 .83 .90 .87 .85 .94 .92 .90 .92 .85 .97 .78 Trust Dwight Howard is an athlete that stands by his word I can rely on Dwight Howard to keep the promises he makes to his fa ns Dwight Howard is a sincere person .93 .91 .90 .94 .84 Intention to Donate I will donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation I intend to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation I am determined to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation .98 .99 .95 .98 .95

PAGE 58

58 Table 4 3 Descriptive statistics for the demographic variables (n = 305 ) Variable Category N % Valid % Cumulative % Age 18 28 46 15.1 21.7 21.7 29 38 70 23.0 33.0 54.7 39 48 42 13.8 19.8 74.5 49 58 34 11.1 16.0 90.6 59 68 13 4.3 6.1 96.7 More than 69 7 2.3 3.3 100.0 No response 93 30.5 Gender Male 185 60.7 83.7 83.7 Female 36 11.8 16.3 100.0 No response 84 27.5 Ethnicity White (non Hispanic) 103 33.8 46.8 46.8 Black 37 12.1 16.8 63.6 Hispanic 56 18.4 25 .5 89.1 Asian/Pacific Islander 23 7.5 10.5 99.5 Other 1 .3 .5 100.0 No response 85 27.9 Household Income Less than $25K 65 21.3 31.1 31.1 $25K ~ $50K 51 16.7 24.4 55.5 $50K ~ $75K 55 18.0 26.3 81.8 $75K ~ $100K 15 4.9 7.2 89.0 $100K ~ $150K 9 3.0 4.3 93.3 More than $150K 14 4.6 6.7 100.0 No response 96 31.5

PAGE 59

59 Table 4 3 Descriptive statistics for the demographic variables (continued) Variable Category N % Valid % Cumulative % Education High school 37 12.1 17.0 17. 0 Some college 66 21.6 30.3 47.2 College degree 57 18.7 26.1 73.4 Some graduate school 11 3.6 5.0 78.4 Professional/ graduate degree 46 15.1 21.1 99.5 Other 1 .3 .5 100.0 No response 87 28.5 Previous Experience (2010) Less than $100 1 09 35.7 60.2 60.2 $100 ~ $300 29 9.5 16.0 76.2 $300 ~ $500 19 6.2 10.5 86.7 $500 ~ $700 9 3.0 5.0 91.7 $700 ~ $1000 3 1.0 1.7 93.4 More than $1000 12 3.9 6.6 100.0 No response 124 40.7 Donate to other non profit organization Yes 146 4 7.9 68.2 68.2 No 68 22.3 31.8 100 No response 91 29.8

PAGE 60

60 Table 4 4 Descriptive statistics for athlete related factors (n = 305) Factors and items M SD Identification with an athlete I identify with Dwight Howard I consider myself a fan of Dwight Howard I consider myself a fan of Dwight Howard Overall 4.78 5.15 5.18 5.03 1.76 1.63 1.66 1.53 A thlete image I have always had a good impression of Dwight Howard In my opinion, Dwight Howard has a good image in the minds of peop le I believe that Dwight Howard has a better image than other athletes Overall 5.34 5.50 5.39 5.41 1.59 1.44 1.40 1.37

PAGE 61

61 Table 4 5 Descriptive statistics for personal involvement (n = 305) Factors and items M SD Personal involvement Unimportant/Important Boring / Interesting Irrelevant/Relevant Unexciting/Exciting Means nothing/Means a lot to me Unappealing/Appealing Mundane/Fascinating Worthless/Valuable Uninvolving/Involving Not needed/Needed Overall 5.07 5.05 5.1 0 4.91 4.78 5.11 4.98 5.41 5.21 5.43 5.10 1.46 1.41 1.42 1.40 1.44 1.45 1.43 1.45 1.51 1.51 1.30

PAGE 62

62 Table 4 6 Descriptive statistics for trust toward an athlete (n = 305) Factors and items M SD Trust toward an athlete Dwight Howard is an athlete that stands by his word I can rely on Dwight Howard to keep the promises he makes to his fans Dwight Howard is a sincere person Overall 5.19 5.04 5.11 5.11 1.45 1.37 1.33 1.30

PAGE 63

63 Table 4 7 Descriptive statistics for intenti on to donate (n = 305) Factors and items M SD Intention to donate I will donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation I intend to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation I am determined to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation Overall 3.64 3.63 3.42 3.5 7 1.72 1.76 1.77 1.72

PAGE 64

64 Table 4 8 Summary result for regression analysis Independ e nt Variable df R R F Sig. Dependent variable: Intention to donate Identification with an athlete 1 .162 .162 59.905 .406 .000*** A thlete image 1 127 .130 45.193 .360 .000*** Trust toward the athlete 1 .157 .160 57.584 .400 .000*** Personal Involvement 1 .301 .304 132.113 .551 .000*** Note. *** p < .001; ** p < .01; p < .05

PAGE 65

65 Table 4 9 Summary result for regression analysis Variab le df R R F Sig. Dependent variable: Trust toward the athlete Identification with an athlete 1 .750 .749 909.493 .866 .000*** A thlete image 1 .776 .775 1048.624 .881 .000*** Note. *** p < .001; ** p < .01; p < .05

PAGE 66

66 Table 4 10 Summary res ult for moderated regression analysis testing the effect of personal involvement on the relationship between identification with an athlete and trust toward the athlete Variable R R F Sig. t Sig. Step 1 .763 .764 490.078 .000** Identification wi th an athlete .771 21.591 .000*** Personal involvement .153 4.291 .000*** Step 2 .768 .005 7.145 .008** Identification with an athlete .975 11.951 .000*** Personal involvement .329 4.408 .000*** ID PI .350 2.673 .008** Note. Dependent variable: Intention to donate Note. *** p < .001; ** p < .01; p < .05

PAGE 67

67 Table 4 11 Summary result for moderated regression analysis testing the effect of personal involvement on the relationship between athlete image and trust toward the athlete Variable R R F Sig. t Sig. Step 1 .793 .793 576.907 .000 A thlete image .783 23.879 .000*** Personal involvement .162 4.935 .000*** Step 2 .793 .000 .004 .951 A thlete image .779 10.785 .000*** Personal inv olvement .157 1.949 .052 IMG PI .008 .061 .951 Note. Dependent variable: Intention to donate Note. *** p < .001; ** p < .01; p < .05

PAGE 68

68 Figure 4 1 Results of the test for mediation on the relationship between identification and intention to donate Note. ** p < .0 5 Note. A Decrease in the boldness of the lines denotes a change in significance.

PAGE 69

69 Figure 4 2 Results of the test for mediation on the relationship between image and intention to donate Note ** p < .0 5 Note. A Decrease in the boldness of the lines denotes a change in significance.

PAGE 70

70 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION This chapter begins with discussion and interpretation of the data analyses conducted for the current study. The general aim of this study w as to expand awareness and knowledge of donor behavior in the sport industry by analyzing several critical factors, which include athlete. Particularly, the pri mary purpose of this study was to explore how identification with an athlete and the toward the athlete, which in turn affect s donor behavior and the moderating role of personal involvement in such relationshi ps. To find those relationships, the conceptual framework was developed based on previous research findings on donor behavior in various literatures. This chapter consists of six sections: (1) instrumentations, (2) descriptive findings, (3) hypotheses test ing, (4) implications, (5) limitations and future research, and (6) conclusion. Although many valuable donor behavior studies have been conducted (e.g., Billing et al. 1985; Mahony et al., 2003) limited research has been conducted to find the impact of a n athlete behavior or advertising. High level of identification with an athlete and positive image of an s attitudes and behavioral intentions (e.g., Fink et al., 2002; Carlson & Donavan, 2008; Branscombe & Wann, 1994; Flavian et al., 2005 ). Additionally, personal involvement and trust have a positive impact on an perception, attitude, and behavi or (e.g., Zaichkowsky, 1985 ; Bennett, 2003 ; Waters, 2008). Instrumentations For inter employed. In this analysis, the data were found to be normal, independent, and properly

PAGE 71

71 distri buted. Inter item reliability of the instrumentations used in this study was very consistent with previous research. For example, in terms of identification with an athlete, we used one of the seven subscales in the PAI. The results of the current study an d previous studies ( e.g., Trail et al., 2003; Robinson et al., 2004) showed that greater than the suggested cut off value of 8 0 for internal consistency. Other scales used in this study (i.e., athlete image, person al involvement, trust toward the athlete, and intention to donate) also 8 0 cut off value. In other words, the instruments used in this study proved reliable and could add contributing evidence to support using those scales in future research. Descriptive findings Overall, the examination of athlete related factors (i.e., identification with an athlete and athlete image) show s rd the athlete, and education, or religion, this study took a different approach by examining the effect of an athlete on donor behavior. For example, previous research on athletic donor motivation focused only on those who make contributions to a college based on several key motives (e.g., Billing et al., 1985; Stau rowsky et al., 1996; Verner et al., 1998). This study, however, focused on antecedents of donor behavior, especially in professional sport settings by finding the influence of athletes on donor behavior. Additionally, we emphasized the important issue of philanthropic behavior. Since trust plays significant role in both interpersonal and interorganizational relationships (e .g, Crosby & Stephens, 1987; Crosby et al., 1990 ; Garbarino

PAGE 72

72 & Johnson, 1999; Gwinner et al., 1998 donor behavior dynamics when athletes are related to donation. Lastly, as previous research findings su ggested (e.g., Tsiotsou, 1998, 2004; Webb, 1989; Bennett, 2009), personal organization represented by a professional athlete. Hypotheses Testing Seeing that numerous pro fessional athletes are actively involved with charitable giving and helping others who need their support, athletes are among the most important factors in athlete identified with an athlete were more likely to make contributions to his/her non profit organization. The results of the study are consistent with previous studies tha t people with strong identification with an athlete or a sport team were more likely to show positive behavior outcomes, such as attending more games, paying more for tickets, or spending more money on team merchandise ( Fink et al., 2002), or more likely t o support the team ( Kwon et al., 2008). willing to donate their money to the organization. This result supported the previous image related studies which revealed tha intention ( e.g., Jowdy & McDonald, 2002; Fink et al., 2004; Carlson & Donavan, 2008). In addition, peopl e who had a high level of trust toward the athlete and/or were highly example, if people believe that the athlete is trustworthy or they have some kind of associatio n profit organization, they will be more likely to donate their time or money.

PAGE 73

73 This finding also supported the previous reseach of Bruce (1998) and Nichols (1991) They found that individuals who suffer from disease or are related to those who are suffering will be likely to donate more than those who have no such association. mediates the relationship between athlete related factors and inte ntion to donate. That is, people with a high level of identification with the athlete tend to have a high level of trust toward the athlete and, in turn, are more likely to participate in a donation program represented by the athlete. Further, if people pe rceive the image of the athlete favorably, they are more likely to have higher level of trust toward the athlete, which ultimately affects their intention to donate to his/her non rust level indicated that people who have a high level of trust tend to donate more money to charitable causes (Bekkers, 2003) and make large contributions to fund raising organizations (Waters, 2008). In line with those findings, the results of the curren t study provide additional support for are planning to donate their money to a non profit organization, especially to the foundation initiated or supported by a professional athlete to whom they feel strong attachment. Consistent with suggestions in the personal involvement literature ( e.g., Grau & Folse, 2007; Blakeley, 1974; Webb, 1989; Tsiotsou, 1998, 2004) two athlete related factors (i.e., identification with an athlete and athlete image) were used to examine the moderating effect of effect of personal involvement shows interesting results. While identification with an athlete has a strong and meaningful association, there is a statistically significant increase in trust toward the athlete as personal involvement increased. This may indicate that the level of identification with

PAGE 74

74 the athlete increased the level of involvement increased. In other words, individuals who have strong attachment to the athlete seem more likely to trust the athlete than those who have low involvement with weak attachment when they have some kind of associations with the non profit organization. However, individuals with low identification with the athlete may be more influenced by their level of personal involvement to feel trustworthiness toward the athlete than those wi th a high level of identification. Implications The results of this study produce several important implications for both academia and practitioners. For academicians, this research contributes toward enhancing and expanding the general knowledge of donor behavior in the sport context. As noted earlier, previous studies overlooked the influence of a professional athlete on donor behavior and the important issue of nu merous researchers tried to find the motives for charitable giving in college athletics and higher education, this study focused on the antecedents of donor behavior in professional sport setting. The results from the conceptual framework suggest that iden tification with an athlete, athlete image, and trust toward the athlete can be viewed as important factors when people consider donating their money to charitable causes of their interests. Furthermore, by showing the mediating role of trust when a profess ional athlete is involved in donations, the current study strongly suggests developing a comprehensive research plan for donor behavior studies. Lastly, by uncovering a statistically significant moderating effect of personal involvement on athlete trust ou tcome, this study supports the possibility of developing cross pollinated research designs with constructs used in sport management literature to better understand dynamics in the sport industry.

PAGE 75

75 Regarding practioners, this study also is notable for sever al reasons. First, organizational managers should consider choosing an appropriate professional athlete before initiating a new non profit organization because people who feel strong attachment to the athlete will be more likely to donate their time and mo ney. Further, the positive and favorable image of the athlete should be considered as a strategic investment for organizational managers. When people feel st rong level of trust toward a professional athlete, they will be more likely to participate in the charitable giving programs. Additionally, managers should aware that while image of an athlete evel of trust toward the athlete take relatively a long period of time to be built. Therefore, managers should consider building a positive image of an athlete first, and maintain that positive image for people to feel the athlete is trustworthy in order t Lastly, organizational managers should develop and initiate appropriate philanthropic programs by becau community visibility and "high profile" stature but also because they feel a community needs for the philanthropic program or are highly related to the philanthropic cause. In short, practitioners should i dentify factors that influence donor behavior and understand donor motivations in order to raise more money and promote further donations Turning for advice to academic experts and paying attention to rich literature on donor behavior would be essential starting points to determine ef fective strategies. Limitation and Future Research The following limitations should be considered for this study: (1) the only one athlete (i.e., Dwight Howard, the Orlando Magic professional basketball player) and one non profit organization (i.e., the D wight Howard Foundation) was selected to assess the proposed

PAGE 76

76 donate may differ from other organizations represented by other professional athletes; (2) this st cause of intests, in reality, many do not; (3) although several trips were made to collect data from not only attendees on game days but also general citizens of Orl ando on non game days and off site, the current research model may differ from the situation in other cities and different non profit organizations represented by other athletes. Future studies should offer a clearer picture of how people incorporate athle te related factors into their potential and actual donor behavior. The results of this study suggest that the athlete related factors (i.e., identification with an he athlete, which may in turn affect their intention to donate. However, several ideas for future research should be considered. Future research may provide better understanding of donor behavior dynamics, especially in professional sport. Because many pro fessional athletes are actively involved with philanthropic programs for a cause of their interest, the gender or ethnicity of the of the athletes. Other motiv considered in future studies. People may donate not because they identify with the athlete, the essure, community development, or previous experiences. Finally, future research needs to pay attention to the qualitative aspects of donor behavior. To fully understand why people donate their time and money to their cause of interests, qualitative resear ch (e.g., in depth interview) in this area needs to be done.

PAGE 77

77 Conclusion The current results indicate that when people perceive a professional athlete as trustworthy and feel strong attachment to him/her because they regard his/her image positively, they ar e more likely to donate their time and money to a cause of interest. The findings also indicate that individuals who are highly involved with a certain cause of interest are more likely to make philanthropic moves. Therefore, this study suggests that in or der to raise more money and more fully the proposed framework in this study and develop better precise fund raising strategies for their charity programs.

PAGE 78

78 APPEN DIX QUESTIONNAIRE Dear Participants: I am a in the sport management program at the University of Florida. As part of my scholarly work, I am conducting a study to explore how identification with the athlete the athle and personal involvement will influence the level of trust toward the athlete which may ultimately affect the don or behavior. This survey is about your perception and expectation toward your donation and donor behavior for charity programs repr esented by a professional athlete Your participation in this study is voluntary. It will take approximately 10 minutes to complete. There are no physical and psychological risks associated with participating in completing this questionnaire. However, you may refuse to answer certain questions or discontinue your participation at any time without penalty. Participants will not receive any benefits by participating in this survey. There is no compensation for participating in this study. Your identity wil l be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Your responses will be anonymous and there will be no identifying markers that will link you to the questionnaire you complete. The data will be reported statistical information. I am grateful for your time and deeply appreciated your assistance with this study. If you have any questions about this research protocol, please contact me at Minhong Kim ( 619 957 9980 ; e mail: minong9980 @ufl.edu ). Questions or concerns about your rights as research participant may be directed to the UFIRB office, University of Florida, Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611, (352) 392 0433. I have read the procedure described above for the study. I voluntarily agree to participate in the s tudy and I have received a copy of this description. Participants: ________________________ Date: _____________________ Principal Investigator: ___ Minhong Kim ___ Date: ___ __

PAGE 79

79 The Dwight D. Howard Foundation The Dwight D. Howar d Foundation, Inc. is proactive in working with youths to encourage a desire for excellence in every aspect of their lives. It is a faith based organization reaching out to strengthen family relationships by providing a family base to assist youths with ev eryday life issues and how to transition through them. PART I: Please circle the number that best represents how strongly you disagree or agree with the following statements. Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1. I identify with Dwight Howard. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. I have always had a good impression of Dwight Howard 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 Dwight Howard is an athlete that stands by his word. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4 In my opinion, Dwight Howard has a good image in the minds of people 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5 I am a big fan of Dwight Howard 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 I can rely on Dwight Howard to keep the promises he makes to his fans. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 I consider myself a fan of Dwight Howard 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Dwight Howard is a sincere pe rson. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 I believe that Dwight Howard has a better image than other athletes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

PAGE 80

80 To me, the Dwight Howard Foundation is Unimportan t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Important Boring 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Interesting Irrelevant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Relevant Unexciting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Exciting Means nothing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Means a lot to me Unappealing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Appealing Mundane 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Fascinating Worthless 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Valuable Uninvolving 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Involving Not needed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Needed Direction: If you are currently donating to the Dwight Howard Foundation please answer PART II. If you are not, please answer PART III. PART I I : Please circle the number that best represents how strongly you disagree or agree with the foll owing statements. Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1. I will donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation continuously. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. I intend to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation continuously 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3. I am determined to keep don ating to the Dwight Howard Foundation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PART III : Please circle the number that best represents how strongly you disagree or agree with the following statements. Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1. I will donate to the Dwight Howar d Foundation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. I intend to donate to the Dwight Howard Foundation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3. I am determined to donat e to the Dwight Howard Foundation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

PAGE 81

81 PART IV : Please respond to the following questions by print ing in the space. Your Age: years old Gender: a. Male b. Female Ethnicity: a. Caucasian d. Asian /Pacific Islander b. African American e. Other c. Hispanic Marital Status: a. Single b. Married Household Income: (Annual) a. Less than $25K d. $75K ~ $100K b. $25K ~ $50K e. $100K ~ $150K c. $50K ~ $75K f. More than $150K Highest Level of Education a. High school d. Some graduate school b. Some college e Professional/graduate degree c. College degree f. Other How much did you donated in 20 10 ? a. Less than $100 d. $500 ~ $700 b. $100 ~ $300 e. $700 ~ $1000 c. $300 ~ $500 f. More than $1000 If you are currently donating to the Dwight Howard Foundation, h ow long have you been donated to this organization/foundation? a. Less than 1 year d. 3 ~ 4 years b. 1 ~ 2 years e. 4 ~ 5 years c. 2 ~ 3 years f. More than 5 years Do you also donate to other organizatio ns? a. Yes b. No Thank you for your participation !!

PAGE 82

82 LIST OF REFERENCES Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. London: Sage. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavio r. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179 211. Andaleeb, S. S., & Basu, A. K. (1995). Explaining b lood d onation: The Trust Factor. Journal of Health Care Marketing, 15 (1), 42 48. Andreassen, T. W., & Lindestad, B. (1998). Cust omer loyalty and complex services: The impact of corporate image on quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty for customers with varying degrees of service expertise. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9 (1), 7 23. Arai, A., & Ko, Y. J (2010). Branding i ndividual a thletes: Developing a c onceptual m odel of a thlet b rand i mage. Master Thesis Baker, J., Grewal, D., & Parasuraman, A. (1994). The i nfluence of s tore e nvironment on q uality i nferences and s tore i mage. Journal of the Academy o f Marketing Science, 22 (4), 328 339. Balmer, J. M., & Gray, E. R. (1999). Corporate identity and corporate communications: C reating a competitive advantage. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 4 (4), 171 177. Barnes, M., & McCarville, R. (2005). Patron or p hilanthropist: c haritable g iving to a p erformance b ased l eisure p rovider. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 23 (2), 110 134. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The m oderator m ediator v ariable d istinction in s ocial p syc hological r esearch: Conceptual, s trategic, and s tatistical c onsiderations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173 1182. Bauer, H. H., Sauer, N. E., & Schmitt, P. (2005). Customer based brand equity in the team sport industry: Operation alization and impact on the economic success of sport teams. European Journal of Marketing, 39 (5), 496 513. Bauer, H. H., Stokburger Sauer, N. E., & Exler, S. (2008). Brand i mage and f an l oyalty in p rofessional t eam s port: A Refined Model and Empirical A ssessment. Journal of Sport Management, 22 (2), 205 226. Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1987). Image t heory: p rinciples, g oals, and p lans in d ecision m aking. Acta Psychologica, 66 201 220.

PAGE 83

83 Bekkers, R. (2003). Trust, a ccreditation, and p hilanthropy in the Netherlands. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32 596 615. Bennett, R. (2009). Impulsive donation decisions during online browsing of charity websites. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 8 116 134. Berens, G., van Riel, C. B., & van Bruggen, G. H. (2005). Corporate a ssociations and c onsumer p roduct r esponses: The m oderating r ole of c orporate b rand d ominance. Journal of Marketing, 69 (3), 35 48. Berry, L. L. (1995). Relationship m arketing of s ervices g rowing i nterest, e merging p erspectives. Jo urnal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (4), 236 245. Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer c ompany i dentification: A f ramework for u nderstanding c onsumers' r elationships with c ompanies. Journal of Marketing, 67 (2), 76 88. Bienstock, C. C., & Stafford, M. R. (2006). Measuring i nvolvement with the s ervice: A f urther i nvestigation of s cale v alidity and d imensionality. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 14 (3), 209 221. Billing, J., Holt, D., & Smith, J. (1985). Athletic fund raising : Exploring the motives behind private donations. Unpublished manuscript Birch, D., & Veroff, J. (1966). Motivation: A study of action. Belmont, CA: Brooks Cole. Blackwood, A., Wing, K. T., & Pollak, T. H. (2008). Facts and Figures from the Nonprofit A lmanac 2008: Public Charities, Giving, and Volunteering. Washington DC: The National Center for Charitable Statistics at the Urban Institute. Blakely, B. E. (1974). Historical and contemporaneous predictors of alumni involvement. Hammond: Purdue Universit y. Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1994). Collective self esteem consequences of outgroup derogation when a valued social identity is on trial. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24 (6), 641 657. Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1991). The p ositiv e s ocial and s elf c oncept c onsequences of s ports t eam i dentification. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 15 (2), 115 127. Braunstein, J. R. (2006). Influence of p roduct e ndorser m atch u p on c onsumer's p urchase i ntention of ( n on sport) e ndorsed p roducts. Doctoral Dissertation Bromley, D. B. (2000). Psychological a spects of c orporate i dentity, i mage and r eputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 3 (3), 240 252.

PAGE 84

84 Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21 (2), 230 258. Bruce, I. (1998). Successful charity marketing : meeting need. Hemel Hempstead, UK: ICSA Publishing. Carlson, B. D., & Donavan, D. T. (2008). Concerning the e ffect of a thlete e ndorsements on b rand and t eam r elated i ntentions Sport Marketing Quarterly, 17 154 162. intentions: An attitudinal perspective. Brand Management, 13 (6), 429 440. CBC. (2010, 1 15). Athlete donations to Haiti ke ep pouring in. Retrieved 5 25, 2010, from CBCsports.ca: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2010/01/15/sp haiti donations.html Celetani, M., Fudenberg, D., Levine, D. K., & Pesendo rfer, W. (1996). Maintaining a r eputation a gainst a l ong l ived o pponent. Econometrica, 64 (3), 691 704. Chen, Q., & Wells, W. D. (1999). Attitude toward the site. Journal of Advertising Research, 39 (5), 27 38. Ciconte, B. L., & Jacob, J. G. (2005). Fund raising Basics: A Complete Guide (2nd Ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Clark, B. H., & Montgomery, D. B. (1998). Deterrence, r eputations, and c ompetitive c ognition. Management Science, 44 (1), 62 82. Clotfelter, C. T. (2001). Who a re the a lumni d onors? Giving by t wo g enerations from s elective c olleges. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 12 (2), 119 138. CNN. (2010, 5 14). $1.3 billion donated for Haiti relief. Retrieved 5 25, 2010, from CNN: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/14/1 3 billion donated for haiti relief/ Connaughton, S. L., & Daly, J. A. (2004). Identification with leader: A comparison of perceptions of identification among geographically dispersed and co located teams. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 9 (2), 89 103. Crosby, L. A., & Stephens, N. (1987). Effects of r elationship m arketing on s atisfaction, r etention, and p rices in the l ife i nsurance i ndustry. Journal of Ma rketing Research, 24 (4), 404 411. Crosby, L. A., Evans, K. R., & Cowles, D. (1990). Relationship q uality in s ervices s elling: An i nterpersonal i nfluence p erspective. Journal of Marketing, 54 68 81. de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2000). The role of corpo rate image and extension similarity in service brand extensions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 21 (6), 639 659.

PAGE 85

85 Dean, D. H. (2003). Consumer p erception of c orporate d onations: Effects of c ompany r eputation for s ocial r esponsibility and t ype of d onation. Journal of Advertising, 32 (4), 91 102. Dichter, E. (1985). What's in an i mage. Journal of Consumer Marketing 2 (1), 75 81. Dowling, G. R. (1988). Measuring Corporate Images: A Review of Alternative Approaches. Journal of Buaincsa Research, 17 27 34. Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. (1991). K eeping an eye on the mirror : I mage and identity in organizational adaptation Academy of Management Journal, 34 (3), 517 554. Eastlick, M. A., Lotz, S. L., & Warrington, P. (2006). Understanding online B to C rel ationships: An integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, and commitment. Journal of Business Research, 59 877 886. Eberl, M., & Schwaiger, M. (2005). Corporate reputation: disentangling the effects on financial performance. European Journal of Marketi ng, 39 (7), 838 854. Ervin, L. H., & Stryker, S. (2001). Theorizing the r elationship between s elf esteem and i dentity. In T. J. Owens, S. Stryker, & N. Goodman, Extending Self Esteem Theory and Research: Sociological and Psychological Currents. Cambridge University Press. Ferrand, A., & Pages, M. (1999). Image management in sport organisations: T he creation of value. European Journal of Marketing, 33 (3), 387 401. Fink, J. S., Cunningham, G. B., & Kensicki, L. J. (2004). Using a thletes as e ndorsers to s e ll w s port: Attractiveness vs. e xpertise. Journal of Sport Management, 18 350 367. Fink, J. S., Trail, G. T., & Anderson, D. F. (2002). An e xamination of t eam i dentification: Which m otives are m ost s alient to i ts e xistence? International Sports Jou rnal, 6 (2), 195 207. Flavian, C., Guinaliu, M., & Torres, E. (2005). The influence of corporate image on consumer trust: A comparative analysis in traditional versus internet banking. Internet Research, 15 (4), 447 470. Fombrun, C. J. (1996). Reputation : Realizing the Value from the Corporate Image. Boston: Harvard Business Scholl Press. Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. (1990). What's in a n ame? Reputation b uilding and c orporate s trategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33 (2), 233 258. Fornell, C., & Larcker D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1), 39 50. Friedman, H. H., Santeramo, M., & Traina, A. (1978). Correlates of trustworthiness for celebrities. Jour nal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 6 (4), 291 299.

PAGE 86

86 Fuller, J., Matzler, K., & Hoppe, M. (2008). Brand c ommunity m embers as a s ource of i nnovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25 608 619. Gabbott, M., & Hogg, G. (1999). Consumer i nvolv ement in s ervices: A r eplication and e xtension. Journal of Business Research, 46 159 166. Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The d ifferent r oles of s atisfaction, t rust, and c ommitment in c ustomer r elationships. The Journal of Marketing, 63 (2), 70 8 7. Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M., & Corley, K. G. (2000). O rganizational identity image and adaptive instability Academy of Management Review, 25 (1), 63 81. Giving USA. (2010). Lessons From Past Inform Haiti Fundraising. Glenview, IL: Giving USA Foundati on. Giving USA. (2009). U.S. charitable giving estimated to be $307.65 billion in 2008. Glenview: Giving USA Foundation. Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2002). Developing an understanding of brand associations in team sport: empirical evidence from consum ers of professional sport. Journal of Sport Management, 16 (1), 54 81. Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2001). Understanding b rand l oyalty in p rofessional s port: Examining the l ink between b rand a ssociations and b rand l oyalty. International Journal of Sport s Marketing & Sponsorship 67 94. Gladden, J. M., Mahony, D. F., & Apostolopoulou, A. (2005). Toward a b etter u nderstanding of c ollege a thletic d onors: What a re the p rimary m otives? Sport MarHetlng Quarterly, 14 18 30. Goldberg, M. E., & Hartwick, J. (1 990). The e ffects of a dvertiser r eputation and e xtremity of a dvertising c laim on a dvertising e ffectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (2), 172 179. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Gots i, M., & Wilson, A. M. (2001). Corporate r eputation: Seeking a d efinition. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6 (1), 24 30. Graeff, T. R. (1997). Consumption s ituations and the e ffects of b rand i mage on c b rand e valuations. Psych ology & Marketing, 14 (1), 49 70. Grau, S. L., & Folse, J. A. (2007). Cause r elated m arketing (CRM): The i nfluence of d onation p roximity and m essage f raming c ues on the l ess i nvolved c onsumer. Journal of Advertising, 36 (4), 19 33.

PAGE 87

87 Greenberg, J. (1983). Self image v ersus i mpression m anagement in a dherence to d istributive j ustice s tandards: The i nfluence of s elf a wareness and s elf c onsciousness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44 (1), 5 19. Gwinner, K. R., Gremler, D. D., & Bitner, M. J. (19 98). Relational b enefits in s ervices i ndustries: The c ustomer's p erspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26 (2), 101 114. Hall, R. (1992). The s trategic a nalysis of i ntangible r esources. Strategic Management Journal, 13 (2), 135 144. Han G. (., & Harms, P. D. (2010). Team identification, trust, and conflict: A mediation model. International Journal of Conflict Management, 21 (1), 20 43. Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (1997). Relations between organizational culture, identity and image. Eur opean Journal of Marketing, 31 (5), 356 365. Helm, S. (2007). The r ole of c orporate r eputation in d etermining i nvestor s atisfaction and l oyalty. Corporate Reputation Review, 10 (1), 22 37. Herbig, P., & Milewicz, J. (1995). The relationship of reputatio n and credibility to brand success. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 12 (4), 5 10. Hunt, K. A., Bristol, T., & Bashaw, R. E. (1999). A conceptual approach to classifying sports fans. Journal of Services Marketing, 13 (6), 439 452. Hunter, C. S., Jones, E B., & Boger, C. (1999). A s tudy of the r elationship between a lumni g iving and s elected c haracteristics of a lumni d onors of Livingstone College, NC. Journal of Black Studies, 29 (4), 523 539. Independent Sector. (2001). Giving and Volunteering in the Uni ted States. Washington, DC: Independent Sector. Jackson, E. F., Bachmeier, M. D., Wood, J. R., & Craft, E. A. (1995). Volunteering and c haritable g iving: Do r eligious and a ssociational t ies p romote h elping b ehavior? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterl y, 24 (1), 59 78. Jacoby, J., & Kaplan, L. B. (1972). The components of perceived risk. Proceedings of the third annual conference of the Association for Consumer Research. Chicago: Association for Consumer Research. Jain, A. K., & Etgar, M. (1976). Meas uring s tore i mage t hrough m ultidimensional s caling of f ree r esponse d ata. Journal of Retailing, 52 (4), 61 96. Jain, K., & Srinivasan, N. (1990). An e mpirical as sessment of m ultiple o perationalizations of i nvolvement. Advances in Consumer Research, 17 59 4 602.

PAGE 88

88 Jowdy, E., & McDonald, M. (2002). Tara Nott case study: C elebrity endorsements and image matching. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 11 (3), 186 189. Kamins, M. A., Brand, M. J., Hoeke, S. A., & Moe, J. C. (1989). Two sided versus one sided celebrity endo rsements: T he impact on advertising effectiveness and credibility. Journal of Advertising, 18 (2), 4 10. Kamins, M. (1990). An i nvestigation into the m atch u p h ypothesis in c elebrity a dvertising: When b eauty m ay be o nly s kin d eep. Journal of Advertising, 19 (1), 4 13. Kartalia, J. (2000). The four building blocks of a reputation management program. Strategy & Leadership, 28 34 36. Keh, H. T., & Xie, Y. (2009). Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: The roles of trust, identification an d commitment. Industrial Marketing Management, 38 732 742. Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, m easuring, and m anaging c ustomer b ased b rand e quity. Journal of Marketing, 57 (1), 1 22. Kennedy, S. H. (1977). Nurturing c orporate i mages. European Journa l of Marketing, 11 (3), 120 164. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press. Krawczynski, J. (2005, 11 11). Garnett donates $1.2 million to Katrina victims. Retrieved 3 29, 2010, from USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/twolves/2005 11 11 katrina garnett_x.htm Kwon, H. H., Trail, G. T., & Lee, D. (2008). The e ffects of v icari ous a chievement and t eam i dentification on BIRGing and CORFing. Sport MarHeting Quarterly, 17 209 217. La Ferle, C., & Choi, S. M. (2005). The importance of perceived endorser credibility in South Korean advertising. Jouranl of Current Issues and Researc h in Advertising, 27 (2), 67 82. Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. N. (1985). Measuring c onsumer i nvolvement p rofiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22 (1), 41 53. LeBlanc, G., & Nguyen, N. (1996). Cues used by customers evaluating corporate image in service firms: An empirical study in financial institutions. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 7 (2), 44 56. Lee, H. J. (2004). The role of competence based trust and organizational identification in continuous improvement. Journal of Manageri al Psychology, 19 (6), 623 639.

PAGE 89

89 Lee, L., Piliavin, J. A., & Call, V. R. (1999). Giving t ime, m oney, and b lood: Similarities and d ifferences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62 (3), 276 290. Leslie, L. L., & Ramey, G. (1988). Donor b ehavior and v oluntary s up port for h igher e ducation i nstitutions. The Journal of Higher Education, 59 (2), 115 132. Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In R. Kramer, & T. Tyler, Trust in Organizations (pp. 114 139). Thous and Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Lord, K. R., & Putrevu, S. (2009). Informational and transformational responses to celebrity endorsement. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 31 (1), 1 13. MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanation. Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (May), 130 143. s tudy of the l oss o f i nstitutional t rust after a m erger. Journal of Management Studies, 45 (2), 372 401. Mahony, D. F., Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2003). Examining athletic donors at NCAA Division I institutions. International Sports Journal, 7 (1), 9 27. Martin, J. H. nonsport product? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 13 (6), 28 43. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An i ntegrative m odel of o rganizational t rust. The Academy of Management Review, 20 (3), 709 734. McCracken, G. (1989). Who is the c elebrity e ndorser? Cultural f oundations of the e ndorsement p rocess. Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (3), 310 321. McGuire, W. J. (1968). The nature of attitudes and attitude chang e. In G. Lindzey, & E. Aronson, Handbook of Social Psychology (2nd eds.) (pp. 136 314). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mohtashemi, M., & Mui, L. (2003). Evolution of indirec t reciprocity by social information: the role of trust and reputation in evolution of altruism. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 223 (4), 523 531. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between p roviders and u sers of m arket r esearc h: The d ynamics of t rust within and between o rganizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (3), 314 328.

PAGE 90

90 Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The c ommitment t rust t heory of r elationship m arketing. The Journal of Marketing, 58 (3), 20 38. Mowen, J. C. ( 1995). Consumer behavior (4th edition ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. National Center for Charitable Statistics. (2009). NCCS Business Master File. Washington DC: National Center for Charitable Statistics. NBA. (n.d.). NBA Cares Retrieved 5 2 5, 2010, from NBA.com: http://www.nba.com/nba_cares/mission/welcome.html Nguyen, N., & Leblanc, G. (2001). Corporate image and corporate reputation in customers' retention decisions in servic es. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 8 227 236. Nichols, J. E. (1991). Targeted Fund Raising. Chicago, Illinois: Precept Press. Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and v alidation of a s cale to m easure c elebrity e ndorsers' p erceived e xpertise, t r ustworthiness, and a ttractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19 (3), 39 52. Ohanian, R. (1991). The i mpact of c elelbrity s pokepersons' p erceived i mage on c onsumers' i ntention to p urchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 31 (1), 46 54. Ole Borgen, S. (2001 ). Identification as a t rust g enerating m echanism in c ooperatives. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 72 (2), 209 228. Ostlund, C., & Brown, J. D. (1985). Predicting potential donors for intercollegiate athletics. Athletic business, 9 (3), 30 31. Page, G., & Fearn, H. (2005). Corporate r eputation: What d o c onsumers r eally c are a bout? Journal of Advertising Research, 45 (3), 305 313. Palmatier, R. W., Dant, R. P., & Grewal, D. (2007). A c omparative l ongitudinal a nalysis of t heoretical p erspective s of i nterorganizational r elationship p erformance. Journal of Marketing, 71 172 194. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September), 135 146. Puusa, A., & Tolvanen, U. (2006). Organizational i dentity and t rust. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 11 (2), 29 33. Ratnasingham, P. (1998). The importance of trust in electronic commerc e. Internet Research, 8 (4), 313 321.

PAGE 91

91 Restubog, S. L., Hornsey, M. J., Bordia, P., & Esposo, S. R. (2008). Effects of p sychological c ontract b reach on o rganizational c itizenship b ehaviour: Insights from the g roup v alue m odel. Journal of Management Studies, 45 (8), 1377 1400. Reynolds, W. H. (1965). The r ole of the c onsumer in i mage b uilding. California Management Review, 7 (3), 69 76. Rindova, V. P., & Fombrun, C. J. (1998). The eye of the beholder: the role of corporate repu tation in defining organizational identity. In D. A. Whetten, & P. C. Godfrey, Identity in Organizations: Building Theory through Conversations (pp. 62 66). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Roberts, P. W., & Dowling, G. R. (2002). Corporate r eputation and s ustain ed s uperior f inancial p erformance. Strategic Management Journal, 23 1077 1093. Robinson, M. J., Trail, G. T., & Kwon, H. (2004). Motives and p oints of a ttachment of p rofessional g olf s pectators. Sport Management Review, 7 (2), 167 192. Ross, S. D. (2006 ). A c onceptual f ramework for u nderstanding s pectator b ased b rand e quity. Journal of Sport Management, 20 (1), 22 38. Ross, S. D., James, J. D., & Vargas, P. (2006). Development of a s cale to m easure t eam b rand a ssociations in p rofessional s port. Journal of Sport Management, 20 (2), 260 279. Ross, S. D., Russell, K. C., & Bang, H. (2008). An e mpirical a ssessment of s pectator b ased b rand e quity. Journal of Sport Management, 22 (3), 322 337. Sargeant, A., & Lee, S. (2004). Donor t rust and r elationship c omm itment in the U.K. c harity s ector: The i mpact on b ehavior. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33 185 202. Sargeant, A., & Lee, S. (2002). Improving public trust in the voluntary sector: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 7 (1), 68 83. Sargeant, A., & Lee, S. (2002). Individual and c ontextual a ntecedents of d onor t rust in the v oluntary s ector. Journal of Marketing Management, 18 (7), 779 802. Shapiro, C. (1982). Consumer i nformation, p roduct q uality, and s eller r eputation. The Bell Journal of Economics, 13 (1), 20 35. Shavitt, S., Swan, S., Lowrey, T. M., & Wanke, M. (1994). The interaction of endorser attractiveness and involvement in persuasion depends on the goal that guides message process ing. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 3 137 162. Snyder, C. R., Lassegard, M., & Ford, C. E. (1986). Distancing after group success and failure: Basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected failure. Jourital of Personality and Social Psychology, 5 1 382 388.

PAGE 92

92 Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic c onfidence i ntervals for i ndirect e ffects in s tructural e quation m odels. Sociological Methodology, 13 290 312. Staurowsky, E. J., Parkhouse, B., & Sachs, M. (1996). Developing an instrument to measure athletic d onor behavior and motivation. Journal of Sport Management, 10 262 277. Sternthal, B., Philips, L. W., & Dholakia, R. (1978). The persuasive effect of source credibility: A situational analysis. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 42 (3), 285 314. Stryker, S. & Burke, P. J. (2000). The p ast, p resent, and f uture of an i dentity t heroy. Social Psychology Quarterly, 4 (63), 284 297. Sutton, W. A., McDonald, M. A., Milne, G. R., & Cimperman, J. (1997). Creating and fostering fan identification in professional spo rts. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 6 (1), 15 22. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The s ocial i dentity t heory of i ntergroup b ehavior. In S. Worchel, & W. G. Austin, The Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7 24). Chicago: Nelson Hall. The Foundation Ce nter. (2010). Foundation Growth and Giving Estimates. New York: The Foundation Center. Thomson, M. (2006). Human b rands: Investigating a ntecedents to c s trong a ttachments to c elebrities. Journal of Marketing, 70 104 119. Till, B. D. (2001). Man aging a thlete e ndorser i mage: T he ef fect of e ndorsed p roduct. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 10 (1), 35 42. Trail, G. T., & James, J. D. (2001). The m otivation s cale for s port c onsumption: A ssessment of the scale's psychometric properties. Journal of Sport Be havior, 24 (1), 108 127. Trail, G. T., Anderson, D. F., & Fink, J. S. (2000). A theoretical model of sport spectator consumption behavior. International Journal of Sport Management, 1 154 180. Trail, G. T., Anderson, D. F., & Fink, J. S. (2005). Consume r s atisfaction and i dentity t heory: A m odel of s port s pectator c onative l oyalty. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 14 98 112. Trail, G. T., Robinson, M. J., Dick, R. J., & Gillentine, A. J. (2003). Motives and points of attachment: fans versus spectators in i ntercollegiate athletics. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12 (4), 217 227. Tsiotsou, R. (1998). Motivation for donations to athletic. The Cyber Journal of Sport Marketing Tsiotsou, R. (2004). The role of involvement and income in predicting large and small d onations to college athletics. International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 6 (2), 117 123.

PAGE 93

93 Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a c ognitive r edefinition of the s ocial g roup. In H. Tajfel, Self Identity and Intergroup Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge U niversity Press. USA Today. (2010, 1 16). Several sports figures, groups pledge help to Haiti relief. Retrieved 5 25, 2010, from USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/20 10 01 15 haiti relief efforts_N.htm Vendelo, M. T. (1998). Narrating corporate reputation: Becoming l egitimate t hrough s torytelling. International Studies of Management and Organization, 28 (3), 120 137. Verner, M. E., Hecht, J. B., & Fansler, A. G. (19 98). Validating an instrument to assess the motivation of athletics donors. Journal of Sport Management, 12 (2), 123 137. Voci, A. (2006). The link between identification and in group favouritism: Effects of threat to social identity and trust related emo tions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45 265 284. Walker, M. B. (2007). Assessing t he i nfluence of c orporate s ocial r esponsibility on c onsumer a ttitudes in the s port i ndustry. Doctoral Dissertation Wang, I. M., Shieh, C. J., & Wang, F. J. (2008) Effect of h uman c apital i nvestment on o rganizational p erformance. Social Behavior and Personality, 36 (8), 1011 1022. Wann, D. L. (2002). Preliminary v alidation of a m easure for a ssessing i dentification as a s port f an: The s port f andom q uestionnaire. In ternational Journal of Sport Management, 3 103 115. Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1995). Influence of identification with a sports team on objective knowledge and subjective beliefs. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26 (4), 551 567. Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1993). Sports fans: Measuring degree of identification with their team. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 24 1 17. past, present, and future performance of a sports team. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78 547 552. Wann, D. L., & Polk, J. (2007). The p ositive r elationship between s port t eam i dentification and b elief in the t rustworthiness of o thers. North American Journal of Psychology, 9 (2), 251 256. Waters, R. D. (2008). Applying relationship management theory to the fundraising process for individual donors. Journal of Communication Management, 12 (1), 73 87. Webb, J. T. (1989). Analysis of financial donors to Oklahoma S programme. Stillwater: Oklahoma State University.

PAGE 94

94 White, M. (2006, 12 2). Retrieved 10 29, 2009, from Associated Content: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/91308/michael_jordan_the_greatest_basketball. html?cat=14 Williams, R. J., & Barrett, J. D. (2000). Corporate p hilanthropy, c riminal a ctivity, and f irm r eputation: Is t here a l ink? Journal of Business Ethics, 2 6 (4), 341 350. Wilson, D., Glier, R., Kepner, T., & Shpigel, B. (2005, 9 23). The New York Times. Retrieved 10 29, 2009, from Sport Business: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9804E1DF1430F930A1575AC0A9639C 8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2 Yoo, C., & MacInnis, D. (2005). The brand attitude formation process of emotional and informational ads. Journal of Business Research, 58 (10 ), 1397 1406 Yoon, E., Guffey, H. J., & Kijewski, V. (1993). The e ffects of i nformation and c ompany r eputation on i ntentions to b uy a b usiness s ervice. Journal of Business Research, 27 215 228. Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the i nvolvement c ons truct. The Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (3), 341 352. Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994). The p ersonal i nvolvement i nventory: Reduction, r evision, and a pplication to a dvertising. Journal of Advertising, 23 (4), 59 70. Zhang, Z., & Won, D. (2010). Buyer or bro wser? An analysis of sports fan behaviour online. International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship 124 139.

PAGE 95

95 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Minhong Kim earned his Master of Science degree (sport management) from the University of Florida in May 2011. He r eceived his Bachelor of Science in physical education from Yonsei University in February 2008. His research goal is to improve and expand the understanding of sport donor behavior corporate social responsibility, and sport philanthropy, to fill the gap be tween academia and sport industry. Beginning 201 1 he will continuously study as a doctoral student at the University of Florida