### Abstract
The Super Bowl is the largest annual sporting event in America in terms of single-game television viewership (5). In addition to the game, a tremendous amount of entertainment is intertwined into the Super Bowl telecast via commercials that can cost as much as $3 million for 30 seconds of air time (16). The consumption of the game and commercials is well documented. However, there is little evidence as to how the Super Bowl telecast is consumed by various demographic subgroups. College students, an often overlooked demographic for major sport marketing campaigns, are one group that appear to be an ideal target market for Super Bowl advertising due to their ability for discretionary spending (13) and affinity for popular culture. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the commercial and game consumption patterns for college students during the Super Bowl. A sample of 651 traditional-aged college students at a mid-size Midwestern university was surveyed within 48 hours of Super Bowl XLIV to determine such patterns. Results indicated students watched in large numbers, watched in group settings, identified humor as a primary factor in commercial enjoyment, were interested most in the game itself, identified a different favorite commercial than the USA Today Ad Meter, are strong sport fans, and demonstrated different viewing consumption patterns by gender. It can be concluded from these results that college students resemble the average adult consumer identified in previous research (1,25) in some of their game and commercial consumption patterns (e.g., watching the Super Bowl in large groups and identifying humor as a primary attribute they enjoyed in commercials), but differed in their commercial preferences, their higher level of sport fanship, and their gender differences. Sport marketers can utilize this information to create strategies that appeal to this important demographic.
**Key words:** Super Bowl, commercials, marketing, sport consumption
### Introduction
On February 7th, 2010 the New Orleans Saints defeated the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl XLIV. This event, as nearly all Super Bowls before it, came with a tremendous amount of media attention, marketing savvy, and fanfare. In fact, this particular Super Bowl was the second most-watched single-game television program in American history behind Super Bowl XLV (5).
In addition to the football game, the Super Bowl television broadcast offers a definitive glimpse into the competitive and creative world of sport marketing and advertising. Consumers anxiously anticipate new commercials unveiled during the Super Bowl. These commercials, which cost as much as $3 million per 30 seconds for Super Bowl XLIV (16), have become a cultural phenomenon that create nearly as much buzz as the game itself (1,3,5,16). In essence, the commercials are considered part of the overall Super Bowl entertainment package. McAllister (22), as well as Apostolopoulou, Clark, and Gladden (1), illustrated the integration of Super Bowl commercials into popular culture by examining their content and relative importance. McAllister (2) found that the discourse surrounding the pre, during, and post-Super Bowl advertising led to special status for Super Bowl commercials. Specifically, Super Bowl commercials “often have characteristics more in line with entertainment media messages than stereotypical commercial media messages” (p. 421). Additionally, McAllister explained that Super Bowl commercials are more likely to include celebrities, are much more expensive, and are more thoroughly scrutinized by the public when compared to non-Super Bowl commercials. Blackshaw and Beard (4), echoed these sentiments by noting the uniqueness of Super Bowl advertising is partly due to their entertainment value, their ability to create a “free media” dividend, their high anticipation levels, and their growing ability to engage consumers beyond television (e.g., internet, telecommications, etc.).
Given the elevated status associated with Super Bowl entertainment, Apostolopoulou et al. (1) surveyed 1,101 Super Bowl viewers and NFL database subscribers to determine what elements of the Super Bowl contributed most to their enjoyment. Not surprisingly, the primary contributor to viewer’s enjoyment was the competitiveness of the game itself. The second largest contributor was the specific teams competing, indicating more enjoyment is based on the level of fanship towards a specific team. The third largest contributor was the Super Bowl commercials. The commercials were rated higher than the pre-game show, the celebrity coin toss, the national anthem, the team introductions, the halftime entertainment, and the post-game show. Furthermore, Elliot (9) reported that approximately 4% of the Super Bowl viewing audience watches the Super Bowl only for the commercials. Results from Apostolopoulou et al. (1) and Elliot (9) suggest that beyond the game, commercials have a tremendously powerful influence on Super Bowl viewing patterns.
Although the popularity of Super Bowl commercials is well-documented (1, 4, 16, 22), there is limited evidence to suggest whether a return on investment (ROI) is realized by the companies producing such commercials. Because the Super Bowl is an isolated event that has limited advertising time, in addition to the extreme cost, it is logical to question if ROI is attainable. O’Reilly, Lyberger, McCarthy, Séguin, and Nadeau (25) found a tremendous amount of volatility surrounding the influence of Super Bowl sponsorship. This volatility is caused by the many extraneous factors influencing advertising during this unique event (e.g., presponsorship awareness levels, existing brand associations, increased clutter in the marketplace, etc.). Despite this instability in the marketplace, there has been evidence for increased intent to purchase sponsored products, as well as a willingness on the part of consumers to pay higher prices for goods advertised during the Super Bowl (17, 25, 28). Additionally, an increasing trend for sponsors is to evaluate consumers’ intent to purchase, which ultimately impacts ROI. Blackshaw and Beard (4) noted a clear latency effect on advertised brands during the Super Bowl whereby brand opinion increased 16% and purchase consideration increased 13% in the week following the Super Bowl. Furthermore, the timing of Super Bowl commercials influenced intent to purchase and ROI, where commercials shown closer to the beginning of the game scored higher on nearly every positive advertising measure. Dotterweich and Collins (8) concluded that consumers’ intent to purchase was also impacted by the ratio of value and prestige for any given product. Achieving prestige is often accomplished by repeated brand recognition, and nearly impossible for new companies given the limited television time afforded during the Super Bowl. Therefore, ROI is likely to be greater for companies that are established and have identified a specific target audience versus start-up companies searching for their ideal demographic.
Findings from Dotterweich and Collins (8), as well as O’Reilly et al. (25), are consistent with the results of the USA Today Ad Meter. The Ad Meter is a real-time evaluation of Super Bowl commercials conducted by USA Today whereby participants’ reactions to Super Bowl commercials are measured using a hand-held device. The 2010 Ad Meter gathered information from 250 adult volunteers from San Diego, California and McLean, Virginia. The winning commercial from the 2010 Ad Meter featured famous actress Betty White in a Snickers advertisement. Consistent with findings from Dotterweich and Collins (8), Snickers is an established brand with a certain amount of prestige. Likewise, Anheuser-Busch and its well-known Budweiser commercials have been the Ad Meter champion a record ten times (16). Besides the prestige and brand recognition associated with these Ad Meter winners, there are some other qualities that impact affect toward the advertisement. Kelly and Turley (18) investigated all of the Super Bowl commercials between 1996 and 2002, and used the Ad Meter scores as a dependent variable. Content analysis revealed advertising for goods (i.e., products) was more effective than services, and the use of humor, animals, sports themes, children, and emotional appeal resulted in high levels of affect.
Although the preceding literature helps to contextualize the Super Bowl as a unique advertising opportunity, there is a gap in the literature pertaining to Super Bowl commercial consumption for specific demographic groups. Ad Meter research, as well as general research investigating viewing and consumption patterns have mostly focused their efforts on the general consumer, or on specific commercial content. For example O’Reilly et al. (25) identified respondents from 10 to 94 years of age when assessing their intent to purchase Super Bowl information, and Apostolopoulou et al. (1) investigated adults aged 25 to 44 when examining many forms of Super Bowl entertainment. However, evidence from Zhang, Lam, and Connaughton (30) suggest a need to differentiate demands of various sociodemographic groups during the marketing process. They found the most active sport consumer profile includes individuals that are relatively young (18-25 years of age), single, have low household income, and have a medium entertainment budget. Traditional college students fit this description well.
Given the similarities between the most active sport consumers and traditional college students, the current study attempted to isolate and examine the viewing patterns and perceptions of college students during the most watched sporting event of all time (5). To date, no research has attempted to ascertain the perceptions and consumption patterns of the Super Bowl for this important demographic audience. However, as consumers college students are a powerful force. Oftentimes this demographic, who are currently referred to as millennials (born between 1979 and 1994), are overlooked in marketing outcome research (2). “Considering that college students wield $200 billion in buying power each year, it may be time to set aside any preconceived notions about these coeds and start thinking of them as serious consumers” (13, p. 18). When evaluated individually, it was estimated that the average college student had $287 in discretionary spending per month, which totals $3,444 per year. Additionally, in 2002 over 99% of college students visited the internet a few times per week. Given the nearly exponential growth of the internet, as well as the increase in social and marketing websites, the number of college students who visit the internet regularly continues to rise. It is these technology-savvy college students (2) who are easily reached by the supplemental advertising offered via the Internet, and are often targeted in Super Bowl advertising (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, smart phone applications, etc.).
Within the college student market, as with most forms of marketing research, it is prudent to examine differences in gender consumption patterns. This was a secondary goal of the current research. Developments such as Title IX, female youth sports, and women’s professional leagues have the current generation of sport marketers realizing females are a viable and relevant group of sport consumers with different wants and needs than their male counterparts (24). Females, in general, have demonstrated an affiliation for the feelings of others while fostering communal relationships (27). Work from Chodorow (7) and Gilligan (14) suggests women are more likely to see “morality as emerging from the experience of social connections and value the ethic of responsibility and care.” (6, p. 609). Additionally, female athletes report they most value feelings of belonging, being part of a university community, exercise benefits, and team affiliation (10). These attributes guiding female consumption patterns lend themselves to various marketing strategies, particularly during the Super Bowl when it is common for group viewing to occur, and especially when one considers that nearly half of the viewers of Super Bowl XLIV were female (20). Furthermore, Beasley, Shank, and Ball (3) found that women’s attention levels were higher for Super Bowl commercials than they were for the game itself. According to Zhang et al. (30), “females represent the greatest market potential for professional sports, and identifying their expectations and interests are vital to the future of professional sport organizations” (p. 50).
In contract, males have generally been found to be motivated by an internal self-guided impulse whereby thoughts and behaviors are created by a particular level of self-efficacy or achievement (23). Furthermore, males have been found to be more physically and verbally aggressive (26), more competitive (12), and value autonomy (6). Similarly, male athletes were found to value competition and winning more than the social aspects offered by competitive sport (10), as well as display higher levels of athletic identity (21). From a purely marketing standpoint, males have been found to consume sport more frequently and value specific sport market demands (e.g., win/loss record, team history, close competition, love of the sport, ticket prices, etc.) more than females (30). These gender differences, combined with the unique and powerful college student demographic, may shed light on consumption patterns during the most watched annual sporting event in modern history (5).
### Methods
The purpose of this study was to determine the commercial and game consumption patterns for college students during the Super Bowl.
#### Sample
A sample of 651 traditional college students (mean age = 20.9 years) from a state-funded mid-sized Midwestern university agreed to participate. The original sample consisted of 656 participants, but five surveys were not used due to incomplete or missing answers. A total of 424 males and 227 females were included in the sample. Based on Frankel and Wallen’s (11) sampling methodology, 651 participants was a large enough sample to be representative of the entire University (approximately 20,000 students) at the 99% confidence level.
#### Procedures
Participants located at high-traffic areas on campus (e.g., food courts, busy common areas) completed a nine-item survey designed to determine; 1) The number of Super Bowl commercials watched; 2) Their favorite Super Bowl commercial; 3) The characteristic they enjoyed most about their favorite commercial; 4) Their intent to spend money on any products advertised during the Super Bowl due to the commercial; 5) The number of people they were with when watching the Super Bowl; 6) Their primary interest during the Super Bowl broadcast; 7) Their level of fanship; 8) Gender; and 9) Age. These variables were chosen in an attempt to initiate new lines of inquiry regarding college student consumer behavior s, as well as replicate some of the previous studies on Super Bowl consumption (e.g., 1, 22). Participants were surveyed using a convenience sample of on-campus college students within 48 hours of the completed Super Bowl telecast.
#### Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted using PASW (version 18). Frequencies and measures of central tendency were used to evaluate all relevant data. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations, and multivariate analysis of variance were utilized to determine significance among appropriate categories.
### Results
Research findings are presented in the following four sections: (a) frequencies (b) descriptive statistics, (c) correlations, and (d) MANOVA results.
#### Frequencies
Table 1 represents the frequencies reported by category for each item investigated, and is divided into commercial information and viewing patterns. For the categories identifying favorite commercial and the characteristics of their favorite commercial, the top three answers are provided. Responses for the amount of Super Bowl commercials watched, number of people students were watching with, and level of sport fanship were coded as a number for purposes of further statistical investigation. For example, the amount of Super Bowl commercials watched were coded into four groups where group 1 = none, 2 = a few, 3 = most, 4 = all. These numbers were then used in the following descriptive, correlational, and MANOVA calculations. Age is the only category listed as a mean score.
#### Descriptive Statistics
Table 2 displays descriptive statistics for the number of commercials watched, the number of people present to watch commercials, and the level of fanship. The highest mean score was found for the number of people students were with when they watched the Super Bowl (M = 3.28, SD = .842), indicating the majority of the respondents watched the 2009-2010 Super Bowl within a group setting. Most of the respondents also indicated they watched the majority of all commercials during the Super Bowl (M = 3.14, SD = .697). A high mean score (M = 3.11, SD = .859) for the level of sport fanship indicated the majority of the respondents identified themselves as a ‘big’ or ‘huge’ sports fans. Skewness and kurtorsis values ranged from |.229| to |.553| and |.625|to |.837|, respectively, which were within the criterion of +2.0 indicating establishment of normality among the variables (15).
#### Correlations
Table 3 displays Pearson correlation coefficients for the number of commercials watched, the number of people students were with during the Super Bowl, the level of fanship, gender, and age. A significant positive correlation (r = .21) was found between the number of Super Bowl commercials watched and the level of sport-fanship, indicating individuals who considered themselves big or huge fans were more likely to watch the Super Bowl commercials. A significant negative correlation (r = -.12) was found between the number of commercials watched and gender, indicating male respondents were more likely to watch the Super Bowl commercials. Gender was also negatively and significantly correlated with the level of sport-fanship (r = -.38), indicating male participants identified themselves as stronger sports fans than female respondents. A significant positive correlation between age and the number of commercials watched indicated older students were more likely to watch Super Bowl commercials. Similarly, older students were more strongly identified as a sport fan than younger students (r = .11). As evidenced by a significant positive correlation of .11, the level of sport-fanship was interrelated with the number of people present to watch commercials. This finding indicates that bigger fans were more likely to watch the Super Bowl commercials with people other than students who identified themselves as having a low level of fanship (r = -.09). The highest correlation among the variables was .38, which is lower than the suggested criterion of .85 to establish discriminant validity (19).
### MANOVA Results
To examine gender differences among the factors (the number of commercials watched, the number of people present to watch commercials and the level of sport-fanship – see descriptive statistics across gender in Table 4), a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted. The results of the MANOVA presented in Table 5 indicate that significant gender differences exist in all factors. The descriptive statistics for the three factors indicated males had higher mean scores in all factors, suggesting males were more likely to be influenced by the three motivational factors listed in the current study. In other words, males were more likely to 1) watch Super Bowl commercials, 2) watch Super Bowl commercials in the presence of others, and 3) display stronger sport fanship. Wilks’ Lambda value of .851 indicated that the three-factor model explained a total variance of approximately 15 percent. However, R squared values at the univariate level indicated that only a small amount of variance (ƞ2 = .014 and .008, respectively) was explained by the number of commercials watched and the number of people present to watch commercials, while a greater amount of variance (ƞ2 = .145) was explained by the level of sport fanship.
### Discussion
The frequency and statistical information presented in Tables 1-5 offers several important insights into the viewing and consumption patterns of college students during Super Bowl XLIV. First, the majority (536 out of 651 participants) indicated they watched most or all of the commercials during the Super Bowl telecast, with males indicating they watched slightly more commercials (M = 3.21) than females (M = 3.04). Given the tremendous popularity of Super Bowl commercials as entertainment (1, 4, 16, 22), it is no surprise college students overwhelmingly engaged in viewing these commercials. However, it is surprising that males watched more commercials than females because males have traditionally been found to be more interested in attributes of the game itself (30), and female attention levels during the Super Bowl were previously found to be higher during commercials (3). Perhaps the Super Bowl is such a mega-special-event (25) that male media desensitization is erased due to the powerful affiliation the commercials seem to have with the game experience. From a practical standpoint, it is important for marketers to acknowledge that male college student demographic is watching the Super Bowl commercials at a greater rate than female college students.
Second, college students were asked to list their favorite Super Bowl commercial and describe the characteristic they enjoyed most about that commercial. With over 70 commercials aired during the Super Bowl XLIV telecast, there were a variety of options. Out of 651 responses, 420 students indicated they had the same favorite commercial. The commercial was from Doritos and it depicted a young boy warning a potential suitor for his mother to “keep your hands off my mama, and keep your hands off my Doritos.” This commercial, although not the Ad Meter winner, was reported by TiVo Inc. to be the commercial that was stopped and played back the most on digital video recorders. Approximately 15% of homes replayed this commercial (5). The results for the Ad Meter ranked this Doritos commercial as the 11th most popular, falling behind another Doritos commercial depicting a dog placing a shock collar on a human to gain access to the man’s Doritos. The second and third rated commercials in the current study (Bud Light ‘house of cans’ and Snickers ‘Betty White football game’) were ranked third and first respectively for the Ad Meter. These results are particularly important for marketers because it suggest a rather large gap (11 spots) between the favorite commercial for college students versus adults who participated in the Ad Meter. This difference validates a marketing strategy that would attempt to isolate particular characteristics of various commercials to be most effective on a specific target audience (e.g., college students).
Although there were different favorite commercials reported for this study and the USA Today Ad Meter, the characteristics that make a commercial enjoyable appear similar. The top three characteristics most enjoyed by college students were humor, creativity, and originality. These characteristics could be used to describe many of the Super Bowl commercials, and reinforces the work of Kelly and Turley (18) who found that humor, sports themes, animals, children, and music increase the likelihood of positive affect towards advertisements. Specifically, the top ranked commercial in this study (i.e., Doritos) used humor and children. The second ranked commercial (i.e., Bud Light house) used humor and music. The third ranked commercial in this study, and first for the Ad Meter (i.e., Betty White football game) used humor and a sports theme. The use of humor is the recurring factor that appears in the top three commercials ranked in this study, and the characteristic chosen by 420 of the 651 participants (64.5%) that made their favorite commercial more enjoyable. Although it is not a secret that humor is an effective advertising tool (also see 29), confirming the importance of this factor within the college student population is a key point for marketers, especially given the overwhelming number of students who reported the importance of humor as the reason they enjoyed their favorite commercial.
Third, this study investigated college students’ intent to spend money on any products advertised during the Super Bowl, commonly referred to as intent to purchase (25). Results confirmed only 11.4% of students indicated they were likely to spend money on any of the products advertised during the Super Bowl. These numbers offer a less than optimistic view for marketers given the intent to purchase is a moderate to strong indicator of ROI (17, 25, 28). Perhaps college students believe the products and services advertised are not important to their lifestyles. Or, perhaps the $3,444 of discretionary spending reported by Gardyn (13) are being applied to products or services that are not advertised during the Super Bowl, but that are important to college students (e.g., laundry, other entertainment, etc.). If this is the case, marketing executives would be wise to understand the general acceptance by college students of Super Bowl advertising, and produce advertising that would peak their interest levels to influence their individual spending behavior, or choose advertising that targets a different demographic altogether.
Fourth, 518 of 651 participants (79.6%) watched the Super Bowl with at least four or more other people, and only 11 students reported watching the Super Bowl by themselves. This finding demonstrates that college students, much like society at large, enjoys the Super Bowl in a communal setting. Furthermore, correlational data demonstrates that males and college students who report themselves as big or huge fans are more likely to watch the Super Bowl with others. The finding that college students watch the Super Bowl in groups is consistent with literature that identifies the Super Bowl as a mega-special-event (25) that focuses on game and surrounding advertisement as a large entertainment package (1). However, the finding that male college students watch the Super Bowl with more people than females is counterintuitive to previous gender literature which suggested females are more attracted to communal relationships and social connections (6, 27). It is possible that the social environment afforded by campus living fosters a more communal context for which males can gather. It is also possible that given the importance of the largest annual sporting event in world, the fans that care about sports most (i.e., males) may find it more important than normal to gather in groups.
Fifth, this study supports the findings by Apostolopoulou et al., (1) which demonstrated that the game itself is the primary point of interest during the Super Bowl. Of the 651 participants, 458 (70.3%) reported they were most interested in the game. This finding is important because it reveals traditional college students are the same as other adults in their primary interest of the game. Marketers can use this interest to incorporate various advertising that might involve the flow of the game (e.g., commercials that air depending on the current score, or commercials that utilize the stars of each team, etc.). Furthermore, the current study found that only 66 of the 651 participants (approximately one percent) tuned into the Super Bowl telecast specifically for the commercials. This finding is noticeably lower than the four percent of the entire Super Bowl viewing audience found by Elliot (9), and implies that college students tune in to specifically watch the commercials at a lower rate than society at large. One must be careful to conclude this result implies college students do not watch commercials. In fact, this study found that most college students do watch and evaluate the majority of Super Bowl commercials, but watching those commercials are not as much of a priority as watching the game itself. Additionally, this study included more males than females, and males have been found to focus more on the aspects of the game (30).
Finally, this study attempted to identify the level of general sport-fanship, and its relationship to viewing patterns. Most students in this study (75.4%) identified themselves as big or huge fans. Males identified themselves as significantly bigger fans than females, and correlational results revealed bigger fans watched more commercials, and watched with more people. These findings allow marketers to begin construction of a blueprint for the average college student sport consumer whereby bigger fans will tend to be males, watch more commercials, and watch with more people. It is not a surprise that males considered themselves bigger fans than females given that males have been found to consume sport more frequently (30), be more competitive (12), value winning more (10), and display higher levels of athletic identity (21). It is also expected that bigger fans would watch more commercials and watch with more people given the large scale entertainment value surrounding the Super Bowl (1, 16). Implications for application are apparent. Marketers should attempt to identify the biggest fans and plan their advertising strategies accordingly. However, one must be mindful that the Super Bowl is a unique event with unusually high consumption, and offers a wide variety of consumers that may not routinely watch sporting events (20). Identifying marketing and advertising strategies for new consumers with varying levels of fanship is a challenging task during any sporting event, but particularly so during the Super Bowl.
### Conclusions
This study evaluated the viewing patterns and perceptions of commercials during Super Bowl XLIV for college students. The results suggest that although college students resemble the average Super Bowl viewer in many ways, they have specific differences that make them an important demographic for marketers to consider. The similarities between college students and the general population include watching the Super Bowl in large numbers, watching the Super Bowl with groups of other people, identifying humor as an enjoyable attribute in advertising, and being interested in the game over other factors (e.g., entertainment). These patterns of behavior lend themselves to specific market segmentation strategies, including advertising that appeals to groups and that contain humor. The differences found between college students and society at large highlight the gap in previous literature that has neglected to isolate this important demographic segment. Specifically, college students displaying a different preference for their favorite commercial (i.e., Doritos house rules vs. Betty White football game) appear to be extremely strong sport fans, and differ greatly by gender. The gender differences are of particular importance because previous literature would lead one to believe that females would be more interested than males in the entertainment portion of the Super Bowl, as well as gathering with large groups of people. This was not the case. The fact that males watched more commercials, and watched in larger groups, implies that male college students are a group of particular importance to marketers. These findings necessitate the need for further research into Super Bowl consumption patterns. Furthermore, given the Super Bowl is the most viewed annual sporting event in the world (5), identifying other sociodemographic consumption patterns is a key for effective marketing strategies.
### Applications in Sports
The results of this study make a strong case for differential game and commercial consumption patterns of college students during the Super Bowl telecast. If sport marketers choose to target the college student demographic in their design of commercials, they would be wise to focus their efforts on strategies which emphasize the importance of the game, using humor as a theme, products that college students would be most likely to use, and concepts that appeal to males. The fact that males are bigger fans, watch both the game and commercials more than females, and gather in groups more so than females, makes the male college student an ideal target market during the Super Bowl. Furthermore, if marketers understand that a majority of college students do not plan to spend money on products or services advertised during the Super Bowl, they may choose to ignore this demographic altogether.
### Tables
Table 1: Total Responses by Category
| Variables | Category | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial information | ||
| Number of Super Bowl commercials watched | All | 210 |
| Most | 326 | |
| A Few | 115 | |
| None | 0 | |
| Top three favorite Super Bowl commercials | 1. Doritos | 290 |
| 2. Bud Light | 72 | |
| 3. Snickers | 45 | |
| Top three characters enjoyed most about favorite commercial | 1. Funny or humorous | 420 |
| 2. Creative | 24 | |
| 3. Original | 21 | |
| Intent to spend money on a product due to a Super Bowl commercial | Yes | 74 |
| No | 489 | |
| Not sure | 236 | |
| Viewing patterns | ||
| Number of people students were with when watching the Super Bowl | 8 or more | 323 |
| 4-7 | 195 | |
| 1-3 | 122 | |
| 0 | 11 | |
| Primary interest during the Super Bowl | Game | 458 |
| Commercials | 66 | |
| People students were with | 113 | |
| Place viewed | 14 | |
| Level of general sport fanship | Huge fan | 255 |
| Big fan | 236 | |
| Somewhat fan | 138 | |
| Not a fan | 22 | |
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics
| M | SD | Skewness | Kurtosis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Std. Error | Statistic | Std. Error | |
| Number of commercials watched | 3.14 | .697 | -.229 | .095 | -.837 | .190 |
| Number of people students were with during the Super Bowl | 3.28 | .842 | -.433 | .095 | .699 | .191 |
| Level of sport-fanship | 3.11 | .859 | -.553 | .096 | -.625 | .191 |
Table 3: Correlations
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of commercials watched (1) | 1.0 | ||||
| Number of people present to watch commercials (2) | .07 | 1.0 | |||
| Level of sport-fanship (3) | .21** | .11** | 1.0 | ||
| Gender (4) | -.12 | -.09 | -.38 | 1.0 | |
| Age (5) | .11** | .04 | .11** | -.04 | 1.0 |
* p < .05
** p < .01
Table 4: Descriptive Statistics across Gender Groups
| Variables | Gender | M | SD | n |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of commercials watched | Female | 3.04 | .72 | 227 |
| Male | 3.21 | .67 | 424 | |
| Number of people present to watch commercials | Female | 3.18 | .91 | 227 |
| Male | 3.33 | .80 | 424 | |
| Level of sport-fanship | Female | 2.67 | .81 | 227 |
| Male | 3.35 | .78 | 424 |
Table 5: Multivariate Analysis of Variance
| Source | Dependent Variables | SS | df | MS | F | Sig.a |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Number of commercials watcheda | 4.270 | 1 | 4.270 | 9.031 | .003 |
| Number of people present to watch commercialsb | 3.519 | 1 | 3.519 | 4.987 | .026 | |
| Level of sport-fanshipc | 69.142 | 1 | 69.142 | 110.282 | .000 | |
| Error | Number of commercials watched | 306.867 | 649 | .473 | ||
| Number of people present to watch commercials | 458.038 | 649 | .706 | |||
| Level of sport-fanship | 406.895 | 649 | .627 | |||
| Total | Number of commercials watched | 6754.00 | 651 | |||
| Number of people present to wach commercials | 7470.00 | 651 | ||||
| Level of sport-fanship | 6775.00 | 651 |
Note: Wilks’ Lambda Value = .851; F(3, 647) = 37.635; p < .01
(a) R2 = .014 (Adjusted R2 = .012)
(b) R2 = .008 (Adjusted R2 = .006)
(c) R2 = .145 (Adjusted R2 = .144)
### References
1. Apostolopoulou, A., Clark, J., & Gladden, J. M. (2006). From H-town to Mo-Town: The importance of Super Bowl entertainment. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 15, 223-231.
2. Baker, S. (2004, July 12). Channeling the future. Business Week, 3891, 70-73.
3. Beasley, F. M., Shank, M. D., & Ball, R. W. (1998). Do Super Bowl viewers watch the commercials? Sport Marketing Quarterly, 7(3), 33-40.
4. Blackshaw, P., & Beard, R. (2009). Super Bowl XLIV: Battle for media ROI. Retrieved from Nielsen website: http://enus.nielsen.com/content/dam/nielsen/en_us/documents/pdf/Webinars/SuperBowlWebinar_clientfinal.pdf
5. CBS (2011). Super Bowl sets TV viewership record. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/07/sportsline/main7326154.shtml?tag=mncol;lst;4
6. Chee, K., Pino, N., & Smith, W. (2005). Gender differences in the academic ethic and academic achievement. College Student Journal, 39, 604-619.
7. Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
8. Dotterweich, D. P., & Collins, K. S. (2005). The practicality of Super Bowl advertising for new products and companies. Journal of Promotion Management, 11(4), 19-31.
9. Elliot, S. (1997, January 24). Advertising. New York Times, p. C5.
10. Flood, S., & Hellstedt J. (1991). Gender differences in motivation for intercollegiate athletic participation. Journal of Sport Behavior, 14, 159-167.
11. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E (2007). How to design and evaluate research in education (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
12. Frederick, C. (2000). Competitiveness: Relations with GPA, locus of control, sex, and athletic status. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 90, 413-414.
13. Gardyn, R. (2002). Educated consumers. American Demographics, 24(10), 18-19.
14. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15. Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
16. Horovitz, B. (2010, February 15). 2010 USA Today Ad Meter tracks Super Bowl XLIV ads. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/money/advertising/admeter/2010admeter.htm
17. Jalleh, G., Donovan, R. J., Giles-Corti, B., & Holman, C. D. (2002). Sponsorship: Impact on brand awareness and brand attitudes. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 8, 35-45.
18. Kelley, S. W., & Turley, L. W. (2004). The effect of content on perceived affect of Super Bowl commercials. Journal of Sport Management, 18, 398-420.
19. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
20. Lapchick, R. (2010, May 6). Super Bowl ads: Time for a change. ESPN.com. Retrieved from http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=lapchick/100505
21. Lubker, J., & Etzel, E. (2007). College adjustment experiences of first-year students: Disengaged athletes, nonathletes, and current varsity athletes. NASPA Journal, 44, 457- 480.
22. McAllister, M. P. (1999). Super Bowl advertising as commercial celebration. The Communication Review, 3(4), 403-428.
23. Meyers-Levy, J., & Sternthal, B. (1991). Gender differences in the use of message cues and judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 84-96.
24. Mullin, B., Hardy, S., & Sutton, W. (2007). Sport marketing. (3rd edition) Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
25. O’Reilly, N., Lyberger, M., McCarthy, L., Seguin, B., & Nadeau, J. (2008). Mega- special-event promotions and intent to purchase: A longitudinal analysis of the Super Bowl. Journal of Sport Management, 22, 392-409.
26. Prakash, V. (1992). Sex roles and advertising preferences. Journal of Advertising Research, 32, 43-52.
27. Shani, D., Sandler, D., & Long, M. (1992). Courting women using sports marketing: A content analysis of the US open. International Journal of Advertising, 11, 377-392.
28. Walliser, B. (2003). An international review of sponsorship of events and tax implications: Is there an opportunity for global co-ordination? International Marketing Review, 14, 183-195.
29. Weinberger, M. G., & Gulas, C. S. (1992). The impact of humor in advertising: A review. Journal of Advertising, 21(4), 35-59.
30. Zhang, J. J., Lam, E. T. C., & Connaughton, D. P. (2003). General market demand variables associated with professional sport consumption. International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 5, 33-55.
### Corresponding Author
James E. Johnson, Ed.D.
HP 223A, Ball State University
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN, 47306
jejohnson1@bsu.edu
765-285-0044
### Author Bio
James Johnson and Donghun Lee are Assistant Professors in the School of Physical Education, Sport, and Exercise Science at Ball State University.
