The Toxic Sports Fandom Scale (TSFS): A Study of Turkish Adaptation, Validity, and Reliability

Öz

The primary objective of this study was to adapt the Toxic Sports Fandom Scale into Turkish and evaluate its psychometric properties within the context of Turkish football culture. Diverging from traditional measurement tools, the TSFS focuses on the cognitive structures and belief systems that legitimize fan aggression. This adaptation aims to address a significant gap in the literature regarding the cognitive and emotional foundations that predispose fans in Türkiye to aggressive behavior. The research sample consisted of 511 active sports fans (76.9% male, X̄_age=24.06), the majority of whom support the “Big Three” clubs. Data were collected via an online survey. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) revealed a robust two-factor structure, diverging from the original multi-dimensional model. The first factor, “Aggressive and Hostile Entitlement,” merges perceptions of entitlement to aggression with hostile environment beliefs; the second factor, “Dysregulated Loyal Fandom,” integrates emotional dysregulation with fan loyalty. The CFA results supported this structure with high fit indices, and the scale demonstrated high internal consistency (α=0.927). While the relatively low mean score for toxic fandom (X̄=2.66) suggests that these toxic cognitions remain somewhat implicit, the findings reveal that Turkish fans cognitively justify aggression as a “right” and recontextualize the loss of emotional control as a marker of “loyal fandom.” In conclusion, the two sub-dimesions and 16-item Turkish version of the TSFS provides a psychometrically sound and culturally sensitive instrument for assessing toxic attitudes and cognitive schemas among sports supporters in Türkiye.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Turkish football
• Toxic fandom
• fan aggression
• fan loyalty

Destekleyen Kurum

N/A

Proje Numarası

N/A

Etik Beyan

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Health Sciences at Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, dated 18 February 2026, under decision number 13/27.

Teşekkür

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all the volunteers who participated in this study

Toksik Spor Taraftarlığı Ölçeği: Türkçe Uyarlama, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Toksik Spor Taraftarlığı Ölçeği’ni Türkçeye uyarlamak ve Türk futbol kültürü bağlamında psikometrik özelliklerini değerlendirmektir. Geleneksel ölçme araçlarından farklı olarak TSFS, taraftar saldırganlığını meşrulaştıran bilişsel yapılara ve inanç sistemlerine odaklanmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın, Türkiye’deki taraftarların saldırgan davranışlara zemin hazırlayan bilişsel ve duygusal temellerini saptama konusundaki literatür boşluğunu dolduracağı öngörülmektedir. Araştırma örneklemi, çoğunluğu “Üç Büyükler” taraftarı olan 511 aktif sporseverden (%76,9 erkek, X̄_yaş=24,06) oluşmaktadır. Veriler çevrimiçi anket yoluyla toplanmıştır. Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) sonuçları, orijinal yapıdan farklı olarak güçlü bir iki faktörlü yapı ortaya koymuştur. Birinci faktör olan “Saldırgan ve Düşmanca Hak Görme”, saldırganlığa yönelik hak görme ile düşmanca ortam inançlarını birleştirirken; ikinci faktör “Duygusal Düzensizlik İçeren Sadık Taraftarlık”, duygusal düzensizlik ile taraftar sadakatini bütünleştirmiştir. DFA sonuçları bu yapıyı yüksek uyum değerleri ile desteklemiş ve ölçek için yüksek iç tutarlık katsayısı saptanmıştır (α=0.927). Toksik taraftarlık ortalama puanının görece düşük olması (X̄=2,66), bu bilişlerin mevcut olmakla birlikte örtük düzeyde kaldığına işaret etmektedir. Bulgular, Türkiye’deki taraftarların saldırganlığı bilişsel olarak bir “hak” gibi meşrulaştırdığını ve duygusal kontrol kaybını “sadık taraftarlığın” bir nişanesi olarak yeniden anlamlandırdığını ortaya koymaktadır. Sonuç olarak, TSFS-TR 16 maddelik iki alt boyutlu formuyla, Türkiye’deki taraftarların toksik tutumlarını ve bilişsel yapılarını ölçmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Toksik taraftarlık
• taraftar saldırganlığı
• taraftar bağlılığı
• Türk futbolu

Destekleyen Kurum

N/A

Proje Numarası

N/A

Etik Beyan

Araştırma için Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Etik Kurulundan 18.02.2026 tarihli ve 13/27 karar sayısı ile etik kurul izni alınmıştır.

Teşekkür

Bu çalışmaya katılan tüm gönüllülere içten teşekkürlerimizi sunarız

Kaynakça

1. Allen, J. J., Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2018). The general aggression model. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19, 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.034
2. Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231
3. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
4. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
5. Berkowitz, L. (1993). Pain and aggression: Some findings and implications. Motivation and Emotion, 17, 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992223
6. Bobbitt, T. D. (2025). Not everyone believes sports are a safe space: Development of a toxic sports fandom scale (Graduate thesis). West Virginia University. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/12879
7. Bushman, B. J. (1993). Human aggression while under the influence of alcohol and other drugs: An integrative research review. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2(5), 148–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768961
8. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Pegem Akademi.

9. Carpenter, S. (2018). Ten steps in scale development and reporting: A guide for researchers. Communication Methods and Measures, 12(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2017.1396583
10. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
11. Dimmock, J. A., & Grove, J. R. (2005). Relationship of fan identification to determinants of aggression. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200590907559
12. Djordjic, V. (2019). Bracketed morality in sport. Physical Education and Sport Through the Centuries, 6(2), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.2478/spes-2019-0011
13. Dunning, E. (2000). Towards a sociological understanding of football hooliganism as a world phenomenon. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 8, 141–162. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008773923878
14. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
15. Foster, W. M., Hyatt, C. G., & Julien, M. (2012). Pronger you ignorant ape...: A study of the institutional work of sport fans. In A. C. Earnheardt, P. M. Haridakis, & B. S. Hugenberg (Eds.), Sport fans, identity and socialization (pp. 119–133). Lexington Books.
16. Furr, R. M. (2011). Scale construction and psychometrics for social and personality psychology. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446287866
17. Giles, H., & Stohl, M. (2016). Sport as intergroup communication. In A. C. Billings (Ed.), Defining sport communication (pp. 150–164). Routledge.
18. Grodecki, M., & Rookwood, J. (2025). Why does fan violence persist in football? Deviant Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2025.2528088
19. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
20. Kavussanu, M. (2019). Understanding athletes’ transgressive behavior. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 42, 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.01.009
21. Kerr, J. H. (2005). Rethinking aggression and violence. Routledge.
22. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
23. Knapton, H., Espinosa, L., Meier, H. E., Back, E. A., & Back, H. (2018). Belonging for violence. Nordic Psychology, 70(4), 278–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2018.1430611
24. Maxwell, J. P. (2004). Anger rumination: An antecedent of athlete aggression? Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5(3), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1469-0292(03)00007-4
25. Porat, A. B. (2010). Football fandom: A bounded identification. Soccer & Society, 11(3), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660971003619594
26. Russell, G. W. (2004). Sport riots: A social–psychological review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9, 353–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(03)00031-4
27. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.
28. Shank, M., & Beasley, F. (1998). Fan or fanatic. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21(4), 435–444.
29. Shuv-Ami, A., & Toder-Alon, A. (2022). A new team sport club aggression scale. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20(5), 1274–1294. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2021.1979076
30. Spaaij, R. (2014). Sports crowd violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19(2), 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.02.002
31. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2015). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
32. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. Austin & S. Worschel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations. Brooks/Cole.
33. Swann, W. B., Gómez, Á., Seyle, D. C., Morales, J. F., & Huici, C. (2009). Identity fusion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 995–1011. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013668
34. Wakefield, K. L., & Wann, D. L. (2006). Dysfunctional sport fans. Journal of Leisure Research, 38, 168–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2006.11950074
35. Vallerand, R. J., Blanchard, C., Mageau, G. A., et al. (2003). Passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(4), 756–767. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.756
36. Wann, D. L., Haynes, G., McLean, B., & Pullen, P. (2003). Sport team identification. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 406–413. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.10046
37. Wann, D. L., & Ostrander, A. (2017). Dysfunctional sport fandom. Contemporary Athletics, 11, 189–197. Wann, D. L., Peterson, R. R., Cothran, C., & Dykes, M. (1999). Sport fan aggression and anonymity. Social Behavior and Personality, 27(6), 597–602. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.1999.27.6.597
38. Wann, D. L., Shelton, S., Smith, T., & Walker, R. (2002). Team identification and aggression. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94, 595–598. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.2002.94.2.595