ABSTRACT
At the outset, a brief review of some of the key goals and purposes of entertainment theory might prove helpful. In short, entertainment theory encompassed a set of psychological perspectives, concepts, and theories that seek to describe, explain, and (to some extent) predict the selection, reception, and effects of media entertainment. Generally speaking, entertainment1 can be defined as “any activity designed to delight and, to a smaller degree, enlighten through the exhibition of the fortunes or misfortunes of others, but also through the display of special skills by others and/or self” (Zillmann & Bryant, 1994, p. 438). Using this lens, it is obvious to see how sport is universally considered an entertainment content. But the primary goal of entertainment theory is not to merely categorize content but rather to explore the experiences people have with content, or in the words of Zillmann and Bryant (1994), to explore “entertainment as media effect” (p. 437). Thus, within this research tradition, entertainment
is further conceptualized as a complex reception process involving various thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. This perspective acknowledges that humans are active agents in deciding what is and is not entertaining to them. That is, we perceive and experience entertainment on an individual level. Ultimately, scholars in the area (e.g., Bosshart & Macconi, 1998; Vorderer, 2001; Zillmann & Bryant, 1994) see entertainment as being in the eye of the beholder, which, for our purposes, explains why great variance exists in the appeal of sport across the population.
