Can socio-cultural predictors help explain the home advantage gap in European men’s and women’s football?

ABSTRACT

The present study aims to explore the socio-cultural predictors (SCp) effects in home advantage (HA) in European men’s and women’s national football leagues. A total of 69,223 matches in 21 countries were analysed. Exploratory regression modelling for HA gender gaps (HAGG) included each country’s SCp (KOF-Cultural Globalization [KOFCuGI]; Global Gender Gap [GGGI]; macro-regionlocation); male and female league competitive balance (MCB, WCB). The HA was demonstrated in 41 leagues with a large HAGG effect (4.3%) in 14 countries (men, 58.4 ± 3.6%; women, 54.1 ± 3.9%; p< 0.001; ES = 0.84). The KOFCuGI ($\beta$= 0.19, p< 0.001) and WCB ($\beta$= 5.40, p< 0.001) could explain moderate variance in HAGG (R² = 0.17, F(5,183) = 7.44, p< 0.001). The western region had the lowest HAGG with medium magnitude differences to the southern region (~3%; p< 0.05, ES = 0.54). The SCp may offer new approaches in studies of gender disparity in sport.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Leite and Pollard, ‘Home advantage in women’s football’.

2. Lapoint, ‘Du soulier à la lucarne’.

3. Pollard and Gómez, ‘Home advantage in men’s and women’s football’.

4. Pollard et al., ‘Global differences in home advantage’.

5. Hays et al., ‘Sources and types of confidence’.

6. See note 3.

7. Wolfson et al., ‘Hormones and the home advantage in English football’.

8. Coulomb-Cabagno et al., ‘Player gender and male referees’ decisions’.

9. Souchon et al., ‘Referees’ decision making in handball’; Souchon et al., ‘Referees’ decision making about transgressions’.

10. Gelade, ‘National culture and home advantage in football’; Kolman et al., ‘Cross-cultural differences in Central Europe’.

11. Gelade, ‘National culture and home advantage in football’.

12. Lago and Lago-Peñas, ‘Cultural sources of deception in soccer’.

13. Triandis et al., ‘Individualism and collectivism’.

14. See note 3.

15. Leite and Pollard, ‘Home advantage in women’s football’; Pollard and Gómez, ‘Home advantage in men’s and women’s football’; Pollard et al., ‘Global differences in home advantage’.

16. Pollard, ‘Home advantage in soccer’.

17. Gygli et al., ‘KOF Globalisation Index’.

18. See note 3.

19. Crotti et al., ‘Global Gender Gap Report 2020.

20. See note 3.

21. Ibid, 20.

22. Ibid, 20-1.

23. Fort, ‘Competitive balance in North American sports’.

24. Cohen, ‘Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences’.

25. Yamashita et al., ‘Stepwise AIC method for variable selection’.

26. James et al., ‘Introduction to statistical learning’.

27. Peña & Slate, ‘Global validation of linear model assumptions’.

28. See note 24.

29. Cohen, ‘Power primer’.

30. Lapoint, ‘Du soulier à la lucarne’; Pollard and Gómez, ‘Home advantage in men’s and women’s football’; Pollard et al., ‘Global differences in home advantage’.

31. Oliveira et al., ‘Testosterone responsiveness in female soccer players’.

32. Kivlighan et al., ‘Gender differences in testosterone and cortisol’.

33. See note 7.

34. See note 32.

35. Leite at al., ‘Home advantage effect in women’s sport’.

36. See note 7.

37. Barreira, ‘Vantagem de jogar em casa no futebol feminino’.

38. See note 3.

39. See note 35.

40. Smith, ‘Disconnects between popular discourse and home advantage’.

41. Leitner and Richlan, ‘No fans – No pressure’; Scoppa, ‘Social pressure in the stadiums’; Wunderlich et al., ‘How does spectator presence affect football?’

42. Pollard, ‘Worldwide home advantage in football’; Pollard and Gómez, ‘Home advantage in football in South-West Europe’; Pollard and Seckin, ‘Why is home advantage in South-east Europe the highest in the world?’

43. Pollard, ‘Worldwide variations in home advantage in football’; Pollard and Gómez, ‘Home advantage in 157 national soccer leagues’.

44. See note 3.

45. Pollard and Gómez, ‘Home advantage in men’s and women’s football’; Pollard et al., ‘Global differences in home advantage’.

46. See note 23.

47. See note 3.

48. Ibid.

49. See note 35.

50. Brasil, ‘Decreto-Lei No. 3.199’.

51. Black & Fielding-Lloyd, ‘Re-establishing the ‘outsiders”.

52. See note 35.

53. Allison, ‘Business or cause?’

54. See note 8.

55. See note 35.