Blab Sports
Study Finds Watching Professional Sports Fuels Zero-Sum Thinking, Says Duke Research
When the stadium lights blaze and fans erupt, the drama on the field can seep into the minds of viewers. A new study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology shows that this effect goes beyond the game: regular exposure to professional sports heightens people’s tendency to see the world as a zero‑sum arena, where one side’s gain is another’s loss.
Led by J. Rex Fuqua Professor Aaron C. Kay of Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business, the research combined observational, experimental and longitudinal designs to trace a causal link between sports viewing and zero‑sum beliefs. The team surveyed participants across the United States, measuring their media habits and attitudes toward competition, cooperation, and societal outcomes.
The study zeroed in on the sport’s most high‑profile moments—playoffs, the World Series, and other championship contests. Participants who reported watching these events regularly scored significantly higher on a validated zero‑sum thinking scale than those who did not. Kay explained that the leisure choices people make—particularly the decision to consume professional sports—can shape their worldview. "While zero‑sum thinking may be the result of structural systems outside of the individual’s control, we showed that the way people choose to spend their time—watching sports, in this case—directly affects a win‑lose view of the world," Kay said.
The authors warn that a win‑lose mindset can seep into everyday decision making. In negotiations, teamwork, and policy debates, a belief that one group’s success automatically trumps another’s can curtail collaborative solutions that would benefit all parties. "If individuals believe that success for one group necessarily means failure for another, they may be less willing to engage in cooperative ventures that could benefit all parties," the paper notes.
Sports are also a study in paradox. While teams rely on coordination and collective effort to win, the competitive nature of the games can reinforce the idea that victory must come at another’s expense. The researchers found that sports can "do two things at once: unite people within groups while simultaneously promoting a worldview in which success requires someone else to fail." They add that the dual effect is nuanced; when teamwork is highlighted, the same environment can also foster positive‑sum outcomes.
From a theoretical standpoint, the findings echo classic game‑theory concepts. In zero‑sum games—such as baseball, football, and basketball—one player’s gain is another’s loss by definition. The study suggests that the cultural framing of these sports may amplify a win‑lose mentality beyond the field, influencing how fans interpret broader social dynamics.
Related research supports the idea that sports consumption can shape perceptions of larger group relationships. A separate study found that watching competitive sports can subtly teach viewers to view life as a zero‑sum contest, affecting attitudes toward international trade, racial discrimination, and wealth distribution.
For business leaders, educators, and policymakers, the implications are tangible. If sports viewing amplifies zero‑sum thinking, environments that demand collaboration—such as classrooms, boardrooms, and community programs—may need strategies to counteract this effect. The authors call for further research into interventions that could mitigate the negative cognitive side effects of sports consumption.
At present, the study does not recommend immediate policy changes. Instead, it adds to a growing body of literature examining the psychological impact of sports media. Future work will likely investigate how different types of sports, levels of competition, and cultural contexts influence the strength of zero‑sum beliefs.
In sum, the Duke study establishes a clear link between professional sports viewing and increased zero‑sum thinking. While the games can bring fans together and showcase teamwork, they also reinforce a win‑lose mindset that may hinder cooperative decision making. Stakeholders in business, education, and public policy should take note as they design programs that rely on collaboration and mutual benefit.
Led by J. Rex Fuqua Professor Aaron C. Kay of Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business, the research combined observational, experimental and longitudinal designs to trace a causal link between sports viewing and zero‑sum beliefs. The team surveyed participants across the United States, measuring their media habits and attitudes toward competition, cooperation, and societal outcomes.
The study zeroed in on the sport’s most high‑profile moments—playoffs, the World Series, and other championship contests. Participants who reported watching these events regularly scored significantly higher on a validated zero‑sum thinking scale than those who did not. Kay explained that the leisure choices people make—particularly the decision to consume professional sports—can shape their worldview. "While zero‑sum thinking may be the result of structural systems outside of the individual’s control, we showed that the way people choose to spend their time—watching sports, in this case—directly affects a win‑lose view of the world," Kay said.
The authors warn that a win‑lose mindset can seep into everyday decision making. In negotiations, teamwork, and policy debates, a belief that one group’s success automatically trumps another’s can curtail collaborative solutions that would benefit all parties. "If individuals believe that success for one group necessarily means failure for another, they may be less willing to engage in cooperative ventures that could benefit all parties," the paper notes.
Sports are also a study in paradox. While teams rely on coordination and collective effort to win, the competitive nature of the games can reinforce the idea that victory must come at another’s expense. The researchers found that sports can "do two things at once: unite people within groups while simultaneously promoting a worldview in which success requires someone else to fail." They add that the dual effect is nuanced; when teamwork is highlighted, the same environment can also foster positive‑sum outcomes.
From a theoretical standpoint, the findings echo classic game‑theory concepts. In zero‑sum games—such as baseball, football, and basketball—one player’s gain is another’s loss by definition. The study suggests that the cultural framing of these sports may amplify a win‑lose mentality beyond the field, influencing how fans interpret broader social dynamics.
Related research supports the idea that sports consumption can shape perceptions of larger group relationships. A separate study found that watching competitive sports can subtly teach viewers to view life as a zero‑sum contest, affecting attitudes toward international trade, racial discrimination, and wealth distribution.
For business leaders, educators, and policymakers, the implications are tangible. If sports viewing amplifies zero‑sum thinking, environments that demand collaboration—such as classrooms, boardrooms, and community programs—may need strategies to counteract this effect. The authors call for further research into interventions that could mitigate the negative cognitive side effects of sports consumption.
At present, the study does not recommend immediate policy changes. Instead, it adds to a growing body of literature examining the psychological impact of sports media. Future work will likely investigate how different types of sports, levels of competition, and cultural contexts influence the strength of zero‑sum beliefs.
In sum, the Duke study establishes a clear link between professional sports viewing and increased zero‑sum thinking. While the games can bring fans together and showcase teamwork, they also reinforce a win‑lose mindset that may hinder cooperative decision making. Stakeholders in business, education, and public policy should take note as they design programs that rely on collaboration and mutual benefit.
