Examining the Role of Source Evaluation in Athlete Advocacy: How Can Advocate Athletes Inspire Public Involvement in Racial Issues?

Abstract

Athlete advocacy is recognized as an important method of persuading the public on social issues, and it demonstrates the role of athletes in achieving racial justice. However, how athlete advocacy can gain the persuasiveness to encourage public involvement remains unclear. This study investigates how the evaluation of an advocate athlete functions to encourage public issue involvement, focusing on Naomi Osaka’s racial advocacy. In particular, driven by balance theory and attribution theory, this study examines the effects of five sociopsychological factors on public involvement in racial issues: perceived credibility, hypocrisy, cause fit, effort expended, and role model status of advocate athletes. Data were collected from a cross-sectional online survey of 855 Japanese adults who were aware of Osaka’s advocacy. The findings highlight that public involvement in racial issues is significantly associated with the evaluations of the athlete’s credibility and hypocrisy. These evaluations are further influenced by perceptions of the athlete’s cause fit and role model status. This study enriches the literature on the management of sports for social change by demonstrating the importance of source evaluation in athlete advocacy in achieving advocacy outcomes. Our evidence implies that athletes looking to promote racial justice issues should effectively be seen as credible, knowledgeable, and non-hypocritical in their issue advocacy.