ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
From interaction to identification: a mixed methods study on the formation mechanism of group identity among Ultimate Frisbee club members.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lifestyle sports like Ultimate Frisbee have emerged as important settings for social connection amid urban social atomization. Nevertheless, the voluntary and non-contractual nature of these clubs means they continue to face persistent challenges in sustaining membership. Although prior research has explored group identity in various sporting contexts, the mechanisms through which ritualized interaction and social exchange jointly contribute to members' identification remain insufficiently understood. Objective: This study investigates the formation mechanism of group identity among Ultimate Frisbee club members by integrating Interaction Ritual Chain theory and Social Exchange theory, and empirically tests whether emotional energy and relational benefits serve as parallel mediating pathways. Methods: A sequential exploratory mixed-methods design was employed. Study 1 adopted a grounded theory approach, using semi-structured interviews with 22 club members across multiple Chinese cities to inductively identify core antecedents and construct a theoretical model. Study 2 employed a cross-sectional survey design, with structural equation modeling applied to a sample of 332 Ultimate Frisbee club members to quantitatively test the hypothesized pathways. Results: The grounded theory analysis indicated a dual-pathway mechanism encompassing an affective pathway (interaction rituals → emotional energy → group identity) and a rational pathway (interaction rituals → relational benefits → group identity). The SEM results indicated that both emotional energy and relational benefits significantly mediated the relationship between interaction rituals and group identity. The mediating effect of relational benefits-encompassing trust and social acceptance-was larger (33.58% of total effect) than that of emotional energy (14.97%). Conclusion: These findings integrate Interaction Ritual Chain theory and Social Exchange theory into a unified framework, suggesting that rational evaluations of social reciprocity were more strongly associated with identity formation than transient emotional experiences in non-contractual sports clubs. The results point to the central role of relational calculus in voluntary organizations where formal incentives are absent. From a practical standpoint, club managers may consider prioritizing relational rewards and the development of ritualized interaction settings to enhance long-term member retention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.