)Vlf;l,] RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LJBRARJES remove this checkout from ...-IEIIIIL your record. FINES will —- be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. on»; a 5. mr APR 7 5 3°95 MAG, Fgé 01%. [9‘9] 02 Hm. 06. JAN 1“,}3999 1 \ ’ 0 ~- Ayn! 4* O p a war I .x "‘9’“ 0” '” r5132 0 ° 23:3 ' Jwgwar MR 2 8 1997,. - ' 3w! ‘ 0‘3 ‘ FEB?2--.:Z,2000 W. . tjq901997 ~3- ,v, C 4.-( r f“? 7 5 ‘ , IdJANO‘MU “' MU. W SE? 11 m . AUG 2 1994 m; § 2001 1-“. J/J~ 0}¢ J U27 " '; I“ 7- _-“ k 1/ / -' ‘A/ _ J ADOLESCENTS IN A MULTI-MEDIA ENVIRONMENT: THEIR MEDIA USE ACTIVITIES AND GRATIFICATIONS By Carolyn A. Lin A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Mass Media Ph.D. Program College of Communication Arts & Sciences 1987 ABSTRACT ADOLESCENTS IN A MULTI-MEDIA ENVIRONMENT: THEIR MEDIA-USE ACTIVITIES AND GRATIFICATIONS By Carolyn A. Lin Teen viewers in the 19805 face a TV screen dramati- cally different from that of previous decades. These viewers represent the first cable-TV and video-cassette- recorder (VCR) generation. With these technologies comes a new media environment, which includes material with highly explicit violent and sexual content such as R-rated or X— rated movies. Despite concern over the role of less orthodox con- tent in socialization processes of teen viewers, little research has addressed how teenagers make use of it or the extent to which they interact with this "abundant" media environment. The present study assesses how teenagers uti- lize media technologies, and what are the relations bet- ween their media-use activity and gratifications. Further, a theoretical model is proposed to interpret the manner in N N which viewers interact with the new home-video cultural phenomenon. The hypotheses tested in this study were based on the "gratification-seeking" phase of a' proposed theoretical model which assesses the overall relations between grati- fication-seeking activity and 1) media gratifications expected as well as obtained, 2) the audience’s media exposure level, and 3) the audience’s overall control over the media exposure process. Data were obtained from an in- class survey of 206 7th graders and 221 10th graders from a medium-sized midwestern community. Results generally revealed that: l) a more active audience tends to expect and to receive a higher level of media gratifications, 2) the more active audience member is also inclined to be a heavier media consumer, 3) the con- trol available to the audience through the use of new video technologies is related to the audience’s gratifications- seeking processes, and 4) the concept of gratification- seeking activity is indeed an intervening factor in the relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications- obtained. The empirical support provided for the hypo- theses and the theoretical model substantiates the theorizing effort incorporated in this study that examined teen audience’s media uses and gratifications within the context of a multimedia environment. The foremost contribution of this study, however, lies in the introduc- tion of new theoretical components that broaden the scope of conventional audience-activity typologies to address the processes of audience media consumption in a new home video culture. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer is much indebted to a number of people during her stay at M.S.U. Gratitude will first be directed to Dr. Bradley Greenberg, who served as her invaluable aca- demic adviser, dissertation director, and mentor. Special thanks is due Dr. Thomas Baldwin, another gracious mentor who provided her with advanced knowledge on new television technologies and with advice throughout her doctoral program. Dr. Joseph Straubhaar was a constant source of inspiration, helping formulate her thinking with insightful perspectives. Dr. Donald Montgomery provided stylistic assistance, in addition to interdisciplinary perspectives on media theory and research methods. And last, but not least, Dr. Thomas Muth, through his policy course and numerous intellectual discussions, challenged her inside as well as outside the classroom--a truly pleasant learning experience. The writer also extends her appreciation to. her husband, David Atkin. Since we met in the Ph.D. program he has been a source of anxiety sharing. In addition, a debt of gratitude is owed to the writer’s parents, as well as her aunt’s family, to all of whom this dissertation is dedicated. The writer also thanks her classmates--Ed Cohen Rob and Jan Wicks, Gary Pizante, Allen Harris, Renato Linsangan, Carrie Heeter, Gloria Viscasillas, Keith Kenney, Larry Collette, Jean-Luc Renaud, Megumi Komiya, T.Y. Lau, John Clogston, Indra DeSilva and Kwadwo Anokwa--the finest colleagues one can have. Finally, heartful thanks to dear Ann Alchin, the greatest and nicest secretary in the whole world. 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION Problem Statement. Need for Study PART I: LITERATURE REVIEW. Uses and Gratifications Perspective Psychological Origins. . . . Social Origins and Factors . . . . Gratifications-Sought vs. Gratifications-Obtained . Gratification-Seeking Activity - Gratifications and Media Effects . . . Models of Uses and Gratifications Perspectives Control Motivation . . Uses of VCRs and Cable TV. VCR Use Activity Teen Use of VCRs . . . Cable Use Activity . . . . Summary . . . . PART II: AN AUDIENCE GRATIFICATION-SEEKING MODEL . . . . General Needs. . . . Need Orientation . . . Basic Motivations. . . . . . Gratification Orientation. . . . . . Gratifications Sought. . . . . Gratification- -Seeking Activity . . . Pre- -exposure Activity. . . . . . During-Exposure Activity . . . Media-Exposure Involvement . . . . Post-Exposure Activity ' Media-Exposure Level . . iii 10 12 14 16 19 21 24 30 28 33 35 38 Media-Use Control. Gratifications-Obtained . . Gratification-Effects. . . . Socio-Cultural Composition . . . . PART III: HYPOTHESES METHODS . . . . . . . . . Model Testing. . . . . . . . Respondent Descriptions . . . . Survey Instrument. . Pilot Study . . . . Data Collection Procedures Definitions of Variables . . . . . Gratifications-Sought. Gratifications-Obtained . . Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure Activity. During-Exposure Activity Post-Exposure Activity . . . . . Media-Exposure Level Media-Use Control. . . . . . ~ . Hypothesis Testing . . RESULTS Pre-Exposure Activity. During-Exposure Activity Post-Exposure Activity . Media-Exposure Level Media-Use Control. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION Hypothesis Discussion. Pre-Exposure Activity. During-Exposure Activity Post-Exposure Activity . . . . . Media- -Exposure Level . . . . . . Media- -Use Control. . . . Gratification- ~Seeking Activity vs Gratifica- tions- Sought and Gratifications— Obtained . . Discussion of Model Testing . . . . Gratifications- -Sought and Gratification- -Seeking Activity . . . . . . . . . Gratifications- -Seeking and Gratifications- Obtained . iv 63 66 67 70 72 67 77 80 82 83 84 85 86 88 89 89 92 95 97 99 103 107 107 ' 111 114 116 118 130 130 130 133 136 138 142 147 150 150 151 Gratification Seeking Activity and Gratifications- -Obtained . . . . . 152 Gratification- Seeking Activity and Media- Exposure Level . . . . . . 153 Gratification- Seeking Activity and Media- Use Control . . . . 155 Gratifications- -Sought and Gratifications- Obtained . . . 157 Media- -Exposure Level and Media- Use Control vs ‘ Gratifications— Sought and -Obtained . . . 159 Media- -Exposure Level . . . . . . . 160 Media- -Use Level . . . . 163 Summarizing the Relations Between Model Components . . . . . . . . 166 Conclusions . . . . . . . 169 Research Implications. . . . .. . . 172 Audience Activity. . . . 172 Gratifications- ~Sought vs Gratifications- Obtained . . . . . . 174 Impacts of New Technology. . . . . . 176 ENDNOTES . . . . . . . . . . 180 APPENDIX 1: MCGUIRE’S TYPOLOGY OF HUMAN MOTIVATIONS . . . . . . . 198 APPENDIX 2: SURVEY INSTRUMENT . . . . . 199 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1. Correlations between Media-Use Orientation and Gratifications-Sought and Grati- cations-Obtained. . 1.2. Correlations between Media-Use Planning and Gratifications—Sought and Grati- fications-Obtained . . . . . . 1.3. Correlations between Time-Shifting Planning and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications. Obtained. . . . . 2.1. Correlations between Technical-Involve- ment and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained . . . 2.1.1. Correlations between Technical-Involvement and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifi- cations Obtained for VCR Owners . . . . 2.2. Correlations between Media-Exposure Involve- ment and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained . . . . . 3.1. Correlations between Post-Exposure Involvement and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained. . . . . . . 3.2. Correlations between Media-Motivated Activity and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained . . . . . 4.1. Correlations between TV-Exposure Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity . . . . 4.2. Correlations between Program-Exposure Diver- sity and Gratification-Seeking Activity . . 4.3. Correlations between VCR-Use Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity . . 5.1. Correlations between Planning Flexibilitiy and Gratification-Seeking Activity . . vi 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 117 118 6. 7. .1 .2. 5. .1. Correlations between Technical Flexibility and Gratification-Seeking Activity . . . T-Test Results for the comparison of Techni- cal Flexibility between Respondents With and Without a Remote-Control Device for the TV . Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained . . . . . . . . Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Gratification-Seeking-Activity and Grati- fications-Sought and Gratifications Obtained. Partial Correlations between the Measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained Controlling for Gratifications- Seeking Activity . . . . . Zero-Order Correlations between the Mea- sures of Gratifications-Sought and Grati- fications-Obtained for VCR Owners . . Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures Gratification-Seeking-Activity and Grati- fications-Obtained for VCR Owners . Partial Correlations between the Measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained Controlling for Gratifications— Seeking Activity for VCR Owners. . Mean Correlations between Gratification Seeking Activity and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained . . . Correlations between Media-Exposure Level and Gratification-Seeking . Correlations between Media-Use Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity . . . Zero-Order Correlations and Partial Correla- tions between Gratifications-Sought and Grati- fications-Obtained (controlling for Gratifica— tion-Seeking Activity) . . . . . . Zero-Order Correlations between the measures of Media-Exposure Level and Gratifications- Sought and Gratifications-Obtained vii 119 120 121 123 124 125 127 128 152 154 156 159 161 Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Media-Exposure Level and Gratification- Seeking Activity. . . . . . . Partial Correlations between Media-Exposure Level and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifi- cations-Obtained Controlling for Gratifica- tion-Seeking Activity . . . . Zero-Order Correlations between the measures of Media-Use Control and Gratifications- Sought and Gratifications-Obtained . Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Media-Use Control and Gratification-Seek- ing Activity. . . . . . . Partial Correlations between Media-Use Con- trol and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifi- cations-Obtained controlling for Gratifica- tion-Seeking Activity Mean Correlations between Gratification-Seek- ing Activity and all Other Model Components Mean Correlations and Partial Correlations among Four Model Components--Gratifications- Sought, Gratifications-Obtained, Media-Expo- sure Level and Media-Use Control. viii 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 10. 10. Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Media-Exposure Level and Gratification- Seeking Activity. . . . . . . Partial Correlations between Media-Exposure Level and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifi- cations—Obtained Controlling for Gratifica— tion-Seeking Activity . . . . . Zero-Order Correlations between the measures of Media-Use Control and Gratifications- Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Media-Use Control and Gratification-Seek- ing Activity. . . . . Partial Correlations between Media-Use Con- trol and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifi- cations-Obtained controlling for Gratifica- tion-Seeking Activity . Mean Correlations between Gratification-Seek- ing Activity and all Other Model Components . Mean Correlations and Partial Correlations among Four Model Components--Gratifications- Sought, Gratifications-Obtained, Media-Expo- sure Level and Media-Use Control. . . viii 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 Figure 1. LIST OF FIGURES A Model for the Process and Activity of Audience Gratification—Seeking . . 43 The Audience Gratification-Seeking Phase . . . . . . . . . 73 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Teen viewers in the 1980s face a TV screen dramatically different from that of past decades. These viewers constitute the first cable-TV and video-cassette- recorder (VCR) generation. Many of them are able to watch certain TV programs that contain highly explicit violent and sexual content such as R-rated or X-rated movies on cable TV. They may also watch pre-recorded movies portraying similarly unrestricted video content by use of a VCR, often without parental supervision. Consequently, concern over the role of TV viewing in children’s lives has sharply increased.1 Parents and educators have started to ponder whether the popularity of graphically ”antisocial” music videos and their "offensive" lyrics might have a negative impact on the youth culture. The pervasiveness of new media technologies across U.S. TV households cannot be disputed. Nearly fifty percent of households subscribe to cable,2 thirty percent. have at least one pay channel, and forty percent own a VCR? Despite concerns over the role of less orthodox video content in the socialization process of teen viewers, little research has addressed how teenagers make use of such content or how they interact with this. ”abundant" CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Teen viewers in the 1980s face a TV screen dramatically different from that of past decades. These viewers constitute the first cable-TV and video-cassette- recorder (VCR) generation. Many of them are able to watch certain TV programs that contain highly explicit violent and sexual content such as R-rated or X-rated movies on cable TV. They may also watch pre-recorded movies portraying similarly unrestricted video content by use of a VCR, often without parental supervision. Consequently, concern over the role of TV viewing in children’s lives has sharply increased.1 Parents and educators have started to ponder whether the popularity of graphically "antisocial" music videos and their ”offensive" lyrics might have a negative impact on the youth culture. The pervasiveness of new media technologies across U.S. TV households cannot be disputed. Nearly fifty percent 'of households subscribe to cable,2 thirty percent' have at least one pay channel, and forty percent own a VCR? Despite concerns over the role of less orthodox video content in the socialization process of teen viewers, little research has addressed how teenagers make use of such content or how they interact with this. ”abundant" media environment. This study will assess how teenagers utilize media technologies and what are the relations between their media-use activity and gratification. A theoretical model will be proposed to interpret how teen viewers interact with the "new” home-video cultural phenomenon. Ereblss §te£essnt Adolescent years are the most stressful time of a person’s developmental transition. Experts have segmented adolescence into early-, mid- and late- stages; each stage is said to have a different phase of challenges.4 The recurrent themes generally appear to be an inevitable search for the following elements that prepare an adolescent for a successful adulthood: l) self-identity (related to body image), 2) autonomy (in relation to gaining indepen- dence), 3) achievement (in academic work and self-worth) and 4) intimacy (indicative of friendship and approval).5 For an adolescent to attain these elements in either a positive or negative direction, parents, schools, peer groups, media and social/cultural environments all play a certain role in the socialization process. Literature has described the potential impact of media on adolescent behavior. Teenagers often model their favorite entertainers in terms of mannerism, clothing, hairstyles, and so on. They exchange opinions on yesterday’s soap-opera episodes or the newly released music videos. They form a "youth culture" that symbolizes independence from their parents. In fact, a teenager’s commitment to the peer-group values is often reflected in the extent to which he or she identifies with the pop media culture adopted by the group.6 According to Roe, pop media culture such as pop music contains "values and roles sponsored by mass media designed for adolescent consump- tion.” 7 However, most TV programs on commercial channels deal with primarily adult-oriented themes. Teenagers who are not intellectually mature may absorb certain morals or values indiscriminately.8 Although parents have sounded their criticisms about the possible negative influence of some pop media culture on their children, most children receive little parental guidance or mediation in their daily TV-viewing activity.9 With the number of single-parent households and dual-working parent households on the rise, watching TV has become a major after-school activity for many children while awaiting their parents’ return home. On average, a teenager spends two to three hours a day watching TV.10 One reason why TV viewing is a favorite activity for many teen- agers is that it represents a rather neutral source for passing leisure time, especially when ”no other attractive alternatives” are available?1 Yet, television--to maintain audience viewing interest and loyalty--must be satisfying certain important psychological needs, because the appeal of TV viewing is still much lower than most other teenage activities. In examining how and why teenagers utilize media to pass their leisure time, their use of cable TV and VCRs must be scrutinized. Access to cable TV and VCRs has undoubtedly created a distinctively new home-video envi- ronment for the audience. Cable TV, with its multichannel capacity, has provided viewers with 24 -hour viewing enjoyment in a good variety of specialty channels such as news, sports, music, movies, and so on. For example, the Music TV channel (MTV) provides 24-hour rock-music videos; it has become the primary source for teenagers to scout the newest rock-music releases. Other channels, such as Nickelodeon, supply programs for children of all ages. Cable TV is obviously capable of meeting a much broader horizon of audience viewing interests than traditional broadcast networks are capable of serving. Having a greater degree of ”control" over the access to home-entertainment options also translates to a greater degree of "audience control” over viewing activity. Such additional ability to ”control" what one wishes to watch on the TV screen is further expanded when a VCR set is brought into the home. Nith a VCR, not only is the audience able to increase viewing options by playing pre-recorded tapes (i.e., rented, purchased, or borrowed), but it can also watch any TV programs at its convenience through recording them for later viewing. A teen viewer may watch a favorite rented movie (with a friend or a group of friends) that is no longer available on TV or in theatres. Alternatively, he or she may play back a program that perhaps had a conflicting schedule with another favorite program or another activity (e. g., sleep, sports). What a VCR can offer to the audience is freedom from the restriction of broadcast and/or cable schedules, as well as thousands of movie titles on videocassettes. Stay- ing home to watch a rental is often more economical than ”going to the movies” in terms of time or cost for the entire family.12 Watching videos at home also gives one 13 privacy and control over timing. Video parties--inviting guests over to watch a video--have evolved into a new kind of socializing event, especially among the younger generation.14 Although a "home-video culture" has not been concretely established at present, all signs indicate that it is in a clearly intensive process of formation. If the ability to "control” one’s viewing enjoyment has become an important concern to the audience, technology has provided yet another answer to that demand. A remote- control device that accompanies a TV or VCR set enables the audience to control viewing conditions with little physical effort. Through the use of a remote-control device, the audience can switch channels freely for the purpose of skipping undesired content (e. g., commercials), scanning the viewing options, or changing viewing choices. The sensation of physically ”controlling” one’s television or VCR machine by using a remote-control device is probably, nevertheless, less significant than the psychological satisfaction of being ”in-control" of one’s viewing activity. Teen viewers, when the circumstance allows, reportedly switch around channels very frequently. 15 Cable-TV and VCR technologies have evidently intro- duced a greater level of ”control” and a widened variety of ”choice” in making viewing decisions. TV viewing is, therefore, no longer a "passive" activity. Instead, the audience can be a relatively active ”participant" in the process of selecting and viewing a program. Although the ”one-way" nature of mass communication has not really been altered, more "interactions” between the audience and its TV screen have nevertheless taken place. The ”locus of control” in this particular communication process has been heavily transferred to the hands of an audience from the media source. An examination of this ”new" home-video phenomenon may lead to a redefinition of the relationship between the audience and its media environment. The multi- media environment may have generated a ”new” dimension of psychological and behavioral consequences highlighted by changes in viewing patterns and an enhancement of media gratification for child as well as adult audiences. Most research related to adolescents’ use of media is one to two decades old, and thus, only a few studies have dealt with adolescent use of cable TV and VCRs. These are preliminary investigations which have provided descriptive information on general media-use patterns and on demo- lgraphic profiles of adolescents and their multi~media environment. Not many media theories have, however, been tested for the purposes of making inferences and interpretations about this new relationship between the n N teenage users and their new media environment. This paucity of work on teens and new media likely stems from the lack of applicable theoretical frameworks that may generalize meaningful new dimensions for explanation. In an attempt to fill this vacuum in theory, Levy proposed a new approach to study audience activity: observing the psychological and behavioral reactions of the adult audience throughout the entire viewing process. He also made an effort to integrate the uses-and-gratifications perspective with various aspects of audience activity to explain how the levels of viewer interaction with media may be correlated with media gratification.16 Though Levy’s contribution needs to be verified as yet through replication, his effort raises the possibility of revising existing theories and assumptions to accommodate new dimensions in media research. It seems that a full understanding of the relations between an audience and its "new" media environment will call for a reexamination of this relationship. Certain fundamental matters pertaining to why and how an audience uses media, what it chooses from media offerings, and what it gains from media use must be reevaluated. Levy has’ explored a few new aspects of audience-media ‘interactions (including VCR use), and other researchers have studied channel switching and program selection processes in cable TV and VCR homes.l7 Nevertheless, there are yet to be thoroughly analyzed the theoretical meanings of a central "audience control” element that captures the essence of the ”new” media environment (i.e., widened content variety, increased media access and technical-control features). The lack of exploration of this "audience control" element has hampered any potential theoretical breakthroughs. £229 £22 §Igdz Amidst all the research old and new, on adolescent use of media, one principal disciplinary area--uses and gratifications-4seems to have been insufficiently studied. Without sufficient knowledge about the psychological motives and consequences of media-use activities among teenagers, the theoretical basis for making inferences on many media-related adolescent behaviors is somewhat rudimentary. To establish that theoretical basis, more research effort will be needed. In light of the changing media environment, it may be useful to combine an utilitar- ian approach with any potential new theoretical elements arising from the ”new” home-video culture. For one can easily study any media-use related concepts within the context of the uses and gratifications perspective. For example, one may assume the concept ”audience control” is one of the underlying motives for media use because ”control motivation" is said to exist in every action a person takes in life.18 It is expected that the exploration of new models will unquestionably broaden our knowledge of the relationship between audiences and their ”new”. multi- media environment. CHAPTER 11: PART I LITERATURE REVIEW To establish a sound basis for the construction of a new communication model, this section will review litera- ture in three areas--the uses and gratifications perspec- tive, "control motivation," and general use patterns of VCRs and cable TV. Each section will be relevant to a part of the communication model proposed in the second part of this chapter. 9222 222 9:211:12221222 22222222122 The general framework for this approach assumes that certain psychological needs motivate individuals to seek mass media content for need-fulfillment purposes. Media exposures will result in the gratification of those psychological needs to varying degrees, and perhaps trigger certain short- or long-term cognitive, affective, and behavioral reactions either intended or unintended by the audience. Implicit in this generalization is the assumption that the individual is an active audience member who is capable of identifying his needs and the preferred means (i.e., media exposure) to gratify those needs. Much research has adopted the uses and gratifications perspective to study media audience behavior. However, CHAPTER 11: PART I LITERATURE REVIEW To establish a sound basis for the construction of a new communication model, this section will review litera- ture in three areas--the uses and gratifications perspec— tive, ”control motivation," and general use patterns of VCRs and cable TV. Each section will be relevant to a part of the communication model proposed in the second part of this chapter. 2222 222 9:222:12221222 22222222122 The general framework for this approach assumes that certain psychological needs motivate individuals to seek mass media content for need-fulfillment purposes. Media exposures will result in the gratification of those psychological needs to varying degrees, and perhaps trigger certain short- or long-term cognitive, affective, and behavioral reactions either intended or unintended by the audience. Implicit in this generalization is the assumption that the individual is an active audience member who is capable of identifying his needs and the preferred means (i.e., media exposure) to gratify those needs. Much research has adopted the uses and gratifications perspective to study media audience behavior. However, 10 media-gratifications studies have long been criticized as being atheoretical.19 Most of them have difficulties in assessing the existence and effects of psychological needs and gratifications in theoretical terms. They also fail to interpret media gratifications within a meaningful social context. Much effort has since been devoted to developing more complete theoretical frameworks to overcome such difficulties. There are five general areas where researchers have explored either new theoretical ramifications or the potential for initiating new theoretical models. I. Psychological Origins To trace the psychological origins of human needs for media gratifications, two types of basic psychological needs--deficiency and non-deficiency--must be examined.20 Deficiency needs are said to derive from internal dissatis- factions such as needs for love and security; most of these needs rely on other people (e. g., friends and families) as need-fulfillment sources. In contrast, the non-deficiency needs (self-actualization needs) are thought to be gratified by sources that are independent of other people and may enhance one’s self-development. Media use is said to be able to fulfill an audience’s non-deficiency needs because mass media may serve as a functional alternative21 to facilitate one’s cognitive or affective growth.22 Empirical findings have supported this assumption. Among the media functions identified by the audience, media exposure may supply positive cognitive and 11 affective (or even behavioral) stimuli to the audience as well as elicit similar positive responses from them.23 Advocates of the "obstinate audience” contend that external factors (e.g., mealtime or work schedule) rather than internal factors (i.e., needs or motivations) general— ly determine an audience’s media-use activity.24 They challenge the notion that an audience is aware of its needs for media use. Because of the fact that audiences often show clearly strong and loyal preferences among equally available mass media, it is difficult to assume that such loyalty is only due to ”habit" or external factors. It may be more reasonable to assume that media use is a purpose- ful act determined by audience needs or motivations.25 McGuire’s sixteen-cell classifications of human motives for media use have opened up a wide range of theoretical supports for such an assumption 26 (see Appendix I). Although the negation of internal factors in the process of media use may not be entirely valid, the role of external factors should not be denied. According to Blumler, external circumstances and internal motivations (or needs) represent separate stages in the process of media use.27 McGuire concludes that external factors domi- nate the initial stage of media exposure (even though available alternatives may limit an individual’s choices), whereas, continuing‘ exposure is motivated by internal forces.28 A The theoretical assumptions discussed in this section generally fall into the following three categories: 1) the 12 conceptualization of basic psychological needs; 2) the individual’s ability to identify his or her psychological needs; and 3) the role of mass media as a functional alternative to gratify certain human needs. These three themes will be integrated into the psychological-orientation phase of the proposed model, in which they will be closely associated with the following model components--Genera1 Needs, Need Orientation, and Basic Motivations. II. Social Origins and Factors Research results have demonstrated that perceptions of media gratifications may have a cultural or social origin. Based on findings of Lichtenstein and Rosenfeld, media use is not related to individual perceptions of media gratifi- cations; both users and non-users of different media describe media images in a consistent manner.29 Their con- clusion, similar to that of Becker 30and Bantz,31 implies that media image is probably a consequence of social learning and/or media self-definition (e. g., films are promoted to the public as ”escape” or ”entertainment"). Additional evidence further reveals that there was a significant degree of agreement between perceived gratifi- cations for one’s self and for others when respondents were asked to describe their own and most people’s (or social or cultural) perception of media gratifications.32Moreover, it was also reported that the audience’s viewing choice is independent from its expected media gratification. This was indicated by the inconsistency between the audience’s 13 general expectation of media gratification (i. e., socially learned) and its choice of favorite programs.33 Social factors such as an audience’s sociological characteristics and social conditions (e.g., family economy, work schedule) may all play an important role in its media use activity and gratifications.34 Media studies have rarely looked at social factors in a meaningful context; instead, these factors have often been introduced as demographic variables at a descriptive level. A Blumler study,3:evertheless, presented a brilliant documentation of the significance of social factors. His overall findings indicate that the various social roles (e.g., full-time worker, older, less educated) and social conditions (e.g., car ownership, geographic mobility) associated with an audience may factor together in different ways to interact with its media-use activity and types of gratifications sought. For instance, a lack of organizational affiliation among retired people is related to more frequent TV use for diversion purposes; being housebound is correlated with surveillance seeking among housewives. It is clear that, as media habits are usually shaped and displayed in social circumstances, social factors serve. as more than just an intervening factor in the process of media use. Social factors are, instead, according to Blumler, a "socially regulated ggenomenon" deserving of further research in its own right. In essence, there is a need for reconceptualizing social factors and redefining 13 general expectation of media gratification (i. e., socially learned) and its choice of favorite programs.33 Social factors such as an audience’s sociological characteristics and social conditions (e.g., family economy, work schedule) may all play an important role in its media use activity and gratifications.34 Media studies have rarely looked at social factors in a meaningful context; instead, these factors have often been introduced as demographic variables at a descriptive level. A Blumler study,3:evertheless, presented a brilliant documentation of the significance of social factors. His overall findings indicate that the various social roles (e.g., full-time worker, older, less educated) and social conditions (e.g., car ownership, geographic mobility) associated with an audience may factor together in different ways to interact with its media-use activity and types of gratifications sought. For instance, a lack of organizational affiliation among retired people is related to more frequent TV use for diversion purposes; being housebound is correlated with surveillance seeking among housewives. It is clear that, as media habits are usually shaped and displayed in social circumstances, social factors serve. as more than just an intervening factor in the process of media use. Social factors are, instead, according to Blumler, a "socially regulated ggenomenon” deserving of further research in its own right. In essence, there is a need for reconceptualizing social factors and redefining 13 general expectation of media gratification (i. e., socially learned) and its choice of favorite programs.33 Social factors such as an audience’s sociological characteristics and social conditions (e.g., family economy, work schedule) may all play an important role in its media use activity and gratifications.34 Media studies have rarely looked at social factors in a meaningful context; instead, these factors have often been introduced as demographic variables at a descriptive level. A Blumler study,3:evertheless, presented a brilliant documentation of the significance of social factors. His overall findings indicate that the various social roles (e.g., full-time worker, older, less educated) and social conditions (e.g., car ownership, geographic mobility) associated with an audience may.factor together in different ways to interact with its media-use activity and types of gratifications sought. For instance, a lack of organizational affiliation among retired people is related to more frequent TV use for diversion purposes; being housebound is correlated with surveillance seeking among housewives. It is clear that, as media habits are usually shaped and displayed in social circumstances, social factors serve. as more than just an intervening factor in the process of media use. Social factors are, instead, according to Blumler, a "socially regulated ggenomenon" deserving of further research in its own right. In essence, there is a need for reconceptualizing social factors and redefining 14 the relations between those factors and an audiences’s media use activity. Such a reconceptualization need will be briefly addressed in the proposed model, within the component entitled "Socio-Cultural Composition." The literature reviewed in this section undoubtedly provides invaluable insights which should aid in the reconceptuali— zation effort. III. Gratifications-Sought vs. Gratifications-Obtained If media gratifications are to be reliably assessed, then the theoretical distinction between the concepts of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained must be properly addressed. The reason is simply that these two concepts don’t have an isomorphic relationship. Palmgreen and Rayburn first attested the difference between the two concepts and found that non-public-TV viewers have a larger discrepancy between their perceived degrees of gratifica- tions-sought and gratifications-obtained than regular public-TV viewers.37 Subsequently, Palmgreen, Wenner and Rayburn reported that the overall correlations between an audience’s gratifications-sought and gratifications- obtained are moderate to strong; program dependency (i.e., viewer loyalty) is relative to the strength of the relationship between gratifications-sought and gratifica- tions obtained pertaining to that program.38 In a separate study, Palmgreen et a1. tested a ”discrepancy model” of program choice that assumes that program choice is a function of the average discrepancy in 15 the perceived gratifications-obtained between a particular program and some similar program(s). The results show that when comparing the perceived gratifications-obtained between favorite (or most watched) news program and compet- ing programs, the respondents reported receiving greater gratifications from the former than the latter. However, once a viewing decision is made (under certain environmen- tal constraints), the perception of gratifications-obtained may be altered (to an acceptable level) to justify the decision.39 Rayburn et a1. retested the "discrepancy model” and found that program selection is influenced by what one seeks from a program, the extent to which gratifications are perceived to be obtained, and an evaluation of gratifi- cations-obtained between one’s favorite and competing programs.40 The results of Palmgreen et a1. and Rayburn et ml. were further supported by a Wanner study, which also revealed gratifications-obtained as a good predictor in explaining the phenomenon of program dependency.4lMeanwhile, Palmgreen . and Rayburn introduced an "expectancy-value model” that assumes a particular gratification will only be sought from X if X is perceived to possess the related attribute, and the attribute is also positively evaluated. The results from testing the model indicate that expecta- tions about and evaluations of, the characteristics of media content are important antecedents to the formation of 42 gratification-seeking motives. 16 It is apparent from the empirical findings that there is no perfect parallelism between gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Individual gratifications-sought are perceived to be gratified at varying degrees. Also, if a program is perceived as more gratifying than others, repeated exposure to the same program will occur. Further- more, a program may be evaluated for its gratification attribute and for the significance of that attribute before an audience makes its viewing decisions. The essence of this particular review section reveals the need theoretically as well as empirically to separate the concepts of gratifications-sought and gratifications- obtained. To meet such a theoretical challenge, these two concepts will be carefully and thoroughly conceptualized in the proposed model. Empirical evidence presented herein will be drawn upon to form the foundation for theoretical claims made in support of the model. IV. Gratification-Seeking Activity Gratification-seeking activity characterizes the process of media use activity or ”audience activity,” because any media—use-related audience activity is assumed to be a goal-oriented act to obtain gratifications. Levy first adopted a more structured approach to examine audience activity by classifying audiences into active and passive types. An active audience member is, for example, an individual who regularly plans his viewing, whereas a passive audience may be an individual who does not usually 17 plan his viewing. The measures of media gratifications and audience activity in the study were, however, independent- ly analyzed and interpreted; the relations between these two sets of measures was not examined.43 Later, Levy developed a two-phase audience-activity typology. Three types of ”qualitative orientation"-- audience selectivity, audience involvement, and audience use--comprise the first phase. Three stages of ”temporal dimension”--pre-exposure, exposure, and post-exposure--form the second phase. By merging the two phases, the first category is characterized by ”audience selectivity” of media use options within the ”pre-exposure” period. The second category illustrates ”audience involvement” (1. e., cognitive, effective, or behavioral interaction) with media content during the "exposure” period. ‘ The third category depicts "audience use” (i.e., cognitive, affective or be- havioral reaction) of media content during the ”post- exposure" period. The overall results suggest that the more active audience is inclined to be more selective in its program choice, more concentrated during exposure, and more frequently engaged in ”using” media content mentally or behaviorally. Furthermore, the more active audience (among the better educated) is not necessarily a heavy viewer or more involved in para-social interaction with TV personalities than the more passive audience.44 Levy and Windahl further formulated a model of ”audience activity, gratifications, and exposure”--integra- ting audience activity with three temporal dimensions 18 (i.e., preactivity, duractivity, and postactivity), media exposure and gratification measures (i. e., gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained). They found that viewers do not possess a consistent orientation toward media content across different phases of audience activity, and that the levels of audience activity appear to covary with gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Thus, according the them ...audience activity and gratifications stand as important intervening variables in the communication process."45 These results provided a sig- nificant theoretical implication; that is, a more highly motivated audience (with greater degrees of gratifications- sought) will be more actively engaged in various types _of audience activity in order to gain greater levels of media gratifications throughout the media use processes. Blumler contends that examining audience activity can determine whether there is an active audience in relation to uses and gratifications.46 Other researchers such as Galloway and Meek,47 as well as Palmgreen and Rayburn,48 assert that the process of how a person acquires media gra- fications may help explain his or her subsequent media behavior. While none of these authors directly addresses the role that gratification-seeking activity (or audience activity) projects in the relations between gratifications- sought and gratications-obtained, this concept was implicit in their work. Moreover, although the concept of gratifica- l9 tion-seeking activity (or audience activity) and its possible intervention in media-use processes has been implicated in past studies, researchers have failed to draw a key inference from the literature. That inference pertains to the effect of any possible intervening varia- bles such as socio-cultural factors or gratification-seek- ing activity on the relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. The proposed model will make an effort to conceptualize these functions as they relate to the overall processes of media uses and gratifications. Furthermore, since the empirical evidence collected in the area of audience activity has thus far been rela- tively limited, a range of other audience activity associat- ”new” media technology needs further ed with access to investigation. To fill in such a theoretical and empirical void, the proposed model will formulate a broader theo- retical scheme that can encompasse the relations between. media gratifications and the uses of both new and old media technologies. V. Gratifications and Media Effects Media gratifications have not been treated as one of the factors to explain the effects of media use to the. extent that they could. In the area of cognitive learning, Becker49discovered that several gratification measures had a siggificant influence on voter knowledge. A study by Gantz reported that motivations*gratifications are strong predictors of information recall when other non-motivatio- 20 nal factors such as attention level are considered. Media gratifications, furthermore, were also said to have affected audience perception of media credibility. Audiences who have a stronger information need tend to value newspapers more than TV as a more credible news source.51 The role of media gratifications in mediating the affective effects of media exposure appears to be a mixed one. It seems that, when programs are categorized into a specific gratification type (e. g., informational, enter- tainment) and matched with gratifications-sought reported by the audience, program enjoyment is lower than when gratification-type associated with a program and audience gratifications-sought are not matched. This lack of parallelism suggests that media content is not ”gratifica- tion-specific"--a single program can provide multiple gra- tifications. The audience with its own set of gratifica- tions-sought, moreover, may seek multiple gratifications from within a particular program type to obtain expected viewing enjoyment.52 To examine the relations between media gratifications and behavioral effects of media exposure, Weaver 53examined political knowledge and discussion through the use of general cognitive orientation measures (i. e., generalized motivation measures) and specific gratification measures. General cognitive orientation (or general informational need) is reflected by the degrees of uncertainty that one feels about certain problems and the relevance of those 21 problems; specific gratification measures are formed by grouping motivational items under certain a priori catego- ries such as surveillance. The results show that general cognitive orientation is more influential as a contingent condition on media effects than specific gratification measures. Specific gratification measures appear to be too narrow and inflexible to detect nuances in audience responses. 54 Blumler has rendered three aspects that characterize the impacts of media gratifications on media effects: "cognitive orientation, diversion, and personal identity.” The above discussion roughly covers part of these three aspects. 'Much more work is needed before the relations between media gratifications and media effects can be better comprehended. As reflected in the proposed model, efforts have been made to examine the role of media gratification as an intervening factor in the process of media-effect formation. In particular, the impact of media gratification will be conceived in the context of the entire process of media-use activity. 222212 21 2222 222 22221112221222 222222221222 There are several media-gratifications paradigms that emerged during the past decade but have not been discussed in any of the above five areas. For instance, Palmgreen et al.551ntegrated earlier work of McLeod and Becker, Weibull, Rosengren, and others and presented a "general media-grati- fications model.” In this model, the media-gratifications process is located within a social and cultural context 22 and interacts with media structure and technology, media- use behavior, media content, media effects and individual characteristics based on an expectancy-value approach. Borrowing the concept of transacgéon communication, Wenner launched a "transactional model” which postulates that media use and media effects for the individual and society are prescribed by certain broad systemic relationships. The major components in the model are as follows. The ”general background” of the audience (i.e., social and psychological origins of needs and values) helps shape the ”general foreground" of the audience (i.e., the audience’s interest, knowledge, attitudes, activities and problems). These individual characteristics will influence the audience’s ”media reference background" such that its media exposure patterns ("habitual media exposure") and experience with alternatives (”functional alternatives") will enable ”beliefs” and "evaluations” to be formed about media sources and their alternatives. The beliefs and evaluations formulated based on media exposure experiences from the ”media reference background” will help determine the gratifications sought within the audience’s "media reference foreground" in which the gratifications obtained are intervened by the content and context of exposure. The last component, media ”effects,” is characterized by the change occurring within and among individuals, media, and society as a whole. 57 Weibull’s model of media use emphasizes the rela- tions between media use habits and exposure. His model 23 assumes that social structure shapes the media structure, which in turn determines the availability/accessibility of media source/content. The social structure also influences the audience’s social situations and needs which help formulate its motivation/gratifications-sought. Though audience use of media content (or media behavior) is restrained by the media structure, a highly motivated audience will be less affected by the existing media structure as a whole in terms of its general output or day’s content. In contrast, an audience with less interest in media outputs or media content seems to be more concerned with specific contents or content composition. These three models, each with its specific emphasis, represent an effort to conceive media gratifications processes through an integrated approach. Along with the empirical evidence discussed above, these models have provided multiple dimensions of theoretical assumptions for future media gratifications research. For instance, the integrated approach taken by Palmgreen et a1. emphasizes a multivariate structure in which the gratification processes are viewed as taking place within an environment where societal structures and individual characteristics constantly interact. For Wenner, the most important concept was that of a "transaction” which focuses on ”dynamic change, not only within the individual, but within and among individuals, media, and society." He maintained, moreover, that an analysis of both ”content” and ”context” 24 of media exposure would be necessary if a ”transactional media gratification framework” is expected. Weibull’s model of media use treats media structure as an explanatory factor for media use behavior. Within a particular media structure, both institutional structure and media outputs can influence an audience’s media-use habits. In Weibull’s opinion, the best way to study how the various media structure factors may affect media-use behavior is to conduct comparative studies between different regions. and countries, and across different times. As the track record in media-use research indicates, much more work is still needed before a theoretically com- prehensive model may be attainable. 2221221 2211222122 The concept of control motivation has its origins in psychological research on motivations. To begin the discussion of ”gaining control" as a motivational force for activating certain behavior, one must first become familiar with the notion of "freedom.” The notion of freedom refers to an individual’s belief that he or she can carry out a particular behavior without specific internal or external constraints in order to obtain a potentially pleasant outcome or avoid an unpleasant one. A freedom thus can be viewed as an expectancy with various degrees of strength that may satisfy motives of different levels of intensity?8 Similarly, the concept of control has also been recognized as an expectancy or belief. The ”locus of 25 59 control,” as an expectancy variable, is defined by Rotter as follow: the degree to which the individual perceives that the reward follows from, or is contingent upon, his own behavior or attributes versus the degree to which he feels the reward is controlled by forces outside of himself and may occur independently of his own actions. Studies have suggested that individuals who lean heavily on ”internality” for reinforcement perhaps value personal freedom and control more highly than those who are inclined toward "externality" for reinforcement. This is not to say those individuals whose inclination rests strongly on "externality" do not cherish freedom and control. Instead, these individuals are said to perceive the external constraints that control their freedoms to receive reinforcement as being more forceful.60 For in- stance, it was found that an individual with an internal locus of control tends to believe that one may utilize the environment or overcome the environmental constraints to accomplish one’s goals. In contrast, an individual with an external locus of control is more likely to submit to environmental barriers and less inclined to maximize existing resources for goal attainment purposes?1 In sum, individuals who are high on internality demonstrate more resistance to external influence than those who are high on externality. From the definitions of ”freedom” and "locus of control,” it can be conceived that, although a person desires a certain kind of freedom to behave in a certain 26 way in order to gratify certain motives, he or she will also evaluate where the ”locus of control" of his or her freedom lies both internally or externally. As a result, the motive to control the outcomes of one’s behavior (or ”control motivation”) will surface because of the intention to preserve one’s freedom of engaging in such behavior. In this regard, an individual who is high on ”internality” may have a stronger motivation to pursue freedom and maintain control, compared to an ”externality”- bound individual who is more restrained by environmental factors. ' There are two intepretations of ”control motivation." One describes the function of control motivation as enhancing the degree of control that an individual has over his or her behavioral consequences in hope of improving the quality of life.62 The other, a more moderate view, considers that control motivation has a functional value because individuals generally wish to perceive themselves as having control over their actions.63 -Overall, both interpretations posit a mastery or general control motiva- tion that encompasses all the activities in which an individual may participate. Implicit in this conception is the assumption that control motivation may also be instrumental in the gratification processes of all. other human motives. To underline the facilitative or beneficial effects of ”control” in an individual’s perception of motivation enhancement, two aspects may be articulated. The first 27 aspect, to have control over one’s behavioral consequences means that one can maximize desirable outcomes and minimize undesirable ones. On the other hand, a lack of control over one’s behavioral outcomes will create a state of frustration. The vital message manifested by these two conditions is that, if a lack of control will instigate frustrations over the motive to control, then having control will strenghten one’s motivation for ensuring the intended outcomes.64 As such, control motivation will in turn facilitate the goal-attainment activity in order to gratify the ultimate motive to control one’s destiny. Empirical studies on how control motivation may possess facilitative functions in human activities have generally focused upon the areas of cognitive learning and information-seeking behavior. For instance, internal- control oriented individuals were able to "efficiently extract information even from ambiguous situations” better than external-control oriented individuals. Moreover, they were also said to be more capable than external-oriented individuals in distinguishing between relevant ' and irrelevant information, organizing and utilizing it to their advantages?5 These observations were confirmed by another researcher who concluded that individuals with internal-control orientation were more efficient processors of cognitive information.66 In another study of mathematics learning among children, it was reported that learning is greatly facilitated when the children are allowed to have 28 control over their learning conditions such as as pacing, scheduling of work periods, and goal setting.67 Research findings regarding information seeking behavior have generally supported the idea that people with stronger internal-control orientation tend to more actively seek information than people with stronger external-control orientation.68 Moreover, the degree of perceived external control has also proven to differentiate the information- seeking motives between the internal- and external-control oriented individuals. One researcher revealed that, when the degree of situational control over what one can expect of the outcomes is vague, the internal-control oriented individuals seek more information than the external-control oriented individuals.69 In applying the concept of control motivation to information-seeking in the media, control motivation or ”locus of control" does not appear to be an effective predictor as concluded in an experimental study on news consumption by Zerbinos.7oIt is denoted that people are not consistently active or passive in their information seeking activity. The author, therefore, speculates that people with an internal locus of control tend to utilize all media more than those with an external locus of control. It seems that the author’s failure in predicting information-seeking behavior through the use of control motivation factor might be a result of comparing two news media of a very different access nature--name1y, newspapers versus electronic bulletins--in an artificial setting. For instance, one may 29 question whether the hypothesis-~that newspaper readers make fewer information~seeking decisions than electronic- news bulletin readers because the use of electronic-news services requires a stronger information-seeking motive--is entirely appropriate. The reason is that newspaper readers don’t necessarily make fewer information-seeking decisions because of the physical and mental effort required to find the desired information. In contrast, electronic-news bulletin users in this experiment were expected to make a certain number of information-seeking decisions in order to access the intended information through technical means. The fundamental difference in the nature of these two news media renders any comparison suspect. It seems that control motivation could play a pivotal role in general media use activity in relation to media gratifications instead of certain information-seeking behavior with no specific goals defined. In particular, control motivation is highly goal-oriented or reinforcement-oriented (as demonstrated in the theoretical discussion' and empirical evidence); it should hence be analyzed in the context of ”controlling" the outcomes of one’s behavior. Prospects on locating control motivation as part of the ”locus of control” associated with an individual’s media uses and gratifications has yet to be investigated. The model proposed in this study will attempt to conceptualize the construct of control motiva- tion (or locus of control) in the context of media uses and 30 gratifications. Control motivation, with its inherent implications for "controlling the outcomes of one‘s behavior" will be conceptualized as an intervening factor in the mechanisms of basic human motivations. The rationale behind this assumption is that individuals with stronger control motivations will tend to reinforce their particu- lar motivations, which comprise their basic mental forces, to activate subsequent need-fulfillment activities and ensure the attainment of media gratifications. 2222 21 2222 222 22212 I! To examine the relations between a "new” multimedia environment and an audience’s media uses and gratifications processes, two "newer” video technologies-—VCRs and Cable TV--must be examined. In particular, the two technologies have provided audiences with more viewing options and better control over viewing schedules as well as viewing conditions. By implication, technologies such as these could help facilitate audience involvement with the media uses and gratifications processes in a more ”active” and "autonomous” fashion (in terms of selecting programs' and controlling viewing time as well as the video hardware). The following review will focus on presenting the nature, the functions, the utilities and the influences of these two technologies in relation to audience use patterns. I. VCR Use Activity VCRs are primarily used for time—shifting (i.e., recording programs for later viewing), video-library 31 building (i.e., recording programs for video collection purposes) and prerecorded tape viewing (i. e., replaying tapes that are rented, borrowed or purchased)?1 According to market research, VCR users are reportedly very active in engaing in all three of these activities.72 The major advantages of owning a VCR are generally thought to include giving users a chance to have more control over their TV viewing activities, viewing conditions and program options?3 In addition to these purposes, there is also a mechanical aspect unique to the viewing process. The specific process concerns the practice of commercial avoidance through the use of a remote-control device. Research has revealed that viewers with remote-control devices are highly likely to zap commercials (through channel switching) during record- ing and zip commercials (through the use of fast-forward control) during playbacks.74 It is obvious that utilizing a VCR means frequent engagements in physically manipulating the machine for controlling one’s viewing activity and mentally contemplat- ing one’s viewing options/decisions. All of these physical and mental viewing enhancement activities require a relatively strong degree of commitment from the audience. In the case of an audience that intends to watch a rental movie cassette, viewers must order the cassette either through mail (from a video club) or a video store, typically within a short period of time. Alternatively, if an audience wishes to record a channel while watching 32 another at the same time, it must program the VCR machine to carry out such a task in advance. It seems that these various activities to which a VCR owner becomes accustomed on a daily basis are much more elaborate than those of a non-VCR owner. If the VCR owner is also a cable TV subscriber, the level of involvement with or interaction of the audience and VCR/TV media combination increases greatly. For there are many cable channels available for the time-shifting purpose such that a more active audience will probably be relatively entangled in the process of making viewing decisions. However, the TV audience seems to be rather enchanted by the idea of owning a VCR and subscribing to a cable-TV ser- vice. Studies have found that VCR households show a strong willingness to install basic and/or pay cable service.75 VCRs have also influenced an audience’s viewing activity in terms of altering exposure patterns and viewing habits. For instance, a recent study of VCR owners reveals that 1) over 30% of those surveyed have increased their time spent in TV viewing and with family members as a direct result of owning a VCR, 2) the quality of TV viewing has improved for 888 of the sample, 3) 69* of the respon- dents have increased their TV viewing time, 4) while 203 of the respondents rent four or more movie tapes a month, 45* of them have joined a video club, and 5) families enjoy inviting other families over for "special event” viewing.76 In an attempt to connect the concept. of audience activity to VCR use, Levy concludes that VCR users are 33 essentially an active audience because, in general, they are actively involved in activities related to TV viewing. Their orientations toward VCR use are "selective, somewhat involving, and often useful” during the pre-exposure, during-exposure and post-exposure periods, in that order. On a theoretical level, Levy argues that different kinds of TV entertainment technologies and/or TV contents may be associated with varying degrees of audience activity, depending on the nature of the technology and program content.77 II. Teen Use of VCRs Only two studies, one conducted in Sweden and one domestically, have thus far examined teen use of VCRs. The general conclusions drawn from these studies are as follow. First, findings from the Swedish study indicate that Teens from lower social economic backgrounds watch more videos. than teens from higher socio-economic backgrounds. The majority of the extremely heavy VCR users spend most of their time watching rented prerecorded tapes; heavy VCR users are also heavy TV viewers. An average teenager spent from five to seven-and-a-half hours viewing videos on a weekly basis, although time-shifting frequencies were. relatively limited. TV use and VCR use are negatively associated with school achievement. Traditional TV viewing is perceived as providing the user with very little scope of control while VCRs are considered to give the user more control over what one wishes to view as well as when and 34 how. The TV set is regarded as a typical ”family” medium, but the VCR is more often perceived as a ”peer group" medium. VCR use enables teens to demonstrate independence and display anti-social identities. It is not a matter of ”where”, so much as ”with whom” the VCR is used that indicates the strongest significance for teen users. Finally, in rural areas, geographic factors and VCR ownership density have limited the chance for a ”video sub- culture” to develop as compared to more urban areas with higher VCR ownership density.78 The domestic study, conducted by Greenberg and Heeter has provided profiles of teens who have home access to VCRs. According to them, teens from VCR homes watch more TV of every variety, expose themselves to other types of mass media (i.e., newspapers, books, movies and magazines) more frequently, and have more access to cable, pay cable and computers. Parental mediation is not widely reported, although youngsters have greater access to explicit sex- oriented TV programs. Teens from VCR homes usually have parents who are better educated and of higher income level:? Although the study on teen VCR use did not address certain aspects of audience activity, teenage users are expected to be a relatively active audience by nature, which is evident from the frequencies that they use the VCR as a medium for pursuing media gratifications. However, theoretical foundations will still need to be furnished to explain how teen audience activity and VCR use are related 35 to media gratification-seeking. Existing theoretical assumptions developed for adult gratification-seeking and audience activity are readily applicable to teen-viewer research. III. Cable Use Activity Early cable-user surveys assessing the impact of cable TV on audience media-use habits have indicated that audiences that have cable and/or other special television services tend to use other news media more than those without such services.80 More upscale audiences who have a stronger tendency to seek information are more likely to install cable and/or other special television services.81 However, the largest impact of cable TV seems to involve the diversion of audiences from local TV-channel viewing to new media outlets. It was cautioned that the growing penetra- tion of cable TV will probably change the audience size and composition for local television channels.82 When cable users were asked why they have cable TV, the most frequently cited reason for the original decision to subscribe was to receive greater variety or more and better program choice. Better TV reception was the second most commonly cited reason. The desire for more specialized program types (e.g., movies, sports, news) and having access to a new technology held a tied rank as the third most important reason for subscribing to cable. Furthermore, although cable use is found to have little effect upon radio, total-daypart TV usage and prime-time TV 36 viewing and network shares have declined. It was predicted that future audiences will tune in to the most attractive programming, disregarding what form the media sources might assume.83 Major differences in audience behavior between cable and non-cable subscribers have been summarized in a recent marketing study. The overall findings disclose that, for subscribers, access to more movies, expanded program choice and the exclusion of commercials constitute the primary reasons for cable subscription. Among .subscribers, cable movie viewing frequencies, viewing during late evening hours, home entertaining, and time spent with the family are increased as a result of cable subscription. In contrast, reasons for not subscribing to cable include a lack of viewing interest, lower levels of time spent with TV, concerns about adult programming (particularly X~rated materials), the cost of subscription and insufficient knowledge about cable programs. The comparisons between these two groups of households regarding the perception of electronic media reveal that cable subscribers greatly outscore non-subscribers in terms of awareness, ownership and/or intention to purchase a home computer, VCR, large- screen TV projection system, videodisc player or a video- game. In short, cable households are much more in step with the development of new electronic media and what tele- vision as an entertainment medium can and will do for 84 them. 37 Additional research evidence reveals that non-sub* scribers appear to be older, have fewer family members and lower household incomes.85 They are also fairly satis- fied with broadcast TV86and more reliant on local media (such as radio, newspapers and local TV stations).87 In comparison, basic cable households are younger, likely to have more family members and be more affluent.88 These audiences are less satisfied with traditional television 89 and consume less local television than non-subscribers.900n the other hand, the demographics of pay-cable households are similar to those of basic-cable households, except that the former watch slightly more television than the latter and view TV as a more important entertainment source. Further, these subscribers use cable to enhance the value of TV viewing rather than avoid traditional television.91 Moreover, they display a greater propensity to purchase other new electronic media technologies.92 In terms of their enhanced control over viewing conditions (i. e., through mechanical means), cable subscribers are equipped with a program-selector that, in itself, can serve as a remote-control device. Market research reveals that at least fifty-five percent of the cable viewers use a remote- control device to preselect programs93 and almost forty percent of them avoid commercials by switching channels.94 Further examples of multichannel viewing or channel switch- ing activity 3; part of the program selection and evalua- tion processes provide ample evidence supporting the idea of a relatively active cable audience. 38 To sum up the above discussion, cable subscription is attrative to audiences who are more interested in upgrading the quality of their TV viewing. However, the cost of sub- scription, lack of knowledge about the programming and indifference toward cable programming have prevented some audiences from subscribing. From the perspective of audience activity, it is evident that cable households present a more diversified viewing pattern because of the availability of more programs and longer programing hours. These households 'aggregate the image of a rather "active audience” that is motivated to exert more control over its viewing environment. In line with the rationale of owning a VCR, cable subscribers are apparently the audiences who are more in tune with the recent progress in electronic media technology. 2222222 The purpose of citing literature across various disci- plinary areas of media research, psychological theory, and audience research is to provide a comprehensive background for the construction of a new media uses and gratifications model. When presented in its fullest perspective, the uses and gratifications approach is still a vital theoretical framework to study media-use activity new and old. However, new theoretical dimensions to address the recently avail- able electronic media and their unique technical features yet need to be developed. Among them, the concept of audience "control” over its TV viewing environment or home- 39 video culture must be adequately addressed, if progress is to be made to update or improve the existing models. To conceptualize ”audience control" within the context of control motivation is one potential way to theoretically locate the focus. As control motivation is said to be reinforcement- or goal-oriented, its objectives are to strengthen one’s control over certain behavioral outcomes such as media consumption. The fact that cable and/or VCR users enjoy an increased level of viewing control either in quality or quantity strongly implies the possibility of a greater level of media gratifications. It can be envisaged that incorporating the concepts of control motivation and audience control (or control aetivity) into the theoretical scheme of a uses and gratifications model is probably both logical and useful. Given the wide range of choices in quantity as well. as diversity of programming available to a cable and/or VCR user, the concept of "audience" has been irrevocably trans- formed from a traditional ”passive” role to a more promi- nently ”active" one. Taking advantage of the unique quali- ties inherent within cable and VCR technology, the audience is not only active but also ”manipulative” of its viewing. activity. Whether or not daily viewing is carefully planned ahead of time, technology has empowered the audience the ability to make viewing decisions in an instant at any time (e. g., flipping around channels or time shift viewing schedules). Ultimately, the most 40 interesting programs will attract audience attention and retain its patronage, if circumstances allow. It is apparent that factors defining the nature of an audience and audience activity have vastly increased in their complexity. If the new uses and gratifications model is to be exhaustive, then the ever complicated audience activity will need to be carefully allocated within its theoretical structure. Overall, the new model will need to integrate both traditional as well as new conceptualiza- tions to interpret the highly interactive relationship between an audience and its multi-media environment. The proposed model will generally adopt the theoreti- cal bases summarized herein as the backbone for the overall model structure. First, psychological origins of human needs—-which depict how human needs are related to the expectation of media gratifications--will be integrated into the psychological-orientation phase of the model. The discussion on control motivation will also be interfaced with the psychological-oriented phase of the model to reflect its intervening nature in the motivations-formation stage. Secondly, the roles of social origins and social factors in the processes of media uses and gratifications will be reconceptualized within a framework which inter- connects media structure, social/cultural systems and indi- vidual sociological characteristics as the overall context within which all media use behaviors to take place._Thirdly the distinction between the concepts of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained will be fully addressed 41 in the gratification-seeking phase of the model; specific theoretical assumptions will be constructed to conceptually justify such a distinction. A fourth component, involves the concept of ”audience activity" (and/or an active audience). This component profiles how an audience member can be actively involved in the process of gratification-seeking activities. The component will be treated as a part of the gratification- seeking phase in the model. Moreover, several possible aspects of ”audience activity” will also be discussed. These may include both mental and physical activities occurring .during the process of gratification-seeking. Fifth, the literature on VCR and cable TV use will supple- ment an array of audience activity aspects to the gratifi- cation-seeking phase of the model such that various types of gratification-seeking activities pertaining to these two technologies can be more precisely assessed. And finally, the relations between media effects and media gratifica- tions will be examined in the gratification-effect phase of the model. ’ In particular, the influence of media gratifi- cations in the formation of media effects will be conceptualized. CHAPTER II: PART II AN AUDIENCE GRATIFICATION-SEEKING MODEL Based on the theoretical discussion and empirical evidence presented in Part I and summarized in the follow- ing areas, an audience gratification-seeking model will be proposed herein. Those areas include: 1) psychological origins of human needs for media gratifications, 2) the intervening nature of control motivation in the functioning of basic motivations, 3) the roles of social origins and factors in the processes of media uses and their impact on media gratifications, 4) the various aspects of gratification-seeking activities (or audience activities), 5) the theoretical distinction between gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained, and 6) the relations between media gratifications and media effects. This model will causally link together relevant components of the uses and gratifications processes extracted from the theoretical background presented in the areas mentioned above. These conponents include 2222221 22222. 2222 22122121122. 22212 22112211222. 2221221 2211221122. 2221111221122 22122121122. 22211112211222z§22221. 2221111221122z§222122 22112112. 22212:!22 2221221. 22211112211222z22121222. 22212:!2222222 12221. 2221111221122 2112212 and 22212:22112221 22222211122 (see Figure 1). 42 43 A|I||ITSS8§8 22858688“ v ZOHH<>HHOZ AOMHZO AOMHZOU szHHHOZ on< Mabmomxmlfimom MabmomNMIoszao mdDwommeMMm AM>MA OHHHH>HHU< UZHMmMm HEUDOw ZOHHauu< was mmooowm usu you Home: < fl shaman 44 2222221 22222 This component addresses the basic human needs charac- terized by Maslow--physiological, safety, love and belong- ingness, esteem and self-actualization (or growth) needs--in an ascending hierarchy of importance. According to him, the higher-level needs (i.e., self-actualization needs) are ”non-deficiency needs" because individuals will have enough self-sufficiency to fulfill them. On the other hand, lower— level needs (or the first four types of needs) fall in the category of "deficiency-related needs" because self-suffi- ciency alone will not help the individual to satisfy them?6 These ”general needs” are commonly shared by all humans, although different individual psychologies may direct them to define the hierarchy of those needs differently. In the context of mass communications, an individual’s needs to consume media products are formed and reinforced primarily by his demographic characteristics and his surrounding media, economic and socio-cultural structurg? Rosengren labels the higher-level needs as ”cognitive” and "affective" need:8 (the parallel terms used by Maslow are ”cognitive,” ”aesthetic" and "self-actualization" needs).99 He claims that an individual’s mass communication behavior is tied to the higher-level needs rather than the lower- level needs. This is because media consumption cannot actually provide psychological gratifications, the feelings of love and belongingness, or self-esteem to an individual. Instead, media consumption is utilized by the individual as a functional alternative to achieve certain desirable cogni- 45 tive or effective satisfaction. In other words, media consumption can help an individual to reach his full poten- tial in pursuing gratifications for his needs. As a result, through repeated media exposures, certain cognitive or affective growth will eventually follow. Such growth can be described as the socialization effect of media. Need Orientation Need grigntgtigg illustrates the process of how an individual identifies his needs, evaluates the psychological imbalance driven by his "need state,” and perceives the solutions to this imbalance problem. This component is similar to the elements "perceived problems" and "perceived solutions” of the Rosengren paradingooThe basic assumption of this component is that, when an individual realizes the emergence of certain cognitive or affective "needs," be may perceive a ”problem” of imbalance from within. This imbalance is caused by the desire to gain the expected cognitive or affective state triggered by the ”need state.” To ease his psychological imbalance, the individual may start to evaluate the extent of such imbalance so as to define the strength of each need. An example might be an individual who believes in a "nuke-free" world hears that. there will be an anti-nuclear warfare demonstration and feels the need to know more about the forthcoming event. This person’s probable solution is either to actively search for additional facts or to passively await further details from others. The vigor attached to this specific 46 ”surveillance need" will eventually be one of the major determinants as to whether the need will be fulfilled. Empirical evidence associated with this concept can be found in Eatz et a1. 1973?01 Among their major findings, individuals were said to be able to identify .the significance of their different needs. They were also capable of determining the likely solutions to each of those needs identified. Further, media consumption was mentioned as the proper source to gratify some of those.needs. These results indicate that individuals are competent in identifying and evaluating their needs. Given the proper circumstances, they can select the proper solutions to the problem raised by their desires for need-gratification. 22212 22112211222 gagig Mgtiygtiggg are the psychological drives or the internal thrusts experienced within an individual that even- tually leads him to take actions to satisfy his needs. The formation of a motivation is a direct result of the Ne g Qgiggtatigg phase and a part of the continuous psychological process of drive-reduction. Typically, after the probable solutions to satisfy the needs have been identified, if the strength of a particular need is sufficiently compelling, than a motivation will be subsequently formed. Within the context of mass communica- tions, ”motivations" enable the individual to initiate the process of seeking out media content to gratify their need:?2 Adapting McGuire’s categories of human motivations to the concept of Basic Mgtiggtiggg, two basic classifications, 47 "cognitive" and ”affective” motivations, are relevant to media consumption¥038ach of these types of motivations con- tains a "growth" and ”preservation" phase, and functions within an internal and external dimension. While the growth phase reflects an individual’s desire to obtain cognitive and affective growth, the preservation phase represents an individual’s impetus to strike a cognitive and affective balance. A motivation (either a cognitive or affective type) within a ”preservation” phase and ”internal” dimension is a product of an individual’s drive to attain internal equilibrium when an imbalance is detected?4 The same moti- vation in a ”preservation” phase and "external" dimension is a result of an individual’s desire to maintain balance in his external orientation to the environment¥o¥n contrast, a motivation in a ”growth" phase and ”internal" dimension is the consequence of an individual’s wish to seek his ultimate autonomous identity through experiencing different stages of internal growth and development}06 And the same motivation in a "growth” phase and "external" dimension” is the indi- cation of an individual’s aspiration to be an active problem solver who is capable of utilizing environmental resources to achieve his goals?07 To describe the process of this particular phase, the previous example of "surveillance need” will be repeated herein. Assuming that the need for obtaining further details about the earlier mentioned demonstration prevails and the solution of actively seeking additional facts is adopted, then a motivation to carry out 48 the solution will be formed. To envisage this motivation in a ”preservation-internal” aspect, it is clear that the indi- vidual finds the psychological imbalance overbearing (i.e., the desire for being alert of new happenings) and wants to restore his internal equilibrium. If this motivation is examined in its "preservation-external” aspect, it can be said that the individual senses the stress of an imbalanced external orientation (i.e., not being able to keep up with the external environmental changes) and wishes to regain the balance. Generalizing from its ”growth-internal" aspect, this motivation is seen as an intention to broaden one’s knowledge about the anti-nuclear movement, which, in fact, reflects the individual’s longing for obtaining social or personal identity. Finally, in its "growth-external" aspect, this motivation is considered to be the individual’s desire to overcome his existing problem (i.e., needs to learn additional facts) through searching out possible options in his environment. Each aspect of the ”surveillance" motivation discussed in the example seems to contain a certain degree of expectancy in terms of obtaining the desired gratification. The expectancy apparently is related to one’s desire to con- trol the outcome of the need-fulfillment action that one may takg? Therefore, the greater the intensity for the outcome-control expectation is, the more actively the indi- vidual may becomgginvolved in ensuring the attainment of the expected outcome. In other words, the motivation to con- trol one’s behavioral outcome can be an intervening factor 49 that influences the level of mental commitment and/or physi- cal participation in the continuing process of need- fulfillment. In terms of the influence of "locus of control" on one’s control motivation, it is often manifested by how an individual deals with the difficulties associated with his need-fulfillment task. For, a more "internally-oriented" individual may experience a similarly forceful control motivation, as a more ”externally-oriented" individual does; however, this individual is less susceptible to the psycho- logical deterrence created by the environmental constrainti? To sum up the major points in this gagig flgtiggtigg phase, it is suggested that once a motivation is established, the individual is brought to the threshhold of engaging in various activities that he or she sees fit for need-fulfillment purposes. An individual with a stronger control motivation may initiate a greater level of subse- quent gratification-seeking activity. For example, to ful- fill one’s surveillance need in relation to an important political event, an individual with a stronger control motivation may be more motivated to be engaged in seeking various media sources for a comprehensive understanding of the event than an individual with a less intensive control motivation. Finally, while applying the concept of ”motivation” (often labeled as motives) to mass communications, one should not loosely equate it with either needs or 50 gratifications. These three concepts, needs, motivations and gratifications are theoretically dissimilar. Even if one does not separate these terms completely in an empirical sense, they should be conceptually distinguished from each other. 9221111221122 92122121122 9221111221122 22122121122 reflects the process of how a person, driven by need-fulfillment motivation(s), examines his options for need-gratification for decision-making pur- poses. The person may begin the process by reviewing a variety of activities (e.g., sleep, eat, play) including media-use activities. During this reviewing process, an individual’s past experience in gratification seeking and/or learned perception of gratification (either related to media or non-media sources) will be used as the basis for making judgments. The potential of each source/activity for need- gratification may, along with its availability and accessi- bility, then be weighed against environmental constraints (e.g., economy, time factors). This, in turn, prepares the person to determine which source(s) to choose for need-ful- fillment purposes. As Kippax and Murrailgndicate, sources of gratification other than media were also identified for each need reported by individuals. An individual’s orientation in non—media gratification generally originates from his or her cumulative experiences in interacting with the environment. For instance, one may realize that interpersonal communication is an effective way to satisfy one’s "surveillance" need. An individual’s 51 orientation in media media gratification, on the other hand, is formulated through experiences in media consumption which also take place within a socio-cultural environment. As suggested by research evidence, needs are said to have their social origins, and individual perceptions of media gratifications are indeed socially learned belieflTsResearch findings also indicate that positive or negative social factors or situations are capable of orienting individuals toward certain media-use behavior. For example, unique social situations such as being the member of a special social interest group may foster one’s expectations to be- come familiar. with certain media content such that the person may be integrated with his valued social groupings?14 The essence of this particular ”orientation" phase, as part of the process of gratification-seeking, is that the individual will become aware of what is and is not a viable choice for meeting his or her need-fulfillment goals. As a. result, the individual will have sufficient information to proceed to the next phase which requires him or her to decide whether to pursue further the fulfillment of a parti- cular need. Again, the individual’s control motivation may affect the effort he or she puts in screening and defining one’s "gratification orientation." 92211112211222z§22821 gratificatigngzgggght is a phase wherein the indivi- dual chooses the source(s) for gratification and realizes his/her expected gratification. Following the review of 52 gratificatien sources from the 9221111221122 92122121122 phase, if the gratifications perceived to be obtained from media sources outweigh those from non-media sources, then media gratifications will be expected and the proper media sources will be identified. This implies that certain gra- tifications from media sources are deemed more highly valued and expected than those from non-media sources by the individual under his existing circumstances. This construct reflects the assumption of the ”expec- tancy-value theoryalghich posits that, unless the goal that an individual seeks to achieve is highly valued as well as expected, he or she is unlikely to be motivated to attain it. Testing this theory in the context of media use, Gallo- way and Meek found that people are more likely to attend to media if their perceived media gratifications are both highly expected and valued. If the perceived media gratifi— cations are expected but not valued, or valued but not expected, exposure is less likely to occurTIGThis.conclusion has also been substantiated by other studies.117 If the decision on media use is primarily contingent upon environmental factors (e.g., if one can’t afford to go bowling) instead of other more desirable circumstances, the person may justify his decision by reducing the significance of perceived value and expectation from non-media activities in an effort to regain internal balance. Alternatively, the person may also try to elevate the significance .of his perceived value and expectation associated with seeking gra- tifications from media sources to achieve the same internal 53 118 balance. This process of dissonance-reduction as a means to recover the desirable level of internal balance also reflects an individual’s desire to be in control of his or her own psychological balance. Therefore, control motivation may influence the manner as well as the psychological ba- lance of an individual in his search for need-gratification. Among the clusters of expected media gratifications, some may be more highly expected and valued than others. These "gratifications-sought” may include--"surveillance," ”informational guidance," ”entertainment," "diversion/es- cape," ”interpersonal communication,” and "para-social/iden- tity utility.” The roots of these functional conceptions can all be traced back to the early "Laswellian typology,” which postulates that media can serve the functions of surveillance, correlation, cultural transmission (or socialization), and entertainment.119 §ugygillgggg can be defined as an individual’s desire to be informed about and monitor his environment. In a modern society, when people seek information concerning their environment, they often depend on media sources. For instance, people watch TV news to keep themselves updated on local, national, and world events. A great deal of research has identified the validity of this function.120 Igfggggtigggl guidance refers to the situation when an individual seeks media sources to obtain information useful for problem-solving or decision-making. For example, evi- dence from political-communications research shows that 54 people may utilize TV news and media campaign information for voting guidance?21 Other empirical results have also reported that TV viewers often expect to get information relevant to their daily life for problem-solving or decision-making purposes}22 Entgntninngnt as an expected gratification item describes how people look to media content for gaining certain affective stimulations that give them pleasure. Schramm contends that newspaper reading provides pleasure to people because ”certain of their impulses, needs, wishes, 123 124 or wants are gratified.” As indicated by Bower and Robin- 125 son, TV news often emphasizes more dramatic or excite- ment-driven events and adopts a rather cosmetic presentation format to draw more audience. As such, many people watch news actually because it is entertaining or exciting. In fact, according to a number of other studies, most people are well aware of the entertainment value of TV news?26 2122551991399929 depicts an individual’s wish to be diverted and escape from the pressures of his environment or other tribulations in everyday life. Many research findings indicate that people often watch television to forget about their problems or loneliness. They also watch TV to relax themselves, relieve boredom, or even vicariously experience the fantasy world illustrated on their TV screen?27 lntgnpnnnnnn; communication reflects an individual’s use of media content for conversation or social purposes. 128 Much research evidence has supported this assumption. Theo- rists have also addressed this assumption in proper 55 conceptual frameworks. For instance, based on his "play theory,” Stephensoizgpostulates that mass media can "give people something to talk to each other about, to foster their mutual socialization.” Nordenstreng132rgues that "it has often been documented...that perhaps the basic motivation for media use is just an unarticulated need for social contact.” Katz, Gurevitch and Has:31 also reason that people use media resources to connect themselves to their surrounding environment (e.g., family, society, etc.). 2222:222121119221111 2111111 illustrates how an individual may gain gratifications from ”interacting” with media to find social support and identity. Research has de- monstrated that people often "talk back” to newscasters or compare their own views with those of the news commentatori?2 People sometimes treat media personalities as "friends" with whom they can exchange thoughts and feelings?33 More- over, people also contrast their own values with those portrayed in media for the purposes of receiving cognitive and affective reinforcement, personal reference and social identity.134 9221111221122:§22212s 22112111 This concept includes any audience activities related to media use for need-fulfillment purposes. The nature of these activities reflects how "active” an audience is in investing its effort to seek media gratifications. Furthermore, these activities also function as intervening factors in the gratification-seeking process and directly 56 affect the relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Based on the assumptions in this model, the role of gratification-seeking activity as an intervening variable can be hypothesized as follow. ”The strength of the relationship between gratifica- tions-sought and gratifications-obtained will decrease when their correlation with gratification-seeking activity is controlled for." Overall, gratification-seeking activity can be classified into three general categories: (1) pngzgxpnnnng nntigity, (2) 922122:22222222 22112112 and (3) 2221:22222222 2211211!- A. Pre-exposure Activity This category illustrates the process of how an audience prepares for its media-use activity. As a general category of Gratification-Seeking Activity, its relations with the gratifications measures can be hypothesized as follow: ”The level of pre-exposure activity will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained.” Furthermore, there are two sub-categories within Pre- exposure Activity: Media-Use Orientation and Media-Use Planning. 1. Media-Use Orientation This factor measures the perceived importance of and the level of interest in media use for an audience. This concept has been empirically proven to 2:5 a significant factor in media use. In a study by Wenner, questions such as ”how disappointed would the audience be if news viewing 57 had to be missed?" and "how often would the person give up news viewing to attend other types of leisure activities?” were found to be relevant to an audience’s viewing habits. As part of the Pre-exposure Activity, the relations between this factor and the gratification measures can be stated in a hypothesis below: "The level of media-use orientation will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained.” 2. Media-Use Planning This factor assesses the manner in which one intends to attend to' media. Generally, how often an audience plans its media use activity encompasses the following areas: 1) which medium, 2) which program or content, and 3) what time of the day and for how long. On the other hand, there are some audiences who hardly make plans and usually‘ consume media on a habitual basis (i.e., a type of ”passive” planning)?36 Again, as part of the Pre-exposure measure, to explore the relations between this factor and the gratification measures, the following hypothesis can be tested. ”The level of media-use planning will be positively corre—. lated with the level of gratifications-sought and grati- fications-obtained.” Furthermore, if one is concerned with another type of media-use planning, time-shifting planning (among VCR users), the relations between time-shifting planning and the gratification measures can also be hypothesized as follow: 58 ”The level of time-shifting planning will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained [VCR owners onlyl.” B. During-Exposure Activity This category involves the concurrent activities per- formed during media-use period, reflecting the degrees of audience involvement with the media content and the media themselves. As a sub-measure for Gratification-Seeking Activity, the ,relations between this category and the gratifications measures can be generalized in the following hypothesis: "The level of during-exposure activity will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained." There are two types of activities that exemplify an audience’s During-exposure Activity, Technical Involvement and Media-exposure involvement. These activities are defined below. 1. Technical Involvement This type of involvement describes how the audience physically manipulates a given medium to facilitate its actual consumption processes. The purposes of such physical effort are to optimize the media consumption conditions and to maximize the levels of enjoyment and gratification. For example, "commercial avoidance” during TV viewing can be facilitated through the use of a remote-controisgevice that enables the audience to switch channels easily. The remote- control device also gives the audience a chance to watch two 59 or more programs at the same time. With a VCR, the audience is able to practice time-shifting and to increase its 138 viewing-schedule flexibility. To assess the relations between audience technical involvement with a medium and the gratification measures, a hypothesis can be stated as follows: ”The level of technical-involvement will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained." 2. Media-Exposure Involvement (This factor depicts the audience’s cognitive, affective and behavioral involvement with the media content in use. TV-news research has suggested that more ”active" audiences are often engaged in verbal discussions about the newscasts with their co-viewers. This audience is also said to express its thoughts and emotions through commenting on the newscasts during viewiii? Further attention, an additional dimension of an audience member’s cognitive involvement with media content, reflects how closely an audience follows the media content and use. This concept was first raised by Palmgreen, Wenner and Rayburifoln their studies of TV news, they stated that viewer attention level can be an intervening variable in the media use process. However, the concept has thusfar not been integrated into any media-gratification model. In this model, the relation between audience-medium interaction factor and the gratifi- cation measures is articulated in the following hypothesis: 60 ”The level of media-exposure involvement will be posi— tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained.” 3. Other Concurrent Activity This type of activity covers a range of behaviors that are not directly related to an audience’s media consumption process but are performed simultaneously during that process. These activities can include playing, snacking, dining, cooking, doing housework, talking to others, doing homework, and so on. Some activities are more distracting 141 ' than others. For instance, during TV viewing, reading or talking will probably affect one’s concentration on the media content more than dining or knitting. C. Post—Exposure Activity This category addresses the types of activities that an audience carries out after its media consumption ceases at a particular time. The frequency and diversity of these activities imply the degree of an audience’s involvement with the media content consumed earlier. As a sub-measure for Gratification-Seeking Activity, the relations between this category and the gratification measures can be hypothesized as follow: ”The level of post-exposure activity will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained." Post-exposure Activity can be further classified into two sub-categories, Post-Exposure Involvement and Media- Motivated Activity. These activities are described below. 61 l. Post-Exposure Involvement This factor assesses that post-use audience involvement with the media content which is a continuation of audience involvement from earlier media consumption. Levy and Windhallquentified several of those activities in their study of ”audience activity.” They include behaviors such as reading about the TV news event in newspapers, discussing the TV news stories with others, commenting about the TV newscasts and thinking about the TV news coverage, etc. In relating this factor to the gratification measures, a hypothesis can be constructed as follows: ”The level of post-exposure involvement will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained.” 2. Media-Motivated Activity This factor presents the types. of activities an audience may be motivated to perform after it consumes certain media content. These activities may include shopping behavior that is influenced by advertisements car- ried in media, or any other activity that is stimulated by the media content consumed. For instance, an audience member donates clothing to victims of a local fire after seeing a TV report asking for such help. The concept of ”media-motivated activity" intends to examine only the ac- tual audience activities in the context of audience involvement rather than short- or long-term effects of the media. Although no media gratification model has dealt with this concept so far, it was based upon the element of "after- exposure activity," from the "audience-activity model" of 62 143 Levy and Windahl. Again, to assess the relations between this factor and the gratification measures, the following hypothesis can be developed: ”The level of engagement in media-motivated activity will be positively correlated with the level of grati- fications-sought and gratifications-obtained.” 22912292222222 12221 This category measures the audience’s actual media exposure in at least two dimensions. These dimensions may include 1) the amount of time devoted to media use on a regular basis and 2) the frequencies of media use in terms of the type of medium used and program/content consumed. The level of media exposure is, as suggested by Ball- Rokeach and Defleurf4gndicative of an audience’s dependency on media as sources for gratifications. By implication, an audience with a greater media-exposure level may also be more active in its gratification-seeking activity, which directly relates to the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. To reflect the relations between media-exposure level and the level of gratifications-seeking activity, the following hypothesis can be constructed: ”The level of media-exposure will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity.” Furthermore, media-exposure level can be divided into at least two sub-categories, when TV viewing is of concern. These two categories include the level of TV—exposure and program-exposure diversity. The former category describes 63 the amount of time that an audience devotes to TV viewing and the latter category depicts the types of program content to which an audience is exposed. The relations between these two categories and the level of gratification- tion-seeking activity can be hypothesized as follow: "The level of TV—exposure will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity." ”The level of program-exposure diversity will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratification-seek- ing Activity.” Moreover, since VCR use is of interest, the relations between the level of VCR use and gratification-seeking activity can also be generalized in the following hypothesis: ”The level of VCR-use will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity.” 22912:922 9221221 This factor addresses an audience’s perception of the~ level of control that it has over its media-use conditions» throughout the entire process of media consumption, including the preparation stage (i.e., the pre-exposure phase). The level of media-use control refers primarily to the extent to which an audience is able to control its media-use activity in the following two general areas. The, first concerns planning flexibility, which includes aspects such as: l) scheduling flexibility--when and how long a media-use activity will take place, and 2) media content selection--what types of content will be selected. The other general area deals with technical flexibility in 64 controlling media-use conditions--how much physical control over the medium (hardware) itself is possible. As indicated in the literature review above, an individual’s control motivation will prompt the person to be more actively seeking media gratifications. By the same token, a more ”active” audience is likely to be more ”actively" engaged in gratification-seeking activity as well. Therefore, the more control an audience possesses in manipulating its media-use condition, the more actively it will be involved in gratifi- cation-seeking activity. To empirically capture the relations between the level of media-use control and gratification-seeking activity, the following hypothesis can be developed: ”The level of media—use control in gratification—seeking activity will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity." The concept of ”audience control” seems to exemplify the overall environmental constraints in a nutshell because it actually reflects how much control an audience has over its media environment at either a personal or social level. For instance, within each of the two areas mentioned above-- planning flexibility and technical flexibility-~a commonly shared central element is whether an audience is free to make the kinds of media-use decisions that it prefers. Decision—making in terms of media consumption often, in one aspect, depends on whether the audience member is _a sole consumer or group consumer for a medium. If the audience member is a group consumer, then the following 65 questions perhaps should be asked when media-use planning is of interest: 1) how often does the audience member makes media-use decisions? 2) how often does the viewing group (either a stable one or a changing one over time) make the decision and what is the degree of within-group consensus? 3) how often does the group leader (other than the audience member) make the decision and what is the degree of agreement between the audience member and the leader? and 4) is the decision-making dominated by the audience member, some other group member(s) or the group as a whole?45To ex- amine audience control from yet another aspect of decision- making, it was reported4ghat the audience member’s awareness of the overall content availability and the availability of its preferred content options will influence its media-use decision. To generalize the relations between the flexibility level of media-use planning and the level of gratification-seeking activity, a hypothesis can be con- structed as follows: ”The level of planning flexibility will be positively correlated with a the level of gratification-seeking activity." In terms of the physical aspect of audience control over the medium itself, mechanical features such as remote- control devices or the ability of a VCR to record programs for time-shifting purposes can actually place much physical control of the media-use conditions into the audience’s hand. The question, then, becomes whether the audience 66 member is in control when utilizing any mechanical devices for making decisions on how to manipulate the media-use conditions. Once again, an audience ability to control its media-use conditions will probably dictate how active it is during the process of gratification-seeking activity. The relations between an audience’s physical control over its media-use conditions and the level of its gratification- seeking activity can be captured by the hypothesis stated below: ”The level of technical flexibility in manipulating media-use conditions will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity." An audience member with a stronger control motivation should expect to have a greater degree of control over his or her media-use processes. However, such an expectation may have to be compromised in accordance with how much actual control one might possess under the existing media-use envi- ronment. 92211112211222z92121222 This component reflects the extent of fulfillment for each cluster of the gratifications-sought in the post- exposure period. In general, each different cluster of the gratifications-sought--surveillance, informational guidance, entertainment, interpersonal communication, diversion/escape and para-social identity utility may be gratified to dis- similar degrees either immediately or after some period of time. This assumption is primarily based upon the following theoretical assertions and empirical evidence. 67 147 According to the argument of Schramm, media gratifica- tions do not necessarily all occur at the same time interval after exposure; there are ”immediate” as well as "deferred" gratifications in terms of the time sequence. Kippax and 148 Murray further suggest that ”most needs are not perceived as being fully met by the media." Among their major findings, the least important needs reported by the audience (i.e., the information needs) are among the most gratified by television, whereas the most important needs reported (i.e., those concerned with personal identity and social relationships) are the least satisfied by television. 149 Other research evidence indicates that gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained do not perfectly corre- late with each other. Moreover, a gratification sought does not guarantee a gratification obtained. To assess more accurately the degrees of gratifica- tions-obtained, the possible intervening effects of gratification-seeking activities at all levels and the extent of perceived control must be taken into considera- tion}50 Other factors, such as single-channel and multichannel viewers, appear to receive dissimilar levels of gratifications and deserve to be examined as well. 9221111221122 2112212 This component addresses the issue of how an audience’s cognitive, affective, and behavioral orientation may have been influenced by media exposure with the mediation of gratification factors. A great deal of 68 research has demonstrated the possible impacts of media content on the audience. Although media effects may not be contingent upon the levels of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained, these gratification factors may nevertheless either negatively or positively reinforce media effects in different ways. For instance, an audience who attends TV news with a strong motivation to fulfill its surveillance need is likely to acquire more knowledge from the exposure than an audience with a weaker motivation (everything else being assumed equal)?51 If these audiences are, however, not sufficiently satisfied with the newscast, a host of intervening factors such as a decrease in concen— tration, interest or motivation, may arise. As a result, these audiences’ learning from the newscast and/or their knowledge gain may also be negatively affected. According to Ball-Rokeach and DeFluerféfhe information learned from media ”will alter various forms of audience cognitions, feelings and behaviors,” because people depend on media to satisfy their needs in many different ways. Therefore, the stronger the need, the stronger the dependency on media content. Consequently, media content may generate certain cognitive, affective or behavioral effects upon the audience as long as the audience’s needs are sufficiently gratified by its media consumption. Research findings have suggested that single channel and multichannel viewers appear to receive dissimilar levels of gratifications. To further substantiate the importance 69 153 of such findings, Blumler comments that, while explaining media effects through examining various combinations of gratifications-sought, the multi-functionality nature of media content must be taken into consideration. This is because a specific type of media content may provide multi- ple gratifications-obtained and differential media effects. This causal relationship among needs, gratifications, media effects, and media dependency seems to have furnished a sound theoretical link between gnntiftnntinn gtfggtn and 2221111221122 22122121122- For exe-ple. if an audience’s surveillance need is sufficiently gratified by TV news, and TV news is also relatively effective in producing the desired cognitive, affective or behavioral impacts on the audience (i.e., 9191111991199 EIEESEQ). then the audience may be positively reinforced to repeat its exposure for future need-gratification purposes. Over time, if repeated- exposures do occur, then a reinforcement mechanism will be established. In the long run, this reinforcement experience will eventually influence the audience’s 2221111221122 22122121122 in such a way that the audience will firmly recognize TV news as a preferred source for gratifying certain of its surveillance needs. By connecting 2221111221122 2112212 with 2221111221122 gnigntntinn, a feedback loop is furnished to complete the model in a full cycle. It is appropriate, then, to address the social/environmental factors that impact on every component in the model as the last item for discussion. 70 92212z92112221 92222211122 This component includes the compositions of the media structure, social/cultural systems, and individual socio- logical characteristics. All these factors may influence the function of each component in the model. Specifically, people with different social, cultural and demographic backgrounds may perceive differently the relevance of each of the basic human needs. This nexus of factors may lead to differential need-gratification orientations, gratification- seeking behavior and media effects within the constraints of the existing media structure/environmigi. The Leeds University studisgn investigating the social sources of media satisfaction is a prime example of scruti- nizing the potential social factors that may help determine individual choices for leisure activity or media consumption behavior. For instance, social background factors such as geographic mobility, organizational affiliations, various aspects of social contact opportunities and people’s work situations were also studied along with other sociological and environmental factors to explain significant variation in media-gratification. Another viable approach may be to adopt the ”social/structur- a1” perspective recommended by McQuail and Gurevitchlsfhat strictly focuses on how the dominant cultural definitions may channel an individual’s choice of media use and reaction to media provision. Moreover, the "media-dependency model" 157 originated by Ball-Rokeach and DeFleur, which emphasizes 71 the interrelationships among societal systems, audience, media effects and media systems may be an alternative in terms of constructing an overall social theory for media gratifications. In the light of the recent innovation and adoption of media technologies, research may also focus on how the audience’s perception of media and their media-use patterns have changed. This may facilitate the task of profiling the role of technological development in shaping media uses and gratifications with new theoretical revelations. CHAPTER II: PART III RYPOTRESES From the literature review and theoretical model pro- posed above, the complexity of the media uses and gratifi- cations process is obvious. It would take an indeterminate number of projects to study the entire process, depending on how one approaches the question. For instance, four phases can be divided roughly as follows: 1) the psychologi- cal-orientation phase, ranging from the need-origination stage to the gratification-orientation stage;. 2) the gra- tification-seeking phase, ranging from the gratifications- sought stage to the gratifications-obtained stage; 3) the gratification-effects phase, which is concerned with the impacts of media gratifications on the overall effects of media and how this influence affects future media uses and gratifications processes; and 4) socio-cultural structure phase, which provides the broad context for media use behaviors to take place. This study will focus on the second phase of the media uses and gratifications process,. namely, the gratification-seeking phase (Figure 2). To apply the theoretical model proposed herein, six main hypotheses will be constructed to assess the relations between the measures for each segment of the gratification- seeking activity (i.e., pre-, during-, or post-exposure 72 73 suaasasxuam Hmuasnuoa. suaswnsuusm weassmam. Homhzoo mmbldHnmz “apogee ao>v auauuo>wa ousmonxm Iamuwoum. Ho>oa ousmonxmu>a. muw>fiuo< woue>auozuewvez. usoaw>ao>su unneceMMIunom. suqucoea Heaoomleusm. sofiueowssaaoo Hesoeuoeuoueu.. unseen \soaeuo>an. usoasusuuousm. oossvwso Hesoaussuousn. Nabmomxulhmom useam>ao>sn ousuoexmueauuz. usosu>ao>cH Heuwsnuoa. NMDmOQNMquHmbn T am>ms umemomxuueHnmx r Amfimsso mo>v newsseam wewumwnmuuasa. mewsasam «mandamus. souueucoauo onalefivoz. mMDmomxulmmm (xix oussaaau>usm. anHdano ImZOHnZonHHEi NBH>HHU< UZHMMNmIonhduHmHH<¢U «menu wswxoumlsoausuauwueuu ousuwvs< any N ouswfim 5353 aswuomnsusm. soausuassaaoo assoeuoeuousn. unseen \soqouo>«n. usuasueuuuusm. masseuse Honowuesuousn. ouseaawo>usm. BmUDOm ImchHfiuHhHuiy—bi 74 activity) and gratifications-sought and gratifications— obtained. The relations between two other factors occur during the gratification-seeking process, media-exposure level and namely media-use control, will also be measured against the level of gratification—seeking activity. Within each of the first five hypotheses to follow, sub-hypotheses are also constructed to measure each specific type of gratification-seeking activity in relation to each different measure of gratifications-sought and gra- tifications obtained. The premise inherent in all of the hypotheses is that audience members who anticipate greater levels of media gratifications will tend to be more involv- ed in gratification-seeking activities and more inclined to receive greater levels of gratifications. More active audience members will also tend to be heavier users of media and perceive themselves as having more control over their media use circumstances. A summarized list of all the hypothesis developed for this study is presented as follows: H1: The level of pre-exposure activity will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. file: The level of media-use orientation will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. Hlb: The level of media-use planning will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications—obtained. file: The level of time-shifting planning will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained (VCR owners only). 75 H2: The level of during-exposure activity will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. HZa: The level of technical-involvement will be positive- ly correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. H2b: The level of media-exposure involvement will be pos- itively correlated with the level of gratifica- tions-sought and gratifications-obtained. H3: The level of post-exposure activity will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. H3a: The level of post-exposure involvement will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. H3b: The level of engagement in media-motivated activity will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. H4: The level of media-exposure will be positively corre- lated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. H4a: The level of TV-exposure will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. H4b: The level of program-exposure diversity will be positively correlated with the level of gratifica- tion-seeking activity. H4c: The level of VCR-use will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity (VCR owners only). H5: The level of media-use control in gratification-seek— ing activity will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. H6: 76 H5a: The level of planning flexibility will be positive- ly correlated with the level of gratifications- seeking activity. H5b: The level of technical flexibility in manipulating media-use conditions will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. The strength of the relationship between gratifica- tions-sought and gratifications-obtained will decrease when their correlation with gratification—seeking ac- vity is controlled for. CHAPTER III METHODS The goal of this study was to observe the patterns of teen-agers’ uses of the television medium and how such uses bring gratifications to their everyday life. To accomplish the goal of behavioral and psychological generalization, it would be necessary to collect data on an aggregate basis. As such, more reliable claims of representation with regard to teenagers’ media uses and gratifications based on the data compiled could therefore be expected. In line with this logic, the survey method was deemed the most appro- priate methodological approach. An additional rationale was that, since past research in this area has generally adopted survey methods, it is also important in this study to maintain methodological consistency. 22221 1221122 As reflected by the hypotheses, this study set out to verify the assumption that the more highly motivated audience members would be more actively engaged in gratifi- cation-seeking activity, and consequently receive greater levels of gratification. To present such a picture within a theoretical framework, the research design was based upon the theoretical model proposed earlier. As explained in 77 78 the previous chapter, among the three phases of the model, the gratification-seeking phase could easily integrate the purposes of the study into a theoretical scheme. Research hypotheses were generated according to the structural com- position of the components in this phase to assess the intercorrelations among them. The components attested by the research hypotheses were: 22211112211222z222821. 2221111221122:2222122 22112112. 22212z22222222 12221. 222122222 2221221. and 82211112211222: nntningg. As revealed by the literature review, Palmgreen et al. have repeatedly shown us the non-monotonic relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Levy and Windhal have demonstrated the intercorrelations among gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained, audience activity (or gratification-seeking activity), and exposure levels. Their effort has paved the way for this study to expand its theoretical horizon in which the intercorrelated nature of these components, gratifications- sought, gratifications-seeking activity, gratifications— obtained, and media-exposure level was redefined. In particular, the gratification-seeking activity component was perceived as an intervening factor in this assumption such that its intensity was thought to be. related to the levels of gratifications-sought and the levels of gratifications-obtained. Hypothesis six captured the essence of that assumption. Moreover, hypotheses one through three were constructed to reflect the relations between the three phases of gratification-seeking activity 79 and gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Specifically, hypothesis one dealt with the pre-exposure activity factor, hypothesis two addressed the during- exposure activity factor, and hypothesis three assessed the post-exposure activity factor. Added to this theoretical scheme were two more com- ponents, media-exposure frequency and media-use control, each directly correlated with gratification-seeking activi- ty. The underlying rationale for this assumption was that audience members who were more actively engaged in gratifi- cation~seeking activity would tend to have greater levels of media-exposure frequency and media-use control (over the gratification-seeking activity). Hypothesis four was developed to test the relations between gratification- seeking activity and media-exposure frequency, whereas hypothesis five was constructed to examine the relations between gratification-seeking activity and media-use control. Among the six research hypotheses developed, the com- ponent of socio-cultural composition, which provided the broader context for the interactions among all model com- ponents, was not independently addressed. The reason, as stated in Part III of the last chapter, is that a separate study would be required to examine the relationship between this component and the entire gratification-seeking process. Therefore, it should be borne in mind that socio-cultural composition could be an intervening factor throughout the entire process of gratification-seeking. It 80 could undoubtedly account for certain unexplained portions of the variances when relations between any two model components are explored. 2222222221 922221211222 Teenagers of two different age groups, seventh graders (twelve or thirteen years old) and tenth graders (sixteen or seventeen years old) were chosen to be the population. These two age categories roughly resemble the midepoints of early and late teenhood. Although age difference was not a main concern of this project, the use of two age groups could provide an opportunity to assess the potential differences in media uses and gratifications between these two groups. As the existing literature has not explored this particular issue, the information gather- ed in this study may prove helpful to future investigators. Teenagers who participated in the study were recruit- ed from a local high school and middle school with the permission of school administrative authorities. The total number of. respondents from the early-teen group was 221, from whom 206 complete responses were received. From the late-teen group of 223, 221 complete responses were obtained. These respondents came primarily from middle-class suburban communities; 223 of them were male and 203 female (one respondent failed to indicate gender). About 22.3% of the respondents lived with a single parent, and 608 of the households had no more than four household members. 81 Approximately 928 of the respondents lived in houses with 838 resident ownership; 868 of all respondents had their own room. The average number of cars each household owned was around 2.5. Occupational distributions among the parents of all respondents, was 412 professional, 162 clerical, 308 service workers, 6% skilled workers, and 7X self-employed. The employment situation among these parents had the following breakdown: 10% not employed, 14% part-time employed, 762 full-time employment. The educational levels of the better educated parent in a household reflected a rather well educated group--50.4X had at least a four-year college degree, within which 28.83 had a college degree, 4.7: had at least some graduate work, and 16.92 had a graduate degree. Of the remaining 49.68 of the parents, 10.83 had some four-year-college schooling, 7* had a community-college degree, 10.4% had some community-college experience, 11.4% had a high-school degree, and 2.88 had some high school (22 cases missing). The occupational, employment, and educational status of the parents of respondents presented a rather up-scale population. With regard to the respondent’s home media environment, the average number of TV sets among these households was three, two of which were color TV sets. Cable subscribers comprised 722 of the households (8 cases missing), and pay-cable subscribers, 55% of all households. Six households owned a home-satellite dish. Among the five types of additional electronic media inquired about, 72% of 82 the households owned a video-game machine, 143 a video-disc player, 183 a compact-disc player, 223 a video camera, 523 a home computer. Furthermore, 783 of the households owned a VCR machine (8 missing cases). An additional index of the respondent’s media envi- ronment was obtained by describing the types of electronic media each respondent individually owned. The results showed that, among all respondents, 56.43 individually owned a TV set, 69.83 an audio-cassette recorder, 66.33 a stereo system, 65.83 a record player, 83.13 a walkman radio, 50.63 a telephone set and 84.83 a hand-held calculator. The overall impression of the respondent’s media environment reflected a very abundant multimedia environ- ment. It was found also that the respondent spent a daily average of 11 minutes reading a newspaper, 18 minutes a magazine, and 2.4 hours listening to the radio, 1.5 hours listening to records, tapes, or compact discs. Moreover, between 443 and 663 of all parents rarely or never practic- ed any parental mediation in relation to the respondents’ TV viewing activity, and between 483 to 783 of the house- holds rarely or never had any rules on the respondents’ TV viewing activity. 122222 1221222221 The instrument for data collection was a self-admin- istered survey questionnaire (see Appendix II). This questionnaire was composed of three parts. All respondents 83 were to answer questions in the first part of the questionnaire (from pages 1 to 14). Only those respondents who had a VCR at home were to respond to questions in the second part (from pages 15 to 18). Those who had a VCR and pay-cable service at home were to fill out the third part of the questionnaire (page 19). The questionnaire basically contained items probing the following areas. First, each component adopted from the gratification-seeking model was measured by items either adopted from past research or used in other studies. Second, a number of demographic descriptions were developed to pinpoint the respondent’s socio-economic background. Third, there was an array of questions related to the res- pondent’s home media environment, assessing, for example, different types of electronic media ownership. Fourth, inquiries of parental mediation in TV/video viewing activity were made. 21121 91222 A pilot study was conducted to pretest the survey instrument and rehearse the survey procedures. Forty-three 9th graders from a local high school participated in the study. Two trained investigators oversaw the entire survey processes. Each of them noted and recorded flaws in the survey procedures and difficulties confronted by respon- dents in filling out the questionnaire. These records were later examined for the purpose of revising the survey pro- cedures and instrument. 84 In addition, based on the results generated through computer analysis, questions that yielded unduly skewed distributions of response categories were deleted from the questionnaire. The general criterion used for deleting a question was whether a particular question had more than 703 of the responses distributed within two neighboring response categories at the higher or the lower end of a five-point scale (or three neighboring response categories, for a seven-point scale). This action was to reduce irrel- evant and self-evident questions. The total number of items deleted was twenty-two out of 223. The seven-point scale used in the pilot study, which appears to have created some confusion among the respon- dents, was converted to a five-point scale. There were also minor modifications on the wording of certain ques- tions to make them more in tune with the respondents’ vocabulary level. A number of the "instructions" in the. questionnaire itself were restructured to increase simplic- ity and comprehensibility. Overall, most respondents were able to complete the questionnaire successfully. A few respondents who lacked requisite reading levels were given additional instructions and more time. 2212:9211221122 2222222222 Data were gathered from the high school and middle school on two separate days. During each data-collection session, the same procedures were carried out in both schools. Specifically, four trained investigators each 85 followed the steps specified in an instruction sheet to execute the survey. The survey was administered on a class-wide basis and was fit into a regularly scheduled and required course subject (i.e., social studies). As in the pilot study, the investigators introduced themselves brief- ly, and explained their presence in each class. The inves- tigators then described the correct manner for completing the questionnaire, and requested that respondents read each instruction carefully. Questions were solicited before handing out the questionnaires and standard pencils. Dur- ing the survey, respondents were free to ask any questions regarding the completion of the questionnaire. Respon- dents were instructed not to discuss questions or answers with each other. Investigators were not supposed to guide the respondents or provide hints to them. Most respondents took 15 to 35 minutes to complete the questionnaire. 92112111222 21 122122122 All the variables tested in the six hypotheses are defined below. To assess the reliability of each measure, a WISE—9.0.1.1 19.0 Fr2129.11291‘199211112121111- was reported when the measure contained two items; a Cronbach’s alphatwas indicated if the measure contained more than two items.158 The construct validiity of each measure against its respective criterion variables was represented by a Pearson correlation coefficient. This_!nligity_tggt~ was done by correlating each single item that was part of the measure of a variable with its criterion variable indivi- 86 dually. The criterion variables for research hypotheses one through three and six, were gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. For hypotheses four and five, the criterion variable was gratification-seeking activity. The measures for each model component under testing are described as follow. I. 91211112211922z§92821 This criterion variable was assessed by six factors, 9222211122221 Informational 921222221 92122121222211 DiversionlEscapg‘ lntnnpennnnnl Communication and Para- §nntnt lggnttty. These six factors, along with the items that measured each of them, were adopted from other grati- fication studies which had confirmed the general validity and reliability of these measures. The items that mensured_ .egchafacton are described below. 922221112222: I watch TV to find out about the latest news on popular music . keep track of sports news . find out about the news events in the country and the world 1212222112221 92122222: I watch TV to get advice on . how to make friends in school . how to get along with my family how to solve my personal problems 9212212122221: I watch TV because I want to . be entertained get some excitement . have some fun feel good 87 I watch TV because want to forget about my problems need to relax need to kill time am lonely am bored Hrwhdnrq 1212222222221 2222221221122: I watch TV to find something interesting to talk to my family about find something interesting to use in starting a conversation . find something interesting to talk to my friend about 22222922121 12221112 I watch TV because . I want to find people like me on TV I like to think of some people on TV as friends I want to talk back to the TV to express my feelings A Likert five-point 3331e#(very often, often, ,3°P°’H fl-..— tifft'm’°53111122313522893 2222 to reflect the -frcquen¢i°9 which each gratification item was considered as relevant to one’s media-use activity. The standardized item alphas (Cronbach’s Alpha) that reflected inter-item reliability within a measure were as follow: .37 for §nngeillnnne, .81 for Informational 92122222. -81 for 9212212122221. -63 for 9122221221922222. -83 for 1212222222221 9222221221122 and -73 for 12222922121 lgenttty. The low alpha value for §nngetllnnne was due to the fact that, unlike adults, teenagers generally have not established a consistent pattern of consuming different types of news content. This finding inevitably affected the overall strength of the gratifications-sought measure in correlating with other measures. The alpha value across these six factors was .66. 88 II. Gratifications-Obtained This second criterion variable was also assessed by the above mentioned six factors--§nnggtttnnng, Informa- 112221 92122222. 9212212122221. Diversionzfiscs22. 121222222 sonsl 9222221221122. 12222922121 12221112--usins the same measurement scale. However, the wording of the items that measured each factor was slightly changed to express the frequencies for which gratification was received due to media use. The items that measured each factor are described below. 922221112222: I am satisfied with . the latest news on popular music . the sports news on TV . the local TV news . the national TV news 1212222112221 92122222: I am satisfied with the advice I get from TV on how to make friends in school how to get along with my family . how to solve my personal problems Entertainment: Watching TV . keeps me entertained . gives me excitement . gives me a lot of fun . makes me feel good Watching TV . makes me forget about my problems helps me relax helps me kill time keeps me from feeling lonely keeps me from getting bored 89 1212222222221 9222221221122: Watching TV . gives me something interesting to talk to my family about . gives me something interesting to use in starting a conversation gives me something interesting to talk to my friends about 92222922121 12221112: Watching TV makes me feel . there are people like me on TV . some people on TV are like friends I can talk back to the TV to express my feelings The standardized item alphas for the multiple items measured in each factor were: .60 for §nngntttnnng, .91 for Informational Qntnnngg, .85 for Entgntntnngnt, .69 for 9122221221922222. -86 for 1212222222221 9222221221122. and .74 for Pnnnz§nntnl 19991112- Further, the alpha for the six factors combined was .71. III- 922111122112229221122 12112112 This variable was further composed of three sets of variables. 922292222222 2211211122. 922122292222222 22112112 and 9221292222222 22112112- The 'overall alpha value across these three sets of variables was .62 for all respondents and .61 for VCR owners. A- 922292222222 22112112 Two variables--922122922 92122121122. and 922122922 91222122--ccnprised the Icasure for 922292222222 22112112. using two separate five-point scales (i.e., for the former--strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree; for the latter--very often, often, sometimes, rarely, never). The correlation between Media- 90 922 92122121122 and 922122922 91222122 was .38 (2 < .001) indicating a satisfactory strength level for the measure. 922122922 92122121122. reflecting the i-portance of TV viewing, was assessed by three items with an alpha value for inter-item correlation of .75. These three items include: . Watching TV is a part of my daily activity . Watching TV is a very important after school activity for me . I would be very disappointed if I miss a favorite TV show Meninzyng Elnnning, indicating the frequencies one makes viewing plans, was measured by three items with an alpha value of .81. These three items contain the following: I know ahead of time . what TV shows I want to watch . how many TV shows I want to watch . when to watch TV In terms of the correlations between the Pngzgxpnnnng‘ Antigity measures and the criterion variables (anttttnn; 112222922221 and 92211112211222292121222). the two Snnggtllnnng measures did not correlate highly with most of the gratification items; the same is true of correlations involving the two lntnnnntinnnl Gnignnng measures with one of the Media-Use Orientation measures. Moreover, a Media-. 29991991999929 ngnnnngn. Although not all correlations between the items that measured Pne39npnnnng Antigity and the criterion variables were strongly significant, the level of construct validity, was, however, reasonable. 91 For VCR owners, the. measures for Eng:enpnnnng Anttgtty were reconstructed to reflect VCR-use planning. This was done by addins 1122222111122 91222122 to 922122922 92122121122 and 922122922 91222122 (the two seasures for 299299299959 9911211! to the recreate the measure for fine: gnpnnnnn Antigtty. The overall alpha value for these three variables combined was .51. Tinn3nnitttng Plnnning was measured by the following three items. I decide ahead of time - . what shows to tape while I am watching TV . what shows to tape while I am watching a different :22: shows to tape while I won’t be watching TV The correlations between all 259393295959 2911911! items (for VCR owners) and the two criterion variables (922111122112222222221 and 92211112211222222121222) indi- cated that about half of all the items didn’t significantly correlate with one of the two Surveillance and Informa- tinnnl Qnignnng measures. This manifested the fact men- tioned earlier, that teenagers generally didn’t treat television as a medium to obtain news or seek advice on a regular basis. There were also three items that didn’t significantly correlate with one of the lntnnpennnnnl annn; nication and £9992§99191 lgentity measures. Although the construct validity for the variables §nngettlnngg and lntnnnnttnnnt Qntgnngn was, as expected, less than impres- sive, the rest four pairs of gratificcation measures never- theless provided a rather satisfactory construct validity level. Therefore, the overall construct validity in this case could be considered acceptable with some reservation. 92 B. 922122292222222 22112112 This variable was measured by the frequencies of two other activities. 122221221212221222221 and 92212292222222 lngntggnnnt. A five -point scale (very often, often, sometimes, rarely, never) was used to describe the frequencies of occurrence of each activity. The correlations between these two variables was .14 (p < .001) for all respondents and .09 (p ( .001) for VCR owners. Tennnignl:1ngnlggngnt, representing one’s interaction with the television medium during viewing, was assessed by three different activities. 9222222121 222122222. 9222221 921122122 and 9211122222221 9122122. Cossercial Avoidance contained two variables--avoid commercials during and between shows; these two variables were each measured by two items. Those items include: When commercials come on during a show, . I change channels until they are over . I do something else until they are over When Commercials come on between shows . I change channels until they are over I do something else until they are over The correlations between the two items within each variable were .75 and .72, respectively; the correlation between these two variables was, however, a low .10. For annngl §gitnntng, the two-item measure had a correlation of .47. These two items contain the following: . Before a show is over, I change channels to watch a more interesting show . During a show, I switch channels to check what else is on 93 Si-ilarly. for 921112222221 9122122. the two-ite- measure also had a high correlation of .78. These two items are described below. . During commercials, I switch channels to watch two or more shows at the same time . During a show, I switch channels to watch two or more shows at the same time However, the relations between all 999192299299959 Antigity items and the two criterion variables (922111122112222222221 and 92211112211222222121222) re- vealed that the two Surveillance and. Informational-Gui- dnnng measures did not correlate with most of the items. This, again, reflected the expected trend mentioned earlier, that teenagers generally had not utilized television as a medium to obtain news or seek advice on a regular basis. Moreover, one item from each of the two variables of anngnninl Agnignnng (i.e., "When commercials come on during a show, I do something else until they are over” and ”When commercials come on between shows, I do something else until they are over”) and one item from the annngl §91199198 (i.e., ”Before a show is over, I change channels to watch a more interesting show") failed to correlate with most of the gratification measures. These three items were deleted from those measures. The overall alpha value among the reconstructed combined measure for 9222222121 222122222. 9222221 921122122 and 921112222221 gigging, reached the level of .76. 92212292222222 12221222221. indicative of one’s in- teraction with the media content under consumption, was 94 measured by two other variables--!tgwtng lngnlggnent and gigging 211991199- These two variables were correlated at .26 . The alpha value among the three items that assessed gigging lngnlgenent was .68. These three items include the following. . I like to talk about a show with someone watching with me . I get into a show that I am watching I like to express my feelings about a show to someone watching with me However, the three items that reflected the level of gigging nttgnttnn only had a low alpha value of .19. These three items are presented below. When I watch a TV show, . I watch it from the beginning to the end . I concentrate totally on the show I miss part of the show because I don’t concentrate enough In order to strengthen the reliability of the overall Ieasure for 92212222222222 12221222221. only one item of the gigging nttgntinn measure (i.e., "When I watch a TV show, I concentrate totally on the show”) was combined with the gigging lngnlgengnt measures, whereas the other two items were deleted. The overall alpha value for the newly co-hiaed seasure of 9122122 12221222221 and 1122122 Attenttnn became .62. In terms of construct validity, the low correlations between all items and the two criterion variables (antttt; 22112222222221 and 92211112211222222121222) once a2ain revealed that the two §nngnillnngg measures were not highly predictive of lost 922122222222222 22112112 measures. 95 Moreover, one of the Divergigglggggpg measures also failed to correlate with one of the items. Although the two §ggg§illgngg measures were again proven to be low on construct validity, the rest of the gratification measures all demonstrated desirable predictive power. Thus, taken as a whole, the overall construct validity for the criterion variables could be accepted with minor reservation. For VCR owners, the two measures for Qggigg395pg§ggg 22112112. 122221221 12221222221 and 22212z22222222 1222122: gent, were reconstructed to reflect the special technical nature of VCR use. First of all, 9999959191 zipping was added to the 9222222121 122122222 (one of the 122221221 {legibility measures) measure. The three measures _of Technical-Involvement for VCR owners, then, include 9222222121 12212222211122122. 9222221 921122122 and 22111: 2222221 2122122- The two items that Ieasured_9222222121 112: ping were correlated at .43. These two items are as follow. . When I am taping a show, I tape the commercials too . When I am playing back a show taped earlier, I fast forward to skip commercials The correlation between 9222222121 1122122 and 9222222121 Agggidgggg was a low .13 (p < .001). Nevertheless, the overall alpha for the three 222122: 22222222 12112112 measures (for VCR owners), Egghgigglzlggglgggggt (combin- 122 92222222121 11221221122122222. 9222221 921122122 and gultighggggl gigging, was a satisfactorily strong .71. The correlations between each of the items that measured Qggigg355pggugg Activity (for VCR owners) and the 96 two criterion variables were relatively strong, except for two items uncorrelated with one of the Informational 92122222. 2212212122221 and 1212222222221 9222221221122 measures. However, the Qggggpgigi Zippipg measures failed to correlate significantly with three out of six measures of 92211112211222:92121222. Since lost 2ratification measures were predictive of their correlates, the overall construct validity level for the two criterion variables (92211112211222:§22221 and 92211112211222:92121222) should be considered acceptable. Minor reservation should, never- theless, be mindfully recognized. C. Post-Exposure Activity Two variables. 2221:22222222 12221222221 and 22212: 221122122 12112112. comprised the measure of 2221:22222222 igiigiiy. Each used a five-point scale (very often, often, sometimes, rarely, never). The correlation between these~ two Ieaeurea was ~39- 2221:12222222 12221222221. reflect- ing one’s post-exposure interaction with the media content consumed, was assessed by four items, with an alpha among the four items. These four items include the follow- ing. After watching an interesting show, . I like to discuss it with someone . I can think about it for a long time I can remember it for a long time I can be moved by it for a long time Sinilarly. 22212:!21122122 12112112. an indicator of the types of activities one performed after media exposure, was also measured by four items. The alpha value among 97 these four. items was .67, and these four items can be described as follow. I will go do something that is fun for me because I saw it on TV . that is meaningful to me because I saw it on TV . that helps me improve myself because I saw it on TV I will go out to buy something because I saw it on TV With regard to construct validity, except for three 2999:95p99999 i9iigiiy items that did not significantly correlate with the two Surveillance measures and one item did not significantly correlate with one of °the 19:9999: ii999i399i99999 measure, all others were well correlated to the two criterion variables. Therefore, though not all gratification measures had satisfactory predictive power, the overall construct validity for the two criterion vari- ables, gggiiii999i9993999ghi and Gratifications-obtained was relatively acceptable, with minor reservation. VI. Media-Exposure Level This variable was assessed by two factors, 1!; 22222222 12221 and B222222:12222222 912222112 '(for all respondents). The correlation between these two factors was .34 (p < .001). For VCR owners, M99i9:§§p99999 99391 was measured by the former two factors and an additional factor, 2933999 L9g9i, to better reflect the overall media consumption pattern. The overall alpha value among these three factors was .63. 129§§p999§9 i9g9i, representing the level of TV exposure, was obtained through combining the number of hours spent watching TV with one’s family and by oneself on 98 a daily basis. The daily TV-viewing hours were computed by dividing the sum of the TV-viewing hours across weekdays, Saturday and Sunday by a constant of seven (the TV-viewing hours across weekdays were calculated by multiplying a constant of five to the daily TV-viewing hours reported). Each item that comprised this measure was reported on a predetermined ratio scale ranging from ”zero to seven-and- more” hours. These items are described below. . The number of hours I watch TV with my family on a typical school day . . The number of hours I watch TV with my family on a typical Saturday . The number of hours I watch TV with my family on a typical Sunday . The number of hours I watch TV alone on a typical school day . . The number of hours I watch TV alone on a typical Saturday The number of hours I watch TV alone on a typical Sunday E222222:22222222 912222112. an indicator of one’s content-exposure diversity level for TV programs, was measured by a five-point scale (very often, often, sometimes, rarely, never). TV programs were classified into the following categories: soap operas, police/detective series, situation comedies, dramatic series, movies or mini-series, sports shows, music-video shows, advice-column shows, TV news and public-affairs shows. The diversity index for one’s program exposure was estimated through the average of different types of programs one was exposed to at the level of ”sometimes," ”often" or ”very often" from the five-point scale. Actual calculation was done by summing the scale values associated 99 with the exposure levels of "sometimes,” "often” or ”very often” across all program types which met one of these exposure levels; then. the sum of these scale values was divided by the total number of different types of programs entering the calculation. 2993999 99291, an indicator of the level of VCR use, was measured by combining the number of hours spent watch- ing videos taped at home and rented videos across weekdays, Saturday and Sunday, on a daily basis. Specifically, the number of hours watching videos taped at home across weekdays and weekends and the number of hours watching rented videos across an entire week were summed; that sum was then divided by a constant of seven to obtain the daily average. Again, each of the 2993999 L9g9i item was reported on a predetermined ratio scale ranging from ”zero to seven-and-more” hours. The items for this measure include the following. . The number of hours I watch videos taped at home from Monday through Friday . The number of hours I watch videos taped at home on Saturday and Sunday . The number of hours I watch rented videos at home during a typical week (from Monday through Sunday) V. Media-Use Control This variable was assessed by two factors--91999i9g 11221211112 and 122221221 11221211112. throu2h the use of a five-point scale (very often, often, sometimes, rarely, never). These two factors were correlated with each other at .13 (p < .004) for all respondents and .55 (p < .001) for VCR owners. 100 Eigpgigg £195i9iiiiy, indicating control over viewing planning, was measured by two variables, 9999991i9g Ei9§i3 211112 and 9221221:921221122 11221211112- 9222221122 9i9§i9iiiix was assessed by four items, with an alpha value of .63 among the four items. These four items include: When I want to watch TV at home, . I decide what shows to watch while watching with my family . I decide what shows to watch while watching by myself I decide when to watch TV for myself I can decide how much TV to watch for myself 9221221:921221122 11221211112. representing options in content choice, was composed of three items. The alpha value among these three items was .67, and these three items include: There are ~ lots of shows on TV lots of good shows on TV lots of different kinds of shows I like to watch The intercorrelation between 999999ii9g §i9§i9iiigy and 9221221:921221122 11221211112 was -17 (p < .001). However, two 0f the 99919912§91991129 9192191111! measures did not correlate with one of the 9999991i9g 9i9§i9iiigz measures. A decision was made to delete these three items (i.e. "When I want to watch TV at home, I decide what shows to watch while watching by myself," ”There are lots of good shows on TV" and "There are lots of different kinds of shows I like to watch”). The remaining 999999ii9g 9i9§i3 211112 and 9221221:921221122 11221211112 seasures were then merged to reconstruct the Eigggigg §i9§i9iii91 measure; the alpha value for the four-item measure was .51. 101 I9999i99139i9§i9i1iiy, a reflection of the control over one’s interaction with the television medium, was assessed by six items. These six items together had an alpha value of .89. They include the following. When I am watching TV with my family, I can control whether to . skip commercials by switching channels during a show . skip commercials by switching channels between shows . flip around channels to pick an interesting show . change channels during a show to find a more interesting show . watch two or more shows at the same time by switching channels during a show . watch two or more shows at the same time by switching channels during commercials With regard to the construct validity for the three criterion variables. 122:22222222 12112112. 922122: 22222222 12112112 and 1221:22222222 12112112 (i.e.. the three Ieasures for 9221111221122z9222122 12112112). each 999i93999 999299i item was correlated against its respective criterion variable. The results showed that items that measured Eigggigg §i9§i9iii§y were well correlated with items that measured 99939§p99999 29313131. All 19999i99i 9i9§i9iiiix measures were highly correlated with 922122z92222222 12112112 Ieasures- And only one of the 19999i99i §i9§i9iiiiy measures did not significantly correlate with two of the £99239§p99999 99iigigy measures. These results reflect a high level of construct validity for the criterion variables. For VCR owners, the two measures for Media-Use Con~ In ggi were reconstructed to reflect the technical flexibil- ity involved in VCR use. First of all, a Eigggigg 9i9§i3 9iiiiz measure for VCR use was created to supplement the 102 original Eigggigg §i9§i9iii92 measure (for TV viewing). Three concepts: 1) types of videos to record, rent and play back, 2) when to play back and 3) how many videos to record, rent and play back, were incorporated into eleven items to form the 9i999i9g 9i9§i9iii§y measure for VCR use. These items were measured by a 5-point scale (very often, sometimes, rarely, never), with an overall alpha value of .89. The following list describe those eleven items. I can tape the shows I like on TV I can decide what videos to rent from a video store for myself . I help decide what videos to rent from a video store for my family I can decide when to play back videos for myself at home I help decide when to play back videos for my family I can decide how many shows to tape for myself at home . I help decide how many shows to tape for my family I can decide how many shows to play back for myself at home I help decide how many shows to play back for my family I can decide how many videos to rent for myself I help decide how many videos to rent for my family The correlation between Eigggigg 2i9§i9iiigz in TV viewing and VCR use was .30 (p < .001). The overall measure of I9999i99i 9i9§i9iiigy for VCR owners, was expanded to indicate the technical control involved in VCR use. The reconstructed measure of 29999i99i Ei9§i9iii21 then comprised the original measure for. technical control in TV-use and the VCR-use control measure-~9999999i9i Zippigg. The correlation between these two measures was .28. The two items that measured 9999959i91 Zippigg were correlated with each other at .62. These two items are described as follow. 103 While taping a show with my family watching TV, I can decide whether to tape the commercials While my family is playing back a video, I can decide whether to fast forward the commercials To sum up, the correlation between the two recon- structed 999193999 9999991 measures for VCR owners, 11222122 11221211112 and 122221221 11221211112 was .55- In terms of construct validity, the overall correlations between each 999193999 9999991 measure and its respective criterion variable, revealed that the 999399p99999 99112i92 measure was uncorrelated with one of the 91999i9g 11221211112 Ieasurea- All 122221221 11221211112 Ieasurea were hi2h12 correlated with the 922122:92222222 12112112 measures but two of them were not significantly correlated with the 9999399p99999 999igi§x measures. The construct validity for the criterion variables was therefore reasonably acceptable. 2222122212 1221122 The statistical technigues used in testing each of the six hypotheses are described below. Within 91p91999i9 999, Pearson correlation coefficients were obtained between the main variables from the three sub-hypotheses and the six gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained measures. These three main variables were Media-Use 92122121122 (Bla). 22212z922 11222122 (Hlb) and 1122: 99i£1i9g 91999i9g (Rlc). The six Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained. measures include 9999911199991 104 1212222112221 921222221 22122121222211 21222212211222221 1212222222221 9222221221122 and 1222:922121 12221112- For 99p9999919 199, there were two sub-hypotheses. Correlation coefficients were calculated between the two Iain variab1es--122221221:12221222221 (82a) and 22212: 99p99999 19991999999 (RZb)--and the six Gratifications- Sought and Gratifications-obtained measures. It should be noted that there were two separate 199991991319991999999 measures (92a), one for all respondents and the other for VCR owners only. Therefore, the sub-hypothesis, 92a, was tested for all respondents and VCR owners independently. The testing of 99p99999i9 19999 involved two sub— hypotheses as well. Correlation coefficients were obtained between the two main variables from the sub-hypotheses (1221:22222222 12221222221 of 83a and 22212:221122122 12112112 of 83b) and the six 92211112211222:922221 and 92211112211222:92121222 Icasures- 99p99999i9 9999 contained three sub-hypotheses. Correlation coefficients between the main variables from each sub-hypothesis. na-ely. 1!:22222222 12221 (84a). 1222222:22222222 212222112 (34b) and 192:222 12221 (84c). and the three independent measures of £99399p99999 12112112. 222122:22222222 12112112 and 2221:22222222 99919199 were computed for the testing of each sub- hypothesis. In terms of the composition for each indepen- dent Ieasure. 122:22222222 12112112. 222122z22222222 12112112 and 1221:22222222 12112112. a brief definition will be revisited as follows. 105 The 122:22222222 12112112 seasure was developed through combining the main variables 999193999 99199999199 (Rla) and 999193999 91999i9g (Hlb)--for all respondents. The same measure was created for VCR owners through coming the previously mentioned two main variables and 11993 99199i9g 9199919g (file). On the other hand, the measure for 999i9g399p99999 99919199, as discussed earlier, was constructed by the main variables Technical-Involvement (H2a) and 22212:12222222 12221222221 (32b). Si-ilarly. this measure was also reconstructed by adding 9999999191 1122122 to the Ieasure of 122221221:12221222221 (while Iaintainin2 22212:22222222 12221222221) for the VCR owners. Furthermore, the 'measure for 9999399p99999 99919199 was formed through combining the two main variables from the two subhypotheses--1221:22222222 12221222221 (852) and 22212:221122122 12112112 (H5b)- For 9999999919 9199, there were two sub-hypotheses. The main variables from these two sub-hypothesis (91999i9g 11221211112 of 35a and 122221221 11221211112 of 35b) were correlated with the individual measure of 999399p99999 12112112. 222122:22222222 12112112 and 1221:22222222 99919199 for all respondents as well as VCR owners. As discussed in the 9999999 chapter, there were two separate sets of 11222122 11221211112 and 122221221 11221211112 measures. Items reflecting the technical control nature of VCR use were supplemented to the original measures (for all respondents) to create another set of measures for VCR owners specifically. 106 99p9999919 819 was tested by computing a partial correlation coefficient. In particular, the three 99991113 221122:9222122 12112112 Ieasures--122:22222222 12112112. 222122z12222222 12112112 and 1221:22222222 12112112--served as control variables and were partialled out from the zero- order correlations between the six pairs of 999911199919993 999g99 and Gratifications-Obtained measures. CHAPTER IV RESULTS The results of the statistical analyses will be presented below. These include the results of each hypothesis tested and additional tests done on comparing the level of technical ease in media usebetween audiences with and without remote-control devices. The minimum significance level for all statistical tests was set at the .05 level. Test results that did not meet the minimum significance level were expressed as "N.S." (not signifi- cant) in each table. The actual statistical significance associated with each test result was also specified in each table. 122:12222222 12112112 Hla: The level of media-use orientation will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Results from the testing of this hypothesis are presented in Table 1.1. Media-Use Orientation was correlated with the Gratifications-Sought measures as follow--Surveillance, .10; Informational—Guidance, .13; Entertainment, .45; Diversion/Escape, .48; Interpersonal Communication, .30; and Para-Social Identity, .25. On the other hand, Media use Orientation was correlated with each 107 108 of the six Gratifications-Obtained measures as follow: Surveillance, .09; Informational-Guidance, .ll; Entertain- ment, .51; Diversion/Escape, .46; Interpersonal Communica- tion, .23; and Para-Social Identity, .25. Although the Media-Use Orientation measure was only weakly correlated with the Surveillance and Information-Guidance measures, all correlations reported were statistically significant. These findings provided support for this hypothesis. Table 1.1 Correlations between Media-Use Orientation and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Media-Use Orientation Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance .10* .093 Informational .13* .ll# Guidance Entertainment .45 .51 Diversion/ .48 .46 Escape Interpersonal .30 .23 Communication Para-Social .28 .25 Identity p < .001 t p < 03 Hlb: The level of media-use planning will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Results from the testing of this hypothesis are compiled in Table 1.2. . The correlations between Media-Use 109 Planning and the measures of Gratifications-Sought were as follow: .16 (Surveillance), .19 (Informational Guidance), .27 (Entertainment), .16 (Diversion/Escape), .30 (Inter- personal Communication), and .26 (Para-Social Identity. Moreover, Media-Use Planning was correlated with each of the Gratifications-Obtained measures at the following levels: .10 (Surveillance), .16 (Informational Guidance), .33 (Entertainment), .23 (Diversion/Escape), .26 (Interper- sonal Communication), and .23 (Para~Socia1 Identity). Again, though a few of the correlations reported were not very strong all of them were statistically significant. This hy- pothesis was therefore fairly well supported by the findings. Table 1.2 Correlations between Media-Use Planning and Gratifications-sought and Gratifications-Obtained Media-Use Planning Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance .16 .10* Informational .19 .16 Guidance Entertainment .27 .33 Diversion/ .16 .23 Escape Interpersonal .30 .26 Communication Para-Social - .26 .23 Identity 110 ch: The level of time-shifting planning will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications— sought and gratifications-obtained. Table 1.3 contains the results from the testing of this hypothesis. The correlations obtained between Time- Shifting Planning and the Gratifications-Sought measures were as follow: .14 (Surveillance), .00 (Informational Gui- dance), .26 (Entertainment),.l7 (Diversion/Escape), .12 (In- terpersonal Communication), and .06 (Para-Social Identity). For the Gratifications-Obtained measures, Time-Shifting Planning was correlated with each one of them at the follow- ing levels: .12 (Surveillance),.02 (Informational Guidance), .35 (Entertainment), .27 (Diversion/Escape), .18 (Interper- sonal Communication) and .11 (Para-Social Identity). Three of the correlations reported (r =.OO,.06,.02) were not stat- istically significant. Hypothesis lb was partially supported. Table 1.3 Correlations between Time-Shifting Planning and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Time-Shifting Planning Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance .14* .th Informational .0013 .02** Guidance Entertainment .26 .35 Diversion/Escape .17 .27 Interpersonal .12 .18 Communication Para-Social .06** .11: Identity 111 222122:12222222 12112112 92a: The level of technical-involvement will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Table 2.1 compiles the test results from this hypothe- sis. Technical-Involvement was correlated with the Gratifi- cations-sought measures at the following levels: .28 (Sur- veillance), .10, (Informational Guidance), .17 (Entertain- ment), .23 (Diversion/Escape), .26 (Interpersonal Communi- cation), .19 (Para-Social Identity). For the measures of Gratifications-Obtained, their correlations with Technical- Involvement were as follow: .15 (Surveillance, .00 (Infor- mational Guidance), .11 (Entertainment), .15 (Diversion/ Escape), .14 (Interpersonal Communication) and .13 (Para- social Identity). It appeared that one of the correlations (r = .00) was not statistically significant. As a result, this hypothesis was only partially supported. Table 2.1 Correlations between Technical-Involvement and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Technical Involvement Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance ----:28--—--——---—---:15 ------- Informational Guidance .10* .00** Entertainment .17 .11 Diversion/Escape .23 .15 Interpersonal Communication .26 .14 Para-Social Identity .19 .13 112 For VCR owners, the correlations between Technical Involvement and the measures of Gratifications-Sought, reported in Table 2.1.1, were as follow: Surveillance, .29; Informational Guidance, .13; Entertainment, .18; Diversion/ Escape, .26; Interpersonal Communication, .24; Para- Social Identity, .17. Moreover, Technical Involvement was correlated with Gratifications-Obtained measures as follow: Surveillance, .18; Informational Guidance -.03; Entertain- ment, .10; Diversion/Escape, .ll; Interpersonal Communica- tion, .13; Para-Social Identity, .09. Clearly, one of the correlation coefficients was not statistically significant (r = -.03). This hypothesis was hence only partially supported. Table 2.1.1 Correlations between Technical-Involvement and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained for VCR Owners Technical Involvement Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance .29 .18 it Informational .13 ' -.O3 Guidance Entertainment .18 .10 Diversion/ .26 .ll Escape Interpersonal .24 .13 Communication s Para-Social .17 .09 dentity 113 R2b: The level of media-exposure involvement will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. Results from the testing of this hypothesis are presented in Table 2.2. The measure of Media-Exposure Involvement was correlated with the Gratifications-Sought measures at the following levels: .08 (Surveillance), .26 (Informational Guidance), .30 (Entertainment),.20 (Diversion/ Escape), .34 (Interpersonal Communication), and .36 (Para- Social Identity). Further, Media-Exposure Involvement was correlated with the measures of Gratifications-Obtained as follow: .05 (Surveillance), .18 (Informational Guidance), .35 (Entertainment), .26 (Diversion/Escape), .39 (Interper- sonal Communication), and .37 (Para-Social Identity). Among all the correlations obtained, two of them (r = .08, .05) were not statistically significant. This provided partial support for the hypothesis. Table 2.2 Correlations between Media-Exposure Involvement and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Media-Exposure Involvement Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance m""”T333”"mm-T357" Informational Guidance ' .26 .18 Entertainment .30 .35 Diversion/Escape .20 .26 Interpersonal Communication .34 .39 Para-Social Identity .36 .37 114 1221:12222222 12112112 83a: The level of post-exposure involvement will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. Table 3.1 contains the results from the testing of this hypothesis. Post-Exposure Involvement was correlated with the measures of Gratifications-Sought at the following levels: .19 (Surveillance), .30 (Informational Guidance), .29 (Entertainment), .12 (Diversion/Escape), .26 (Interper- sonal Communication), and .36 (Para-Social Identity). For the measures of Gratifications-Obtained, Post-Exposure In- volvement was correlated with each one of them as follow-- .17 (Surveillance), .19 (Informational Guidance), .23 (En- tertainment), .13. (Diversion/Escape), .42 (Interpersonal Communication), and .38 (Para-Social Identity). Table 3.1 Correlations between Post-Exposure Involvement and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Post-Exposure Involvement Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance .19 .17 Informational .30 .19 Guidance Entertainment .29 .23 t * Diversion/ .12 .13 Escape Interpersonal .26 .42 Communication Para-Social .36 .38 Identity 115 Although some of the correlations reported were relatively weak, all of them were statistically signifi- cant. These results supported this hypothesis. H3b: The level of engagement in media-motivated activity will be positively correlated with the level of gra- tifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Results from the testing of this hypothesis are compiled in Table 3.2. The variable Media-Motivated Acti- vity was correlated with the measures of Gratifications- Sought at the following levels: .18 (Surveillance), .29 (Informational Guidance), .26 (Diversion/Escape), .39 (In- terpersonal Communication), and .41 (Para-Social Identity). Media-Motivated Activity was also correlated with the six Gratifications—Obtained measures as follow: .18 (Surveil- Table 3.2 Correlations between Media-Motivated Activity and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Media-Motivated Activity Gratifications Items r (Sought) r (Obtained) Surveillance .18 .18 Informational .29 .22 Guidance Entertainment .29 .35 Diversion/ .26 .29 Escape Interpersonal .39 .35 Communication - Para-Social .41 .48 Identity 116 lance), .22 (Informational Guidance), .35 (Entertain- ment), .29 (Diversion/Escape), .35 (Interpersonal Communica- tion), and .48 (Para-Social Identity). All of the correla- tions were statistically significant, providing the support of this hypothesis. 22212z22222222 12221 H4a: The level of TV-exposure will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. The results, as reported in Table 4.1, indicated that TV-Exposure Level was correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post-Exposure Activity at the levels of .48, .14 and .26, respectively. Although one of the correlations was relatively low, all were statistically significant. These findings provided the support for this hypothesis. Table 4.1 Correlations between TV-Exposure Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity --—----—--—--—-—---_—-_-------—----——-------‘---—----—--—— Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity r r ' r Level .48 .14 .26 84b: The level of program-exposure diversity will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratification-seek- ing activity. According to the results presented in Table 4.2, Program-Exposure Diversity was found to be significantly correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity, During3Exposure Acti- vity and Post-Exposure Activity at the levels of .40, .28 117 and .21, in that order. All three correlations were relatively strong as well as statistically significant, pro- viding support for this hypothesis. Table 4.2 Correlations between Program-Exposure Diversity and Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity r r r Program-Exposure Diversity .40 .28 .21 94c: The level of VCR-use will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. Results from the testing of this hypothesis can be found in Table 4.3. The correlations between VCR-Use Level and the measures of Pre-Exposure Activity, During Exposure, Activity and Post-Exposure Activity were--.38, .13 and .17, respectively. Although two of the correlations obtained were relatively weak, all three correlations were statisti- cally significant. This hypothesis was, therefore, supported by these findings. Table 4.3 Correlations between VCR-Use Level and Gratificaé tion- Seeking Activity Pre—Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity r r r VCR-Use Level .38 .13 .17 p < .001 .-----------—-—---—-_----—-—--------—----—-———-P--—--—----- 118 Media-Use Control 95a: The level of planning flexibility will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. Based on the results presented in Table 5.1, the level of Planning Flexibility was correlated with the measures of Pre-Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post-Ex- posure Activity at the level of .23, .18 and .21, respec- tively, for all respondents. For VCR owners, these correla- tions were .38,‘.27 and .21, in that order. All of the cor- relations obtained were statistically significant. Hypothesis 5a was therefore supported by the findings. Table 5.] Correlations between Planning Flexibility and Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity r r r Planning-Flexi- bility (All) .23 .18 .21 Planning-Flexibi- _ lity (VCR Owners) .38 .27 .21 p < .001 R5b: The level of technical flexibility in manipulating media-use conditions will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. Results from the testing of this hypothesis are in Table 5.2. The level of Technical Flexibility in manipulat- ing media-use conditions was correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post-Exposure Activity at the levels of .02, .35 and .17 for all respon- dents, respectively. For VCR owners, these correlations 119 were .26, .30 and .23, in that order. It was apparent that one of the correlation results obtained (r = .02) for all respondents was not statistically significant. Therefore, it was concluded that this hypothesis was only (1) partially supported by the results when tested for all respondents and (2) fully supported by the results when tested for VCR owners only. Table 5.2 Correlations between Technical Flexibility and Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity r r r Technical Flexibility 8* (All) .02 .35 .17 Technical Flexibility (VCR Owners) .26 .30 .23 p < 001 it N 8 Special analyses were also performed to compare the level of Technical Flexibility in manipulating media-use conditions across respondents with and without a remote-con- trol device for their TV set. As indicated by the results presented in Table 5.3, there was a significant difference in the level of Technical Flexibility between the groups with and without a remote-control device, for all respondents (t = -3.18, p < .002) as well as for VCR owners (t = -2.63, p < .009). In fact, the remote-control device group reported a greater level of Technical Flexibility in manipulating media-use conditions than the non-remote 120 control device group, for all respondents (one-tail p < .004) and VCR owners (one-tail p = .018). An attempt was also made to compare the level of Technical Flexibility in manipulating media-use conditions between the groups with and without a remote-control device for their VCR sets. However, because the number of respondents with a remote- control device was at least ten times greater than the number of respondents without a remote-control device, and the latter was simply too small in magnitudefor survey data, the T-test results were considered as largely unreliable and thus not reported herein. Table 5.3 T-Test Results for the comparison of Techni- cal flexibility between Respondents With and Without a Remote—Control Device for the TV-set No Remote Remote Control Control _ _ Two-Tail X X T Prob. Technical 2.30 2.59 -3.18 .002 Flexibility (n = 159) (n = 119) (All) Technical 2.87 3.13 -2.63 .009 Flexibility (n = 115) (n = 202) (VCR Owners) 96: The strength of the relationship between gratifications -sought and gratifications-obtained will decrease when their correlation with gratification-seeking activity is controlled for. Analyses were performed to present the intervening effect of the three types of Gratifications-Seeking Activity (i.e., Pre—Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post-Exposure Activity) in the relations between each pair of the measures for all respondents as well as VCR owners. of all 121 Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained , zero-order correlations between the First six paired measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtain- ed were .66 (E sonal Communication) and .70 (Para-Social Identity). results are presented in Table 6. --.54 (Surveillance), ntertainment), .63 (Diversion/Escape), (Informational Guidance), .65 (Interper- These Table 6 Zero—Order Correlations between the Measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Gratifi- cations Obtained Surveil- lance Informa- tional Guidance Enter- tainment Diversio Escape Inter- personal Comm. Para- Social Identity Informa- Inter- Para- Surveil- tional Enter- Diversion personal Social lance Guidance tainment /Escape Comm. Identity .54 .51 .66 n/ .63 .65 .70 122 Secondly, zero-order correlations between three types of Gratification-Seeking Activity and the six measures of Gratifications-Sought and -Obtained were also computed. These correlations are compiled in Table 6.1. The correlations between Pre-Exposure Activity and six pairs of Gratification measures were: 1) Gratifications-Sought--.07 (Surveillance),.lB (Informational Guidance), .41 (Entertain- ment), .35 (Diversion/Escape), .30 (Interpersonal Communi- cation) and .29 (Para-Social Identity); 2) Gratifications- Obtained--.Ol (Surveillance), .14 (Informational Guidance), .48 (Entertainment),.4l (Diversion/Escape), .26 (Interper- sonal Communication) and .27 (Para-Social Identity). Corre- lations between During-Exposure Activity and six pairs of Gratification measures were: 1) Gratifications-Sought--.26 (Surveillance), .23 (Informational Guidance),.31 (Entertain- ment), .29 (Diversion/Escape), .40 (Interpersonal Communica- tion) and .35 (Para-Social Identity); 2) Gratifications-Ob— tained--.15 (Surveillance), .10 (Informational Guidance), .29 (Entertainment), .27 (Diversion/Escape), .34 (Interper- sonal Communication) and .32 (Para-Social Identity). The correlations between Post-Exposure Activity and six pairs of Gratification measures were: 1) Gratifications—Sought-- .22 (Surveillance), .36 (Informational Guidance), .34 (Entertainment), .22 (Diversion/Escape), .38 (Interpersonal Communication) and .46 (Para-Social Identity); 2) Gratifi- cations:Obtained--.22 (Surveillance), .25 (Informational Guidance), .34 (Entertainment), .25 (Diversion/Escape), .47 (Interpersohal Communication) and .51 (Para-Social Identity). 123 Table 6.1 Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Gratification-Seeking-Activity and Gratifica- tions-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity Gratifica- tions Items ---------------------------------------------------- Sought Obtained Sought Obtained Sought Obtained Surveil— it it t lance .07 .01 .26 .15 .22 .22 Informa- * * tional .18 .14 .23 .10 .36 .25 Guidance Entertain- .41 .48 .31 .29 .34 .34 ment Diversion/ .35 .41 .29 .27 .22 .25 Escape Interper- .30 .26 .40 .34 .38 .47 sonal Comm. Para- .29 .27 .35 .32 .46 .51 Social Identity p = 000 tp ( 02 **N S Partial correlations were independently calculated for the six pairs of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained measures controlling for the in- fluence of Pre—Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity. and Post-Exposure Activity. As reported in Table 6.3, the partial correlation results were as follow -- .48 (Surveillance), .46 (Informational Guidance), .55 (Enter- tainment), .55 (Diversion/Escape), .56 (Interpersonal Com- munication) and .60 (Para~Socia1 Identity). 124 Table 6.2 Partial Correlations between the Measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Controlling for Gratifications-Seeking Activity Informa- Inter- Para- Surveil- tional Enter- Diversion personal Social lance Guidance tainment /Escape Comm. Identity Gratifi- cations ----------------------------------------------------- Obtained Surveil- .48 lance (.54) Informa- .46 tional (.51) Guidance Enter- .55 tainment (.66) Diversion/ .55 Escape (.63) Inter- 56 personal (.65) Comm. Para- .60 Social (.70) Identity p = .001 * Figures in parentheses represent zero-order correlations. As shown in Table 6.2, when the partial correlation between each pair of Gratification measures was compared to its respective zero-order correlation, various degrees of multicollinearity were found. The extent of multicolli- nearity for each pair of Gratification measures was as fol- lows: .06 (Surveillance), .05 (Informational Guidance), .11 (Entertainment), .08 (Diversion/Escape), .09 (Interpersonal Communication) and .10 (Para-Social Identity). 125 For VCR owners, partial correlations for each pair of Gratification measures, controlling for three types of Gratification-Seeking Activity, were also computed. As indicated in Table 6.3, zero-order correlations between the six paired measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained were first calculated; they were, .51 (Surveillance), .50 (Informational Guidance), .68 (En- tertainment), .66 (Diversion/Escape), .63 (Interpersonal Commmunication) and .70 (Para-Social Identity). Table 6.3 Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtain- ed for VCR Owners Informa- Inter- Para- Surveil- tional Enter- Diversion personal Social lance Guidance tainment /Escape Comm. Identity Gratifi- cations ---------------------------------------------------- Obtained Surveil- lance .51 Informa- tional .50 GuidanCe Enter- tainment .68 Diversion/ Escape .66 Inter- personal .63 Comm. Para-So- cial Identity .70 126 Furthermore, zero-order correlations between the three types of Gratification-Seeking Activity and the six measures of Gratifications-Sought for VCR owners, are pre— sented in Table 6.4. The correlations between Pre-Exposure Activity and six pairs of Gratification measures were: 1) Gratifications-Sought--.12 (Surveillance),.ll (Informational Guidance), .43 (Entertainment), .35 (Diversion/Escape), .27 (Interpersonal Communication) and .23 (Para-Social Identity); 2) Gratifications-Obtained--.07 (Surveillance), .ll (Informational Guidance), .51 (Entertainment), .45 (Diversion/Escape), .27 (Interpersonal Communication) and .23 (Para-Social Identity). Correlations between During- Exposure Activity and six pairs of Gratification measures were: 1) Gratifications-Sought-- .25 (Surveillance), .23 (Informational Guidance), .32 (Entertainment), .32 (Diversion/Escape), .37 (Interpersonal Communication) and .31 (Para-Social Identity); 2) Gratifications-Obtained--.16 (Surveillance), .09 (Informational Guidance), .26 (Entertainment), .23 (Diversion/Escape), .33 (Interpersonal Communication) and .26 (Para-Social Identity). The correla- tions between Post-Exposure Activity and six pairs of Gra- tification measures were: 1) Gratifications-Sought--.22 (Surveillance), .33 (Informational Guidance),.35 (Entertain- ment), .23 (Diversion/Escape), .40 (Interpersonal Communication) and .46 (Para-Social Identity); 2) Gratifica- tions-Obtained--.23 (Surveillance), .22 (Informational Gui- dance), .32 (Entertainment), .26 (Diversion/Escape), .47 (Interpersonal Communication) and .50 (Para-Social Identity). 127 Table 6.4 Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Gratification-Seeking-Activity and Gratifications- Sought and Gratifications-Obtained for VCR Owners Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity Gratifica- tions Items ---------------------------------------------------- Sought Obtained Sought Obtained Sought Obtained Surveil- * it x lance .12 .07 .25 .16 .22 .23 Informa- * t * tional .ll .11 .23 .09 .33 .22 Guidance Entertain- .43 .51 .32 .26 .35 .32 ment Diversion/ .35 .45 .32 .23 .23 .26 Escape Interper- .27 .27 .37 .33 .40 .47 sonal Comm. Para- .23 .23 .31 .26' .46 .51 Social Identity p = 000 *p < .05 ttN S Partial correlations, independently calculated for the six pairs of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained measures, controlling for the influence of Pre- Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post-Expo- sure Activity, are reported in Table 6.5. These partial correlations were as follow: .48 (Surveillance), .47 (In— formational Guidance), .56 (Entertainment), .60 (Diversion/ Escape), .51 (Interpersonal Communication) and .59 (Para- Social Identity). 128 Table 6.5 Partial Correlations between the Measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Ob- tained Controlling for Gratifications-Seeking Activity for VCR Owners Informa- Inter- Para- Surveil- tional Enter- Diversion personal Social lance Guidance tainment /Escape Comm. Identity Gratifi- cations ---------------------------------------------------- Obtained Surveil— .48 lance (.51) Informa- .47 tional (.50) Guidance Enter- .56 tainment (.68) Diversion/ .60 Escape (.66) Inter- 51 personal (.63) Comm. Para- ' .59 Social (.70) Identity p = .001 * Figures in parentheses represent zero-order correlations In comparing the partial correlation for each paired Gratification measures to its respective zero-order corre- lation, as indicated in Table 6.5, different degrees of multicollinearity were observed. The extent of multicolli- nearity for each paired Gratification measure was as fol- lows--.03 (Surveillance), .03 (Informational Guidance), .12 129 (Entertainment), .06 (Diversion/Escape), .12 (Interpersonal Communication) and .11 (Para-Social Identity). By looking at the extent of multicollinearity found between each of the paired Gratification measures (for both all respondents and VCR owners), it seems clear that the correlations between the paired measures of Entertainment, Interpersonal Communication and Para-Social Identity were more heavily affected by the intervening effect of Pre- Exposure Activity, During Exposure Activity and Post- Exposure Activity. As a contrast, the correlations between the paired measures of Surveillance and Informational Guidance were least affected by the intervening effect of these three types of Gratification-Seeking Activity. CHAPTER'V SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION In this chapter, the results reported in the previous chapter will be individually discussed. Each hypothesis will be addressed separately to provide a sense of continuity in the discussion. Conclusions drawn from empirical tests of the proposed model will be examined. 2222122212 2122222122 1. Pre-Exposure Activity Hla: The level of media-use orientation will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Within Hla, Media-Use Orientation-- an indicator of the importance of TV viewing to a teen viewer--was most strongly correlated with 'the two Entertainment and Diversion/Escape measures, moderately correlated with the two measures of Interpersonal Communication and Para-Social Identity, and weakly correlated with the two Surveillance and Informational-Guidance measures (Table 1.1). This suggests that teen viewers who considered TV viewing as being more important to their everyday life also, first and foremost, expected and actually received a greater level of entertainment and diversion/escape. According to Roe, 130 131 teenagers indeed primarily watch TV for entertainment and passing time (or relieving boredom).159 Media functions related to gratifying less temporal needs such as interper- sonal communication or para-social identity purposes appeared to be moderately important to teen viewer’s agenda. Moreover, teenagers seemed to be least concerned with utilizing media content for the purposes of surveillance or gaining advice. Hlb: The level of media-use planning will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Media-Use Planning, reflecting how frequently a teen viewer made viewing plans, was not correlated with the gratification measures in a clear—cut fashion. It appears that teen viewers who more frequently made viewing plans sought Interpersonal Communication, Entertainment and Para- Social Identity (in that order) to a modest degree more than Informational Guidance, Surveillance and Diversion/ Escape. In terms of receiving gratifications, teen viewers who planned more often were also more satisfied in the areas of Entertainment, receiving Interpersonal Communication topics, Para-Social Identity and Diversion/ Escape. Surveillance and Information Guidance were the least gratified needs among those studied (Table 1.2). These results imply that teenagers who were more interested in making deliberate viewing plans were also more interested in satisfying higher level needs--i.e. 132 those beyond the temporal realm of entertainment and diversion/escape. These youngsters would expect to use media content more intensively for ”interaction" purposes such as interpersonal communication and para-social identity, reflecting more active ”interaction-oriented gratification-seeking" among more ”active" viewers. This particular implication paralleled the findings of Levy and Windhal, who found that media functions such as entertain- ment, interpersonal communication, and para-social identity were strongly to moderately related to pre-exposure activity (measured by viewing importance and planning, in a 160 similar manner to this study). ch: The level of time—shifting planning will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. Time—Shifting Planning--an indicator of the frequency a teen viewer records TV programs for later viewing purposes--was primarily related to Entertainment; Diversion/Escape was the second most sought after gratifi- cation. The remaining gratification measures had either very weak or close to zero correlations with Time-Shifting Planning. With regard to Gratifications-obtained, Enter- tainment and Diversion/Escape again emerged as the most gratified needs among teenagers who more frequently prac- ticed time-shifting planning (Table 1.3). This suggests that teenagers who were more active in making recording plans also tended to look for more entertainment and diversion/escape from the use of TV/VCRs. Furthermore, 133 VCR-use—-like TV viewing in general--was predominantly treated as a practice for acquiring more entertainment and diversion/escape from the TV medium. These findings were similar to Levy’s interpretation-~though dissimilar to Roe’s--regarding the meaning of VCR use; Levy considered VCR use to be a "comparatively privatistic behavior to en- hance one’s viewing enjoyment":6:hereas, Roe viewed VCR use as a means to facilitate peer group interaction (among Swe- 162 dish youths). II. During-Exposure Activity 82a: The level of-technical-involvement will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. The results from the testing of this hypothesis revealed a different pattern of how gratification-seeking activities may be related to gratification measures. There were two measures for Technical-Involvement. The measure for all respondents reflected the frequencies with which a teen viewer physically manipulates his or her viewing conditions. The measure for VCR users contained two additional activities--avoiding commercials during record- ing and replaying. Overall, Technical-Involvement measures were more strongly correlated with the measures of Surveil- lance, Diversion/Escape and Interpersonal Communication than the other gratification measures (Table 2.1 and 2.1.1). These findings reflected that teen viewers who were more involved 'in the activities of commercial 134 avoidance, channel switching and multichannel viewing were generally those who expected and received more gratifica- tions in the areas of surveillance, diversion/escape and interpersonal communication. A pattern that emerged from these findings indicates that teenagers who were more physically active in pursuing media gratifications during viewing were probably those who knew how to derive maximum utility from media content. Not only would they utilize media content to free themselves from the tribulations of everyday life, these youngsters would also use media content to learn about the world around them as well as to entertain social situations. These teens probably well exemplified an active audience, from a behavioral perspective. H2b: The level of media-exposure involvement will be positively correlated with the level of grati- fications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Results from the testing of this hypothesis disclosed relatively insightful information about the relations between Media-Exposure Involvement, a measure of the depth of a teen viewer’s cognitive, affective and behavioral involvement/interaction with media content--and the gratification measures. Media-Exposure Involvement was moderately correlated with Para-Social Identity, Informational Guidance, Entertainment, Interpersonal Communication and Diversion/Escape, and weakly correlated with Surveillance (Table 2.2). Based on these correlations, 135 it was clear that teen viewers who more frequently talked about, expressed their feelings about, paid more attention to, or became involved with media content during viewing had the inclination to utilize media content for "interac- tion” purposes in addition to obtaining information and emotional relief. Such ”interaction” purposes were naturally reflected by expected gratifications such as para-social identity and interpersonal communication. These findings seem to concur with the findings of Levy and Windhal, -in a broad sense.163 Those authors, how- ever, defined audience involvement (or during-exposure activity) with media content in a different fashion. They considered talking about the media content under consumption to be an inattentive as opposed to ian ”involving” type of behavior. Moreover, a range of "inattentive activities," such as reading a book and preparing food, were also combined in the measure of audience involvement in a negative sense. It appears that Levy and and Windhal’s conceptualiza- tion of audience involvement focused more on audience ”attentiveness" in a rather general fashion, whereas the model proposed in this study. conceptualized audience involvement in terms of an audience’s cognitive, affective, and behavioral ”interactions” with the media content. Specifically, this study treated activities such as talking about the media content under consumption as a form of ”interaction” rather than "inattentiveness." -After all, if an audience member were "uninvolved" with the media content 136 under consumption, he or she would not take the effort to discuss it with other audience members. Though this point is open to debate, it seems that the Levy-Windhal concep- tualization of audience involvement did not adopt this line of easoning. III. Post-Exposure Activity H3a: The level of post-exposure involvement will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. The Post-Exposure Involvement variable indicates the extent to which a teen viewer was cognitively, affectively and behaviorally "involved" with the media content consumed during the post-exposure period. The results showed that Post-Exposure_ Involvement was moderately correlated with Para-Social Identity, Informational Guidance, Entertainment. and Interpersonal Communication and weakly correlated with Surveillance and Diversion/Escape (Table 3.1). These findings indicate that teen viewers who more frequently discussed, thought about, remembered and remained "moved" (for a long period of time) by the media content were those who expected to receive and actually received a greater level of gratifications in the areas of information, enter- tainment and interpersonal and para-social interaction. These results also revealed the types of "involving” activities in which the teen viewers were engaged closely reflected the types of gratifications they expected to receive. For example, discussing media content with 137 someone clearly was an ”interpersonal communication” activity, whereas remembering media content for a long time was probably for the purpose of retaining the information (or advice) learned; further, escape- or diversion- seeking reflected a temporal dimension of media-audience interaction for the moments of viewing. The results reported herein resembled those of Levy and Windahl to a great extent.164 Since the. Levy-Windhal measures for post-exposure activity were relatively similar to the measures for the post-exposure involvement variable under discussion, it is reasonable to believe that the Levy-Windahl assumption on this particular segment of the overall gratification-seeking processes has been verified herein. H3b: The level of engagement in media-motivated activity will be positively correlated with the level of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. Media-Motivated Activity was conceptualized as the reflection of certain immediate responses to the media content to which one was exposed. These responses could include activities such as doing something fun or meaningful, or doing something that prompts one to improve oneself or go buy something, because that ”something" was portrayed on TV as being able to fulfill all of these demands. The results of the hypothesis testing indicated that Media-Motivated activity was strongly correlated with Para-Social Identity, moderately correlated with 138 Interpersonal Communication, Entertainment, Diversion/Escape and Informational Guidance, and weakly correlated with Surveillance (Table 3.2). Based on these results, participating in some kind of activity that was performed by certain personalities on TV and expecting to receive similar results to those shown on TV, clearly reflects the processes of para-social identity. In doing so, the teen viewer might also expect to have something interesting to talk to others about, enjoy a certain degree of entertainment and diversion/escape, and retain the advice or information learned. IV. MediaeExposure Level H4a: The level of TV-exposure will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. TV-exposure was strongly correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity, weakly correlated with During-Exposure Activity and moderately correlated with Post-Exposure Activity (Table 4.1). These results seemingly reflected a relatively logical flow of events. It was self-evident that teen viewers who considered TV viewing as more important to their daily lives and were more active in making viewing plans tended to be heavier viewers; these teenagers apparently had a greater level of interest in TV viewing. Moreover, if a teen viewer’s involvement with the media content consumed could sustain them through the post- exposure period at a reasonable level and if this teen 139 viewer’s participation level in media-motivated activities was also greater, then this teenager would also be expected to be a heavier viewer. However, whether the teen viewer was highly active or less active in his or her mental involvement with media content and/or physical involvement with the media hardware is moot; in either case, it was a less powerful indicator of whether the teenager would be a heavier viewer. This is probably because a teen viewer with a greater interest in watching more television would also be more ”affected” by the TV content consumed afterward, disregarding whether he or she was a lot more mentally involved with the TV content or physically engaged in manipulating the viewing conditions to maximize his or her viewing enjoyment. These results were dissimilar to those reported by Levy and Windahl.165 Their findings indicated that TV- Exposure Level was moderately correlated with during- exposure activity and weakly correlated with pre-exposure activity and post-exposure activity, in a hierarchical order. Although, Levy and Windahl did not provide— any explanation for the meaning of these results, their ”audience activity model” did assume pre-exposure activity as the determining factor for the level of TV exposure. H4b: The level of program-exposure diversity will be posi- tively correlated with the level of gratification- seeking activity. The level of Program-Exposure Diversity, an indicator of the diversity of programs to which a teen viewer is 140 exposed, was relatively highly correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity and moderately correlated with During-Exposure Activity and Post-Exposure Activity, in a descending order (Table 4.2). These results again revealed that, if a teen viewer perceived TV viewing as an important activity and more frequently made viewing plans, he or she could be expected to have seen a greater variety of TV programs. However, unlike the test-results of H4a, in which TV- Exposure Level was more strongly correlated with Post- Exposure Activity than with During-Exposure Activity, Program-Exposure Diversity was, instead, more highly cor- related with During-Exposure Activity than with Post- Exposure Activity. This was probably due to the fact that a teen viewer with a greater diversity of program exposure did not necessarily behave in the same way as a teen viewer with a greater quantity of TV exposure. It was indicated that the teen viewer who had been exposed to more diversified programs tended to be more involved with the media content under consumption as well as more active in physically manipulating his or her viewing conditions. Nevertheless, this teen viewer was less concerned with the media content consumed as well as whether to participate in any media-motivated activities afterward. It appeared that a teen viewer with a greater interest in the diversity rather than the quantity of TV viewing tended to be someone who would be more mentally and physically involved with the maximization of his or her 140 exposed, was relatively highly correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity and moderately correlated with During-Exposure Activity and Post-Exposure Activity, in a descending order (Table 4.2). These results again revealed that, if a teen viewer perceived TV viewing as an important activity and more frequently made viewing plans, he or she could be expected to have seen a greater variety of TV programs. However, unlike the test-results of H4a, in which TV- Exposure Level was more strongly correlated with Post- Exposure Activity than with During-Exposure Activity, Program-Exposure Diversity was, instead, more highly cor- related with During-Exposure Activity than with Post- Exposure Activity. This was probably due to the fact that a teen viewer with a greater diversity of program exposure did not necessarily behave in the same way as a teen viewer with a greater quantity of TV exposure. It was indicated that the teen viewer who had been exposed to more diversified programs tended to be more involved with the media content under consumption as well as more active in physically manipulating his or her viewing conditions. Nevertheless, this teen viewer was less concerned with the media content consumed as well as whether to participate in any media-motivated activities afterward. It appeared that a teen viewer with a greater interest in the diversity rather than the quantity of TV viewing tended to be someone who would be more mentally and physically involved with the maximization of his or her 141 viewing enjoyment during exposure--but less concerned with the content consumed afterwards. One plausible explanation for this phenomenon could be that this teen viewer was a more critical viewer, who was better at evaluating the quality of media content and was less easily influenced by the content consumed. An alternative explanation could be that this teen viewer was a more discerning viewer who could better distinguish reality from media fantasy, proving less susceptible to the content consumed. H4c: The level of VCR-use will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. VCR-Use Level was found to be moderately correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity and weakly correlated with Post- Exposure Activity and During-Exposure Activity, in a descending order (Table 4.3). These results paralleled those of H4a, which dealt with the relations between TV- Viewing Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity, though all the correlations obtained for this hypothesis were slightly weaker than those of H4a. As revealed by the results, teen viewers who more frequently utilized their VCRs were those who considered TV viewing as more important to their daily lives and more actively made viewing as well as time-shifting plans. These teenagers were, however, somewhat less actively engaged in activities that were related to mental involvement with the media content consumed or physical manipulation of the viewing conditions during the use of a 142 VCR. To an even lesser extent, these teenagers were concerned with keeping a high level of mental involvement with the media consumed and behavioral participation in media-motivated activities after initiating VCR use. According to Levy’s study of VCR-use and audience activity, VCR users were found to be generally more actively involved with pre-exposure activity than post- exposure activity and during-exposure activity, in that order.166Although Levy’s data did not reflect the relations between VCR-use level and audience-activity level, and his measures for audience-activity level also differed from those of this study, both studies reveal that pre-exposure activity appears to be more relevant to VCR users in terms of their participation in "audience activity.” V. Media-Use Control H5a: The level of planning flexibility will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. There were two measures for Planning Flexibility, an indicator of how much control a teen viewer had over making media-use decisions. For all respondents, the measure was composed of Scheduling Flexibility (for TV viewing) and- Content-Selection Flexibility. For VCR owners, the measure comprised Scheduling Flexibility (for TV viewing and VCR use) and Content-Selection Flexibility. The measure of Planning Flexibility for all respondents was moderately correlated with Pre-Exposure Activity and Post-Exposure 143 Activity and weakly correlated with During-Exposure Activity (in a hierarchical order). Among VCR owners, Planning Flexibility was moderately correlated with Pre— Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post- Exposure Activity (in a descending order); these correla- tions were also somewhat greater than those obtained for all respondents (Table 5.1). The fact that Pre-Exposure Activity, the only stage of gratificationeseeking activity directly corresponding to media-use planning, was most highly correlated with Planning Flexibility indicated a conceptual consistency. Moreover, it was also suggested that teen viewers who were more actively engaged in post-exposure activity than during-exposure activity were those who actually had more control in making viewing plans. Comparing these results to those of H4a, which revealed that teen viewers who were more active during post-exposure than for during-exposure periods were heavier viewers, a certain degree of parallel- ism can be found. This relationship is based on the assumption that a heavier viewer should also have a greater level of control over how much TV he or she wishes to watch. In contrast, among VCR owners, if a teenager was more actively engaged in during-exposure activity than post- exposure activity, he or she was said to have a greater level of control in making both viewing and VCR-use 'plans. The discrepancy between all respondents and VCR owners in terms of whether during-exposure or post-exposure activity 144 should be more related to flexibility in making media-use plans could be interpreted as the result of making plans with or without access to a VCR. VCR owners apparently had an easier time in becoming more actively engaged in during-exposure activity such as commercial avoidance as well as more actively involved with media content mentally because of reduced commercial interruptions or the total lack of commercial interruptions (i.e., when replaying a pre-recorded video). Therefore, the relations between planning flexibility and the level of during-exposure activity among VCR owners outscored those between planning flexibility and the level of post-exposure activity. In sum, a teen viewer who more frequently made TV- viewing or VCR-use plans had a greater level of control in making decisions related to TV viewing and VCR use. Moreover, VCR owners appeared to have a greater level of control over decision-making in relation to overall media- use planning than the comprehensive group of respondents. These findings again verified the assumption that an audience member with access to a more diversified media environment such as a VCR would have better control over his or her viewing activities because of the increased opportunities provided by additional technical functions. H5b: The level of technical flexibility in manipulating media-use conditions will be positively correlated with the level of gratification-seeking activity. Technical Flexibility, reflecting the level of control a teen viewer had in manipulating viewing 145 conditions, had two measures. The difference between these measures was that, for all respondents, only TV-viewing conditions were assessed, whereas, for VCR owners, VCR-use conditions were added to TV-viewing conditions to form the measure. Overall, the results showed that Technical Flexi- bility was moderately correlated with During-Exposure Activity, weakly correlated with Post-Exposure Activity and uncorrelated with Pre-Exposure Activity, for all respondents. In contrast, Technical Flexibility was found to be moderately correlated with During-Exposure Activity, Pre—Exposure Activity and Post-Exposure Activity, in a descending order, among VCR owners (Table 5.2). According to these results, a teen viewer who had more control in making decisions in terms of whether to zap commercials, switch channels, and watch multiple programs was more active in actually manipulating his or her viewing conditions through those activities during exposure. This was also true among VCR owners. Furthermore, a teen viewer who was more in control of the viewing conditions also appeared to be more concerned with the media-content consumed as well as more involved in media-motivated activities, to a nominal extent.. This was less true of VCR owners. Although the results for all respondents indicated that the relations between a teen viewer’s control over viewing conditions and post-exposure as well as pre- exposure activity were less than impressive, such relations 146 were, nevertheless worth noting among VCR owners. A VCR user with a greater level of control in manipulating viewing and VCR-use conditions was said to be more actively engaged in pre-exposure activity and somewhat less actively involved in post-exposure activity. A reasonable explana- tion to these phenomena could be, for example, that a VCR owner who was more active in exercising control over viewing and VCR-use conditions was probably someone who would make more time-shifting plans and remain more concerned with the media-content after exposure. One might then infer that, for most VCR owners, the nature of VCR use was most relevant to flexibly controlling' one’s viewing schedule, viewing conditions, and media content viewed. These functions directly correspond to making time-shift- ing plans (pre-exposure activity), to manipulating viewing conditions (during-exposure activity), and to becoming more involved with the media content consumed (post-exposure activity). The results obtained from the t—tests comparing Media-Use Conditions between teen viewers with and without a remote-control device (for the TV set) were both signifi- cant for all respondents and VCR users (Table 5.3). Teen viewers with a remote control device had much more control in the viewing conditions than those who did not have a remote control device. The remote control device, like the VCR, can be seen as an additional technical option that enables the audience member to maximize control over the overall viewing conditions. 147 VI. Gratification-Seeking Activity vs Gratifications- Sought and Gratifications-Obtained H6: The strength of the relationship between gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained will decrease if their correlation with gratification- seeking activity is controlled for. This hypothesis was developed to test a theoretical proposition that gratification-seeking activity (i.e., Pre-Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post- Exposure Activity) was an intervening factor in the relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications- obtained. The results supported this hypothesis by presenting a reduction in the original levels of zero-order correlations between the six pairs of gratification mea- sure for all respondents (Table 6 and 6.2) as well as VCR owners (Table 6.3 and 6.5), after the three factors of Gratification-Seeking Activity were controlled for. In order to interpret the strength of the partial correlation results, the zero-order correlations (or the original correlations) between all gratification-measure pairs as well as correlations between the three Gratification-Seeking Activity' measures and all gratification measures will be revisited to demonstrate the strength of the partial correlations obtained. First of all, correlations between the six paired measures of Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained appeared to be relatively strong--with .51 the lowest level and .70 the highest level--for all respondents (Table 6) as well as 148 VCR owners (Table 6.3). On the other hand, all gratifica- tion measures were significantly correlated with Pre-Expo- sure Activity, During-Exposure Activity and Post-EXposure Activity, with the exception of either one (for VCR owners, Table 6.4) or both (for all respondents, Table 6.4) of the Surveillance measures. In particular, with the exception of either one or both of the Surveillance and Informational Guidance measures having relatively weak but significant correlations with either Pre-Exposure Activity or During- exposure Activity measures, all other gratification measures had moderate to strong correlations (ranging from .22 to .51) with the three Gratification-Seeking Activity measures. . These findings reveal that strength of the relations between each paired gratification measure and Gratification- Seeking Activity was not equivalent to that of the rela-. tions between the six paired gratification measures. Nevertheless, the capability of the three Gratification- Seeking Activity measures to weaken the relations between each of the six pairs of gratification measures has been implicated. As predicted, the partial correlation results demonstrated a decrease in the strength of the relations- between the six paired gratifications-sought and gratifica- tions-obtained measures in a descending order as follows-- Entertainment (r =.ll), Para-Social Identity (r =.10), Interpersonal Communication (r =.09), Diversion/Escape (r =.08), Surveillance (r =.06) and Informational Guidance (r 149 =.05)--for all respondents (Table 6.2). Among VCR owners, that reduction in the strength of the relations between the six paired gratifications-sought and gratifications - obtained measures can be described in a descending order as follow--Entertainment and Interpersonal Communication' (r .12), Para-Social Identity (r =.ll), Diversion/Escape (r .06), Surveillance and Informational Guidance (r =.O3) (Table 6.5). Granted, 'the variance explained by the' intervening variable was relatively small. These partial correlation results, nevertheless, represented a significant theoreti- cal endorsement for the model proposed in this study. Even though the concept of audience activity was first examined by Levy and Windahllsgin relation to media uses and grati- fications, and the non-isomorphic relations between grati- fications-sought and -obtained was first reported by Palmgreen and Rayburn}7o neither line of research has treated "gratification-seeking activity" as an intervening variable in the process of uses and gratifications. It is important, however, to note that, in this exploratory study-~within which various measures created were still far from being completely polished--these results should prove highly instructive for any future verification projects. In sum, the basic picture presented by the test results of this hypothesis suggest that the relationship between a teen viewer’s expected gratifications and' those actually received is a strong one. Nevertheless, such a strong linkage seems partially attributable to the overall 150 level of gratification-seeking activity in which the teen viewer was engaged. If the intervening effect of the teen viewer’s involvement with gratication-seeking activity was statistically controlled, then the overall relations between the gratifications expected and those actually received would decrease to a relatively noticeable extent. Therefore, the degree to which the teen viewer was active (in terms of his or her participation in the overall gratification—seeking activity) would partially determine the levels of media gratification he or she would receive. 2122222122 21 22221:!221122 Findings from each hypothesis discussed above will be summarized to help verify the causal relations among all model components within the "gratification-seeking phase.” In order to present and interpret the causal links speci- fied in the model without comprehending an excessive amount of relevant information, mean correlations between model components will be utilized to reflect the strength of relations between them. The derivation of these mean cor- relations within each causally connected component pair will be addressed below. I. Gratifications-Sought and Gratification-Seeking Activity In Table 7, the mean correlations between Gratifica- tions-Sought and the three Gratification-Seeking Activity measures were obtained through averaging the sum of all correlations between the six Gratifications-Sought and 151 three Gratification-Seeking Activity measures (i.e., Pre- Exposure Activity, During-exposure Activity and Post- Exposure Activity) reported in Table 6.1 (for all respondents) and Table 6.4 (for VCR owners). For instance, Gratifications-Sought and Pre-Exposure Activity were correlated at the level of .27. That correlation was computed through averaging the sum of all correlations involving the relations of Pre-Exposure Activity with Surveillance, Informational Guidance, Entertainment, Diversion/Escape, Interpersonal Communication and Para- Social Identity (i.e., averaging the sum of all correla- tion coefficients of the first column in Table 6.1). As shown in Table 7, the mean correlations between Gratifications-Sought and the three Gratification-Seeking measures clearly demonstrate a steady increase in (the average level of activity through the pre-exposure, during- exposure, and post-exposure phases among all respondents (r’s =.27, .31, .33 in that order) as well as among VCR owners (r’s =.26, .30, .33). This progression implies that the greater the expectation for gratification, the 'more active the teen viewers will become engaged in the process of gratification-seeking activities. II. Gratification-Seeking Activity and Gratifications— Obtained The mean correlations between Gratifications-Obtained and the three Gratification-Seeking measures reported in Table 7 were also gathered through averaging the sum of all correlations between 'the three Gratification-Seeking 152 Table 7 Mean Correlations between Gratification Seeking Activity and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Gratifications-- Gratifications- Gratification- Sought Obtained Seeking activity --------------------------------------- ---------------- (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) Pre-Exposure .27 .26 .26 .27 Activity During-Exposure .31 .30 .25 .22 Activity Post-Exposure .33 .33 .34 .33 Activity Column .30 .30 .28 .28 Mean P < .05 Activity and six Gratifications-Obtained measures reported in Table 6.1 (for all respondents) and Table 6.4 (for VCR owners). Based on the results in Table 7, it appears that the average level of correlations between Gratifications- Obtained and the three Gratification-Seeking Activity measures begins at the level of .26 within the Pre- Exposure Activity phase (.26 for VCR owner), decreases to the level of .25 within the During-Exposure Activity phase (.22 for VCR owners), and rises to the level of .34 within the Post-Exposure Activity phase (.33 for VCR owners). As indicated by the findings, teen viewers who were more active during the post-exposure period tended. to receive more gratifications than those who were more active within the pre-exposure and during-exposure periods. Furthermore, these results reflect the fact that teen 153 viewers who were most affected by the media content consumed tended to be most gratified by their media- exposure experiences, whereas teen viewers who were more gratified by media exposures were those who more actively engaged themselves in pre-exposure activities (i.e., those who considered TV-viewing as more important and make more viewing/time-shifting plans). Moreover, it is also clear that processes of actual consumption of media content were least indicative of whether teen viewers would receive the expected levels of gratifications. III. Gratification-Seeking Activity and Media-Exposure Level The mean correlations between Media-Exposure Level and the three Gratification-Seeking Activity measures (i.e., Pre-Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activity, and Post-Exposure Activity) reached the level of: l) .42, .21, and .24 for all respondents, 2) .36, .14, and .16 for VCR owners (in that order). These mean correlations for all respondents were obtained through averaging the sum of correlations between the two Media-Exposure Level and three Gratification-Seeking Activity measures reported in Table 7.1 (based on the results from Table 4.1 and 4.2). By the same token, the mean correlations for VCR owners were derived from averaging the sum of the three Media-Exposure Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity measures presented in Table 7.1 (based on results from Table 4.3'and 4.4). 154 Table. 7.1 Correlations between Media-Exposure Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Media- Activity Activity Activity Exposure ---------------------------------------------- Level (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) TV-Exposure Level .48 .43 .14 .10 .26 .16 Program- Exposure .40 .27 .28 .19 .21 .15 Diversity VCR-Use .38 .13 .17 Level Mean Correlation .42 .36 .21 .14 .24 .16 p < .05 The mean correlations shown in Table 7.1 clearly support the notion that a more active audience member would also be a heavier consumer of media. In particular, the‘ finding suggests that heavier viewers tend to be more committed to viewing, more inclined to make viewing plans, more involved with the media content, and more prone to interact with the medium itself. However, except for the pre-exposure phase, the relations between exposure level and audience activity are relatively moderate. To better explain the -relations between media- exposure level and gratification-seeking activity, other factors that may affect media exposure level, such as Socio-Cultural Composition, should probably be examined. Such an examination is important because the nature of an 155 active audience primarily depends on the interaction among factors of social and cultural background, media-system structure, and individual demographic characteristics of the audience.171 Moreover, in the case of teen viewers, the factor of parental mediation may also be a potential source of accounting for a certain amount of the unexplained variance, because the level of parental mediation could directly affect the level of a teen viewer’s media-exposure level.172An additional observation worth noting is that VCR users did not appear to be a more active audience than the general audience. This fact further suggests that, although access to an additional video technology enables the audience to become increasingly more active in the entire processes of gratification-seeking activity, environmental constraints may, nevertheless, restrict such access. As a result, various activities associated with the utilization of the technology may be confined. IV. Gratification-Seeking Activity and Media-Use Control Table 7.2 reports the mean correlations between Media- Use Level and the three Gratification-Seeking Activity mea- sures (i.e., Pre-Exposure Activity, During-Exposure Activ- ity and Post-Exposure Activity) which reached the level of: 1) .13, .27 and .19 for all respondents, 2) .32, .29 and .22 for VCR owners. These mean correlations were attained through averaging the sum of correlations between the two Media-Use Level and three Gratification-Seeking Activity measures, based on the results from Table 5.1 and 5.2. 156 Table. 7.2 Correlations between Media—Use Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Media-Use Activity Activity Activity Control ---------------------------------------------- ----------- (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) Planning Flexibility .23 .38 .18 .27 .21 .21 Technical it Flexibility .02 .26 .35 .30 .17 .23 Mean Correlation .13 .32 .27 .29 .19 .22 p < .05 it N S The relations between Gratification-Seeking Activity and Media-Use Control, as suggested by the findings, appeared to substantiate the assumption that a more active audience would tend to have more control in manipulating the media-use conditions for its convenience and interest. However, the extent of that substantiation ranged only from a weak to a moderate degree. The larger part of the unex- plained variance, again, could probably be attributed to the factor. of Socio-Cultural composition. An example provided below could illustrate the rationale behind this assumption. Assuming that a teen viewer lives in a two-parent household (with only one working parent) with a sibling of similar age, the chances for this teenager to dominate the TV-viewing conditions (e. g., commercial zapping or time- shifting) to a significant extent are low. This situation 157 is especially true if the entire family usually watches TV together and a certain degree of parental mediation in TV viewing exists. In a word, there could be a variety of different combinations among factors of Socio-Cultural Composition that could result in highly distinctive media- use environments that directly reflect differential levels of media-use control among individual teen viewers. Furthermore, the impact of additional video technolo- gy could also create the difference in how much more active an audience member may be in the processes of controlling their media-use conditions. As reported herein, more active VCR users also had more control in manipulating their viewing conditions than an active general audience. The apparent advantages that VCR users had over a general audience accrued from the technical features available on the VCR that provided its users with greater flexibility in the areas of viewing scheduling, content selection and commercial avoidance. V. Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Within Table 8, both the correlations and partial correlations between Gratifications—Sought and Gratifica- tions-Obtained were attained by averaging the sum of the correlations and partial correlations between all six paired gratification measures reported in Table 6.2 (for all respondents) and Table 6.5 (VCR owners). Based on the mean correlations, one can conclude that, for teen viewers, there is a strong degree of association between their level 158 of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained as opposed to a monotonic correlation. Furthermore, after the intervening factor of Gratification-Seeking Activity was controlled for, the strength of the relations between Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained measures decreased at the average level of 9% for all respondents and 7% for VCR owners. Although the magnitude of the influence of Gratifica- tion-Seeking Activity is relatively moderate, these results have provided sufficient empirical support for the fundamental theoretical assumption proposed by the model-- gratification-seeking activity is an intervening variable in the relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. An additional revelation is that the strength of the relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained for all respondents, before and after the impact of gratification-seeking activity was partialed out, is relatively similar to that for VCR owners. Furthermore, an overall observation generalized from these findings is that gratification-seeking activity functions within a process in which the audience is cogni- tively, effectively and behaviorally involved with the actions taken to pursue media gratifications. Furthermore, since that process is an intentional one, the level of expectation for receiving media gratifications may directly affect the level of gratification-seeking activity initiat- ed by the audience. As a result, the intensity of grati- fication-seeking activity may ultimately influence the 159 level of media gratifications the audience may receive. As such, the magnitude of gratification-seeking activity serves as an intermediate factor that varies along with the extent of an audience’s gratifications-sought and dictates the degree of satisfaction in terms of gratifications- obtained. Table 8 Zero-Order Correlations and Partial Correlations between Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained (controlling for Gratification-Seeking Activity) Gratifications-Obtained Gratifications- (All Respondents) (VCR Owners) Sought --------------- r partial r r partial r Surveillance .54 .48 .51 .48 Informational Guidance .51 .46 .50 .47 Entertainment .66 .55 .68 _ .56 Diversion/ Escape .63 .55 .66 .60 Interpersonal Communication .65 .56 .63 .51 Para-Social Identity .70 .60 .70 .59 Mean Correlation 62 53 61 54 VI. Media-Exposure Level and Media-Use Control vs Gratifications-Sought and Gratification-Obtained According to the model, Gratification-Seeking Activ- ity is directly related to Media-Exposure level and Media- 160 Use Control in addition to Gratifications-Sought and Grati- fications-Obtained. However, due to the lack of theoreti- cal foundation, the model did not specify any direct causal relations between components of Gratifications-Sought (or Gratifications-Obtained) and l) Media-Exposure Level 2) Media-Use Control. To attest the fact that Media-Exposure Level and Media-Use Control were only theoretically linked with Gratification-Seeking Activity instead of Gratifica- tions-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained, one must assume there is a spurious relationship between Media-Exposure Level (or Media-Use Control) and l) Gratifications-Sought, or 2) and Gratifications-Obtained. This means Media-Expo- sure Level and Media-Use Control are only correlated with Gratifications-Sought (or Gratifications-Obtained) because of their correlations with Gratification-Seeking Activity. If the influence of Gratification-Seeking Activity is. controlled for, then the relations between Media-Use Exposure (or Media-Use Control) and Gratifications-Sought (or Gratifications-Obtained) will be close to zero or diminish. The following discussion demonstrates the effort in verifying this exploratory assumption. A. Media-Exposure Level Table 9 shows the zero-order correlations between the overall measures for Media-Exposure Level and the two gratification measures. Correlation results indicate the existence of a rather weak relationship between these two sets of measures. In terms of deriving the overall measure 161 for Media-Exposure Level (for all respondents), the two main variables related to TV viewing exposure (TV-Exposure Level) and program-viewing diversity (Program-exposure Diversity) were combined. Whereas, for VCR owners, the same measure was formed through merging the previously mentioned two main variables and VCR—use Level. As report- ed in the Methods chapter, the overall scale reliabilities for these two reconstructed measures were r =.34 for the former and alpha =.63 for the latter. Table 9 Zero-Order Correlations between the measures of Media-Exposure Level and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Media-Exposure Level Media-Exposure Level (all respondents) (VCR owners) Item Sought Obtained Sought Obtained *1 1* ** Surveillance .07 -.04 .20 .08 Informational ** it 3* 2* Guidance O7 .02 .06 .03 Entertainment .20 .30 .13 .22 Diversion/ Escape .19 .27 .17 .17 Interpersonal ** *1 Communication .17 .08 .ll .07 Para-Social Identity 24 .19 .10 .10 p = .000 p < ** N.S Table presents the zero-order correlations between Media-Exposure Level and the three Gratification- 162 Seeking Activity measures. The correlations appeared to have ranged from weak to moderate to strong between these two sets of variables. Table 9.1 Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Media-Exposure Level and Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity Media-Exposure Level .45 .13 .11 (all respondents) Media-Exposure Level .36 .14 .16 (VCR owners) Table 9.2 reports the partial correlation results after the influence of Gratification-Seeking Activity was controlled for. The partial correlations between Media- Exposure Level and the two gratification measures indicated a decrease in the strength of the relations between these two sets of measures. Although not all partial correla- tions appeared to have approximated the zero level, the mean partial correlations had. Moreover, for those partial correlations that did not approach the zero level, the strength of their correlation coefficients were relatively weak (ranging from .11 to .16). Therefore, based on these initial trial results, one can conclude that there is a spurious relation between Media-Exposure Level and the two gratifications measures--Gratifications—Sought and Gratifi- cations-Obtained. 163 Table 9.2 Partial Correlations between Media-Exposure Level and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained Controlling for Gratification-Seeking Activity Media-Exposure Level Media-Exposure Level (all respondents) (VCR owners) Gratifications ------------------------------------------- Items Sought Obtained Sought Obtained Surveillance .05 (.07) —.O4 (-.O4) .16 (.20) .04 (.08) Informational Guidance -.01 (.07) -.04 (.02) -.Ol (.06) -.09 {-.03) 3 Entertainment .04 (.20) .12 (.30) -.05 (.13) .03 (.22) Diversion/ * Escape .04 (.20) .ll (.27) .04 (.17) .00 (.17) Interpersonal Communication .05 (.17) -.03 (.08) -.Ol (.11) -.O7 (.07) Para-Social * * Identity .15 (.24) .10 (.19) .03 (.10) -~.02 (.10) Mean Correlation .06 (.16) .07 (.15) .05 (.13) .04 (.11) p = N.S. * p < .05 Figures in parentheses represent zero-order correlations. B. Media—Use Level Table 9.3 reflects the zero-order correlations between the overall measures for Media-Use Control and the two gratification measures. The results indicated that Media-Use Control was not correlated with one of the two gratification measures in several instances; the overall correlations between the measures for Media-Use Control and gratifications were either weak or moderate. In terms of the two overall measures for Media-Use Control, they were 164 constructed by collapsing the two main variables-~Planning Flexibility and Technical Flexibility--for all respondents as well as VCR owners. According to the Methods chapter, the scale reliability for these two overall measures was at the level of r =.l3 for the former and r =.55 for the latter. The scale reliability for the former measure (for all respondents) appeared to be less than satisfactory. This may partially explain why the correlations between several Media-Use Control and gratification measures were relatively weak. Table 9.3 Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Media-Use Control and Gratifications—Sought and Gratifications—Obtained ----—-_—-——---------—--—-—--—-—--'--—-——-——--—---—-------—— Media-Use Control .Media-Use Control (all respondents) (VCR owners) Gratifications ------------------------------------------ Items Sought Obtained Sought Obtained Surveillance .21 .26 .31 .27 Informational ** ** ** ** Guidance .06 .08 -.02 .03 Entertainment .16 .21 .23 .26 Diversion/ Escape .16 .23 .24 .28 Interpersonal * * ** * Communication .14 .16 .08 .16 Para-Soci .* * 2* * Identity .09 .14 .08 .14 165 Table 9.4 shows the zero-order correlations between the two Media-Use Control measures and Gratification- Seeking Activity. The results also reflected weak to moderate relations between these two sets of variables. Table 9.4 Zero-Order Correlations between the Measures of Media-Use Control and Gratification-Seeking Activity Pre-Exposure During-Exposure Post-Exposure Activity Activity Activity Media-Use * Control (All .13 .37 .22 respondents) ' Media-Use .35 .32 .23 Control (VCR owners) Table 9.5 reports the partial correlation results for the relations between Media-Use Control and the two grati- fication measures controlling for the intervening effect of Gratification-Seeking Activity. By looking at the partial correlations obtained, one finds a few partial correlations failed to reach the near zero level, and two of the mean partial correlations were also not close to the zero level-~namely, they were at the level of .085 and .10. Again, the low scale reliability may in part explain the failure to fully achieve the intended results. Nevertheless, the overall picture of all mean partial cor- relations is still able to provide sufficient support for the claim that the relation between Media-Use Control and the two gratification measures was a spurious one. 166 Table 9.5 Partial Correlations between Media-Use Control and Gratifications-Sought and Gratifications- Obtained controlling for Gratification-Seeking Activity Media-Use Control Media-Use Control (all respondents) (VCR owners) Gratifications ------------------------------------------- Items Sought Obtained Sought Obtained * x x _ * Surveillance .13 (.21) .23 (.26) .25 (.31) .23 (.27) Informational * Guidance -.04 (.06) .03 (.08) -14 (-.02) -.04 (.03) 2 Entertainment .04 (.16) .ll (.21) .03 (.23) .06 (.26) Diversion/ * * Escape .05 (.16) .14 (.23) .08 (.24) .12 (.28) Interpersonal . Communication -.02 (.14) .03 (.16) -.01 (.08). .05 (.16) Para-Social Identity -.00 (.09) .00 (.14) -.09 (.08) -.Ol (.14) Mean Correlation .05 (.14) .09 (.18) .10 (.16) .085 (.19) p = N.S. * p < .05 Figures in parentheses represent zero-order correlations. VII. Summarizing the Relations Between Model Components In conclusion, the results obtained from the hypotheses and assumptions tested have provided sufficient- evidence to validate the theoretical claims of the model proposed in this study. By and large, the model accurately predicted the interrelations among all the components that were specified in each hypothesis or assumption. The proposed model was, therefore, found to be theoretically 167 applicable and verifiable in its first empirical trial. To summarize the relationships among all model components tested, the following two tables have collected all the mean correlations and partial correlations from Table 7 through Table 9.5. Table 10 shows the mean correlations between Gratification-Seeking Activity and all other components that are theoretically linked in the model. Table 10 Mean Correlations between Gratification-Seeking Activity and all Other Model Components Gratifica- Gratifica— Media-Expo- Media-Use tions-Sought tions-Obtained sure Level Control (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) Pre- Exposure .27 .26 .26 .27 .42 .36 .13 .32 Activity During- Exposure .31 .30 .25 .22 .21 .14 .27 .29 Activity Post- Exposure .33 .33 .34 .33 .24 .16 .19 .22 Activity Column Mean 30 .30 28 .28 29 23 20 28 p < .05 Table 10.1 presents the mean correlations and partial correlations among the following components: 1) Gratifica- tions-Sought and Gratifications-Obtained, 2) Gratifications- Sought and Media-Exposure Level, 3) Gratifications-Obtained and Media-Exposure Level, 4) Gratifications-Sought and Media-Use control and 5) Gratifications-Obtained and Media- Use control. 168 Table 10.1 Mean Correlations and Partial Correlations among Four Model Components-- Gratifications-Sought, Gratifications-Obtained, Media-Exposure Level and Media-Use Control Gratifications- Media-Exposure Media-Use Obtained Level Control (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) (All) (VCR) Gratifications- .62 .61 .16 .13 .14 .16 Sought (.53) (.54) (.06) (.05) (.07) (.04) Gratifications— .15 .11 ° .18 .19 Obtained (.07) (.04) (.09) (.085) * Figures in parentheses represent partial correlations. With all the necessary mean correlations and partial correlations summarized, in Table 10 and 10.1, one can visualize the causal relations between each pair of model components in Figure 3 and 4 below, for all respondents and VCR owners, respectively. Figure 3 Mean Correlations among Model Components (all respondents) 2‘ .15 (.07) .16 (.06) ratifications Sought ‘4“ . edia-Exposur Gratification- Level Seeking Activit .62 (.53) Pre-Exposure .28 uring-Exposure ratifications Post-Exposure Media-Us Obtained Control I .18 (.07) .14 (.05) 1 Figures in parentheses represent partial correlations 169 Figure 4 Mean Correlations among Model Components (VCR owners) .ll (.04) .13 (.05) 2 Gratifications .23 Media-Exposur Sought Gratification- Seeking Activit .61 (.54) Pre-Exposure ‘ “* .28 During-Exposure .28 ratifications ‘Post-Exposure ' Media-Us Obtained Control 1 I ' - T 7 v .19 (.085) , .16 (.10) * Figures in parentheses represent partial correlations CONCLUSIONS As stated at the beginning, the two main objectives of this research were: 1) to better understand the largely ignored subject of relations between the teen audience and its multimedia environment, and 2) to propose a media uses and gratifications model that could encompass the complex processes and characteristics pertaining to the functioning of a multimedia environment. The overall conclusions from the study have furnished significant support for the interrelations specified among all model components and defined by the theoretical assumptions mentioned above. Particularly encouraging among all the results was the confirmation of the role of gratification-seeking activity as an intervening factor within the relations .between gratifications-sought and 170 gratifications-obtained. Another new theoretical assump- tion verified by the data concerned the audience’s percep- tion of the level of control that it has over its media use condition within each phase of the gratification-seeking activity. In spite of the empirical success in verifying the proposed model, certain limitations and caveats should be borne in mind while interpreting the results generated by this study. First, in constructing some of the variables that were untested before, little past research could provide reliable or replicable measures for reference purposes, aside from certain general theoretical postula- tions. The lack of opportunity to confer existing measures perhaps affected the likelihood of achieving a possible maximum level of reliability and validity contained in those scales that measured the new variables introduced in this study. As a result, the overall predictive and explanatory strength of the model might have been reduced. Second, the disproportionately high penetration rates of cable TV (71.92), pay-cable service (54.88), and VCRs (78%) made it impractical to actually compare any potential differences in the responses to the five theoretical components tested through a 2 X 3 Analysis-of Variance manipulation--with VCR ownership as the bi-level variable and TV-hodsehold types (i.e., broadcast only, basic cable only and pay-cable) as the tri-level variable. The difficulty in applying the ANOVA test stems from the unevenly distributed cell sizes, ranging from a low of 14 171 cases to a high of 188 cases in some cells. This inability to conduct an ANOVA test to obtain the comparative information on teen viewer’s uses and gratifi- cations processes across various home-media environments completely undercut one of the sub-goals of this study. Consequently, without the ANOVA results to indicate whether there is a significant difference among different TV-house- hold types (either VCR owners or non-VCR owners), a series of t-tests that could have been conducted to describe the directions of the relations between TV3household types in terms of teen viewer’s uses and gratifications processes were also abandoned. Third, as reported in the results chapter, the vari- able gratification-seeking activity proved to be an inter- vening variable in the relations between gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained. Even so, other vari- ables such as the component Socio—Cultural Composition from the socio—cultural structure phase in the proposed model could also function as intervening variables. The compo- nent, Socio-Cultural Composition, according to evidence primarily from Blumler’s research,173played a relatively important role in the processes of media gratification- seeking. Moreover, the relations between gratification- seeking activity and media-exposure level as well as media- use control could be partially accounted for by additional variables such as media-exposure levels in other mass media (i. e., newspapers, magazines, radio and sound record- 174 ings), access to other'electronic media (i.e., video-game, 172 video-discs, compact-discs, video cameras and personal com- puters),l75the degree of parental mediation in TV viewing and the component Socio-Cultural Compositions as well?76 RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS The empirical evidence presented in this study has basically encompassed several gratification research areas that still require much research before becoming theoreti- cally and structurally sound. These areas include audience activity, gratifications-sought vs. gratifications-obtained and the role (or the impacts) of the more recent media technologies in audience media use processes. 12212222 12112112 The concept of an active audience has long existed in various theoretical discussions without much verification from systematic empirical evidence. Blumler noted the reason for such neglect stemmed from the challenges involved in studying the "extraordinary range of meanings” associated with the activity concept¥77More recent attempts by Levy and Windahl have studied audience activity in relation to media gratifications.l78Their audience-activity model illustrates three types of activities--selectivity, involvement and utility--each of which corresponds to a separate phase in a temporal dimension, i.e., before, during or after exposure, respectively. Comparing Levy and Windahl’s audience-activity model to Gratification-Seeking Activity, the parallel construct in the model proposed herein, the conceptualization 173 differences can be easily detected. Gratification-Seeking Activity was viewed as an overall representation of an audience’s possible cognitive, affective and behavioral involvement with the media-use processes from the pre- exposure period through the post-exposure period. In contrast, Levy and Windahl assume that an audience is only engaged in the activities of ”selectivity in exposure- seeking” before exposure, "mentally decoding and interpret- ing the media content” during exposure, and "using the social utilities of the content consumed" after exposure. It seems that an audience is not necessarily tied to the a priori categories of activities that Levy and Windahl’s model has outlined. For instance, physical (or behavioral) involvement with viewing processes such as commercial zapping or channel switching could also take place along- side mental involvement during exposure. After exposure, audiences could simply learn (i.e., cognitive involvement) the message without using it for any immediate practical purposes. The above comparison clearly points out the need to conceptualize audience activity in a broad context within which various types of activities related to media use from the pre-exposure through the post-exposure periods may allocate themselves. Only through creating a broad context can certain newly emerged audience activities such as commercial zapping, generated through access to ”newer" media technologies, be comprehensively examined. That broad 174 context of audience activity can be the one that contains the basic forms of audience interaction with media content across time. These basic forms of audience involvement can be represented well by the audience’s cognitive, affective and behavioral involvement with the entire process of media use, as suggested by this study. Although this conceptual- ization seems theoretically sound, much more effort is still needed to develop reliable and valid measures for empirical verifications. An additional aspect in need of an elaboration herein is that Gratification-Seeking Activity or audience activity in fact, reflects the media-use processes where the audience perceives, comprehends and retains the messages received from its exposures experience. By implication, Gratification38eeking Activity or audience activity can pro- bably be seen as the basis for the occurrence of media. effects in the long run, because retention of media messages is the key element in generating media effeciZ? Therefore, future research can probably explore how Gratification-Seeking Activity or audience activity affects media effects. 92211112211222:922221 222 92211112211222:92121222 The concepts of gratifications-sought and gratifica- tions-obtained were first empirically distinguished by Palmgreen and Rayburn in the late l$370M The major findings from their own as well as others’ research indicated that these two sets of gratification measures were only correlated with each other from a moderate to 17S strong extent (.40 to .60). . In comparison, this study finds a somewhat stronger relationship between the measures of gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained; cor- relations ranged from .50 to .70 for the two sets of grati- ication measures in the present study. The discrepancy could be due to the differences in subject, namely, adult versus child audiences. However, the major concern here is the large proportions of the unexplained variances in the relations between gratifications-sought and gratifications- obtained (e.g., 51X to 75% for this study). Although various other media uses variables such as exposure level, program choice and media dependency level have been empirically proven as relevant to the two grati- fication measures, no attempt was intended to utilize any of these variables to account for those portions of unexplained variances between the two gratification measures. This study made an effort to assess the meaning of these variables through an examination of a Gratifica- tion-Seeking Activity measuree which largely reflected the conceptualizations of these variables. Gratification-Seek- ing Activity, a constructed variable containing a large number of media use measures, was strongly correlated with the two overall gratification measures. It was treated as an intervening variable in the relations between the two gratification measures. The partial correlation obtained between the two sets of gratification measures (controlling for Gratification-Seeking Activity) decreased at the 176 average level of .09 (all respondents) and .07 (VCR owners) from the original zero-correlations between each of the six paired measures (see Figures 3 and 4). Though Gratification-Seeking Activity, only account- ed for a very limited proportion of the total unexplained variance existing in the relations between gratifications- sought and gratifications-obtained, the result was, never- theless, a significant empirical proof for the existence of an intervening variable in the relations between the two gratification measures. It is obvious that there is a great deal more than just one intervening variable within the relations between the two gratification measures. What is needed in future studies, then, is the discovery and verification of additional intervening variables to account for the unexplained variances between measures for gratifications-sought and gratifications-obtained. 1222212 21 222 1222221222 The emergence of new media technologies has attracted a great deal of research attention in recent years. In par- ticular, the most popular new video technologies, cable TV and VCR, are said to have a strong impact on the patterns of TV viewinglalThe commonly documented influences of cable TV generally include the areas of increases in viewing options and exposure levels, whereas, the primary aspects affected by access to a VCR include the previous two areas and an increase in control over the overall 182 viewing conditions (e.g., time-shifting). Although a 177 number of studies have examined the functions of these technologies and a list of other factors relevant to their role in media uses, no real effort was geared toward inspecting the multi—functional role of these technologies within any existing theoretical framework. The closest thing is probably a Levy study that intended to profile the types of audience activity in which a VCR user is likely to actively participate.183 This study explored the relations between these technologies and media uses within the proposed model. Since the uses of these technologies generally provide the utilities of expanded program selection, more diversified programming and greater flexibility in viewing scheduling, these utilities were considered to have a unique role in the uses and gratifications processes. That role was conceptualized within the notion of Media-Use Control. This is because these utilities actually express different dimensions of "control" the audience has over its overall viewing conditions. For instance, a VCR’s ability to time shift viewing schedules or cable TV’s diversified programm- ing can provide the audience with a greater level of control (or freedom) in viewing scheduling or viewing selection. It was further assumed that the audience with a greater level of Media-Use Control would also be more involved in Gratification-Seeking Activity because the audience who had more control over its viewing conditions would tend to be more active in the gratification-seeking 178 processes. The findings suggested that Media-Use Control was moderately to strongly correlated with Gratification- Seeking Activity for all respondents and VCR users, respectively. Moreover, a spurious relationship was found to exist between Media-Use Control and the two sets of gra- tification measures. These results generally revealed that the control available to the audience through the uses of these technologies indeed was relevant to the audience’s gratification-seeking processes. However, the unexplained variance between Media-Use Control and Gratification- Seeking Activity suggests that further exploration of additional dimensions of Media-Use Control--such as the level of interaction with the media hardware and the nature of the so-called ”personalness" during uses--may shed more light on the relations between these two variables.184More- over, better measures for Media-Use Control are definitely needed since the reliability and validity scales for most of the Media-Use Control measures were unsatisfactorily low. In conclusion, the overall empirical evidence generated from this exploratory study and the theoretical implications stemming from this evidence are relatively resourceful for a better understanding of media uses and gratifications among the teen audience. Although the teen audience was the subject for this study, the knowledge gained from the results generated by this study should nevertheless be generally applicable to the adult audience as well. In particular, the interrelations among the 179 components specified in the proposed model should remain consistent across both teen and adult audiences. As a final note, an observation can be made to illustrate the effort invested in theoretical exploration through the proposed model in understanding a multimedia environment. Specifically, the model component, Gratifica- tion-Seeking Activity, expanded the traditional range of audience activities. These activities are made possible because of the available technical features provided by the new video technologies and expanded viewing options provided by a multimedia environment. Moreover, another model component introduced, Media-Use Control, assessed the audience’s perceptions of how much physical or technical control it has over its overall media-use processes, from the pre-exposure to post-exposure phase. These two theoretical components have captured the nature and spirit of what access to new video technologies and a multimedia environment may mean to the processes of general media use, to a large extent. Future research can certainly take advantage of what has been concluded on how to observe media use processes in new video settings. Furthermore, based on the components outlined in this model, researchers can further explore broad theoretical applications and discoveries in the ”brave new world" of home video. 180 ENDNOTES 1 . "Expert advice: keep control of family fun,” 91 99 9999 9 99919 99p999, 28 October 1985, p. 54; "What enter- tainers are doing to your kids." 22 91 2222 2 22212 122221 28 October 1985, p. 46., "Censor entertainment? Teens parents speak up." 21 92 2-22 9 22212 122221 23 October 1985, p. 52. 2 Cable Television Advertising Bureau, Inc. 1992 99919 11 12212222. 1987. 3 J. McCullaugh, "Overview,” 911199999, 25 April 1987, 4 B. Hamburg, "Theses and variations of adolescence," in M. Schwarz (ed.) 12 9 199991 99p9999 1999 99 999 199999 (Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1982), pp. 2-99. 5 1212. 6 K. Roe. 2222 22212 222 1221222221 9222211221 92211121 22 92:2212122222 (Stockholm. Sweden: Alnqvist & Wiksell International, 1983). 7 1212- 8 M. J. Haefner, L. S. Hunter and E. A. Wartella,. ”Parents, children and new media: expectations, attitudes and use,” Paper presented at the International Communica- tion Association in Chicago, 111., May 1986. 9 E. A. Medrich, J. Rozien, V. Rubin and 8. Buckley, 122 9221222 22212222 21 9222122 22 (Berkeley. CA: University of California Press, 1985). 181 10 . J. D. Brown, K. E. Bauman, G. M. Lentz and G.G. Koch, "Young adolescents’ use of radio and television in the 19805," Paper presented at the International Communication Association in Montreal, Canada, May 1987. 11 M. Csikszentmihalyi, and R. Larson, 9919g 99919999919 22211121 222 222212 12 122 1222222 12222 (New York: Basic Books, 1984). 12 M. G. Harvey and J. T. Hothe, ”Video cassette recorders: their impact on viewers and advertisers," 1222221 21 22222112122 22222222 25 (1986). pp. 19-27- 13 . "VCRs bring big changes in use of leisure," 199 999 X999 11999, 3 March 1985, p. 2. 14 D. A. Yorke and P. J. Kitchen, ”Channel flickers and video Speeders." 1222221 21 22222112122 22222222 25 (1985). pp. 21-27. 15 B. S. Greenberg and C. Heeter, "VCRs and Young People: the picture at 39% penetration--and growing," 22221222 2222212221 221221121 30 (1987). pp. 509-521. 16 M. R. Levy, and S. Windahl, ”Audience activity and gratifications: a conceptual clarification and explora- tion." 2222221221122 22222222 11 (1984). pp. 51-78. 17 Yorke and Kitchen, 99 911., note 14; B. M. Kaplan, ”Zapping--the real issue is. communication,” Journal of 22222112122 22222222 25 (February 1985). pp. 9-12- 18 S. W. Brehm, and J. W. Brehm, 99199919g1991 222212222; 2 122222 21 1222222 222 2221221 (New York. NY: Academic Press, 1981). 19 E. Hatz, J. G. Blumler, and M. Gurevitch, ”Utilization of mass communication by the individual,” in J. G. Blumler and E. Katz (eds.) 199 9999 91 9999 Communication: Current 999999911399 99 Gratification 99999999 (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1974). 20 A- H- 288102. 2211221122 222 22222221112 (New York: Harper Publications, 1970). 182 21 K. E. Rosengren and S. Windahl, ”Mass media consumption as a functional alternative,” in D. McQuail (eds.) 222121222 21 2222 22222212211222 (Barmondsworth: Penguin, 1972). 22 P. Elliot, "Uses and gratifications research: a critique and a sociological alternative," in J. G. Blumler and B. Katz (eds.) 122 2222 21 2222 22222212211221 2222221 222222211222 22 22211112211222 22222222 (Beverly Hills. CA: Sage Publications, 1974). 23 E. Katz, M. Gurevitch and H. Hass, ”On the use of mass media for important things.” 99991999 9991919gy 993199 38 (1973). PP. 164-181. 24 L. Bogart, ”The mass media and the blue collar worker,” in A. Bennett and W. Gomberg (eds.) 199 9199 991199 99919. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1965); Bauer, H. A., "The obstinate audience: the influence process from the point of view of social communication.” 22221222 222222122121 19 (1964). 22. 314- 328. 25 W. J. McGuire, ”Psychological motives and communi~ cation gratification," in J. G. Blumler and E. Katz (eds.) 122 2222 21 21 2222 22222212211221 2222221 222222211222 22 22211112211222 22222222 (Beverly Hills. CA: Sa2e Publications, 1974). 26 1212- 27 J.G. .Blumler, "The role of theory in uses and gratifications studies." Communication Research 6 (1979) pp. 9-36; Elliot, 99 911., note 22. 28 McGuire, 99 911., note 25. 29 A. Lichtenstein and L. B. Rosenfeld, ”Uses and mis- uses of gratifications research: an explication of media functions.” 2222221221122 22222222 10 (1983). pp. 97-109. 30 L. B. Becker, "Measurement of gratifications,” 2222221221122 22222222 6 (1979). pp. 54-73. 183 31 C.R. Bantz, ”Exploring uses and gratifications: a comparison of reported uses of TV and reported uses of favorite program type." 2222221221122 22222222 9 (1982). pp. 352-379. 32 A. Litchtenstein and L. B. Rosenfeld, "Normative expectations and individual decisions concerning media gra- tification choices." 2222221221122 22222222 11 (1984). 22. 393-414. 33 S. Standford, ”Predicting favorite TV program gra- tifications from general orientations," 9999991991199 99999999, 11: (1984). pp. 523-536. 34 J. G. Blumler, "The social character of media gratifications," in K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner and P. Palm2reen (eds.) 22212 22211112211222 222222221 2222221 999999911999. (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985), pp. 41-59. 35 Blumler, 99 911., note 27. 36 1212- 37 P. Palmgreen and J. D. Rayburn II, ”Uses and grati- fications and exposure to public TV: A discrepancy approach." 2222221221122 22222222 6 (1979). 22. 155-180- 38 P. Palmgreen, L. A. Wenner and J. D. Rayburn II, ”Relations between gratifications sought and obtained: a study of TV news." 2222221221122 22222222 7 (1980). pp. 162-192. 39 P. Palmgreen, L. A. Wenner and J. D. Rayburn II, "Gratifications discrepancies and news program choice," 2222221221122 22222222 8 (1981). 22. 451-478- 40 J.D. Rayburn II, P. Palmgreen and T. Acker, "Media gratifications and choosing a morning news program,” 1222221122 222212212 58 (1981). pp. 149-156. 184 41 L. A. Wenner, ”Gratifications sought and obtained in program dependency: a study of network evening news programs and ‘60 minuteS'” 2222221221122 22222222 9 (1982). pp. 539-560. 42 P. Palmgreen and J. D. Rayburn II, ”Gratifications sought and media exposure: an expectancy value model," 2222221221122 22222222 9 (1982). pp- 561-580. 43 M. R. Levy, ”The Audience experience with TV news," 1222221122 2222822222 5 (1978). 44 M. R. Levy, "Conceptualizing and measuring aspects of audience activity.” 1222221122 922212211 60 (1983). pp. 109-114. 45 Levy and Windahl, 99 911., note 16, p. 17. 46 Blumler, 99 9119, note 27. 47 . J. J. Galloway and F. L. Meek, ”Audience uses and gratifications: an expectancy model," Communication 22222222 8 (1981). pp. 435-450. 48 Palmgreen and Rayburn 99 ci1., note 37. 49 L. B. Becker, "Two tests of media gratifications: Watergate and the 1974 election,” 1999991199 Q9991991y 53 (1976), pp. 28-33. 50 W. Gantz, ”How uses and gratifications affect recall of television news,” 1999991199 999919911 55 (1978), pp. 644-681. 51 R. Mulder, "Media credibility: a uses-gratifications approach." 1222221122 92221221! 57 (1980). pp. 474-477. 52 S. Standford and B. Riccomini, "Linking TV program orientations and gratifications: an experimental approach," 1222221122 92221221! 61 (1984). pp. 76-82. 185 53 D. J. Weaver, ”Audience need for orientation and media effects.” 2222221221122 22222222 7 (1980). pp. 361- 376. 54 Blumler, 99 911., note 27. 55 P. L. Palmgreen, L. A. Wenner and K. E. Rosengren, "Uses and gratifications research: the past ten years," in K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner and P. Palmgreen (eds.) Media Gratifications Research: Current 999999911999 (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985), pp. 11-40. 56 L. A. Wenner, ”Transaction and media gratifications research,” in K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner and P. Palmgreen (eds.) 22212 22211112211222 222222221 2222221 222222211222 (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985), pp. 73-94. 57 L. Weibull, ”Structural factors in gratifications research,” in K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner and P. Palmgreen (eds.) M9919 Gratifications Research: Current 299999911399 (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985), pp. 123-147. 58 Brehm and Brehm, 99 ci1., note 16. 59 J. B. Rotter, ”Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement,” 99999919g1991 2222822222. 80 (1966). 60 P. D. Cherulnik and M. M. Citrin, ”Individual difference in psychological reactance: the interaction between locus of control and mode of elimination of freedom.” 1222221 21 2222222111! 222 222121 2212221222 29 (1974), pp. 398-404. 61 H. M. Lefcourt. 12222 21 22212212 2222221 122222 12 199991 999 39999999 (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Brlbaum Associates, Publishers, 1982); W. L. Daves and E. J. Phrases, ”Internal-external control as a determinant of information-seeking in a social influence situation,” 1222221 21 2222222111! 35 (1967). pp. 547-561r 186 62 R. DeCharms, Personal causation: 199 internal 211221122 221222122212 21 22222122 (New York: Academic PreSS. 1968); E. L. Deci. 121212212 2211221122. (New York. Plenum Publishing Corp., 1975); H.H. Kelly 91191991199 19 social interaction (Morristown, N.J.: General Learning 63 M. J. Lerner, D. J. Miller and J. 6. Holmes, "Deserving and the emergence of forms of justice," in L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances 19 999991999191 social 9999991959, Vol. 9. (New York: Academic Press, 1976); E. Walster, ”Assignment of responsibility for an accident," 1222221 21 2222222111! 222 222121 2222221232 3 (1966). pp- 73-79. 64 R. E. Savage, L. C. Perlmuter and R. A. Monty, "Effects of reduction in the amount of choice and the perception of control on learning,” in L. C. Perlmuter and R A. Monty (eds.), Choice 999 999991999 control (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1979). 65 D. Bar-Tal and Y. Bar-Zohar, ”The relationship between perception of locus of control and academic achievement.”'222122222222 22222112221 222222122! 2 (1977). pp. 181-199. 66 M. J. Haamstad, The Effects of locus of control and 2211:2221122128 22 behavior 222 information 2222222122 (Unpublished dissertation, Southern Illinois University, 1978). 67 T. A. Brigham, ”Some effects of choice on academic performance," in L. C. Perlmuter and R. A. Monty (eds.), Choice and Perceived Control. (Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1979). 68 . Lefcourt, 99 911., note 61; W. L. Daves and E. J. Phrases, ”Internal-external control as a determinant of information-seeking in a social influence situation," 1222221 21 2222222111! 35 (1967). pp. 547-561. 69 M. J. Weiner and T. Daughtry, ”Locus of control as a determinant of information seeking,” 99999991119 999 999191 2222221221 22112112 1 (1975). pp. 505-508- 187 70 8- Zerbinos. 12122221122z222212z 222 12122221122 2222222122 12 122 22222::22121 222 electronic 22121 (Unpublished dissertation, Michigan State University, 1986). 71 T. R. Donohue and L. L. Henke, ”The impact of video cassette recorders on traditional television and cable viewing habit and preferences," Research Report, National Association of Broadcasters (1985). 72 National Association of Broadcasters, Home Video and Broadcast Television: 1999919 999 9999919911199 (Com/Tech Report (1983). 73 M. R. Levy and E. L. Fink, "The use of home video recording and the transcience of television broadcasts,” 1222221 21 2222221221122 34 (1984). pp- 56-71- 74 Yorke and Kitchen, 99 9119, note 17; B. S. Greenberg and C. Heeter, "Profiling the zappers," 1999991 91 2222211212: 22222222 25 (1985). pp. 15-19. 75 ”Will VCRs KO pay cable?" 99919919199 9199, 25 June 1984, pp. 26-33; "Probing VCR-pay cable compatibility," 99999999119g, 18 February 1985, p. 69. 76 M. G. Harvey and J. T. Rothe, ”Video cassette recorders: their impact on viewers and advertisers,” 1222221 21 22222112122 22222222 25 (1986). pp- 19-27- 77 . M. R. Levy, "VCR use and the concept of audience activity. 2222221221122 222212211 (1986). 78 V. Johnsson-Smaragdi and K. Roe, "Teenagers in the New Media World: Video Recorders, Video Games and Home Computers," Lund Research papers in the Sociology of Communication (1986). 79 Greenberg and Heeter, 99 9119 note 15. 80 ' . G. L. Grotta and D. Newsom, ”How does cable TV in the home relate to other media use patterns?” 1999991199 999919919 59 (1982), pp. 588-591, 609. , 188 81 D. Krugman and D. Eckrich. ”Differences between cable and pay cable viewerS." 1222221 21 22222112122 22222222 22 (1982). pp. 23-29- 82 S. J. Kaplan, "The impact of cable TV services on the use of competing media." 1222221 21 222222221122 22 (1981), pp. 156-165. 83 G. D. Metgzer, ”Cable TV audiences: learning from the past and the present.” 1222221 21 22222112122 22222222 22 (1983), p. 47. 84 J. T. Rothe, M. G. Harvey and G. C. Michael, "The impact of cable television on subscriber and nonsubscriber behavior.” 1222221 21 22222112122 22222222 23 (1983). pp- 15-22. 85 J. Webster, ”The impact of cable and pay cable television. on local station audiences," 1999991 91 222222221122 27 (1983). pp. 119-125- 86 L. B. Becker, S. Dunwoody and S. Rafaeli. ”Cable’s impact on the uses of other news media," 1999991 91 222222221122 27 (1983). pp. 127-140- 87 S. J. Kaplan, "The impact of cable television services on the use of competing media,” 1999991 91 222222221122 22 (1978). pp. 18-25. 88 Becker, Dunwoody and Rafaeli, 99 ci1., note 86. 89 M. Banks and A. Gagnard, ”A comparison of media uses and attitudes in two suburban cable areas of a large metropolitan market," Paper presented Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, 1984. 90 J. Webster, 99 911., note 85. 91 Krugman and Eckrich, 99 911., note 81. 92 W. P. Danko and J. MacLanchlan, ”Research to accelerate the diffusion of a new invention," 1999991 91 22222112122 22222222 23 (1983). pp. 39-43- 189 93 Yorke and Kitchen, 99 911., note 17. 94 Television Audience Assessment, Inc. 1983. 95 C. Heeter, "Program selection with abundance of choice: a proces8 model.” 22222 2222221221122 22222222 12 (1985), pp. 126-152. 96 Maslow, 99 911., note 20. 97 K. E. Rosengren, ”Uses and gratifications: a paradigm outlined," in J.G. Blumler and E. Katz (eds.) The 2222 21 2222 Communication: Current 222222211222 22 Gratifications Research. (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1974). 98 Blumler and Katz, 99 911., note 27. 99 Maslow, 99 911., note 20. 100 Rosengren, 99 9119, note 97. 101 Katz, Gurevitch and Bass, 99 911., note 23. 102 Rosengren, 99 911., note 97. 103 McGuire, 99 911., note 25. 104 The ”consistency.theories" refer to several consisten- cy formulations originated by the following researchers: Reider (balance notion), Osgood and Tanenbaum (congruity concepts), Festinger, (dissonance theory), and Newcomb (interpersonal symmetry). For author references, please see the reference table. 190 105 The ”attribution theories” refer to the theories of personality and social psychology. For more details, see 8.2- Jones and C- Cortman. 1222211211221 22 221122 199999999 (Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press, 1973); H. H. Kelley, "Attribution theory in social psychology." in D. Levine (ed ) 22222222 222222122 22 9911991199 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967); 2.2. Jones, D.E. Knouse, H.R. Kelley, R.E. Nisbett, S. Valens, and B. Weiner, Attribution: Perceiving 199 999999 91 99999199 (Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press, 1972). 106 The "autonomy theories" can be found in the works of the following authors. G.W. Allport 9911999 999 999919 19 B9999991119, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961); E.H. Erikson, 991199999 999 9991919 (New York: Norton, 1963); P. Tillich, 199 99999g9 19 99 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1952); E. Fromm, 199 99991 91 999 (New York: Harper and Row 1964); A. H. Maslow, 99 911., note 20. . 107 The "utilitarian theories" can be found in the writings of the following authors: E. C. Tolman, 999999199 22222122 12 2212212 222 222 (New York: Century. 1932); A-D- Woodruff and F. DiVesta, "The relation between values, concepts and attitudes." 2222211221 222 2222221221221 99999999991 8 (1948), pp. 645-659; M. J. Rosenberg, ”Cog— nitive structure and attitudinal effect," 1999991 91 22222221 222 222121 2222221222 53 (1956). pp. 367-372: M. Fishbein and I. Ajzen "Attitudes and opinions,” in P.H. Mussen and M.R. Rosenjweig (eds.), 999991 999199 91 99999919g9 (Palo Alto, Calif: Annual Reviews, 1972), pp. 487-544. 108 S. W. Brehm and J.W. Brehm, 99 911., note 18. 109 L. C. Perlmuter and R.A. Monty (eds.), 999199 999 999991999 9991991 (Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1979). 110 Lefcourt, 99 911., note 61; Daves, W. L. and E. J. Phrases "Internal-external control as a determinant of information-seeking in a social influence situation," 1222221 21 22222221112 35 (1967). pp. 547—561. 111 Rosengren, 99 911., note 97. 191 112 S. Kippax and J.P. Murray, "Using the mass media: need gratification and perceived utility,” 9999991991199 22222222 7 (1980). pp- 335-360. 113 Litchtenstein and Rosenfeld, 99 911., note 32. 114 E. Katz and D. Fouldes, ”On the use of mass media for important things." 22221222 222121221221 222122 38 (1962); K. E. Rosengren and S. Windahl, "Mass media consumption as a functional alternative," in D. McQuail (eds.), 9991919g9 91 9999 99999919911999. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972); C. K. Atkin, "Anticipated communication and mass media information-seeking.” 222112 9212122 922212212 36 (1972); A. Edelstein, ”An alternative approach to the study of source effects in mass communication," Studies 19 222222221122 9 (1973). ------- 115 M. Fishbein and I. Ajzen. 2211211 211112221 121221122 999 99999199 (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975). 116 J. J. Galloway and F. L. Meek, ”Audience uses and gratifications: an expectancy model," 9999991991199 22222222 8 (1981). pp. 435-450- 117 T. M. Newcomb, ”An approach to 'the study of communicative acts.” 2222221221221 222122 60 (1953). 22- 393—404; P. Palmgreen and J. D. Rayburn II, "Gratifications sought and media exposure: an expectancy value model," 2222221221122 22222222 9 (1982). 22.561-580; Osgood. 0.8. and P.H. Tannenbaum, "The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change,” 99999919g1991 999199 62 (1955), pp. 42-55. 118 L. Festinger, "Behavioral support for opinion change,” 222112 2212122 222212212 28 (1964). pp. 404-417; Heider. F.. 122 2222221222 21 1212222222221 221211222212 (New York: Wiley, 1958). 119 H. Lasswell, "The structure and function of communi- cations in society" in L. Bryson (ed.), 199 9999991991199 91 1999 (New York: Harper, 1948); C. Wright, "Functional analysis and mass communication,” in L. Bryson (ed.), 199 Communication of Ideas (New York: Harper, 1960). 192 120 D. McQuail, J.G. Blumler and J.R. Brown, "The television audience: a revised perspective,” in D. McQuail (ed-) 222121222 21 2222 22222212211222 (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972); J.M. McCleod and Becker, ”Testing the validity of gratification measures through political effects analysis," in J. G. Blumler and E. Katz (eds.) 199 2222 21 2222 222222122112221 2222221 222222211222 22 2221111221122 22222222 (Beverly Hills: Sage. 1974); C. K- Atkin, "A conceptual model of information seeking,avoiding, and processing," in P. Clarke (ed.) 999 Models 199 9999 Communication (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1973). 121 McLeod and Becker, 99 911., note 120; J. G. Blumler and D. McQuail. 1212212122 12 22111122 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969); C. K. Atkin, 99 911., note 120. 122 Kippax and Murray, 99 911., note 112; Levy, 99 911., note 43; R. J. Compesi, "Gratification of daytime TV serial viewers." 1222221122 222212212 576 (1980). pp. 155-158- 123 W. Schramm, "The nature of news," 1999991199 922212212. 25 (1949). pp. 259-269- 124 R. T. Bower, Television 999 199 999119 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973). ~ 125 J. P. Robinson, "The audience for national TV news programs." 222112 2212122 922212212. 35 (1971). 22- 403- 405. 126 Rayburn II, Palmgreen and Acker, 99 9 note 40; 11-. Gantz, 99 911., note 50; Levy, 99 911., note 43. 127 B. S. Greenberg, ”Gratifications of television viewing, and their correlates for British children," in J.G. Blumler and E. Katz (eds.), 199 9999 91 9999 22222212211221 2222221 222222211222 22 22211112211222 99999999 (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1974); M. R. Levy, "Experiencing television news,” Journal 91 Communication 27 (1977), pp. 112-117; A. Rubin, "An examination of TV viewing motivations," 9999991991199 99999999 8 (1981), p. 141; A. Rubin, "Television uses and gratifications: the interactions of viewing patterns and motivations." 27 1222221 21 222222221122 (1983). pp. 37- 51; Wenner, 99 911., note 41. - 193 128 Atkin, 99 919., note 114; D. L. Swanson, "Political communication research and the uses and gratification model: a critique." 2222221221122 22222222 6 (1977). pp. 37-53; Wenner, 99 919., note 127. 129 W. Stephenson. 122 2122 122222 21 2222 2222221221122. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1976). 130 K. Nordenstang, ”Comments on ’gratifications research’ in broadcasting.” 999119 9919199 999999911 34 (1970). 131 . M. Gurevitch and H. Hass, ”0n the use of mass media for important things." 22221222 222121222 222122 38 (1973). pp. 164-181. 132 Levy, 99 919., note 43; Levy, 99 919., note 43; _M. R. Levy, ”Watching TV news as parasocial interaction," 1222221 21 222222221122 23 (1979). pp. 60-80- 133 D. Horton and R. Wohl, "Mass communication and para- social interaction," 9919919991 19 (1956), pp. 215-229. 134 McQuail, Blumler and Brown, 99 919., note 120. 135 Levy, 99 919., note 43. 136 1212 137 C. Heeter, 99 919., note 95. 138 B.S. Greenberg and C. Heeter, "Profiling the zappers," 1222221 21 22222112122 22222222 25 (1985). 22. 15-19. 139 Levy, 99 919., note 132. 140 Wenner, Rayburn II, 99 In Io "-2 '0 IH- 919., note 41; Palmgreen, Wenner and O 141 LeVY. 22 IO IH In :1 0 (If m A w 194 143 Levy, 99 919., note 45. 144 Ball-Rokeach, S.J. and M.L. Defluer, "A dependency model of mass media effects," 9999991999199 99999999 3 (1976), pp. 3—21. 145 Webster, J.G., "The impact of group viewing on patterns of TV program choice.” 1222221 21 222222221122 26 (1982), pp. 445-455. 146 Webster, J.G. and J.J. Wakshlag, "A theory of televi- sion program choice-" 2222221221122 22222222 10 (1983). pp- 430-455. 147 Schramm, 99 919., note 123. 148 Kippax and Murray, 99 919., note 112. 149 Palmgreen, Wenner and Rayburn, 99 919., note 38; Wright, C. "Functional analysis and mass communication,” in L. Bryson (ed.) 122 2222221221122 21 12222. (New York: Harper, 1960); Wenner, 99 919., note 41. 150 Levy and Windahl, 99 919., note 16. 151 ‘ Gantz, 99 919., note 50. 152 Ball-Rokeach and Defluer, 99 919., note 144. 153 Blumler, 99 919., note 27. 154 1212 155 195 156 D. McQuail, M. Gurevitch, ”Exploring audience behavior: three approaches considered," in J.G. Blumler and W. Katz (eds.), The Uses of Mass Communications: Current 222222211222 22 22211112211222 22222222 (Beverly Hills. CA: Sage Publications, 1974); Ball-Rokeach and Defluer, 99 919., note 152. . 157 Ball-Rokeach and Defluer, 99 919., note 144. 158 L. J- Cronbach. 2222211212 21 2222221221221 1221122 (New York: Harper and Row, 1960). Cohen, J. "Multiple regression as a general data analytic system," Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 426-443. 159 Roe, 99 919., note 6. 160 Levy and Windahl, 99 919., note 16. 161 . M. Levy, "Some Problematics of VCR Research," 22221222 2222212221 221221121 30. 5 (1987). pp. 461-470- 162 ‘ K. Roe, ”Adolescents’ VCR Use: How and Why," Paper presented at the 37th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Montreal, May, 1987. 163 Levy and Windahl, 99 919., note 17. 164 1212 165 1212 166 1212: Levy. 22 211-. note 77. 167 Johnsson-Smaragdi Roe, 99 919., note 78. 168 Greenberg and Heeter, 99 919., note 15. 169 Levy and Windahl, 99 919., note 16. 196 170 Palmgreen, 99 919., note 37. 171 Blumler, 99 919., note 34. 172 Brown, Bauman, Lentz and Koch, 99 919., note 10. 173 Blumler, 99 919., note 34. 174 J E. Nordlund, "Media Interaction," Communication 99999999 5 (1978), pp. 150-175; L. B. Becker and J.W. Fruit, "Understanding Media Selection from a Uses and Motives Perspective," Paper presented at the International Communication Convention, 1978. 175 J. G. Webster, "Audience behavior in the new media environment." 1222221 21 2222221221122 36 (1986). pp. 77- 91; F. Williams, A. F. Phillips and P. Lum, "Gratifications Associated with New Communication Technologies" in K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner and P. Palmgreen (eds.), 99919 22211112211222 222222222 2222221 222222211222 (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985). 176 R. Desmond, J. Singer, D. Singer, R. Calam and K. Colimore, ”Family mediation patterns and television viewing." 22222 2222221221122 22222222 11 (1985). pp- 461- 480; P. Messaris, and D. Kerr, "TV-related mother-child interaction and children’s perceptions of TV characters," 1222221122 222212212 61 (1984). pp. 662-666. 177 Blumler, 99 919., note 34. 178 Levy and Windahl, 99 919., note 16. 179 Palmgreen, Wenner and Rosengren, ., note 55. IO '0 IO IH Ir? 180 Palmgreen and Rayburn II, 99 919., note 37. 181 D. M. Krugman, ”Evaluating the audiences of the new media.” 1222221 21 22222112122 14 (1985). pp. 21-27- 182 G. D. Metzger, "Cable television audiences,” 1999991 21 222222221122 23 (1983). pp- 41-47- 197 183 Levy, 99 919. note 168. 184 Williams, Phillips and Lum. 99 i9., note 178. APPEN DI CES APPENDIX I coqwmuaou .o~ hauwnem .m~ couuaumamm .NH o>anmounxm .~H chumuxm sowuonvou mbfiuommm< couumoam9ucovH .eH coauuonm< .mfi o>amcmm09towm .ofi snomeH .m HwaumusH Handwoaowama .w aowuwasaaum .5 chouuooaqu .9 .oaumoz .m Hwauwuxm um>~om usfluwamoo (Ewanoum .e hfideus< .m :odumuauowoumo .N mocwumfimcoo .a chumuaH aqsnaowu ounum Imaom oHau< mo m>fiuowom m>Huo< m>auommm 0>Huo< :Ofiumu onHoum {Emma onHu< 9922 no son m :u a uHHanwum onHauoz 295:: no hwoaonhs 9.029200z H navamaa< ’198 APPENDIX I I Appendix II Survey Instrument I. Here are some questions asking what you e§9ect to get out of watchin 1!. Circle the answer 1E5 you from {He 0 owing: VERY OFTEN (V0), OFTEN (0), SOMETIMES (S), RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 1. I watch TV to a. find out about the latest V0 0 S R N news on popular music b. keep track of sports news V0 0 S R c. find out about the news events V0 0 S R in the country and the world 2. I watch TV to get advice on a. how to make friends in school V0 0 S ‘R b. how to get along with my family V0 0 S R c. how to solve my personal V0 0 S R problems 3. I watch TV because I want to a. be entertained V0 0 S R N b. get some excitement V0 0 S R N c. have some fun V0 0 S R N d. feel good V0 0 S R N 4. I watch TV because a. I want to forget about my V0 0 S R N problems b. I need to relax V0 0 S R N c. I need to kill time V0 0 S R N d. I am lonely . V0 0 S R N e. I am bored V0 0 S R N 199 200 VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER S. I watch TV to a. find something interesting to V0 0 S R N talk to my family about b. find something interesting to V0 0 S R N use in starting a conversation c. find something interesting to V0 0 S R N talk to my friends about 6. I watch TV because a. I want to find people like me V0 0 S R N on TV ' b. I like to think of some people V0 0 S R N on TV as friends c. I want to talk back to the TV V0 0 S R N to express my feelings II. Here are some questions asking what watching TV means to you. Circle the answer that fits you from the foIlowing: STRONGLY AGREE 13A) , AGREE (A), NEUTRAL (N), DISAGREE (DA), or STRONGLY DISAGREE (SD). 1. Watching TV is a part of SA A N D SD my daily activities 2. Watching TV is a very important SA A N D SD after-school activity for me 3. I would be very disappointed if SA A N D SO I miss a favorite TV show 201. The following estions ask what on usuall do before starting 't ou fiom the following: to watch TV. C role the answer Eha f1 S or NEVER (N). VERY OFTEN 4. I know ahead of time a. what TV show I want to watch V0 b. how many TV shows I want to watch V0 c. when to watch TV VO 5. I decide ahead of time what TV shows to watch by a. asking someone V0 b. checking a newspaper V0 c. checking a.TV (or cable) guide V0 III. Here are some questions asking what watching TV. Circle the answer that fits ERY or NEVER (N) . 1. When commercials come on during a show, V0 a. I change channels until they V0 are over b. I do something else until they V0 are over 2. When commercials come on between shows, a. I change channels until they V0 are over b. I do something else until they VO are over 3. Before a show is over, I change V0 channels to watch a more interesting show 4. During a show, I switch channels V0 to check what else is on Him V‘ER——y OFTEN—(v-y—o , OFT‘EW‘(O)—_, SOMETIME__(_S S), LY (R) , SOME- OFTEN TIMES O O 20% TEN-(vT—O’O , FT_EN (OT—SO, ME—‘TIME—(Ss ), VERY OFTEN OFTEN TIMES S S S S RARE- LY NEVER R suall do while u 2 rom LY (R), or SO S S e fEIlowing: RARE- LY NEVER R, N R N R N R N R N R N R N 202 0 During commercials, I switch channels to watch two or more shows at the same time During a show, I switch channels to watch two or more shows at the same time I like to talk about a show with someone watching with me I get into a show that I am watching I like to express my feelings about a show to someone watching with me When I am watching TV, I like to read something at the same time take care of chores at home (cleaning, cooking, etc) talk to someone about other things When I am watching TV, I_am also eating a meal at the same time playing games at the same time doing homework at the same time When I watch a TV show, I watch it from the beginning to the end VERY FTEN V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 I concentrate totally on the show V0 I miss part of the show because I don't concentrate enough V0 SOME- OFTEN TIMES o S O S O S o S o S s S O s S s S O S S S RARE- LY NEVER' R N R N R N R N R N R R N R R R R N R R 203 IV. Here are some questions asking what ou usuall do after watchin 3!. Circle the answer that fits you fromfthe o owing: VERY OFTENTTVO), OFTEN(OFTEN), SOMETIMES (S), RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 1. After watching an interesting show, a. I like to discuss it with someone V0 0 S R N b. I can think about it for V0 0 S R a long time c. I can remember it for a long time V0 0 S R d. I can be moved by it for V0 0 S R a long time 2. I will go do something a. that is fun for me because V0 0 S R N I saw it on TV b. that is meaningful to me V0 0 S R N because I saw it on TV c. that helps me improve myself V0 0 S R N because I saw it on TV 3. I will go out to buy something V0 0 S R N because I saw it on TV V. Here are some questions asking how much T! on usually watch. You can circle one of tHe answers t a i s you. 1. The number of hours I watch TV with my family on a typical school day is O 1 l 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 2. The number of hours I watch TV with my family on a typical Saturday is 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 3. The number of hours I watch TV with my family on a typical Sunday is 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 204 4. The number of hours I watch TV alone on a typical school day s O 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 5. The number of hours I watch TV alone on a typical Saturday is O 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 6. The number of hours I watch TV alone on a typical Sunday is O 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 ' 7 and more 7. The number of hours I watch TV at a friend's home during a typical week (from Monday to Sunday) is O 1 l 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more The following questions ask what types of shows you usually wwatch Circle the answer that fits y%§ from he following : VERY OFTEN (V0 5, OFTEN (O FTEN), SfifiETI (S), RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). RY SOME- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 8. I watch a. soap operas V0 0 S R N b. police/detective series V0 0 S R N c. situation comedies (Cosby Show) V0 0 S R N d. dramatic series V0 0 S R N (L.A. Law, St. Elsewhere) e. movies or mini-series VO 0 S N f. sports shows V0 0 S 9. music video shows V0 0 S R (Friday Night Videos, MTV) h. advice-column shows VO 0 S R N (Dr. Ruth, health shows) 1. TV news V0 0 S R j. public affairs shows V0 0 S (Nightline, 60 Minutes) VI. 205 Here are some questions asking how much control over the deciSIOn to watch TV. Circle one of the VERY OFTEN (V0), OFTEN (05,—SOMETIMES (S),_RAREEY (R), NEVER (N) . VERY OFTEN 1. When I want to watch TV at home, a. I decide what shows to watch V0 while watching with my family b. I decide what shows to watch VO while watching by myself c. I decide when to watch TV V0 for myself 2. I can decide how much TV to V0 3. watch for myself at home When I am watching TV with my family, I can control whether to skip commercials by switching channels during a show skip commercials by switching channels between shows fli around channels to pick an nteresting Show change channels during a show to f nd a more interesting show watch two or more shows at the same time by switching channels during a show watch two or more shows at the same time by switching channels during commercials V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 V0 SOME- OFTEN TIMES 0 S 0 S O S 0 S O S O S O S 0 S 0 S 0 S on have olIEWIng: RARE- LY NEVER R N R N R N VR N R N R N R N R N R N R N 206 The following questions ask about the choices ou have on your 2! set. Circle the answer that fits you from t e foIIowIfig: STRONGLY AGREE (SA), AGREE (A), NE TRAL (N), DISAGREE (DA), or STRONGLY DISAGREE (SD). 4. I think there are a. lots of shows on TV SA A N D SD b. lots of good shows on TV SA A N D SD c. lots of different kinds of SA A N D SD TV shows I like to watch VII. Here are some questions asking about our family environment. You can fill in or chec e answers that are right for you. 1. Counting myself, there are people living in my family 2. The parent(s) who live(s) with me is (are): ___Father and Mother ___Father and Stepmother ___Father only ___Mother and Stepfather ___Mother only ___Other Adults 3. I have brother(s) living with me. sister(s) living with me. 4. My age is 5. I am a _____ male _____ female 6. The kind of grade _____A ____ A or B icfifi‘éilié’fe‘ 1" _ a _- a or c .____ c ____ c or D D D or F F 7. My family lives in an apartment a house 8. My family owns the place we live in _____ yes _____ no 9. The number of bedrooms in my home is 10. The number of cars my family owns is 11. I have my own room yes no 12. The number of working TV sets at my home is 13. The number of color TV sets at my home is. 207 14. The highest educational level of the parent(s) living with mg’is some high school high school some community college community college degree some four-year college four-year college degree some graduate school graduate (or medical or law) degree other 15. The employment of the parent(s) living with me is Step- Step- Father Mother father Mother a. not employed b. part-time employment c. full-time employment 16. The type of work the parent(s) living with me do(es) is Father Mother Stepfather Stepmother For the next question, check the items according to the length of time your family has owned them. Don't check the ones your family doesn't own. 17. My family has owned a less than one to two two to three more than one year years years three years Video-game player Video-disc player Compact-disc player Video camera Personal computer 18. The 208 We have cable TV at home yes no If the answer is "NO," go to Question 19 on the next page. If the answer is "YES,” answer Questions 3 and 2. How long has your family had cable? less than a year one to two years two to three years more than three years We have at least one movie channel yes no (HBO, Disney, etc.) If the answer is "NO," go to Question l2 pp Egg Eggs pggg. If the answer is "YES," answer Questions EL g Egg 3. How long has your family had a movie channel? less than a year ____ one to two years- two to three years ____ more than three years Check the name(s) of the channel(s) your family currently has HBO CINEMAX SHOWTIME THE MOVIE CHANNEL DISNEY OTHER (write in the name) following questions ask what t es of shows on usuall ' ou from: watch on movie channels. CircIe t e ansfiEr EHaE 1 s V_ERY o‘FTE—(VON )—T, OFTE (0)_, SOMET_IMES—(—)_S , RARE—LYW- ,LN‘EVER (N). VERY e. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER I watch movies that are not rated V0 0 S R N (for audiences of all ages) G-rated movies (for general V0 0 S R N audiences of all ages) PG-rated movies (parental V0 0 S R N guidance suggested) PG-l3 rated movies (parental V0 0 S R N guidance for children under 13) R-rated movies (restricted V0 0 S R N for children under 17) rock concerts V0 0 S R N 209 19. We have a VCR at home yes no If the answer is ”NO," go to Question g9. If the answer is "YES," answer Questions 3 and p. a. How long has your family had a VCR? less than a year one to two years two to three years more than three years b. Does the VCR have a remote-control device yes no If the answer is "NO," go to Question 29. If the answer is "YES,” answer Question 9. VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER c. I get to use the remote- V0 0 S R N control while watching videos with my family 20. We have push buttons on our TV set yes no 21. We have a remote-control device for our TV set yes no If the answer is "NO," go to Question 2; on the next page. If the answer is "YES," answer Questions 5 and p. VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER a. I et to use the remote control V0 0 S R N while watching TV with my family b. Our remote-control device is a calculator-like keypad or push-button cable box both 210 22. I have my own a. TV set ____ yes ____ no b. audio cassette recorder ‘____ yes ____ no c. stereo system ____ yes ____ no d. record player ____ yes ____ no e. walkman radio ____ yes ____ no f. telephone ____ yes ____ no g. hand-held calculator yes no 23. The number of newspapers my family regularly gets is 24. The number of magazines my family regularly gets is 25. On a typical day, the number of minutes or hours a. I read newspapers is minutes b. I read magazines is minutes c. listen to radio is hour(s) d. I listen to records, tapes or compact discs is _____ hour(s) The following questions ask how often your parent(s) get(s) involved in our TV watching activIEies. Cer e e answer EHaE fiEs—Vou rofi? ER OF EN (V0), OFTEN (O), SOMETIMES (S), RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 26. My parent(s) would a. tell me not to watch V0 0 S R N certain TV shows b. encourage me to watch V0 0 S R N certain TV shows c. discuss certain TV shows V0 0 S R N with me 211 VERY OFTEN 27. In our family, we have rules on a. how much TV I can watch V0 b. what kinds of TV shows V0 I can watch c. how late I can watch TV V0 SOME- OETEN TIMES 0 RARE- LY NEVER VIII. Here are some questions asking what you actually gain from watchin 3!. Circle the answer that—fits EHe fo owing: VERY OFTEN (V0), OFTEN (0), SOME RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). VERY OFTEN 1. I am satisfied with a. the latest news of popular V0 music on TV b. the sports news on TV V0 c. the local TV news V0 d. the national TV news V0 2. I am satisfied with the advice I get from TV on a. how to get along with VO my family b. how to solve my personal V0 problems c. how to solve my personal V0 problems 3. Watching TV a. keeps me entertained V0 b. gives me excitement V0 c. gives me a lot of fun V0 d. makes me feel good V0 SOME- OFTEN TIMES 0 O O O O S (003030) on from MES (S), RARE- LY NEVER R N R R R R N R N R N R N R N R N R N 212 VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LS NEVER 4. Watching TV a. makes me forget about my problems VO 0 S R b. helps me relax V0 0 S R c. helps me kill time V0 0 S R d. keeps me from feeling . lonely V0 0 S R e. keeps me from getting bored V0 0 S R 5. Watching TV a. gives me something interesing V0 0 S R N to talk to my family about b. gives me something interesting V0 0 S R N to use in starting a conversation c. gives me something interesting V0 0 S R N to talk to my friends about 6. Watching TV makes me feel a. there are people like me VO 0 S R N on TV b. some people on TV are like V0 0, S R N friends c. I can talk back to the TV to V0 0 S R N express my feelings THANK YOU very much for your help with this survey. If you finish early, turn the questionnaire over and list your favorite music videos. When you raise your hand, the researcher will come piCk it up. IF YOUR FAMILY HAS A VCR, PLEASE CONTINUE. 213 ** FOR THOSE WHO HAVE A VCR AT HOME ONLY ** From here on, unless you have a VCR at home, you don't need to answer any more questions. I. Here are some questions asking what on usuall do before ta in a show. Circle the answer E55? ¥IES ou Troi— Efig‘fge oiIo“_wing: ——‘YVER __TOF E—TVTN O ,_0FTE_TN O), OMETIMES (S), RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER l. I decide ahead of time a. what shows to tape while V0 0 S R N I am watching TV b. what shows to tape while I am V0 0 S R N watching a different show c. what shows to tape when V0 0 S R N I won't be watching TV II. Here are some questions asking how you usually use our VCR machine. Circle the answer that fits you from the £0 owing: VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 1. When I am taping a show, V0 0 S R. N I tape the commercials too 2. When I am playing back a show V0 0 S R N taped earlier, I fast forward to skip commercials III. Here are some questions asking how much on use your VCR machine. You can circle the answers tha fit you. 1. The number of hours I watch videos taped pp home from Monday through Friday is 0 1 l 2 2 3 3 A 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 2. The number of hours I watch videos taped 3p home on Saturday and Sunday is 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 214 3. The number of hours I watch rented videos pp home during a typical week (from Monday fig Sunday) is O 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 S 5 6 6 7 and more 4. The number of hours I watch videos taped from TV at a friend's home during a typical week (from Monday to Sunday) is 0 1 l 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more 5. The number of hours I watch rented videos at a friend's home during a typical week (from Monday pg Sunday) is O 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 and more The following questions ask what t es of shows oyou usually tape. Circle one of the following answers Efia Ffits : VERY OFTEN 7W0 , OWEN-(6)7 (S), RARELY (R')_,—or EVER (N). VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 6. I tape a. soap operas VO 0 S R N b. police/detective series V0 0 S R N c. situation comedies (Cosby Show) V0 0 S R N d. dramatic series V0 0 S R N (L.A. Law, St. Elsewhere) e. movies or mini-series V0 0 S R N f. sports shows V0 0 S R 9. music video shows V0 0 S R (Friday Night Videos, MTV) h. advice-column shows V0 0 S R N (Dr. Ruth, health shows) i. TV news VO 0 S R j. public affairs shows V0 0 S R (Nightline, 60 Minutes) 215 IV. Here are some questions asking how much control you have Circle one o? the of over the decision to watch videos. TEIIOWIn : VERY OFTEN—(V0), OFTEN (O), SOMETIMES (8)7 RARE Y (N L ), NEVER (N). VERY OFTEN 1. I can tape the shows I like V0 I like on TV 2. I can decide what videos to V0 rent from a video store for myself 3. I help decide what videos to V0 from a video store for my family 4. I can decide when to lay back V0 videos for myself at ome 5. I help decide when to play V0 back videos for my family 6. I can decide how many shows V0 to tape for myself at home 7. I help decide how many shows V0 to tape for my family 8. I can decide how many shows to V0 play back for myself at home 9. I help decide how many shows V0 to play back for my family 10. I can decide how many videos V0 rent for myself 11. I help decide how many videos V0 to rent for my family 12. While taping a show with my V0 family watching TV, I can decide whether to tape the commercials 13. While my family is playing V0 back a video, I can decide whether to fast forward the commercials SOME- OFTEN TIMES O O S 8 RARE- LY NEVER R N R N R N R N R N R N R N R N R N R N R N R N R N 216 V. Here are some questions asking how much your parent(s) get(s) involved ip your video watch ng activitiee. Circ e e answer EBaE fiEs ou rom Efie fo owing: VERYTOFTEN (V0), OFTEN 0 , SOMETIME (S), RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 1. My parent(s) would a. tell me not to watch VO 0 S R N certain types of videos b. encourage me to watch V0 0 S R N certain types of videos c. discuss certain video V0 ' O S R N content with me d. pay for the videos I plan V0 0 S R N to rent 2. In our family, we have rules on a. how Often I can rent a video V0 0 S R b. what kinds of videos I can V0 0 S R rent c. how often I can watch videos VO 0 S R N at a friend's home d. how often I can rent a video 'VO 0 S R N with a friend THANK YOU very much for your help with this survey. If you finish early, turn the questionnaire over and list your favorite music videos. When you raise your hand, the researcher will come pick it up. IF YOUR FAMILY HAS A MOVIE CHANNEL, PLEASE CONTINUE. 217 ** FOR THOSE WHO HAVE A MOVIE-CHANNEL ON CABLE ONLY ** From here on, unless you have a movie-channel at home, you don't need to answer any more questions. The following questions ask whatt es of shows on usuall ta e h3E‘fIEg __E— from our movie channel(s J. —Circ e Efiefl answer on from efollowing: VERY OFTEN (V0), OFTEN (O), SOMETIMES S), RARELY (R), or NEVER (N). VERY SOME- RARE- OFTEN OFTEN TIMES LY NEVER 1. I tape a. movies that are not rated V0 0 S R N (for audiences of all ages) b. G-rated movies (for general V0 0 S R N audiences of all ages) . ‘ c. PG-rated movies (parental V0 0 S R N guidance suggested) d. PG-13 rated movies (parental V0 0 S R N guidance for children under 13) e. R-rated movies (restricted V0 0 S R N for children under 17) f. rock concerts VO 0 S R N THANK YOU very much for your help with his survey. If you finish early, turn the questionnaire over and list your favorite music videos. When you raise your hand, the researcher will come pick it up. THANKS AGAIN!