' A CORRELAHON STUDY OF THE RELATEONSHH’ BETWEEN HUMAN VALUES AND BROADCAST TELEVISMN Dissefiafian for the Degree of Ph. D. MECHEGAN STATE UHWERSET‘! LEE RiCHARD THORNTOE‘: 1975 ill/1mill/m l/lI/l/l/l HUI/Ill * m" 1293 10316 9060 i 315.; 553:: Sear-e 5 1, Usher 3:: . j; 15“. ,.p~‘.'.w-‘ao-‘m_ This is to certify that the thesis entitled A CORRELATION STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN VALUES AND BROADCAST TELEVISION presented by Lee Richard Thornton has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D; degree in Cgmmggicajion Arts and Sciences - Mass Media Major professor John D. Abel Date August 13, 1976 0-7639 -*una" IUAB & SIIS' ' mm mm M: l; LIBRARY BINDERS l. ». 3 1293 10316 9060 g 9 -!,°,.{ ; . 2‘ P L. I, 1391-..?! \3‘113 t . . L J ‘7'. \ T'fv 'r ..~ ‘ J. .' . a .a- ‘ V ‘5. A . y ' ‘i T“ “W "vow-r” “uni This is to certify that the thesis entitled A CORRELATION STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN VALUES AND BROADCAST TELEVISION presented by has been accepte of the rec PhoDo de Date August 13, 1976 ?‘ 9. ill, 1 N m aw s 19.5% 1111111111111111/111111 11 a m J - Imam hr =' l9" I 80W 390“ BIND!" WC. LIBRARY am or as mincmr. mm W mz/é/f GZECCZL. ABSTRACT A CORRELATION STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN VALUES AND BROADCAST TELEVISION By Lee Richard Thornton The purpose of this research was to eXplore the relation- ship between human value structure and broadcast television viewing. The study relies on Milton Rokeach's concepts and measurement of values.1 The study examines the notion that the motivation for viewing television is related to an indi- vidual's values and value system priorities. Control vari- ables include reSpondent's television viewing hours per week, attitude toward television, self-esteem, education, and sex. The rationale for the hypotheses emerged from the theo- retical concepts of "belief congruence" and "institutional socialization." Defining television as a societal institution, the notion was deve10ped that television may play an important role as a value socializing agent. "Belief congruence" inter- acts with the socialization perspective by suggesting that belief systems are valued to the extent they are consistent with one's own belief system. An individual whose value system has been influenced by and is consistent with tele- vision's perceived value system, would therefore, be strongly attracted to television as an agent reinforcing that value system. Thus, television may be considered as a source, Lee Richard Thornton reinforcer, and product of the values of a social system. The author's concern for this topic arises from the general area of media "uses and gratifications." This area of research is important because it considers the social and psychological state of the individuals who are receiving the media message. It was thought that value processing may repre- sent an important psychological use of television, and that the reinforcement aSpect may represent an important psycho- logical gratification. The study utilizes Rokeach's l8-item Instrumental and Terminal Value Surveys to measure the independent variables. ReSpondents were instructed to rank order the list of 18 values "...in order of importance to XQQ as guiding principles in XQUR life." Respondents also ranked a list of 18 television programs according to viewing preference. Television's institutional values were measured by having the reSpondents rank Rokeach's Terminal Value Survey in order of the most important values they felt television promoted. In addition to the testing of specific hypotheses, fre- quency distributions for the value surveys and program pref- erences were compiled. These distributions were then cross- tabulated by the control variables, and Median Tests were com- puted to determine whether the ranking of a value by one group was significantly different from the ranking of the other group. A probability sample of 200 reSpondents was systematically Lee Richard Thornton selected from the greater Lansing area for personal inter- views. Respondents were sent a cover letter, but interviewers called on the respondent's home without a scheduled appoint- ment. The major findings of the study are: 1) There are more positive correlations between respon- dents' ranking of their personal terminal values and the values they perceive to be promoted by television among the high tele- vision viewers, those with a favorable attitude toward tele- vision, and those having a low amount of education. 2) Respondents with similar values view similar televi- sion programs. Additional analysis raised the question of whether the program preference survey sufficiently discrimi- nated between those with similar and dissimilar values. 3) A negative relationship exists between television viewing and self-esteem. 4) A positive relationship exists between the amount of television viewing and attitude toward television. 5) Two different reSpondent groups emerge from the study. The first may be described as having low education, viewing a high number of television hours per week, having low self- esteem with a favorable attitude toward television. This group ranked values such as "a comfortable life," "family security," "national security," "a world at peace," "cleanli- ness," "politeness," and "forgiveness" higher than the second group. As a group they rank detective and game shows higher than the second one. Lee Richard Thornton The second group may be described as having higher edu- cation, viewing a low number of television hours per week, having high self-esteem and an unfavorable attitude toward television. They ranked values such as "imaginative," "true friendship," and "self-respect" significantly higher than the first group. They also ranked news shows and programs like "Mary Tyler Moore," and "M*A*S*H" higher than the first group of respondents. 6) Nearly all the respondents agree that the most impor- tant values that television promotes are "pleasure," "an exciting life," "a comfortable life," and "social recogni- tion." 1 Milton Rokeach, The Nature of Human Values, New York: Free Press, 1973. A CORRELATION STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN VALUES AND BROADCAST TELEVISION By Lee Richard Thornton A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Communication Arts and Sciences - Mass Media 1976 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to a number of indi- viduals whose help was instrumental in the completion of this study and program. The personal interviewers were: Bill Brownell, Jim Miller, Mark Edwards, Fred Stephens, Dick Hofman, Joey Reagan, Paul Jacobs, Rob Silberstein, and John Casey. I would also like to note the efforts of Marc Conlin in the design of the computer program. I would like to thank the members of my Guidance Commit- tee: Dr. Thomas Baldwin, Dr. John.Abel, Dr. Thomas Muth, Dr. Lawrence Sarbaugh, and Dr. Charles Mauldin. Dr. Baldwin who served as my Guidance Committee Chairman, and especially Dr. Abel who directed my dissertation deserve special thanks for their help during the past three years. I would also like to thank Larry Rudner, a friend, who shared with me much of the pleasure and pain of the past three years. Finally, I would like to thank Sue, Emily, and Julianne, my family, who have shared with me all the pleasure and pain of the past three years. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List Of TableSOIOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIOIIIOIIIIIIIOIIIIIIII v Chapter II IntrOduCtionIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIOIIIIIIIIOI l Rokeach on Values.......................... 3 Uses and Gratification Literature.......... 13 Theoretical Rationale. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 16 Hypotheses and Rationale................... 23 II. Method.......................................... 28 Sample..................................... 28 Interviewers............................... 31 Interview Procedure........................ 31 Operationalization of Variables............ 32 Hypothesis Testing......................... 37 Frequency Distributions and Median Testing. 42 III. Results......................................... 43 Completion Rates........................... 43 Description of Sample...................... #3 Results of Hypotheses Testing.............. #6 Frequency Distributions and Median Testing. 53 Other Findings............................. 56 IV. Discussion...................................... 62 Review of Findings......................... 62 Discussion and Implication of Findings..... 63 Study Limitations and Future Research...... 77 Appendices AI CoverLetterIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIOIII 82 B. Attitude Toward TV Measure................. 83 Self-Esteem Measure........................ 84 Personal Terminal Value Survey............. 87 Personal Instrumental Value Survey......... 88 Program Preferences........................ 89 Television Terminal Value Survey........... 90 Other Control Variables.................... 91 C. Interviewer's Instructions.. ..... .......... 92 D. List of Television Programs................ 95 E. Complete Frequency Distributions........... 98 iii Appendices F. Other Frequency Distributions.............. G. Median Rankings for Value Surveys and Program Preferences Cross Tabulated by Control Variables....................... H. Spearman rho's Between Personal Terminal and Television Terminal Values for all RespondentSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Bibliography..................... iv Page 170 190 192 'lllllll'll. I'll Table 10. ll. 12. LIST OF TABLES Summary of Hypotheses l, 2, and 3, Predictions. Description of Sample Population. Sum of the Ranks of the Rank Order Correlations between Personal Terminal Values and Television Terminal Values for High and Low Television Viewers. Mann-Whitney U Test. Sum of the Ranks of the Rank Order Correlations between Personal Terminal Values and Television Terminal Values for Favorable and Unfavorable Attitudes Toward Television. Mann-Whitney U Test. Sum of the Ranks of the Rank Order Correlations between Personal Terminal Values and Television Terminal Values for Low and High Self—Esteem Respondents. Mann-Whitney U Test. Kendall Coefficient of Concordance of Program Preferences for Those Respondents with Similar Personal Terminal Values, Personal Instrumental Values, Television Terminal Values, and for all Respondents. Median Values and Composite Ranks of Personal Terminal Values for all 200 Respondents. Median Values and Composite Ranks of Personal Instrumental Values on all 200 Respondents. Median Values and Composite Ranks of Television Terminal Values for all 200 Respondents (values that television promotes). Median Values and Composite Ranks of Program Preferences for all 200 Respondents. Personal Terminal Value Medians. Personal Instrumental Value Medians. V Page 40 45 47 48 49 52 54 54 55 55 57 58 13. 14. 15. Television Terminal Value Medians. Program Preference Medians. Difference of Proportions Test on Unhypothe- sized Relationships. vi 59 60 61 I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this research is to explore the relation- ship between human value structure and the viewing of broad- cast television. The study relies on Milton Rokeach's (1973) concepts and measurement of values. The study examines the notion that the motivation for viewing television is related to an individual's values and value system priorities. Utilizing a probability sample, personal interviews will be conducted to gather data for exploring the nature of the "television-value" relationships. Also, relying on the theo— retical concepts of "belief congruence" and "institutional socialization" a rationale will be developed for the test- ing of specific hypotheses. The theory suggests that an interdependence exists be- tween human values and television viewing. First, defining television as a social institution, the greater the amount of time an individual spends viewing television, the more likely television will have some impact on the viewer's values (tele- vision as an institution will be discussed later in this chapter.) Secondly, operating from the notion of "belief con- gruence" via selective exposure and selective perception, an individual's personal value structure affects his television viewing behavior. 2 Values then, may be examined as both independent or de- dependent variables. However, the primary purpose of this research is not to test the direction of "value-television" relationship, but to test the nature of the relationship. The introduction is divided into four sections. Section A. Rokeach On Values, reviews Rokeach's definitions and oper- ationalization of values. Section B, Uses and Gratifications Literature, describes the general category of mass media study from which this research emerges. Section C provides the "Theoretical Rationale" for the study. Part I, relying on the "consistency principles" discusses the concept of "belief congruence." Part II uses the sociologist's social- ization perspective to discuss the idea that man is a social product" whose values are influenced by society's institu- tions. Section C concludes with the major theoretical hypo- thesis. Section D "Research Hypotheses and Rationale," highlights the most important concepts previously discussed and provides further support for the research hypotheses. The concern for this topic arises from a general inter- est in media "uses and gratifications" research. Uses and gratification research portrays the media consumer as an active, purposive participant in the mass media process. While this type of research is intrinsically interesting, its major value is in the role it plays as an intervening variable in the more traditional media effects research. It highlights the importance of considering both the social and psychological context in which the message has been received. Glaser (1965) observes: Since users approach the media with a variety of needs and predispositions...any precise identifica* tion of the effects of television watching...must identify the various types of viewers. Unfortunately, as Blumler and Katz (1974) point out: The study of mass media use suffers at present from the absence of a relevant theory of social and psychological needs...Thus far, gratifications research has stayed close to what we have been calling media related needs (in the sense that the media have been observed to satisfy them at least in part)...(p.24). The proposed research suggests that television viewers, identified as viewing a high number of hours per week, use television both as a source for value identification and value system prioritization, as well as a reinforcer of that value system. This value processing may represent an impor- tant psychological use of television. The reinforcement as- pect may represent an important psychological gratification. ROKEACH ON VALUES The author's interest in human values is generated from a theory of values offered by Rokeach (1973). It is Rokeach's theory and research perspective on values that provide the foundation for this research project. The first task is to review for the reader Rokeach's per- spective on values. Taken largely from his book, The Nature of Human Values, it will include definitions of the terms value and value system, an explanation of the difference between values and attitudes, identification of value func- tions, explanation of Rokeach's operationalization of the 4 value system, the differentiation between higher and lower order values, and a report on values research. Rokeach states: "...values occupy a more central posi- tion than attitudes within one's personality makeup and cog- nitive systems, and they are therefore determinants of atti- tudes and behavior (p.18)." Values then, precede attitude and behavior. Rokeach outlines five assumptions that under- pin his theory: 1) the total number of values that a person possesses is relatively small. 2) all men everywhere possess the same values to dif- ferent degrees. 3) values are organized into value systems, 4) the antecedents of human values can be traced to culture, society, and its institutions, and per- sonality, and 5) the consequences of human values will be manifested in virtually all the phenomena that social scien- tists might consider worth investigating and under- standing (p. 3). Further, Rokeach argues that the value concept occupies a central position across all the social sciences, and shows promise of being able to unify the diverse interests of all sciences concerned with human behavior. At this point, it is important to remind the reader that Rokeach's value theory is not a theory of value acquisition or development. Rather, it is a theory of value organization. Value is defined as "...an enduring belief that a speci- fic mode of conduct or end—state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of con- duct or end-state of existence. (p.5)." Significantly more 5 research has been completed on the theory and measurement of attitudes than with values. Rokeach attributes this to the rapid development of attitude measurement tools, and the lack of clarity in distinguishing between and functionally relating attitudes and values. Therefore, an understanding of why values are more useful than attitudes for predicting behavior is in part contingent upon understanding the differ— ences between values and attitudes. According to Rokeach: An attitude differs from a value in that an attitude refers to an organization of several beliefs around a specific object of situation. A value on the other hand, refers to a single belief of a very specific kind. It concerns a desirable mode of behavior or end-state that has a transcendental quality to it, guiding actions, attitudes, judgments, and compari- sons across specific objects and situations and be- yond immediate goals to more ultimate goals (p.18). Based upon that definition Rokeach further articulates important value attitude differences: 1) whereas a value is a single belief, an attitude refers to an organization of several beliefs that are all focused on a given object or sit- uation. A Likert scale, for example, consists of a representative sample of beliefs all of which concern the same object or situation. When summed, it provides a single index of a per— son's favorable or unfavorable attitude toward an object or situation. 2) a value transcends objects and situations whereas an attitude is focused on some object or situation. 3) a value is a standard but an attitude is not a standard. Favorable or unfavorable evaluations of numerous attitude objects and situations may be based upon a relatively small number of values serving as standards. 4) a person has as many values as he has learned be- liefs concerning desirable modes of conduct and end-states of existence, and as many attitudes as direct or indirect encounters he has had with 6 specific objects or situations. It is thus est- imated that values only number in the dozens. whereas attitudes number in the thousands. 5) values occupy a more central position than at- titudes within one's personality makeup and cog- nitive system, and they are therefore determin— ants of attitudes as well as of behavior. 6) value is a more dynamic concept than attitude, having a more immediate link to motivation. 7) the substantive content of a value may directly concern adjustive, ego defense, knowledge or self-actualization functions while the content of an attitude is related to such functions only inferentially, (p.18). An individual's values are then organized into a prior- ity system of values. Rokeach defines this value system, ...as an enduring organization of beliefs concerning pre- ferable modes of conduct or end-states of existence along a continuum or relative importance (p.5)." As will be de- tailed later, this definition is operationalized into two value systems: 1) preferable modes of conduct or instru- mental values and 2) end-states of existence or terminal values. One approach to understanding values and their useful- ness in research is to examine the functions of values and value systems. Rokeach suggests three functions: 1) values are standards that guide on-going activ— ties. 2) value systems are employed as general plans to resolve conflicts and to make decisions. 3) values give expression to human needs (p.13). He lists a variety of examples of how values provide standards for behavior. Values lead us to positions on 7 social issues. They help us evaluate and judge ourselves and others. They tell us which beliefs, attitudes, values, and actions are worth challenging, protesting and arguing about. One particularly interesting notion is that values tell us how to psychoanalytically rationalize beliefs, attitudes, and actions personally and socially unacceptable, so that we will end up with personal feelings of morality and compe- tence. Rokeach states that both of these ingredients are in- dispensable for the maintenance and enhancement of self-esteem. He provides the following examples: an unkind remark made to a friend may be rationalized as an honest communication: an inhibited sex life may be rationalized as a life guided by self-control: and an act of aggression by a nation may be rationalized as in the interest of national security. The second function of values identified by Rokeach was the employment of values as general plans to resolve conflict and make decisions. Here, he suggests that when situations activate several values, it is unlikely the individual will be able to act in a compatible manner with each value. Based upon the individual's priority ranking of values, the individ- ual will choose between the alternatives and solve the problem. The third function identified was the role values play in giving expression to human needs. These are expressed in terms of long range needs. Values also have a strong motivational component. "If we behave in all the ways prescribed by our instrumental values. we will be rewarded with all the end-states specified by our terminal values (p.14)." Another aspect of value motivation 8 is that individual values are the "conceptual tools and wea- pons" we use to maintain and enhance self-esteem. Rokeach's solution to the problem of measuring values was the result of considering a number of approaches. The approach of drawing inferences about a person's values from his behavior was rejected because it was too time consuming and expensive, couldn't be employed with a large sample, was difficult to quantify, and subject to observer bias. The self-report approach was rejected because of the unlikelihood of an individual being able or willing to report honestly. Avoiding these limitations, Rokeach constructed a list of in- strumental and a list of terminal values to be rank ordered by the respondent in terms of "importance to IQU as guiding principles in XQUR life." The ranking method assumes that it is not the absolute presence or absence of value that is of interest, but their relative ordering (p.27). Rokeach describes the ranking task as highly projective, and that the respondent must rely on his own internalized system of values to tell him how to complete the ranking. While a number of versions of the value scale have been developed, the final (Form D) version presents the respondent with a list of 18 instrumental and 18 terminal values: Terminal_Values A comfortable life (a prosperous life) An exciting life (a stimulating, active life A sense of accomplishment (lasting contribution) A world at peace (free of war and conflict) A world of beauty (beauty of nature and the arts) Equality (brotherhood, equal opportunity for all) Family security (taking care of loved ones) Freedom (independence, free choice) Happiness (contentedness) Inner Harmony (freedom from inner conflict) Mature love (sexual and spiritual intimacy) National security (protection from attack) Pleasure (an enjoyable, leisurely life) Salvation (saved, eternal life) Self-respect (self-esteem) Social recognition (respect, admiration) True friendship (close, companionship) Wisdom (a mature understanding of life) Instrumental Values Ambitious (hard-working, aspiring) Broadminded (open-minded) lO Capable (competent, effective) Cheerful (lighthearted, joyful) Clean (neat, tidy) Courageous (standing up for your beliefs) Forgiving (willing to pardon others) Helpful (working for the welfare of others) Honest (sincere, truthful) Imaginative (daring, creative) Independent (self-reliant, self sufficient) Intellectual (intelligent, reflective) Lo ical %consistent, rational) Loving (affectionate, tender) Obedient (dutiful, respectful) Polite (courteous, well mannered) Responsible (dependable, reliable) Self-controlled (restrained. self-disciplined) The values were selected from large lists of values com- piled through extensive literature reviews and personal inter- views. The process of list reduction for the terminal values 11 was based on a number of criteria: values were eliminated when 1) they were judged to be more or less synonymous with one another (e.g. freedom and liberty), 2) they were empir- ically known to be more or less synonymous (e.g. the correla- tion between rankings of salvation and unity with God was over .80), 3) they overlapped (e.g. religion and salvation), or 4) they did not represent end-states of existence (e.g. wis- dom is an end—state but education is not, (p.29). The major source for the list of original instrumental values was Anderson's (1968) list of 555 personality trait words. The eighteen instrumental values were selected by re- taining only one value from a group of synonyms or near sy- nonyms (e.g. helpful, kind, kindhearted), by retaining those judged to represent the most important values in American society, by retaining those deemed to be maximally discrim- inating across social status, sex, race age, religion, politics, etc., by retaining those judged to be meaningful values in all cultures, and by retaining those one could readily admit to without appearing immodest or vain (p.29-30). In 1968 Rokeach conducted a major research project using his value survey. In April of that year, the National Opinion Research Center administered the value survey to a national sample of adults over twenty-one. Other data obtained in the survey included demographics, reactions to the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, attitudes toward civil rights, the poor, Vietnam, student protest, church involvement toward the 12 political and social affairs of society, and preferences for 1968 presidential candidates. Rokeach observes: "These find- ings provide us with perhaps the first descriptive data of a systematic nature on the distribution of values in a cross section of adult American society, and they may be regarded as one important indicator of the quality of life in America (13-56)." The data analysis examined values both as dependent and independent variables. As a dependent variable, terminal and instrumental values differentiated significantly between cultures and a variety of demographic characteristics. As a determinant of attitudes, a large number of signi- ficant relationships were determined between values and atti— tudes. As Rokeach points out, many of the relationships make intuitive sense, others are not explainable. Of all thirty- six values, equality was reported the value best predicting reactions to the assassination of Dr. King, attitude toward Blacks, poor people, Vietnam, student protest, and church activism. Salvation was the value most related to perceived importance of religion, differences in religious orientations, and anticommunist attitudes. Salvation and obedient were values most associated with the attitude dogmatism (p.120). Some expected relationships did not materialize. The value, world at peace, did not distinguish hawks and doves: national security, did not discriminate between those expressing atti- tudes for and against communism, and broadmindedness did not discriminate between those who were gleeful and fearful after 13 Dr. King's assassination and those who were saddended, angered, or ashamed (p.120). In examining values and behavior, equality was the best predictor of interracial behavior such as joining the NAACP. participating in civil rights demonstrations, and partisan pol— itical activity. Salvation was the best predictor of church going; and the value, world of beauty, best differentiated between artists and other professional groups. The best pre- dictors of education as a profession were the values imagina- tive, intellectual, and logical (p.159). A comparison between the attitude and behavior data re- veals that the values comfortable life, equality, and salva- tion, are significantly related to more than half of all the behaviors measured, as well as to most of the attitudes. Rokeach suggests that socioeconomic, political, and religious values are the most powerful determinants of attitudes and behaviors. The values clean, polite, and obedient predict attitudes more than behavior. Values such as an exciting life, world at peace, mature love, pleasure, being capable, forgiving, helpful, honest, and self-control predict behavior more than attitudes. Self respect and true friendship are the least discriminating values (p.159). USES AND GRATIFICATION LITERATURE The review of Rokeach's perspective on values should pro- vide the reader with an understanding of how values in this study are defined and operationalized. As previously mentioned, this study is designed to explore an individual's values and 14 value system as they relate to motivation for viewing televi- sion. "The advantage of the motivational approach is that it is conceptually closer to the 'why' of media usage." (McLeod and O'Keefe, 1972, p.125) Studies of viewer motivation assume that the viewer in the mass media process is an active part- icipant (Klapper, 1960: Mendohlson, 1964: Schramm, Lyle, and Parker, 1961). The general category of research that as- sumes this position has been labeled "uses and gratifications" research. It seeks to answer the question, why do people spend so much of their time consuming media? Some of the best known early studies were Cantril's (1942) analysis of quiz programs and Herzog's (1944) examination of why women listened to soap operas. Waples et a1. (1940) and Berleson (1949) looked at uses of the newspaper. Bereleson's classic study asked people what they missed during a newspaper strike. Weiss (1969) in his review of the "uses and gratifi- cations" literature suggests that most "uses and gratification" studies can be categorized into a few general categories with- out doing particular injustice to their specific qualities. Providing numerous citations for each category, he lists the following headings: 1) time filling, 2) relaxation or diver- sion, 3) social, and 4) personal. A similar categorization procedure occurs with the various "functional" explanations of the media. For example, the four "functions" of the media was initially proposed by Lasswell (1948) and later by Wright (1960). They suggested that the media serve the functions of surveillance, correlation, 15 entertainment, and cultural transmission. McQuail, Blumler, and Brown (1972) suggest further categorization, diversion (including escape from the constraints of routine and the burdens of problems, and emotional release): personal rela- tionships (including substitute companionship as well as so- cial utility): personal identity (including personal refer- ence, reality exploration, and value reinforcement):and surveillance. While "uses and gratifications" studies emerging from these various categories have been valuable and interesting, they have primarily dealt with motivations from the point of view of audience expectations. For example, I am motivated to watch television in order to relax, to be informed. to pass the time, etc. Such studies often include the highly tentative assumption that many of the goals of mass media use can be derived from self-report. This assumes that individuals are sufficiently self-aware to report the reasons why they consume media. The obvious methodological problem with this approach is the difficulty it poses in "exploring the links between gratifications detected and the psychological and sociological origin of the ngggg that were so satisfiedfl (Katz, Blumler, Gurevitch, 1974, p. 20) According to Rokeach (1973), values even go beyond needs to combine the sociological and psychological forces acting upon an individual: Values are the cognitive representation not only of individual needs but also of societal and institu- tional demands. They are the joint results of so- ciological as well as psychological forces acting upon the individual--sociological because society l6 and its institutions socialize the individual for the common good to internalize shared conception of the desirable: psychological because individual motivations require cognitive expression, justifi- cation, and indeed exhortation in socially desir— able terms (p. 20). It would seem, therefore, that value identification may be the needed "link" between gratifications detected and the psychological and sociological origin of the needs satisfied. THEORETICAL RATIONALE The theoretical base for the current study combines the notion of "belief congruence," and socialization, i.e., an individual is a "social product" whose value structure is ultimately a reflection of society's institutions. Both of these ideas are elaborated in this section. Part I The notion of "belief congruence" (Rokeach and Rothman, 1965) asserts the general principle that people value a be- lief system to the extent it is similar with their own: The principle of belief congruence asserts that we tend to value a given belief, subsystem, or systems of beliefs in proportion to their degree of congru- ence with our own belief system and, further, that we tend to value people in proportion to the degree to which they exhibit beliefs, subsystems, or sys- tems of belief congruent with our own (p.129). This study views the institution of television as representa- tive of a particular belief system. Rokeach identifies values as being one of three types of beliefs: 1) true or false beliefs, 2) evaluative beliefs judged to be either good or bad, and 3) beliefs that some means or end actions areeither desirable or undesirable. 17 Values, he suggests, are of the third type (1973, p.6-7). Belief congruence is then considered to be closely related to value congruence. "Belief congruence" is similar in nature to the basic consistency theories found in the social psychological lit- erature. Emerging basically from the work of Fritz Heider (1944, 1946, 1958) they include principally the model of congruity (Osgood, Suci, Tannenbaum, 1957), the balance mo- del (Newcomb, 1953: Cartwright and Harary, 1956: Abelson and Rosenberg, 1960) and Festinger's (1957) dissonance theory. The element that ties all three theories together is the prin- ciple that human nature abhors incongruity, dissonance, or inbalance (Zajonc, 1960). Secord and Backman (1964) state that an individual needs the support of others to maintain his attitudes and beliefs. Sullivan (1947) refers to the attempt to validate ones at- titudes through agreement with others. consensual validation. Newcomb (1961) postulated that individuals attempt to achieve balance in attitudes as part of a general strain towards sym- metry. A number of studies have provided support for the general principle of belief congruence. Rokeach, in separate experi- ments with Smith and Evans (1960) and Mezei (1966) found that belief similarity was of greater importance than religion or race in determining personal preferences. Measuring social distance and feelings of friendliness as dependent variables, Stein, Hardyck, and Smith (1965) found that the independent variable belief congruence, explained more of the variance 18 than race. Other studies, Byrne (1966), Byrne and Wong (1962) provide additional support. The belief congruence position is supported in mass media research by the notion that people tend to expose themselves to mass communications which are consistent with their exist— ing attitudes and interests (Klapper, 1960, p. 19). If they are exposed to materials inconsistent with their existing views they will utilize the self-protective exercises known as selec- tive exposure, selective perception, and selective retention. Predominantly, research literature supports the idea that individuals are m0re likely to expose themselves to communi- cation experiences consistent with their attitudes, values, and beliefs, than communication experiences inconsistent with their attitudes, values, and beliefs. Part II The second theoretical notion of interest is the notion that the individual is a social product of society's insti- tutions. An institution is defined as an enduring organization of some aspect of collect- ive life (social, political, economic, religious) controlled by rules, customs, rituals, or laws. While the organization consists of persons, the pat- tern of their relationship is such a way as to be relatively independent of the individual (English and English, 1958, p. 266). Often, mass media such as radio, newspapers, and television are referred to as institutions. Defleur (1966) adds clarity to this reference defining institutionalization as the sta- balizing of widespread patterns of actions related to some cultural trait or combination of traits. In this sense, l9 Defleur explains, institutionalization is the.end-product of innovation and represents equilibrium in a system rather than change. If behavior patterns related to a particular item have been institutionalized, it can be postulated that such an item fulfills some functional need in the social system in question. Thus, the concept of institution encompasses not only the social organization, but behavior patterns. Rokeach (1973)in discussing a systematic method for classi- fying values suggests that it is just as meaningful to speak of institutional values as of individual values (p.24). English and English (1958) note, "These abstract concepts (values) of worth are usually not the result of the individual's own valuing; they are social products that have been imposed upon him and slowly internalized, i.e., accepted and used as his own criteria of worth" (p.576). Rokeach adds that each human value has been preserved and passed on by institutions. which he defines as social organizations. Social organiza- tions specialize in the transmission of selected values from generation to generation. The identification of institutional values, then should provide insight to societal values. This position emerges from the field of socialization. "In its broadest conception, socialization refers to the sum total of past experiences an individual has, that in turn, may be expected to play some role in shaping his future behavior (Inkeles, 1969, p.615). Socialization has its roots in psy- chology, anthropology, and sociology. "From the sociological point of view, socialization refers to the process whereby 20 individuals acquire the personal system properties--the know- ledge, skills, attitudes, values, needs and motivations, cog- nitive, affective, and conative patterns, which shape their adaption to the physical and sociocultural setting in which they live." (Ibid.) Inkeles (p.618) adopts the conventional division of life cycle into infancy and childhood, youth and adolescence, adults and old age to compare and contrast four main elements in the socialization matrix: 1) 2) 3) 4) the main socialization issue that is, the typical life condition or social demand which dominates the attention of the socializee and the social- izers and becomes the characteristic or defining aspect of any given stage of individual bio- social development. the agents of socializations, these individuals and social units or organizations which typical- ly play the greatest role in the socialization process in the several stages of develOpment. the objectives which these agents set as goals for successful socialization in each period, that is, the qualities they wish to inculcate and the conditions under which they prefer to train the socializee. the main task facing the socializee, that is the problem to be solved or the skill learned as it confronts the socializee from his internal per- spective. The dimensions of the social structure from which this socialization matrix is examined are ecology (concerns popula- tion), economics and politics (concerns institutions), and system of values (concerns culture). A number of observations reported by Inkeles provide sup- port and are of interest to the proposed theoretical notion: 1) Despite the massive importance of the earliest years in 21 the development of the individual, socialization is a process that goes on continuously through life. New socialization problems arise during the life cycles forcing the individual to alter concepts and values. 2) Recognizing the life long continuity of socialization requires us to acknowledge the im- .portance of social units other than the nuclear family as so- cializing agents. 3) The integration of the individual as a psychic or personality system and the integration of society as a social system set limits on the variablitiy of sociali- zation within any given sociocultural system. If the social- ization demands of different parts of the social system are too disparate, individuals may be subject to unendurable pres— sure or conflict. This is certainly one element contributing to what anthropologists have noted as the "strain toward sym- mgtgy." 4) Effective socialization is a pre-condition of or- ganized social life. Every social organizatipn must be pre— pared to do some socialization of its constituent members, partly to teach ways of acting distinctive to its needs, and partly to reinforce established patterns, thus insuring min- imal drift away from expectations and norms. Every social or- ganization is therefore, to some degree an agent or producer of socialization. English and English-(1958) have referred to a "social or- ganization" as an "institution." Institutions, then can also be described, to some degree, as agents of producers of social- ization. Carrying the syllogistic logic one step further, tele- vision, possessing the institutional characteristics described 22 by Defleur (1966) can also be described, to some degree, as an agent or producer of socialization. The extent to which television, as a socializing agent, affects each individual is situation dependent. Research has provided general support for the socializing aSpects of tele- vision.* As reported above, socialization is a continuing life- long process. Television viewing is a popular activity of all ages. Considering the life-long continuity of socializa- tion, television would seem a logical choice as an influential socializing agent for high television viewers. The final point is the interesting notion that television, as a social organization, mugt, by the definition of its role, socialize its constituents. This occurs, as Inkeles pointed out, partly to teach its constituents ways of acting to its distinctive needs (buying of advertized products), and partly to reinforce established patterns and insuring minimal drift away from expectations and norms (habitual television viewing). The interaction of the two theoretical notions of "belief congruence" and man as a social product provides the impetus for the major research hypotheses of this study: The personal value system of an individual and his per- ception of the institution of television's value system is more likely to be similar among high television view- ers than low television viewers. *Since the classic works of Himmelweit, Oppenheim, and Vince (1958) and Schramm, Lyle, and Parker (1961), there has been great interest in the broad area of television's socializ- ing effects. Research conducted by such individuals as Bandura (1965), Ward (1972), Eron, et al., (1972), Feschbach and Singer (1971), and Friedrich and Stein (1973) have examined both the anti and prosocial effects of television from a variety of view— points. '1'...Il.. 23 HYPOTHESES AND RATIONALE Thus far, it has been suggested that values are determin- ants of attitudes and behavior, and occupy a more central pos- ition than attitudes within one's personality makeup and cog- nitive system. Values are beliefs concerning preferable modes of conduct (instrumental values) and endrstates of existence (terminal values). Values are internally ranked or ordered by an individual along a continuum of relative importance, creating a value system. Similar value rankings by individuals or groups may reliably predict certain types of behaviors or attitudes of those individuals or groups. Rokeach has oper- ationalized this continuum in his "value survey." An attitude differs from a value in that an attitude re- fers to an organization of several beliefs (values) around a specific object or situation. A value refers to a single belief of a very specific kind. The relationship between an individual's values and his value system priorties, and television viewing behavior is established through the interaction of two theoretical notions- "belief congruence" and that man is a "social product" whose values and priorities are influenced by society's institutions. Television is a social organization. It is an institu- tion which plays an important role in the continuing life- long socialization process of man. Television is a socializ- ing agent which must continually "socialize" its audience to insure its own stability. Television, as an institution, is representative of certain values which as part of the 24 socializing process are seen to be adopted or learned by the viewer. High television viewer's value systems would logically then, be more consistent with perceived values of television than a low television viewer. Television viewing may represent in society, what Alex Inkeles reported as, the "strain toward symmetry." This idea is supported by the sociological consistency principles. "Belief congruence" theory suggests that we tend to value a belief system in proportion to its consistency with our own belief system. Consequently, an individual whose value sy— stem has been influenced by and is consistent with television's perceived value system, would be strongly attracted to televi- sion as an agent reinforcing that value system. Thus, televi- sion may be considered as a source, reinforcer, and product of the values of a social system. It is therefore hypothesized: The positive correlation between a respondent's ranking of their personal terminal values and their ranking of the institution of television's terminal values will be significantly higher among high television viewers than among low television viewers. The major source for an individual's perceived values of television would be the programing viewed. It would be likely then, that individuals with similar values will view similar programs. It is therefore hypothesized: Respondents with similar values view similar televi- sion programs. Rokeach states that there is a functional relationship between attitudes and values. One view of the nature of that 25 functional relationship is hypothesized by Woodruff and Divesta (1948). They propose: An individual's attitude toward any object, proposi- tion, or circumstance will be favorable if, according to his concepts, that object seems to favor the achieve- ment of his strong positive values. Conversely, one's attitude toward any object, proposition or circumstance will be unfavorable if, according to his concepts, the obj2g§)seems to threaten his strong positive values pI I One would expect that if an individual's values are re- lated to his perception of television values, they would dem- onstrate a favorable attitude toward television. Conversely, inconsistency of value relations should predict an unfavorable attitude toward television. It is therefore hypothesized: The higher the respondent's hours of television viewed per week the more favorable the respondent's attitude toward television. The positive correlation between a respondent's ranking of their personal terminal values and their ranking of the institution of television's terminal values will be significantly higher among those who have a favorable attitude toward television than those who have an unfavorable attitude toward tele- vision. A limited number of media studies have dealt with per- sonality factors and television viewing. Anast (1966) re- ported support for the hypothesis that television viewers and movie goers fit Jung's sensation-oriented personality type, and readers of novels tended to be intuitive. Gutman (1973) found women's perception of themselves and what would constitute an ideal self differed for heavy and light tele- vision viewers. Perrow's (1968) study of television viewers and certain television roles regularly viewed, found that personality traits of viewers tended to be correlated more 26 positively with the perceived personality traits of liked television characters than with traits of less liked tele- vision characters. Edgar (1973) studied social and personal- ity factors influencing learning from film and television. He found that both males and females with low self-esteem were related with high television viewing and greater movie attendance. Low self-esteem males and females read fewer books, and listened to radio more often than high self-esteem individuals. Self-esteem has been selected as a control variable for this study because previous research has indicated that low self-esteem individuals may be among the high television viewers. The self-esteem variable also provides interest when one examines Mossman and Ziller's (1968) concept of self-esteem in light of Inkele's previous comments regarding the conse- quences of highly disparate socialization demands on indi- viduals (see p. 24). Mossman and Ziller (1968) view self—concept as a mediat- ing agent between the organism and the social environment, and that self-esteem is that component of the self-system which is associated with the organism's consistency of social responses. Self-esteem, then, regulates the extent to which the self- system is maintained under conditions of strain, such as during the processing of new information. Persons with low self-esteem do not possess well developed conceptual buffers for evaluative stimuli (p. 363-367). 27 The highly disparate socialization demands placed on in- dividuals by different parts of social system may in some cases provide the motivation for low self-esteem individuals to turn to television as a medium more likely to reinforce existing values and attitudes than challenge them. The medium of tele- vision may provide ideal stimuli for those viewers, who as Inkeles describe, "strain towards consistency." This study presents the opportunity to explore the re- lationship between self-esteem, television viewing, and per— sonal values. The following hypotheses will be tested: The higher the respondent's television viewing hours per week, the lower the respondent's self-esteem score. The positive correlation between a respondent's rank- ing of their personal terminal values and their ranking of the institution of television's terminal values will be significantly higher among low self-esteem respond- ents. Ail, ,Allll. Pill. I... l1,..i|l’l.fl IIIITIIIIIII.IAIIIII. I II. METHOD The method utilized in this study was a field survey. The purpose of this section is to explain the procedures employed to test the hypotheses advanced in Chapter I. The section is subdivided into A) Sample, B) Interviewers, C) Interview procedure, D) Operationalization, E) Hypothesis testing, and F) Frequency distributions and median testing. SAMPLE The Lansing (including East Lansing, Haslett, and Okemos) telephone directory and the Lansing City and Suburban directories were the two sampling frames considered as sources for the sample selection. Each sampling frame has both advan— tages and disadvantages. The primary advantage of the telephone directory is its convenience. The entire greater Lansing area is listed in one, easily accessible frame. This aids considerably in a systematic random sample selection. The primary disadvantage is that the telephone directory is not a complete listing of the universe of households. Individuals with unlisted numbers, as well as households without telephones, may represent a p0pulation subgroup unlike the telephone directory population. 28 29 In a discussion with a Michigan Bell representative, he stated there was approximately a 98% penetration of tele- phones in the greater Lansing area, but that approximately 12% of the numbers were unlisted. The problem with the data collected from a telephone sample is that it is only generalizable back to the telephone directory population. This can be alleviated, to some extent, by comparing the telephone sample population demo- graphics with the latest census data. If the sample is repre- sentative of the census demographics, you would have more confidence in the generalizability of the findings to the entire universe. The primary advantage of the city directory is that between 97%-98% of the universe of households is represented. The disadvantage of the city directory is that in the case of the greater Lansing area, two separate books must be con- sulted. This necessitates a proportional draw from each book based upon the total population represented by each book. The final consideration in the selection is the date of the frame's publication. This is important in the Lansing/ East Lansing area because of the high rate of occupancy change. In an interview with the R.L. Polk Co., publishers of the city directories, they reported during 1974-75 a 36.75% change of occupancy for Lansing and 40.01% for East Lansing. The sampling frame with the most recent data was the telephone directory compiled in the Fall of 1975. The Lansing city directory was compiled in the Spring of 1975, and the 3O suburban directory in the Summer of 1974. In consideration of the high rate of occupancy change in the greater Lansing area, along with the easy accessibi- lity of the telephone directory, the more up-to-date tele- phone directory was selected as the sampling frame. A systematic random sample of 400 respondents was select- ed. From the list of 400 respondents, 200 respondents were randomly selected for personal interviews. The remaining 200 respondents were used as replacements for the original sample. Each reSpondent received a letter from the Department of Telecommunication introducing the study and seeking the respondent's cooperation. The reSpondent was informed that within the next few weeks a student from the Telecommunication Department would be calling on them at their home to ask them questions about television. Initial contact with the respon- dent was made without appointment. The addresses of all respondents were pinpointed on a city map to define logical geographical clusters. The clus- ters were then assigned to interviewers. The assignments were based primarily on the interviewer's availability of transportation, and in some cases, interviewers with beards were not assigned to established working class neighborhoods. The primary purpose of the assignment technique was to cluster the respondents in order to save travel time and expense. It should be noted, however, that the non-random nature of the interview assignments increases the likelihood of 31 interview bias against a particular socioeconomic group located within a geographical cluster affecting the study results. Whereas, a randomly composed group of respondents assigned to interviewers would likely represent a variety of socioeconomic groups: therefore, lessening the likelihood of interview bias affecting the study results. INTERVIEWERS Seven Michigan State University graduate students and two senior undergraduate students from the Department of Telecommunication served as personal interviewers. Each interviewer was required to attend a two-hour, group train- ing session and a one hour individual training session to become familiar with the nature of the study, interview requirements, and techniques of personal interviewing. Inter- viewers received either course credit or cash payment for their participation. INTERVIEW PROCEDURE A questionnaire packet was prepared for each respondent. The packet consisted of an index card with the respondent's name, address, phone number, and code number, a gang-typed cover letter on Telecommunication Department letterhead (See Appendix A), and an envelope with a commemorative stamp. The interviewer then, hand addressed each respondent envelope. Also included in the packet were the value index cards for sorting by the respondent, television attitude questionnaire, self-esteem measure, and forms for recording value ordering, 32 hours of television per week, and the educational level, sex and occupation of the respondent (See Appendix B). The interviewers staggered the mailing of the cover letters to narrow the time period between the respondent's reception of the cover letter and the interviewer's calling on the respondent. Interviewers called on reSpondents at a variety of times during the morning, afternoon, and evening attempting the maximize the likelihood of the respondent being home. If, after repeated visits to the reSpondent's home no contact could be made, the interviewer attempted to reach the respondent by phone (See Appendix C for interviewer's instruction sheet). If, for some reason, the interviewer could not complete an interview with an originally assigned respondent, the respondent was replaced by randomly selecting another respon- dent from the 200 available replacements. OPERATIONALIZATION OF VARIABLES This subheading describes how the following variables were operationalized: 1) general attitudes toward television, 2) respondent's values, 3) reSpondent's perception of tele- vision's values, 4) television program preferences, 5) self- esteem measure, 6) control variables. General Attitudes Toward Television General attitudes toward television was operationalized by using a semantic differential deve10ped by Steiner (1963) in his nationwide study of television viewing. Seventeen bipolar adjectives were given to the respondent with 33 instructions to, "Read each pair quickly and put a check mark someplace between them, wherever you think it belongs to describe television." Steiner reports that the scale discriminated between higher and lower educational and income groups. For this study, a total attitude score was computed for each reSpondent. Components of the scale include: Exciting l g 3 4 5 6 Dull In Good Taste - In Bad Taste Wonderfu1 - Terrible Important - Unimportant Nobody Cares Much - 0n Everyone's Mind Generally Bad - Generally Excellent For Me - Not for Me Lots of Variety — All the Same Getting Better - Getting Worse Upsetting - Relaxing Informative - Not Informative Interesting - Uninteresting Lots of Fun - Not Much Fun Wonderful - Terrible Imaginative - No Imagination Respondent's Values The interviewers instructed the respondent to rank order Rokeach's eighteen instrumental and terminal values. Each value for the instrumental and terminal group was typed on a 3x5 index card and presented to the respondent in alpha- betical order. A brief definition of the value was provided on the card. The reSpondent was instructed to lay the value cards out on the table and sort them in order of importance to YOU as guiding principles in.XQUR life (Rokeach, 1973, p- 27)- Reliability estimates for Rokeach's value survey for test-retest after a seven week period was reported in the .70's (Rokeach, 1973, p. 33). The validity issue of Rokeach's 34 survey is discussed in terms of predictive validity in Robinson and Shaver (1973). Robinson and Shaver report the rank order of the terminal value salvation highly predicts church attendance. The relationship between the average relative position of the values "equality" and "freedom" differentiated between those who are sympathetic and unsym- pathetic to civil rights demonstrations. Those sympathetic to civil rights demonstrations ranked freedom #1 and equality #3. Those unsympathetic ranked freedom #2 and equality #11 (p- 547)- Respondent's Percgption of Televison Values The operationalization of the respondent's perception of the institution of television's values required the reSpon— dent to think about television in holistic terms. It was hoped that an individual would be able to apply Rokeach's 18 terminal values to the multidimensional nature of television. Pretest results indicated that respondents were able to com- plete the task, although in some cases, the interviewer had to urge the reSpondent to complete the ranking of values. Interviewer instructions for the completion of this task were: Here again is the deck of 18 (terminal) values. Now, this time instead of putting these values in order according to how important they are to you personally...I would like you to think for a moment about your overall impression of tele- vision...bringing together your thoughts on the good things about television and the things you might not like about television...So, basically, your overall impression, or point of view about television. Now, based upon this overall impres- sion of television, what do you think is the most important value that television promotes? ‘(See Appendix C) 35 The word "promote" was selected instead of "represent" because it was felt that "promote" was an easier instruction for the respondent, and was suggestive of an image of tele- vision that went beyond value association with programming, i.e., the image of television the "institution." Television Program Preferences A complete list of network commercial and public tele- vision offerings was compiled and presented to a group of twenty judges. The judges were asked to place each program in one of six categories (Chaffee, McLeod, and Atkin, 1970). The categories were news, crime-detective, adventure-drama, comedy-variety, situation comedy and game shows. The game shows category was a replacement for the original westerns category. Programs categorized in agreement by all judges were retained. From this list, the three highest viewer rated programs within each of the six categories were used to create an eighteen item list of television programs (See Appendix D for complete program list). Each program was typed on a 3x5 index card and presented to the respondent.in alphabetical order. The interviewer instructed the respondent, "On these eighteen cards are eighteen different television programs. Imagine you have a TV set with eighteen different channels. Each of these programs is on at the same time. Which program would be your first choice to watch? Which would be your second choice, etc.?" The respondent then sorts the program cards into preference order. 36 Self-Esteem Measure The self-esteem variable was operationalized by utiliz- ing Charles Berger's (1966) factor analyzed self—esteem measure (See Appendix B). Berger developed this measure by factor analyzing Janis—Fielding's Feeling of Inadequacy Personality Questionnaire. He then added some original items to comprise the eighty item self-esteem measure. Defining self-esteem as the "overall evaluation a person places on himself," five factors emerged measuring various dimensions of self-evaluation. For the purpose of this research, a shortened version of Berger's scale was created by selecting the five highest loaded items from each of the first four factors, and the three highest loaded items from the fifth factor. Each item is measured on a five point scale. Control Variables The most crucial control variable in this study was the number of hours per week the reSpondent spends watching tele- vision (this is often referred to in the study as high and low television viewing). The data were collected by breaking the television viewing day into day-parts. These include the time period from 6:00 AM to 12:00 noon, 12:00 noon to 6:00 PM, and 6:00 PM to 2:00 AM. To maximize the respondent's recall, each was asked to report average viewing for Monday through Thursday, and Friday, Saturday, and Sunday separately. Other control variables were the previously operation- alized self-esteem and attitudes toward television. In 37 addition the educational level and sex of the reSpondent were reported. HYPOTHESIS TESTING H 'The positive correlation between a reSpondent's ranking 1 of their personal terminal values and their ranking of the institution of television's terminal values will be significantly higher among high television viewers than among low television viewers. There is no significant difference in the correlations among high and low television viewers. Variables - l) Respondent's personal terminal value survey. 2) Respondent's terminal value survey for the institution of television. 3) Respondent's television viewing hours per week. Level of measurement - ordinal Statistics - l) Spearman rank correlation coefficient: rS (Siegel, 1956)- 2) Mann-Whitney U Test (Siegel, 1956). Procedure - Spearman rank correlation coefficient was computed between each reSpondent's personal terminal value survey and the terminal television value survey. The coefficients of all respondents were then ranked and ordered with the highest negative correlation receiving the rank of No. l and highest positive correlation receiving the rank of No. 200. Each respondent Was then identified as a high or low television viewer by dividing the distribution of hours viewed at the 38 median. The ranks were summed for the high and low groups and the Mann—Whitney U Test was employed to compare them. The Mann-Whitney U Test is the nonparametric version of the t-test. It tests whether the difference attributed to the two groups could have happened by chance. (See Appendix H for rhos and ranks.) H2 The positive correlation between a respondent's ranking of their personal terminal values and their ranking of the institution of television's terminal values will be significantly higher among those who have a favorable attitude toward television than those who have an unfavorable attitude toward television. HO There is no significant difference in the correlations among viewers with favorable and unfavorable attitudes toward television. Variables - l) Respondent's personal terminal value survey. 2) Re8pondent's terminal value survey for the institution of television. 3) Respondent's general television attitude scale (Steiner, 1963). Level of measurement - ordinal Statistics - l) Spearman rank correlation coefficient: rS 2) Mann—Whitney U Test Procedure - The procedure for Testing H is similar to the 2 testing of H1 with the exception that each respondent was identified as a viewer with favorable or unfavorable atti- tudes towards television. This was established by dividing 39 the distribution of attitude scores at the median. Those respondents above the median were labeled as favorable, and those below the median as unfavorable. The ranks based on the previously established Spearman rank correlation coeffi- cients were summed for the favorable and unfavorable attitude groups. The Mann-Whitney U Test was then employed to test whether the difference between the two groups could have occurred by chance. H3 The positive correlation between a respondent's ranking of their personal terminal values and their ranking of the institution of television's terminal values will be significantly higher among low self-esteem respondents than among high self-esteem respondents. There is no significant difference in the correlations among high and low self-esteem respondents. A Variables - l) Respondent's personal terminal value survey. 2) ReSpondent's terminal value survey for the institution of television. 3) Self-esteem scale (Berger, 1966). Level of measurement - ordinal Statistics - l) Spearman rank correlation coefficient: rS 2) Mann-Whitney U Test Procedure - The procedure for test H3 is similar to the test- ing of H1 and H2 with the exception that each respondent was identified as a viewer with a high or low self-esteem level by again dividing the distribution of scores at the median. The ranks based on the previously established Spearman rank :ll"! ..leL'V i llitlliul i.l1.~ .I’I’lllll:ll'll 40 correlation coefficients were summed for the high and low self-esteem groups. The Mann-Whitney U Test was then employed to test whether the difference between the two groups could have occurred by chance. See Table l for summary of hypo- theses 1, 2, and 3. Table 1. Summary of Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 Predictions. Sum of the Ranks. Ranks are assigned to each respondent based upon the magnitude of the correlation between the respon- dent's personal terminal value survey and his television terminal value survey. The greater the positive correla- tion the higher the rank. Low Sum of Ranks High Sum of Ranks Low TV Viewing Unfavoravorable TV X Attitudes High Self-Esteem High TV Viewing Favorable TV X Attitudes Low Self-Esteem Respondents with similar personal terminal values will view similar television programs. ReSpondents with similar personal instrumental values will view similar television programs. Respondents with similar television terminal values will view similar television programs. There is no similarity in television programs viewed by respondents with similar values. 41 Variables - 1) Respondent's personal terminal value survey. 2) Respondent's instrumental value survey. 3) ReSpondent's television terminal value survey. 4) ReSpondent's program preferences. Level of measurement - ordinal Statistics - Kendall cofficient of concordance, W (Siegel, 1956) Procedure - A technique was needed by which respondents with similar values could be identified from the sample. Based upon the combined rankings for all respondents on each value survey, an overall median rank order was established for the personal terminal, instrumental, and television terminal values. For each survey taken separately, respondents with similar values were defined as those having ranked five of the highest ranked values within their first seven values.* Next the program preferences of the selected respondents were evaluated by using Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W, to determine the extent their program preferences were similar. This was completed separately for each of the three value survey groups identified. Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W, measures the extent to which there is agreement between the rankings on any number of variables. H The higher the reSpondent's television viewing hours per 7 week the lower the respondent's self-esteem score. *The criteria for selecting five of the first seven values was arbitrarily chosen in the attempt to identify at least the minimum number of similar respondents required by the statistic to test the hypotheses. If this criteria had not identified a sufficient number of reSpondents, a different criteria would have been established. 1 [III- Iii 1ilill! Illllillll iii-Ill I II Ill-Ii 1' lIIIIllII‘ I'll 42 Variables - l) Respondent's television viewing hours per week. 2) Respondent's self-esteem score. Level of measurement - the equal appearing intervals in the self-esteem measure is assumed to be interval level. Statistics - 1) Pearson Product-moment correlation (Blalook, 1972). Procedure chhg,Pearsoanroductzmemanigggggelation_i§g§_mgasure ofaassgeiationr The hours of television viewing per week will be correlated with the self-esteem scores. H8 The higher the reSpondent's television viewing hours per week the more favorable the respondent's attitude toward television. Variables - l) Respondent's television viewing hours per week. 2) Respondent's general television attitude score. Level of measurement - the equal appearing intervals of the television attitude measure is assumed to be interval level. Statistics - Pearson Product-moment correlation. Procedure - The number of hours of television viewing per week will be correlated with the general television attitude scores 0 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS AND MEDIAN TESTING Complete frequency distributions for all variables were determined. For the personal terminal, instrumental, and television terminal value surveys, and the program preferences, median rankings for all 200 respondents, on each item, were compiled. Frequency distributions for the entire sample were 428 also cross-tabulated by high and low television viewing, high and low self-esteem, favorable and unfavorable televison attitudes, high and low education, and by the sex of the resppndent. Median Tests (Siegel, 1956) were computed to determine whether the ranking of a value by one group was significantly different from the ranking of the other group. For example, do high television viewers rank the personal terminal value "national security" significantly lower than the 19w television viewers? Or, do the low television viewers rank the television program "60 Minutes" higher than the high television viewers? The Median Test determines whether the differences between the two medians are attributable to dif- ferences between the groups, or are due to chance (See Appen- dix E for complete list of tables). III I RESULTS Results section will include 1) completion rate, 2) description of sample population, 3) results of hypotheses testing, 4) frequency distributions and median testing, and 5) other findings. COMPLETION RATES The data were collected by personal interview from the cities of Lansing, East Lansing, Okemos, and Haslett, Michigan. Two hundred interviews were completed. Fifty-six of the ori- ginal 200 sample were replaced for a variety of reasons: 31 respondents had either moved, could not be located, or were never home after repeated attempts to contact: three reSpon- dents were deceased; two respondents could not complete inter- views because of age: twenty refused to cooperate. The primary reason offered for the non-cooperating group was, "I don't have the time." Overall, 256 respondents were selected, 7.8% refused, 13.3% could not be contacted or were deceased, and .8% were unusable. This resulted in an overall completion rate of 78.1%. DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE Measures of central tendency computed on the various data distributions collected, indicated the sample population was 43 44 "normally" distributed (See Appendix F). Education of the reSpondents ranged from eight to twenty years. The mean was 14.3 years, the median was 14.3 years, and the mode was 16 years. The sample was composed of 94 males and 106 females. Both of these findings com- pare favorably with 1970 census data for the greater Lansing area. The census reports that the average years of education completed for Lansing is 12.2 years and the average years of education for East Lansing is 16.4 years. With this study's sample composed of reSpondents from both Lansing and East Lansing, the reported average of 14.3 years indicates a normal education distribution. Respondent's television viewing hours ranged from 0 to 69 hours per week. The mean was 22.8 viewing hours per week, the median was 19.1 viewing hours per week, and the mode was 18 hours per week. Respondent's attitude towards television ranged on a scale from 24, the most unfavorable attitude, to 84, the most favorable attitude. The mean attitude was 49.7, the median was 48.1, and the mode was 47. Respondent's self-esteem measure ranged from a low of 40 to a high of 105. The mean was 79.4, the median was 80.8 and the mode was 77. The complete frequency distributions for education, television viewing hours, attitudes toward tele- vision, and self-esteem can be found in Appendix F. Table 2 summarizes the sample description: 45 mHH 1 mm am 1 ea A.xoammmv meson wma 1 0 made» om 1 o mmcmm oamom mm a: ma 0H mUoE m.om H.me H.ea m.:H eeeeea e.ms s.me w.mm m.sa new: med 1 o: :m 1 am mm 1 0 made» om 1 m mwsmm mvmn seeemm1eeem meespeeee >9 mhsom mcflzofl> >9 QOflPmOsvm maeeeee> .sowpmasmom mHmEmm mo Gowvgflpommn .m manna it ..C C» n: ,f‘ ...e V 8 L. ”Y L ‘. L 1” d;- I" rem 11 46 RESULTS OF HYPOTHESES TESTING Testing of hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 first required the computation of Spearman rank correlation coefficients between each respondent's personal terminal values and television terminal values. Personal terminal values were operational- ized by the respondent rank ordering Rokeach's terminal value survey in "order of importance to YOU as guiding principles in.XQUR life." The television terminal values used the same value survey, but asked the respondent to rank order the values in terms of "What is the most important value that television promotes?" The result was 200 Spearman rho, rs, correlations that ranged from -.80 to +.94 (See Appendix H for complete distribution). Rank orders were then assigned to each re5pondent on the basis of the magnitude of their Spearman rho correlation. The largest negative correlation received the rank of 1. The largest positive correlation received the rank of 200. With the computed correlation coefficients and the ranks assigned, hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were analyzed using the ManneWhitney U Test. Hypothesis One Hypothesis one predicts that the correlation between the reSpondent's personal terminal values and the ranking of their television terminal values will be higher among high television viewers than low television viewers. The distribution of television viewing was divided at the median, with those respondents viewing 19 hours or less 47 per week, designated as low television viewers (n=105). Those above 19 hours per week were designated as high tele- vision viewers (n:95). Table 3 presents the statistical analysis for hypothesis 1. Table 3. Sum of the Ranks of the Rank Order Correlations between Personal Terminal Values and Television Terminal Values for High and Low Television Viewers. Mann-Whitney U Test. sum of the ranks for low television 9517.5 viewing reSpondents, n=105 sum of the ranks for high television . 10582.5 viewing reSpondents, n=95 U = 3952-5 2 = -2.5323 P is less than .01 Table 3 provides support for the rejection of the null hypothesis. Examination of the sum of ranks reveals that the high TV viewing group has the highest sum of ranks. Thus, the predicted relationship is in the correct direction and the difference is statistically significant. While the data analysis supports hypothesis 1, it would be misleading not to report that the median Spearman rank correlation coefficients for the high television viewing group was small. The median Spearman rho for the high group was +.03. For the low television viewing group, the median Spearman rho was -.12. Another measure for expressing the general relationship between the personal terminal values and television terminal values of the high and low television viewers, was determined by calculating a Spearman rank correlation coefficient on 48 the overall composite rank order of the median values for the personal terminal and television terminal values of the high and low television viewing group separately (See Appendix I for the distribution). This resulted in a Spearman rho for the high viewing group of -.l7, and a Spearman rho for the low viewing group of -.39. The impact of the negative Spearman rhos will be dis- cussed in Chapter IV. Hypothesis Two Hypothesis 2 predicts that the correlation between a respondent's ranking of their personal terminal values and television terminal values will be higher among those with a favorable attitude toward television. The distribution of respondents' television attitudes was divided at the median. Those respondents with an attitude ranging from 24 to 41 are designated as having an unfavorable attitude toward television (n=104). Those respondents with an attitude ranging from 42 to 84 are designated as having a favorable attitude toward televison (n=96). Table 4 presents the statistical analysis for hypothesis 2. Table 4. Sum of the Ranks of the Rank Order Correlations be- tween Personal Terminal Values and Television Termi- nal Values for Favorable and Unfavorable Attitudes Toward Television. Mann-Whitney U Test. sum of the ranks for respondents with unfavorable attitudes toward televison 9650.5 sum of the ranks for respondents with favorable attitudes toward televison 10449.5 U = 4190 Z = “109601 P is less than .05 49 Table 4 provides support for the rejection of the null hypothesis. The sum of ranks for the two groups are different. {Hue largest sum of ranks occurs in the favorable attitude group and is statistically significant. lflrpothesis Three Hypothesis 3 predicts that the correlation between a respondent's ranking of their personal terminal values and the ranking of their television terminal values will be higher among low self—esteem respondents than high self-esteem reSpondents. The distribution of the respondent's self-esteem scores was divided at the median. Those respondents with a self- esteem score ranging from 40 to 80 are designated low self- esteem respondents (n=98). Those respondents with a self-esteem score ranging from 81 to 105 are designated as high self-esteem respondents (n=102). Table 5 presents the statistical analysis for hypothesis 3. Table 5. Sum of the Ranks of the Rank Order Correlations be- tween Personal Terminal Values and Televised Termi- nal Values for Low and High Self-Esteem Respondents. Mann-Whitney U Test. sum of the ranks for respondents with 9788.0 low self-esteem, n=98 sum of the ranks for respondents with 10312.0 high self-esteem, n=102 U 4937.0 2 -.l49l P greater than .05 Ch a: 4 u ... v.3 Pa \ 50 With P greater than .05, the null hypothesis cannot be re jected. There is no significant difference between the (xxrrelations of the personal terminal and television terminal values for low and high self-esteem respondents. Hypotheses 4, 5, and 6 examine the notion that respon- dents with similar values will select similar television pro- grams to view. The criterion for determining which respon- dents have similar values was devised. Based upon the com- bined ranking of all respondents for each value survey taken separately, personal terminal values, personal instrumental values, and television terminal values, three overall compo- site rank orders of median values were established. Respon- dents with similar values were defined as those re8pondents who had ranked the five highest median values among their first seven. Hypothesis Four Hypothesis 4 predicts that respondents with similar personal terminal values will view similar television programs. Using the procedure explained above, nine respondents were identified as having ranked the five highest median personal terminal values among their first seven. Next, the program preferences of those reSpondents were analyzed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W. Kendall's W is a measure of the relation among k rankings of N objects or individuals (Siegel, 1956, p. 229). The value of W ranges from 0 to 1. The coefficient of concordance computed for hypothesis 4 was 11 = .295 (114.001). 51 'Hy1;<3thesis Five Hypothesis 5 predicts that respondents with similar pearsonal instrumental values will view similar television programs. Sixteen respondents were identified as having ranked the five highest personal terminal median values among their first seven. The coefficient of concordance computed for hypothesis 5 was W = .46 (p‘(.001). Hypothesis Six Hypothesis 6 predicts that respondents with similar television terminal values will view similar television pro- grams. Thirty-five respondents were identified as having ranked the five highest television terminal median values among their first seven. The coefficient of concordance com- puted for hypothesis 6 was W = .325 (p(.001). In all three conditions, personal terminal, personal instrumental, and television terminal values, the W was highly significant. However, the magnitude of the concordance is moderate, with the personal instrumental group having the highest, W = .46. To establish a base for comparing those with similar values to those with dissimilar values, a coefficient of con- cordance was computed on the program preferences of all 200 reSpondents. Table 6 presents that statistic and a summary of the W's from hypotheses 4, 5, and 6. The similarity of the highly significant W's reported in Table 6 raises the question of the ability of the program preferences to discriminate between reSpondent groups. This issue will be discussed in Chapter IV. 52 Table 6. Kendall Coefficient of Concordance of Program Preferences for Those Respondents with Similar Personal Terminal Values, Personal Instrumental Values, Television Terminal Values, and for all ReSpondents. number of cases _W _13 personal terminal values 9 .295 .001 personal instrumental values 16 .46 .001 television terminal values 35 .325 .001 all respondents 200 .219 .001 Hypothesis Seven Hypothesis 7 predicts that the higher the respondent's television viewing the lower the reSpondent's self-esteem score. Two statistical analyses, Pearson Product-moment correlation and the difference of pr0portions test, examined this prediction. Correlating TV viewing hours with self- esteem scores resulted in an r = -.215 (p = .001). The dif- ference of proportions test revealed that 55.1% of the high television viewing group are categorized as having low self- esteem, and 40.1% of the high television viewing group are categorized as having high self-esteem (t = 2.88, p1(.01). Hypothesis Eight Hypothesis 8 predicts that the higher the respondent's television viewing hours, the more favorable the respondent's attitude toward television. As in hypothesis 7, the Pearson Product-moment correlation and differences of proportions test are used to test this hypothesis. Correlating TV viewing hours with attitudes toward televison resulted in an r = +.37 with P less than .001. The difference of proportions test revealed that 34.6% of the high television viewers are 53 categorized as having unfavorable attitudes toward television, and 61.5% of the high television viewers are categorized as having favorable attitudes toward television (t = 5.095, p ( .001). Statistical analyses performed on hypotheses 7 and 8 provide moderate support for the predictions. While both correlations are significant and in the predicted direction, the magnitude of the correlations, —.215 and -.37, inhibit unqualified support. Both hypotheses received unqualified support with the difference of proportions test. This illus- trates the sensitivity of the more powerful interval level Pearson Product-moment correlation. FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS AND MEDIAN TESTING Frequency distributions for each value survey, personal terminal, personal instrumental, and television terminal values, and program preferences were compiled for all 200 reSpondents. Tables 7, 8, and 9 present the median values and composite rank of those surveys.* Frequency distributions for the three value surveys, program preferences, sex, and educational variables were compiled for the following cross tabulations: male-female, *It should be noted that respondents rank-ordered the program preferences immediately prior to the rank-ordering of their perception of the values that television promotes. Since there were no public television programs among the eighteen to be ranked, the respondent's television terminal values, likely reflect a definition of television that would include only commercial broadcast programming. Table 7. Table 8. 54 Median Values and Composite Ranks of Personal Terminal Values for all 200 Respondents. Rank Value Family security Self-reSpect Happiness Inner harmony Freedom True friendship Wisdom Mature love A sense of accomplishment A world at peace Equality A world of beauty A comfortable life Pleasure An exciting life Salvation National security Social recognition Malia O\U\O\ \O 0000\1 O\O\O\U1U\U\ Kl) CDO‘xUIU‘ CDUIU1\O'\'} -? 10.07 12.3 12.65 12.75 13.2 13.5 13.67 15.1 Median Values and Composite Ranks of Personal Instrumental Values on all 200 Respondents. Rank \0m\10\U\.F’\.ONl-' HFJF' IOFJO Value Honest Loving Responsible Forgiving Broadminded Capable Independent Helpful Ambitious Cheeful Courageous Self-controlled Logical Intellectual Polite Clean Imaginative Obedient Megan \1 O\N\}U\U\k~) |-' Ch) 0 1...: \OUI MDUI \O\0\OCOG)CDCOODO\U1U) U1 an; #40 FJH MFA teqao ox [.1 N c- 12.55 15.9 55 Table 9. Median Values and Composite Ranks of Television Terminal Values for all 200 Respondents (values that television promotes). Table 10. Median Values and Composite Ranks of Program Preferences for all 200 Respondents. Rank Proggam Median l 60 Minutes 2.67 2 CBS News 3.16 3 M*A*S*H 5.5 4 11 PM local news 6.7 5 A11 in the Family 6.87 6 Waltons 7.2 7 Mary Tyler Moore 8.5 8 Johnny Carson 9.0 9 Hawaii Five 0 9.35 10 Kojak 9-4 11 Medical Center 10.79 12 Carol Burnett 10.89 13 Adam-12 11.3 14 Sonny and Cher 12.2 15 Hollywood Squares 12.5 16 Star Trek 12.7 17 Price Is Right 13.96 18 Let's Make a Deal 14.0 Rank Value Median 1 Pleasure 3.46 2 An exciting life 4.26 3 A comfortable life 4.46 4 Social recognition 6.3 5 Happiness 7.5 6 Freedom 7.9 7 Equality 8.16 8 Family security 8.5 9 A world of beauty 9.28 10 A sense of accomplishment 9.88 11 National security 10.07 12 Self-respect 11.0 13 Wisdom 11.09 14 True friendship 11.16 15 Inner harmony 12.86 16 A world at peace 12.9 17 Mature love 12.96 18 Salvation 16.59 56 favorable-unfavorable attitude towards television, high-low self-esteem, and high-low viewing hours. Median tests were computed on the median values from each group to determine if the value ranking from one group discriminated from the value ranking of the other group. The tables presented below summarize the statistically significant findings. Com- plete frequency distributions broken down in group categories can be found in Appendix G. OTHER FINDINGS Analysis of unhypothesized variable relationships revealed that the Spearman rho correlations between a respon- dent's personal terminal and television terminal values were more positive and of greater magnitude among low education respondents than high education reSpondents (sum of the ranks for the low education group, n:105, equals 11,210. Sum of the ranks for the high education group, n:95, equals 8890. U = 4330, z = 1.6078 with P = .05). Other relationships examined by the difference of pro- portions test were education and attitude towards television, education and self-esteem, and education and number of tele- vision hours viewed per week. The results of the analysis are found in Table 15. Table 11. Personal Terminal Variable: Sex Value A world at peace A world of beauty Pleasure Variable: Education A comfortable life An exciting life Family security National security Salvation Self-respect True friendship 57 Value Medians. Variable: Attitude Toward Television A comfortable life Pleasure Variable: TV Viewing Hours A comfortable life A world at peace Family security Happiness True friendship Wisdom Variable: Self Esteem A world at peace A comfortable life National security Male Female 11.0 8.2 13.1 10.5 11.7 13.6 m High 12.0 13.8 14.4 12.1 4.6 6.6 13.0 14.6 9.8 16.5 6.9 4.2 800 6.1+ Lg! High 13.8 11.9 13.8 12.0 Egg High 1 1 1 .05 .01 .05 .01 .01 .05 .05 .01 .01 .001 .01 .01 I01 .01 I05 .01 I05 .05 .05 .05 .05 Table 12. Personal Instrumental Values Medians Variable: Sex Cheerful Logical Variable: Education Capable Clean Forgiving Imaginative Intellectual Logical Obedient Polite Responsible 58 Variable: Attitude Toward Television Imaginative Variable: TV Viewing ngrs Cheerful Clean Imaginative Polite Variable: Self Esteem Clean Forgiving Honest Male Female 10.8 7.9 9.2 13.1 Egg High 10.2 7.2 10.0 15.1 7.2 9.0 14.3 10.4 14.2 9.1 12.4 9.7 14.6 16.9 10.3 13.8 6.8 5.5 Egg High 11.4 13.7 Egg High 10.5 8.6 13.6 10.6 11.8 13.4 13.5 11.0 Egg High 11.7 13.6 6.9 9.0 2-7 3-5 .E .01 .001 .001 .001 I 05 .001 I 001 .05 .001 .001 .05 .Ol .05 .05 .05 Table 13. 59 Variable: Sex Male. Happiness 6.3 Variable: Education Egg A comfortable life 5.6 An exciting life 5.7 Television Terminal Values Medians. Female 8.9 F: Uh) l-" NCD :3" Variable: Attitude Toward Television Low Equality 9.0 Wisdom 12.7 Varigble: TV Viewing Hours no significant differences Variable: Self Esteem t‘ O i National security 9 Self-respect 2 [.1 ual-4 L: H0 :3" l-" 00‘. N\O +4e1:: 01-4 1;; she 3' I’d I01 .05 .05 .05 .Ol .05 .05 Table 14. 60 Variable: ng Male All in the Family Medical Center 60 Minutes Waltons [.1 \ONNO\ WU-F'H Variable: Education t4 o i Adam-12 11 PM local news Johnny Carson Price Is Right 60 Minutes Star Trek Waltons FHJ mwuwomo 1...: owl-4th) l-‘kn Program Preferences Medians. Female 8.1 If: P' :3" Variable: Aptitude Tgward Television Low Hawaii Five 0 10.0 Mary Tyler Moore 7.6 M*A*S*H 4.3 Medical Center 11.7 60 Minutes 2.6 Variable: TV Viewing ngrs Low Adam-12 13 . 0 Carol Burnett 10.2 CBS News Cronkite 2.7 11 PM local news 4.9 Mary Tyler Moore 6.9 Price Is Right 14.9 Variable: Self Esteem Low Hawaii Five 0 8.8 Hollywood Squares 11.7 60 Minutes 3.3 H I); F4 FJF':n NwmeOP- mmmowwtr Alt: l'” 23‘ H NWO PCDCD 2 .05 I001 .01 .01 I001 .01 I05 .001 .01 .05 .05 .05 I05 .05 .05 I05 .01 .05 .05 .01 I05 .05 .05 .01 .Ol 61 Hoo. mm.m ea.sm sm.mm Hoo. m:.m em: sow Hoe. em.m see smm m p moan: mane coepeesem seq eoepeosem swam .mafistOvaamm omaflmonwomzssb no Pmme onappomopm mo meazea> >9 ewe: sompmonwamm nmfi: coamfl>maop ohmzop eespeppe eagero>ee ooCmHmM%HD .mH mHnme IV. DISCUSSION This chapter will include a review of the findings, dis- cussion and implications of the findings, suggestions for future research, and study limitations. REVIEW OF FINDINGS 1) Upon assigning ranks to respondents based upon the magnitude of the correlation between the rankings of their personal terminal values and television terminal values, it was determined that the highest sum of ranks occurred among those respondents categorized as high hourly viewers of tele- vision per week, as having a favorable attitude toward tele— vision, and as being in the low education group. 2) It was predicted that the highest sum of ranks would also occur among the low esteem respondents; however, this prediction was not supported. 3) It was determined that while the data supported the notion‘flurtreSpondents with similar values view similar tele- vision programs, additional analysis raised the question of whether the program preference survey sufficiently discriminated between those with similar and dissimilar values. 4) It was determined that there was a negative relation— ship between the amount of television viewing and the 62 ‘ I V; .LL' 9 63 respondent's self-esteem scores (r = —.215, P (.001). 5) It was determined that there was a positive rela- tionship between the amount of television viewing and atti- tudes toward television (r = +.37, P4.001). 6) ReSpondents with favorable attitudes toward tele- vision were found to be in greater proportion among the low education group. High self-esteem respondents were found to be in greater proportion among the high education group and males. High hourly viewers of television were found to be in greater proportions among the low education group. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS The broad purpose of this study was to examine the rela- tionship between human value structure and the viewing of broadcast television. More specifically, it was hoped that a study of values would provide some insight into the issue of motivation for television viewing, and determine to what extent television is used as a source for value identification and ordering, or in some situations, as a reinforcer of pre- viously held values. The rationale for the hypotheses in this study were based upon the theoretical notions of "belief congruence" and "institutional socialization." The frequency distributions compiled on the value surveys help provide an overall picture of the respondents. Based upon the median rankings of the entire sample, respondents reported that the most important values they use as guiding principles in their lives were the values: family security, 64 self-reSpect, happiness, inner harmony, freedom, honesty, loving, reSponsibility, forgiveness, and broadmindedness. They perceived television as promoting the following values: pleasure, an exciting life, a comfortable life, and social recognition. Their favorite television programs were "60 Minutes," "CBS News," "M*A*S*H," "Local News," and "All in the Family." Refinement of the respondent picture was undertaken by cross tabulating the frequency distributions by the variables sex, high and low education, high and low hours of televison viewing per week, favorable and unfavorable attitudes toward television, and high and low self-esteem scores. Cross tabulations on sex and education were compared with the findings of Rokeach's 1968 nation-wide study of values. While the findings reflect consistency between the two studies, Rokeach's larger sample (n:1404) and more refined educational breakdown (seven separate educational categories) identifiedzalarger number of values that discriminated between males and females and the various educational levels (Rokeach, 1973. pp- 57-58. 64-65)- An examination of the various combinations of variable relationships established in this study reveals a picture of two highly different respondents. The first respondent may be described as being within the low educated group, viewing a high number of hours of television per week, having low self-esteem with a favorable attitude toward television. The second reSpondent is within the high education group. Viewing S ‘1 L. C. .r1.. 1‘ . a . A; fi1v L». 65 a low number of hours of television per week, this respondent is among those categorized as having high self-esteem and an unfavorable attitude towards televison. These two reSpondent groups differed in the way each ranked a number of values and television program preferences. The first respondent group ranked what Rokeach refers to as more "conventional" values significantly higher than the second group. These include the values "a comfortable life," "family security," "national security," "a world at peace," "cleanliness," "politeness," and "forgiveness." As a group they rank detective shows and game shows higher than the second group. The second group ranks values such as "imaginative," "true friendship," and "self-respect," significantly higher than the first group. They rank news shows and programs like "Mary Tyler Moore," and "M*A*S*H" higher than the first group of reSpondents. Hypotheses 6, 7, and 8 predicted that viewers with simi- lar values would watch similar television programs. Using the Kendall coefficient of concordance, significant coeffi- cients were computed between individuals with similar personal terminal, instrumental, and television terminal values. A coefficient of concordance was also computed on the entire sample which resulted in a lower, but significant coefficient. Thus, no difference was established between individuals with similar and dissimilar values. The inability of the program preferences to discriminate 66 between the two groups, may in part, be a function of the type of programs that were selected for ranking, and the instructions given to the respondent. The programs were selected according to six predetermined categories. iTwo of the categories were highly skewed--the game shows ranked very low by all respondents and the news shows ranked very high by all reSpondents. Also, the reSpon- dents were asked to rank their program preferences which may be different from the programs they actually watch. A more productive procedure might have been to fill the program categories with the highest rated 18 programs in the Lansing area. Then, instead of asking for program preference, the respondent would be instructed to rank the programs accord- ing to actual viewing rate. This technique should discriminate between program preferences of high and low television viewers, and thus, be more likely to discriminate between individuals with similar and dissimilar values. This technique also would provide a reliability measure to determine the extent of "socially desirable" rankings. Frequency distributions of the collected data could be com- pared with the actual program rating. While values and programs have been reported that dis- criminate between individual reSpondents, one of the more interesting results was the high respondent agreement on the values that television promotes. Regardless of the respondent category, high education-low education, favorable attitudes 67 toward television-unfavorable attitudes toward televison, etc., the four values of "pleasure," "an exciting life," "a comfortable life," and "social recognition" were consistently ranked as the most important values that television promotes. Comparing these values to the respondent's ranking of their personal terminal values (values they use as guiding princi- ples in their lives), "pleasure" ranked 14th, "an exciting life" ranked 15th, "a comfortable life" ranked 13th, and "social recognition" 18th. Hypothesis one's prediction was predicated on the notion that the correlations between reSpondents' personal terminal values and television terminal values would be more positively correlated among the high television viewers than the low televison viewers. The statistical analysis supported the hypothesis. However, it was discovered that the overall correlation of the group of high television viewers was nega- tive, r = -.17 (less negative, however, than the overall s correlation of the low television viewing group, rS = -.39). Therefore, the correlation between the personal terminal and television terminal values for the entire sample was -.23. A major reason for the negative correlations between value surveys is the inconsistency in the ranking of the values "pleasure," "an exciting life," "a comfortable life," and "social recognition." In a secondary analysis, the personal terminal and television terminal value relationships were examined by eliminating the four above-named values and by computing a Spearman rho on the fourteen remaining values. 68 The correlation between the personal terminal and television terminal values for the entire sample changed from rs = -.23 to rS = +.279. For the low television viewing group, the correlation changed from rS = -.39 to rS = .01. For the high television viewing group, the correlation increased from rS = -.17 to rS = +.428 (this correlation is approaching sig- nificance at the .05 level. For a fourteen item correlation to be significant at .05, rS must equal .456). . The secondary analysis revealed that by eliminating the four dominant television terminal values from the value survey, there is less inconsistency in the way high TV viewing reSpondents order their personal values and the values they perceive television as promoting. However, little more can be said without inserting the values "pleasure," "an exciting life," "a comfortable life," and "social recognition" back into the discussion. The secondary analysis emphasizes the importance of the four variables in describing the nature of the inconsistency between the two value surveys. The identification of this subset of television terminal values may be the most important discovery of the study. Rokeach (1973, p. 327) states that different social institu- tions can be conceptualized as specializing in the enhance- ment of different subsets of values. His research indicates, for example: The effects of Christian institutions are reflected mainly as variations in salvation and forgiving, and the effects of political institutions are reflected mainly as variations in equality and freedom. 69 Similarly, the effects of educational, economic, and law enforcement institutions are reflected as variations in yet another subset of values. Thus a person's total value system may be an end result, at least in large part, of all the institutional forces or influences that have acted upon him. It is consistent with the study results to conclude that television specializes in the enhancement of the values "pleasure," "an exciting life," "a comfortable life," and "social recognition." While this study has established that disparity exists between the reSpondent's ranking of their personal and tele- vision terminal values, the reader should be reminded that the disparities between personal terminal values and the perceived values of other leisure time activities have not been established. Therefore, it is possible that television may represent the least incompatible of a number of other leisure time activities. Nevertheless, in light of the number of hours an indi- vidual spends watching television per week (22.8 hours per week according to this study), the disparity between the rankings of the personal and television value surveys is an interesting problem. Consistency theories, such as the balance model, would predict that the lack of balance between an individual's own values and values perceived to be promoted by television should result in a change of attitude of behavior towards television, i.e., reduction in total viewing time, viewing of only programs that would support their strong positive values, or by taking citizen action to alter or change the 7O nature of the institution. The inconsistency between.value surveys is also curious in light of the relationship hypothesized by Woodruff and Divesta (1948). As mentioned in Chapter 1, they hypothesized that an individual's attitude toward any object or circum- stance would be favorable, if, according to his concepts, the object or circumstance seemed to favor the achievement of an individual's positive values. Yet, even among those study respondents with favorable attitudes toward television, incon- sistency exists in the value surveys. The author believes that a number of explanations of why more individuals do not "act" to balance value inconsistencies are possible. These include: social desirability of rankings, respondents are not aware of the inconsistencies, respondents are aware of the inconsistencies but tolerate them for a variety of reasons, or the inconsistencies are merely a result of the nature of the rank ordering procedure. One possibility may be because respondents ordered their personal terminal values in a socially desirable manner. It would, for example, be more socially desirable to rank the value "family security" as more important than "pleasure." While socially desirable responses are a possibility with all obtrusive measures, Kelly, Silverman, and Cochrane (1972) have encouraging results from their research on the social desirability of reSponses to Rokeach's terminal value survey. They asked reSpondents to rank the terminal value survey under standard instructions, and then later asked them 71 to rank the survey in a manner that would make them appear more favorably in the experimenter's eyes. The correlation between the two sets of rankings was rS = -.09. The higher the correlation, the more likely the respondent had ordered his personal values in a socially desirable manner. Rokeach (1973, p. 42) suggests that the -.09 correlation indicates there was "...no significant relationship between the ten- dency to respond in a socially desirable manner and the rank- ing of the value survey under standard instruction." It is realistic for the researcher to remain aware that socially desirable responses are possible at any time. In this particular situation, it is not an adequate explanation because it does not account for the respondents' near unani- mous ranking of the values "pleasure," "an exciting life," "a comfortable life," and "social recognition" at the top of the terminal value survey. Balance theory suggests another possible explanation for why the inconsistencies between personal values and perceived Values of television have not resulted in an attitude or behavior change that would resolve those inconsistencies. The imbalanced situation is not sufficient, by itself, to generate change. There must be some thought by the indi— vidual concerning the relationships involved. The individual must realize that inconsistencies exist before motivation for change will occur. Are television viewers cognizant of the discrepancies between their personal values and the values they perceive television to promote? «I: 72 Evidence from this research suggests that those cate- gorized as being among the highly educated are aware of the value inconsistencies and as a group are different from the low educated: 1) they have more unfavorable attitudes toward television, 2) are among the low television viewing group, and view more public television (Bower, 1973, p. 52). It is also safe to assume that the majority of individuals involved in community actions against broadcast stations are among the more highly educated. For those who watch a high number of television hours per week, one might Speculate as to the nature of the con- flict endured by individuals who respond to the demands of society in the ordering of their personal values, but who, on the other hand, are regularly exposed to stimuli that promote values likely to be considered appealing, yet contrary to societal demands. Another explanation for the value ordering inconsis- tencies suggests that respondents are cognizant of the incon- sistencies, but tolerate them for a variety of reasons. These include: amount of physical effort involved, the con- cept of psychic mobility and respondent's self-esteem level. As a leisure time activity, television viewing consumes 40% of the average U.S. citizen's available time (Robinson and Converse, 1972, p. 211). There are few activities, other than sleeping, that require less effort on the part of the individual than watching television. Is the amount of "effort" expended a critical factor in determining what leisure time L 1 o. ‘ A; r 73 activities individuals will engage? Is an individual willing to tolerate value inconsistencies as a tradeoff for the "effortlessness" of this leisure time activity? For many individuals television might provide what Daniel Lerner (1958) describes as "psychic mobility." Lerner states that television exposes the viewer to the vicarious universe. In comparing the television viewer to the traveler, Lerner suggests that while the traveler may become bewildered by the strange sights and sounds of his travels, the media consumer is "likely to be enjoying a com- posed and orchestrated version of the new reality. He has the benefit of a more facile perception of the new experi- ence as a whole with the concomitant advantage (which is sometimes illusory) of facile comprehension. The stimuli of perception, which shapes understanding, have been simpli- fiedf°(p. 53) In another dimension of the concept "effort," television not only requires a minimal effort to engage in the activity, but requires minimal mental effort to understand the message. Lerner comments: "Instead of the complexities that attend a 'natural' environment, mediated experiences exhibit the simplicity of 'artificial' settings contrived by the creative communicator."(p. 53) This line of reasoning is compatible with research findings that indicate that individuals with low self-esteem are among the high television viewers. In this study self- esteem was defined as that element of the self-concept which 7L1 regulates the extent to which the self-system is maintained under strain, in, for example, the processing of new informa- tion. Low self-esteem individuals are more threatened by the prospect of processing new information than high self— esteem individuals. The findings from this study--that an inverse relationship exists between the level of self-esteem and the number of hours per week spent watching television-- support previous research findings. Television's characteristically, non-controversial, escapist programming provides little new information to be processed by the viewer. The popular escapist fare "exhibits the simplicity of artificial settings contrived by the crea- tive communicator," posing little threat to a viewer's previously held beliefs. Three variables have been proposed that might, to some extent, account for the variance observed between the respon- dent's personal terminal values and his perception of the values that television promotes. These have been the minimal nature of the physical "effort" required to engage oneself in the activity, the concept of "psychic mobility" and tele- vision's ability to simplify reality, and the appeal of the less threatening nature of the television message. Each of these conditions might well provide the rationalization necessary to mediate the inconsistencies between an indivi— dual's personal values and the values perceived as being promoted by television. Other conditions can be identified that might well 75 explain the viewers' willingness to tolerate the inconsis- tencies measured between their value surveys. The various functional analyses mentioned in Chapter I suggest that needs such as surveillance of the environment, cultural transmis- sion, substitute companionship, correlation of information, and other more utiliarian uses of the media, may provide the necessary rationalization to cope with value discrepancies. It is possible that the inconsistencies between the value surveys are a result of the value rank ordering proce- dure, and are really not inconsistencies at all. It would be reasonable to expect that personal values like "family security" and "self-respect" would be of greater importance than values like "pleasure" and "social recognition." Such values may have a place of importance in an individual's life, but are proportionately less important than "family security." The largest single time allocation made by an individual is for work: with this activity used for pursuit of family or personal security. Therefore, it would seem consistent that family security would be the most important personal value. The divergence between the rank orderings of the two surveys may be the result of television's function--as has been demonstrated by this study's data--as a major source of leisure time activity, one that individuals perceive to be as a separate activity in itself. The final explanation offered as to why more individuals may not "act" to balance the inconsistencies between their value surveys is the notion that what the respondents were 76 ordering in their television terminal value survey were not the values that television promotes, but rather a descrip- tion of the "images" that television represents. As Daniel Boorstin (1961) writes, television is the medium of the pseudo-event* and "...what the.pseudo—event is in the world of fact, the image is in the world of value3'(p. 185) While coverage of news events is the major focus of Boorstin's book, it would be accurate to describe the vast majority of all television programs as a continuous array of pseudo-events designed to capture the largest possible audience. The operation of a television station is governed pri- marily by profit motive which depends upon the mass appeal of its programs. The measure of a station's success is a high return on investment and financial stability. An integral part in the maintenance of that financial stability is the presentation of what Melvin Defleur describes as "low taste content." Defleur contends that it is the "low taste content" of programming which "...provides entertainment content of a type that will satisfy and motivate the largest number to carry out their roles with the needs of the system (mass media system). Such content will, in other words, maintain the stability of the system" (Defleur and Rokeach, *Boorstin describes the pseudo-event as being a non- spontaneous event, but coming about because someone has planned, planted, or incited it. Its relation to the underlying real- ity of the situation is ambiguous. Typically, it is not an actual train wreck, or an earthquake, but an interview gathered second hand (p. 11). 77 1975, p. 177). Examples of "low taste content" according to Defleur, are programs widely distributed and attended by a mass audience. These would include TV crime dramas that emphasize violence, or other content considered to contribute to a lowering of taste, disruption of morals, or stimulation toward socially unacceptable content (Defleur and Rokeach, 1975. p- 171)- Within the context of this explanation, the values "pleasure," "an exciting life," "a comfortable life," and "social recognition" are the reSpondent's perception of the images projected by television programming. STUDY LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH These two sections have been combined because future research suggestions are in part, contingent upon the resolu- tion of the study's major limitation. The operationalization of values is the major limitation of this study, and a major limitation for future value research. Rokeach has defined values as a single belief ‘whose influence in any situation is dependent upon the relative ordering of that value within a hierarchy of values. This limits the analysis of the data collected to ordinal level statistics and prohibits the development of multi- variate predictive models which depend on a higher level of measurement to examine values simultaneously with other inter- vening variables. Values are a difficult concept to operationalize. Rokeach's value operationalization is consistent with his 78 theory of values. However, research needs to be undertaken on the development of a higher level of measurement. This would necessitate careful consideration of a value theory that would include the notion that values vary in intensity from situation to situation, and that distances between an individual's value priorities can be measured. A higher level of value measurement would have permitted a factor analytic approach to the testing of hypotheses 6, 7, and 8. In the attempt to identify respondents with similar values, the matrix of 200 reSpondents could have been factor analyzed to determine if certain respondents were grouped together on a particular value dimension. Program preferences could then have been analyzed within the dimension as a ‘measure of similarity and compared across dimensions as a measure of dissimilarity. A higher level of measurement would also permit the design of a multiple regresssion model that could provide insight into the interaction of televison viewing and an indi- vidual's value structure. VALUE CONGRUENCE S TELEVISION VIEWING This would enable television viewing and value congruence to be treated as either dependent or independent variables in separate regression models. It is important to emphasize that the use of multi- variate analysis is dependent on a higher level of measure- ment than.Rokeach's value survey represents. Can a theory of values and a measuring tool be developed that would permit 79 interval or ratio level measurement? This question should set the agenda for future research. A completely different approach to future research is suggested by Rokeach's theory of attitude and behavior change. In Chapter 8 of The Nature of Human Values (1973), Rokeach explains that the major function served by a person's values is the maintenance and enhancement of one's total conception of himself. He suggests that an effective way to bring about an attitudinal or behavioral change is to induce dissatisfac- tion in the individual by presenting the individual information about their values in comparison to the values of other people. If, an individual can be made aware of the inconsistency, and the inconsistency is evaluated as a threat to the individual's self—conception, it is likely some cognitive change will occur (pp. 224-234). As was pointed out in the Discussion section of this chapter, a possible reason why more respondents have not taken action to "balance" the inconsistencies measured between their personal and television terminal values is because they are ‘unaware the inconsistencies exist. If they were made aware of the inconsistencies between their values and their percep- tion of television's values would this result in an attitude or behavior change? Rokeach's attitude and behavior change theory suggests an experiment where the value inconsistencies are eXplained to the reSpondent. One would predict, that by explaining to the reSpondent the ‘. Bree favc may inco vish teacl progi Views 0f ti tions Pared 80 the nature of the inconsistencies in the manner they ranked their personal values--representing the respondent's concept of self--and the way they ranked their perception of the values (or image) television promotes, a state of dissatis- faction should then result in a measurable change in attitude and behavior. For example, respondents may change from a favorable to an unfavorable attitude towards television, they may reduce the number of television viewing hours per week, or they may join a community action group to try and influence television to conform to their own personal values. The technique of explaining to the television viewer the inconsistencies that exist between their personal and tele- vision terminal values would be an interesting approach to teaching younger viewers to be more conscious of television program content and hopefully, to be more selective television viewers. This approach might be enhanced by conducting studies of the relationship between personal values and other discre- tionary time activities. Value congruence could then be com- pared and contrasted across a range of such activities. The final suggestion deals with a practical implication of this research. Of what value would it be to a broadcast television programmer to know that (within the context of Rokeach's value survey) the majority of respondents surveyed in this study perceive television as promoting the values "pleasure," "a comfortable life," "an exciting life," and "social recognition"? One method for finding out suggests a study where the 81 personal and television terminal value surveys would be administered to broadcast television programmers. In a personal interview, the programmer's rankings could be dis- cussed and individually compared with other programmers and respondents from the general population. A number of research questions could be suggested regarding the television programmer and values. Among these are: 1) does the programmer perceive television as having a relationship to personal values, 2) does the pro- grammer perceive that particular television programs affect particular individual values, and 3) do the values of the programmer affect his program decision-making. APPENDIX A Cover Letter 82 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Telecommunication . Union Building East Lansing . Michigan . 48824 What are the reasons why you do or do not watch tele- vision? The answer to that question is one of the most interesting and talked about topics of the day. It is often discussed on TV talk shows and is the subject of books, magazines, and newspaper articles. Your name has been picked at random from the Lansing/ East Lansing telephone directory1x>he1p us answer some ques- tions we have about people who watch television, and people who do not watch television. Within the next few weeks a student from the Telecommu- nication Department at Michigan State University will call at your home to talk with anyggdult member oijour hggsehold. The interviewer will have a copy of this letter to show you that he is connected with this study. To be a part of this study does not require any Special knowledge about television. Rather, all that is needed is just a willingness to help us for about thirty minutes to find out what people think about the values of television. There are no wrong or right answers to the questions that will be asked. We just want to know your Opinions. I believe that you will find the questions and tasks the interviewer asks you to complete to be interesting and fun. Let me assure you that your answers will be held in the strictest confidence. Information from the study will be reported only as part of the entire group of 200 citizens who will be answering questions. Let me also assure you we are pg; selling or promoting any products. This is an authorized television research project. If you have any questions about the project, please call the Telecommunication Department at 355-8372. Yours truly, Lee R. Thornton Project Supervisor P.S. Results of the research project will be available to all those taking part. APPENDIX B Attitude Toward TV Measure Self-Esteem Measure Personal Terminal Value Survey Personal Instrumental Value Survey Program Preferences Television Terminal Value Survey Other Control Variables PUT A CHECK BETWEEN EACH PAIR — WHEREVER YOU THINK IT BELONGS - EXCITING IN GOOD TASTE IMPORTANT GENERALLY BAD LOTS OF VARIETY UPSETTING INTERESTING WONDERFUL NOBODY CARES MUCH FOR ME GETTING BETTER INFORMATIVE LOTS OF FUN IMAGINATIVE TO DESCRIBE TELEVISION: DULL IN BAD TASTE UNIMPORTANT GENERALLY EXCELLENT ALL THE SAME RELAXING UNINTERESTING TERRIBLE ON EVERYONE'S MIND NOT FOR ME GETTING WORSE NOT INFORMATIVE NOT MUCH FUN NO IMAGINATION 84 Put a check between each pair - wherever you think it belongs - to best describe yourself: How often are you troubled with shyness? very often _____ practically never Do you find it hard to make talk when you meet new people? very often _____ practically never When in a group of people, how often do you have trouble thinking of the right things to talk about? very often practically never How comfortable are you when starting conversation with people with whom you don't know? very comfortable not at all comfortable When you have to talk in front of a group of people, how afraid or worried do you feel? very worried never worry How often do you feel worried or bothered about what other people think of you? very often practically never When you think of the possibility that some of your friends or acquaintances might not have a good opinion of you, how concerned or worried do you feel about it? very concerned not concerned How much do you worry about how well you get along with other people? very much not at all 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 85 How often do you worry about whether other people like to be with you? very often not very often When you are trying to convince other people who disagree with your ideas, how worried HmcHspma Hanomumm MH mH HH 3H NH ON :H MH NN MH OH ON mH NH OH NH OH HH NH OH OH NH 3H 5H MH :H MH NH OH MH 3H mm MH MH OH OH MH AH NH HH mH m NH mH MH 5H mH NH M. OH OH OH NH mH OH 3H N. MH 3H NH OH HH 0 NH OH ON 3H NH 3N W HN AH ON OH :H m NH OH NN 3H N :H 5N 3H OH _M on mH ON HH PH mmmchmmm sovmmym hPH9306m AHfiemm szHmsvm hPSMmp mo UHhoa < momma pm vaoz < pameanHmEooow mo mmCmm H omHH mcHPHoxm GH mMHH mHQMphomEoo < OON n z 99 m:m.m : d m 3 m NH OH MH O MH NN HH HN m NH mH mH OH EoomHB OOO.O N H A H O O O AH mH ON AH AN AH AH ON NN OH N AHHA IUQOHHM maps AOH.mH Am Om NN OH mH AH O HH HH O A m A H A H H N OOHszNOOOu HmHoom mmm.m N H m m : m 0 OH O OH MH AH AH MH MN 5N NN HH PommmmhlmHmm m.mH on ON O m A A n O m N O A m A O A N Am :OHHN>Hmm mA.NH A OH ON AH ON OH AH AH HH AH N A n O A A N N OHOAOOHA OAO.AH AN AN NN NH AH HN AH OH HH A O A m A A O N N AHHNAOOA HNOOHHNz m.m A A HH OH AH A OH OH OH A A O OH OH NH HN AH H O>OH Opspmz m.O A O m n O A OH AH A HH AH OH OH OH HN OH Acoegmn umch OOHOOE .MH NH. mH WH mH. NH MH HH. NH m. m N m. .w m m. M H OON u z lOO O.m OA.O mNH.O OA.A ON:.NH OOO.m 0.0 OO0.0 OAN.O OOHOMH AN (DI: H OH OH 53 )3 \0 rd mpcmucogmom HHm Mom mmHocmsvmnm osHm> HMPGOESHPmnH Hmzomhmm OH OH OH AH OH OH NH OH OH 3H NH OH OH OH OH OH OH A OH OH OH :H OH OH OH HH NH NN OH OH OH HN HH OH OH OH O. NH OH HH OH AH OH OH O. OH OH OH HH OH NN OH O N. OH OH 3H OH OH OH :H O O. OH OH OH :H NH :H HH W. AH OH OH 3H OH OH OH O m. ON OH OH OH OH OH mN OH OH NH O OH OH H HO ON H. Pmmcom HOOOHOm OCH>HOHom mSOOOmHSoO aonO H5%Hmmco mHQmmmo UOUQHEOmoHO OOOHNHOEO OON H z 101 NAH.OH A OH O HH AH OH NH AH AH NH AH AH O A OH A AH O OOHHoppcoouOHOm AO.O H N O A O A NH O A NH AH OH ON AH NN HN AH NH OHOHOcogmmm AOA.NH O NH AN OH OH OH AH O AH OH OH A A OH OH A O H OHHHOA AAA.AH AA AA OH OH NH OH N A A A HH N A N A H A H szHOOnO OOA.A A O A A O O A AH O A A A A AH HH NN ON NA OOHAOH OAO.HH OH OH ON OH OH NH NH AH AH AH OH A OH A O A A A HOOHmoH AHA.HH AH OH AH OH AH OH NH OH OH A AH AH A HH A OH N H HOOPOOHHOOOH A.O O A A HH A ON NH A A NH HH A NH OH HH NH ON AH HOOOOOAOOOH AAA.NH NN AN AH OH NH AH OH AH NH OH N O N O>HHOOHOOEH A A cmHOOS OH. NH. OH. WH MH OH _MH. HH OH O M N .W w H O M. H OON n z 102 O.A NHA.A 0.0 AOH.O OON.A A.NH HOO.A AON.O NO0.0 OOHOMH HN ON ON NH OH OH AH O OH NH. ml OH OH OH NH HH mpsmcconmmm HHm 90% NH NH AH A 3H 3H NH OH OH :H O HH \0 \O NI. N mmHosmswmhm 05Hm> HOQHSHOB QonH>mea OH AH AH NH OH 3H O OH AH NN :H OH AH N. OH NH NN OH OH OH O. OH OH OH OH OH OH NH O OH NH OH OH NH AH ON H. OH NH HH OH ON ON O. OH OH OH OH AN AN M OH OH OH OO NN r-ll mmmchmmm Eocmmmm Apszomm AHHOOA APHHOSON Apzmmn mo OHNoz H momma Pm OH903 H pamE£mHHQEooom No memm H mNHH OQHPHoxm CH ONHH mHQmPnomEoo < OON H z 103 HOO.HH AOH.HH ONO.O O.HH HO0.0H OOO.A HA0.0H NOO.NH :OO.NH cchms NH OO OH OH OH OH NN OH NN AH OH HN HN OH AH OH OH HH HH HH OH ON 33 53 OH OH HN OH OH OH AH OH NN OH OH OH OH NH NN NH OH OH :H OH OH OH OH 0\ 0| 0\ H OH OH NH HH OH NN OH OH HH “N NH OH OH OH HH NH AH NH OH “H OH HN OH HH ON OH OH HO HH A :1 «1 HH AH ON OH OH OH O: F” OOOOHO QHQm uccmHHN wage QoHPHCOoooH HmHoom pommmmHuNHmm 20Hpm>Hmm whammmHm APHHSOOm HOGoHHmz o>0H mysemz AQoEHw: HOQQH OON H z 104 OAO.A O.NH o.A AOO.A OHA.O AOH.O OO0.0H OA0.0 OHO.HH OOHAMH A OH AH A A O A OH OH ON NH AH OH NH NH OH NH AH AH HH AH ON HH Ed ‘N H OH OH OH mpcmucommmm HHm How mmHonmswmhm monHmMmhm EOHOon OH HN OH HH OH AH OH OH AH OH OH :N OH O OH ON HN OH OH NH OH _N AH OH OH OH HH AH OH O OH NH OH A AH AH :H OH OH A OH HH N O OH :H OH OH NH ON A O. OH NH HH AH ON OH OH O H OH ON ON HN ON HO NH NI O HmHom O mmpwsvm OoozhHHom O Commmo chnow O o m>Hm HHmzwm A mamz HOOOH Em HH AA OOHHcopO pOpHmz mzmz mmO O ppmchsm Hommo OH AHHemm Asp :H HHO O NHIEOOH OON n 2 HI 105 HON.A OA.mH AON.NH OAO.N NOA.OH OOA.OH O.m 0.0H cm H Ola: NN HN HH OH OH OH AO OH AH AH OH NN OH OH AH HN HH NH AH OH OH OH HH HH NN OH OH OH OH NH OH NH OH AH OH AH OH HH OH AH OH OH OH OH HH OH OH AH HH NH HH OH OH OH OH AH NH “N AN OH HH OH OH NH OH OH OH “M NH OH OH OH HH OH OH HN OH :1 OH ON NH OH AO ON 0" OH AH F” mcopng xmpe pmpm pmno Ucm assom mmpscHS OO pgmHm mH wOHnm hmpcmo HMOHUmz m*m*¢*2 mgooz ymHhe hams Hmmm m mxmz m.PmH OON u z 106 ON.OH 0.0H AHA.HH OAO.NH HA0.0 OOA.OH OO0.0 O0.0 Omm.mH ANA.NH NAA.HH mmA.mH OOHOQH 343 ON} Vli O \00\ KN“ OH OH O OH NH. OH mpsom OQHBOH> >9 cmHm cam 30H an mmSHm> chHEpme stomhmm pom mmHocmsvmym QM“ HH OH {HO \O «“3 OH._MH {HS HH HH NH OH? 340 VVO O -3C\ UN? m {MN O GM“ N dWN w W 0H“ m O\fi O 0L3 M m H maze: OOH: maze: 30H HpHHmswm mason :OHQ mpzoc 30H mpsmmp HO UHMOB < maze: smHn whzog 30H momma pm OHpos O mason QOHQ musog 30H messmHHmEooom mo mmcmm < mason OOH: mason 30H OOHH msHpHoxm OO mh30£ SOHQ thoz 30H mMHH mHQmPMOOEoo O 107 MO MB- \O\O m0 r-ld' MG) \02’ OOHOIms OHA OH OH 00 NH °°| H 5.1 ‘°| O\d' N-fi' MO OW on L\-\O In: O L\- (1):) “\0 “:2" (DO\ \00 0cm run mun OHA anvx «LO vnH .Oxn run any uwvx rug OmO H 3| 51 ml 0| H con \Ol NI OH OH HI mQSOQ an: muse: 30H thpSOOm HOGOvaz maze: SOH: muse: 30H m>OH OQSPOE mazes ann maze: 30H agoahmz pmccH mpSOO OOH: maze: 30H mmmchmmm mhson OOH: mnsOn 30H EoOmmum whacn OOH: mnSOO 30H szpzoom hHHEmm 108 NNN.O O O N O O O O A O O A A OH H O O O O muses OOH: OOO.O O O N A OH O HH O A HH A OH mason 30H EOOmfis OOm.A o H N H N OO .O CO NO ux (I) 2% HH A m HH O O H mpsos OOH: HH H A OH O H mhson 30H QHQO :OcmHum msue ANO. H NH OH HH A A O O A M O m a O O N H H H mgson OOHO ANA. H O H H o o H mpson 30H CoHPHsmoomp HwHoom OOH.O H O O O N O O O O O A HH O A OH NH O O mgsog OOHO O N OON.O H H H AH O maze: 30H PomQOOQIMHmm OON.MH AN OH N O N N O O N N O H H O N m O OH mgsog OOHO ON. H AN NH O H O O N O O O O N O O O O NN mgsog 30H COHPmAerm OOO.NH O A NH A A A O A O A O H N O O N N O mason OOH: OOH.OH O A NH NH OH A HH O O O O O O N N H O N mpsog 30H mgsmmmHm QOHOos OH. NH. OH. OH OH. OH MH HH OH O M N m w m. n M. H 109 O0.0H 0.0H OO.NH OAN.NH OAA.OH OOA.O O0.0 OO0.0 NOO.NH OA.OH OOA.OH ONO.HH OOHOOO (1):? d‘N NH? «DD- «MA “3' \Od' Orn NN \O-d' Nd’ NM #0 (I) whoom EmmpmManmm hp mmsz> HmcHEhme HOComhmm gem mmHocmsvmmm .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H szHOswm .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H Opsmmp Mo OHnoz < .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H momma Pm OHpoa < .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H PcOeanHmEooom mo mmsmm < .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H mMHH Onwpwoxm c< .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H OOHH mHnmpuomEoo < llO O0.0H OOA.NH ONO.A OOO.A OO0.0 OO0.0 OA.O OA.O OA.O O0.0 OH0.0 OOHOmz “(ID NO m0 301 \fid’ 00 HP! Nr-l NN 3N :I'H'i' din L\-\O d‘O c>o NrH Nd" mum Ncu :I’d Orfi bOo El 21 2| :1 fl 1] fil 3\ an OH HH OH OH NI O\O\ OH AH OH OH PH .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H OPHMSOOO HOQOHPOZ .m.O OOH: .m.m 20H o>0H OHSPOS .m.m OOH; .m.m 30H Ozosumn anzH .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H mmmsHmmwm .m.m OOH; Omom 30H Eovmmpm .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H OPHOSOOO OHHEOm lll OO0.0 AOH.A OHO.OH HA0.0H HA0.0 O O OOA.OH OON.OH OA.NH NOO.NH COHOOS ON AH AN NgN 0‘“ AH AH OH OH MN Nd‘ NH NH MN NM WC!) r-l HH O OH OH DOO {\d NM 3\ \O[\ “N “\N Md HA“? MN “N H UNI-l NH OH HH O HH HH “H OH O OH AH PH .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H EOOmHz .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H QHSO nOcmem maps .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H mafipwcwoomn HOHoom .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H Pommmmganmm .m.m OOH: aflom 30H coapm>HOm .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H whammmHm 112 HA0.0H Hmo.0H HHO.NH A.HH m.m m.OH A.m omm.m mmm.mH mum.mH :OO.HH mom.mH cmflumm dWO O NH HH mH O OH HH 3H m1 WH o»: moo tn NH MH. dd HH NH HH (DUN \OL\ \OC'N 523' O Nd’ \OC"\ m. ®O\ M Nd’ N (\d' m w. MN m M-fi' m d'O M (“41' H .ppm swag .ppm 30H thHmsvm .ppm zmfln .ppm 30H APSMmp mo vaoz < .ppm cmfln .ppm 30H momma pm gage: < .ppm swag .Ppm 30H meEanHmfiooom mo mmCmm < .ppm :mfin .ppm 30H mMHH wcHPHoxm :H .ppm swan .ppm 20H mwfifl mHQMPnomEoo H moOSPHpPH >9 smHm Una 30H %m mmsz> HmQHEpme Hanomnmm Mom wwHozmSAmhm 113 NNN.NH NH NH OH N N N N N N N N O N N N H O .ppa NNHN N O O.NH NH NH NH N N NH H H H N .ppm 30H NPHMSONN HMCOHPNZ ON.N N m N N N H N N N N N N N N N OH N H .»»m NNHN NNN.N O N N N N N N N N N N N N N HH OH O .ppm 2OH m>oH waspmz NNN.N N N N N N N H N N N N N OH N N N N N .ppm NNHN ON.N N O N H N N N N N N N N N N HH N NH NH .ppm zOH Nzospm: ymnnH NNN.N O H N N N N N H N m N NH N N OH N N NH .ppm NNHN NHN.N O H H N N N O H N N N O N HH HH N NH .ppm 30H mmmszQmm O.N O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NH N .ppm NNHN NNH.N O O H H N N N N N N N HH N OH HH N NH N .ppm zOH Sodmmgm NNN.N O H N N N O N N O N N N N N OH NH N NH .Npm NNHN NNO.N O N N N N N N N H N N N N HH OH N N HH .ppm 3OH NpHHsOmm NHHemm :NHONS mu. NH NH NH. NH. WHO MH. HH NH. m m N m n H n M H 114 QNHNNN ON NH AH NM 10:} NH NH NH 3H N N N N NH N N N N N N N O H N N N N N N N H N N Nd” H-IT (DUN mm on d't-I °\ L\\O (“if an OH HH NLN “N on Nd” NH HH :TN 31 on HH HH 0" \om OH HN PH .ppm NNHN .HNN 3OH EocmHz .ppm NNHN .ppm sOH mHnm uvcmHnm mane .ppm NNHN .ppm 30H soHpHcmoomu HmHoom .ppm NNHN .pvm 30H pomQNNNIMHmm .ppm NNH: .ppm BOH :oHpm>Hmm .ppm NNHN .ppm zOH mNSNNmHm 115 Hm0.0H HNo.OH N.OH NNH.NH mmN.m HNo.HH O\U\ L\-O\ N.mH mHH.MH NNN.NH NN.HH NNHNMH [\d' In: O\d’ om mm \0 (\ “4 H Ed “1 H NH :H 03' 0:} N-fi' 0M3 d'w oHN NLN \OL\ -:7'0\ 03B NL\ Nd’ d’d’ Nd‘ \om M4? NM «3% NI HI Nmm Np mmsHm> HNfiHEhme Hmcomhmm How meocmsvmhm mHNswm mHNE NNHHNNNN meEmm onE Npsmwp mo GHHoz H mHmemm meE momma pm UHHoz H NHNENN mHNE psmEHmHHmEooom mo memm H mHNEmm meE mNHH wchHoxw GH mHNEmN mHNE mmHH meanomEoo H 116 ON.NH NH NH N N N OH N N N N N N N N N N N N NHNENN NNN.NH N NH NH N N HH N N N N N O H H H N O O NHNe NPHHSONN HNcOHpNz NNH.N N N N N N N OH N N N N N N OH N NH HH H NHNENN O.N N N N H N O N N N N N N OH N N N N O mHme m>0H NHSPNE ON.N N N H N N N N N N N N N OH N OH N HH OH NHNENN ON.N N N N N H N N N N OH N N N N N N OH N NHNe ascends HmccH NNN.N O H O N N N N H N N N HH N N HH N N NH NHNENN NNN.N O H N N N N N H N N N N N N OH N OH NH mHNE mmmchgmm N.N O H H N N N N N N N N OH N N OH N NH N NHNENN N.N O H N O N N N N N N N N N N N N NH NH mHme Sowmmhm NNN.N O N N N N N N N O N N N m N NH NH N NH NHNENN HNN.N O H N N H N N N H N N N H HH N N N OH mHms NpHgsomm NHHENN cmHOmz NH NH. NH NH NH. NH. MH HH. NH N m N m w H n M H 117 on On OO.NH OH.#H NNN.NH NNN.HH NNHNNH. NN NH NN AN Od HN NH OH OH on Nd ”I H NM dr-i ‘31 3| H 0d d0 WN \ON “N 51] “I H dN Nd Nd C'NN r-lCD \Ol\- HH CDC“ Nd “(D UNd O OH com r-ld °| H L\\O NH OH HH O\d an A OH NM W0 “N \OL\ Nd NH OH MN 31 NH NH 0" NN NH Ffl mHNEmm mHNE EoOmHB mHmEmm mHNE mHnm IOQmem @599 mHNEmm mHNE SOHPHcmoomu HNHoom mHmEmm mHNE pommmmhanom mHNEwm mHNE GOHpN>HNm mHNEON wHNE ONSNNOHA 118 ONN.A OO0.0H MHH.HH NOO.NH NNN.OH NN.N ONN.N NNN.N NNH.NH NNN.NH NHN.NH O.NH :NHONH Fwd (Ld “W H (Ld Ed \OL\ OH OH Q)F\ NH MH COHPNosvm Np N NH N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NH N N H N N N N N N N N H N N N N HH ml N m mmzHN> HNQHEumB Hmcompmm How mmHonsvmum VVD 0L3 N -dC\ OLd m QLd NH HH rtd W “WV m m OLd M OLd -dC\ :TQI F” Om NNHN Om 30H NPHHmsvm OO NNH: Om 30H Npsmmn MO UHMOB < Om NNHN Om 30H momma pm OHNO3 N Om NNHN Om 30H pcmsgmHHmEooom No mmCmm H No NNHN Om 30H mMHH wchHoxm CH Om NNHN Om 30H ONHH mHQNPHONEoo H 119 NNN.N ON.N NHm.O OON.O mm0.0 NN:.O NN0.0 NNN.N NNHHQH \OC'N mo do NM (DUN 00 NO Hm mm mm [\N L\\O c>O ahH 0L3 Nun FL: ravx rvn OwH Duo °°| I—l $1 ‘°| H :21 ‘1 H SI 2| 3| an NH NH NI NH NH NH :H F" Om NNHN Om 30H thpsOmm HNQOHPNZ OO NNHN Om 30H m>oH NHSPNE NO NNHN Om 30H knoEHNH HNQCH OO NNHN Om 30H mmmchmNm OO NNHN cm 30H Eoommpm Om NNHN Om 30H NPHMSONN NHHEON 120 NHA.O NNN.: AOA.O NNN.NH ONN.N HHH.MH NHN.NH QNHONS OH HN NN HN NH HN mH mH OH NH HH NH MN O\d \OW Md W0 do mo r-{\O NM NM NM OW r-IO\ L\O\ (Dr-l H (Din “\O \O(\ MN 1.1 3| H q flil SI “H “N 31 Nl PH Om NNHN Om 30H EocmHz Om NNHN Om 30H mHsm IOGNHHM NSMB NO NNHN Om 30H SOHPHQmoomp HwHoom Om NNHN Om 30H pomQNNAIMHmm OO NNHN Om 30H COHPN>HNm Om NNHN Om 30H whammmHm 121 omné momé mmmé. om.w mmdm Hmm.m :SIIES :2'\O “\0 \0-3' NOW on \OL\ :rm tn:- :TN O\:I' :01 MN 1r\(I) \O m UNVN wx: um: \Olfi FL: an: “N 31 wH. NH mH nH mhsog QMHQ mQSOQ 30H msowmeSOO muse: QmHn mhsoc 30H waHo maze: gmHn mason 30H szummgo mpson gwfin muse: 30H mHnmmmo mhson ana maze: 30H @mcsfleumopm maze: gmHs thon 30H mSOHPHps< mhsom mcHzmH> >9 smHm Usm 30H hp mmsz> HMPCmESMPmQH Hdzomhmm 90m mmHozmswmhm in com (\d' mm mm \O("\ \00\ 122 (1):? (DUN MN Nr-l Or-l mm 0cm wuv «L3 54» bAn 3:)“ bnn rwv ruv ruv 3N d‘d‘ vvn N4? 015- ”I H ‘1] :l .31 NI r—l SI con \Ol :n NI v-Il maze: :mHz maze: 30H HmSPomHHmwnH muses an: maze: 30H PCmvcmmmUQH mason ann made: 30H m>HmeHmmsH mason ann whacz 30H Pmmcom maze: :mHn mason 30H aswmaom mhso: sts mpson 30H mcH>Hwhom 123 mmm.m mmo.HH mma.m mmm.m O.HH om:.ma www.mfl o.oa mm:.m om.m MdH.HH mHm.0H unfluma H4? OVN In: Nd’ \OC'N (DO\ MUN N m M:? VH5- "\N :3 ravx \oaw oxm ch run .3cfi \0C» :2“: \oo\ \06\ .3ln vvo \Od' mun 54» H :1' UN wwx cum nun abb- In: tn: °°| Ed ‘°l E] 3| H S] .‘Iil SI an w» :1 NI ru muses gmHn maze: 30H umaaoppzoo-mamm mpsog nmfin maze: 30H mHnHmCommmm thon stn mpSon 30H mpfiaom mQSOS ang mMSOQ 30H pcmfiUmno mason ann mHSOQ 30H mQH>oq mn50: :mHQ mazes 30H HacHon «L: (DIN um: .&C\ .$C\ 0L3 0L: (0:? I-i-Z? Nd’ Nd \Od’ \OL\ -:?‘N 124 r-id' L\\O Md \0 m 3:)" on on O\\O mm \02' \O\O (DB \O[\ In: Mr! [\O\ (\(D L\L\ Md‘ :1‘ (\- MB [\3 a" :1 0" mmoom Emmpmm HHmm hp mmSHm> HMPQmSSMPmQH Hmzomhmm how meocmsvmnm .m.m swan .m.m 30H msomwwuzoo .m.m swan .m.m 30H cmmHo .m.m swag .m.m 30H Hampmmgo .m.m gmflg .m.m 30H mHnwmmo .m.m gmflg .m.m 30H UvaHEGMOpm .m.m smflg .m.m 30H mSOflpflps< 125 mmN.HH 0H.NH ow.ma om.ma mmm.m mmm.© cmflcya CD“ on: (D m mxo MO 0»: MN r-h-l MN Or-l NW -=}'\O (1):? MW \O\O NC’N om mm mm mm UN \OM WC!) “I H 3] 3| H S] NI I-l °| H «M «M :1 HH 5H 0H ma r” .m.m gmfls .m.m 30H HddpomHHmpsH .m.m gm“; .m.m 30H PamocmmmucH .m.m swag .m.m 30H m>HchHmmEH .m.m swag .m.m 30H Pmmzom .m.m swan .m.m 20H Hs%mamm .m.m swan omom 30H mQH>Hmaom 126 mmm.HH 500.0H smduya FL: 0:? d’d‘ 30 NN “1 H 51 mH MH \O{\ 5&0 NM NW mm mm in MN Hm 3N 1I'\N \ON 5:? L\-L\ \Od’ VH5- :I'CI) OL\ Ln: NM :1 3'l H SH SH SI OOI \m :1 0H H .m.m swag m .m.m 30H coafloppcoo-mamm m .m.m gm“: m .m.m 30H mHnHonmmmm o .m.m swag H .m.m 30H mpflaom o .m.m gmfls H .m.m 30H psmflumpo mm .m.m gmflg m .m.m 30H mQH>oA H .m.m swag N omom 30H Hmoflmoq H 127 moo.HH mma.ma om.m mmm.m Hmo.m mMH.w ooa.m omu.m smflmya MW (DN O\:}’ Nd MN 500 com WI-l rid" O\:}' (“r-I VVI) r-ld' (”NH-1' 1mm N L\- \Od' “\O (\m min \O\O \0m 3:? “CD 10:? 0" .ppm swag .ppm 30H acommmnsoo .ppm gm“: .ppm 30H cmeo .ppm swan .ppm 30H Hsmammgo .ppm smfi: .ppm 30H memmmo .ppm nmfl; .ppm 30H UmUQHEUwonm .ppm swan .ppm 20H msOHpHQE¢ mmwSPpr< >9 anm ccm 309 hp mmSHm> HMPQmESMPmQH Hanomgmm pom mmHocmsvmpm 128 OON.HH HH OH O M O O N O O m O N O M O O H H .ppm OOH: O H.NH O O OH O O O O O OH O N O H O .ppm 30H HmSPowHHwPCH OOO.N O O O O O N O N O N N N O O O O O O .ppw OOHO H.O H O O O N OH N O O OH O N O O O O HH N .ppm 30H PQOOCOQOOQH N.OH NH OH O O OH O O O O O O O H O O O N O .ppm OOHO O.HH OH OH O O N O O OH N O O O O O O N N N .ppm 30H m>HpmszmEH NOO.N H O O O N H N O O O N O O OH O OH HH NO .OPO OOHO OOH.O O O H H H H O O H O O N O O OH OH OH ON .ppm 30H pmmzom ON.O N O O O NH N O OH O O O OH O H O O O O .ppw OOHO O.O H O O N O O O O O O O O N N OH O O O .ppm 30H HOOOHOO OHN.O N N H O O O O O O O N O OH N O O N O .ppm OOH: OO0.0 O O OH N O O O O O NH O O O O O NH O O .ppm 20H mcH>HmHom :NHOOE MH NH mH “H mH mH MH HH mH_ m M N. w w m M M H 129 Hmo.HH O.HH OOOONa r-i-d‘ \Otfi (1):? O\:)' mm t-i-ZT 10:? 00:? (IDL\ ®\O NM MN #10 dr-l CHI-i mm NO NO ‘03“ “N Md vnH cu own vnn ban ocu «>5. own «ab- 10:? “MA “1 H EH :1 H S] NI r-‘I SI an \m :1 NI HI .ppm OOH: .ppm 30H OOHHONOOOO-OHOO .ppm OOHO .ppm 20H mHnHmcommmm .ppm OOHO .ppm 20H OPHHOO .OPN OOH: .OPO 30H OOOHOOOO .POO OOH: .ppm 30H mcH>oH .Opm OOHO .ppm OOH HOOHon 130 OOH.O 0N.O OH.OH mmm.m cmHUmz NH OH OH O ON (I) L\ \n L\ .:)’ O r-i m m tn N O O O N O O O O HH HH NH N O O O N ONOOOHNOONOOHOOOON NHONOOOOOOHHOOONNO H O O O O O O N O O N O O O O O N OOOHHOONOOOOOOOOOO ONOOHOONOOONOOOOHH O.HNHOIOHHIOHNIHHOIOONOOHON xmm hp mmSHm> HOPCOEsmeQH Hanompmm pom OOHocmswmhm Nd \om NH m H mHOEmw mHme OSommmp500 OHOEOM mHmE camHo mHmsmm mHOE H5%hmm£o mHmsmm mHOE mHnwmmo mHmEmm wHOE OmcsHEOmopm meEmm OHOE msoHpHnE< 131 HNO.NH ON.HH OOO. OO. (\oo mmm.NH ONN.NH OHO.N OON.O mm CO\O O\L\ OOO. COHUOS «1O OHO \OL\ NW \ON MCI) (I)O\ “\O :H MO 30 \Od' \O\O :1": 00:} 10(1) MN NI—l 3N 3:)" (\m CDCD ‘03 ”I H :31 3| H SI fil 2| «N “N O1 NI Om ON PH mHOEmm mHmS HOSPomHHmch mHOEmw mHOE PcmwstmOQH mHmEmm mHOE m>HchHmmEH mesmm meE Pmmzom OHOEOM OHOE HOOOHOO mHmso% mHmE wnH>Hmhom 132 OO0.0H OON.O NNN.O OH0.0 O.NH mmw.NH OOH.OH NO0.0H OO0.0 NOH.N OH.OH ONN.O OOHOOH NM OO ON NCD do Ed ‘W H HH NH “Nd" “\O aavx O\d‘ In: «an. NW \Od’ MN moo NM d’O th 3m r-H.\ ION \OL\- Nd) L\-V\ dd) OL\ O\\O \OM mo :1 H 3] 3“ E“ an v» O1 NI On mHmEmm mHme UmHHoppnooumHmm mHmEmm OHNE meHmcommmm OHOEOM mHNE OPHHOm OHOEOH mHOE pcOHOOpO mHmamm mHmE wcH>oH mHOEmw mHmE HOOHmoH 133 ovx MN :T H \OCO \OU\ (Li \OC\ :1 ‘°| O O OH OH COHPwosum Op mmSHm> HOPCOESMvaH Hanommmm Mom mmHocmsvmhm In: Nd H'TN \O\O “N ‘03 \OL\- MN \00 0:} \OO DHO NJO cum :H Om OOHO Om 30H msomwmpzoo Om OOHO Om 30H :pmmHo Om OOH: Om 30H HOOOmmOO Om OOHO Om 30H memQOo Om OOH: Om 30H OmccHEOOomm Om OOHO Om 30H OSQHPHQEH 134 ONH.O O O O O O O O OH O m O O O O N OH N H Om OOHO O OOH.OH OH OH OH OH O O O O O O O O O O O O Om 30H HOOpmmHHmOOH NO0.0 H O O O O NH N O O N O H O O N O OH O Om OOHO OOO.O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N O Om >>OH PCOUCOmmocH OOO.OH N N H O O N O N O O O N O O O N O H OO OOHO OOO.OH OH OH OH O O OH N O O N O O O H O O H H Om 30H m>HPOQHmOEH OOH.O O O O H N N O O H O N O O O O OH NH ON Om OOOO OOO.N H O H O H O N H O O O O O HH OH OH OH OO Om 30H PmmCom HN0.0 H O O O N N O N N O O O O O O O O O Om OOH: OON.O N O N O O O O HH O O O O OH O OH O O O Om 3OH HOONHom O.O N O O O O O NH O O O O O O O O N O H Om OOHO OOH.N O N O N O N O O O NH N OH O N O O HH O OO 30H mcH>HMMom cOOOmz MH NH _WH OH OH NH MH HH ml. m M N w w m n M H 135 HN0.0H OO0.0 OHN.O NHO.NH OOHOMH cvaw mum \ocx anvx 54v ovo «MO r—l\0 OM \ON MN Mt—l :1'\O L\-O .Oxn OW rqrx ONO axO OHA uxO 50 \0-3' mm \O\O M\O Md NM ‘Ol 31 3| H S] “I H 0l H an «n :1 on On Om OOHO Um 30H OOHHoppsom-OHmO Om OOH: Om 30H mHQHmcommmm Om OOHO Um 30H OOHHOO Om OOHO Om 30H pcmHOmOO Om OOHO Om 30H wcH>oH Om OOHO Om 30H HOOHon 136 NO0.0 HON.O OOOOOH O O OHOmO NH HH O\\O \0 00 HH 0 0H m 0H HH mH m :1‘O\ H H N H 1n \n m mH r-IM NM O O m N OH HH N N OH OH :rI—l H CO N O N :TN Ln mINHOIOHHOHmHMHHIHHOINw. N .O. O. H O. HH NH HH OH M 1J'VI) NH HN OH NH H muses ann mhson 30H OPHHmsvm wnson anc mpson 30H >Psmmp Mo OHhoz H mpson ann mason 30H momma OO OHpoz O OHSOQ stc maze: 30H pcmesmHHmSooom Mo mmCmm H maze: smHn mason 30H OOHH msHpHoxm CH maze; gmH: Ogden 30H mMHH mHQNpHOOEOO H mcHamH> >9 gmHm USN 30H >9 mm3Hm> HNQHEHO9 20HmH>mHm9 90M mmHocoswwhm in: Md’ «>N. \OC\ cva\ \oa\ \OC\ UN: Ni 137 NM umO umO HMO :1' M cvv\ 10:} N-II' \oaN aarx aavx aaox MN"? u—{r-l MW H‘Tt-i 10:? \Olfl r-lM OW \O(D (ID\O (1) OJ Ed “1 H 3] SH 0| H «M NH CH (DE \ON r1rx -:T{.\ (N 31 NI r" mpsog gmHg mhzon 30H OPHMSOOO HNQOHPNZ mason :mHn maze: 30H m>0H mpsvmz muse: zmHs mHSOH 30H OCOEHNS HmccH muse: :mHn OHSQH 30H mmmchmmm mason smHn mason 30H Ecummpm OHSOH :ng OHSOQ 30H OPHHSOOO OHOOOO 138 HNO.OH ONO.HH OHO.HH OOO.OH OON.O NO0.0 OO0.0H OON.HH NNN.OH NH0.0H OON.O OHH.O OOHONH mm HO O\d‘ {Nd Md“ (I) (\ .ch \O£\ M\O 03' \00\ \0V\ (D\O (1):) \O-d’ NM (\VN Mr-l a\o owo o\o Ncu run :2’ M «no «vn Md' Md aux aux E] 3| H 51 SJ C’I an \m :1 mpson ngn mgson 30H EOOOHB mason zmHz mason 30H mHsm IOCOHHO OSH9 mason ann muse: 30H COHPHCwoomH HmHoom Ogden aan mpsos 30H PommmmnumHmm mason :mH: muse: 30H cOHpm>Hmm mpson cmHn muse: 30H whammmHm 139 OOOOOH HH NH NH O N O OH O O O O O O O O O O O O O O :ro\ O- \0 UN O1 N O O O O N O O O N H N N O O O O O O O O O O O OH O O O H N O H H O O O O O O NH OH N O O H N N O N N O O O O O OH NH N N N O N N O O O O O O O O NH OH MI NH O: OH OH OH. NH HH m1 m m N w w m N whoom Emmpmm NHmm Op mmsHm> HmsHspm9 SOHOH>mHm9 pom mmHocmsvmhm Nd‘ UN-d‘ HH NH OH HH .M HN NH NH OH H. .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H OpOHmsvm .m.m OOHO .m.m >>0H Opswmn No OH903 H .m.m OOH: .O.O OOH momma Om OHNO3 O .m.m OOOO .m.m 30H szenwOHQEooom No wmcmm H .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H mmHH wchwoxm CH .m.m OOHO .O.O 30H mOHH mHQOpHomEoo H l#0 ON.HH OH.m ONO.NH O0.0H ON.OH OOO.NH OO.N OOO.N CO (\(I) mmm.O ONH.O OOHOMO MN \OL\ NL\ NW 0:) Md \OV\ 00:? UN-ZI' «um UmO cvv\ vnH «v0 «VD own OHH z)": (wax vvo rqrx «an. arc b4\ GDO\ °°| r—i Ed :‘il 3] 3| H :3 SI SI an HH HH L\-:)' L\.:}' OHO OM? “N 31 “H r" .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H OPOASOOO HOQOHPOZ .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H m>oa mthwz .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H Ozoepmn MOQCH .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H mmmzflmmmm .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H Eoummhm .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H OpHpsoom hHfiEmm 141 OO0.0H OOO.HH $3.012 O\-:}' H: MN (\3 omo (I): O\-:)' N UN NM OHO 0L3 0m: Fm: mi Nd’ 3M L\L\ mm zit—i \O\O NOW NCV r4m Nra r4N run UMH axO «No one HC\ °°I S1 ‘°| r1 :1 3! r{ .21 “I r1 0| O1 “N (H NI PH .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H Eocmfiz .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H mflgm IOQOOMM make .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H Coapflcmoomp Hmfioom .m.m OOHO omom 30H pomgmmpumamm .m.m OOH: .m.m 30H cowpm>amm .m.m OON: .m.m 30H OMSOMOHm 142 mmmé mdo.m Him 3:? NOO. OmHOOO O O OH O N O OH N N O O O O O O O H H «um 1n .ch NH NH NH NH NH NH. NH HH NH N N N N N m N \00\ NH OH M \OL\ ma ma H .ppm OOHO .ppm 30H OPNNwsvm .ppm OOH: .ppm 30H hvsmmn O0 OH903 O .ppm OON: .ppm 30H momma pm OHOoa O .ppm OOHO .Ppm 30H PamecmNHmEooom mo mmcmm < .ppm OOH: .ppm 30H ONNH mcflpwoxm c< .ppm OOH: .ppm 30H OOHH OHQNPHONEOO < mmOSPNPP¢ >9 swam USN 309 hp mmsam> HNQNEQOB SONmN>mHme Mom mmflocmswmnm 143 ONO.OH O.HH HNO.OH NON.NH OOHOOO \OL\ «\xo \OL\ NC'N In: \OL\ \OV\ H 3' W3 0:? d’N H\O MN on 3N In: {\d' (DUN CDO\ t-lr—i N\O NM :I'U'N \oxn Hm (D\O °°| t-l Ed “’l H 3] 3| H 31 SI «N NH OH @5- #0 corn :I'B “N 31 “H F” .ppm OOHO .ppm 30H OPNQSOOO HNQONPNZ .ppm OOH: .ppm 30H m>0H manpmz .Ppm OOH: .ppm 30H OnoEpmn hmch .ppm OOH: .vpm 30H mmmzwmmwm .ppm OOH: .ppm 20H Eovmmpm .ppm OOHO .ppm 30H OPNASOOO zawewm 144 OHN.OH NNN.NH OOO.HH O.OH OOOOOO rt: NM NO OO COW O\:)' NM MC!) \00» mo 00:)- :39— cuuw :f-fi' (DB O\V\ ONO FMH «:1' M O M M“ mm Nd’ M3 0| an «n O1 on On .ppm OOHO .ppw 30H OOOOHO .ppm OOOO .ppm 30H mflzm IOQONmN maps .ppm OOH: .ppm 30H Coawficmoomn HNNoom .ppm OOHO .ppm 30H pommmwnumamm .ppm OOH: .ppm 30H EONPN>HOm .ppm OOOO .ppm 30H madmmmam 145 OoO.NH OO0.0H 560.0 50H.OH OHN.O OO.O OON.O OON.O $3.42 O O O O N H O O O N N O H O O O OH OH NH 0 HH O OH O O O O N O N O N O N N O H O O O H O O O O N O H NH NH OH. NH O O O O N OH OH NH OH H \O -:)’N M UN UN N (\ M H N H OH NH. NH HH NH N N N w N m N M xmm hp mmsz> HNSHEhmB COHmH>mHme pom mmHocmsvmhm NM NH ON NH OH H OHNEON mHNE OPHHNSON meEmN mHNE zpsmmp No OHpoz < OHNEON OHNE momma pm OHpoz < OHNEON OHNE PQOEQOHHQEoooN mo mmcmw O OHOEON OHOE ONHH wchHoxm CO meemm meE ONHH OHQNPMONEOO < 146 ON0.0 NO.HH OO.NH WNH.MH OOO.NH NO.NH ON0.0 OON.O OOO.N ON.O OOO.N OO0.0 cmfioma \O:)' 3:) com \OM OM \OL\ mxo NM FL: umO Nd’ :T M MN m: WW «VA Ncm In: oOO ch 0%) DJ\ 5&\ Fun ONH Si “1 H :3 “1 H 54 an WM 31 Nl r-il OHOEON OHOE OPHMSOOO HNQOHPNZ OHNEOM OHNE m>0H OMSPNE meEmm mHNE thEpNQ nmscH OHOEON mHmE mmmchmmm OHNEON OHOE Eovmmgm OHNSON OHOE OPHNSOOO OHHOOO 147 O0.0H O.HH O0.0H ONO.HH om.HH HHm.OH 03.0H OON.OH O0.0 OO0.0 $3.1m: O\:?‘ {\M com NM \mo 42': in “(\- \ON MO\ \0M (1)“ r-ld' CON NW (DB \ON Md’ Nd NM 3‘“ OM OM 0:? 541' MH NM O-fi' raw\ r4N Ono rvn uwrx OLO cuuw °°l Oi 21 \0 HI 0I Oi an (N :1 “H r” OHNEON OHNE EOOOHB OHOEON mHme QHgm nOsmHum maps OHNEON OHOE COHPHCMQOON HwHoom mHmEmm meE pommmmnumHmm mHmEmm mHNE COHPN>HNm OHNEON OHNE whammmHm 148 0.0H me.NH OO0.0H ONN.O OOOOOO NM umO NM UNI-i \03' \OM O\-:)' aux d’d‘ aarx NL\ \OL\ \OM \Od‘ :I‘O :7'N NM MN :f-fi' :I'r—l Mr-l NM MN HM M4? \00 M\O M O\:“ OH OH NH N M H COHpmosOm an mmSHm> HNQHEhme COHmH>mHme 90M mmHmsmswmpm 0H Om OOOO Om 30H OPHHNsvm Om OOOO Om 30H Opzmmp Oo OHOos O Om OOHO Om 30H momma Om OHOoz O Om OOH: Om 30H meEOmHHQEooom mo mmcmm < Om OOHO Om 30H mmHH mchHoxm z< Om OOH: Om 30H mOHH mHnmPMONEoo < 149 HN0.0 NH0.0 OOOOMO 3:? MN MO \OL\ NM \00\ m:- \0M 0:} “3' (I)L\ Nd’ :TM MN 3'“ NB CI)“ 01—! \ON :Tu-i \OM COL\ \OCD (\L\ (\d' 30 :1 “4 H E] 0l H a” “N O1 NI PH Om OOOO Om 30H OPHpsOmm HOQOHpOz Om OOOO Om 30H m>0H mpzpwz Om OOHO Om 30H Ozoemm: thCH Om OOOO Om 30H mmeHmmmm Om OOHO Om 30H EOOmmpm Om OOHO Om 30H OpHNSOmm OHHENm 150 ONO.HH oO.OH OON.OH OOO.HH {\- \O 00 BM OON.HH OOO.OH OON.OH mHu.OH MON.m ON.O OOHOOO NM 3 OO O\-:)' \OL\ OH HH Nt-l L\L\ “I H \OUW [\-\O N-fi' 3%) NN 3| :I'M 3| NH OH 3M \OCD \ON C’I CD: \ON OH NH “N \Od’ NM CDO\ :T'M “N Md' \OO\ "Wt-i M3 OH OH (13% NM OH NH MH NH NI ON ON rfl Om OOOO Om 30H OOOOOO Om OOH: Om 30H QHsm IOQmHHN maps Om OOHO Om 30H QOHPHQmoomp HmHoom Om OOOO Om 30H pommmmhumHmm Om OOHO Om 30H COHOO>HOm Om OOOO Om 30H mQSOOmHm 151 ONO.HH OOH.OH Omm.N OO0.0 OO0.0H 0.0H OOO.Olmz O\:)‘ NL\ moo \OM t-id' H3 N3 Nd“ (0:? NM \OL\ dix MN NM ll'\\O Nd MN MM :Td' In: O\:2' (IDM (DB NM #0 00] :H NI r-il NH OH NH NH mamamH> >9 anm Ocm 30H hp moCmpmNmmm sapmohm pom mmHocmsvmhm mhmzmH> ONO: mumzmH> 30H 0 m>am HHmzmm mpmzmH> OOH: mpmamH> 30H mzmc HOOOH 2m HH mpmzmH> OOH: mpmzmH> 30H mPchogo pmpHmz mzmz mmo mMmBmH> ANN: mnmzmw> 30H Opngsm Hopwo mumBmH> :sz mamZmH> 30H OHOOOO map QH HHO mhmzmH> ans mgmamH> 30H NHIENO< 152 OO0.0 O O H O O H O N m o O O O O O OH OH O mpmzmfi> OOHO HHH.O O O O O O HH H H N O O O N NH OH OH O mpmzmfl> 30H m*m*¢*2 NO0.0 O O O O O O N O N O O OH O O O O O N mpmgmH> OOH: NH0.0 N O O N O O O O O O O O O OH O O O O mpmzmfi> 30H mpoos hmHhe ONO: NOO.OH NH O N O OH O O O O O O O O O O O O H Opmzmfl> OOHO OO0.0H MN OH HH m N N o o mpmzmH> 30H HOmO N mxmz m.PmH ONN.O N O O N O O N O O O N O N O O m N O mpmzmfl> OOH; O O O O N HHH.OH O N O N O HH N OH O O O O N mpmsmfl> 30H Omhox OOO.NH O O OH O O O OH O O O O O O O N N H O mpmzmfl> OONO OO.NH NH N OH N O O HH N O N N O O H N N H O mpmsmfl> 30H mmpmsvm OoozhHHom O.O OH N H N O O O O N HH N O N O OH N N H mpmzmfl> OON: 0.0 O O O O O O O N O O O HH NH OH N O O N mpmamfl> 30H comnwo OQCOOO gmNOmO NH NH NH OH OH NH. NH HH NH N N N N O N N N H 153 ONN.O OO0.0 ON0.0H NOO.NH OOO.NH mom.HH OHO.N om.N Hum.NH me.:H OO0.0H NHO.HH OOOOOO N O HH HH \0m 0:? NH NN OH NH G)O\ d)b— HH .ch DO: 3] ‘1 H MIN SH Nd‘ WI? (130\ L\\O NW 0| {NH—1' CD\O om OOI NH OH MCI) N HH “N NM :H mH HN om NI «)5- HO ON I—il mhmamH> :st mnmsz> 30H mQOPHOB mumsmH> zmHn mpmzmH> 30H xmpe OOPO mhmzmH> ans mumzmH> 30H hmgo USN Oczom OhmsmH> :an mpmzmH> 30H Ompscflz OO mpmzmH> stn mhmzmH> 30H POOOO OH OOOOO mpmzmH> :mHs mgmzmH> 30H nmpcmo HOOHOOS 154 ON0.0 mom.m NOH.O NOH.N OOO.HH ONO.OH mom.© HOO.N 3:0.HH NNN.OH COHUOE Nd“ QDV\ Phi FVO d)“\ \00\ um: 0&“\ 02-2? GL3 \OUN WKV 323 UNN WV“ VDN ““0 “DD- OOO OCh .ch PM} Owe VDO\ CVU\ WWW °°| :1 “I :31 OH HH NH NH QWN NH HH OH OH 3:) “H H .m.O OOHO m omom 30H 0 m>Hm HHmzmm O .m.m OOOO O .m.m 30H mBmQ HNOOH 2m HH ON .m.O OOOO ON .m.m 20H m¥w¥£oho MmPHNB mzmz OOO .m.m OOH: .m.O 3OH ppmchsm Hopmo 3W3 .m.m OOOO .m.m 3OH OHHSwm OOP 2O HHO \Od' H .m.O OOOO N .m.m OOH NH-emO< HI whoom Emmpmm MHmm hp mmosmumymhm sapwogm mo OOHocmsvmpm 155 ON0.0 OON.O mmm.w mmm.m mic. H OOO. H ON0.0 OON.O OOO.OH OHN.HH HO0.0 O0.0 OOOOOE NM OH OH (IDO\ NW [\\0 Ed \0 OI NOW NH (\m L\-\O 3CD :1 3| [—.i {\d' HH HH mm (D: O\:}' \OL\ \0m 03' mm C3| r-l \O[\- “N OH : WM UV \OL\ NW 31 OH O (I): NH 0” HO r” .m.O OOOO .m.m 30H m*m*<*s .m.m OOOO .m.m 30H mpooz pmHze ONO: .m.O OOHO .m.O 30H Hmma O Ost O.OOH .m.m OOHO .m.m 30H xmflox .m.m OOOO .m.m sOH mmpwzwm OOOzOHHOm .m.O OOHO .m.m 30H Compwo Occnoh 156 OHO.N O O O O O O O O O O O OH O N O O O O .m.m OOHO OOH.N N O O O O O N N O O O HH OH N O O O O .m.m 30H onPHNS OOO.NH HH O N O OH O O N O N O N O O O N O N .m.O OOOO OOO.NH HH O NH N O N O N O H O N O O O O N O .m.m 30H xmhe .Hum ONH.NH N O N O O HH O HH O O O O O O O O O O .m.m OOH: OHO.NH OH O N O N O HH O N O N N O O H H N O .m.O 30H pmno cam ascom NOO.N H H O N H N O H N N H H O N O NN HN OO .m.m OOOO OON.O N N N N H O H N O O O O O N H NH OH NN .m.m 30H OOOOOOS OO OOO.OH O ON NH HH O O N O OH O O O N O N H H O .m.m OOOO NNN.OH N OH OH OH O O O OH O O O O N O O O O O .m.O 30H POOHO OH OOHOO OO.HH O O OH O N N O O O O O O N N O O N N .m.O OOH; O0.0H O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N H O .m.m 3OH pmpcmo HOQHOOE :OHOOS MH NH MH WH HH mHV NH HH NH m M N w W m n M H 157 HO0.0 OO0.0H :HN.HH 0mm.HH OOOOOO “H N no in .:)- O\:} N O O O O O HH HH O O N N N O O O OH OH O O N N O O N O N NH O O O N N N O O O O O O O O O HH HH O O O O O O N H O O N N N O O N N O N O HH O O N O O O O O NH O OH OH N OH O O NH OH O N O O N O N H O O O OH NH H O O N N O O O O N O MI OH OH NH NH. HH NH N m N w W m O OH OH N3 NI N .ppm OOH: N .ppm 30H O O>HO HHOOOO O .OPO OOOO O .ppm 30H mam: HNOOH 2O HH ON .OPO OOOO OO .ppm 20H OPOOOOOO OmpHmz mzmz OOO .ppm OOHO .ppm :OH Pmehsm Hopmo 03' O .ppm OOOO O .ppm 30H OHOEOO OOP cw HHO H .OPO OOH: N .ppm 30H NH-eOO< HI OOOSPHOP¢ >9 30H UGO :mHm On mmocmpmmmhm Empmopm p09 mmHoCmsvmum 158 NOH.N O O N O m O N O N N O O N HH O O OH O .OOO OOOO N O ONO.O O N H N O N H O O O NH HH OH HH .ppm 30H m*m*<*2 NO0.0H O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O .ppm OOH: HHO.N H O N O O O O N O O O O N OH O O O O .ppm zOH muooz hmHme Ohms OO0.0H HH NH O O O O O N O O O O N N O H H O .ppm OON: ONO.OH ON N NH O OH O N O O O N N O N O O N H .ppm 20H HOOO m mxmz m.PwH 0.0 O O O O O O N N O O OH O O O O N N N .ppm OON: NHO.O N O O O O O O OH N NH N HH O O O O O O .ppm 30H Ommom NOO.NH O N NH O OH O N O O O O N m O O O H O .ppm OOH: OOO.NH O O OH O N O OH N O O O O H O H H O .ppm 3OH mmpwswm OOOzNHHOm NOH.O OH O O N O N O O O NH N O O O O H O O .ppm OOHO OON.O O O N O O O O N O O O HH OH HH O H O O .ppm 30H Comgmo massed OOOOOE NH NH NI OH NH NH NH HH NI N N N N O N N N H 159 OO0.0 OOO.N MNw.NH HNN.NH OOO.NH O.NH OOO.N ONw.N OOO.NH ON.OH CON W0 °°| H 30 21 NH OH m5 0:? \0V\ (DD NW O\:}' MN a” HH (Wt-l m OH WC!) “N oOO NN :1 NM ON OH 0” ON OO PH .ppm OON: .ppm 30H mCopHmz .ppm OON: .ppm 30H NOON NNOO .ppm OON: .ppm 30H hmno UGO Nanom .ppm OOOO .ppm 30H mopscHS OO .ppm OON: .ppm 20H POOOO OH OOHNO .ppm OON: .ppO 30H pmpfimo HOOHOOS 160 HOO.O O O H O O OH O O HH NH O O N O O O O N OHOEON O.O N H O O O O O O OH O N O N O N O O N .OHOOE O O>Hm Oflmswm ON0.0 O O O O N N O O O O N O O O O N OH O OHOEON OO.O N O O N O O N O O O N O O O OH OH OH H OHOe mzmc HNOOH 2O HH OO.O H H N H N N H H O N O O O OH O OH OH ON OHOEON ON.N H O O H O O H H N O O N N O HH OH NH ON OHOe mPHxQOhU hmPng mzmz OOO OO0.0H O O O N O OH O O N N O O O O OH H O O OHOEON OO0.0H O O O O O N N OH N OH O O O O O H N O OHOe ppwchsm Hommo ONH.O N O N O O O O O O O O N O NH O OH O O OHOEON OOH.O O N O O O N O H O O HH O HH O O HH N O OHOe OHHEmm OON cH HHO OON.NH O N OH OH OH O O N N O OH N O O N N O O OHOEON OO0.0H O O H O OH O O O O HH O O O N O O O O OHOe NHIEOOO OONOOE NH NH NH NH NI NH NH. HH NI N N N N N N N N H xmm Op mmocmpmmmym ENNNONN pom mmHocmsvmmm 161 OO.O N O N O O N N O O O O H O O O OH NH O OHOeON OO.O H H N N N O O O O O O O O N NH OH O O OHOs m*m*<*2 OOH.O O N O O N O OH O O O O O O O O HH O O OHOEON OO0.0 O O N O O O O N O O N N O NH O H O N OHOs muooz NOHOB Ohms ONH.OH ON NH O O O O O N O O O O O O O H N H OHOEON ONO.OH OH N O O OH N O O O N N O N H O O H O OHOs HNOO m ONO: O.OOH O0.0H O O O N O O OH O O O HH O O O O O N N OHOEON OO0.0 N O O H O O O O O NH O O O O O O O O OHOOE Omnox OOO.HH O O OH O N O HH O O O N O O O N O N N OHNeON ON0.0H O O OH O OH O OH O O H O O H H N H O H OHOE mthSNm OooszHHom ON0.0 HH O O N O N O O O O O NH OH O O H O O OHNSON OON.O O O O O O O O O H NH N N O O O H O O OHOe Compmo Ocznow :OHOOS NH NH NH NH NI NH NH HH NH N N N N N N N N H 162 0.0H OON.OH O0.0 0:.NH OOHNNH HH HH wN OH O ON :H \OVN 100 in :1 H 03' S] om \OH :0 NW H 0l H “VD NW max NC“ a” NH OH “N (1):? mo FL? 31 r-ld' NH NH Nd NH NN 0” ON OO PH OHNEOH OHOE wsopHmz OHOEOO mHme NOON OOPO OHNEON mHNE hmgo Nam masom OHOEON meE mmpscfiz OO OHNEON OHOE OOOOO OH OOONO OHOEON mHNE pmpsmo HOOHOOE 163 OOO.O O H O O O O O O OH O O N O O O O O H Om OOOO OON.O O O H H N O O O OH NH O N O O O O O O cm 30H O m>HO Oflmzmm OON.O H N N O O m O N O O O O O N O OH OH O Om OON: OOO.O O N O O N O N O O O O N O HH O OH O Om 30H mams NOOH 2m HH OON.N H H O H H O H O H H O O O OH O OH OH OO Om OON; OOO.O H O O H H N H N O O O O N O HH HH NH ON Om zOH OPHxCORU .HmPHNZ mzmz OOO OON.OH O O O O O OH O OH O N N O O O O O O H Om OON: O.HH H O O O N N HH O O O O O O O N N O O Om 30H Ppmznzm Home ONO.O O H O O O O O N O O N O NH NH O HH O O Om OOHO NOO.N O O N O O O O O O O NH O N O O OH O O Om 30H OHHemm OON 2O HHO NOO.OH O O O OH OH O N O O O O N O N N H H O Om OOHO OON.O O O O O OH O O O N N NH O O O O O O O Om 3OH NHISOOO OOHOOS NH NH NH OH NH NH NH HH NI. N N N N N N N N H COHPOonm Op mmocmhmwmmm Emmmonm pom mmHocmswwnm 164 HNO.O H N O N H O N N m H O O O N OH NH OH O OO OON: OON.O N O O O O O O O N O O O O HH O OH O Om 30H m*m*¢*2 OON.N N O O N N O O O N O O N O OH O O O O Om OON: ONH.OH O O N OH O OH O O O O O O N O O N O O OO 3OH mpooE pmHOB NAME OHN.OH ON NH N N NH N O O O N N N O H N O O O Om OON; 0.0H NH N HH OH OH O O O O O O O N O O H O H Om zowmmm m ONO: m.PmH HN0.0 O O O O O N O OH N N O NH O O O N O N Om OON: OO0.0 O O O O O HH N O O O O O O O O O N O Om 30H Omhox ON0.0H OH O OH O NH O N N N N O O m O O O O O Om OOOO NOH.NH O OH OH O O OH OH O O O O O O O H N O Om OOH mmumsvm OoozmHHom OOO.O O O O O N O O N O OH N OH O N N H O O Om OOH: OOO.OH OH O O OH O O O O O N O O OH O O H O O OO 3OH COONOO Occnow cOOOms NH. NH NH OH NH NH NH HH 2| ow a" 04 “N “’1 d1 01 0" On 165 OHN.O O O O O O O N H O N O OH O N N O N O OO OON: OHO.O O O O O O N O O O O H OH OH N O O NH NH Om OOH mCopHms OHO.HH OH O O N O O N O O N O H O O O N O m Om OOH: OOO.OH NH OH HH O OH O O O H N O O O O O H Om 30H Ompe MONO HHH.NH O N O O O N O N NH O O O O H O H H O Om OOHO OOO.NH OH N O O O N OH NH O O O O O O H O H O Om 30H pmso USN assom HNN.N N H H O O H O O H H N O O N O NH ON ON Om OON: ONH.O H N O O N H H O O H O O O N O NH OH ON Om 30H OOPSQHE OO HNO.OH N ON NH OH N O O O O N N O O H H H O O Om OOOO OOO.HH O OH OH N O N O OH O O O O H N O O H O Om 30H OOOOO OH mOHNO OOO.HH O O O O N HH O O O N O N O O O H O H OO OOH: HHH.OH N O N O O O O O O N O O O HH O H O H Om 30H MOPCOO HOOHOOS OOOOOS NH NH NH NH NH NH NH HH NH. N N N N N N N N H APPENDIX F Other Frequency Distributions 166 Frequencies on TV Viewing Hours for all Respondents Range=O-69 hours Mean=22 . 8 Median=19 . 083 Mode=18 Hours Frequency Hours Frequency i—‘O O O HHHHHNHHHH [_a \o l-‘i—J N N HNHHHWWUHthNWWKflWNm-PHONOMKJINW QMWVONWKAme-F'N-C'NPHH 167 IFrequencies Television Attitudes on all ReSpondents Range=214m81+ Mean=Lk9 . 695 Median=1+8 . l Mode=47 Score Frequency Score Frequency 24 25 26 fl 0\ HNNI—‘l—‘N 4: m I—‘l—J Hmmmmemm:twomesmwtemOHmwmmmwwmetammmpwmmmmmHH 168 Frequencies on Self Esteem Measure on all Re8pondents Range=h0~lO§ Mean=79.355 Median:80.75 Mode=77 Score Frequency Score Frequency 40 45 49 51 54 100 l 102 3 103 l 105 2 fl U't NNVI—JUIOUIUI-P‘WQVKACDOC'CDCDO-PWNtNmmwwN-F'mwPNNCDNHl-‘NWHi-‘F-‘wl—‘H 169 Frequencies on Highest Grade Completed (Education) Range=8-20 Mean=lh.3 Median=l#.315 Mode=l6 QEQQE Frequency 8 l 9 1 10 8 11 1+ 12 1+9 13 15 14 27 15 ll 16 53 17 20 18 5 l9 5 20 l APPENDIX G Median Rankings for Value Surveys and Program Preferences Cross Tabulated by Control Variables Personal Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks for Low and High TV Viewers N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-respect Social recognition True friendship Wisdom Low 13-9 12.7 8.8 11.0 12.6 10.0 6.3 6.3 7.0 5.6 7.u 1n.2 13.1 13.2 5-3 15.7 6.# 6.4 170 n=105 (16) (13) (9) (ll) (12) (10) (3-5) (3-5) (7) (2) (8) (17) (14) (15) (l) (18) (5-5) (5-5) 11. 10. 10. 13. 12. 14. l4. N??NW-¢'WO\D\OO\CDN\OO\O\ (12) (16) (8-5) (8-5) (13) (ll) (1) (A) (2) (5) (10) (15) (l4) (l7) (3) (18) (6) (7) .01 .Ol .01 .05 .05 *Median test - significance is less than or equal to p Personal Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks 171 for Low and High Self Esteem N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-respect Social recognition True friendship Wisdom Low ll. 13. 12. 10. 13- 12. 13. 15. \OO\U\O\UI ONOOUVOOOVOUOWCDCD 6 \O n:28 (13) (17) (8.5) (8.5) (12) (ll) (1) (5) (2) (3-5) (10) (15) (14) (16) (3-5) (18) (6) (7) CD\I0\U'(UI \lWQCDWUIOKDChVDUme‘CDCD 6. 601+ (10) (10) (12) (10) (l) (3) (5) (7) (8) (18) (14) (15-5) (2) (l7) (6) (4) .05 .05 *Median test - significance is less than or equal to p 172 Personal Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks for Low and High TV Attitudes N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-respect Social recognition True friendship Wisdom Low 13.8 12.8 8.3 10.5 11.9 10.1 6.1 6.2 5.2 5-7 7.8 14.0 13.8 16.0 5.0 15.4 6.9 7.0 (9) (ll) (12) (10) (4) (5) (2) (3) (8) (16) (14.5) (18) (l) (17) (6) (7) 10. 13. 12. 12. 15. \o O\ ox x: .p (I) O\O (TKO 0 :mxo O\O'\1 |-’ O\\7\O .322 2* (12) .01 (9) (8) (15) (11) (1) (6) (3-5) (5) (10) (16) (13) .01 (14) (2) (18) (3-5) (7) *Median test - significance is less than or equal to p Personal Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks for Males and Females N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-respect Social recognition True friendship Wisdom *Median test - significance less than or equal to p Males 11.6 13.1 7-9 11.0 13.1 10.1 5-7 6.3 5.6 6.7 8.0 13.8 11.7 14.1 6.0 14.6 6.8 6.5 173 n=24 (12) (14.5) (8) (ll) L4.5) (10) (2) (4) (l) (6) (9) (16) (13) (17) (3) (18) (7) (5) Females 13.2 13-5 9-5 8.2 10.5 10.1 4.9 6.7 6-3 6.4 9.2 13.5 13.6 12.0 5-5 15.7 6.9 7-9 n=106 (14) (15-5) (10) (8) (12) (ll) (1) (5) (3) (4) (9) (15.5) (17) (13) (2) (18) (6) (7) .05 .01 Personal Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks 174 for Low and High Education N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-reSpect Social recognition True friendship 'Wisdom Low 12.0 14.4 13. 10. \o \J Kn o\ .p o C) (h xo d) no <3 -q A) kn -: Ox 0\ +4 -q :- n=10§ (13) (17) (9) (8) (16) (12) (1) (3) (2) (5) (10) (15) (14) (11) (4) (18) (6-5) (6-5) High 13.8 12.1 7-5 10.4 11.1 9.8 6.6 6.7 6.8 5-3 6.4 14.6 13.1 16.5 4.2 14.4 6.4 6.9 11:25 (15) (13) (9) (ll) (12) (10) (5) (6) (7) (2) (3-5) (17) (14) (18) (1) (16) (3-5) (8) 2* .01 .Ol .05 .01 .01 .001 *Median test - significance is less than or equal to p Personal Instrumental Value Medians and Composite Ranks N=200 Ambitious Broadminded Capable Cheerful Clean Courageous Forgiving Helpful Honest Imaginative Independent Intellectual Logical Loving Obedient Polite Responsible Self-controlled 175 for Low and High TV Viewing Low 9 8 8 ll. 8 10. 10. 5. l6. l3. 5 ll 3 8 3 6 5 8 5 4 8 8 .6 7 9 2 0 5 -9 .1 1129.5 (10) (8.5) (5) (ll) (17) (8.5) (6) (4) (1) (15) (7) (12) (13) (2) (18) (16) (3) (14) High 9 l (I) K1) N 00 4TH CDKJD CNW (I) -{—‘O\ O\ (2) (18) (14) (3) (10.5) .05 .05 .05 .01 *Median test - signficance is less than or equal to p Personal Instrumental Value Medians and Composite Ranks N=200 Ambitious Broadminded Capable Cheerful Clean Courageous Forgiving Helpful Honest Imaginative Independent Intellectual Logical Loving Obedient Polite Responsible Self-controlled *Median test - significance less than or equal to p 176 for Low and High Self Esteem t“ O S 10. 8. 2. 12. 8. 12. 10. 5. 15. 12. 6. 10. \OGDCDCI) mflHmmemflVO‘sN-F‘m 8 4 0 1 .2:2§ (9) (6) (5) (10) (14) (12.5) (4) (8) (1) (l7) (7) (15) (12.5) (2) (18) (16) (3) (11) High 9.6 8.3 8.9 9.6 13.6 8.8 9.0 8.8 3-5 12.6 8.5 11.8 11.4 4.8 16.0 12.3 6.1 10.3 n=102 (10.5) (4) (8) (10.5) (17) (6-5) (9) (6-5) (1) (16) (5) (14) (13) (2) (18) (15) (3) (12) .05 177 Personal Instrumental Value Medians and Composite Ranks for Low and High TV Attitudes N=200 Ambitious Broadminded Capable Cheerful Clean Courageous Forgiving Helpful Honest Imaginative Independent Intellectual Logical Loving Obedient Polite Responsible Self-controlled Iggy 9-9 8.6 8.1 9-9 13.2 9-3 8.1 8.0 3.1 11.4 9.1 12.1 11.0 5-3 16.5 12.8 5.8 11.3 22191 (10.5) (7) (5-5) (10.5) (17) (9) (5-5) (4) (1) (14) (8) (15) (12) (2) (18) (16) (3) (13) *Median test - significance is High n= 6 2* 8.6 (7) 8.1 (5) 9.1 (8) 9.3 (9-5) 11.7 (14) 10.5 (12) 8.2 (6) 9.8 (11) 2.9 (1) 13.7 (17) .01 7.6 (4) 11.8 (15.5) 11.1 (13) 5-4 (2) 15.5 (18) 11.8 (15.5) 6.4 (3) 9.3 (9.5) less than or equal to p Personal Instrumental Value Medians and Composite Ranks N=200 Ambitious Broadminded Capable Cheerful Clean Courageous Forgiving Helpful Honest Imaginative Independent Intellectual Logical Loving Obedient Polite Responsible Self-controlled 178 for Males and Females Malg £3195 Female n=95 8.7 (6.5) 10.1 (10) 8.7 (6-5) 8.1 (7) 8.3 (5) 8.6 (8) 10.8 (13) 7.9 (6) 12.5 (16) 12.4 (15) 8.8 (8.5) 10.3 (11) 8.8 (8.5) 7.5 (4) 9.9 (12) 7.6 (5) 3-3 (1) 2.8 (1) 12.3 (15) 12.8 (16) 7.9 (4) 8.8 (9) 11.7 (14) 12.1 (14) 9.2 (10) 13.1 (17) 7.2 (3) 4-3 (2) 15.7 (18) 16.1 (18) 12.8 (17) 12.0 (13) 6.3 (2) 5-7 (3) 9.8 (11) 10.8 (12) 2* .01 .001 *Median test - significance is less than or equal to p 179 Personal Instrumental Value Medians and Composite Ranks for Low and High Education H3229 112! 15195 1.11.8.4 .325 12* Ambitious 8.9 (7.5) 10.0 (12) Broadminded 9.8 (9) 7-9 (5) Capable 10.2 (13) 7.2 (4) .001 Cheerful 8.9 (7.5) 10.1 (13) Clean 10.0 (11) 15.1 (17) .001 Courageous 10.1 L2) 9.6 (9.5) Forgiving 7.2 (4) 9.0 (7) .05 Helpful 8.3 ¢) 9.6 (9.5) Honest 2.8 (l) 3.1 (l) Imaginative 14.3 (17) 10.4 (14) .001 Independent 8.1 (5) 8.9 (6) Intellectual 14.2 (16) 9.1 (8) .001 Logical 12.4 (15) 9-7 (11) .05 Loving 5.3 (2) 5-4 (2) Obedient 14.6 (18) 16.9 (18) .001 Polite 10.3 (14) 13.8 (16) .001 Responsible 6.8 (3) 5.5 (3) .05 Seli¥controlled 9.9 (10) 10.6 (15) *Median test - significance less than or equal to p 180 Television Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks for Low and High Self Esteem N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-reSpect Social recognition True friendship Wisdom Low 4.8 4.3 9.8 11.9 8.7 8-9 8.1 7.0 7-9 12.6 13.0 9.1 3.4 16.3 12.3 7.0 11.5 11.4 n=28 (3) (2) (11) (14) (8) (9) (7) (4.5) (6) (16) (17) (10) (l) (18) (15) (4.5) (13) (12) High 4.3 4.1 10.10 13.8 9.8 9.8 8.9 8.0 7.0 13.2 12.9 11.7 3.6 16.9 10.1 5-8) 11.0 10.9 n=102 2* (3) (2) (10) (17) (8-5) (8.5) (7) (6) (5) (16) (15) (14) .05 (l) (18) (11) .05 (4) (13) (12) *Median test — significance less than or equal to p Television Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks 181 for Low and High Television Viewing N=ZOO A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-respect Social recognition True frienship Wisdom Low “.2 4.3 10.0 12.6 9.0 8-3 8.8 8.4 7.8 13.4 13.1 9-7 3.1 16.4 11.3 6.0 10.5 11.6 Hi (2) (3) (ll) (15) (9) (6) (8) (7) (5) (17) (16) (10) (1) (18) (13) (4) (12) (14) High 4.9 4.2 9.8 13.6 9-7 8.1 7-9 7.0 7.4 12.5 12.9 10.4 4.3 16.7 10.9 6.8 11.8 10.8 n:25 (3) (l) (10) (17) (9) (8) (7) (5) (6) (15) (16) (11) (2) (18) (13) (4) (14) (12) 2* *Median test - significance is less than or equal to p Television Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks 182 for Low and High Television Attitudes N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-respect Social recognition True friendship Wisdom *Median test - significance less than or equal to p Low 4.0 4.1 10.0 13.1 9-5 9.0 8.5 8.4 7.8 12.8 11.5 9-3 3-3 16.5 10.3 5-3 10.0 12.7 n=lO4 (2) (3) (11.5) (17) (10) (8) (7) (6) (5) (16) (14) (9) (l) (18) (13) (4) (11.5) (15) High 5.1 4.5 9.8 12.5 8.8 6.9 8.5 7-5 7.1 13.1 13.6 11.3 4.2 16.7 11.6 7.9 11.9 10.2 n=26 (3) (2) (10) (15) (9) (4) (8) (6) (5) (16) (17) (12) (1) (18) (13) (7) (14) (11) 2* .01 Television Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks N=200 A comfortable life An exciting life A sense of accomplishment A world at peace A world of beauty Equality Family security Freedom Happiness Inner harmony Mature love National security Pleasure Salvation Self-respect Social recognition True friendship Wisdom 183 for Males and Females Male 4.3 4.3 10. 13. O\(I>\O (I)\O \JKQN-P‘OKDl-‘N 12. 13. 11.2 H 3.1 16.6 10.6 6.0 11.9 11.5 n=94 (2-5) (2-5) (10) (16.5) (8) (6) (9) (7) (5) (15) (16.5) (12) (1) (18) (ll) (4) (14) (13) Female 4.8 4.2 9.7 12.4 9.2 8.3 8.0 7-5 8.9 12.9 12.7 8.9 4.5 16.4 11.5 6.5 10.5 10.9 n=lO6 (3) (l) (15) (10) (7) (6) (5) (8) (l7) (l6) (9) (2) (18) (14) (4) (12) (13 2* .01 *Median test - significance is less than or equal to p 184 Television Terminal Values Medians and Composite Ranks for Low and High Education 11.1-M 1:21! 2=_l_05 2122 IF 2* A comfortable life 5.6 (2) 3.8 (3) .05 An exciting life 5.7 (3) 3.2 (l) .05 :czgggiigiment 9.7 (10) 10.1 (10) A world at peace 12.8 (16) 13.0 (16) A world of beauty 9.4 (9) 9.2 (9) Equality 7-5 (6) 8-7 (7) Family security 8.4 (7) 8.6 (6) Freedom 7.3 (5) 9.0 (8) Happiness 8.6 (8) 7.0 (5) Inner harmony 12.5 (15) 13.3 (17) Mature love 13.6 (17) 12.3 (15) National security 10.0 (11) 10.3 (11) Pleasure 4.2 (1) 3.3 (2) Salvation 16.7 (18) 16.3 (18) Self-respect 10.5 (13) 11.8 (13) Social recognition 7.0 (4) 5.7 (4) True friendship 11.5 (14) 10.8 (12) Wisdom 10.4 (12) 11.9 (14) *Median test - significance less than or equal to p Program Preferences Medians and Composite Ranks 185 for Low and High TV Viewers N=200 Adam-12 All in the Family Carol Burnett CBS News Walter Cronkite 11 PM local news Hawaii Five 0 Johnny Carson Hollywood Squares Kojak Let's Make a Deal Mary Tyler Moore M*A*S*H Medical Center Price Is Right 60 Minutes Sonny and Cher Star Trek Waltons *Median test - significance less than Low 13.0 6.1 10.2 2.7 4.9 9-7 9.0 12.8 10.1 14.4 6.9 6.1 11.4 14.9 2.8 11.9 12.5 7-7 1:195 (16) (4.5) (11) (1) (3) (9) (8) (15) (10) (17) (6) (4-5) (12) (18) (2) (13) (14) (7) gggg 10.1 7.9 11.7 \OCDCDMQ \0 \OWV FO‘beW (EV (I) {3' OVUXW 12. 13. 10. 12. 12. 13. _E25 (11) (5) (l3) (2) (6) (7) (9) (14) (8) (18) (10) (3) (12) (15) (1) (l6) (l7) (4) or equal to p 2* .01 .05 .Ol .05 .05 Program Preferences Medians and Composite Ranks 186 for Low and High Self Esteem N=200 Adam-12 All in the Family Carol Burnett CBS News Walter Cronkite 11 PM local news Hawaii Five 0 Johnny Carson Hollywood Squares Kojak Let's Make a Deal Mary Tyler Moore M*A*S*H Medical Center Price Is Right 60 Minutes Sonny and Cher Star Trek Waltons *Median test - significance less than or equal to p Low 10.7 7.6 10.6 3.2 7.1 8.8 9-5 11.7 9.2 14.0 8.8 5.6 10.5 13.7 3-3 12.3 12.6 7.1 n=28 (13) (6) (12) (l) (4.5) (7-5) (10) (14) (9) (18) (7-5) (3) (ll) (17) (2) (l5) (16) (4.5) High ' 11.9 6.3 11.0 3.1 6.1 9.8 8.6 13.8 9.6 14.1 8.3 5.4 11.3 14.5 2.4 12.1 12.8 7.3 (2) (4) (10) (8) (l6) (9) (l7) (7) (3) (12) (18) (1) (14) (15) (6) .05 .01 .01 Program Preferences Medians and Composite Ranks 187 for Low and High TV Attitudes N=200 Adam-12 All in the Family Carol Burnett CBS News Walter Cronkite 11 PM local news Hawaii Five 0 Johnny Carson Hollywood Squares Kojak Let's Make a Deal Mary Tyler Moore M*A*S*H Medical Center Price Is Right 60 Minutes Sonny and Cher Star Trek Waltons *Median test - significance less than or equal to p Low 11.4 7.0 10. 10. 12. 14. ll. 14. 12. 12. 2' \J <3 ox cn -q u: EA 2- 4: .p -q l-‘(DO O n=104 (12) (5) (11) (2) (4) (10) (8) (15) (9) (l7) (7) (3) (13) (18) (1) (14) (16) (6) High 11.2 6.5 11.5 3-3 7-5 8.5 9.1 12.6 9-5 13.3 10.7 7.2 9.4 12.3 2.8 12.3 12.8 7.0 5325 (12) (3) (l3) (2) (6) (7) (8) (16) (10) (18) (ll) (5) (9) (14.5) (1) (14.5) (17) (4) 2* .05 .05 .05 .05 Program Preferences Medians and Composite Ranks for Males and Females N=200 Adam-12 All in the Family Carol Burnett CBS News Walter Cronkite 11 PM local news Hawaii Five 0 Johnny Carson .Hollywood Squares Kojak ILet's Make a Deal Mary Tyler Moore M*A*S*H Medical Center Price Is Right 60 Minutes Sonny and Cher Star Trek Waltons *Median test - significance less than or equal to p 188 Males n=94 10.8 (11) 6.1 (4) 10.9 (12) 2-7 (2) 6-5 (5) 9.0 (8) 8-7 (6) 13-3 (16) 9.1 (9) 13-9 (17) 8-8 (7) 5-5 (3) 12.4 (15) 14.7 (18) 2-3 (1) 11.8 (14) 11.4 (13) 9-3 (10) 12.3 8.1 10.8 3-5 6.8 9.4 9-3 11.8 10.3 14.1 8.1 5-5 9-5 13.0 3.1 12.6 13.2 6.7 Females n=106 (14) (6-5) (12) (2) (5) (9) (8) (13) (ll) (18) (6-5) (3) (10) (16) (1) (15) (17) (4) .05 .001 .01 .01 189 Program Preferences Medians and Composite Ranks for Low and High Education N=200 .1124 112195 21.82 2:25 2* Adam-12 9.3 (8.5) 13.6 (15.5) .001 All in the Family 7.5 (5) 6.4 (5) Carol Burnett 11.0 (13) 10.8 (11) CBS News Walter Cronkite 3.6 (2) 2.8 (2) 11 PM local news 8.1 (6) 5.3 (4) .01 Hawaii Five 0 9.2 (7) 9.6 (9.5) Johnny Carson 10.3 (12) 8.5 (7) .05 Hollywood Squares 12.1 (15) 13.6 (15.5) Kojak 9-3 (8-5) 9-6 (9-5) Let's Make a Deal 13.0 (17) 14.8 (17) iMary Tyler Moore 10.1 (10.5) 7.3 (6) NflAfiS*H 6.8 (4) 4.6 (3) Imedical Center 10.1 (10.5) 11.7 (13) Price Is Right 11.4 (14) 15.3 (18) .001 60 Minutes 3.1 (l) 2.2 (l) .01 Sonny and Cher 12.4 (16) 12.1 (14) Star Trek 13.7 (18) 11.3 (12) .05 Waltons 6.6 (3) 8.7 (8) .05 *Median test - significance less than or equal to p APPENDIX H Spearman rho's Between Personal Terminal and Television Terminal Values for all Respondants Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient 190 between Personal and Television Terminal Values Rank UXUI \nUxeUl U‘tU‘t KAU'IUIU‘UIUI \JIU‘UXU'K UIU‘UIUIUXUI Rank 100 102 102 102 10 5. 10 5. 10 5. 10 5. 109 . 109 . 109 . 109 . 112 113 114 115 116. 116. 118. 118. 120 . 120 . 122 . 122. 124 125 126. 126 O 128 130 . 130. 130 . 130 . 133 . 133 - 136 136 139 139 139 142 . 142 C 142. 142. 146 146 146 148 149 UtUIUIUIU‘U'tU’tUK \nUxU'tknan‘Knkn UtUtU'tan'tU't U'IUI \AUNUXU'I Rank 150. 150- 152 153 154 156 156 156 158 159. 159. 161 162 163 164. 164. 166. 166. 168 169. 169. 172 172 172 175 175 175 178 178 180 182 182 182 184 185. 185. 187. 187. 189 190 191 192. 192. 194 195 196 197 189 199 200 \nU't UiU'x UIUIUIUI UIUIUIU‘ U'xU't BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Abelson, R.P. and Rosenberg, M.J., Symbolic Psycho-logic: A Model of Attitudinal Cognition, Behavioral Science, 3, 1958. Anast, P., Personality Determinants of Mass Media Perfor- mance, Journalism Quarterly, 43, 1966. Bandura, A., "Influence of Models of Reinforcement Contin- gencies on the Acquisition of Imitative Resources," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 589-595- Berger, Charles, A Factor Analytic Study of Self-Esteem, Unpublished Masters Thesis, East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1966. Blalock, Hubert M. Jr., SocialStatistics (2 ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972. Boorstin, Daniel J., The Image, New York: Harper and Row, 1961. Bower, Robert T., Television and the Public, New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston, 1973. Byrne, D. and Wong, T.J., "Racial Prejudice, Interpersonal Attraction, and Assumed Similarity of Attitudes," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 65, 2 -2530 Byrne, D., "Interpersonal Attraction and Attitude Similarity," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 62, 713-715- Cantril, Hadley, "Professor Quiz: A Gratification Study," in P.F. Lazarsfeld and F.M. Stanton (eds.) Radio Research, New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1941. Cartwright, D. and Harary, F. "Structural Balance: A Gene- ralization of Heider's Theory," PsycholOgical Review, 1956. 63. 277-293- 192 193 Chaffee, Steven H., Jack M. McLeod, Charles K. Atkin, "Parent- Adolescent Similarities in Television Use," paper presented to AEJ, Washington, D.C., 1970. Defleur, Melvin L., Theories of Mass Communication, New York: David McKay Co., 1970. Defleur, Melvin and Rokeach.Sandra-Ball, Theories of Mass Communication (3rd ed.), New York: David McKay Co., 1975. Edgar, P.M., "Social and Personality Factors Influencing Learning from Film and TV," paper presented to American Education Research Association, New Orleans, February 1973- English, H.B. and English, A.C., A Comprehensiye Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytic Terms, New York: Longmans, Gree, 1958. Eron, L.D., Huesman, L.R., Lefkowitz, M.M., and Walder, L.O., "Does Television Violence Cause Aggression?" America Psychologist, 1972, 27, 253—263. Feschbach, S. and Singer, R.D., Television and Aggession: An Experimental Field Study, San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1971. Festinger, L., A Theory of_Cognitive Dissonance, Evanston: Row, Peterson, 1957. French, J. and Kahn, R., "A Programmatic Approach to Study- ing the Industrial Environment and Mental Health," Journal of_Social Issues, 18, 1962. Friedrich, L.K., and Stein, A.H., "Aggressive and Pro-social Television Programs and the Natural Behavior of Pre- school Children," Mono a hs of the Societ for Research in Child Development, 1973, 38 (4, Serial No. 151). Glaser, W.A., "Television and Voting Turnout," Public Opinion Quarterly, 29, 1965. Greenberg, Bradley, "Media Use and Believability: Some Multiple Correlates," Journalism Quarterly, Winter 1966. Gutman, J., "Self Concepts and Television Viewing Among Women," Public Qpinion Quarterly, 37, 1973. Heider, F., "Social Perception and Phenomenal Causality," Psychological Review, 1944, 51, 358-374. ," Attitudes and Cognitive Organization," Journal of Psychology, 1946, 21, 107-112. 194 ," The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, New York: Wiley, 1958. Himmelweit, H.T., Oppenheim, A.N., and Vince, P., Television and the Child, London: Oxford University Press, 1958. Inkeles, Alex, "Social Structure and Socialization," in David A. Goslin (ed.), The Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969. Janis, I.L., and Field, P.B., "The Janis and Field Person- ality Questionnaire," in Havland, C.I. and Janis, I.L. (eds.), Personality and Persuasibility, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969, 300-302. Katz, Elihu, Blumler, Jay G., and Gurevitch, Michael, "Utili- zation of Mass Communication by the Individual," in Blumler, Jay G. and Katz, Elihu (eds.), The Utilization pfgass Commqpication, Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. 197 . Kelly, K., Silverman, B.I., and Cochrane, H., "Social Desira- bility and the Rokeach Value Survey," Journal of’E er- imental_Research in Personality. 6, 84-87 (1972). Klapper, Joseph, The Effects of Mass Communication, Glencoe: Free Press, 19 O. Lasswell, Harold, "The Structure and Function of Communication in Society," in Bryson, L. (ed.), The Communication of Ideas, New York: Harper and Row, 19 . Lerner, Daniel, The Passing of Traditional Society, Glencoe: Free Press, 1958. Maslow, A.H., Mgtivation and Personality (2nd ed.), New York: Harper and Row, 1970. McLeod, Jack, and Okeefe, Garret, "The Socialization Perspec- tive and Communication Behavior," in Kline, Gerald and Tichenor, Phillip (eds.), Current Perspecpives in Mgss Communication Research, Beverley Hills: Sage Publica- tions, 1972. McQuail, D., Blumler, J.G., and Brown, J.R., "The Television Audience: A Revised Perspective," in McQuail, D. (ed.), Sociology of Mass Communication, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972. Mendohlson, Harold, "Listening to Radio," in Dexter, L.A. and White, D.M. (eds.), People, Sociepy, and Mass Communica- tion, Glencoe: Free Press, 19 . 195 Mossman, B.M. and Ziller, Robert, "Self Esteem and Consis- tency of Social Behavior," Journal of Abnormal Psycho- logy, 73, 1968. Murray, H.A., Exploration in Personality; A Clinical and Experimental Syudy of Fifty Men of College Age, New York: Oxford University Press, 1938. Newcomb, T.M., The Acquaintance Process, New York: Rhinehart and Winston, 1961. Newcomb, T.M., "An Approach to the Study of Communicative Acts," Psychological Review, 1953, 60, 393-404. Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.L., and Tannerbaum, Ph.H., The Measure- ment of Meaning, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957- Perrow, M.V., "A Description of Similarity of Personality Between Selected Groups of Television Viewers and Certain Television Roles Regularly Viewed by Them," Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, USC, 1968. Robinson, John P. and Converse, Phillip, "The Impact of Tele- vision on Mass Media Usage," in Szalaj, Alexander (ed.), The Use of Time, Netherlands: Mouton and Co., 1972, 211. Rokeach, Milton, The Nature of Human Values, New York: Free Press, 1973. Rokeach, M. and Mezei, L., "Race and Shared Beliefs as Factors in Social Choice," Sgience, 1966, 151, 167-172. Rokeach, M., Smith, P.W., and Evans, R.I., "Two Kinds of Prejudice or One?" in Rokeach, M. (ed), The 0 en and Closed Mind, New York: Basic Books, 1960, 132-168. Rokeach, M. and Rothman, G., "The Principles of Belief Con- gruence and the Congruity Principle as Models of Cogni- tive Interaction," Psycholpgical Review, 72, 1965. Samuelson, M., Carter, R., and Ruggels, L., "Education, Available Time, and Use of Mass Media," Journalism Quarterly, 40, 1963. Schramm, W., Lyle, J., and Parker, E.B., Television in the Lives of O r Children, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1961. Secord, P.F. and Backman, C.W., Social Psychology, New York: McGraw Hill, 1964. 196 Siegel, Sidney, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, New York: McGraw Hill, 1956. Stein, D.D., Hordwyck, J.A., and Smith, N.B., "Race and Belief: An Open and Shut Case," Journal of Personality and Social Ppychology, 1965, 1. Steiner, Gary, The People Look at Television, New York: Knopf, 1963. Sullivan, H.S., Conception of Modern Psychiatry, Washington, D.fi.: The William Alanson White Psychiatric Foundation, 19 7- Tippett, Jean and Silker, E., "Self Image Stability: The Problems of Validation," Ppychological Reports, 1965, 17. 323-329- Waples, Douglas, Berleson, Bernard, and Bradshaw, Franklyn R., What Readinngoes to Peopley Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1940. Ward, 8., "Effects of Advertising on Children and Adolescents," in Rubinstein, E.A., Comstock, G.A., and Murray, J.P. (eds.), Television and Social Behavior, Vol. 4. Tele- vision in Day to Day Life: Pattern of Use, Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972, 432-451. Weiss, W., "The Effects of the Mass Media of Communication," in Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 5, Revised edition, Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1969. Westley, B.H. and Severin, W.J., "Some Correlates of Mass Media Credibility," Journalism Quarterly, 41, 1964. Woodruff, A. and Divesta, F., "The Relationship between Values, Concepts, and Attitudes," Educational Psypho- logical Measurement, 8, 1948. Wright, Charles, "Functional Analysis and Mass Communication," Public Opinion Quarterly, 1960. Wylie, Ruth, The Self Concept, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1974. Zajonc, R.B., "The Process of Cognitive Tuning in Communica- tion," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 61, 1960.