7/28/2019 Age Identification, social identity and TV watching

1/4

Person. indirid. Of/j. Vol. 21, No. 6. pp. 1081-1084. 1996Copyright c 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd

Printed tn Great Britain. All rights reservedSO19b8869(96)00127-4 0191-8869196 $15.00+0.00

Sensation seeking, television viewing motives, and home television viewing patternsRichard Potts,* Angela Dedmon and Jeff Halford

Department of Psychology, O klahoma State U niversity, Sti l l w ater, OK 74078, U .S.A.(Recei ved 3 August 1995; recei vedfor publ icat i on 26 June 1996)

Summary-This study examined the relationships between sensation seeking and television viewing motivesand home TV viewing preferences. A total of 189 participants completed a sensation seeking scale, ratedthe importance of several global television viewing motives, and indicated viewing frequency for 18categories of TV programming. Findings indicated that, contrary to previously-reported results, highsensation seekers did not watch less television or rate it as less important in their lives compared to lowsensation seekers. Sensation seekers did, however, indicate several program viewing preferences. Comparedto low sensation seekers, high sensation seekers watched more music videos, daytime talk shows, stand-upcomedy programs, documentaries, and animated cartoons; they watched fewer newscasts and drama series.Findings are discussed in terms of selective exposure processes and social-environmental influences onbehavioral manifestations of sensation seeking. Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd.

INTRODUCTIONSensation seeking is defined as a need for novel, complex, and varied stimulation (Zuckerman, 1979, 1988). Considerableevidence supports the concurrent validity of a sensation seeking trait, as scores on the sensation seeking scale are predictiveof a wide range ofstimulation-seeking behaviors (e.g. Horvath & Zuckerman, 1993; Zuckerman, 1979, 1988,1994). Regardingselective exposure to media content, sensation seekers should prefer intense, emotionally-evocative television programmaterial, and/or material that presents novel and unusual content, over other less stimulating fare. The present study wasan investigation of the relationship between sensation seeking and television viewing motives and home television viewingpatterns.

Several studies on sensation seeking and media use have been reported, although each has certain limitations. Studies thatuse self-report television viewing preference questionnaires, and/or laboratory channel-changing preferences measures, havefound that sensation seekers preferred newscasts, erotic material, action/adventure, and horror programs, and dislikedromantic fare, certain comedy fare, and musical productions (e.g. Schierman & Rowland, 1985; Zuckerman & Litle, 1986).Limitations of the questionnaire studies include the fact that only TV content preferences were assessed, not reports of actualhome TV viewing behavior. The laboratory channel-changing measures have high internal validity for the study of relativecontent preferences, but they do not necessarily reflect naturalistic viewing patterns that routinely occur in the homeenvironment (cf. Webster & Wakschlag, 1985). In what is perhaps the only reported study to assess the relationships betweensensation seeking and home TV viewing patterns, Rowland, Fouts and Heatherton (1989) used a method in which Ss peruseda schedule of the previous weeks TV listing and marked which programs they had actually viewed. No relationships werefound between home TV viewing patterns and sensation seeking, except that sensation seeking was negatively related tooverall weekly viewing hours.

It is possible that Rowland et al. s (1989) null findings were due to the unusually low viewing level of that college studentsample. Their mean of only 1hour per day is substantially lower than estimates by audience ratings services and empiricalTV viewing studies of that age group (e.g. Condry, 1989; Potts & Sanchez, 1994). It is not difficult to imagine that differentcommunities (e.g. urban settings vs small towns) have differing options for extracurricular activities, such that somepopulations use TV more frequently than others, including even the high sensation seekers. While results of Rowland et al.shome viewing assessment are no doubt valid for their samples, such infrequent viewing necessarily constrains availableprogram choices.

The present study assessed home TV viewing and sensation seeking in a college sample known from previous research toreport more than twice the weekly viewing hours as those in Rowland ef al.s (1989) sample, which may provide greateropportunity for observing potential relationships with a sensation seeking trait. Also, home TV viewing was assessed usinga greater number of program categories than used by Rowland et al. Both of these considerations were expected to providea more generalizable assessment of sensation seeking and TV viewing relationships than the method used by Rowland et al.

In addition to individual TV viewing patterns, sensation seeking may also be related to overall motivations for usingtelevision, i.e. Why a person watches TV. Thus, the present study also assessed gratifications sought from TV by sensationseekers, using a conceptualization and method used frequently for examination of audience uses of TV in mass communicationresearch (e.g. Finn & Gorr, 1988; Potts & Sanchez, 1994; Rubin, 1983).

METHODSubjects

Participants were 189 college students (75 males, 114 females) from a university of about 19,000. located in a midwesternUnited States community with a total population of about 40,000. Ages ranged from 18 to 35 years, with a mean of 19 years,*To whom all correspondence should be addressed.

1081

7/28/2019 Age Identification, social identity and TV watching

2/4

1082 Notes and Shorter CommunicationsParticipation was solicited through introductory psychology classes in exchange for extra credit points. S recruitment andexperimental procedures complied with guidelines of the American Psychological Association for human experimentation.Ail Ss reported virtually unlimited access to cable teIevision service, which provided about 40 channels.

Participants received a questionnaire for assessment of television viewing motives and home TV viewing patterns. Eleventelevision viewing motives were selected from previous studies on media uses and gratifications (e.g. Potts & Sanchez, 1994;Rubin, 1983). Ss rated the importance of each viewing motive on a O-3 scale, where 0 = not an important reason, and 3 = avery important reason for viewing. A final item in this list asked Ss to rate the overall importance of TV in your life onthe same O-3 scale. These 12 items are listed in Table 1.

Participants indicated their home TV viewing patterns by rating the frequency with which they watched each of 18categories of programs. These categories represented virtually all genres of commercial programming typically available,and was derived from previous program categorization schemes (Center for Research on the Influences of Television onChildren, 1983; Tangney, 1988). On this instrument, each category was listed, along with several example program titles (e.g.Situation comedies. Examples: Seinfeld, Family Matters, Wings). Ss indicated typical viewing frequency of each programcategory on a O-3 scale, where 0 = almost never; 1 = occasionally; 2 = fairly often; and 3 = very often. Ss also estimatedtheir overall weekly viewing total. The 18 viewing categories are listed in Table 2.

Validity of the home TV viewing instrument was established in an independent sample of 93 persons for the same collegepopulation. Ss in the validation sample first responded to the program category viewing assessment just described. Next theywere given photocopied pages from the local television schedule for the preceding week, and they marked which programsthey had actually watched. Correlations were examined between the frequency ratings (0,1.2, r 3) on the program categoryviewing instrument and the number of programs actually viewed from the corresponding categories. Statistically significantpositive correlations were found for 16 of the 19 TV program categories, and ranged from 0.18 to 0.65 (for 14 categories,P < 0.01; for two categories, P

7/28/2019 Age Identification, social identity and TV watching

3/4

Notes and Shorter Communications 1083RESULTS

Multiple regression analyses were used to examine relationships between each dependent variable (I 1 TV viewing motives,overall TV importance rating, 18 TV program category viewing scores, total weekly TV viewing hours) and a set of predictorsincluding age. gender, sensation seeking, and the interaction of sensation seeking and gender, which were entered into theregression equation simultaneously. The remaining interaction terms were not of theoretical interest and not included aspredictors. This regression model allowed examination of the independent variance contributed by each predictor of interestcited by previous researchers (e.g. Rowland et al., 1989) but avoided the necessity of artificial groupings of continuous scores(e.g. high, medium, and low sensation seekers). However, for interpretation of significant Gender x Sensation seekinginteractions, means of high. medium, and low sensation seeking groups within each gender were calculated.Television ciewing motices

Part correlations and significance levels for predictors of each TV viewing motive are listed in Table 1, Sensation seekingwas not related to any TV viewing motives, with the exception that the interaction of Gender x Sensation seeking was asignificant predictor of the motive viewing for entertainment. On that measure. mean ratings of importance for low.medium, and high sensation seeking males were 2.7, 2.6, and 2.4. respectively. and for females, 2.7, 2.8, and 2.8, respectively.Thus, sensation seeking was generally unrelated to different TV viewing motives. In particular, there was no relation betweensensation seeking and Ss ratings of the importance of TV in their lives.

Part correlations and significance levels for predictors of each TV viewing category are listed in Table 2. In addition toage and gender differences in several viewing categories, sensation seeking was significantly related to several viewingpreferences. Sensation seeking was a significant positive predictor of viewing of documentaries, music videos, daytime talkshows. stand-up comedy performance programs, and animated cartoons; it was a negative predictor of viewing of newscastsand drama programs. Additionally, significant Gender x Sensation seeking interactions were found for viewing of newsmagazine programs. documentaries, and stand-up comedy performance. For news magazine programs, means for low,medium, and high sensation seeking males were I .O. 1.2. and 0.8. respectively, and for females, 1 O, 1.4, and 1.2, respectively.For documentaries, means for low, medium, and high sensation seeking males were 0.9, I .2. and 0.9, respectively, and forfemales, 0.4, 0.7, and 0.9. respectively. For stand-up comedy performance. means for low. medium, and high sensationseeking males were I 7, I .5, and 1.2, respectively, and for females, 0.6, I. I, and I 6, respectively.

The total weekly viewing hours estimated by this sample was 18.5 (SD = I l.5), or about 2.6 hours per day. An additionaloverall viewing index was created by summing the program category viewing scores (C&3) across all 18 categories; the meanof this score was 24.5 (SD = 6.8). and was significantly correlated with total viewing hours, r = 0.41,~ < 0.001. No significantrelationship was observed between any predictor and either of these overall TV viewing indices.

DISCUSSION

In a recent text summarizing many years of research on sensation seeking. Zuckerman (1994) states Clearly, television isof lesser interest than other life activities to high sensation seekers (p. 209). a conclusion apparently based on the findingsof Rowland e/ al. (1989). Schierman and Rowland (1985). and Zuckerman and Litle (1986). The present findings offerevidence contrary to this conclusion, and indicate that a low regard for television by high sensation seekers is not so clearlyestablished. Analyses of measures of overall TV use and importance to viewers indicated no relationship with sensationseeking. Thus, high sensation seekers in this sample watch as much TV and regard it as equally important in their lives aslow sensation seekers. Differences in the local culture and environment may partially explain the discrepancy between thesefindings and those of Rowland et ui. (1989). Limitations on available extracurricular activities, cultural events, recreationalattractions, and the like may result in more TV viewing by high sensation seekers compared to those living in more enrichedlocations. Both Arnett (1995) and Farley (1991) have discussed mechanisms by which the immediate cultural and socialenvironment may determine behavioral manifestations of a sensation seeking disposition.

Unlike the findings of Rowland el al. (1989). sensation seeking was related to specific TV viewing preferences in the presentstudy. Sensation seekers tended to watch more music videos, dayttme talk shows, stand-up comedy programs (females only),documentaries, and animated cartoons, and watched fewer newscasts and drama programs, compared to low sensationseekers. Several of these relationships are in accordance with previous research findings or sensation seeking theory. Musicvideos offer up-tempo rock music and highly stylized, often sexual, images (Litle & Zuckerman, 1986). Daytime talk showsoffer presentation of unusual lifestyles with audience participation that is often confrontational, which may be congruentwith the social disinhibition component of sensation seeking. Documentaries offer presentation of potentially novel people,places, and other material that may not appear frequently in entertainment fictional programming. Schierman and Rowland(1985) reported that sensation seekers enjoyed non-fiction print media: TV documentaries can be seen as the electronicanalogue to that preference. Comedy performance programs and animated cartoons offer humorous material, of whichcertain types are preferred by sensation seekers, such as sexual humour, which is often the topic of stand-up comedy routines,and non-sensical humor, which is typical of animated cartoons (Ruth, 1988; Zuckerman. 1994).

Some predictions based on theory and previous empirical reports were not supported. Of perhaps most significance was anegative relationship between sensation seeking and news viewing. which is contrary to the positive relationship reported bySchierman and Rowland (1985). This is somewhat surprising, considering that TV newscasts often feature violence, conflict,and other unusual and out-of-the-ordinary content. Future research is indicated for investigation of what aspects of TVnewscasts are considered appealing or unappealing to sensation seekers. Additionally, sensation seekers did not reportpreferential viewing of exciting action/adventure programs, sports events, or videorealism police/rescue programs. Whilethey may choose such programs over less-desirable options in forced-choice, selective exposure situations (e.g. Schierman &Rowland, 1985). there does not appear to be a special preference for these types of TV programs in a home viewing setting.

The significance of personality correlates on media preferences is that cumulative social learning effects of trait-influencedselective exposure might be expected across years of TV viewing (e.g. Bandura, 1986; Weaver, 1991; Wober, 1986). However,

7/28/2019 Age Identification, social identity and TV watching

4/4

1084 Notes and Shorter Communicationsthe present findings suggest that sensation seekers do not appear to shun television viewing in favor of other more dramaticand exciting activities, nor are their typical viewing patterns substantially different from those of non-sensation-seekers.

REFERENCESArnett. J. (1995). The young and the reckless: Adolescent reckless behavior. Current Di recti on i n Psychologi cal Science, 4,

67-71.Bandura, A. (1986). Socialfoundations of thought and action: A social cogniriue theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Center for Research on the Influences of Television on Children (1983). CRITC program categorizat ion coding manual.

Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.Condry, J. (1989). The sychology of feleoision. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Farley, F. (1991). The type T personality. In Lipsitt, L. & Mitnick, L. (Eds) Self -regulat ory behavi or and ri sk rak ing: Causes

and con sequences (pp. 371-382). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Finn, S. & Gorr. M. B. (1988). Social isolation and social support as correlates of television viewing motivation. Com-

munication Research, 15. 135-I 58.Horvath, P. & Zuckerman, M. (1993). Sensation seeking, risk appraisal, and risky behavior. Personality and Individuul

Di fferences, 14, 41-52.Litle, P. & Zuckerman, M. (1986). Sensation seeking and music preferences. Personali ty and Ind iv idua l Di fferences, 7, 5755

578.Potts, R. & Sanchez, D. (1994). Television viewing and depression: No news is good news. Journal of Broadcasti ng and

Electr onic M edia, 38, 7& 90.Rowland, G., Fouts, G. & Heatherton, T. (1989). Television viewing and sensation seeking: Uses, preferences, and attitudes.

Personali ty and Indi vi dual Di fferences, IO , 1003-1006.Rubin, A. (1983). Television uses and gratifications: The interaction of viewing patterns and motivations. Journal of

Broadcasting. 27, 37-5 1.Ruth, W. (1988). Sensation seeking and the enjoyment of structure and content of humor: Stability of findings across four

samples. Personali ty and Ind iv idua l Di fferences, 9, 861-871.Schierman, M. J. & Rowland, G. L. (1985). Sensation seeking and selection of entertainment. Personality and Individual

Di fferences, 6, 599-603.Tangney, J. P. (1988). Aspects of the family and childrens television viewing content preferences. Chi ld Development, 59,

107&1079.Weaver, J. B. (1991). Exploring the links between personality and media preferences. Personality and Indi vidual D ifferences,

12, 1293-1299.Webster. J. & Wakshlag, J. (1985). Measuring exposure to television. In Zillmann, D. & Bryant, J. (Eds) Selective exposure

IO communication (pp. 35-62). Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum.Wober, J. M. (1986). The lenses of television and the prism of personality. In Bryant, J. & Zillman, D. (Eds) Perspecfives on

media effect s (pp. 21 I-231). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Zuckerman, M. (1979). Sensati on seeki ng: Beyond the opfi mai evel of arousal. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Zuckerman, M. (1988). Behavior and biology: Research on sensation seeking and reactions to the media. In Donohew, L..

Sypher, H. & Higgins, E. T. (Eds) Communciari on, social cognit i on, and affect (pp. 173-194). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral expressions and biosociul ba ses of sensati on seeki ng. N ew York: Cambridge University

Press.Zuckerman, M. & Litle, P. (1986). Personality and curiosity for morbid and sexual events. Personality and Individual

Di fferences, 7, 49-56.