Contributions
A significant contribution of this study is the identification of the characteristics viewers assign to reality television. Several previous studies (e.g., Ebersole & Woods, 2007; Hall, 2006; Lundy, Ruth, & Park, 2008; Nabi, 2007; Nabi et al., 2003) have identified highly varied characteristics of this type of programming, and this study contributes to defining what constitutes this new, popular genre.
This study also examines reality television in the perspective of the viewer. Allowing viewers themselves to place reality programs on a continuum from "real" to "unreal" is valuable for a variety of reasons. First, this method allows viewers to critique shows that are currently on the air, instead of simply discussing the realistic or unrealistic nature of the shows in generic terms across the genre. Second, the viewing public holds a great deal of power in the media, and allowing viewers to talk about the attributes they appreciate in reality shows is theoretically and practically useful.
In theoretical terms, understanding the appeal of certain reality shows over others adds depth to the previous assumptions of uses and gratifications theory. First, in accordance with the first and second assumptions of uses and gratifications, this study confirmed that consumers are active participants who use media in order to achieve personal goals and fulfill needs. The goals and needs that are achieved by reality television, however, are quite different than other forms of media. Viewers do not use reality television to gain information, but rather to escape from their daily lives. They use reality television to achieve a goal that is directly opposite from what the name of the genre implies: to be immersed in "unreality."
Second, uses and gratifications asserts that consumers are able to make accurate conclusions about whether or not their needs are being met. This was overwhelmingly evident in focus group conversations, as participants voiced their satisfaction or dissatisfaction of particular reality shows based on the show's ability to meet particular criteria. While most viewers enjoyed the entertainment value of unrealistic shows, some viewers chose to avoid these shows in favor of "real life" programming.
On a practical level, the information garnered from this study is valuable to networks. It is important for networks to understand the viewing preferences of the audiences they serve. Participants voiced disdain over established reality shows that had become markedly more extreme as seasons progressed. Shows that had started out with openly unrealistic intentions seemed to be more respected than shows that began as real-life depictions and then slowly declined to unrealistic extremism. Viewers appreciated shows that were either consistently unrealistic or consistently realistic.
Limitations/Future Research
The sample used in this study had several limitations that should be addressed in future research. The sample was solely composed of college students, and while this demographic makes up the largest viewership for reality television, there are several other age groups that could offer valuable insight to the appeal of this genre. Additionally, the focus groups were relatively small and dominated by male participants. Larger focus groups that are more gender-balanced could provide more diverse discussion.
This study explored the characteristics of reality television and the realistic or unrealistic perception viewers have of particular reality programs. In focus group discussions, several new and unexpected themes emerged in addition research question-related themes. For example, game shows (i.e., Who Wants to Be a Millionaire) and dramas (i.e., One Tree Hill) were frequently brought up as types of programming that may fall into the reality sphere. Game shows met some of the criteria participants listed for reality television, including the chance for a prize and competition. Dramas were considered potential reality shows because they depicted real life events. Although participants ultimately decided game shows and dramas did not fit into reality television, future research should focus on how viewers segment and classify programs. With the growing popularity of reality television, viewers may classify the majority of programs as reality. Additional exploration in this area could yield significant findings about viewers' television perceptions.
Although this study succeeds in further determining the characteristics viewers assign to reality television, future research should continue to address the attributes viewers use to characterize reality shows. The types of reality shows that are broadcast are highly varied, and new shows are continually being produced; viewers' opinions and perceptions fluctuate along with the ever-changing face of reality television.
Functional Outline
Introduction
* Introduce topic of study.
* Preview what the paper will discuss.
* Create "information hunger" -- why should the reader continue reading?
(Transition from introduction to literature review: Discovering the characteristics viewers attribute to reality television, along the reasons why they perceive certain shows as more realistic than others, can illuminate why this new genre is so appealing.)
Literature Review
* Provide a synthesis of pertinent literature.
* Move from known to unknown.
* Identify gaps in previous literature (build argument for my own study).
Background of RT
* Provide viewership statistics.
* Provide reasons for RT popularity from the standpoint of networks and viewers.
* Identify problem -- genre is poorly defined, along with the characteristics of the programming.
Uses and Gratifications Theory
* List and explain basic assumptions of uses and gratifications.
* Provide previous RT studies that have used a uses and gratifications perspective.
* Focus on "realism" as a popular gratification of RT.
Characteristics of RT
* Identify the widely varied characteristics listed in previous literature.
* Bring in uses and gratifications (viewers are active participants in media) -- make argument that viewers should be able to identify criteria for a particular genre.
* Introduce RQ1: What characteristics define reality television?
Realism of RT
* Identify the "unrealism" of RT.
* Discuss reasons for high viewership despite lack of reality.
* Discuss potential harmful effects in consuming unrealistic programming (but subconsciously accepting the message as real).
* Introduce RQs 2a-3b: What reality shows are perceived as most realistic to viewers? Why do viewers perceive these shows as most realistic? What reality shows are perceived as most unrealistic to viewers? Why do viewers perceive these shows as unrealistic?
(Transition from literature review to method: Focus groups will be used to explore the research questions about reality television.)
Method
* Identify and justify the method itself.
* Describe data collection, participant recruitment, and data analysis.
Participants
* State number of focus groups and number of participants.
* State length of focus groups.
* Identify process of recruitment for participants (gathered from Public Speaking research pool at a Midwestern university).
* Justify convenience sample.
Data Collection
* State location of data collection.
* Give a brief synopsis of the procedures followed at the focus groups.
* State number of transcript pages that were analyzed.
Data Analysis
* Explain the process of thematic coding (define "theme," explain the phases of open coding, line-by-line analysis, axial coding, and selective coding).
* Provide examples from the transcripts of how categories will be identified and collapsed for open and axial coding.
(Transition from method to results: Transcripts were analyzed until there were no new concepts or categories found in the data, or when theoretical saturation had been reached.)
Results
* Identify key themes that emerged from the data.
* Provide focus group examples for each of the themes.
* Move beyond the "surface" -- give detailed explanations of why each theme was prominent in the data.
Discussion
* Move from theme identification to analysis.
* Identify the "so what" -- what are the implications of the themes?
Conclusion
* Tie together major findings presented in paper.
* Give a sense of closure to the reader and reiterate the "so what."
Contributions
* Discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the study.
* Identify how the study expands the field of communication.
Limitations/Future Research
* Discuss ways researchers can develop and expand new themes identified in the research.
* Identify shortcomings in the current study and turn them into ideas/tips for future research.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
Reality Television Literature Review Outline
I. Background of Reality Television (RT)
A. Popular culture phenomenon: This paragraph will discuss the popularity of RT. It will provide a definition of RT and viewership statistics for a variety of demographics.
B. Appeal to television networks and audiences: This paragraph will demonstrate how lucrative RT is for television networks. It will provide an example of the cost of an RT program in comparison to a sitcom, and will also discuss the "crossover" nature of RT (i.e., RT contestants often go on to make records or sign book deals).
C. Building argument: This paragraph will contrast the popularity of RT with two downfalls of the programming -- unclear characteristics and lack of realism. These two problems are the basis for my research questions, so this paragraph sets up my argument for the rest of the paper.
II. Uses and gratifications theory
A. Definition: This paragraph will define the key assumptions of uses and gratifications theory and provide RT studies that have used this perspective.
B. Gratifications: This paragraph will list the widely varied gratifications that have been identified by previous studies. Additionally, this paragraph will juxtapose "gratifications" with "characteristics" and suggest the two are the same. Like RT gratifications, there have been few consistent RT characteristics identified (connecting to RQ1).
C. Realism: This paragraph will establish that "realism" is frequently named as a gratification/characteristic of RT. The paragraph will discuss why viewers feel RT is unreal, but still continue to view RT programs. Finally, the paragraph will question the attributes that contribute to realism in RT (connecting to RQs 2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b).
III. Characteristics of RT
A. Overview of characteristics: This paragraph will discuss the many characteristics for RT that have been listed in previous literature.
B. Introduction of RQ1: This paragraph will mention lack of consistency in literature in RT characteristics and introduce RQ1: What characteristics define reality television?
IV. Realism of RT
A. The "downfall of realism": This paragraph will discuss how the "reality" intended for reality television has now become a "reality effect."
B. Viewership: This paragraph will list the reasons viewers still choose to consume RT, even though the programming lacks realism.
C. Problems: This paragraph will identify the problems involved with the values espoused on RT. Even though the scenarios on RT programs often aren't "real," viewers may mimic the attitudes expressed by RT stars, such as perspectives on dating. This paragraph makes a connection between RT consumption and actual values and behavior.
D. Problems, continued: This paragraph extends the previous paragraph and discusses the "dark side" of RT. Viewers often aren't aware of the increased costs that occur after getting a new home (Extreme Makeover: Home Edition) or the painful recoveries associated with cosmetic surgery (I Want a Famous Face, The Swan).
E. Introduction of RQ2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b: This paragraph identifies the need for additional exploration about the realism of RT programming and introduces RQ2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b: What reality shows are perceived as most realistic to viewers? Why do viewers perceive these shows as most realistic? What reality shows are perceived as unrealistic to viewers? Why do viewers perceive these shows as unrealistic?
A. Popular culture phenomenon: This paragraph will discuss the popularity of RT. It will provide a definition of RT and viewership statistics for a variety of demographics.
B. Appeal to television networks and audiences: This paragraph will demonstrate how lucrative RT is for television networks. It will provide an example of the cost of an RT program in comparison to a sitcom, and will also discuss the "crossover" nature of RT (i.e., RT contestants often go on to make records or sign book deals).
C. Building argument: This paragraph will contrast the popularity of RT with two downfalls of the programming -- unclear characteristics and lack of realism. These two problems are the basis for my research questions, so this paragraph sets up my argument for the rest of the paper.
II. Uses and gratifications theory
A. Definition: This paragraph will define the key assumptions of uses and gratifications theory and provide RT studies that have used this perspective.
B. Gratifications: This paragraph will list the widely varied gratifications that have been identified by previous studies. Additionally, this paragraph will juxtapose "gratifications" with "characteristics" and suggest the two are the same. Like RT gratifications, there have been few consistent RT characteristics identified (connecting to RQ1).
C. Realism: This paragraph will establish that "realism" is frequently named as a gratification/characteristic of RT. The paragraph will discuss why viewers feel RT is unreal, but still continue to view RT programs. Finally, the paragraph will question the attributes that contribute to realism in RT (connecting to RQs 2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b).
III. Characteristics of RT
A. Overview of characteristics: This paragraph will discuss the many characteristics for RT that have been listed in previous literature.
B. Introduction of RQ1: This paragraph will mention lack of consistency in literature in RT characteristics and introduce RQ1: What characteristics define reality television?
IV. Realism of RT
A. The "downfall of realism": This paragraph will discuss how the "reality" intended for reality television has now become a "reality effect."
B. Viewership: This paragraph will list the reasons viewers still choose to consume RT, even though the programming lacks realism.
C. Problems: This paragraph will identify the problems involved with the values espoused on RT. Even though the scenarios on RT programs often aren't "real," viewers may mimic the attitudes expressed by RT stars, such as perspectives on dating. This paragraph makes a connection between RT consumption and actual values and behavior.
D. Problems, continued: This paragraph extends the previous paragraph and discusses the "dark side" of RT. Viewers often aren't aware of the increased costs that occur after getting a new home (Extreme Makeover: Home Edition) or the painful recoveries associated with cosmetic surgery (I Want a Famous Face, The Swan).
E. Introduction of RQ2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b: This paragraph identifies the need for additional exploration about the realism of RT programming and introduces RQ2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b: What reality shows are perceived as most realistic to viewers? Why do viewers perceive these shows as most realistic? What reality shows are perceived as unrealistic to viewers? Why do viewers perceive these shows as unrealistic?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Oral History
Interview Protocol:
1) Do you remember a time without the Internet?
2) What do you use the Internet for?
3) Think about the time you first used the Internet (how you accessed it, what you used it for, etc.) How does that initial usage compare to the way you use the Internet now?
4) How has the Internet affected your personal life? Professional life?
5) What are your general feelings about the Internet?
6) How would your life be different if you didn't have consistent access to the Internet?
Oral History:
Sara Burgin can't imagine life without the Internet. Her day wouldn't be complete without sending e-mails, reading the newsfeed on Facebook, checking the weather, and "Googling" for random bits of information. Although the Internet is now part of her everyday life, it hasn't always had such a great influence. Burgin remembers the Internet-free days of elementary school, and vividly recalls the very first time she used the Internet in middle school. She was doing a school report on sea anemones, and performed her first Internet search on this topic.
Shortly after this memorable first experience, the Internet gained popularity. It became more and more common to use the Internet for academic, professional, and personal reasons. Burgin fondly remembers using the Internet during middle school and high school on her parents' computer, which had a dial-up connection. The high-pitched screeching noise, a trademark of dial-up, was a small downfall. The excruciatingly slow loading speeds of the webpages was another flaw to contend with. But even through these disadvantages, she was always excited to log on to the Internet because she could then engage in one of her favorite activities: AOL Instant Messenger. She would log in under her username, Buzzmeister86, and promptly begin a conversation with Spyderman301. Spyderman was actually a boy named Nils who was in her class, but they enjoyed chatting online even after spending their days together at school.
Burgin's Internet usage has certainly changed from her middle school days. As a high school science teacher, Burgin uses the Internet on a daily basis to peruse sample lesson plans and gather ideas for the classroom. On a personal level, she primarily uses the Internet to communicate with others. She frequently sends e-mails to family members, friends, and co-workers, and she recently re-connected with Nils (Spyderman301) through a Facebook message.
Burgin's general feelings about the Internet are predominantly positive. She feels the Internet enriches lives, as it provides an opportunity to communicate with others and gather information. However, she also feels the unregulated nature of the Internet could be detrimental, as children could easily come across inappropriate websites if not carefully monitored by their parents. Burgin's overwhelming assessment, though, is that the Internet can be used positively to maintain connections among people.
1) Do you remember a time without the Internet?
2) What do you use the Internet for?
3) Think about the time you first used the Internet (how you accessed it, what you used it for, etc.) How does that initial usage compare to the way you use the Internet now?
4) How has the Internet affected your personal life? Professional life?
5) What are your general feelings about the Internet?
6) How would your life be different if you didn't have consistent access to the Internet?
Oral History:
Sara Burgin can't imagine life without the Internet. Her day wouldn't be complete without sending e-mails, reading the newsfeed on Facebook, checking the weather, and "Googling" for random bits of information. Although the Internet is now part of her everyday life, it hasn't always had such a great influence. Burgin remembers the Internet-free days of elementary school, and vividly recalls the very first time she used the Internet in middle school. She was doing a school report on sea anemones, and performed her first Internet search on this topic.
Shortly after this memorable first experience, the Internet gained popularity. It became more and more common to use the Internet for academic, professional, and personal reasons. Burgin fondly remembers using the Internet during middle school and high school on her parents' computer, which had a dial-up connection. The high-pitched screeching noise, a trademark of dial-up, was a small downfall. The excruciatingly slow loading speeds of the webpages was another flaw to contend with. But even through these disadvantages, she was always excited to log on to the Internet because she could then engage in one of her favorite activities: AOL Instant Messenger. She would log in under her username, Buzzmeister86, and promptly begin a conversation with Spyderman301. Spyderman was actually a boy named Nils who was in her class, but they enjoyed chatting online even after spending their days together at school.
Burgin's Internet usage has certainly changed from her middle school days. As a high school science teacher, Burgin uses the Internet on a daily basis to peruse sample lesson plans and gather ideas for the classroom. On a personal level, she primarily uses the Internet to communicate with others. She frequently sends e-mails to family members, friends, and co-workers, and she recently re-connected with Nils (Spyderman301) through a Facebook message.
Burgin's general feelings about the Internet are predominantly positive. She feels the Internet enriches lives, as it provides an opportunity to communicate with others and gather information. However, she also feels the unregulated nature of the Internet could be detrimental, as children could easily come across inappropriate websites if not carefully monitored by their parents. Burgin's overwhelming assessment, though, is that the Internet can be used positively to maintain connections among people.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Reality Television Paper Proposal
Reality television (RT) programs are vastly popular and growing in number on today's networks (Baruh, 2009; Ebersole & Woods, 2007; Ferris, Smith, Greenberg, & Smith, 2007; Hall, 2006; Nabi, 2007; Nabi, Biely, Morgan, & Stitt, 2003). RT is defined as "programs that film real people as they live out events (contrived or otherwise) in their lives, as these events occur" (Nabi et al., 2003, p. 304). Viewers are drawn to RT for a variety of reasons, including personal connection to RT contestants (Ebersole & Woods, 2007), the voyeuristic quality of RT (Baruh, 2009), and the suspense involved with the programming (Hall, 2006). Click here for commentary on the popularity of reality television.
Despite its popularity, RT is a poorly defined genre (Nabi, 2007; Nabi et al., 2003). Viewers provide widely varying criteria for RT programs (Hall, 2006). Nabi (2007) created 12 sub-groups of the broad RT genre, but found that most shows studied had attributes from several of the categories, indicating blurriness in classifying programs. Many viewers may not even realize they are consuming RT, even though the shows they regularly watch would be classified as reality programming (Lundy, Ruth, & Park, 2008). Additionally, many of the common characteristics of RT (i.e., romance and competition) are present in many television shows that are not considered RT, so further exploration is needed to determine the unique characteristics of RT (Nabi et al., 2007).
RQ1: What characteristics define reality television?
In addition to defining the characteristics of RT, the perceived realism of these programs must be assessed. Ironically, viewers list RT's unrealistic nature as one of the main motivations for watching (Hall, 2006; Holbrook & Singer, 2009; Leone, Chapman Peek, & Bissell, 2006; Lundy et al., 2008; Nabi et al., 2003). Although viewers' perceptions of the overall realism of reality programming has been extensively studied, additional research is warranted for self-described realism of particular shows, including the reasons why viewers perceive these shows as real or unreal.
RQ2a: What reality shows are perceived as most realistic to viewers?
RQ2b: Why do viewers perceive these shows as most realistic?
RQ3a: What reality shows are perceived as most unrealistic to viewers?
RQ3b: Why do viewers perceive these shows as unrealistic?
Methodology
Focus groups will be used to gather data for this project. Semi-structured questioning will be used, which will allow for free-flowing, spontaneous discussion. Participants will be recruited from the COMM 110 undergraduate research pool, and the groups will be conducted on NDSU's campus. Focus groups allow participants to openly interact and build on the comments of one another (Hall, 2006; Lundy et al., 2008), which is especially conducive to discussing a popular culture topic such as RT. Participants will have the opportunity to add to the comments of others in an open-ended discussion about the criteria for RT programming and RT realism, which will allow for rich data and collaborative thought.
Contributions
Although several studies have been done about the characteristics of reality television, no consensus has been reached. Responses regarding the criteria of RT have varied from lack of scriptedness and use of natural settings (Hall, 2006), to elements of romance and competitiveness (Nabi, 2007), to unrealistic scenarios (Papacharissi & Mendelson, 2007). The highly varied responses about the characteristics of RT signal a need for additional research. Further, research on viewers' perceptions of reality in RT -- along with the aspects of the shows that contribute to this perception -- would increase knowledge about the reality shows viewers enjoy most. Allowing viewers to place shows on a "reality continuum" is a valuable tool for understanding the appeal of RT.
Annotated bibliography:
Baruh, L. (2009). Publicized intimacies on reality television: An analysis of voyeuristic content and its contribution to the appeal of reality programming. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 190-210.
* Voyeurism, a potential motivation of reality television (RT) viewing that has received significant scholarly attention, is addressed in this study. Differentiation is made between the traditional sexual definition of voyeurism used in psychology and the voyeurism studied in RT ("pleasure derived from access to private details," p. 191).
Cohen, J., & Weimann, G. (2008). Who’s afraid of reality shows? Exploring the effects of perceived influence of reality shows and the concern over their social effects on willingness to censor. Communication Research, 35(3), 382-397.
* An important assertion is made in this study: influence of RT differs from the effects of RT. People can think RT has a great influence on daily life but doesn't effect society, or they can perceive RT as minimally influential but see its effects frequently. The disconnect between influence and effect adds a unique dimension to the findings of Leone, Chapman Peek, and Bissell (2006), whose study examines the personal influence people believe media has on them.
Curnutt, H. (2009). “A fan crashing the party”: Exploring reality-celebrity in MTV’s Real World franchise. Television & New Media, 10(3), 251-266.
* Interviews with RT star Susie Meister (Real World) are used to examine the phenomenon of the "reality-celebrity," a new breed of celebrity that allows "ordinary people" to become famous. The participatory nature of RT has increased the popularity of RT and has caused more people to break into show business through their roles on RT programs. Meister's comments in interviews contribute to the ongoing debate of the "realness" of RT as everyday people live their lives in front of cameras. Although I have several studies that focus on the reality of RT from viewers' perspectives, input from an actual RT star helps my argument.
Dixon, W.W. (2008). Hyperconsumption in reality television: The transformation of the self through televisual consumerism. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 25, 52-63.
* The ease of self-transformation that is portrayed in RT is reviewed in this article. Dixon uses examples from three popular RT programs to demonstrate the new culture RT has created: a culture of people who believe their homes, bodies, and entire lives can be overhauled publicly. This critique of RT describes the disadvantages of this new, popular genre.
Ebersole, S., & Woods, R. (2007). Motivations for viewing reality television: A uses and gratifications analysis. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 23(1), 23-42.
* Focusing on the perceived realism of RT, this study examined the relationship between affinity for viewing television and subsequent affinity for RT. Results confirmed a connection between TV affinity and RT viewing; affinity was also positively associated with perceived RT realism. Viewers' justification for seeing RT as "real" -- including their tendency to relate to characters personally and use RT to negotiate self-identity -- provides interesting insight to my own study.
Ferris, A.L., Smith, S.W., Greenberg, B.S., & Smith, S.L. (2007). The content of reality dating shows and viewer perceptions of dating. Journal of Communication, 57, 490-510.
* Along with Roberti (2007), this study examines reality dating shows. A content analysis revealed that women are frequently portrayed as sex objects, men are portrayed as sex-driven, and dating is considered a "game" in reality dating shows. Men who perceived RT as "real" were more likely to believe and perpetuate these stereotypes. This research provides a connection between RT perceptions and actual behavior.
Hall, A. (2006). Viewers’ perceptions of reality programs. Communication Quarterly, 54(2), 191-211.
* Like Nabi (2007), Hall asserts that the RT genre is undefined. Participants listed several reasons RT is appealing, with responses ranging from RT's suspense to its inspirational nature. The ironically unrealistic nature of RT was also noted. This study used focus groups, so it serves as a good example for my own method.
Harry, J.C. (2008). Cheaters: “Real” reality television as melodramatic parody. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 32(3), 230-248.
* The societal implications of the popular RT program Cheaters are discussed. Typical of the RT genre, Cheaters provides a means to spy on the misfortunes of others without leaving the living room. Harry argues that the ethical issues that surround this program -- and many other RT shows -- have made everything that should make viewers feel guilty into a "can't stop watching" pleasure. This study adds to others that discuss the appeal of RT.
Holbrook, A., & Singer, A.E. (2009). When bad girls go good: Models of the self and reality on VH1’s Flavor of Love Girls: Charm School. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 37(1), 34-43.
* The reality show Charm School is used as a case study to examine the realism of RT in the eyes of both viewers and contestants on the show. Logically, viewers had different perceptions of the show's reality when compared with those who were behind the scenes. The article makes a distinction between the "original selves" and "media selves" that are portrayed on RT shows, which contributes to other information on realism.
Jenkins, H. Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.
* The chapter on American Idol in this book discusses the ways this RT phenomenon "grabs" viewers with product placement, participation, and perceived kinship with the contestants. Breaking down the reasons why American Idol is so successful taps into viewer motivation, which aids my own research.
Katz, E., Blumler, J.G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Uses and gratifications research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509-523.
* As uses and gratifications is the theoretical perspective for my project, this article is necessary. The assumptions of U&G are listed: the audience is active, the consumer is fully responsible for picking the media choice that is most gratifying, media continually compete with other sources that provide gratification, media rely on audiences to understand motivations and interests, and finally, communication is mediated by a wide variety of factors. This theory relates well to the study of RT, as the gratifications viewers receive from RT are both complex and perplexing.
Leone, R., Chapman Peek, W., & Bissell, K.L. (2006). Reality television and third-person perception. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50 (2), 253-269.
* People often believe others are more influenced by media than they themselves are. This study found that this assumption is also true for viewers of RT. This finding provides valuable information about the perception viewers have of the effect RT has on their lives. Additionally, RT realism is discussed.
Lundy, L.K., Ruth, A.M., & Park, T.D. (2008). Simply irresistible: Reality TV consumption patterns. Communication Quarterly, 56(2), 208-225.
* This article examines the viewing patterns of those who consume RT, along with the rationale for watching these programs and viewer perceptions of the shows. This study is very useful because it provides basic information about the motivations behind RT viewing and the feelings viewers take away from these shows. Both voyeurism and escapism are discussed in depth throughout the article, which is extremely appropriate and helpful for my study.
Nabi, R.L. (2007). Determining dimensions of reality: A concept mapping of the reality TV landscape. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 51(2), 371-390.
* Although two salient attributes of RT are romance and competition, Nabi notes that the genre lacks definition. In her study, the characteristics of several RT shows overlapped various defining categories. This article justifies additional exploration on the characteristics that constitute RT.
Nabi, R.L., Biely, E.N., Morgan, S.J., & Stitt, C.R. (2003). Reality-based television programming and the psychology of its appeal. Media Psychology, 5, 303-330.
* This landmark study provides a definition of RT that has been popular in several other RT studies. Additionally, realism and voyeuristic appeal of RT is explored. Results indicate RT genre, however undefined, is marked by one significant characteristic: shows that lack reality. Voyeurism was not found to be a motivation for viewing RT, a finding that negates popular belief and the findings of other RT studies.
Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. (2007). An exploratory study of reality appeal: Uses and gratifications of reality TV shows. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51(2), 355-370.
* This study negates the influence of voyeurism on RT viewing, corroborating Nabi, et al. (2003). Using RT for entertainment purposes and to pass time were the two main motives for viewing. This article is useful because it provides support for the lack of voyeuristic motive in RT viewing. I want to provide both sides to the "voyeurism debate" in my paper, so this study is helpful.
Reiss, S., & Wiltz, J. (2004). Why people watch reality TV. Media Psychology, 6, 363-378.
* People who consistently view RT were found to place great significance on self-importance. RT has the potential to increase self-esteem in two ways: by making people feel better about themselves after watching the unfortunate choices of RT characters (i.e., viewers feel comforted that they would never make "that mistake"), and by emphasizing the importance of ordinary people (i.e., if an ordinary person can be on a reality show, perhaps I could too). This motivation for viewing provides a background to one of my research questions.
Roberti, J.W. (2007). Demographic characteristics and motives of individuals viewing reality dating shows. The Communication Review, 10, 117-134.
* Reality dating shows were examined as a specific RT context in which to study motives and viewer demographics. Young adult females are more likely to view dating shows than males, and excitability and escapism were the main motivations for viewing. Although my study will seek to determine broad themes and motivations across a variety of RT programs, it is helpful to understand this information for specific types of shows, as well.
Rose, R.L., & Wood, S.L. (2005). Paradox and the consumption of authenticity through reality television. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 284-296.
* When people view RT, they are faced with a variety of paradoxes that cause them to question the reality of the show. For instance, viewers are often shown both ordinary and extraordinary attributes of characters, which potentially causes confusion and doubt about the authenticity of the person. This study breaks down the cognitive reasons people have trouble deciphering between the real and fake on RT.
Skeggs, B., & Wood, H. (2008). The labour of transformation and circuits of value ‘around' reality television. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 22(4), 559-572.
* This article touches on several key issues in RT, including perceived realism, "self-transformation," and the portrayal of domesticity and gender roles. I want to include this study because it provides basic information about the growing popularity of RT, along with the positive and negative aspects of the genre.
Despite its popularity, RT is a poorly defined genre (Nabi, 2007; Nabi et al., 2003). Viewers provide widely varying criteria for RT programs (Hall, 2006). Nabi (2007) created 12 sub-groups of the broad RT genre, but found that most shows studied had attributes from several of the categories, indicating blurriness in classifying programs. Many viewers may not even realize they are consuming RT, even though the shows they regularly watch would be classified as reality programming (Lundy, Ruth, & Park, 2008). Additionally, many of the common characteristics of RT (i.e., romance and competition) are present in many television shows that are not considered RT, so further exploration is needed to determine the unique characteristics of RT (Nabi et al., 2007).
RQ1: What characteristics define reality television?
In addition to defining the characteristics of RT, the perceived realism of these programs must be assessed. Ironically, viewers list RT's unrealistic nature as one of the main motivations for watching (Hall, 2006; Holbrook & Singer, 2009; Leone, Chapman Peek, & Bissell, 2006; Lundy et al., 2008; Nabi et al., 2003). Although viewers' perceptions of the overall realism of reality programming has been extensively studied, additional research is warranted for self-described realism of particular shows, including the reasons why viewers perceive these shows as real or unreal.
RQ2a: What reality shows are perceived as most realistic to viewers?
RQ2b: Why do viewers perceive these shows as most realistic?
RQ3a: What reality shows are perceived as most unrealistic to viewers?
RQ3b: Why do viewers perceive these shows as unrealistic?
Methodology
Focus groups will be used to gather data for this project. Semi-structured questioning will be used, which will allow for free-flowing, spontaneous discussion. Participants will be recruited from the COMM 110 undergraduate research pool, and the groups will be conducted on NDSU's campus. Focus groups allow participants to openly interact and build on the comments of one another (Hall, 2006; Lundy et al., 2008), which is especially conducive to discussing a popular culture topic such as RT. Participants will have the opportunity to add to the comments of others in an open-ended discussion about the criteria for RT programming and RT realism, which will allow for rich data and collaborative thought.
Contributions
Although several studies have been done about the characteristics of reality television, no consensus has been reached. Responses regarding the criteria of RT have varied from lack of scriptedness and use of natural settings (Hall, 2006), to elements of romance and competitiveness (Nabi, 2007), to unrealistic scenarios (Papacharissi & Mendelson, 2007). The highly varied responses about the characteristics of RT signal a need for additional research. Further, research on viewers' perceptions of reality in RT -- along with the aspects of the shows that contribute to this perception -- would increase knowledge about the reality shows viewers enjoy most. Allowing viewers to place shows on a "reality continuum" is a valuable tool for understanding the appeal of RT.
Annotated bibliography:
Baruh, L. (2009). Publicized intimacies on reality television: An analysis of voyeuristic content and its contribution to the appeal of reality programming. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 190-210.
* Voyeurism, a potential motivation of reality television (RT) viewing that has received significant scholarly attention, is addressed in this study. Differentiation is made between the traditional sexual definition of voyeurism used in psychology and the voyeurism studied in RT ("pleasure derived from access to private details," p. 191).
Cohen, J., & Weimann, G. (2008). Who’s afraid of reality shows? Exploring the effects of perceived influence of reality shows and the concern over their social effects on willingness to censor. Communication Research, 35(3), 382-397.
* An important assertion is made in this study: influence of RT differs from the effects of RT. People can think RT has a great influence on daily life but doesn't effect society, or they can perceive RT as minimally influential but see its effects frequently. The disconnect between influence and effect adds a unique dimension to the findings of Leone, Chapman Peek, and Bissell (2006), whose study examines the personal influence people believe media has on them.
Curnutt, H. (2009). “A fan crashing the party”: Exploring reality-celebrity in MTV’s Real World franchise. Television & New Media, 10(3), 251-266.
* Interviews with RT star Susie Meister (Real World) are used to examine the phenomenon of the "reality-celebrity," a new breed of celebrity that allows "ordinary people" to become famous. The participatory nature of RT has increased the popularity of RT and has caused more people to break into show business through their roles on RT programs. Meister's comments in interviews contribute to the ongoing debate of the "realness" of RT as everyday people live their lives in front of cameras. Although I have several studies that focus on the reality of RT from viewers' perspectives, input from an actual RT star helps my argument.
Dixon, W.W. (2008). Hyperconsumption in reality television: The transformation of the self through televisual consumerism. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 25, 52-63.
* The ease of self-transformation that is portrayed in RT is reviewed in this article. Dixon uses examples from three popular RT programs to demonstrate the new culture RT has created: a culture of people who believe their homes, bodies, and entire lives can be overhauled publicly. This critique of RT describes the disadvantages of this new, popular genre.
Ebersole, S., & Woods, R. (2007). Motivations for viewing reality television: A uses and gratifications analysis. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 23(1), 23-42.
* Focusing on the perceived realism of RT, this study examined the relationship between affinity for viewing television and subsequent affinity for RT. Results confirmed a connection between TV affinity and RT viewing; affinity was also positively associated with perceived RT realism. Viewers' justification for seeing RT as "real" -- including their tendency to relate to characters personally and use RT to negotiate self-identity -- provides interesting insight to my own study.
Ferris, A.L., Smith, S.W., Greenberg, B.S., & Smith, S.L. (2007). The content of reality dating shows and viewer perceptions of dating. Journal of Communication, 57, 490-510.
* Along with Roberti (2007), this study examines reality dating shows. A content analysis revealed that women are frequently portrayed as sex objects, men are portrayed as sex-driven, and dating is considered a "game" in reality dating shows. Men who perceived RT as "real" were more likely to believe and perpetuate these stereotypes. This research provides a connection between RT perceptions and actual behavior.
Hall, A. (2006). Viewers’ perceptions of reality programs. Communication Quarterly, 54(2), 191-211.
* Like Nabi (2007), Hall asserts that the RT genre is undefined. Participants listed several reasons RT is appealing, with responses ranging from RT's suspense to its inspirational nature. The ironically unrealistic nature of RT was also noted. This study used focus groups, so it serves as a good example for my own method.
Harry, J.C. (2008). Cheaters: “Real” reality television as melodramatic parody. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 32(3), 230-248.
* The societal implications of the popular RT program Cheaters are discussed. Typical of the RT genre, Cheaters provides a means to spy on the misfortunes of others without leaving the living room. Harry argues that the ethical issues that surround this program -- and many other RT shows -- have made everything that should make viewers feel guilty into a "can't stop watching" pleasure. This study adds to others that discuss the appeal of RT.
Holbrook, A., & Singer, A.E. (2009). When bad girls go good: Models of the self and reality on VH1’s Flavor of Love Girls: Charm School. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 37(1), 34-43.
* The reality show Charm School is used as a case study to examine the realism of RT in the eyes of both viewers and contestants on the show. Logically, viewers had different perceptions of the show's reality when compared with those who were behind the scenes. The article makes a distinction between the "original selves" and "media selves" that are portrayed on RT shows, which contributes to other information on realism.
Jenkins, H. Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.
* The chapter on American Idol in this book discusses the ways this RT phenomenon "grabs" viewers with product placement, participation, and perceived kinship with the contestants. Breaking down the reasons why American Idol is so successful taps into viewer motivation, which aids my own research.
Katz, E., Blumler, J.G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Uses and gratifications research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509-523.
* As uses and gratifications is the theoretical perspective for my project, this article is necessary. The assumptions of U&G are listed: the audience is active, the consumer is fully responsible for picking the media choice that is most gratifying, media continually compete with other sources that provide gratification, media rely on audiences to understand motivations and interests, and finally, communication is mediated by a wide variety of factors. This theory relates well to the study of RT, as the gratifications viewers receive from RT are both complex and perplexing.
Leone, R., Chapman Peek, W., & Bissell, K.L. (2006). Reality television and third-person perception. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50 (2), 253-269.
* People often believe others are more influenced by media than they themselves are. This study found that this assumption is also true for viewers of RT. This finding provides valuable information about the perception viewers have of the effect RT has on their lives. Additionally, RT realism is discussed.
Lundy, L.K., Ruth, A.M., & Park, T.D. (2008). Simply irresistible: Reality TV consumption patterns. Communication Quarterly, 56(2), 208-225.
* This article examines the viewing patterns of those who consume RT, along with the rationale for watching these programs and viewer perceptions of the shows. This study is very useful because it provides basic information about the motivations behind RT viewing and the feelings viewers take away from these shows. Both voyeurism and escapism are discussed in depth throughout the article, which is extremely appropriate and helpful for my study.
Nabi, R.L. (2007). Determining dimensions of reality: A concept mapping of the reality TV landscape. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 51(2), 371-390.
* Although two salient attributes of RT are romance and competition, Nabi notes that the genre lacks definition. In her study, the characteristics of several RT shows overlapped various defining categories. This article justifies additional exploration on the characteristics that constitute RT.
Nabi, R.L., Biely, E.N., Morgan, S.J., & Stitt, C.R. (2003). Reality-based television programming and the psychology of its appeal. Media Psychology, 5, 303-330.
* This landmark study provides a definition of RT that has been popular in several other RT studies. Additionally, realism and voyeuristic appeal of RT is explored. Results indicate RT genre, however undefined, is marked by one significant characteristic: shows that lack reality. Voyeurism was not found to be a motivation for viewing RT, a finding that negates popular belief and the findings of other RT studies.
Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. (2007). An exploratory study of reality appeal: Uses and gratifications of reality TV shows. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51(2), 355-370.
* This study negates the influence of voyeurism on RT viewing, corroborating Nabi, et al. (2003). Using RT for entertainment purposes and to pass time were the two main motives for viewing. This article is useful because it provides support for the lack of voyeuristic motive in RT viewing. I want to provide both sides to the "voyeurism debate" in my paper, so this study is helpful.
Reiss, S., & Wiltz, J. (2004). Why people watch reality TV. Media Psychology, 6, 363-378.
* People who consistently view RT were found to place great significance on self-importance. RT has the potential to increase self-esteem in two ways: by making people feel better about themselves after watching the unfortunate choices of RT characters (i.e., viewers feel comforted that they would never make "that mistake"), and by emphasizing the importance of ordinary people (i.e., if an ordinary person can be on a reality show, perhaps I could too). This motivation for viewing provides a background to one of my research questions.
Roberti, J.W. (2007). Demographic characteristics and motives of individuals viewing reality dating shows. The Communication Review, 10, 117-134.
* Reality dating shows were examined as a specific RT context in which to study motives and viewer demographics. Young adult females are more likely to view dating shows than males, and excitability and escapism were the main motivations for viewing. Although my study will seek to determine broad themes and motivations across a variety of RT programs, it is helpful to understand this information for specific types of shows, as well.
Rose, R.L., & Wood, S.L. (2005). Paradox and the consumption of authenticity through reality television. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 284-296.
* When people view RT, they are faced with a variety of paradoxes that cause them to question the reality of the show. For instance, viewers are often shown both ordinary and extraordinary attributes of characters, which potentially causes confusion and doubt about the authenticity of the person. This study breaks down the cognitive reasons people have trouble deciphering between the real and fake on RT.
Skeggs, B., & Wood, H. (2008). The labour of transformation and circuits of value ‘around' reality television. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 22(4), 559-572.
* This article touches on several key issues in RT, including perceived realism, "self-transformation," and the portrayal of domesticity and gender roles. I want to include this study because it provides basic information about the growing popularity of RT, along with the positive and negative aspects of the genre.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Timeline: Effects of Reality Television Consumption
September 7-13
- September 9: Project timeline due
- Collect literature and begin to prepare annotated bibliography, research questions, and methods for paper proposal
- Prepare IRB paperwork and consent form for focus groups
- September 16: Paper proposal due / IRB application submitted
- Continue collecting literature
September 21-27
- Mid-week: Literature collection and outline of review completed
- Begin writing literature review
September 28-October 4
- Begin writing methods section
- End of week: Begin editing draft of literature review
- Recruitment e-mail sent to undergraduate research pool (pending IRB approval)
October 5-11
- October 7: Literature review due
- Focus groups held during this week
- End of week: Begin editing draft of methods section
October 12-18
- October 14: Methods section due
- Focus groups held during this week
- GOAL: All data collected by October 18
- Finish up focus groups (if the need arises due to scheduling or recruitment difficulties)
- October 23: Data collection due by 5:00 p.m.
- Data transcription / analysis
November 2-8
- Data transcription / analysis
- Begin writing contribution / limitations
November 9-15
- Data transcription / analysis
- End of week: Begin editing draft of contribution / limitations
November 16-22
- Finish up data analysis
- November 18: Contribution / limitations due
- November 25: Functional outline due
- Edit entire paper
- December 4: Draft of paper submitted electronically by 5:00 p.m.
- December 11: Letters to journal editor due by 5:00 p.m.
- Implement suggestions of peer editors
- December 18: FINAL DRAFT due by 5:00 p.m.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Academic Biography
Whitney Frahm is in the second year of the communication master's degree program at North Dakota State University, where she also serves as a Graduate Teaching Assistant. She received her B.A. in English Writing and Public Relations in 2008 from Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota.
Her primary research interest is interpersonal communication, and her thesis will focus on uncertainty, maintenance, and conflict in long-distance romantic relationships. Frahm is also interested in the influence of popular media on young girls. This interest developed after completing a content analysis of the television show Sex and the City with colleague Katie Hedberg. The paper about this project was presented at the undergraduate honors conference at the Southern States Communication Association in Louisville, Kentucky, in April 2007.
Frahm has previously worked as a reporter for a rural North Dakota newspaper and as an intern in the public relations department at MeritCare Health System. Most recently, Frahm was the Box Office Manager at Trollwood Performing Arts School, where she implemented several marketing strategies and provided communication training to fellow co-workers.
Frahm currently teaches COMM 110 (Public Speaking) and COMM 200 (Media Writing) at North Dakota State University, where she has also taught COMM 310 (Advanced Media Writing).
Her primary research interest is interpersonal communication, and her thesis will focus on uncertainty, maintenance, and conflict in long-distance romantic relationships. Frahm is also interested in the influence of popular media on young girls. This interest developed after completing a content analysis of the television show Sex and the City with colleague Katie Hedberg. The paper about this project was presented at the undergraduate honors conference at the Southern States Communication Association in Louisville, Kentucky, in April 2007.
Frahm has previously worked as a reporter for a rural North Dakota newspaper and as an intern in the public relations department at MeritCare Health System. Most recently, Frahm was the Box Office Manager at Trollwood Performing Arts School, where she implemented several marketing strategies and provided communication training to fellow co-workers.
Frahm currently teaches COMM 110 (Public Speaking) and COMM 200 (Media Writing) at North Dakota State University, where she has also taught COMM 310 (Advanced Media Writing).
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
First post!
Just trying this out with a thought for the day...
"Research is formalized curiosity. It is poking and prying with a purpose."
-Zora Neale Hurston
More to come!
"Research is formalized curiosity. It is poking and prying with a purpose."
-Zora Neale Hurston
More to come!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
