Contributions/Limitations and Functional Outline

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.