Uses & Gratifications

This theory explains that people deliberately use certain types of media for different purposes. In the bigger picture of this field of communication it stands to show that if you want to study the effects media has on people [see theory from my last post; Cultivation Theory] you must first remember that people are specifically choosing most of the media they are exposed to. In this discussion we are going to focus on this theory: People decide what type of media they want to use and then also what effects they want (or will let) the media have on them and there for the same message can have a different impact on different individual.

To narrow it down, this theory focuses on: what types of media people are using, why people use those certain types of media, what different needs they are gratifying with their use of that media, and the different effects media has on different people.

I did a little research of my own in order to better understand this theory and interviewed three people from different age groups. I asked them about the types of media they consume, why they use that certain type and how it compares in relation to other types or media, and what they get out consuming this media.

Here is the first interview I did with a college student named Laura:

Laura said that she listened to music and this was the type of media she used the most. Examples of why she chose to use music was for entertainment while driving and in other cases to relax such as when doing homework. She also said she watched TV for different reasons and that different shows did effect her differently. She then talks about how she uses Facebook, social media, to pass the time and to communicate with other people. She said she really disliked the show Family Guy and that she liked the story line of The Walking Dead but thought it was scary. 

Here is the second interview with Spencer who is 15 years old and is in high-school.

Spencer said he listened to music when I asked him what type of media he consumed the most of. He said he listens to music in his down time and as entertainment such as while taking a shower. He said it gave him an uplifting feeling. Spencer said he plays video games as well but his reasoning for doing so differed. He plays certain games to pass the time and for enjoyment but also used it for social interaction through collaborating online while playing and "to win" in some instances as well. He loved the show Family Guy and was excited about the show The Walking Dead.

This is the third interview I did with my mother, Kelly:

Kelly said she mostly read books. She reads all different types but reads mostly around the same time, after work, in order to relax and because she enjoys the down time. She said she liked to get lost in the story and go into her own little world. She also said that she watches TV in order to laugh without having to pay a lot of attention to what is going on. She has never played video games and barely interacts on Facebook. She also said she didn't like Family Guy and has never really watched the show The Walking Dead.

All these interviews reinforced the idea that different people use different types of media and for varying reasons. Some media was used to pass the time, some to communicate with others, and some simply for entertainment purposes. This range of answers depicted what the theory of Uses and Gratifications is trying to explain - different people deliberately use different types of media and for varying reasons.

It also showed that the same type of media could have a different effect on different people. Spencer thought the show Family Guy, which is an animated adult cartoon with crude humor, was hilarious while both of the other participants felt that the show was awful and gave many negative feelings towards it. It also showed that people do pick what type of media they are exposed to. This could be seen through the different media they described using and a specific example is of the varying use of Facebook; Laura was sometimes on the website for hours in a day while Kelly hardly even knew what the social media site was.

Cultivation Theory

The Mean World Syndrome; an attitude caused by media

 

Cultivation Theory states that television tells us what exists, is important, and what is right.

Cultivation Theory of George Gerbner focuses on violence seen on TV and how it affects “viewers’ beliefs about the world around them and the feelings connected to those beliefs.”

Violence is defined as “dramatic violence” being an overt expression of physical force. This can be with or without a weapon, against one’s self or towards others, but does not consider things such as verbal abuse.

This theory brings up the fact that television plays a large role in why we think more bad things happen in our world than is statistically proven to be happening. This is called the “mean world syndrome”: *“the cynical mindset of general mistrust of others subscribed to by heavy TV viewers.” Gerbner defines heavy TV viewers as people who watch more than 4 hours of television a day and also claims that the more television someone watches, the more they are susceptible to the effects of the mean world syndrome.

Plane crashes, rape, pedophiles, serial killers, so many scary things – the more you watch the more you are exposed to these horrible images – the more you are susceptible to see the *“real world through TV’s lens” or a skewed perception of the real world stemming from TV’s cultivating power. Here is an example of a plane crash where the explicit details of people getting sucked out of the plane add drama to the scene, after seeing this in multiple different movies and TV shows, a plan crash becomes more of a reality and even more scary.

 

The mean world syndrome  actually makes a lot of sense when you start to realize how much violence is shown on TV, no wonder we are thinking there are more bad things happening, we are constantly bombarded with images that are sometimes even worse than reality actually can be – think about zombie apocalypse, vampires, and medieval themed shows such as Game of Thrones.

 

If you are anything like me, this scene makes your skin crawl and as soon as the blood starts squirting everywhere I have to turn it off. But if you love Game of Thrones, like a lot of people do, then this is not even comparable to the violence in some other scenes. Click here to read about critics of The Game of Thrones and to watch a clip that is One of the Most Gruesome Scenes in Television History. You are less sensitive to these images if you are exposed to them more.

It is somewhat of a mystery: We are becoming increasingly desensitized to violence (meaning it doesn’t faze us as much when we see violent images on TV). But at the same time we believe that violence is more prominent than it actually is. Both are resulting from the increase in violence on television.

Why is violence continuing to increase on television?

I really liked how our *textbook for this class described why media uses violence; it’s cheap to produce and it speaks in a language that is universally understood- giving the ability to export the product globally in order to realize maximum profits at minimum costs. The more violence they can show, the more they are making while at the same time the viewers are increasing.

One website I pulled up described the “ANYONE CAN DIE trope” and explained that unless a character’s name is in the show’s title, they are pretty much fair game to get killed off at any time. Read more: The Most Unexpected Deaths on Television. Violence on TV is no longer even restricted to stereotypes or bad guys, any one can be killed!

Think about the message that sends! Just another reason that reinforces the effect that watching television has on creating this “Mean World Syndrome.”

*Class Textbook
Griffin, Emory A. "Chapter 29: Cultivation Theory of George Gerbner." A First Look at Communication Theory. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2009. N. pag. Print.

Symbolic Convergence Theory

This theory is all about how shared “fantasies” play a large role in group bonding.

This is the process that the theory describes:

A dramatizing message is presented, a chain reaction forms around this topic as people chime in and keep the conversation about the story going – known as a fantasy chain, they create a trigger word, or cue because it can be any type of signal, that helps them return to the fantasy chain they had previously shared, and this in turn strengthens the bond and cohesion between the group members.

Let’s break each part down in order to understanding the communication theory wordage I used in the above description of the process laid out in the Symbolic Convergence Theory.

1.    The Dramatizing Message

When a group is working on a project you would think their focus should strictly remain on the task at hand. Disruptive comments about irrelevant outside events can seem counterproductive. But, in some cases when the comment, such as a joke or story, resonates with the other group members and a conversation starts to be had there may actually be some large benefits for the group.

To be a dramatizing message the group member must use descriptive language to paint a picture and show emotion within the joke or story they are sharing. The story can’t be related to the work aspect of the group – it has to be regarding an outside event about the group member’s past experiences or future plans or fantasies.

Disclaimer: I'm a huge fan of the TV show Sons of Anarchy

Example: Sally talking about an idea she has for the project is not a dramatizing message, but Sally explaining that she wants to be done with the meeting by a certain time so she can get home to watch her favorite TV show is an example.

2.    Fantasy Chain

A fantasy chain occurs after a dramatizing message is shared by a group member if the other group members embrace and acknowledge the comment, or story, and enthusiastically start to interact and agree about the original dramatizing message. This dramatizing message becomes the definition of “fantasy” and sparks a chain reaction of communication about this fantasy.

Example: Sally says she wants to get home to see the new Sons of Anarchy and someone in the group responds by saying, “that’s my favorite show too!” and then the next person adds in, “I just watch it because Charlie Hunnam is gorgeous” another group member adds, “what I wouldn't give to be Tara (the actors girlfriend in the show) in that show; but they live such a crazy life” and a conversation then unfolds about what it would be like to be in a merciless bike gang.

3.    Symbolic Cue

A symbolic cue is an agreed-upon trigger that sets off group members to respond as they did when they first shared a fantasy. This can range from code words or nonverbal signals to any kind of short hand that the members of a group recognize as having a specific meaning.

Example: As Sally’s group’s conversation about Sons of Anarchy progressed one of the members made a gesture like they were riding a Harley; they put their hands up as if holding the handle bars and quoted the show.  The whole group paused, looked around at each other, and started laughing at the silly gesture. Now, whenever the group project meeting seems to be getting monotonous, some one will hold up their hands as if riding a motorcycle and the group laughs and they talk about the latest episode of Sons of Anarchy for a few minutes.

4.    Symbolic Convergence

A quick definition of this term is: What the fantasy sharing of group members creates and how it affects the group consciousness and cohesion. When group members share these fantasies and symbols are created and shared, the worlds of the individuals start to come more closely together and may even overlap. This shared fantasy, the symbolic cues surrounding it, and the commonality of wordage that forms helps to bring the group members together. Instead of thinking about themselves they start to think in terms of “we” and “ours”. Group cohesion is seen when the group sticks together through thick and thin (such as a challenge in the process of completing the group project) and they seem to be attracted to one another.

Example: One of the group members says, “Okay, let's work really hard and get out of here so we can go watch the new Sons of Anarchy.”

This is helpful to successful group communication because it helps everyone to work together. They are communicating and contributing because they feel a connection to the other members and want, not only themselves but, everyone to succeed ( for example: every one wants all of them to get a good grade on the project).

Some fantasy chains move beyond the group level to become public-

While fantasy chaining normally starts in small groups sometimes they can spread across the public, especially with the help of mass media. The example group I referred to could all contribute in a conversation about a fantasy reality of being in a biker gang. But on a large scale, there is a population of people who all like the show Sons of Anarchy (ex. A fandom, or a group of followers or enthusiasts usually related to a show, sport, activity, or famous person) and are extreme fans. This would be an example of a public fantasy chain. People who share this interest seem to feel connected to each other and recognize the same symbols and associate specific meaning to them. Everyone in this group knows what the following symbol represents:

"The Dark Side" of Cognitive Complexity



Cognitive complexity is often looked at from a positive light, the more complex an individual, the better they are at effectively communicating their message. It makes sense then to rephrase this statement as “More cognitive complexity is equivalent to an advantage over others who have less mental structures and therefore less cognitive complexity.” Think about how this advanced complexity could be used negatively. While researching this topic I came across a research article that studied “The Dark Side of Cognitive Complexity”:

[See below post for definition of Cognitive Complexity]

“The current study provides tentative evidence that in situations where the communicative objective is to hurt one's romantic partner, cognitively complex individuals generate messages that are evaluated by nave actors as being more hurtful and more sophisticated than those generated by relatively less complex persons.”

http://www.udel.edu/communication/web/thesisfiles/bacue.pdf

I thought it was very interesting to think of how cognitive complexity can be beneficial to someone through both positive and negative messages. Either way, more cognitive complexity gives you the upper hand in conveying messages and effectively communicating.

I'm the oddball in my family; both my mother and brother are hot heads with a raging temper that often seems to cloud their judgment and fuel their anger. I'm the exact opposite, when something provokes me I sit and quietly contemplate my revenge and plan my comeback to any of the responses I think I might get during the confrontation. I can talk circles around my family when we get upset at one another. I use my cognitive complexity to win the argument.

Cognitive Complexity

Cognitive Complexity, as it relates to the Communication Theory of Constructivism can be defined as: the level of one’s ability to distinguish (and mentally organize) the subtle personality and behavioral differences among people. It’s one's ability to “read” people and the situations in which they are communicating in.

These mental organizations are called constructs which is basically just a fancy word for how one organizes people and their personalities. People studying communication measure cognitive complexity by the number of constructs that are said to be in one’s head.

Take the test!

(Shortened version of actual test done by scientists studying this topic) Think of someone you like, one of your favorite people, and use as many words as you can to describe their personality – exclude physical characteristics.

...

It is stated that if you can name a lot of advanced traits about person- beyond words such as nice and funny – your cognitive complexity is higher than someone who was less able to come up with as many or as complex words. (The actual scoring rubric for this test is more intricate, but generally speaking, anything >25 would represent a high level of cognitive complexity).

Why is cognitive complexity relevant to communication?

The more constructs you possess à the more cognitive complexity you have à the better you are a creating person-centered messages à the better ability you have to communicate skillfully and successfully with others (or “communication competence”)

Person-centered messages are messages that a cognitively complex person has the ability to craft and tailor to a specific individual and context as to effectively convey their message. It is also the communicator’s ability to anticipate the response of the individual to which they are communicating with and constantly adjust their message accordingly to be effective throughout a conversation.

A simple example of this is the saying that, “You wouldn’t talk to your grandma the way you talk to your friends”. You would craft your message for the person, your grandma, differently than you would if you were trying to convey it to a friend.

Even at a young age we start to develop these constructs to categorize personalities and context in which we are communicating in in order to send the appropriate message.

The level of schooling and interaction we got as children can potentially affect our individual level of cognitive complexity. This goes hand in hand with the variety of interactions that we have with the people that surround us growing up along with the environments in which we communicated in. All these factors play a role in the potential that an individual has to increase their cognitive complexity.

How to increase your cognitive complexity:

Even just hearing,reading about, and understanding  this term helps you to be more cognitively complex because you can focus on and start to improve your ability to better mentally categorize people by their behavioral and personality traits.

You can become more cognitively complex by increasing your exposure and interaction with varying types of people in all different kinds of situations. The more you understand and practice communication the better you will be able to effectively communicate.

Expectancy Violation Theory

Short definition of Expectancy Violation Theory (EVT): When what people predict will happen in an interaction is unexpectedly different than the "norm" for that interaction, resulting in a positive or negative value being placed on that unexpected interaction.

What a relevant topic to start out with in our Communication Theories class!

In the stock market expectancy violation is a constant, yet unwelcome, occurrence-
the experts calculate that the economy will continue to grow and hardly know how to react when we hit an economic down turn!
Beanie Babies were all the craze in the 90s and everyone knew they would someday be valuable collectibles... but they have violated collectors expectancies by now being close to worthless.

http://laist.com/2013/07/26/bankrupt_by_beanies_chris_robinson.php

Here is what Expectancy Violation Theory means in regards to communication theory--

Expectancy Violation Theory explains how and why unexpected behavior violates and upsets others. People have a certain idea of how others will react in daily life and the circumstances that arise. When people that they interact with act outside of their predictions, their expectancy is violated.

It's also important to remember that communication is easy for people when they know the situation and everyone is operating in the social "norm". When someone violates this norm, communication becomes difficult because you have to reevaluate what you were previously going to say and come up with a new reaction to an event that is outside of your comfort zone.

It can take a long time to decide the valence of the violation that you are experiencing. Violation valence is defined as "the positive or negative value we place on an unexpected event". Some times you can have a positive reaction, maybe you think the violation is humorous or it is a good surprise that makes you happy. But it can also cause a negative reaction like in this video:

Introduction

Q: What is worth more; a dollar today or a dollar tomorrow?

This is a simple question whose answer defines multiple underlying principles of the financial world that I am constantly surrounded by.

My name is Sara. I am a senior at Oregon State University and I love it here.

As you may have gathered, I am Finance Major (part of the College of Business) but I am also Minoring in Communication. I am interested in this field for many reasons. I want to better prepare myself for future interactions with my clients as my career choice is to be a Financial Consultant. Even though I will be doing a lot of number crunching I will still be interacting with many types of people, from co-workers to management to clients. I am very interested in how others interpret language, gestures, and the signals that make up our society.

Currently, I am the Oregon State Finance Club president. I feel that studying Communication has also impacted my work with the club, helping me to understand how to present and inform the students in an effective manner.

If you would like more information on how to invest your money, hiring someone to help you do it, or just want to know more about finance in general, here is a god website to start you off: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/

Outside of school, I love to run. I am always looking for the next 5k, 10k, or half marathon to support a great cause. I enjoy reading, anything besides textbooks, and my favorites include: The Great Gatsby, Game of Thrones, and Jurassic Park. I love spending my free time with best friends, boyfriend, and family. I am from McMinnville (about 45 minutes up 99W) and go home to visit my mom and brother whenever I get the chance. We consider ourselves a “football family” and love to watch NFL games and my brother’s high school football games. Go Chargers and Grizzlies!

A: A dollar is worth more today than it is tomorrow because you can invest that dollar today and it will start to earn money!

This is me with my niece and nephews, the definition of how I love to spend my time!