5 NUCLEAR WAR ON TV

BOX 2.5 NUCLEAR WAR ON TV

One of the most hyped television events of the 1980s was the 1983 ABC- TV movie The Day After (TDA), the drama depicting the aftermath of a nuclear attack on the American Midwest, aired in the height of the Cold War. Its anticipation became such a media event in itself that competing CBS’ 60 Minutes took the unprecedented step of covering TDA hype as one of its feature stories 1 hour before the movie’s airing. It also became

a political event. Antinuclear groups encouraged people to watch it, whereas conservatives decried it as an unfair move in the battle to mold public opinion on arms control issues. Mental health professionals worried over its impact on impressionable young minds and warned people to watch it only in groups and to not allow young children to see it at all. All of the heavy media coverage, of course, insured a large audience, which numbered over 100 million viewers, the largest audience to date for a TV movie.

Psychologists Scholfield and Pavelchak (1985) studied exactly what impact this controversial film’s airing had. Contrary to some fears or hopes, the movie actually did little to change attitudes about arms control and related issues. Arguments such as the possible failure of a deterrence-through-strength policy had been widely discussed in the media and were not really new ideas to most viewers. Many viewers felt that, horrible as it was, TDA’s portrayal of the effects of a nuclear attack was actually milder than hypeweary viewers had expected and in fact was somewhat akin to many disaster and horror movies. The movie did have its effects, however. Viewers were more likely to seek information about nuclear issues and become involved in disarmament activities, and they reported thinking about nuclear war twice as often after seeing the film as they had before.

45 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication

Empathy

Empathy, the ability to understand and feel what someone else is feeling, may be seen as emotional identification, and it is a very important factor in the enjoyment of media. We enjoy a comedy more if we can feel something of what the characters feel. We enjoy a ball game more if we play it ourselves and can relate to the tense feelings of being at bat with two outs in the bottom of the ninth and our team down by one run. We enjoy a tragic movie more if we can easily empathize with the suffering of another (Mills, 1993).

In the case of media (Zillmann, 1991b), empathy is diminished somewhat by the relatively omniscient position we occupy relative to the characters. We generally know more of what is going on than they do, as when we know that the bad guy is just around the bend waiting to ambush our unsuspecting hero. If we know the final outcome of some behavior, it is often difficult to become as emotionally involved as it would be if we knew as little as the character. Such enjoyment varies a lot depending on the genre, however. Audiences for reruns of sports events are almost nonexistent, whereas audiences for reruns of comedies hold up quite well. Apparently, the loyalty to the characters and show and the empathy and degree of parasocial interaction with them are crucial factors (Tannenbaum, 1980).

Empathy is composed of cognitive and emotional components. Cognitive empathy involves the ability to readily take the perspective of another, whereas emotional empathy involves readily responding at a purely emotional level M.H.Davis, Hull, Young, and Warren (1987) showed that the level of both of these types of empathy influenced emotional reactions to viewing the films Brian’s Song and Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, but that each type of empathy influenced reactions in different ways.

Empathy has also been conceptualized as a three-factor construct (Zillmann, 1991b). One factor may override another that initially predominated. For example, suppose the initial natural, unlearned response to the victim of violence in a news story or cartoon is one of empathy, This may, however, be overridden by a less empathic response to the next news story, commercial, or cartoon action quickly following. Thus, what might otherwise elicit considerable empathy may not do so, in part due to the sound-bite nature of the medium of television. This could explain why it is so difficult to become caught up emotionally in a TV movie broken up by 2 commercials.

Another approach, not extensively examined in the research, is the extent to which media, especially television, teach empathy to children or could potentially do so, if more sensitivity were given to such issues by writers, directors, and networks (N.D.Feshbach, 1988; N.D.Feshbach & S.Feshbach, 1997).

Research and Theory in Mass Communication 46

Suspense

Suspense is usually characterized as an experience of uncertainty whose properties can vary from noxious to pleasant (Vorderer & Knobloch, 2000; Zillmann, 1991c). The suspense we feel in an adventure show or drama evolves as we anticipate the outcome and is maximal if some negative outcome (hero is about to die) appears to be highly likely but not absolutely certain; for example, everything points to disaster with just a slight hope of escape. If the negative outcome either is not very likely or is absolutely certain, there is not much suspense (Zillmann, 1980, 1991c). We experience

a high level of suspense, for example, if our hero appears about to be blown up by a bomb, with just a slight chance to escape. Suspense is also heightened by the omniscient status of the viewer; we know something about imminent danger that the character doesn’t know, and that knowledge heightens the suspense we feel. The physiological excitation of suspense is relatively slow to decay and may be transferred to subsequent activities (Zillmann, 1980, 1984, 1991c, 1996).

Suspense may be studied either through an examination of suspenseful texts or an analysis of the audience’s activities, expectations, emotions, and relationships with the characters (Vorderer, Wulff, & Friedrichsen, 1996). The text-oriented approach examines such factors as outcome uncertainty, delay factors, and threats to the character. The reception approach studies the audience’s identification with the character, their expectations and curiosity, their emotions, and their concurrent activities and social situation, which may enhance or detract from the experience of suspense. The fact that both aspects of suspense are important confirm how this experience emerges as the person interacts with the text of the medium to create the emotional experience of suspense.

Humor

One very common aspect of consuming media is the enjoyment that comes from experiencing something funny (D.Brown & Bryant, 1983; Zillmann, 2000; Zillmann & Bryant, 1991). But what makes something funny? Why is one line of comedy so hilarious and a very similar one not at all funny, and perhaps even offensive?

Most comedy involves some sort of incongruity, inconsistency, or contradiction, which is finally resolved, as in the punch line of a joke (Long & Graesser, 1988; McGhee, 1979; Perlmutter, 2000; Suls, 1983; Vaid, 1999; Wyer & Collins, 1992). Neither the incongruity nor resolution by itself is usually very funny. Although the joke “Two elephants got off the bus and left their luggage by the tree” is highly incongruous, it is not particularly funny because there is no resolution. On the other hand, ‘Two soldiers got

47 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication

funny either, because there is no incongruity Only “Two elephants got off the bus and left their trunks by the tree” has both incongruity and resolution.

The best jokes offer some intellectual challenge, but not so much that we cannot get it or have to work too hard to do so. Some of the most satisfying jokes are very esoteric as in jokes involving knowledge from a particular group, such as a profession. What presents an adequate challenge for one person may not be for another. For example, many children find certain very predictable, even dumb, jokes funny, whereas adults do not. They are simply not novel or challenging enough for adults. Sometimes the relevant in-group may be the viewers of the show themselves; some jokes on Friends may be funny only to regular viewers of the show and those viewers may experience solidarity with others as they watch the show.

Another important concept in understanding media humor is the psychodynamic notion of catharsis, the emotional release of tension we feel from expressing some repressed feelings. For example, if you are very worried about some problem but talk to a friend and feel better just for having “gotten it off your chest” what you are experiencing is catharsis. Humor is often seen as a healthy and socially acceptable outlet for dealing with some of our darker feelings. For example, we may be able to deal with some of our own hidden sexual or hostile impulses by listening to a caustic comedian or talk-show host insult people or brazenly ask someone about their first sexual experience. We would never say those things ourselves but might secretly want to; hearing someone else do it partially fulfills our need to do so. Catharsis is often invoked to explain why people appreciate racist, ethnic, sexist, or sexual jokes. It is also frequently put forth as a socially beneficial outcome of consuming sexual or violent media, although research has failed to confirm such a conclusion (see chapters 9 and 10).

Social factors can make a lot of difference in the experience of humor (Apter, 1982; Vaid, 1999). Sometimes the presence of others watching with us enhances our enjoyment, particularly for broader, more raucous humor. Although an extreme example, consider watching The Rocky Horror Picture Show by yourself versus in a group. The presence of others may genuinely enhance our enjoyment, or we may outwardly appear to enjoy it more due to peer pressure to conform; if we are in a room full of people laughing uproariously at some TV show, it is hard to avoid at least a few smiles, even if we are not at all amused. This is the principle behind the inclusion of a laugh track on some sitcoms. The person who tells the joke is also an important factor. A joke making fun of Mexican Americans may be very funny if told by a Latino but highly offensive if told by an Anglo or an African American.

There are individual and cultural differences in appreciation of humor. Some people prefer puns, others prefer physical humor or practical jokes; still others prefer sexual or ethnic jokes. Also, societal standards change over

Research and Theory in Mass Communication 48

time. In the very early days of television (early 1950s), Amos and Andy could make fun of African Americans as slow-witted; a few years later Ralph Kramden could playfully threaten his wife with physical violence on The Honeymooners (“One of these days, Alice, pow, right in the kisser!”) and the audience roared with laughter. Now we have the chance to laugh at more sexual innuendo on TV than we could then, but now Andy and Ralph somehow do not seem quite so funny.

All of these factors affect the dispositional consequences of moral assessment, as theorized by Zillmann (2000; Zillmann & Bryant, 1991). According to this view, the recipient of the humor is a “moral monitor” who either applauds or condemns the intentions of the other character(s). A lot depends on whether that response is positive or negative. For example, a sitcom character who responds to a witty putdown from another character with a retort in kind is implicitly offering approval and the viewers experience humor and liking for both characters. On the other hand, if the recipient character is offended and lashes back at the first character, it sets the stage for an antagonistic relationship, where viewers’ emotional support goes to the “good guy” (usually the unfairly wounded party) and roots for the discomfort of the “bad guy.” Both paradigms are common in comedy, but the dynamics are different and the experience of viewing is different.

Different cultures find different themes and approaches funny. In North American society, for example, certain topics are off limits or very touchy, at least for prime-time humor (late-night TV and some cable programs are more permissive). Jokes on U.S. TV about racism, feminism, violence against women, or mainstream religion are risky; such humor does exist, but people are likely to take offense and thus producers and comedians are very cautious. On the other hand, a Brazilian TV commercial for a department store chain during one Christmas season showed the Three Wise Men walking to Bethlehem. Suddenly, to a rock beat, they throw open their ornate robes and start dancing in their pastel underwear, featured on sale at the store. It seems unlikely that such an ad would be aired in the United States. See Box 2.6 for some examples of culture-specific humor that ran up against unfunny political realities.

One function of media humor is as a sort of leavening in the context of a more serious offering. A little so-called comic relief in the midst of a serious drama is much appreciated, although if done badly, it runs the risk of being in poor taste and thus offending people. If done well, it can increase motivation and interest and make the characters seem more human. If the humor is too funny, it may distract from the major content. Effects of humor in serious drama are complex and depend on many other factors, including viewer gender, character status (hero vs. villain), and context (King, 2000). This is particularly a concern with commercials. Some of the funniest and more creatively successful TV commercials have not been very effective at

49 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication

selling because the humor overshadowed the commercial message. People remember the gag but forget the product, not a situation that advertisers want!

BOX 2.6

HUMOR IN UNFRIENDLY POLITICAL CONTEXTS Sometimes political realities conspire against humor. When the producers

of Sesame Street tried to launch an Israeli version designed to promote harmony between Israelis and Palestinians, they ran into difficulty. Palestinians did not want their Muppets living on the same street as the Israeli Muppets. A later proposal to have the show set in a neutral park foundered on the problem of which side owned the park. In another example, a former president of Zimbabwe, Canaan Banana, banned all jokes about himself after tiring of endless banana jokes. Perhaps the most extreme case is North Korea, where all satire is banned because “everything is perfect in the people’s paradise” Still, there are those who resist, as in the case of one enterprising Chinese wit who created a computer virus that destroyed the hard drive of anyone who answered “no” to the question, “Do you think that Prime Minister Li Peng is an idiot?” (What’s So Funny? 1997).

Mood Management

Another function of media use, especially entertainment media, is seeking to maintain good moods and alleviate bad ones. People in good moods will seek the least engaging stimulation in order to perpetuate their current state, while people in negative moods will seek stimulation to alter their mood (Potts & Sanchez, 1994). This could help explain why happy people might frequently turn on some mindless sitcom rerun or unhappy people would watch an outrageous comedy that could distract them from their negative mood. Television may also direct attention away from ourselves and how we are failing to meet our ideal standards (Mosalenko & Heine, 2003).

MEDIA AS PERCEIVED REALITY

Now that we have examined some of the research types, theories, and psychological constructs used in the scientific study of the media, let us return for a more careful look at the theme introduced earlier: the reality created by the media.

Research and Theory in Mass Communication 50

The Reflection Myth

Often people think of the media as vehicles for reflecting the world around them. News stories report what happened in the world that day. Sitcoms reflect the values, lifestyles, and habits of their society. TV dramas and magazine fiction reflect the concerns and issues that viewers are struggling with. The presence of violence and offensive stereotypes merely reflects the ugly reality of an imperfect world. Advertising reflects the needs and wants that we have. Media, in this view, are a sort of window on reality This view of media is used in authoritarian societies who attempt to control media and thus control their people’s view of reality; see Box 2.7 for what is probably the most extreme modern example of such control.

BOX 2.7

NORTH KOREAN CINEMA AS MANIPULATOR OF REALITY

Surely the most rigidly controlled authoritarian society in the modern world is the North Korean police state ruled by Kim Jong-Il, and earlier his father Kim Il-Sung, since shortly after World War II. As well as being

a ruthless dictator, the younger Mr. Kim is also a film fanatic, particularly enjoying American and Hong Kong action and horror films, which he sees at private screenings, although they are not available to his countrymen. He is thought to particularly enjoy the Friday the Thirteenth films and gangster movies like Scarface and The Godfather. All North Korean films are made according to Kim’s 1973 book, The Art of Cinema, and are overtly for propaganda purposes. They show only a positive image of their country, in fact one of the most desperately poor and plundered in the world. The army is usually the hero who comes to rescue the people. For example, in one film, the army carried buckets of water for miles and joined hands to form a human dam to hold back a flood. Help comes from the army and from working harder, never from foreign nations, the UN, or non-governmental organizations. Kim also had a film made to model another favorite of his, Titanic. This film told of the sinking of a North Korean ship in 1945 and even had a love story modeled on the Kate Winslet-Leonardo DiCaprio romance in the 1997 film. Perhaps Kim’s most outrageous act was to kidnap the admired South Korean film director Shin Sang-Ok. He captured him and put him to work making North Korean films, among them Pulgasari, an imitation of the Japanese Godzilla, transformed into an iron-eating lizard who fights with the peasants against their feudal overlords (N.Korean movies’ propaganda role, 2003).

51 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication

Would anybody believe such heavy-handed messages so far removed from reality? Probably so. North Koreans are not allowed to leave their country or have any exposure to foreigners or foreign media, and they have heard this heavy propaganda all their lives. Even Kim Jong-Il hardly even leaves the country; he may very well believe that his beloved American horror and gangster movies portray typical American life.

The reflection view is not the only way to view mass communication, however. It may be that we think certain events and issues are important because the news tells us they are. Sitcoms may portray certain values, lifestyles, and habits which are then adopted by society. TV dramas deal with certain issues that are then considered by the viewers. Stereotypes seen on television implicitly teach young viewers what different groups of people are like, and the presence of much violence on TV teaches that the world is a violent place. Advertising convinces us that we have certain needs and wants that we did not know we had before. In this view, media are not merely reflecting what is out there in the world. Rather, they are constructing a world that then becomes reality for the consumer. This world may be accepted by TV viewers, who are often unaware of such a process happening, as they believe they are only being entertained. Soon the world as constructed by media may become so implanted in our minds that we cannot distinguish it from reality.

Do the media reflect the world or create a new reality? Certainly media do in many ways reflect what is out there in the world. However, they also choose what to tell us about what is out there in the world (agenda setting), and we then accept that interpretation, which then becomes part of our memory and our experience. In this book, we examine how media create a world which then becomes our reality. This cognitive perspective focuses on the mental construction of reality that we form as a result of our contact with print and broadcast media. One’s constructed reality often differs substantially from objective reality in ways that one is not always aware of. The plan of this book is to examine various content areas from a cognitive psychological perspective, particularly focusing on the theme of how media create a reality.

The Study of Perceived Reality

Each of the theoretical approaches discussed earlier has something to say about studying the perceived reality that we cognitively construct through interaction with media. For example, agenda setting (McCombs, 1994; McCombs & Reynolds, 2002; Dearing & Rogers, 1996) tells us what is important to think about to begin with. Social cognitive theory (Bandura,

Research and Theory in Mass Communication 52

2002) examines how we learn the behavioral component of this reality. Cultivation theory (Gerbner et al, 2002; Signorielli & Morgan, 1990) focuses on the construction of a world view. Uses and gratifications theory (Palmgreen, 1984; A.M.Rubin, 1983, 2002; Windahl, 1981) looks at the uses we make of media and the gratifications they give us, increasingly connecting this research to an examination of the effects of media. Socialization theories stress how this knowledge becomes a part of how we learn what it is like to be an adult member of our society. The Limited Capacity Model (Lang, 2000) looks at the knowledge structures that we create from exposure to the media.

When we speak of the reality perceived from the media, this is actually a more complex construct than it may first appear. At least two different components are involved (Fitch, Huston, & Wright, 1993; Potter, 1988). The central factor in perceived reality is factuality, or magic window. This is the belief in the literal reality of media messages. This reality can be conveyed at the level of either style or content. The style of news reporting, for example, may convey a message of factual correctness more strongly than the style of an entertainment program. The content of action-adventure shows presenting

a world that is very dangerous may cultivate a view that the world is also like that (Gerbner, et al., 1986, 2002; Signorielli, 1990).

The understanding of f actuality develops gradually (Davies, 1997). Two- year-olds do not understand the representational nature of TV images at all and will try to answer a TV person talking to them. By around age 10, children’s factuality judgments are essentially equivalent to adults. During the transition period, as they learn to read TV programs, their emotional experience may be affected by the complexity of the plot and also by how realistic they perceive the program to be. For example, Weiss and Wilson (1998) found that the higher the degree of realism attributed to an episode of the sitcom Full House, the more concerned elementary schoolchildren were about similar negative emotional events in their own lives. Even relatively mundane factors can affect perceived reality For example, a larger screen size can lead to greater arousal and involvement of the viewer (Detenber & Reeves, 1996; Grabe, Lombard, Reich, Bracken, & Ditton, 1999; Lombard, Reich, Grabe, Bracken, & Ditton, 2000).

One does not have to believe in the literal reality of media to have it become real for them. A second component of perceived reality is social realism, which refers to the perceived similarity or usefulness of the media representation to one’s own life, even while recognizing its fictional nature. For example, a viewer with a strong belief that soap operas present very real- life situations would expect more application to their own life than another viewer who feels that soap operas present wildly unrealistic and purely escapist content (A.M.Rubin & Perse, 1988). Shapiro and Chock (2003) found that viewers rely heavily on typicality to judge the social reality of

53 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication

television; the more typical a situation seems, the more real it is judged to be. Because of their much lesser amount of life experience, young children often see greater social realism than adults do in television content, in that they have less with which to compare the media representation to assess its reality In general, media have greater effects on those who impute a higher degree of social realism to it. This has important consequences whether we are talking about violence, sex, advertising, news or values.

Social realism can be enhanced by the degree to which viewers believe that a character is active in their own lives. In extreme cases there is a tremendous outpouring of grief for these parasocial media friends we have never met, most notably what occurred following the death of Princess Diana in 1997. The character need not even be real. When the network many years ago killed off Col. Henry Blake of M*A*S*H on his way home from Korea, they were deluged with letters from grief-stricken and irate fans who did not appreciate the intrusion of wartime reality into their sitcom. See Fitch et al. (1993) and Potter (1988) for further discussion of the construct of perceived reality.