This dissertation has been 65-9388 microfilmed exactly as received TOPPING, Jr. , Malachi Combs, 1924- DEVELOPMENT OF A FORCED CHOICE INSTRUMENT TO MEASURE TELEVISION STATION IMAGES.
The Ohio State University, Ph. D. , 1965 Speech- Theater
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan Copyright by
MALACHI COMLS TOPPING, JH.
lht-L DEVELOPMENT OF A FORCED CHOICE INSTRUMENT
TO MEASURE TELEVISION STATION IMAGES
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
Malachi Combs Topping, A.B., M.A.
The Ohio State University 1965
Approved by
Advi ser Department of Speech VITA
October 27, 1924 Born - Terre Haute, Indiana
1947 ...... A.B., Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri
1959-196l .... Teaching Assistant, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, Col unbus, Ohio
1961-1962 .... Research Assistant, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, Col unbus, Ohio
1 9 6 1 ...... M.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1962-1965.... Assistant Professor, Oklahoma State University, Stillw ater, Oklahoma
i i i
CONTENTS
Page VITA ...... i i
TABLES...... iv
Chapter I. TELEVISION STATIONS AND THEIR IMAGES ...... 1
I I . CONCEPT OF STATION IMAGE...... 23
I II. CONSTRUCTION OF THE FORCED CHOICE INSTRUMENT ...... 38
IV. PILOT SURVEY OF FORCED CHOICE INSTRUMENT CONCERNED WITH IMAGE OF TELEVISION STATIONS...... 53
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...... 71
APPENDIXES
I . LIST OF PHRASES DESCRIBING A TELEVISION STATION ...... 78
I I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE OF 353 OKLAHOMA RESIDENTS REPLYING TO A QUESTIONNAIRE ESTABLISHING VALUES OF PHRASES AND STATEMENTS CONCERNING TELEVISION STATIONS ...... 90
III. INDICES AND STANDARD DEVIATION FOR 150 FORCED CHOICE ITEMS AS ESTABLISHED BY 353 OKLAHOMA RESPONDENTS .... 92
IV. QUESTIONNAIRE FORM FOR PILOT TEST OF INSTRUMENT...... 102
V. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE OF 131 GUTHRIE RESIDENTS TAKING PART IN THE PILOT SURVEY OF THE INSTRUMENT . . . 107
VI. LETTER ESTABLISHING SIGNAL STRENGTH IN GUTHRIE, OKLAHOMA...... 109
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 110
ill TABLES
Table Page
1. Forced Choice Item Indices with Standard Errors and Standard Deviations of Items Arranged According to the Preference Index Rank ...... *+6
2 . 27 Pairs of Forced Choice Statements with the Indices for Each and i Scores Comparing Discrimination Indices of P airs ...... - 48
3. Raters of Stations and Their Preferences Compared to the Total Sample* s Rating of S ta tio n s ...... 57
4. Educational Attainment of the Guthrie Sample As Compared with i 960 Census Figures ...... 57
5. Percentages of Those in the Sample According to Age Group As Compared to Similar Groups in the i 960 Census ...... 59
6 . Comparison of Mean Ranks for Raters According to Their Station Preference ...... 6l
7. Mean Ranks of Three Stations Compared According to Educational Attainment ...... 62
8 . Comparisons of the Mean Ranks of Three Stations According to Age Group of Guthrie Respondents ...... 63
9. Mean Ranks of Respondents When Classified According to Occupation ...... 64
10. Comparison of the Mean Ranks of Respondents According to Their Viewing Habits ...... 64
11. Share of Audience Ratings for Three Oklahoma City Television Stations for 11 Years ...... 68
iv CHAPTER I
TELEVISION STATIONS AND THEIR IMAGES
Broadcasting has become a vital part of many phases of American life. Political fortunes can hang on the abilities of a make-up man. In
one broadcast, religious leaders address congregations that outnvmber the
total of those who heard Christ in person. Sponsorship of a popular program can mean astounding success for a business firm. Television,
particularly, has made a profound mark on the life of the American
family—performing the job of the biby sitte r, actually altering the
bedtimes and eating habits of some families and, according to one writer,
preserving marriages by preventing quarreling.^
Statistics te ll part of the story. A survey in 1963 revealed
that 94 per cent of the American homes had a working radio set and 92 per
cent were equipped to receive television.^ in 1963 the family television
set was on for an average of a little more than six hours a day.3
The idea of a population spending a fourth of its time each week
watching television programs is appalling to some writers, who point out
that the program fare on television does not warrant close, serious
attention.
^Stan Opotowsky, TV—The Big Picture (New York: Collier Books, 1962), p. 20.
^”1963—Good Year for Radio-Tv," Broadcasting. 1964 Yearbook Issue (January 1, 1964), p. 1 3 .
3Ibid.. p. 1 6 .
1 2
Controversy rages over the amount of influence that such great exposure to popular art has on our nation. There is little doubt that as the "mass media . . . drip into us" over a long period of time, there is some effect on our ideas and attitudes.^ The function of television in giving the nation information was dramatically demonstrated in 1963 during the events surrounding the death and funeral of President Kennedy . Some writers suggest the informational function of television has given both depth and range to the national awarenessi
The TV has also pretty certainly extended the ranee of public opinion, in the sense of judgments formed with good a 6 well as potentially evil effects. In an age when we live so much in the atmosphere of crises that human beings cannot tear away their fascinated eyes and their captured ears from the daily news that spans the world with select images of everything from the news commentators 1 resuscitation of the nightmares of the Eichmann trial to "trial by TV" of a political, even presidential campaign, it is impossible really to escape the present .2
The economic impact of television and radio broadcasting on the
United States is easier to record than the psychological and sociological
changes it has engendered. Television alone had gross proceeds of nearly
one and one-half billion dollars in 1 9 6 2 .^ The proceeds are paid to
television stations and networks so that businesses and others may
advertise their goods and services for sale. It should be noted that
advertisers normally do not pay television stations directly for
Wilbur Schramm, Responsibility in Mass Communlcations (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1957), p. 52.
^W. Y. E llio tt, "The Limits and Competence of Public Opinion," in The Citizen and the News (Milwaukee: The Marquette University Press, 1 9 6 2 ). p. 5 3 . 3 Broadcasting, o p. cit.. p. 13- 3 advertising. The company wanting to advertise its products nationally on television usually hires a specialist, who develops the commercial message and places the message on the networks and stations. Representa tive of the advertiser is the advertising agency, whose personnel are interested in a number of matters concerning the station or network of stations. The agency wants to know how many sets are located in the area served by the station or network. They ask how many sets might be tuned to the station when their product is advertised. The estimate of sets tuned at any given time to a station is provided by rating services— commercial concerns which sell the audience information to stations, networks, advertising agencies and others. So the simple transaction of advertising a product before a television audience becomes an act of
sharing values among several business enterprises. The station, either alone or through its network, in effect, sets a value on the number and quality of the people it can muster to watch a certain portion of air
time which has been leased to an advertiser.
Establishing the Value of Ajr Time
Many facts and figures can be gathered to establish the value of
a ir time on a television station. The advertiser or his agency examine
population figures; he can compare station^ advertising rates; and he can
look at audience ratings of the estimated number of sets tuned to a
station.
However, an examination of rates charged (and received) by te le
vision stations reveals that stations are placing values on their
broadcasting time that do not reflect population and audience estimates.
Advertising charges vary considerably in the same community. The 4 evaluation of broadcasting time is subject to interpretations according to the point of view and objectives of the evaluator.
This conflict in evaluation is a constant irritation for broad casters in dealing with the networks, with advertisers, with the federal regulatory agency which licenses stations, and with Congress, to name some groups involved.
Network viewpoint .—The president of the National Broadcasting
Company network referred to this conflict at a meeting of local station executives in 1964 by pointing out that "Every survey shows that we [NBC]
are known as the 1 class* network."^ Kintner was explaining that all
other variables being equal, his network placed extra value on its
broadcasting time because of "class."
In effect, the advertiser pays a premium to the station which can
demonstrate itself to be the "class" station in a community. A station,
by placing a dollars-and-cents value on its broadcasting time, is to a
great extent publicizing its self-appraisal. The advertiser may disagree
with this appraisal.
Advertisers 1 evaluation.—Advertisers and their agencies are
major participants in the conflict over the value of broadcasting time.
The advertising agency is accused by broadcasters of depending too
heavily on th 6 ratings of a station and ignoring other factors or
variables. Advertising agencies recognize the inadequacies of ratings.
They admit that judgment must replace unavailable measurable information.
^"Beefed up TV Programs Planned," Broadcasting (June 8, 1964), p . 4 9 . 5
One agency representative re-defines "judgment" as "a hodge podge of inarticulate feelings, sound and unsound opinions, assorted, but dis arranged, facts. Advertiser evaluations of a station's broadcasting time, when other available factors are nearly equal, seem to fall heavily on estimated audience ratings. A time buyer commenting candidly on this writes:
A number of people . . . have said that ratings are just one factor on which a buy is made. Our opinion is that the claim is true—ratings are just one factor—but they're probably the most important factor, and there's no sense denying that.^
F.C.C. concern. The government places a different value on
station broadcasting time. It is, for the most part, unconcerned with
the price of advertising, but has expressed its interest in the value of
time regarding the effects of programs. The Federal Communications
Commission was created to license stations to operate "in the public
in terest." Commission Chairman S. William Henry expressed his concern
about programs in a report on hearings he held in Nebraska in 19&3
concluding that the three community stations need to "make a genuine,
good faith effort to determine and meet their community's needs, interests
in the local sphere." He added that these efforts are not limited to
programs that are profitable
^ "How to Rate Radio Stations," Sponsor (February 7, 1959), p- 6. 2 "One Buyer's Opinion . . . Hearing about Ratings," Television Ag§. (April 1, 1963). p. 73.
3 ,rWhat Omaha Taught Henry," Broadcasting (October 28, 1963), p . 31. 6
The commission has expressed in terest in the comparative public service that stations give in similar marketing situations.
Legislative in te re s t.—Congress has expressed concern many times as to the use television stations make of their broadcasting time. A
House Committee devoted several months to questioning and surveying to discover the importance of estimated audience ratings in the determination
of programming policies.^ The Committee discovered that programs con
sidered of high cultural quality, which receive low ratings, lose their
advertisers and are replaced. The Committee found that, assuming the
accuracy of a low rating of a program of high cultural value, other
factors should be considered. Limitations of ratings listed in the
Committee report included the view that
Rating services do not reflect the preference of those who are not listening or viewing. Rating surveys do not estimate whether a survey of the underlying preferences of all those who now liste n and view would agree with current programming. Rating surveys only estimate tuning or viewing or listening behavior and sometimes include various characteristics of the audiences.^
The Committee also found a number of possible methodological
inadequacies of ratings, but of most importance to the present study was
the observation that
It is unfortunate that many decisions, particularly with respect to the buying of commercial time for announcements only, should be made without utilizing information on the effects of programs or stations on sales but such informa tion is not readily available.3
1 U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com merce, Evaluation of Statistical Methods Used in Obtaining groadcagt Ratines. 8 ?th Congress, 1 st Session 1 9 6 1.
2Ib id .. p. 1 6 . p. 1 8 . 7
Examining the representative views of broadcasters, advertisers, and government representatives (when all other available factors are nearly equal) program audience ratings determine broadcasting time value.
Ratings are limited to estimating the listening behavior of the audience, but not its preferences and attitudes.
One writer, Lazarsfeld, refers to these preferences and attitudes as the "disposition" of an audience toward a station and its programs.
According to Lazarsfeld, a rating of a station describes the "external exposure" of a member of the audience to the stimulus of the station.
Lazarsfeld differentiates between the two terms "exposure" and "disposi tion" as follows:
When a study has imputed a causal impact to an external exposure. I call this component an influence. When a study has imputed causal impact to a disposition. I will call it a ggtlYfi. 1
Meed for Additional Information on "Disposition" of Audience
Broadcasters have been aware of the need to measure the disposi
tion of the audience towards stations. Their conclusions are quantified
somewhat by the charges they make for station time.
Most vocal in expressing a desire for information of this nature
are the advertising agencies. A research director for an advertising
agency admits that "We are making decisions about commercial environments
now anyway, only we 1 re doing it intuitively."^
1 Robert A. Dahl, Mason Haire, and Paul F. Lazarsfeld, Social Science Research on Business: Product and Potential (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959). p. 107. 2 "K & E*s Bud Sherak Sees 3 Research Headaches," Sponsor (January 1959), p. 6 1 . 8
There is seeming consensus in various journals that "numbers" are not enough—something other than ratings and advertising charges are
needed to evaluate television stations. The other factors are usually
lumped together and called "image"—"The difficult-to-measure element
of station popularity or 'image5 often influences the size of an audience
for a given network program."^
The word image used by Hoffman has become popular among broad
casters as a term which describes the disposition of an audience towards
a broadcasting station. Advertising spokesmen have insisted that they
"are more interested in a station5s community image than in ratings
claims," in statements throughout the late 1950*s and into the mid-
1960*s .2
Rw -Cgpggpt. g f .
The idea of image was brought to broadcasting by people inter
ested in the subtle techniques used in motivation research. A series of
articles in Advertising Agency Magazine in 1958 described the relation
ship of "image building" to "MR" (Motivation Research).-^ In explaining
motivation research, Harold 3ell, who at the time was head of a research
agency, said that the research tools used in motivation research are
^Robert M. Hoffman, "Local Audience Variation for Network Programs," Media/scope (September, 1962), p. h8.
2 Ratings Secondary to Station's Image," Broadcasting (September 16, 1963), p. 10 or see, Alvin Zakin, "Monday Memo," Broadcasting (January 14, 1963), p. 2 k.
^Donald David, "Image Building Is an Unexplored Advertising Horizon," Advertising Agency Magazine (January 3, 1958). p. 13. 9
those that have been "developed out of many years of experimentation in M1 human motives and behavior.
The popular definition of “station image" tends to be hazy. The word became the despair of one trade journal editor who wrote: "The p advertising catchword of 1958 was easily the over-worked word, 'im age.'"
An advertising executive sees the image of a station as "a crystalliza
tion of the cumulative impressions, attitudes and feelings held by media
people toward a station."-^ However, later in the same a rtic le he refers
to the two images of the station as local and national. This suggests
that there are a number of points of view about station image.
Another advertising executive writes that "image research itself
is less than a decade old" and points out that “the standard text on
advertising psychology and research, published in 1950* does not have any
discussion of the subject as such."** He was referring to the Darrell
Blaine Lucas and Steuart Henderson B ritt book Advertising Psychology and
Research.5 As a matter of fact their la ter book. Measuring Advertising
Effectiveness published by the same firm in 1963, devotes a section to
image but seems to prefer use of the word “personality." Winick defines
^Harold Bell, "Motivation Research Can Fill the Gaps in Statistical Studies," Advertising Agency Magazine (December 6, 1957), p* 26. 2 John E. McMillin, "Commercial Commentary," Sponsor (January 3, 1959), p. 6. 3 Donald G. Softness, "Advertising Primer," Television Age (October 15, 1962), p. ?0. 4 Charles Winick, "How to Find Out What Kind of Image You Have," Developing the Corporate Image, ed. Lee H. B ristol, J r. (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, I960), p. 23.
^Lucas and B ritt (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1950). 10 image as "the end result of a persons experiences, recollections and impressions of a company. It enters directly and centrally into how he i perceives the company."
Winick's definition, as he notes, is a result of nearly a century of psychological research into the nature of image. Galton reported research findings conducted prior to 1900 stemming from his interest in
"persons whose visual memory is so clear and sharp as to present mental pictures that may be scrutinized with nearly as much ease and prolonged attention as if they were real objects."^ Perky, among others, was
conducting experiments in imagery in the early 1900*5.3
Schools of psychological thought were concerned with the concept
of image throughout the f ir s t half of this century. Titchener maintained
that "... meaning is carried by all sorts of sensational and imaginal
processes.A key word in this statement is "processes" which is
upheld by Titchener's efforts to discover a structural scheme for human
thought.
Woodworth revealed less interest in the mechanism of the thought
process when he defined mental imagery as "A sensation or complex of
sensations recalled by a substitute stimulus. . .
1Winick, lo c. c i t . 2 Francis Galton, 7,pguir;ye3 into Human Faculty and Its Develop ment (New York: Dutton and Co., 1907), p. 5?. 3 C. W. Perky, "An Experimental Study of Imagination," American JQttrnaESyotology. 1910, 21, pp. 422-452.
Edward B. Titchener, Experimental Psychology of the Thought Processes (New York; MacMillan, 1909), p. 178.
^Robert S. Woodworth, Psychology, A Study of Mental Life (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1921), p. 3 6 8 . 11
The interest in images as a thought process generated consider able controversy and a number of variations in types of images were isolated through psychological research. In the mid-thirties, a psycho logical dictionary listed seven types of image. The general definition of the term, however, revealed less concern with thought process and more with mere description— "iffl&gg. . . . an element of experience which is centrally aroused and which possesses all the attributes of sensation.
The controversy over image diminished as psychologists began to show less concern about plotting thought processes. Woodworth admitted that the whole argument over image in thought is probably insoluble.c
No matter what the reasons, by 1952 an author could report that "the
study of imagery has lo st its former interest for psychologists."3
As the concern about the real image was dampened, some psycholo
gists concentrated on imagination. An important concept is the idea that
reality "does not signify 'right 1 or 'tru e 1 nor does i t signify 'useful 1
or, necessarily, 'intelligible* (or 'intelligent'), or even 'conscious.'"^
Reality in this sense is merely the image that a person can express of
the outside world.
Tho tendency is to define image without regard to reality , in the
sense of what is real, and without regard to the process of thinking, but
^Howard C. Warren (ed.). Dictionary of Psychology (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 193^)t p. 131.
Robert S. Woodworth, Experimental Psychology (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1938). pp. 788-?89. 3 w. E. Vinacke, The Psychology of Thinking (New York: McGraw- H ill Book Co., 1952), p. 49.
4Ib ld .. p. 195. 12 as "the recurrence of perceptual responses without the original overt stimulus."^ It should be noted that the Woodworth definition, published thirty years prior to the preceding definition, shows marked similarity.
Boulding, unconcerned with the process of thinking, but in ter ested in the images that persons have of "reality," flatly states:
"The image is built up as a result of all past experience of the possessor of the image." 2 This concept of image is rather broad for the present
study, which is concerned with television stations. For purposes of this paper, the term image will be defined as The end result of the experi ences. rec^^c^ 9ns and impressions of a television station according
to a person in the viewing area of that station.
Chapter II of this paper is devoted to an examination in detail
of published research on the concept of radio and television broadcasting
station images.
Use of Rating Scales to Measure Broadcasting §> U ,gp_la«gg.
Advertising agencies report that any measurement of image of
television and radio stations, to be useful to the advertising agency
must be adaptable to computer use. One advertising executive explained,
"We are, in effect, living in the age of the computer and the measurable
s ta tis tic ."3 Another agency reports that a "practical media model" for
P- 359. 2 Kenneth E. Boulding, The Image (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1961), p. 6 .
•^William E. Steers, "Monday Memo," Ek*oadcastlng (September 30, 1963), p. 26. 13 the "new frontier" in computer use must include provisions for handling the “behavior of consumers with the media.
A number of authors have suggested that a corporate image can be p measured by means of rating scales. One test which has been adapted to the study of images of businesses is the semantic differential.
Semantic differential .—The authors of The Measurement of Meaning
suggest that semantic differential scales are particularly applicable to
studies of the mass media.3
Lucas and B ritt find that "most comparative studies of media profiles or of profile changes apply the semantic-differential
technique.*^ The authors also discuss the semantic differential as a method of describing a newspaper*s "personality image."5 An earlier
effort to use the semantic differential in the appraisal of the images of
broadcasting stations in Columbus, Ohio, has been reported by Sabah.^
One advantage of the semantic differential over other tests in image
Sf & R Computer fFaces Real Life,*" Sponsor (October 1, 1962), p. 32; also see: "Men, Media and the Machine," Television Age (March 19, 1962), p. 27. 2 See Dahl, Haire, and Lazarsfeld, op. c i t.. p. 121 and Lucas and Britt, loc. cit.
-^Charles E. Osgood, George J. Suci, Percy H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana; University of Illin o is Press, 1957). pp. 303-310.
^Lucas and B ritt (1963), op . cit.. p. 336.
3Hddi.. p. 337.
^Franklin David Sabah, "The Use of the Semantic Differential Tech nique in the Analysis of the Images of Three Columbus Commercial Tele vision Stations" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 1959). l h studios is that the bi~polar scales used in the semantic differential may be used interchangeably for many "concepts."
The semantic differential, although listed as a "disguised" attitude measuring instrument is not immune to "fakabillty." The rater
trying to manipulate a scale as listed in Lucas and Britt, would have little difficulty in "punishing" the organisation he was to rate.^
The adaptability of the semantic differential to image measurement— despite some of its defects—has allowed i t to dominate the area in the 2 so-called "disguised" method of questionnaire.
Another disguised and indirect type of rating scale is the
forced choice instrument. Unlike the semantic differential, the forced
choice is developed by a number of steps which make its scales unadapt
able to certain varied testing situations.
Development of the Forced Choice Instrument
An early consideration of the forced choice technique of measuring
attitudes was published by the Social Research Council and was of a some
what speculative nature. In one section, Paul Horst printed out that
One of the greatest weaknesses of the current temperament and personality tests is the fact that they can be "beaten" by persons with sufficient intelligence. Some investigators have gone so far as to advocate that temperament tests of the questionnaire type be abandoned altogether, and efforts be directed to develop tests of a more objective character.
1Loc. c i t . 2 James William Gibson, “Direct and Indirect Attitude Scale Measurements of Positive and Negative Argumentative Communications" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 1962), p. 28. 15
However, with sufficient ingenuity and resourcefulness, it should be possible to develop techniques which would reduce considerably the possibilities of "beating" the question naire type of test.^
Gordon indicates that much of the material in the Horst monograph 2 stemmed from discussions between Horst and Wherry.
Forced choice rationale.--Horst explained the rationale for the forced choice instrument in a supplementary study following his mono graph. In most rating scales, he pointed out, there are two essential steps for the rater:
1. With reference to each trait he must discriminate between all possible pairs of individuals in order to allocate each person on the tra it scale. 2. With reference to each person he must discriminate between all possible pairs of traits in order to allocate each trait according to its strength for the person. 3
Horst contended that the rater must do even more, he must "choose a unit and origin of measurement and maintain them consistently throughout the rating process."^
The idea of the forced choice, then, is to simplify this procedure for the rater by removing references to all units and a single origin.
Dr. Horst described two steps for the rater of the forced choice, specifying that
1. The rater may adopt any arbitrary origin and unit while allocating the persons with reference to a given
^Paul Horst, The Prediction of Personal Adjustment (New York: Social Science Research Council, Bulletin No. 48, 1941), p. 134. 2 Leonard V. Gordon, "A Comparison of the Validities of Forced- Choice and Questionnaire Methods in Personality Measurement" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The Ohio State University, 1950), p. 27. 3 Horst, pp. cit.. p. 407.
^Ih ld . 16
trait. He may shift the origin and unit when passing to another trait. 2. The rater may adopt any arbitrary origin and unit while allocating the traits for a given person. He may shift the origin and unit when passing to another person.^
flarlv use of forced choice.—At a session of the American Psycho logical Association in 19^+6, members of the staff of the Personnel
Research and Procedures Branch of the Adjutant General*s Office reported on their work with the forced choice technique and its uses as a predic- 2 tive instrument. The military staff told the psychologists that the forced choice technique "reduces the rater's ability to control the final result of his ratings."-^
In describing the forced choice technique the paper stated that the rate r is forced to "choose between descriptive phrases which appear of equal value (have the same preference index) but are different in validity (discriminative index).
A series of five steps was outlined by the Army research group to develop a forced choice instrumenti
(l) Procurement of descriptive essays of successful and unsuccessful persons; ( 2 ) preparation of a complete l i s t of descriptive phrases or adjectives; ( 3 ) determination of preference and discriminative indices for each phrase; (4) pairing the alternatives so that preference indices differ, being negligible for one alternative; and ( 5 ) try out on a specified criterion group.5
p. 1 6 2 . 2 Staff, Personnel Research Section, Personnel Research and Proce dures Branch, Adjutant General's Office, "The Forced Choice Technique and Rating Scales," The American Psychologist I (19^6). p. 2 6 7 .
3 Ib id . 5Ib ld . 1?
These steps have been maintained in developing most forced choice instruments.
Advantages of forced choice.—In 19^? the Army adopted a new rating scale for officers which involved the use of the forced choice.
Sisson described the technique as one which creates a "spread" in the estimates of the value of various officers.^ In discussing the attributes of the forced choice rating method, Sisson listed a number of advantages
over previous efficiency reports. He noted the forced choice instrument
calls for objective reporting and minimizes subjective judg ment . . . ; reduces the rater*s ab ility to produce any desired outcome by the choice of obviously good or obviously bad tra its; produces better distribution of ratings relatively free from the usual pile-up a t the top of the scale; is quickly and objectively scored by machine.*
Gordon in 1950»^ Brooks in 1955.^ and Gibson in 1962^ agreed
that the forced choice instrument possesses the qualities outlined by
Sisson.
"Fakabllitv" resistance .—The major support made by the advocates
of the forced choice instrument is for its resistance to manipulation or
"faking" by raters. This very problem was the one which intensified
Army interest in the instrument to rate officers. There has been
considerable research to see if the forced choice can be "faked" or
^Donald Sisson, "Forced Choice—The hew Army Rating," Personnel Psychology I (19;*8). pp. 365-381.
2Ih id . „ p. 3 6 6 . -^Gordon, op. c i t . h Keith Brooks, "The Construction and Testing of a Forced Scale for Measuring Speaking Achievement" (unpublished PhJD. dissertation. Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 1955).
^Gibson, 18 manipulated. A study at Grlnnell College indicated that students, when
instructed to give either high or low ratings to college teachers by
using the forced choice instrument, “were able to do so somewhat better
than chance would allow, but not nearly to the extent that such faking
is possible on most other rating scales . 1’1 Longstaff and Jurgesen, in a
series of tests of the validity of the forced choice found that
"fakability" was quite a serious problem "where persons are likely to 2 be motivated to obtain good scores."
The term fakability implies the desire on the part of the rater
to manipulate his answers. This desire, conscious or unconscious, has
been reported by a number of researchers as a halo effect, particularly
common in rating scales. Guilford outlines the problem as follows:
A consistent error to which every judge fa lls victim is the halo effect . . . One result of the halo effect is to force the rating of any trait in the general direction of the general impression of the individuals rated and to that extent to make the ratings of some traits less valid. Another result is to produce a spurious amount of positive correlation between the traits that are rated.3
The construction of the forced choice test is designed to combat this
kind of deviation, generally and for specific items. Particular care is
used to discover if the halo effect is operative in the test of the
instrument.
1 George D. Lovell and Charles F. Haner, "Forced-Choice A.ppliod to College Faculty Rating,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, p. 303-
2H. P. Longstaff and C. E. Jurgensen, "Fakability of the Jurgensen Classification Inventory," The Journal of Applied Psychology (1953), p. 89-
. P. Guilford, Psychometric Methods (New York; McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1938), pp. 27^—275* 19
Selection of the forced choice .—The forced choice rating scale instrument waa selected as a method of measuring image for several reasons. Methods previously used to measure broadcasting station images
have been inadequate in areas where the forced choice has demonstrated
u tility .
The forced choice has shown evidence of sensitivity not found in
some other rating scales. There is evidence that, in the minds of
viewers, television stations are considered alike in many respects. The
forced choice, as constructed, "spreads out" scores of groups of
respondents. The spread of the scores provides possibility of dis
crimination where there is considerable similarity in the images of
statio n s.
Ag has been noted by industry spokesmen, a major need in broad
casting circles is a test that can produce a score which is indicative of
an image. The forced choice lends itself to quantification.
Research indicates that there is difficulty in "beating" the
forced choice. Some researchers report efforts to “fake" answers on the
forced choice have not been completely successful. The forced choice
also was chosen because it is particularly immune to the halo effect.
The rater is compelled to deal with items as isolated units rather than
as parts of a whole.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to develop a forced choice instru
ment to measure some of the experiences, recollections and impressions
of a television station according to persons in the viewing area. 20
Information about television station images would be of particular value to the following:
Television stations—since the instrument is made up of specific phrases which describe station practices. These phrases can have prac tical application in station decision-making.
The advertiser—who demands that he be given a "score" for com puting the value of a station to his needs.
Reyulatorv agencie s--which could judge audience evaluation of television stations by methods other than the perceptions of government investigators and their sources.
The study had further implications in the field of communications research. One of three questions Berio lists concerning the use of channels by audiences for which "we have little or no systematic knowledge . . . " i s "Which channels have the moat impact ?"1 Perhaps
"impact" is too broad a word to use in the case of an "image" study.
Certainly, the "image" of a situation should contribute a "disposition" which in turn would affect the "impact" of the message.
The Rileys in 1959 pointed out that
Marketing at its best, for example, regards the consumer as a member of a household, a socio-economic class, a region. It takes the response of the consumer into account through analysis of audience and sales statistics by regions and over time. By conducting surveys, it provides channels through which consumers may in itia te requests for new or improved products. It utilizes wage and cost-of-living indices, recognizing that payments by producers provide
1David K. Berio, The Process of Com»unication (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, i 9 6 0), p. 6 5 . 21
buying power for consumers. And yet. although marketers have almost certainly had much experience with the interactive C-R model, l i t t l e of the substance has been set down.l
The lack of material that has been "set down" has irritated a number of researchers. They hope that information gathered for businesses, including broadcasting stations, will be preserved for complete exposure at 6uch time when it will no longer put a firm at competitive disad vantage .
Limitations of the Study
As will be discussed in Chapter III, this study was limited to impressions of audience members from Oklahoma. Network service to a station has a great deal to do with the "universal" image of a station, but other criteria, such as news activity, local personalities, and local programs may be common only to the Oklahoma area ,
Other limitations should be noted. The study, of course, does not lend itse lf to cross-media comparisons. Items selected for the instrument are from essays about television stations only and have been
ranked according to various different stations. The resulting instrument
differentiates between television stations only, on this limited basis.
It also should be considered this instrument does not necessarily
measure the complete image of a station. As advertising executive
William E. Matthews wrote to caution the quantitative-minded, "In media
selection there are always sets of numbers we do not have."3
^John W. Riley and Matilda White Riley, "Mass Communications and the Social System," Sociology Today, ed. Robert K. Merton, Leonard Broom and Leonard S. Cottrell, Jr. (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1959), p. 571. 2 For a discussion of factors which seem to affect radio see "CBS Cites Radio Success Formula," Sponsor (September 17, 1962), p. 33. ■^William E. Matthews, "There* s Always a Set of Numbers That You Don't Have," Media/scope (December, 1961), p. ?8. 22
There is also the possibility that there is no difference between television stations in the eyes of many viewers. As Cantril warned in
Gauging Public Opinion, the surveyor should avoid asking the respondent
"questions presenting issues not sufficiently circumscribed."^ Every effort was made to avoid this problem by making the questions as descriptive as was possible.
There have been a number of efforts to establish the measurement of the "image" of broadcasting stations and Chapter II examines some of the salient points in research which have been published. It seeks to find the disposition of audiences to radio and television stations.
1 Hadley Cantril, Gauging Public Opinion (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 19^), p. 9. CHAPTER I I
CONCEPT OF STATION IMAGE
The definition of the image of a station as the end result of the experiences, recollections, and impressions according to a person in the viewing area of a station, is satisfactory in a broad sense. For the purposes of this paper, which is concerned with developing a measurement of image, more detail is necessary to achieve proper understanding.
The image of broadcasting station depends upon the viewpoint of
the person perceiving the image. Audiences; critics; broadcasters,
themselves; and advertisers perceive stations in different settings. The
notion that a station has an image indicates that there is difference in
the minds of audiences so that viewers, consciously or without realizing
it, may use another station or stations as a "bench-mark" to describe a
station.
The "Many Faces" of Broadcasting
A Washington Post television critic has described the difficulty
in establishing a "bench-mark" for evaluating television as a professional
viewer.^ Describing the perfect television critic as "absolutely incor
ruptible, a firmly anchored man of objectivity in a stomy world of
Lawrence Laurent, "Wanted: The Complete Television C ritic," The Eighth Art (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963), pp. 155-171.
23 Z k special interest and pressure groups."^ Laurent is describing, in different plane, anyone asked to evaluate the television industry or television stations. He assures his readers that no such paragon can be found.
Self-images are varied .--Broadcasters are aware that stations are evaluated in many ways. The Crosley Broadcasting Company attempts to evaluate radio stations according to the needs of advertisers and laments that.
In practice, it is expected, most media planners and buyers probably w ill s ta rt by specifying what percentage of the buying decision should be based on "the numbers" an example of which might be cost-per-thousand persons seeing the ad. This may vary from zero, . . . to 90 per cent or more
This broadcasting firm was working with several advertising agencies to
provide evaluative information for advertising time buyers on "news
service, type of music and general community stature."^
Stations often feel that advertising agency time buyers do not
correctly assess the station in the "home" community. The broadcaster
doubts the advertising agency judges the station as do local audiences.
On the other hand, an advertising agency representative points out that
information his firm gets from radio executives is acceptable to "media
buyers rather than media planners."^ These communication problems
indicate that an evaluation of image must be in language and according to
the needs of the "population" for which it is intended.
1IM ., p. 156. 2 "Agencies Like Radio Value Measurement," Broadea s ti ng (November 25. 1963), p. 52.
3Ifeld. ^"Radio Marking Time without Image," Broadcasting (October 7, 1963), p. 53. 25
Related 1w*ya«-..-Rrofldcaatincr not only has several faces, but Is tied to the other institutional Images. Sponsor magazine reported that
"The image interests of both ad-men and broadcasters are strikingly and dramatically interrelated through television."^ Advertising* s major
trade group conducts a continuing campaign to polish its image as the result of a "depth study of the attitudes toward advertising by selected
opinion leaders."2
Network, affiliation, in the case of television stations, particu
larly, is related to the images of statio n s. The networks have conducted
numerous studies on the attitudes of audiences toward them .3
The size of the home community of the station can affect its
image. A new owner described his small-town station as the "joke ofthe
industry," until he took steps to improve news coverage, participation in
local affairs, local participation shows and editorials.^
Any test of station image should recognize the complexity of
broadcasting. The effort to find variables should take into account the
various images of a station.
^"Special Report—Part One: The Image-builders 1962-63," Sponsor (August 13, 1962), p. 32.
2"AAAA Complete Study of Opinion Leaders," Sponsor (August 14, 1961), p. 32.
^See "CBS TV Research Brews up a Storm," Sponsor (July 4, 1959). pp. 27-29, 53, 54 for a discussion of Network and independent station operation. Also, see "Changing the Station Image," Television Age (March 19, 1962), p. 53.
^"TV Stations," Sponsor (April 30, 1961), p. 54. 26
Image of the Broadcasting Indue try
Broadcasters always have been conscious of various forms of feedback. Early research seemed to be most concerned with station popu
la rity or with the educational potentialities of radio.^
mComparetive w studv.—An early evaluation of radio as an industry was conducted by Lazarsfeld who compared the dispensibilities of radio,
magazines, newspapers and such institutions as government, church and
schools. This type of question is a "standard" method to measure the 2 public esteem for broadcasting in general. Comparison of institutions
has persisted.
Steiner compared institutions as part of his report on the image
of television more than twenty years after Lazarsfeld.^ An interesting
off-shoot of this type of study was conducted in Houston when respondents
were asked how they would allocate an advertising budget of <$ 2 5 ,0 0 0
among radio, television and print
damage brines surveys.—Broadcasters tend to become most
concerned with their image when they feel i t may be tarnished. During a
period which was particularly difficult for the industry, a permanent
^ See Education on the Air, ed. Josephine MacLatchy (Columbusi Ohio State University, 1932), pp. 211-31^ for a review of audience research to that time.
2Paul F. Lazarsfeld, Radio and the Printed Page (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, Inc., 19*K)).
■^Gary Steiner, The People Look at Television (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1963), p. 31.
^"Negroes Choose Radio," Sponsor (March 28, 1959)» p. 37. 2? image-buffing organization was set up—the Television Information
Office.^ During the quiz show scandals in 1958 and throughout the fol
lowing year, adverse publicity continually beset television. Broadcast
ing organizations defended themselves with various image studies testing
the public reaction like a physician takes temperatures. Broadcasting
magazine commissioned two research firms to test the public temper . 2
The Television Information Office, later in the year, announced
the results of a study conducted by yet another commercial research firm.
A major section of this research was concerned with the acceptability of
broadcasting media as compared with print media.3
Studies generated from a desire to "clear the good name" of
broadcasting characteristically are not innovative. Most of them are
designed to get information about a specific condition, such as the
public reaction to quiz scandals, and are temporal of nature.
Early Surveys of Station or Network IaageB
Efforts to find audience attitudes toward stations were conducted
as early as 1922 by WLW, which encouraged home calls from listeners with
program suggestions.^ Telephoned comments gave way to examination of fan
^"TV Industry Launches Counterattack against Critics of Program Quality," Business Week (September 12, 1959). p. 72. Also, see "TV's Project off the Ground," Broadcasting (July 20, 1959). p. 35.
2"New Vote of Confidence for TV," Broadcasting (March 16, 1959). p. 1*K) and "Hardly a Scratch in TV's Image," Brtadcastine (November 2, 1959). p. ^1* Also, for a continuance of the November study see; “How Deep a Scar in TVs ImageY" Broadcasting (November 9. 1959). p. 37.
^"What Public Really Thinks of TV," Broadcasting (December 21, 1959). p. 19.
**Lawrence Lichty, "'The Nation's Station1--A History of Radio Station WLW" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, Department of Speech, 196*0, p. 1*^5. 28 mail as a means of assaying the worth of various program practices.^ In describing the research situation in 1931 and 1 9 3 2, Lumley reported the O country was "flooded with questionnaires." Lumley noted that the
Columbia Broadcasting System since 1929 had compiled "tables of station -i popularity" from mailed questionnaires. Problems involving the inter pretation of surveys and the selection of favorable results already were prevalent in 1 9 3 2;
Unfortunately, surveys and methods of measuring audience reaction are being used at the present time not only to find out the true audience reaction but to sell radio to adver tise rs and even, though I blush to mention i t , to exaggerate the results of educational programs. It is only natural under such circumstances that a number of peculiar interpretations should be obtained. Instances of this are not hard to secure.**
Nearly 30 years after this statement. Business Week observed that polls
by two networks indicated each was preferred depending "on who does the
asking and where.
Some Survey Questions Asked
In examining the types of questions which are of interest to
networks and stations, several were discarded although they were found
in many surveys. One was the open-end question where the respondent
expresses himself on the "best thing about a station." Such questions
call on interpretation of the analyst outside the scope of this paper.
L. H. Lumley, "Measuring Audience Reactions," Education on the Air, ed. Josephine H. MacLatchy (Columbus: Ohio State University, 1932), p. 2 9 2.
2Ib id .. p. 2 9 1 . 3 Ibjd.. p. 2 9h. ^Ibld .. p. 2 9 7 .
-*"CBS, NBC Publish Polls of Viewers; Each Finds That I t 's Most Popular," Business Week (July h, 1959), p. 26. 29
Other questions not particularly pertinent to this study were in the
"rating" category. Herein a respondent is asked to describe his liste n ing habits—what he does while he is listening, how often he listens and the like. A third question type avoided by this study was concerned with program preference. The listener checks his favorite program types—the questioning is program-oriented, not station-oriented.
Nearly every questionnaire or survey report examined in this study was sponsored by a network or a station. In each case, the sponsor of the survey was given some measure of control of the publication of
the survey. Control over the publication of the survey was maintained
by Summers and later by Whan in their Kansas and Iowa surveys that measured radio station audiences in the late 1 9 3 9' s and 1 9^+0 ' s.
News and public affairs services .—One question used in every
Simmers and Whan survey was; "To what radio news broadcast do you listen
most frequently?"^ A question concerning the station "usually listened
to for farm news and market reports" was used in Whan surveys after
19^7.^ The Summers and Whan studies contained a number of questions
which could be interpreted as seeking the "image" of stations. The 19^3
Iowa Study asked respondents: "Which station is doing the most for the
war effort?" In the three studies conducted from 1951 to 1953 in Kansas,
Whan asked; "Which station carries the best weather reports?"
■j This question f ir s t appeared in: H. B. Summers, The Kansas Radio Audience of 1939. Manhattan, Kansas. 2 Found in Forest Whan, The 19h7 Iowa Radio Survey (Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Company, 19^7) and Forest Whan, The Kansas Radio Audience of 19^-7 (Wichita: University of Wichita, 19^7). 30
As suggested in Summers and Whan surveys, news was of particular interest to the radio or television station manager, since it was an expensive element in local programming. A study of the attitudes of audience members to news broadcasts indicated that television news was most effective “when it is delivered with the greatest amount of vi suali za ti on. M *
A Chicago survey indicated that "good program variety," "well rounded news coverage," "good sports coverage," "good taste," "universal appeal," "for the whole family," and "intelligent appeal" were desirable tra its in the image of a station.^
The station image is affected by the way a station presents its news. A study in New York City revealed that station image may vary with
the way the news is presented:
Two stations among those studied—10 in a ll—were con sidered primarily as "rather remote, impersonal conveyors" of news . . . A third, which probably devotes as much time to news as those two, was considered "an informal, personal ized medium for absorbing 'low level 1 information." And a fourth, also strong on news was thought of as "presenting timely and useful information of immediate utility."3
“Beliovabllitv" questions.—A Shenandoah, Iowa, research firm
conducted surveys in 1958, I960 and 1962 for KRNT radio and television
* "Why News Is TV's Hidden Asset," Broadcasting (June 29, 1959), p. 6*4-.
^"The Image of WGN Radio" (Chicago: WGN, Inc., i960).
^"Most People Depend on Radio," Broadcasting (March 26, 1962), p . 7 2 . 31 stations in Des Moines*^ Respondents were asked to which radio or television station they would turn in case of emergency. The survey also asked about conflicting facts on programs—which station would the respondent "believe" most. Another question asked respondents to select
the "most believable" local television performers.
Make-up of station’s avriience.—A survey in Houston introduced an
audience self-evaluation question. Respondents were asked to agree or
disagree with the declaration "Mostly teenagers listen to that
station."^
Advertising practices.—Other areas of interest to broadcasters
were brought out in a report on the survey conducted for the Henry I.
Christal Company for radio stations it represented.3 The report sug
gested that certain stations were liked for the following general
reasons:
1. Like products advertised, local advertising and the absence of advertising which listeners regard as objectionable. 2. Brief, not so much advertising.
"Des Moines Media Study" (Shenandoah: Central Surveys, Inc., 1958); "Des Moines Media Study" (Shenandoah: Central Surveys, Inc., 1939); *nd "Des Moines Radio and Television Stations: An Image Study" (Shenandoah: Central Surveys, Inc., 1962). 2 "Dr. Dichter Psychoanalyzes Radio," Sponsor (January 3, 1959), p. 2 7 . Also, "Formula for the Ideal Station," Broadcasting (January 5, 1959), pp. 43-44.
3"Radio: Who Listens, When* Where," Broadcasting (February 24, 1958), pp. 130-132-134. 32
3. Do not exaggerate, not high pressure, interesting advertising, easy to listen, like vocal presentation. Reliable, dependable, higher class, more intelligent.1
Networks, in research on their images, usually interpret the col1octive images of their affiliated stations. The Columbia Broadcast ing System found significance in answers to questions concerning adver tising presented by its affiliates in New York and Los Angeles. The implication was that the "firm that is slipping in sales" would be more likely to advertise on stations other than those owned and operated by
the network .2
Semantic differential surveys.—Semantic differential image
studies do not use "questions" as such—words are used in bi-polar pairs.
In 1957 radio station KDKA, in Pittsburgh, sponsored a semantic
differential image study incorporating the concept of the "ideal station
profile.Pairs included in the Pittsburgh survey were: unpleasant-
pleasant, unfair-fair, tense-relaxed, worthless-valuable, stale-fresh,
dull-exciting, passive-active, stuffy-casual, rough-smooth, weak-strong,
heavy-light, low class-high class, loud-soft, and usual-unusual.^
Tannorbaum and his colleagues conducted a number of image surveys
using the semantic d ifferen tial, including newspaper studies in Minnesota,
1Ibid., p. 1 3 2 . 2 "More Than Meets the Eye" (New York; Columbia Broadcasting System, 1959)- 3 "Semantic D ifferential: A New Way to Measure Stations," Sponsor (November 23, 1957), p. 43.
^Ibid.. p. 43. 33
Wisconsin and Illin o is. The semantic differential has become a tool used extensively in image studies for many types of firms and institutions.^
Sabah used the semantic differential in an effort to establish a pattern of image for television stations in Columbus, Ohio. His results were reported as a "profile" study rather than as means or scores for the
stations . 2
Station personalities.—A study conducted in seven major markets indicates that the voice, delivery, and personality of the broadcasting
performer is another aspect of the image of a station.3
"Bigness" or network affiliation.--A radio image study by Motiva
tion Analysis in 1957 for the Columbia Broadcasting System concerned
itse lf with network affiliation or "bigness" as a variable in the image
of a station.**-
Other Image Variables
Cnm«ynjtv 1 ovaltv.—One Independent variable, introduced from
marketing studies, has advanced loyalty to the station "community" as a
possible condition of station image. This would be particularly true in
*"Burleigh Gardner: Selling the U.S. by Class," Printers 1 Ink (March 25, i 960), p. 80. 2 Sabah, op. c it. 3 "What*s Radio* s Success Secret?" Broadcasting (September 17, 1962), p. 35.
^"Listeners Prefer CBS Radio—CBS," Broadcasting (November 25, 1957), p. 60. 3^ communities where signals are available from more than one area. Robert
F. Agne explains this concept:
Let us suppose that television is truly a medium of informa tion rather than a medium of entertainment. Is it not logical then that viewers should select stations on the basis of weather reports and/or news coverage in the city most important to them or which has the most prestige? This may be the place where they work, the place where they shop, or the place to which they turn for special services or enter tainment. Other things being equal, this choice may also reflect clarity of reception (which is generally in inverse relationship to distance from the station). The sum total of factors such as these add up to what we term Mtelevision orientation." By definition, for any locality, all of the viewing of channels of one city-of-origin is the "orienta tion" to that city; and a ll the viewing of channels of a second city-of-origin is the orientation of that city; and so on.*
The idea of "television orientation" will be accepted as a
possible variable and was avoided in the p ilo t study conducted with the
instrument developed in this study.
A study of the nature reported in this paper, should apply to a
great number of television viewers in a situation which allows them to
compare stations. A report from the American Research Bureau indicates
that "only ‘)j> of U.S. TV families are limited to one-station service."^
Industrv ideas.—A number of ideas have been advanced in the
industry to improve the images of stations. There seems to be l i ttl e or
no research to support certain ideas that persist like folklore. The
nature of the forced choice study precludes use of "folklore" unless
Robert F. Agne, "The Principle of Television Orientation," Television and Human Behavior, ed. Leon Arons, Hark A. May (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1963), p. 231.
2"ARB Survey Shows Big Choice of Channels," Broadcasting (July 15. 1963), p. 28. 35 members of aixiience also perceive i t as part of the station description.
"Originality" is a part of image that is d ifficu lt to measure, but is
considered by some as an attribute of the "good" station.^
One New York station announced i t was giving its image a "face
lift" by replacing the stripped syndication shows and film re-runs" with p more "locally produced series." The locally-produced show was Implied
to be better for the station image than the re-run. An advertising
agency, instructing its representatives to find prize spots for adver
tising, advised them to keep their eyes "open for good local
programming. "3
Another station was inclined to examine its programming, studio
sets and the like to maintain "complete control of all the images . . .
it presents to the world.A Fort Worth-Dallas station applied this
idea by "removing clutter" on studio sets and in commercials.
Public relations figure in station image according to the
director of the Television Information Office, who explained that the
organization would help stations in three ways by providing
(l) a study of the community activities and outside interests of television broadcasters, ( 2 ) a "resources book" on
"Reality's Fine, but Please Pitch It Elsewhere," Sponsor (March 25, 1963), p. 35.
^"Sponsor-Scope," Sponsojr (March 25, 1963), p. 22.
-)"Y & R's 'Field Hands' Hoe Media Row," Sponsor (January 14, 1963). p. 39. /j. "WBAP-TV Builds Image around ' Ikonogenics,'" Broadcasting (September 16, 1963), p. 52. 36
television for social studies teachers .... and ( 3 ) a survey of television editorials.^
"Good" programs.—Stations receive much advice about image from advertising agencies. One advertising executive pointed out that "good children1s programming is not only good business . . . but can play an important part in the over-all growth of the station."^ Another adver tising representative urged television stations to accept and adhere to the National Association of Broadcasters Code of Good Practices, to enhance their image.3
Research in other fields has contributed to the array of station image variables. All of these concepts cannot be pushed aside as invalid, yet the study of image must be based on the concrete and measurable
information a viewer feels is important, rather than that which is con
sidered important by a Madison Avenue agency man or even by a station
owner.
Summary
Audience reactions to the many faces of broadcasting have been
assessed in a number of surveys. Many use the "ideal station" as a
standard measuring stick for the image of stations. The forced choice
^ "What TV Stations Can Do to Improve Image," Broadcasting (April 8 , 1963), p. 82.
^William M. Scruggs, "The S eller1s Viewpoint," Sponsor (March 5, 1962), p. 69.
Robert W. Ferguson, "The Seller's Viewpoint," Sponsor (January 8 , 1 9 6 2), p. 6 1 . 37 instrument, permits this ideal station concept to be "built in" by the method of construction. The forced choice cannot, in this study, be extended to the "standard" indicator in many image surveys which compare the services of other institutions and media with television. It was hoped that the forced choice instrument would yield information of interest to broadcasters.
Stations seemed to be interested in a number of image variables, according to recurring questions asked in their surveys. Among these were the following:
1. Audience reaction to programs of news and public affairs programs, including farm, weather, and techniques of preacntattgn.
2 . 8 elievabjlity of the station, particularly in matter of agWfi_c£X2£&£&.
3 • The viewer^ analysis of the type of audience that the station attracts.
4. Perception of the advertising practices of the station according to types of products, brevity, honesty. reliability and "intelligence.w
5 • Impact of the statio n 's personalities in the eyes of the viewers.
There was minimal control in selecting items in construction of a
forced choice instrument. However, in original selection of items, each
of the concepts listed above was represented as shown in Chapter III. CHAPTER I I I
CONSTRUCTION OF THE FORCED CHOICE INSTRUMENT
The forced choice instrument has been used extensively to evaluate the behavior of individuals--particularly in the evaluation of personnel in industrial and military institutions. The writer was unable to discover published material on the forced choice used with a broadly- based sample of the general population to measure an in stitu tio n al image.
Correspondence with nearly 50 research centers In 1963 (including most of the well-known commercial audience and market research firms) revealed that they were not conducting, nor planning, any such studies. The librarian of the Television Information Office, which serves as a clear ing house for much research into television, indicated she was not aware of any image studies using the forced choice technique.
There are a number of detailed descriptions of the method of developing a forced choice instrument, but there has been no major variation from the early analysis of the steps as reported by Sisson.^
This study adapted Sisson's steps to measure the "image” of television
statio n s:
1. Collect the descriptions of extremes on the scale— good, average, and poor station descriptions. 2. Dissect the descriptions into lists of small elements— statements and phrases—in an effo rt to cover every aspect described.
1 Sisson, loc. clt.
38 39
3. Establish two values for each item—the preference scale and the discrimination scale. 4. Pair items so that where there is a similarity on the preference scale, there is a difference on the discrimination scale. 5. Administer i t to a group not including members of the original scorers, to see if it does, indeed, discriminate between stations.
The fifth step, a test of the instrument, is reported in
Chapter IV.
There are a number of problems inherent in the forced choice that are magnified by applying i t on the broad scale of a public survey.
The collection of descriptive essays, normally should come from
the general sample to be surveyed. This was nearly impossible since the
essays would need to be written by the general public on a random basis.
There seemed to be no source for these essays which would match exactly
the final sample to be tested. Essays were obtained from students in
Oklahoma State University, who reside throughout Oklahoma.
A suggestion by Berkshire that the preference index is superior
in establishing the attractiveness of various items was accepted in this
studyJ
Another sample problem can be minimised, according to Wherry, by
selecting persons to judge items for the final test from the sample that o is to be used in the final testing situation. This requirement could
^James ft. Berkshire, "Comparisons of Five Forced-Choice Indices," Educational and Psychological Measurement. 3, 1958, pp. 559-560.
^L. K. Waters and R. J. Wherry, J r., "The Effect of Intent to Bias on Forced-Choice Indices," Personnel Psychology. 15. 2, 1 9 6 2, p. 21^. Also see Waters and Wherry, "The Preference Index and Responses to Forced-Choice Pairs," Persdnnel Psychology. 15, 2 , 1962, p. 102. 40 not be met and still benefit the television industry. It would not be economically feasible to establish a forced choice test for every market in the United States. This study compromised the requirement by having items evaluated first by a sample selected from Oklahoma only, allowing
for special interests in programs according to the general section of the
country, yet not limiting the use of the instrument to an area served by
the television stations in one community.
Collecting Extreme Descriptions
A total of 330 essays from freshmen students in English and
speech classes at Oklahoma State University in the Fall and Winter
semesters of 1963-64 supplied descriptive statements of television
stations. Each student was asked to name the station and to be con
cretely descriptive. Because of the nature of the assignment and its
applicability to class work, students were given a choice of describing
good, bad, or average stations. The major portion of the essays were
descriptive of "good" stations:
278 “good" station descriptions 41 "bad" station descriptions 11 descriptions indicating neither good nor bad
330 total
The sample consisted of essays from 156 men and 174 women students.
Items were culled from the essays without regard to final appli
cability. These items totaled 3.053 impressions of good, average, and
bad stations. Two types of items were eliminated from the l i s t —those
which referred specifically to network personalities (for example,
"Station is served by the network which has Huntley-Brinkley") and 41 those statements which referred to poor reception because of fringe area location.
Dissection of Pescriptive.Itemg
Items were then grouped loosely into three categories—statements concerning personnel on the station or stations, programs on the station, and descriptions of the audience of the station. Break-down of the 1,892 remaining items was as follows:
Good Averag? Fwr
Personnel 359 17 45 Programs 768 91 145 Audiences 399 28 40
Totals 1526 136 230
In each category, items were separated according to descriptive
content. For example, one general group concerning quality of the staff
received 4-5 separate statements, while another category concerned with
ownership, contained only four statements.
An examination of the statements in each of the categories,
"Good," "Average," and "Poor," showed l i t t l e differenoe in the content or
wording of statements.
Each of the 67 -item groupings was culled for duplications. Par
ticular care was exercised in the case of items which expressed polar
descriptions. The final l i s t of 150 statements, avoided duplications but
allowed for variation in similar statements. No effort was made to have
equal numbers of positive and negative statements. 42
Original "wording was preserved. However, in order to make the lis t of statements more understandable in the mail survey, each item was rephrased so that i t would complete the statement: "The station I am describing."^
Estakllfih3.Pg. index v*lW?.6
This study established two index values by using a survey method,
rather than a personal interview or group technique.
A panel of Oklahoma residents was asked to evaluate the 150 items
on five-point scales.^ The panel was established in i 960 as a result of
a survey conducted by Lacy.-5 The panel of 1,252 members volunteered to
participate in broadcasting studies, but had not been solicited prior to
the present study. The panel consisted of persons who were identified by
Lacy as "leaders" in business, politics, labor, religious groups, women*s
organizations and farm organizations.
An equal number of "Good," "Average," and "Poor" questionnaires
was sent to the panel. A total of 417 "Good" and the same number of
"Average" questionnaires were sent. Four-hundred and eighteen "Poor"
questionnaires were mailed out. The three types of questionnaires were
identical except for the instructions to describe either "Good,"
^ See Appendix I .
^See Appendix I .
-'Robert P. Lacy, "Determining the Needs of Television and Radio Audiences in the State of Oklahoma" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 19^3), pp. 12-18. "Average," or "Poor" stations. The respondent was asked to identify the station or channel he was describing.
A total of 353 usable questionnaires was returned, 28 per cent of the sample. Those members of the sample assigned to describe a "poor" station showed a reluctance to respond. Demographic characteristics of the respondents are reported in Appendix II. Analysis of the response indicated that "good" and "average" stations were more likely to be evaluatedi
86 poor station descriptions 137 average station descriptions 130 good station descriptions
353 total
The sample reflects the Lacy study which was seeking "leaders"
tending to have characteristics not necessarily those of a representative
sample of Oklahoma residents. Nearly one-third (31 per cent) of the
sample was in the 30- to 59-y©*r-old age group. The sample over represented farmers and farm wives with a total of 26 per cent in that
classification. Males were somewhat over-represented (67 per cent of the
sample). College experience was too prevalent for a representative
sample, with 75 per cent reporting they attended or graduated from an
institution of higher learning.
Set ownership seemed to be near "normal" expectancy. Seventy-
four per cent of the sample reported only one television set, with the
remaining group having two or more sets. A total of 85 per cent of the
sample reported it viewed television four hours or less. The majority of
respondents reported reception of three or more stations, with only 14
per cent limited to one and two stations. 44
Information from the returned questionnaires was transferred to cards and sta tistic a l analyses were conducted on an IBM 1410 computer. iSach item was tabulated and preference and discrimination indices established. The statistical procedure is as follows:
Item 118. Provides daytime dramatic shows with the housewife in mind.
Accurate Inaccurate
Alternatives 1 2 3 4 5 Weight (w) 4 3 2 1 0 Frequency (f) total
Poor (P) 21 20 17 7 2 67 Average ^5 37 22 4 3 111 Good (G) J+7 33 10 5 6 101
£ f 113 90 49 16 11 279 £ f «w 452 270 98 16 0 836 d| G-P | 26 13 7 2 4 52
a f • w Preference Index: AY 100 00 OS ' • H O O = 299 N 279
Discrimination Index: 52.
Standard deviation of all scores: 1 .0 8 1
Appendix III has indices and standard deviations of scores for all items,
Selection of Pairs
A number of criteria were used in the selection of test item
pairs. The recommendation made by Brooks to avoid item pairs with
1 extreme discrimination indices was followed
^Brooks, op. c it.. p. 49. ^5
A cut-off point of 1.300 standard deviations rejected statements with high standard deviations—avoiding some chance of instab ility as warned by Gibson.*
A total of 68 items was retained. Table 1 lists the items, ranked according to preference scale, from which the final selection of items was drawn.
A more subtle and sensitive method of establishing discrimination was needed. The discrimination index, therefore, was replaced by a
"validity Source of this manipulation was the Brooks dissertation.^
Statistical procedures for deriving the validity £ is described by
Ferguson as a correlation coefficient.3
The validity £ for each item was converted to a standard score
using an r to zr transformation table. Discrimination was then estab
lished by finding the significant differences in ar scores. Formula used
for this comparison was
/l^T
Table 2 lis ts the final pairings of the accepted phrases and the compara
tive indices scores) as derived from the formula.
1 Gibson, fip., . P- 59- 2 Brooks, qd , clt.. p. 39. 3 George A. Ferguson, S tatistical Analysis In Psychology and education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1959)» P* 95. TABLE 1
Forced Choice Item Indices with Standard Errors and Standard Deviations of Items Arranged According to the Preference Index Rank
Item Stan. Pref. Stan. Discr. No. Devia. Index Error Index
6 1.187 62 6.51 94 136 1 .2 3 6 84 6.94 42 80 1.070 95 6.05 50 101 1.263 104 6.94 56 139 1 .1 0 6 104 6.18 74 53 1 .1 7 2 108 6.64 50 48 1 .2 6 2 116 6.95 57 1*4-0 1-153 212 6 .9 6 43 51 1.287 224 7.37 54 49 1.263 236 7 .2 1 43 52 1 .2 9 0 238 7.34 68 66 1 .2 2 1 240 6.81 53 141 1 .2 3 2 241 7.03 63 74 1 .2 9 0 242 8 .1 1 46 41 1 .2 5 0 250 7 .0 1 83 50 1.217 253 6.84 94 137 1 .1 6 6 256 6 .5 0 108 78 1.282 257 7.27 77 19 1.291 261 7.03 106 38 1.293 266 7.11 95 104 1 .2 5 6 268 6.95 91 82 1 .0 9 0 268 6.04 80 36 1 .2 1 6 272 6 .7 2 90 73 1.147 275 6.39 80 126 1.233 281 6.91 42 129 1-137 282 6.34 103 71 1 .1 9 6 284 6 .5 0 46 20 1.283 285 6.95 87 138 1 .0 6 1 288 5.82 102 148 1.227 290 6 .8 8 99 90 1.203 290 7.03 47 142 I .0 9 4 290 6 .5 1 71 62 1.284 291 7 .1 0 66 131 1 .2 6 6 295 6 .9 8 101 84 1.128 295 6 .36 68 135 1.126 296 6.20 91 103 1.208 296 6 .65 101 117 1.210 296 6.95 71 77 1.143 297 6.34 95 TABLE 1 ( c o n t d .)
Item Stan. Pref. Stan. Discr. No. Devla. Index Error Index
15 1 .0 5 4 298 5.71 92 17 1 .1 5 5 298 6.24 110 96 1 .2 6 5 298 6.93 59 118 1.081 299 6.47 52 26 1.128 300 6.18 67 132 1 .1 0 9 303 6 .1 9 96 97 1 .0 6 8 304 5.82 95 27 1.060 304 5.7 8 86 12 1 .1 6 2 307 6 .58 85 115 1.185 309 6.91 60 114 1.053 311 5.93 66 70 1.071 311 5.86 76 54 1.017 314 5 .6 0 96 133 1.086 314 6.03 88 93 1.090 319 6.07 84 18 1.054 320 5.70 83 124 1.098 320 6.27 6 5 7 1.112 321 5.98 83 8 1.070 322 5.78 98 3 1.072 324 5.75 72 16 1.015 328 5.43 95 4 1.078 329 6.01 60 23 1.045 332 5.63 89 13 1.02? 334 5-73 90 14 0.994 335 5.35 95 95 1.016 337 5.56 93 10 0.940 344 5.05 88 1 0.772 348 4.13 87 28 0.710 358 3.86 63 48
TABLE 2
27 Pairs of Forced Choice Statements with the Indices for Bach and Scores Comparing Discrimination Indices of Pairs
No.n Q- Statement1-.+ + T Pref. , _ Discr. , „ "in Index Index Score
139. Neither soothes nor relaxes but dulls and bores the viewer. 104 74 101. Devotes one-fourth of the news to car wrecks which occurred in the area. 103 56 3.0270
139. Neither soothes nor relaxes but dulls and bores the viewer. 104 74 53* Has too many kiddie shows in its schedule. 107 50 3.1595
49. Has the best westerns of any station available 235 43 52. Has children's shows which are always superior. 238 68 2.7031
49. Has the best westerns of any station available. 235 43 141. Has good shows to keep the children off the streets from the time school is out until dark. 241 63 2.8550
137. Has good quality programs that keep people interested in what they are watching. 256 108 78. Doesn't have an excess of blood and thunder as is found on other stations 256 77 2.5803
82. Combines humor, serious and action shows to make a night of very enjoy able watching. 268 80 38. Generally has high quality local programs. 265 95 2 .2 2 9 0
82. Combines humor, serious and action shows to make a night of very enjoy able watching. 268 80 36. Over-all has the cleanest and most worthwhile programs. 271 90 2.1750 49
TABLE 2 ( c o n td .)
No. Statement Pref. Discr. "i11 Index Index Score
2 0 . Has the network I lik e. 284 87 129. Has programs which relax people and make them think somewhat. 281 103 2 .5 0 0 8
138. Provides good wholesome entertain ment for leisure hours. 28? 102 6 2 . During special programs cuts the advertisements to a minimum. 290 66 3.6543
148. Is one my friends think is a good station on the whole. 289 99 90. Has selected movies to conform with the time of the year. During Christmas they have Christmas movies. 289 47 ^.7351
90. Has selected movies to conform with the time of the year. During Christmas they have Christmas movies. 289 47 142. Takes part in many civic projects and has contributed generously to charity. 290 71 2.8 2 3 2
131. Covers the news which directly affects me very well. 294 101 117. Has an excellent show for children. 296 71 2.0 2 6 6
84. Presents programs for adult viewers late in the evening when most children are asleep. 295 68 103. Has news broadcasts with interesting closing items. 296 101 3 .8271
84. Presents programs for adult viewers late in the evening when most children are asleep. 295 68 77, Has a well-rounded slate of programs ranging from cultural to western to children *5 shows. 296 95 3.3333
135. Provides good entertainment for all members of the family. 295 91 9 6 . Has news and weather just like the other stations. 298 59 5 .9866 50
TABLE 2 ( c o n t d .)
No. Statement "A" Index Index Score
15* Always seems to be making improve ments . 29? 92 118. Provides daytime dramatic shows with the housewife in mind. 299 52 3.4723
17. Is first to come through with the la te s t on what happened, when a news story breaks. 297 110 26. Is interested in the public welfare and not purely interested in personal gain. 299 67 3 .9 0 6 2
9 6 . Has news and weather just like the other stations. 298 59 27. Has a staff that keeps up with trends in programming whichin terest people. 303 86 4.9418
26. Is interested in the public welfare and not purely interested in personal gain. 299 67 97. Presents news of local interest superbly. 303 95 3.56.10
132. Carries a wide variety of programs for different groups and their interests. 303 96 115. Every afternoon has programs for the kiddies which are varied anywhere from a series to cartoons. 308 60 2 .9 8 6 3
70. Has some advertisements that are amusing, entertaining, and informative. 311 76 133. Has something for everybody. 314 88 2 .0426
93. Usually broadcasts a ll major sporting events. 318 84 7. Has announcers that talk directly to their viewers and never grope for words. 320 83 2.1793
18. Has given us word of important stories which occurred nearby. 320 83 8. Has enthusiastic news reporters. 321 98 2.2148 51
TABI*£ 2 (contd.)
Pref . Discr. "i" No. Statement Index Index Score
124. On Sunday has programs on religion especially helpful to the bedfast or others who could not attend church services. 320 65 8. Has enthusiastic news reporters. 321 98 2.2846
3. Has fair coverage of local news and sports. 324 72 1 6 . In the time of crisis presents news so correctly and quickly that every one knows the situation. 328 95 5.0834
4. Has religious services which do not "push" a particular faith. 328 60 23. Has quite competent local person alities who report the news, weather and sports. 332 89 2.024?
4. Has religious services which do not "push" a particular faith. 328 60 13. Takes pride in i t s staff members. 333 90 2.8668 52
Pairings equal to, or lesB than, t scores of 1 .960 were rejected with a resu lt of 27 pairs of items. I t should be noted that criteria for establishing the final pairs was influenced by Krug and Northrup who hypothesized that "individuals are reluctant to use words or phrases of negative emotional tone as descriptions of self or of others."^ They also suggest that subjects be given pairs indicating either favorable or
unfavorable responses, but not both.^
Summary
Both in the collection of descriptions of extreme statements
about stations—good, average, and bad—and in the establishment of
indices by the panel, there was a puzzling reluctance to describe a poor
station. This also was noted by Krug and Northrup in their study to test
an instrument.
Twenty-seven pairs of items were established for incorporation
into the final step, the test of the instrument, reported in Chapter IV.
Robert E. Krug and Doris Northrup, "Judgment Time for Forced- Choice Adjective Pairs," Journal of Applied Psychology.1959, p. **07.
p . ^1 0. CHAPTER IV
PILOT SURVEY OF FORCED CHOICE INSTRUMENT CONCERNED
WITH IMAGE OF TELEVISION STATIONS
The final step in developing a forced choice instrument is a field te st. Normal procedure is to match the performance of the forced
choice with some other established test on the same topic. In this case,
the forced choice was concerned with television station images.
As pointed out in earlier chapters, there is no published quanti
fied test of the image of television stations. The material reported by
lannenbaum on the semantic differential is interpreted as a relationship
of "profiles" of the stations involvedJ Ratings have the advantage of
quantification, but are found lacking when listener disposition is
desired. E. William Henry, Chairman of the Federal Communications
Commission, commented:
The audience ratings that play so large a role in the com mercial system fa ll far short, as we have seen, of measuring the whole public interest in broadcasting.2
The forced choice scale developed in this study could not be
reliably compared with other image surveys since none was available which
resulted in "numbers."
^"Semantic Differential: New Way to Measure Stations," Sponsor (Novemoer 2 3 , 1957). PP• 92-43. 2 Federal Communications Commission, Inquiry into Local Programming in Omaha. Nebraska. Docket No. 14863 (October 24, 1963), p. 54.
53 5^
Despite the warnings of Chairman Henry, the writer felt there should be some relation between the "image11 the audience has of a station and audience viewing habits. Thus, ratings of the three stations were compared with the scores compiled from the forced choice instrument.
Another check was a "face value" question seeking the respondents* perceived attitude toward the stations in the market (area served by the station) .
Selection of the Sample Community for Testing the Instrument
Guthrie, Oklahoma, was chosen as the community for the te st study. Guthrie television sets receive an excellent signal from each of the three Oklahoma City stations. (See Appendix VI for information con
cerning the signals received in Guthrie from Oklahoma City television
statio n s.)
The community is near the Stillw ater campus, hence student
surveyors could be transported for interviewing and returned the same
day. All the interviews were conducted the same day to avoid programming
occurrences during the interview period which might precipitate an
attitude shift toward the stations. Guthrie is of a size (less than
10,000 population) that can be sampled in one day without the necessity
of excessive travel for return trips.^ Nine geographical areas were
selected to include all residential sections of the community, bach
interviewer followed a similar route in each section and the routes
covered every residential block in the community.
^U.S. Department of Commerce, Census of Population: I960. Vol I, Part 38, Oklahoma (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963). 55
Questionnaire forms (Appendix IV) specified the station each respondent was to describe. Forms for each station (KOCO, KWTV and WKY) were alternated.
Interviews with a householder or the "woman of the house" were
sought. Young people or elderly people were avoided, unless they were
the persons in charge of the home. Interviewers were instructed to give all aid possible to respondents, short of evaluation, and to be sup portive in complaints or resistance. Interview resistance indicated that
the test was "too long" and that there was "little to choose" between the
paired statements.
Following the administration of the test, respondents answered
classification questions. The first question concerned the relative
image of the three stations in a non-specific way: "Which station do you
think is doing the best job?" Interviewers asked about education, age,
occupation, and television viewing habits and also recorded the sex,
socio-economic status and the race of the respondents. Seven Oklahoma
State University students conducted the interviews on Saturday, October 3»
196*4- in Guthrie. The interviews averaged 15 minutes in length.
Characteristics of the Test Sample
A total of 138 questionnaires was collected and 131 deemed
suitable for use in the study. The difficulty of the test and the length
seemed to be major reasons why seven persons failed to complete the form.
An examination of the classification material revealed no apparent
pattern for those who left the questionnaire hlank. Interviewers were
unaware that the persons were failing to complete the survey form. 56
The sample (7.3 per cent of the Guthrie households) showed some
unusual characteristics, particularly in the “station preference" classi fication. (For a complete report of sample characteristics see Appendix
V.)
Station preferred.—The interviewer asked each respondent:
"Which television station do you think does the best job?" This question,
intended to be indefinite, was expected to indicate "face value" station
preference. More than one-third— J8 per cent—of the sample listed WKY
as "doing the best job." A total of 21 per cent of the sample Indicated
that i t "did not know."
There was a tendency for the respondent to indicate preference
for the station he rated by forced choice. More than half—52 per cent—
of the respondents asked to rate WKY, indicated they preferred WKY.
The tendency of the rater to prefer the station he has rated is
revealed in Table 3.
The information in this section indicated that the halo effect
was in operation. The respondent, after considering the merits of a
station, tended to report that he preferred that station when asked,
"Which station is doing the best job?" As w ill be noted later in this
analysis, the "face value" preference did not extend into the actual
scores of the respondents on the forced choice.
hducation.—Some defects in the sampling are found in the
comparison of the sample of 131 Guthrie residents with U.S. Population
Census figures as is indicated in Table 4 content. The difference between 57
table 3
Raters of Stations and Their Preferences Compared to the Total Sample*s Rating of Stations
Respondents Who "Prefer": WKY KOCO KWTV (48) (43) (40)
R aters: Aecording to station rated 52* 40* 25*
According to to ta l sample 38* 25* 16*
tahle h
Educational Attainment of the Guthrie Sample As Compared with I960 Census Figures
Grade Hi. Sch. Hi. Sch. College 1-8 yr 9-H yr. Graduate
Sample (131) 26.7* 20.6* 2 9 .8 * 22.9*
Census (6193)* 46.9* 15.7* 3-5.7* 22.5*
This figure represents the total number in the educational groups from the first grade through college in the Census of Populations 58 those in grade school and for high school graduates was out of line with the figures published by the Department of Commerce in the i 960 population census.
Occupation.—Questionnaire forms yielded uncertain occupation groups for 21 respondents. Out of the remaining 111 respondents, 77 indi cated that they were either in a combined class of professional and/or white collar or a class of unskilled workers. Respondents tended to identify place of occupation rather than occupation.
Viewing habits.—The sample watched television at about the
estimated national average by the A. C. Nielsen Co., commercial rating
firra.^ Seventy per cent of the group viewed television five or more
hours every day. The national average, reported by Neilsen for a day is
a l i ttl e more than six hours per household.
Age.—The sample compared somewhat more favorably with i960
population figures in regard to age of the respondents in Guthrie, as is
indicated in Table 5 content.
Race.—The population census lis ts Guthrie as having a non-white
community equal to 20 per cent of the 9,502 residents in 1960.^ The
sample revealed only three persons interviewed as non-white. Two problems
arose in this classification. Non-white in the population census includes
Indians, who are quite numerous in Oklahoma. No student interviewer
Broadcasting Yearbook Issue—196^ (January 1, 196h), p. 1 6 . 2 U.S. Department of Commerce, loc. c i t. 59
TABLE 5
Percentages of Those in the Sample According to Age Group As Compared to Similar Groups in the I960 Census
Percentages of Age Groups: 15 to 39 y rs. 40-59 y rs. 60 and More
Sample (131) 48.9 # 26.7# 24.4#
Census (686 o)a 37.1# 31.3# 31.6#
aThis figure was the total number of persons 15 years or older living in Guthrie in i 960 according to the Census of Population: I960. positively identified any of his respondents as Indians. The three non white persons who were identified in the sample are Negroes and came from
a section which is on the fringes of a d is tric t mainly composed of
Negroes and probably some Indians.
The second problem arose in the interim after Guthrie had been
selected, material prepared for sampling and the actual Interview date
set. The community was subject to a violent race riot which involved
out-of-town white students and Guthrie non-white residents. Police
advised white interviewers to avoid predominantly Negro sections of the
community. All of the interviewers were white students.
Sg-SMlta-Qf—the Guthrie Survey
The data collected in Guthrie were examined from a ntimber of
points of view. The analysis of scores was extensive. Goal of this
analysis was to uncover possible "reasons" the scores of one group
differed from another. For example, "Do the 'sometimes* viewers score
stations different from fans?" 60
Scores of the total group.—The instrament was tested on three groups: 48 persons scoring WKY, 43 scoring K0C0, and hO scoring KWTV.
Average scores of the three stations indicated that, with a possible perfect score of 27, WKY was ranked higher by its group than the other two stations by their groups, but by very little:
Average score WKY 14.? KOCO 13.7 KWTV 14.1
Statistical tests comparing the average scores for the three
stations revealed no significant differences between the figures. A £
test for independent samples was used to compare the scores of the three
stations.^
The respondents' forced choice scores belied their station
preferences. Scores indicated there was no difference between the
stations on the forced choice scale. Yet the respondents liked WKY by
significant difference when asked for their "face value" preference. The
variation between the station preferred and the forced choice result
indicated that something other than mere choice of stations was being
measured. Further examination of the figures indicated the halo effect
may have been operating for the face value question, but was diminished
in the forced choice scoring.
Station preference.—Scores were compared for the three groups
each classified according to the station considered to be doing the "best
job." Forced choice scores were compared according to station preference.
1 Ferguson, op. c i t .. p. 1 3 7 . 6 l
Table 6 indicates there were significant differences between the scores for those who said that KOCO and KWTV were '’doing the best job."
I t was apparent that persons scoring KOCO gave higher scores to KWTV and
TABLE 6
Comparison of Mean Ranks for Raters According to Their Station Preference
Mean Ranks i __ Chi WKY KOCO KWTV Square®
Prefer WKY 2.37 1.70 1.81 4.98
Prefer KOCO 2.15 1.83 2.11 13.86
Prefer KWTV 1.76 2.52 1.76 lkA2
aA X2 of 5*99 is needed for significance. r those scoring KWTV gave high scores to KOCO. TheFriedman two-way analysis of variance was used to test the data.^ Ranks were established by converting raw scores to percentages. The resulting -X.2 was treated as having K-l degrees of freedom.
This breakdown of scores offers evidence that the halo effect,
seen in the face value evaluations, was no longer operating. The theory
that forced choice would eliminate the tendency for the respondents to allow their general impression of the station to effect their ratings of
the tra its appeared to receive substantiation.
Education. — There was interesting sameness in the scores of the
group when classified according to educational attainment. The comparison
1 Ibid ., pp. 272-273. 62 by the Friedman analysis of variance of scores in Table 7 indicated no significant difference between scores for groups according to their education nor for groups when compared according to the station they were asked to rate.
TABLE 7
Mean Ranks of Three Stations Compared According to Educational Attainment
Mean Ranks: Chi WKX KOCO KWTV Square3
Grade-Junior High 2.07 2 .0 0 1.93 0 .2 9 6
Attend High School 2 .0 2 1 .8 0 2 .1 9 2 .0 6 0
High School Graduate 2.30 1 .7 0 2 .0 0 4.740
College 2 .2 0 1 .8 9 1.91 1.685
Chi Square *3 0.277 0 .8 3 0 4.670
aTo show a significant difference the X^ should be equal to or greater than 5 «9 9-
of 7 .8 2 or greater is needed to show significance.
Age .—The age group in the 40 to 59 years classification rated
WKX as preferable to the other stations. The test of significance using
Friedman analysis of variance (see Table 8 ) Indicated a difference in
scoring for this group both in comparisons with other age groups and with
other stations in the same age group.
The other age groupings indicated no significant difference in
ratings of the three stations. 63
TABLE 8
Comparisons of the Mean Ranks of Three Stations According to Age Group of Guthrie Respondents
Mean Ranks: Chi WKY KOCO KWTV Square®
15-39 years 2 .2 6 1.70 2.0** 4.22
**0-59 years 2.35 1.65 2.00 6 .69
60 yrs. and more 1.89 2 .2 6 1.85 2.74
Chi Square® 6.89 2.57 0.35
aNeed equal to or greater than 5.99 to be significant.
Occupation.—The stability of the test internally continued to be upheld when occupation was used as a factor of difference in the compar ison of scores with a Friedman analysis of variance. There was some evidence in the scores of the two groups in Table 9 that the unskilled tended to prefer KWTV over the professional-white collar groups, although this difference was not indicated as being statistically significant using the Wilcoxan matched-pairs signed ranks test.
Viewing habits.—The "light" viewer (those watching four hours or less a day) ranked KOCO somewhat lower than did the other viewers rating that station. "Light" viewers also ranked the station significantly different from light viewers ranking the other two stations. "Heavy" viewers who watched six or more hours each day seemed to find little difference in the stations. The Friedman two-way analysis of variance by ranks was again used in this examination. 64
TABLE 9
Mean Ranks of Respondents When Classified According to Occupation
Mean Ranks: Chi WKY KOCO KWTV Square*
Professional-White Collar 2.20 1 .9 6 1.83 1.907
Unskilled 2.07 1.89 2.04 0.518
^ score*3 0.1043 0.9457 1.093
A of 5.99 or more is needed for significance.
^A £ score of 1 ,9 6 or more is needed for significance.
table 10
Comparison of the Mean Ranks of Respondents According to Their Viewing Habits
Mean Ranks: Chi WKY KOCO KWTV Square*
Up to 4 hours 2.30 1.56 2.15 8.29
5 hours 2.04 2.02 1.94 0.13
6 hours and More 2 .1 9 1.93 1.89 1.41
Chi Square8, 1.13 8.04 0 .23
fit O A Xr of 5-99 °r more is needed for significance. 65
The results of the breakdown of scores by viewing habits seem to indicate that there was a measurement of image involved in this study.
The lig h t viewer having a different image of the stations than the heavy viewer seems to indicate that familiarity with the station breeds differ
ent preception. In the case of the Oklahoma City stations there was a
tendency for the fan to see the stations alike, while the lig h t viewer
detected differences. With the small sample available, to try to dis
cover the reasons for this difference was deemed inadvisable.
Item analysis.—Favorable and unfavorable responses for all 27
forced choice pairs were compared for the three stations. Four of these
statements were found to elicit a response which could be attributed to
more than chance.
In each case only the favorable statement is recorded.
Statement 5. "In the time of crisis presents news so correctly
and quickly that everyone knows the situation.n
Respondent Evaluations
Favorable Unfavorable Station: WKY 37 10
KOCO 18 21
KWTV 26 1^
A chi square analysis of responses indicates that there was a
significant difference in the responses to this statement (X^ = 10.777)
which is well over the 5.99 with two degrees of freedom needed). 66
Statement 9. "Carries a wide variety of programs for different groups and their in te r e s t."
Evaluation of Respondents
Favorable Unfavorable Stations WKY 21 25
KOCO 27 15
KWTV 32 6
KWTV seemed to rank highest in this with WKY lowest. The chi
square analysis indicated that the groups scores were significant (X^ =
11.168 with 5-99 needed with two degrees of freedom).
statement 14. "Has something for everyone."
Evaluation of Respondents
Favorable Unfavorable Station: WKY 25 21
KOCO 29 10
KWTV 32 ?
KWTV again was rated highest by the group with KOCO rather high
and WKY ranked as lowest for this item. The statistical analysis indi
cated that there was significant differences between the groups (X^ =
6.931 with 5*99 or more needed with two degrees of freedom).
Statement 23. "is the firs t to come through with the latest on
what happened when a news storv breaks."
Respondent Evaluations
Favorable Unfavorable Station: WKY 3? 9
KOCO 19 19
KWTV 25 15 6?
As in statement 5 which was concerned with news, WKY ranked high est. Statistical analysis showed this item to be rated significantly different by the groups = 7.324 with 5*99 with two degrees of freedom needed for significance).
Of the four statements which are different significantly there was a tendency for respondents to rank WKY high in news coverage, KWTV
high in variety, with a tendency to include KOCO in the high variety
group rather than the news grouping.
The item analysis of scaled items for the three Oklahoma city
stations indicated there were at least two variables in the minds of the
sample or which the stations were significantly different. There were a
number of variables in the instrument which were apparent such as items
concerning children's shows, religious programs, various dramatic shows,
sports coverage and the like. Other stations in other cities might be
found to differ on other variables. In this situation, however, only
two variables emerged from the instrument as being perceived differently
by the audience—news and variety.
Survey and Ratings Compared
A record of television set uses for Oklahoma City stations over
a period of 11 years indicates that there was a ranking of ratings which
puts WKY firs t, KWTV second and KOCO third, as is shown in Table 11.
The figures in Table 11 are from American Research Bureau diaries
kept by set owners in the Oklahoma City area. The diary study in
November of 1964 was conducted only a month after the forced choice
survey reported in this paper. The November, 1964 A.R.B. figures as 68
TABLE 11
Share of Audience Ratings for Three Oklahoma City Television Stations for 11 Yearsa
Number of ------^jiSJeiSHS------Diaries WKY KWTV KOCOb per l/4 hr. Per Cent ______Per Cent ______Per Cent
c d 1954 (October) • • 37.2 6 1 .1 • • d 1955 (November) 232 46.5 5 2 .1 • •
1956 (November) 241 46.9 47.4 7.4b
1957 (November) 244 45.2 3 8 .2 1 9 . ob
1958 (November) 259 41.9 40.8 18.5
1959 (November) 243 42.7 42.2 14.8 i 960 (November) 180 42.1 40.7 17.2
1961 (November) 180 44.0 35.0 21.0
1962 (November) 181 42.0 38.0 20.0
1963 (November) 181 44.0 40.0 1 6 .0 b 1964 (November) • « 41.0 25.0 35.0
aSource is American Research Bureau, The Oklahoma Cltv Television Audience, reports from 1954 to 1964, Beltsville, Maryland.
bUntil 1958 KOCO was assigned the call letters KGEQ and was located in Enid, Oklahoma.
cNumber of diaries not recorded.
^Not on the a ir . 69 compared with the evaluation of stations by the sample with the forced choice show some similarities;^ WKY KOCO KWTV Average Forced Choice Score 14.7 13.7 14.1 Average Share of Audience 41$ 25$ 35$
Summary
The results of the Guthrie study indicated that the forced choice was suited to the measurement of television station images.
Differences which inadequate sampling might have imposed in the study did not seem to be variables which would have affected the results.
Sections of the community which were not surveyed were those which tradi
tionally had unskilled workers and low educational attainment. Examina
tion of the scores according to occupation and education revealed no
significant differences at various levels.
Where differences in results did occur, there was evidence that
the scale was measuring image of the stations. The differences between
the scores and ratings of the stations was marked.
Support that there may be little difference in the total images
of stations was evident throughout the construction of the test. A
breakdown revealed that the heavy viewer scored the stations alike while
the lighter viewer found differences between the stations.
The halo effect seemed to be diminished by the forced choice
scaling. This was particularly apparent when the scales were compared
with responses to the face value question.
American Research Bureau, The Oklahoma Cltv Television Audience: November, 1964 (Beltsville; American Research Bureau, 1964), p. 1. 70
The instrument appeared to be suited to a survey of a broad-based population. Socio-economic differences and education did not seem to affect the scores. Interviewers reported little trouble in administering the test, although it was evident that most of the respondents had not been previously exposed to the forced choice.
Two types of station activity—pews and variety in programming— were found to set stations apart. Based on the small sample, it is inadvisable to say these are the only differentiating items for televi sion stations. Since the construction of the test depended on a number of differentiating items it is suggested that other stations, in other markets, might be different on other scale items.
This suggests further study on the forced choice in the measure ment of television station images, which will be expanded in Chapter V. CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Theorizing that a sensitive rating scale can be adjusted to a general survey is easier than implementing this theory. The forced choice has been established in personality testing, but its use in image studies has been limited. In fact, the writer could find no published information about the forced choice in a public survey. Other rating scales have been used in public surveys. As most-interested consumers of image studies, the advertising agencies report that quantification is necessary for the best application of image information.
The need of some compact measure of the images of television
stations is felt by many groups.
Ratings—that is the recording of the number of sets tuned to
stations--are considered inadequate in gauging the real worth of a
television station. The station, trying to meet demands for "up-graded1’ programs, can suffer in ratings, while creating a local image which
evokes great respect and "believability." Ratings, however, are a
decisive factor when advertisers place their messages on stations.
The station owner recognizes the need for providing prospective
advertisers with qualitative information. His station advertising and
71 72 promotional materials often contain too little concrete information for
the advertising agency or advertiser.
Government investigators have been concerned with the domination
of ratings in the selection and valuation of station programs. Members of
Congress and of the Federal Communications Commission have urged that
programming judgments be based on factors other than the size of the
audience.
Advertising agencies have written copiously complaining there is
too little usable Information concerning image values.
Prospects are dreary for discovering a panacea which, taken like
a prescription, will fill this need. The Sabah study, the most compre
hensive study of this nature, was inconclusive in defining differences
between television stations in Columbus, Ohio.^ Sabah in his pioneering
effort to establish the semantic differential as a television image
measurement instrument did not put together a "holistic*1 test which
differentiated between stations.
The semantic differential technique was depicted as being appli
cable "to communications problems . . . as broad and varied as the 2 comr.unication area itself." Despite this hope, the value of the semantic
differential has been limited to the interpretation of station profiles.
Limitations in previous attempts to quantify the image of tele
vision stations suggest that the forced choice technique had little hope
as a measuring device: this goal being a clear differentiation between
television stations.
1 Sabah, op. c lt.
^Tannenbauro e t a l.. op. c jt.. p. 27^. 73
T est Survey Summary
The goal of this study was to develop a forced choice instrument which would measure the images of television stations. Results show
stability of scores for a majority of the groups in the sample. Test
results show the instrument is measuring something other than the audi
ence rating and the "face value" judgments of the sample.
The stability of the results between groups indicates the scores
reflect the images of the three stations. The sample perceives the
stations as essentially having the same total image.
It is also possible that the instrument used in Guthrie was not
measuring image at all; that there is considerable difference in the public
image of these three stations and that the forced choice pairs in the
instrument do not probe out these differences. However, there is, in
fact, small difference in the images of many stations as revealed by
respondents at stages of establishing the test.
A number of the original essays, from which the statements were
obtained, protested that it was difficult to differentiate between "good"
and "poor" television stations, since they are so much alike.
The panel respondents, while rating the statements, volunteered
marginal notes on the survey forms, reporting difficulty In identifying
the "good" and "poor" station.
Interviewers in Guthrie heard similar feelings from the pilot
sample. This difficulty was demonstrated by one-fifth of the Guthrie
sample which was unable to choose a station that "does the best job."
It seems quite possible that the three stations are very much
alike--to quote Gabah--"holistically" as perceived by the Guthrie sample. ?**
The item analysis of the questionnaire shows differentiation between stations by certain program activity. For example, the sample clearly established a preference for one station's news service while finding more program variety on another.
Stations might be said to have "news images" and "variety images."
In a general score of the test, the two strengths, if not belonging to the same station, could offset each other. Conflicting "image factors" might very well add up to scores which, though similar, hide sharp differences.
The Forced Choice as a Public Survey Tool
There has been evidence that the forced choice instrument is a delicate one, not suited as a survey which involves the general public.
It has been limited, according to published reports, to select and more
sophisticated samples. In this survey, there was no selection of sample
for education nor for unusual interest in the test topic.
Interviewers reported little hostility to the form of the test.
One policeman's wife commented while she filled the form: "You never
know what these Harvard nuts will come up with next." The "impossibility"
of choices did not overwhelm nor frustrate Guthrie respondents.
The length of the instrument—27 items of two-sentence pairs—
seemed to tire some of the respondents. Interviewers reported boredom
with similarity of question types.
The instrument was effective in eliminating the tendency for the
respondent to "punish" or "praise" a station by manipulating answers.
The forced choice instrument, in shorter form, seems suited to use in
broad based public surveys. 75
The problem of halo effect was evidently diminished considerably by the use of the forced choice. Comparison of face value results with the results of the forced choice showed the instrument was measuring at a level somewhat independent of the casual evaluation of the rater.
Conclusions
This project suggests several conclusions which should aid in further research on images of television stations.
1. Audiences rank television stations by a number of varjafeleg.
As revealed in the Sabah study and further corroborated in this project, image studies of television stations should recognize that the television audience differentiates various programming services of television
stations. Two were apparent in the evaluation of the Oklahoma City
stations—news and variety. It is probable that other television station audiences would differ in other variables.
2. One general instrument to measure the image pf_ a te le v isio n
station as a whole seepig jprprobab^Ie. Television station image must be
measured with more than one factor in mind. This is in step with uses
that have been made of the forced choice in other studies. The test has
not been extended to measure the "whole" personality, but has gauged
performance in a specific area of endeavor. The television audience (or
audiences) recognizes a number of faces of the station image and does not
rate the station on one continuum.
3. The forced choice instrument is acceptable as a measuring
device in a general public survey. Forced choice is not too advanced for
a public survey. Use of the instrument with pairs (rather than tetrads) all being answered the same way—either the "best" or the "least" seems to be challenging and interesting to various age, education, and occupa tional groups. Its purported advantage of being "cheat-proof" probably is more appropriate to a general survey than to a group which is familiar with its mechanism. APPENDIXES
77 APPENDIX I
LIST OF PHRASES DESCRIBING A TELEVISION STATION
First of all we would like to know something about you. All answers on this form will be treated as confidential. Your name will never be used in coincidence with the information on this form—even if you permit it.
Your age:______years
Your sex: Male: ______Female:______
What is the occupation of the head of your household: ______
(if unemployed or retired write that in the space above)
Circle the highest school year completed:
1 2 3 ^ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1** 15 16 over 16 (grade school) (high school) (college) (post graduate)
How many working television sets do you have in your home: (circle answer)
Mans. Que Xzlsl Three £gac More t han four
How many working color television sets do you have; (circle answer)
Mans. 2 m Tha Thr
About how many hours a day on the average do you watch television: (circle answer)
Less than one One Two Three Four Five Six Seven or more
How many stations do you receive on your set with a good, dependable, picture: (circle answer)
Qua Ih m a Earn F ive Six. §gyga..ar,JS9re
78 79
Now, to the major part of this questionnaire. We want you to pick a station that you know well enough to describe and we want you to check the phrases that most accurately describe it.
And one more thing. We want you to select one station that you think is poor. Others in this survey are being asked about other types of stations. Will you please write in the call letters or the channel number of the station you are describings
Call Letters or Channel Number: ______
Location of Station: ______
Following you will find a lis t of descriptive phrases about the television station. After each phrase, you will see a series of five blank spaces. The blanks are ranged from (5)» on the left, which means this is a very accurate description of "your” station to (l), on the right, which means this phrase is completely inaccurate in describing your station.
Here is a general idea of what each space means: (5) Completely Accurate (4) Partially Accurate (3) Sometimes True or Sometimes Doesn't Apply (2) Partially Inaccurate (1) Completely Inaccurate
Now, here is an example of how a question might be answered:
4) H d ) r—T Od q | -»-> iH b b c« c t a cd p p *3 3 *3 0^.0 rt Ct o at o «d J Ou a.
THE STATION I AM DESCRIBING: (5) (4) (3) (2) (l)
0. Seems to always make improvements. ______: X ______:______:______
(You mark this (4) because you have noted some improvements in the station. Or perhaps the station has improved in its picture but still makes some mistakes in the news.)
On the following pages are the descriptive phrases. Please remember that you are describing only one station. The one you selected as a poor station for this reply. 80
* * © r H © r-H m Hi +-> rH +-> fH H b dJ ctf cti cij 3 -HO O £ -d ^ -HO.... O O O »-t g © THE STATION I AM DESCRIBING: £ * < &. m m
(3) W (3) (2) (1)
1. Is prompt in fixing network trouble.
2. Sounds and looks like it is in a neighborhood barn.
3 . Has fair coverage of local news and sports.
4. Has religious services which do not “push" a particular faith.
5. Has announcers with no local flavor to their speech.
6 . Treats news with humor.
7 . Has announcers that talk directly to their viewers and never grope for words.
8 . Has enthusiastic news reporters.
9. Has announcers who seem to have less class.
10. Has people in front of camera who are neat, clean, and not dull and speak well.
11. Has an over-all attitude (from the newscaster to the camera operator) of over-enthusiasm to put this station on top.
12. Has newsmen who often move to higher positions.
13. Takes pride in its staff members.
14. Operates in a professional manner with only occasional mixups.
1 3 . oeeras to always be making improvements. (the station I am describing)
16. In the time of crisis presents news so correctly and quickly that everyone knows the situation.
17. Is first to come through with the latest on what happened, when a news story breaks. '
18. Has given us word of important stories which occurred nearby.
19. Has been, on the whole, the most positive asset in this area.
20. Has the network I like.
21. Has network shows which are the only thing I don't like about it.
22. Gives weather reports without "lessons" on the weather.
23. Has quite competent local person alities who report the news, weather and sports.
24. Has local personalities who have little talent.
25. Seems to look for just any kind of show to be put on the air instead of providing enjoyable, entertaining programs.
26. Is interested in the public welfare and not purely interested in personal gain.
27. Has a staff that keeps up with trends in programming which interest people.
28. Has a friendly attitude.
29- Forfeits good taste for audience appeal.
30. Does not use enough home talent on its local shows. (the station I am describing)
31. Has reporters who report disasters or spectacular crimes rather than news that is more pleasant and informative.
32. Drops many programs which are better than those they add.
33* Is owned by the local newspaper.
34. Has a radio station with the same call letters.
33* Has won several awards for its programs.
3 6 . Over-all has the cleanest and most worthwhile programs.
37. Has evening programs that are inter esting but for real value they have none.
38. Generally has high quality local programs.
39. Has many of the programs which should not come into our living rooms.
40. Has many local shows which are very inadequate and irritating.
41. Has the best local programs available.
42. Has few local programs.
4 3 . Has local shows which do not bother with culture—presenting backwoods singing and playing and live wrestling.
44. Presents informative programs on state history.
43. Presents more special reports than other stations.
46. Has too few educational shows. (the station I am describing)
4 7 . Has entirely too many quia programs.
48. Has just a continuous noise of bank robbers shooting up the town or horses running over the prairie.
*+9. Has the best westerns of any station available.
50. Seems to produce the better plays and other such special shows.
51. Is noted for situation comedies during the evening.
52. Has children's shows which are always superior.
53. Has too many kiddie shows in its schedule.
54. Has some very good serious and inspirational programs.
55. Signs off every night with a prayer.
3 6 . Has too many re-runs. Frequent watchers end up seeing the same show they saw a few months ago.
57. Has too many soap operas.
38. Identifies itself too frequently.
39. Has too many commercials.
6 0 . Has advertising which is neither excessive nor annoying, and is done in good taste.
6 1 . Outs movies so that it can adver tise every five minutes.
6 2 . During special programs cuts the advertisements to a minimum.
63. Cuts off sports shows at climax of the event for ads. (the station I am describing)
6^. Shows advertisements during the movies that break the thought and, in a way, ruin the program.
6 5 . Sometimes gives you the feeling you are missing the funniest part of the show during ads.
66. Manages to present advertisements and station identification breaks when there is a lull in the program.
6 7 . Has local advertisements that are usually corny.
68. Features many fast-talking salesmen pointing to cheap furniture and yelling out their lungs.
6 9 . Tends to make advertisements louder than the program itself.
70. Has some advertisements that are amusing, entertaining and informative.
71. Shows the same commercials over and over.
7 2 . heeds to get busy and dream up some new commercials.
73. Has an excellent listing of shows that are scheduled at appropriate time s.
74. Has morning programs during the week that can sometimes be monotonous.
75- Should have a slogan: "A time and place for everything."
7 6 . Changes its programs quite frequently
77. Has a well-rounded slate of programs, ranging from cultural to western to children's shows. (the station I am describing)
78. Doesn't have an excess of blood and thunder as is found on other stations.
79 • Sometimes goes overboard on the number of certain types of programs i t offers.
80. Has one love story after another.
81. On some nights has no variation in program types from the time you turn the set on until the news.
82. Combines humor, serious and action shows to make a night of very enjoyable watching.
83. Cuts off national network programs for local presentation.
84. Presents programs for adult viewers late in the evening when most children are asleep.
83. Has quit carrying a late show or midnight movie during the week.
86. Runs grade B movies that are mostly re-runs.
87* Doesn't have as many movies as the other stations.
88. Gives the impression that the station doesn't have anything to present, and can't shut down, so they show old movies instead.
8 9 . Has movies that are all old with stories that are too much alike.
90. Has selected movies to conform with the time of the year. During Christmas they have Christmas movies.
91. Seems that all one can get on Saturday and Sunday is sports. 86
(the station I am describing) (5) (*0 (3) (2) (1)
9 2 . Garries local wrestling show.
93. Usually broadcasts all major sporting events.
9 h. Puts too great an emphasis on spor ts .
95. Has excellent world news coverage. *# ■ • _• _* 0*
96. Has news and weather just like the other stations. if**
97. Presents news of local interest superbly. •* 4 • ______4 • • 0
98. Has the finest news coverage this state has to offer.
9 9* Is likeable not because of the programs it presents but because of the news programs.
100. Usually leaves something out of the news which can be seen on another channel.
101. Devotes one-fourth of the news to car wrecks which occurred in the area.
102. Usually forgets news on Sunday.
103- Has news broadcasts with inter 0 0 4 0 esting closing items. 0 ______• ______• ______* lOh. On the news gives a number of smaller yet interesting tidbits that otherwise would be swept out of sight.
105. Gould stop some of the repetition of news and give fuller coverage.
106. Has good editorials on pressing situations and problems.
10?. Presents a majority of the shows that I like to watch. (the station I am describing)
108. Carries my favorite show.
109. Fits my taste best.
110. Is one that I seldom switch from.
111. Is not one that I watch at night.
112. I watch most often but has cer tain programs that are of no interest to me.
113. Is not one I would choose to watch for a whole day.
ll^o Gives children something to watch other than murder mysteries and sex shows.
1 1 5 - hvery afternoon has programs for the kiddies which are varied any where from a series to cartoons.
116. Presents ideas on many programs that may influence a child the wrong way.
117. Has an excellent show for children.
118. Provides daytime dramatic shows with the housewife in mind.
119. Presents soap operas which are boring to people who have no interest in them.
120. Was the first television station I ever watched.
121. Is one I have always enjoyed watching.
122. Is one whose studios I have visited.
123. Lets the teen-ager release some of his stored energy in joining the festivities for him. (the station I am describing)
124. On Sunday has programs on religion especially helpful to the bedfast or others who could not attend church services.
125. Is one that students have been asked to watch for educational values.
126. Should devote more time to educa tional programs.
127. Has some special programs, which are interesting to watch and help me in my work.
128. Has programs that give me a chance to learn in an enjoyable way.
129. Has programs which relax people and make them think somewhat.
130. Is the first station I would turn to for information or weather because I could be reasonably confident of receiving the correct report.
131. Covers the news which directly affects me very well.
132. Carries a wide variety of programs for different groups and their interests.
133. Has something for everyone.
134. Presents some programs that appeal only to the person who has no care what selection he makes.
135* Provides good entertainment for all members of the family.
136. I can watch all day long without being bored,
13?. Has good quality programs that keep people interested in what they are watching. 89
(the station I am describing) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
1 3 8. Provides good wholesome entertain ment for leisure hours.
139. Neither soothes nor relaxes but dulls and bores the viewer.
140. Has an excellent line of "baby sitter" programs presented at times perfect for mothers.
141. Has good shows to keep the children off the streets from the time school is out until dark.
142. Takes part in many civic projects and has contributed generously to charity.
143. Has many programs which under-rate the intelligence of the listeners.
144. Has an audience made up of people without much education or culture in their background.
145. Aims far too many commercials at the moron level.
146. Is the most popular station in the community.
14?. Is the only station some folks watch.
148. Is one my friends think is a good station on the whole.
149. Has a program for children to appear on.
150. Encourages audience participation. appendix II
Characteristics of the Sample of 353 Oklahoma Residents Replying to a Questionnaire Establishing Values of Phrases and Statements concerning Television Stations
Station Type Age of Respondents (years) De scribed: 20 - 30- 40- 50- 60- 70- 80- No 2 2 22. 42 52 52 22 22 Answer Poor 3 25 17 25 9 4 l 2 Average 2 36 3? 9-3 14 9- 0 1 Good _2 22 22 Jii 22 _5 2 0 Total 7 91 86 109 43 13 1 3
Occupation of Respondents
Station Type: Clergy Teacher Farmer Govt. * Retired Others ______wq1 > ------Poor 16 16 19 19 8 2 9 2 Average 13 32 9-2 21 15 8 3 3 Good 18 26 31 32 9 5 9 0 Total 47 74 92 72 32 15 16 5
Station Type: Sex of Respondents
Male
Poor 63 23 Average 86 51 Good 88 92
Total 237 116
_ _ Education of Respondents Station T y p e : ______Grade Junior High College Post No High School Grad . Answ( Poor 9 0 17 29 36 0 Average 0 2 37 90 55 3 Good 0 5 22 91 59 0 Total 9 7 89 110 145 3
90 91
Number and Types of Sets
Station Type Black and White Described: One Two Three Cole Set Sets or More
Poor 63 17 6 3 Average 102 30 4 5 Good 98 27 _7
Total* 263 74 14 15
Estimated Daily TV Viewing Hours
Under One Two Three Four Five Six or Station Type: One Hr. Hr. Hr s. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. More Hrs.
Poor 5 12 22 22 16 2 7 Average 11 21 29 36 24 8 8 Good 8 20 30 32 14 10 15
Total 24 53 81 90 54 20 31
Number of Television Channels Received
One Two Three Four Five Six Seven No Station Type: or More Answer
Poor 4 5 38 24 6 6 3 0 Average 5 13 75 24 6 4 9 1 Good 4 17 57 32 12 4 4 0
Total 13 35 170 80 24 14 16 1
* Information in the table "Number and Typ es of Sets" is derived from two questions and therefore represents more than the 353 respondents in the other tables. APPENDIX I I I
Indices and Standard Deviation for 150 Forced Choice Items As Established by 353 Oklahoma Respondents
Item Number and Item Pref. Discr, Stan. Index Index Devi.
1. Is prompt in fixing network trouble. 348 87 .7721
2. Sounds and looks like it is in a neighborhood barn. 63 94 1.1876
3. Has fair coverage of local news and sports. 324 72 I .0720
4. Has religious services which do not "push" a particular faith. 329 60 1.0782
5. Has announcers with no local flavor to their speech. 231 56 1.4681
6. Treats news with humor. 212 63 1.3839
7. Has announcers that talk directly to their viewers and never grope for words. 321 83 1.1125
8. Has enthusiastic news reporters. 322 98 1.0701
9. Has announcers who seem to have less class, 137 68 1.4347
10. Has people in front of camera who are neat, clean, and not dull and speak well. 344 88 1.9403
11. Has an over-all attitude (from the news caster to the camera operator) of over enthusiasm to put this station on top. 253 55 1.4305
12. Has newsmen who often move to higher positions. 307 85 1.1627
13. fakes pride in its staff members. 334 90 1.0277
14. Operates in a professional manner with only occasional mixups. 335 95 1.9945
15* Seems to always be making improvements. 298 92 1.0543
92 93
Item Number end Item ?rf - ^ or • ®Wn' Index Index Dev.
1 6 . In the time of crisis presents news so correctly and quickly that everyone knows the situation. 328 95 1.0155
17. Is first to come through with the latest on what happened, when a news story breaks. 298 110 1.1557
18. Has given us word of important stories which occurred nearby. 320 83 1.0543
19. Has been, on the whole, the most positive asset in this area. 260 106 I .2913
20. Has the network I like. 285 87 1.2830
21. Has network shows which are the only thing I don't like about it. 123 50 1.307?
22. Gives weather reports without "lessons" on the weather. 270 63 1.4105
23. Has quite competent local personalities who report the news, weather and sports. 332 89 1.0458
24. Has local personalities who have little talent. 127 73 1.3510
25. Seems to look for just any kind of show to be put on the air instead of providing enjoyable, entertaining programs. 118 78 1.3548
26. Is interested in the public welfare and not purely interested in personal gain. 300 67 1.1287
27. Has a staff that keeps up with trends in programming which interest people. 304 86 1.0601
28. Has a friendly attitude. 358 63 .7106
29. Forfeits good taste for audience appeal. 152 53 1.3969
30. Does not use enough home talent on its local shows. 139 56 1.2913
31. Has reporters who report disasters or spectacular crimes rather than news that is more pleasant and informative. 162 44 1.3963 94
Pref. Discr. Stan. Item Number and Item Index Index Devi.
32. Drops many programs which are better than those they add. 205 87 1.4336
33. Is owned by the local newspaper. 171 51 1.8620
34. Has a radio station with the same call letters. 224 58 1.9436
35. Has won several awards for its programs. 297 75 1.4205
36. Over-all has the cleanest and most worthwhile programs. 272 90 1 .2 1 6 0
37. Has evening programs that are interesting but for real value they have none. 195 51 1.3097
38. Generally has high quality local programs. 266 95 1.2933
39. Has many of the programs which should not come into our living rooms. 142 80 1.4196
40. Has many local shows which are very inadequate and irritating. 134 76 1.4145
41. Has the best local programs available. 250 83 1.2502
42. Has few local programs. 214 47 1.3866
43. Has local shows which do not bother with culture—presenting backwoods singing and playing and live wrestling. 178 65 1.4961
44. Presents informative programs on state history. 259 88 1.4223
45. Presents more special reports than other stations. 225 96 1.3596
46. Has too few educational shows. 241 67 1.3630
47. Has entirely too many quiz programs. 174 48 1.4727
46. Has just a continuous noise of bank robbers shooting up the town or horses running over the prairie . 116 57 1.2620
49- Has the best westerns of any station available. 236 43 1.2636 95
Pref. Discr. Stan. Item Number and Item Index Index. Dev.
50. Seems to produce the better plays and other such special shows. 253 94 1.2173
51. Is noted for situation comedies during the evening. 224 5^ 1.2876
52. Has children's shows which are always superior. 138 68 1.2904
53. Has too many kiddie shows in its schedule. 108 50 1.1724
5^. Has some very good serious and inspira tional programs. 314 96 1.0174
55. Signs off every night with a prayer. 151 23 1.7327
56. Has too many re-runs. Frequent watchers end up seeing the same show they saw a few months ago. 268 40 1.3070
57. Has too many soap operas. 209 26 1.4122
58. Identifies itself too frequently. l4o 56 1.4874
59. Has too many commercials. 264 51 1.4005
60. Has advertising which is neither excessive nor annoying, and is done in good taste. 213 70 1.3626
6 1 . Cuts movies so that it can advertise every five minutes. 197 53 1.4829
6 2 . During special programs cuts the advertise ments to a minimum. 291 66 1.2847
63. Cuts off sports shows at climax of the event for ads. 178 41 I .4960
64. Shows advertisements during the movies that break the thought and, in a way, ruin the program. 243 74 1.3828
65. Sometimes gives you the feeling you are missing the funniest part of the show during ads. 204 63 1.4992
66. Manages to present advertisements and station identification breaks when there is a lull in the program. 240 53 1.2213 96
Pref. Discr. Stan. Item Number and Item Index Index Devi.
6 7 . Has local advertisements that are usually corny. 189 76 1.4636
68. Features many fast-talking salesmen point ing to cheap furniture and yelling out their lungs. 222 73 1.4306
6 9 . Tends to make advertisements louder than the program itse lf. 26l 6l 1.4620
70. Has some advertisements that are amusing, entertaining and informative. 311 76 1.0711
71. Shows the same commercials over and over. 289- 46 1.1967
72. Needs to get busy and dream up some new commercials. 277 71 1 .3 2 7 6
73 • Has an excellent listing of shows that are scheduled at appropriate times. 275 80 1.1474
74, Has morning programs during the week that can sometimes be monotonous. 242 46 1.2906
75• Should have a slogan: "A time and place for everything. 245 43 I .3665
76. Changes its programs quite frequently. 194 51 1.3248
77. Has a well-rounded slate of programs, ranging from cultural to western to children's shows. 29? 98 1.1435
78. Doesn't have an excess of blood and thunder as is found on other stations. 25? 77 1.2829
79. Sometimes goes overboard on the number of certain types of programs it offers. 199 64 1.3565
80. Has one love story after another. 95 50 1.0703
81. On some nights has no variation in program types from the time you turn the set on until the news. 166 53 1.4465
82. Combines humor, serious and action shows to make a night of very enjoyable watching. 268 80 1 .0 9 0 9 97
Pref. Discr. Stan. Item Number and Item Index Index Devi. 8 3 . Cuts off national network programs for local presentation. 220 51 1.3717
84. Presents programs for adult viewers late in the evening when most children are asleep. 295 68 1.1280
8 5 . Has quit carrying a late show or midnight movie during the week. 125 35 1.6371
86. Runs grade B movies that are mostly re-runs. 207 43 1.4851
8 7 . Doesn't have as many movies as the other stations. 201 49 1.5230
88. Gives the impression that the station doesn't have anything to present, and can't shut down, so they show old movies instead. 112 74 1.3416
89. Has movies that are all old with stories that are too much alike. 142 55 1.3622
90. Has selected movies to conform with the time of the year. During Christmas they have Christmas movies. 290 47 1.2034
91. Seems that all one can get on Saturday and Sunday is sports. 207 53 1.5388
9 2 . Carries local wrestling show. 194 48 1.8072
93. Usually broadcast all major sporting events. 319 84 1.0900
94. Puts too great an emphasis on sports. 131 51 1.3617
95- Has excellent world news coverage. 337 93 1.0163
96. Has news and weather just like the other stations. 298 59 1.2657
97. Presents news of local interest superbly. 304 95 1.0684
98. Has the finest news coverage this state has to offer. 259 105 1.4182 Pref. Disc. Stan. Item Number and Item Index ...Index . .Deyi^.
99. Is likeable not because of the programs i t presents but because of the news programs. 191 65 1.4297
1 0 0 . Usually leaves something out of the news which can be seen on another channel. 152 72 1.4688
1 0 1 . Devotes one-fourth of the news to car wrecks which occurred in the area. 104 56 1.2631
1 0 2 . Usually forgets news on Sunday. 156 60 1.5797
103. Has news broadcasts with interesting closing items. 296 101 1.2084
104. On the news gives a number of smaller yet interesting tidbits that otherwise would be swept out of sight. 268 91 1.2565
105. Could stop some of the repetition of news and give fuller coverage. 211 66 1.4375
1 0 6 . Has good editorials on pressing situa tions and problems. 241 68 1.4891
1 0 7 . Presents a majority of the shows that I like to watch. 261 90 1 .3 2 1 0
1 0 8 . Carries my favorite show. 249 64 1 .5 8 0 8
109. Fits my taste best. 256 116 1.3752
1 1 0 . Is one that I seldom switch from. 190 69 1.4955
1 1 1 . Is not one that I watch at night. 154 57 1.4721
1 1 2 . I watch most often but has certain pro grams that are of no interest to me. 270 8? 1.4385
113. Is not one I would choose to watch for a whole day. 280 44 1.5213
114. Gives children something to watch other than murder mysteries and sex shows. 311 66 1.0532
115. livery afternoon has programs for the kid dies which are varied anywhere from a series to cartoons. 309 60 1.1853 99
Pref. Disc. Stan. ______Item Number and Item ______Index Index Devi.
116 . Presents ideas on many programs that may influence a child the wrong way. 153 5^ 1.3246
117. Has an excellent show for children. 296 71 1.2106
118. Provides daytime dramatic shows with the housewife in mind. 300 52 1 .0 8 1 2
119. Presents soap operas which are boring to people who have no interest in them. 256 32 1.4200
120. Was the first television station I ever watched. l4l 40 1.8 1 5 2
121. Is one I have always enjoyed watching. 260 114 1.4595
122. Is one whose studios I have visited. 147 35 1.8857
123. Lets the teen-ager release some of his stored energy in joining the festivities for him. 20? 36 1 .3 0 7 6
124. On Sunday has programs on religion especially helpful to the bedfast or others who could not attend church services. 320 65 1.0 9 8 8
125. Is one that students have been asked to watch for educational values. 220 68 1.4055
126. Should devote more time to educational programs. 281 42 1 .2 3 3 9
127. Has some special programs, which are interesting to watch and help me in my work. 247 77 1.4680
128. Has programs that give me a chance to learn in an enjoyable way. 251 87 1.3747
129. Has programs which relax people and make them think somewhat. 281 103 1 .1 3 7 7
130. Is the first station I would turn to for information or weather because I could be reasonably confident of receiving the correct report. 297 116 1 .4 5 1 9 100
Item Number and Item Pref. Discr. Stan. Index _____Index ______Devi .
131. Covers the news which directly affects me very well. 295 101 1.2665
1 3 2 . Carries a wide variety of programs for different groups and their interests. 303 96 1.1 0 9 1
133- Has something for everyone. 314 88 I.O 867
134. Presents some programs that appeal only to the person who has no care what selection he makes. 217 6? 1.4095
135* Provides good entertainment for all mem bers of the family. 296 91 1.1263
136. I can watch all day long without being bored. 84 42 I .2369
137. Has good quality programs that keep people interested in what they are watching. 256 108 1.1660
138. Provides good wholesome entertainment for leisure hours. 288 102 1.0618
139- Neither soothes nor relaxes but dulls and bores the viewer. 1Q4 74 1.1063
140. Has an excellent line of "baby-sitter" programs presented at times perfect for mothers. 212 43 1.1 5 3 1
141. Has good shows to keep the children off the streets from the time school is out until dark. 241 63 1.2320
142. lakes part in many civic projects and has contributed generously to charity. 290 71 1.0941
143. Has many programs which under-rate the intelligence of the listeners. 204 67 1.4157
144. Has an audience made up of people without much education or culture in their background. 142 59 1.3031 101
Pref. Disc. Stan. Item Number and Item Index Index Devi.
145. Aims far too many commercials at the moron level. 187 53 1.5327
146. Is the most popular station in the community. 262 89 1.3494
147. Is the only station some folks vatch. 203 39 1.5357
148. Is one my friends think is a good station on the whole. 290 99 1.2274
149. Has a program for children to appear on. 299 44 1.3225
150. Encourages audience participation. 237 64 1 .3 2 2 0 APPENDIX IV
questionnaire form for pilot test of instrument
TO RE FILLED OUT 31 INTERVIEWER
Interviewer asks respondent:
"Which telev isio n station do you think does the psgt .job?" (CIRCLE) 1. WKY 2. KOCO 3. KWTV 4. Other 5. Don't Know
(Call Letters) "How far did you go in school?"
Grade Jr, Hi. High College Post 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
"To which age group do you belong?" (circle)
15 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59
50 to 69 70 and over
"What is the occupation of the head of the household?"
(if retired or unemployed, note above)
"About how many hours a day do you watch television?" (CIRCLE)
Less than 1 12345 6 or more
ro BE FILLED IN.BX THE INTERVIEWER (CIRCLE)
Male Female
Hi mid lo
W 0
BE SURE TO THANK THE RE SPOMPEM I
102 103
OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY TV SURVEY
The station you are to describe is; WKY-TV KOCO-TV KWTV
Each question has two statements which describe a television station. Check ONE statement in each question which most nearly describes the station. Thank you.
□ Combines humor, serious and action shows to make a night of very enjoyable watching. 1. Over all has the cleanest and most worthwhile □ programs.
Neither soothes nor relaxes but dulls and bores the I 1 viewer. 2 . Devotes one-fourth of the news to car wrecks which □ occurred in the area.
----■ 1 Presents programs for adult viewers late in the *----' evening when most children are asleep. 3. Provides daytime dramatic shows with the housewife □ in mind. ----■ 1 Is interested in the public welfare and not purely '----' concerned with personal gain.
Presents news of local interest superbly. □
Has fair coverage of local news and sports.
In the time of crisis presents news so correctly and L 1 quickly that everyone knows the situation.
! , Neither soothes nor relaxes the viewer but dulls and bores him. 6 . |____| Has too many kiddie shows in its schedule.
I | Has the network I like. 7 . . Has programs which relax people and make them think '------' somewhat. 104
Q.SU IV Survey
|-----1 Presents programs for adult viewers late in the evening when most children are asleep, 8. Has a well-rounded slate of programs ranging from □ cultural to westerns to children's shows.
Carries a wide variety of programs for different □ groups and their interests. 9 I----. Every afternoon has programs for the kiddies which I----1 are varied anywhere from a series to cartoons.
.----- Has religious services which do not "push" a '-----' particular faith. 1 0. |-----, Has quite competent local personalities who report '---- * the news, weather and sports.
|----1 Has the best westerns of any station available. 11. |-----1 Has children's shows which are always superior.
Provides good wholesome entertainment for leisure hours. 1 2. |-----: During special programs cuts the advertisements to minimum.
Provides good entertainment for all members of the family. 13. □ j 1 Has news and weather just like the other ' ‘ stations.
|-----1 Has some advertisements that are amusing, entertain- ing and informative .
□ Has something for everyone.
j 1 Has religious programs which do not "push" a particu- lar faith. 15- □ Takes pride in its staff members.
□ Has the best westerns of any station available. 16 Has good shows to keep the children off the streets □ from the time school is out until dark. 105
QSU TV Survey
j 1 Is one my friends think is a good station on the w h o le . 17. j 1 Selects movies to conform with the time of the year ’ During Christmas they have Christmas movies.
| | Always seems to be making improvements. 1 8. i------[ Provides daytime dramatic shows with the housewife 1----- * in mind .
□ Usually broadcasts all major sports events. 19. Has announcers that talk directly to their viewers □ and never grope for words.
j----1 Has good quality programs that keep people interested * * ' in what they are watching. 2 0. j j Doesn't have an excess of blood and thunder as is found on other stations.
|-----1 Has selected movies to conform with the time of the *-----' year. During Christmas they have Christmas movies. 2 1. I j Takes part In many civic projects and has contrib uted generously to charity.
Has given us word of important stories which occurred n e a rb y . 2 2 . □ j | Has enthusiastic news reporters.
Is first to come through with the latest on what happened when a news story breaks. 23. □ |-----1 Is interested in the public welfare and not purely '-----' interested in personal gain.
Combines humor, serious and action shows to make a □ night of very enjoyable watching. 2 ‘4 [" I Generally has high quality local programs OSU TV Survey
Covers the news which directly affects me very □ w e ll. □ Has an excellent show for children.
Has news and weather just like the other □ stations. j j Has a staff that keeps tip with trends in program- ' ming which interest people.
. On Sunday has programs on religion especially helpful I 1 to the bedfast or others who can not attend church s e r v i c e s . Has enthusiastic news reporters. APPENDIX V
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE OF 131 GUTHRIE RESIDENTS TAKING PART IN THE PILOT SURVEY OF THE INSTRUMENT
"Which Television station do you think does the begt .lob?"
Respondents who scored: WKY KOCO KWTV TOTAL Station Preferred (**8) (*+3) (hO) (131)
P re fe r WKY 25 15 10 50
P re fe r KOCO ? 17 9 33
P re fe r KWTV 6 15 10 21
D o n 't Know 10 6 11 27
far did vou eo in school?"
Re spondents who scored: Educational Wtf¥ KOCO pwxv TOTAL A ttainm ent (he) (h3) (ho) (131)
Grade (1 to 8 y r s .) n 12 12 35
High (9 to 11 y r s .) 10 8 9 27
High Graduate 15 lh 10 39
College 12 9 9 30
"To which ace kfoud do vou belone?"
Respondents who scored: WKX KOC(? KWTV TOTAi, A.ge Grpiip (he) (h3) (ho) (131)
15-39 years 20 22 22 6h
40-59 years 15 10 10 35
60 or more 13 11 8 32 107 108
"What Is the occupation of the head of the household?"
Respondents who s c o re d : Occupational WKY KQC9 KWTV total Group* (30) ( 2 6) (21) (77)
Professional or White Collar 15 13 10 38
U n sk illed 15 13 11 39
Respondents were also asked:
"About how manv h ours a day do you watch television? "
Respondents ; who s c o r e d ; E stim ated WKY KOCQ KWTV total Viewing (**6) (43) (4o) (131) Hours 4 hours and less 14 13 12 39
5 hours 17 18 16 51
6 hours and more 1? 12 12 41
♦ Only the occupation groups which were obviously professional, white collar and unskilled were used in the breakdown, since a number gave their occupation as the place of business rather than their duties, APPENDIX VI
Letter Establishing Signal Strength in Guthrie, Oklahoma
OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY * STILLWATER
School of Electrical Engineering
January 5, 19&5
Professor M. C. Topping Department of Speech Oklahoma State University CAMP US
Dear Professor Topping:
In response to your inquiry concerning a community in Oklahoma which receives all three Oklahoma City commercially licensed television stations, I recommend the community of Guthrie, Oklahoma. Since Guthrie is within 35 miles of Oklahoma City, it would be above the 65 to 70 dbu field strength level for all of the Oklahoma City stations. This would certainly put it in the primary coverage area of each s t a t i o n .
My data for this opinion is taken from the publication, "Engineering Aspects of Television Allocations, A Report of the Television Allocations Study Organization of the Federal Communications Commission." Specific reference is to the work done by TASO Committee 3*3 of Panel 3 which made direct subjective studies of picture quality versus field strength all over the United States. I feel qualified to testify on tnis matter, since I was the engineer that directed the field work of Panel 3•
Very truly yours.
Wm. L. Hughes Head School of Electrical Engineering
WLHJba
109 *
BIBLIOGAAPHY
110 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Agne, Robert F. "The Principle of Television Orientation," Television and Human Behavior. Eds., Leon Arons, Mark A. Way. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1963.
Berio, David K. The Process of Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, i 9 6 0.
Boring, E.G. A History of Experimental Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1929-
Boulding, Kenneth E. The Image. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1963.
Britt, Steuart Henderson, and Lucas, Darrell Blaine. Measuring Adver tising Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1963.
Cantril, Hadley. Gauging Public Opinion. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 19^.
Dahl, Robert A., Haire, Mason, and Lazarsfeld, Paul L. Social Science Research on Business: Product and Potential. New York: Columbia University Press, 1959-
Dewey, John. How We Think. Boston: D. C. Heath and Co., 1933.
Ferguson, George A. Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1959*
Galton, Francis. Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development. New York: Dutton, 1908.
Guilford, J. P. Psychometric Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936.
Head, Sydney W. Broadcasting in America. Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1956.
Johnson, D. M. The Psychology of Thought and Judgment. New York: Harper and Bros., 1955-
Klapper, Joseph. The Effects of Mass Communications. Glencoe: The Free Press, i 9 6 0.
Ill 112
Laurent, Lawrence. "Wanted: The Complete Television Critic," llhe Eighth Art. .New York: Holt, Hinehart and Winston, 1 9 6 2.
Lazarsfeld, Paul F. Radio and the Printed Page. New York: Due11, Sloan and Pearce, Inc., 19^+0.
Lucas, Darrell BLaine, and Britt, Steuart Henderson. Advertising Psychology and Research. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1950*
Lumley, L. H. "Measuring Audience Reactions," Education on. the Air. Ed., Josephine H. MacLatchy. Columbus: Ohio State University, 1932.
Opotowsky, Stan. TV--The Big Picture. New York: Collier Books, 1962.
Qsburn, A. F. Applied Imagination. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1953.
Osgood, Charles E., Suci, George J., and Tannenbaum, Percy H. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana; University of Illinois Press, 1957*
Pillsbury, Walter B., and Meader, Clarence L. The Psychology of Language. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1928.
Reinsch, J. Leonard, and Ellis, E. I. Radio Station Management. New York: Harper and Bros., I960.
Riley, John W., and Riley, Matilda White. "Mass Communications and the Social System," Sociology Today. Eds., Robert K. Merton, Leonard Broom, and Leonard S. Cottrell, Jr. New York: Basic Books Inc., 1959*
Ruch, Floyd L. Psychology and Life. Chicago: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1959*
Schramm, Wilbur. Responsibility in Mass Communications. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1957*
Steiner, Gary A. The People Look at Television. New York; Alfred A. Knopf, 1963.
______. The Citizen and the News. Milwaukee: The Marquette Univer sity Press, 1962.
i'itchener, Edward B. Experimental Psychology of the Thought Processes. New York: Macmillan, 1909.
Vinacke, W. E. The Psychology of Thinking. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1952• 113 Winick, Charles. "How to Find Out What Kind of Image You Have," Developing the Corporate Image. Ed., Lee H. Bristol, Jr. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, i 9 6 0.
Woodworth, Robert S. Experimental Psychology. New York: Holt, 1938.
______. Psychology, a Study of Mental Life. New York; Henry Holt and Co., 1921.
Articles and Periodicals
"AAAA Completes Study of Opinion Leaders," Sponsor. 15:33* August 14, 1961
"Agencies Like Radio Value Measurement," Broadcasting. 65:22, November 25, 1963.
"ARB Survey Shows Big Choice of Channels," Broadcasting. 65:3* July 15, 1963.
"Beefed Up TV Programs Planned," Broadcasting. 66:23. June 8, 1964.
Bell, Harold. "Motivation Research Can Fill in Gaps in Statistical Studies," Advertising Agency Magazine. 50:25, December 6, 1957.
"Burleigh Gardner: Selling the U.S. by Class," Printers' Ink. March 25, I960.
"CBS Cites Radio Success Formula," Sponsor. 16:38, September 17, 1962.
"CBS, NBC Publish Polls of Viewers; Each Finds That It's Most Popular," Business Week. July 4, 1959.
"CBS TV Research Brews Up a Storm," Sponsor. 13:27, July 4, 1959.
"Changing the Station Image," Television Age. IX:17, March 19, 1962.
David, Donald. "Image Building Is an Unexplored Advertising Horizon," Advertising Agency Magazine. 51:1, January 3, 1958.
"Dr. Dichter Psychoanalyzes Radio," Sponsor. 13:1, January 3, 1959*
Ferguson, Robert W. "The Seller's Viewpoint," Sponsor. 16:2, January 8, 1962.
"Formula for the Ideal Station, 11 Broadcasting. 56:1, January 5, 1959-
"Hardly a Scratch in TV's Image," Broadcasting. 57:18, November 2, 1959.
Hoffman, Robert M. "Local Audience Variations for Network Programs," scope. 6:9, September, 1962. 114
"How to Rate Radio Stations," Sponsor. 13:6, February 7, 1959*
Kanter, Donald L. "Why Attitude Research Must Be Predict: ve," Media /scope. 6:2, February, 1 9 6 2.
"K & E's Bud Sherak Sees 3 Research Headaches," Sponsor. 13:4, January 24, 1959.
"Listeners Prefer CBS Radio—CBS," Broadcasting. 33:22, November 25, 1957.
Matthews, William b. "There's Always a Set of Numbers That You Don't Have," frledia/scope. 5:12, December, I 96I.
McMillin, John b. "Commercial Commentary," Sponsor. 13:1, January 3, 1959.
"Men, Media and the Machine," Television Age. IX:17, March 19, 1962.
"Most People Depend on Radio," Broadcasting. 62:13, March 26, 1962.
"NBC Radio Stresses More Research," Sponsor. 16:50, December 10, 1962.
"Negroes Choose Radio," Sponsor. 13:12, March 20, 1959*
"New Vote of Confidence for TV," Broadcasting. 56:14, March 16, 1959-
"Now a Deep Scar in TV's Image," Broadcasting. 57:19» November 9. 1959-
"One Buyer's Opinion . . . Hearing about Ratings," Television Age. April 1, 1963.
"Radio's Marking Time without Image," Broadcasting. 65:15. October 7, 1963.
"Radio: Who Listens, When, Where?" Broadcasting. 54:8, February 24, 1958.
"Ratings Secondary to Station's Image," Broadcasting. 64:2, September 16, 1963.
"Reality's Fine, But Please Pitch It blsewhere," Sponsor. 17:12, March 25. 1963.
Softness, Donald b. "Advertising Primer," Television Age. X;6, October 15, 1962.
Scruggs, William M. "The Seller's Viewpoint," Sponsor. 16:10, March 5. 1 9 62.
"Semantic Differential: New 'Way to Measure Stations," Sponsor. 12:48, November 23, 1957- 115
"Sponsor-scope," Sponsor. 17:12, March 25, 1963.
Steers, William S. "Monday Memo," Broadcasting. 65:lA, September 30, 1963.
"The Image-Builders—1962-'63," Sponsor. 16:33, August 13, 1962.
"TV Industry Launches Counter-Attack Against Critics of Program Quality," Business Week. September 12, 1959-
"TV's PR Project Off the Ground," Broadcasting. 5?:3, July 20, 1959.
"TV Stations," Sponsor. 16:18, April 30, 1961.
"WBAP-TV Builds Image Around 'Ikonogenics,1" Broadcasting. 62:12, September 16, 1^53.
"What Omaha Taught Henry," Broadcasting. 65:18, October 28, 1963.
"What Public Really Thinks of TV," Broadcasting. 57:25, December 21, 1959.
"What's Radio's Success Secret?" Broadcasting. 63:12, September 17, 1962.
"What TV Stations Can Do to Improve Image," Broadcasting. 6A;lA, April 8, 1963.
"Why Is News TV's Hidden Asset," Broadcasting. 5 6 :6 A, June 25, 1959.
"Y & R Computer 'Faces Real Life,'" Sponsor. l6:A0, October 1, 1962.
"Y & R's 'Field Hands' Hoe Media Row," Sponsor. 17:1, January lA, 1 9 6 3.
Aakin, Alvin. "Monday Memo," Broadcasting. 6A;2, January lA, 1963.
Journals
Bell, Daniel. "Twelve Modes of Prediction," Daedalus. 93:3, Summer, I 96A.
Berkshire, James R. "Comparisons of Five Forced-Choice Indices," iwiuca- tional and Psychological Measurement. XVIII:3, 1958.
Krug, Robert E., and Northrup, Doris. "Judgment Time for Forced-Choice Adjective Pairs," Journal of Applied Psychology. A3:6, 1959.
Longstaff, H. P., and Jurgenson, C. E. "Fakability of the Jurgenson Classification Inventory," Journal of Applied Psychology. 37:2, 1953. 116
Lovall, George D., and Haner, Charles F. "Forced-Choice Applied to College Faculty Rating," Educational and Psychological, Measure- msjai, 15. 1955*
McGee, Reece. "A Test for Halo Effect in Ranked Data," The Southwestern Social Science Quarterly. h2, December, 1961.
Perky, C. W. “An Experimental Study of Imagination," American Journal of Psychology. 2 1 , 1 9 1 0.
Sisson, Donald E. "Forced Choice—the New Army Rating," Personnel Psychology. I, 19^.
Staff, Personnel Research Section, Personnel Research and Procedures Branch, Adjutant General's Office, "The Forced Choice Technique and Rating Scale," The American Psychologist. I, 19^+6 •
Waters, L. K., and Wherry, R. J., Jr. "The Effect of Intent to Bias on Forced-Choice Indices," Personnel Psychology. 15:2, 1962.
______. "The Preference Index and Responses to Forced-Choice Pairs," Personnel Psychology. 15:2, 1962.
Reports
"Des Moines Media Study," Shenondoah: Central Surveys, Inc., 1958.
"Des Moines Media Study," Shenondoah: Central Surveys, Inc., 1959.
"Des Moines Radio and Television Stations: A n Image Study," Shenondoah; Central Surveys, Inc., 1962.
Summers, Harrison B. "1938 Kansas Radio Audience," Manhattan: Kansas State College, 1938.
______. "The Kansas Radio Audience of 1939." Manhattan: Kansas State College, 1939.
______, and Forest L. Whan. "A Study of Radio Listening Habits in the State of Iowa," Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Company, 19^1.
"The linage of wGN Radio," Chicago: WGN, Inc., i 9 6 0 .
Whan, Forest L. "The 19*+^ Iowa Radio Audience Survey," Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Co., 19^+.
______. "The 19^+6 Iowa Radio Audience Survey," Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Co., 19 *+6 • 117
______. "The Kansas Radio Audience of 1947," Wichita: University of Wichita, 19^7.
______. "The 1947 Iowa Radio Survey," Des Moines: Central Broadcast ing Co ., 1947 .
______, "The Kansas Radio Audience of 1948," Wichita: University of Kansas, 1948.
______, "The 1948 Iowa Radio Audience Survey," Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Co., 1948.
______. "The 1949 Iowa Radio Audience Survey," Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Co., 19^*9 •
______. "The 1950 Iowa Radio Audience Survey," Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Co., 1950.
______. "The Kansas Radio Audience of 1951»" Wichita: University of Wichita, 1951.
______. "The 1952 Iowa Radio-Television Audience Survey," Des Moines: Central Broadcasting Co., 1952.
______. "The Kansas Radio-Television Audience of 1953," Manhattan: Kansas State College, 1953.
Unpublished Material
Brooks, Keith. "The Construction and Testing of a Forced Choice Scale for Measuring Speaking Achievement." Unpublished Ph.D. disserta tion, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 1955.
Gibson, James William. "Direct and Indirect attitude Scale Measurements of Positive and Negative Argumentative Communications." Unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 19&2.
Gordon, Leonard V. "A Comparison of the Validities of Forced-Choice and Questionnaire Methods in Personality Measurement." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1950. lacy, Robert P. "Determining the Needs of Television and Radio Audi ences in the State of Oklahoma." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 1963.
Lichty, Lawrence W. "'The Nation's Station'—A History of Radio Station WLW," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, 1964. 118
Sabah, Franklin David. "The Use of the Semantic Differential Technique in the Analysis of the Images of Three Columbus Commercial Tele vision Stations." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1959.
Other Sources
American Research Bureau. "The Oklahoma City Television Audience," Beltsville: American Research Bureau, 195^”196A.
Broadcasting Yearbook Issue—I 9 6R, Vol. 66, Yearbook 28, January 1, 196h.
Horst, Paul. "The Prediction of Personal Adjustment," Social Science Research Council Bulletin. ^8, 19^1.
"More Than Meets the Eye." New York: Columbia Broadcasting System, 1959 .
Warren, Howard C. (ed.). Dictionary of Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1934.
Public Documents
Federal Communications Commission. Inquiry into Local Programming in Omaha. Nebraska. Docket No. 1^+863, October 2A, 1 9 6 3.
U.S. Congress, House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Evaluation of Statistical.Methods Use in Obtaining Broadcasting Ratings . 8 7 th Congress, 1st Session, 1961.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Census of Population: I960. Vol. I, Part 38, Oklahoma. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963.