INFORMATION TO USERS
The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction Is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6H x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
University Microfilms International A Ben 4 Howen information Company 300 Norm Zeet} Road Ann Arbor Ml 48106 t34feuSA 3’J 761 4700 800 521 0 6 0 0 Order Number 9031037
An ecological study of gratification niche dimensions and competition in the video entertainment industries
AI bar ran, Alan Brett, Ph.D.
The Ohio State University, 1990
Copyright ©1990 by A lbs rr an, Alan Brett. All rights reserved.
UMI 300 N. Zccb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 AN ECOLOGICAL STUDY OF GRATIFICATION NICHE DIMENSIONS AND
COMPETITION IN THE VIDEO ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES
DISSERTATION
presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate
School of The Ohio State University
b y
Alan B. Albarran, B. A., M. A.
*****
The Ohio Stale University
1990
Dissertation Committee: Approved By:
John W. Dimmick, Ph.D.
Joseph M. Foley, Ph.D.
Kathleen J. Krone, Ph.D
A d v iser
Department of Communication Copyright by Alan B. Albarran 1990 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Measures from "Formulas for computation of niche breadth, niche, overlap, and competitive superiority of communication media using gratification measures/' Copyright 1985 John W. Dimmick. Used with permission of the author.
This study was supported in part by a dissertation grant from the Dowden Center for Telecommunications at the University of Georgia.
My sincere thanks and appreciation are extended to my dissertation adviser, Dr. John Dimmick, for his helpful guidance and assistance throughout this research. I am also deeply indebted to Dr. Joe Foley and Dr. Kathy Krone, the other members of my advisory committee, for their helpful comments and suggestions throughout my course work and dissertation study. Finally, to my wife, Beverly, thanks for your love and undying support, and your willingness to disrupt your career so I could return to graduate school. To my children, Beth and Amanda, I thank you for your love, understanding and patience. To my mother, Jean, thanks for always having faith in my ability to succeed. VITA
1976 ...... B. A. in Speech Marshall University Huntington, West Virginia
1977-1978 ...... Manager, WMUL-FM Graduate Teaching Associate Department of Speech Marshall University
1978 ...... M.A. in Speech Marshall University
1978-1979 ...... Broadcast Coordinator Raleigh County Schools Beckley, West Virginia
1979-1987 ...... Instructor, Radio-TV-Film Sam Houston State University Huntsville, Texas
1987-1989 ...... Graduate Teaching Associate Department of Communication The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio
1989-1990 ...... L ecturer Department of Communication The Ohio State University
iii PUBLICATIONS
Albarran, A. B. (1989), The Federal Communications Commission's multiple ownership rules: Implications for program diversity and the public interest. Arizona Communication Association Journal. 18 (Fall) 15-24.
Albarran, A. B. (1983). Managing sales conference highlights. Feedback. 25 (2) 28-9.
Albarran, A. B. (1981). The growing unity of college radio. Feedback. 25 (2) 23-4.
Albarran, A. B. (1981). Promotions at the college radio station. Journal of College Radio. 18 (4) 16.
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Communication ABSTRACT
The ecological theory of the niche was combined with the uses and gratifications approach to determine how the video entertainment media (broadcast television, cable television, the VCR, premium cable, pay per view) compete with one another in their ability to satisfy audience needs. Telephone survey research methods included a pilot study of 150 respondents which generated fourteen gratifications obtained and eight gratification opportunities items for use in the main study. Interviews with 464 heads of household in cable television homes were completed in October of 1989 in Franklin County, Ohio. Factor analysis extracted three niche dimensions underlying audience entertainment needs which were labeled as affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities. The ecological measures of niche breadth, niche overlap, and competitive superiority were used to describe the complex pattern of competitive relationships which exists among the video entertainment media across the three gratification niche dimensions. On the affective dimension the VCR exhibited the broadest niche in satisfying entertainment needs, followed by cable television and broadcast television. Broadcast television had the broadest niche on the cognitive dimension, while the VCR was found to be the most diverse medium in satisfying audience needs on the gratification opportunities dimension. Competition for audience gratifications was the strongest on the affective dimension as indicated by the niche overlap measures. Across dimensions the most intense competition was observed between premium cable and pay per view and between broadcast television and cable television. In terms of media superiorities cable television and the VCR dominated the pairwise comparisons on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions, while broadcast television and cable television were superior to other media forms on the cognitive dimension. Implications of the findings were (1) broadcast television is vulnerable to the diversity of programming options offered by cable television and the VCR, but is superior to premium cable and pay per view in serving entertainment needs; (2) cable television serves a wide variety of entertainment needs and is the strongest competitor to broadcast television; (3) the VCR is clearly superior in providing gratification opportunities to the audience; and (4) premium cable and pay per view are perceived as too similar to one another and offer little in the way of need satisfaction across the gratification niche dimensions. TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... ii
VITA...... iii
ABSTRACT...... v
LIST OF T A B L E S ...... x
LIST OF FIGURES...... xii
CHAPTER PAGE
I. RATIONALE ANDLITERATURE REVIEW...... 1 Introduction ...... 2 The Theory of the Niche...... 5 Niche Dimensionality ...... 7 Niche Breadth and Niche O verlap...... 8 Displacement ...... 9 Uses and Gratifications ...... 12 Gratifications Research...... 13 Gratification M odels ...... 16 Gratification Studies of the New M ed ia ...... 16 Pay Cable and Pay Per View Studies ...... 18 Niche Theory and Media Gratifications ...... 2 0 Competitive Superiority ...... 2 1 Other Niche Studies...... 2 2 Gratification Opportunities ...... 2 3 Conclusion and Overview of Subsequent Chapters . 2 5
II. METHODS...... 2 7 Overview of Research Methods ...... 2 8 Sampling Method ...... 3 0 The Pilot S tu d y 3 2 Pilot Design and Administration 3 2 Pilot Results 3 6 Main Study 4 2 Questionnaire D esig n 4 3 Internal V alidity 4 4 Pretesting and Adm inistration 4 5 Quantitative Data Analysis 4 7
III. RESULTS: GRATIFICATION NICHE DIM ENSIONS 5 0 Introduction 5 0 Factor Analysis Procedure 5 1 Factor Analysis: GO Dimensions 5 3 TV GO Factor Results 5 4 Cable GO Factor R esu lts 5 6 VCR GO Factor R esults 5 8 Premium Cable GO Factor Results 5 8 Pay Per View GO Factor Results 6 1 Summary of GO Factor R esu lts 6 3 Factor Analysis: Gratification Opportunities 6 4
IV. RESULTS: NICHE BRDEADTH AND OVERLAP 6 8 Introduction 6 8 Defining the Breadth and Overlap Measures. 6 9 Niche B readth 7 3 Sum m ary 7 6 Niche O verlap 7 6 Affective Dimension 7 8 Cognitive Dimension 8 1 Gratification Opportunetes Dimension 8 4 Summary 8 7
V. RESULTS: COMPETITIVE SUPERIORITY 9 1 Defining the Superiority Measure 9 1 Pairwise Comparisons of Superiority 9 2
viii Affective D im ension ...... 95 Cognitive D im ension ...... 98 Gratification Opportunities Dimension ...... 100 S um m ary ...... 104
VI. RESULTS: SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION...... 110 Summary: Gratification Niche Dimensions ...... 110 Summary: Niche Breadth ...... 112 Summary: Niche O v erlap...... 113 Summary: Media Superiorities ...... 115 Reliability and Validity ...... 12 1 Limitations of the Study ...... 13 0 Implications and Areas for Future Study ...... 13 1 Broadcast T elevision ...... 13 1 Cable Television ...... 13 3 The V C R...... 13 5 Premium Cable ...... 13 7 Pay Per View ...... 13 8 Conclusion ...... 14 0
LIST OF REFERENCES...... 143
APPENDICES
A. Video Entertainment Pilot Questionnaire ...... 154
B. Video Entertainment Main Study Questionnaire . . . 159
ix LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1. Pilot Study Categories of VideoEntertainment Needs 3 7
2. Anticipated Dimensions—Video Entertainment ...... 3 9
3. Pilot Study Use of Pay Cable and Pay Per View Channels...... 4 2
4. Principal Axis Factor Solution for TV G O ...... 5 5
5. Principal Axis Factor Solution for Cable TV G O ...... 5 7
6. Principal Axis Factor Solution for VCR G O ...... 5 9
7. Principal Axis Factor Solution for Premium Cable GO. 6 0
8. Principal Axis Factor Solution for Pay Per View GO 6 2
9. Factor Loadings for Gratification Opportunities D im ension ...... 6 5
10. Niche Breadth Results ...... 7 4
11. Niche Overlap Measures—Affective Dimension ...... 7 9
12. Niche Overlap Measures—Cognitive Dimension ...... 8 2
13. Niche Overlap Measures—Gratification Opportunities Dimension ...... 8 5
14. Affective Dimension Media Pair Superiorities ...... 9 7 15. Effect Size and Power Analysis (Alpha-.05) for Affective Dimension ...... 99
16. Cognitive Dimension Media Pair Superiorities ...... 101
17. Effect Size and Power Analysis (Alpha-.05) for Cognitive Dimension ...... 10 2
18. Gratification Opportunities Dimension Media Pair Superiorities ...... 10 3
19. Effect Size and Power Analysis (AIpha-.05) for Gratification Opportunities Dimension ...... 105
20. Summary of Media Superiorities Across Gratification Niche Dimensions ...... 10 6
21. Response' o Internal Validity Item ...... 123
22. Comparison of Compensatory and Non-Compensatory Models ...... 12 7
XI LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1. Formulas for Niche Breadth and Niche O verlap 7 1
2. Formulas for Competitive Superiority 9 3
xii CHAPTER I
RATIONALE AND LITERATURE REVIEW
This study seeks to understand how different media industries compete with one another in their ability to satisfy audience entertainment needs. To this end, the study focuses on the audience patterns of media use and gratifications derived from the video entertainment industries. This study combines the ecological theory of the niche with the uses and gratifications approach in order to assess the dimensions on which the video entertainment industries compete with one another. The central question driving the study is as follows: How do the different video entertainment industries such as broadcast television, cable television, the videocassette recorder (VCR), premium or pay cable channels and pay per view programming compete and coexist with one another in their ability to satisfy audience needs, and which of the media forms are perceived to be superior across the various audience dimensions? This chapter offers a theoretical rationale for the study, drawing upon the literature from media uses and
1 gratifications and the ecological theory of the niche as a framework to guide the research. Introduction The video entertainment industries in the United States continue to experience rapid change. For many years, the traditional broadcast networks were the dominant force in television entertainment. Today this is not the case (Broadcasting. 1989). Competing technologies, in the form of basic cable television service and the home videocassette recorder (VCR), are found in over fifty percent of all television households. Premium or pay cable channels, such as Home Box Office and Showtime, currently reach approximately 35 million households (Broadcasting. 1990). The latest video entertainment technology, pay per view programming, continues to diffuse rapidly in cable households. Many analysts predict that pay per view will become a billion dollar entertainment industry this decade, possibly as early as 1991 (Hawkins, 1989; Kumit, 1987; Yarrow, 1988). The proliferation of these new video technologies have eroded the audience shares of the broadcast networks and increased the need for more accurate research in audience measurement (Beville, 1988; Rice & Associates, 1984). The migration of the audience to these new technologies has also created shifts in advertising budgets allocated to the broadcast 3 networks and cable channels (Broadcasting. 1987, 1989). These developments have created the need to understand competition among the various media entertainment industries. A difficulty in assessing competition is determining an effective way to measure and quantify competition among the media industries. There are several ways one could analyze competition among the media industries. Many studies have centered on intraindustry competition, or competition within an industry. Representative studies include Owen, Beebe and Manning's (1973) study of the television networks, Rosse's (1980) analysis of competition in the newspaper industry, and Chan- Olmsted and Litman's (1988) analysis of the cable television industry. The focus of this study is on intermedia competition— competition between industries. Again, there are several ways one could approach this type of study. For example, one could examine the competition for advertising dollars on the local and national levels. However, not all of the entertainment mediums are supported by advertising, such as home video rentals, premium cable channels and pay per view services. Alternatively, one could study consumer patterns of expenditures on the media as a means to measure competition (e.g., McCombs, 1972), but this type of research has been very 4
limited. Audience ratings would provide another source of data used to gauge competition, but rating services are limited to the broadcast stations and networks and the major cable channels, because of their importance to both local and national advertisers (Beville, 1988). The ecological theory of the niche, combined with the uses and gratifications approach, provides a framework which can be used to assess competition between the media industries. Following this approach, media industries are conceptualized as populations that compete for the gratifications derived by the members of the audience. The terms "population" and "gratifications" as used in this study require further explanation. In an ecological model a population is a set of organizations which are more similar to each other than they are to members of other populations, although structure and other characteristics may vary from organization to organization (McKelvey & Aldrich, 1983). Hence, television stations or cable systems form recognizable populations which roughly correspond to what is meant as a medium or industry. Gratifications represent the satisfaction, or utilities obtained by audience members from the entertainment media. To date, many of the gratifications studies have focused on isolating through factor analysis the specific dimensions underlying the 5 needs served by the media for their respective audiences. In the next section of the chapter an overview of the theory of the niche is presented, along with a discussion of the key concepts of niche dimensionality, breadth, overlap and displacement. The Theory of the Niche Niche theory developed in the field of bioecology. Niche theory offers a set of concepts which are used to explain how populations compete and coexist on limited resources in an ecological community. The concept of the niche is a central part of ecological study, and refers to the position of a life-iorm in a given population or community. As discussed earlier a population can be thought of as a species in bioecology; in human ecology we can think of a population as a set of organizations. A set of populations which exist on the same resources constitute a guild. It is within these guilds where the competition for resources by the member populations can be quite intense. The ecoiugical community consists of the system where the different populations interact with one another and the environment. Different theorists have applied ecological theory to populations of organizations in establishing the population ecology framework which attempts to explain the relationship that exists between organizations and their environments. Hannan and Freeman (1977) used a population ecology 6
framework to determine how different populations of organizations compete for the available pool of resources in the environment. Aldrich (1979) defined organizational success as the ability to survive, through relative superiority over other organizational forms. Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) posit a resource dependency perspective, an adaptation model, to understand how organizations adapt to their environments in order to survive. Several ecologists provide insight to the concept of the niche. Hawley (1950, p. 44) notes the community can be considered an "organization of niches, since the activities of each class of organism influences the activities of every other class in the association." Whittaker (1975) adds the niche is not just the position of a particular species, but rather encompasses the relationship of the species to other forms. Pianka (1983, p. 239) concludes the niche represents "the total of the spatial, temporal and trophic adaptations of the individual, population or community to its environment." Ecologists have been interested for many years in how populations adapt to various niches, particularly from the standpoint of cooperative processes and relationships. Ecologists tend to view competition as an indirect phenomena, where utilization of a resource by one population limits the availability of that resource to other populations (Ricklefs, 7
1979). Thus, the ecological niche emerges when different populations partition resources among themselves along a set of niche dimensions. Niche Dimensionality. The first efforts toward developing a set of theoretical statements regarding niche dimensions began with Hutchinson (1957) who defined the niche as a hypervolume existing in n-dimensional space. A population which occupies a single resource could be plotted in simple one-dimensional space. When several resources are obtained from different dimensions, the intersections form what Hutchinson terms a hypervolume. Typically, a niche of a species comprises many different dimensions, although most researchers have studied only one or two dimensions. Another contribution by Hutchinson was the distinction between the fundamental and realized niche of a species. The fundamental niche is the "ideal" or hypothetical niche attained in the absence of competitors, while the realized niche is the actual niche achieved under competitive conditions. When two or more populations use the same set of resources in the environment the realized niches can be expected to differ. If one population utilizes a resource to the extent to which the resource becomes limited or unavailable to other populations, then the realized niches will differ. Hence, niche differences occur as each population in the environment utilizes a distinct 8 set of resources, which are found both within and across different dimensions. One of the major questions for ecological research is determining how many dimensions exist for the populations under study. Once the individual dimensions are identified, it is then possible to make precise descriptions of the niches. These descriptions are vital to understanding the patterns of resource allocation among different populations, and how these resources are shared. One of the objectives of this study is determining the number of g.«iification niche dimensions underlying the entertainment needs of the audience. Levins (1968) mathematically defined the concepts of niche breadth and niche overlap as a way to describe the relationships between populations and their resources. These measures offer insight as to the competitive relationships among populations for various resources. Niche Breadth and Niche Overlap. Niche breadth refers to the distance along a particular resource dimension or axis that a population occupies in the niche hypervolume. Breadth can also be thought of as the relationship of a population to resources in a community. Breadth reflects the amount of functional differentiation or diversity among organizational forms in the population. Broad niched forms, or generalists, utilize a wide range of resources. Narrow niched forms, or specialists, utilize few resource dimensions. Two examples illustrate these concepts. Along a trophic dimension, a broad- niched species would consume food from several categories, while a narrow-niched form would select food from a smaller number of trophic categories. In terms of media industries, the pretelevision movie industry was dependent for many years on a single resource—box office admissions—for survival. Over the years, the movie industry diversified its product and thus broadened its niche, and now draws resources from numerous sources, including broadcast and cable licensing fees, vidcocassette sales and rentals, international and domestic syndication and pay per view. Niche overlap refers to the degree to which two populations utilize the same resources for survival. Overlap is the. area of niche space shared by different populations, and defines the degree of similarity between forms in the guild. High overlap indicates intense competition for the same resources. Low overlap indicates little utilization of the same resources, and thus little competition among populations. Niche breadth and niche overlap are affected by the number of different populations and the amount of resources available in an ecological community. D isplacem ent. A high level of niche overlap is one of the conditions which may eventually lead to competitive 1 0 displacement of one population over another. If two populations compete with one another in a resource-limited environment, the superior competitor could drive the other population from the community. This type of condition is typically referred to as exclusion. The complete extinction of a population is also a possibility. Many ecologists prefer the more moderate term of competitive displacement, which suggests alteration of the niche of one competitor which lowers competition between the two populations (Colwell & Futuyma, 1971). Dimmick and Rothenbuhler (1984a, 1984b) applied the theory of the niche to determine how competition for advertising resources had changed over several years of analysis between the newspaper, radio, television, and outdoor industries. The authors found that high overlap--where competition for resources was most intense--provided an indication of competitive displacement. By calculating measures of niche breadth and niche overlap, Dimmick and Rothenbuhler were able to explain how the television industry had displaced the radio industry for national advertising resources. These authors determined the survival of radio was attributed to its pre-television generalism. As the television medium began to dominate national advertising, the radio 1 1 industry began to specialize toward local advertising. Dimmick and Rothenbuhler (1984a, 1984b) concluded that broad and narrow-niched populations (or industries) utilize resources differently, and generalists are better prepared to survive in changing environments. In summary, the theory of the niche helps to explain how populations compete and coexist on limited resources in an ecological community. Identifying the niche dimensions of the populations under study is necessary to calculate measures of niche breadth and overlap. Niche breadth and overlap provide descriptive tools to map the diversity and similarity of resource utilization by organizational forms in the community. In applying niche theory to media industries it would be improper to suggest that populations of organizations providing video entertainment and populations of biological species have anything in common. However, because populations of organizations and populations of species each depend on a set of resources they fall under the general purview of the theory. As Dimmick and Rothenbuhler explain (1984a, p. 107) "the theory of the niche is abstract and general . . . its substance is a set of concepts and propositions concerning competition . . . as such, it is not exclusively a biological theory but a theory formulated by bioecologists to describe and explain competition and coexistence." 1 2
The theory of the niche shares a conceptual relationship with media uses and gratifications research. The uses and gratifications approach helps to explain the similarities and differences among the media in providing gratifications to the audience. The next section of this chapter reviews the major components of the uses and gratifications literature to explicate these key concepts and their relationship to niche theory. Uses and Gratifications The uses and gratifications approach views the audience as individuals that are active and goal-directed in their patterns of media consumption. The audience uses the media to satisfy different needs by selecting among the different types of media content. A wide range of media competitors may offer similar content, therefore individual choice may be guided by expected gratifications. Hence, the media compete for the available audience in their ability to satisfy various audience gratifications. Media which provide a broad or diverse range of entertainment and information needs (suc\ as television) are conceptually similar to a generalist in niche theory. On the other hand, media which are more specialized in their presentation (such as newspapers) offer a limited range of need gratifications to the audience. When media forms are similar in serving the same need gratifications, conditions 1 3
analogous to the ecological concept of niche overlap exist. When media forms are dissimilar in serving audience gratifications, there is little or no overlap, and thus little competition. Hence, some parallels exist between the uses and gratifications approach and the key concepts of niche theory. The uses and gratifications approach provides an understanding of how audience needs and expectations are linked with media behaviors. Katz, Blumler and Gurevitch (1974, p. 20) summarized the components of the uses and gratifications paradigm as concerned with "(1) the social and psychological origins of (2) needs, which generates (3) expectations of (4) the mass media or other sources, which lead to (5) differential exposure patterns of media exposure (or engagement in other activities), resulting in (6) need gratifications and other (7) consequences, perhaps mostly unintended ones." The following paragraphs discuss the major trends in gratifications research. Gratifications Research. Over the years, researchers have examined audience motivations and gratifications from a variety of different perspectives regarding media and content. The majority of gratifications studies have reported two or more substantive dimensions which underlie the need structures of the audience. In synthesizing much of the literature on gratifications research, Palmgreen (1984) suggests 1 4 that findings indicate an association between gratifications sought and gratifications obtained from the media, and between gratifications and media exposure, medium choice, program and content choice, and time spent with the media. Several reviews discuss similar theoretical and methodological advances in gratifications research (see Blumler, 1979; Blumler & Katz, 1974; McQuail, 1984; Rosengren.Wenner & Palmgreen, 1985). Some researchers have focused research on gratifications provided by one particular medium. Herzog (1944) found three gratifications of female radio serial listeners—-emotional release, wishful thinking, and advice. Berelson (1949) identified several uses of the newspaper, including information and interpretation of public affairs, and a tool for daily contact. Wolfe and Fisk (1949) studied comic book use by children and found different types of comics were preferred by different age groups. Mendelsohn (1964) found radio listening provided companionship, a source of news and information, and aiding social interaction. Palmgreen and Rayburn (1979) observed seven public television viewer gratifications—relaxing, learning about things, communication utility, passing time, companionship, entertainment, and forgetting daily cares. As a group, these studies help illustrate the diverse range of media content that researchers have investigated in the uses and gratifications tradition. Other researchers have examined specific types of media content to determine gratifications sought and obtained from areas such as network television news (Palmgreen, Wenner & Rayburn, 1980), television soap operas (Carveth & Alexander, 1985; Herzog, 1944) and religious television programming (Abelman, 1987). Individual programs have been investigated
as well, such as the television mini-series "Roots" (Hur Sl Robinson, 1981) and the newsmagazine "60 Minutes" (Rubin, 1981a). Katz, Gurevitch and Haas (1973) authored a seminal work which attempted to determine the use of the mass media (defined as books, newspapers, radio, television, and film) to satisfy different types of needs for Israeli adults. The authors found the media was used by individuals to interact with others through instrumental, affective and integrative relations. The media were used in an interchangeable manner with one another, with technical attributes, content, and context important in determining which medium to use. Further, this study recognizes the similarity among different media in their ability to satisfy different types of audience needs. 1 6
Gratification Models. Several models have developed to explain the associations between gratifications sought and obtained and media choice and consumption. Palmgreen, Wenner and Rayburn (1981) found a discrepancy model (referred to as the perceived difference between watching one program and an alternative program) was useful in predicting what news program viewers were likely to watch. Subsequently, Palmgreen and Rayburn (1982, 1985) used expectancy value theory as the basis for formulating an expectancy value model of gratifications sought. Wenner (1985, 1986) has argued for transactional models which take into account both gratifications sought and obtained from the media. Finally, McQuail (1984) argues for models that employ two independent gratifications dimensions; a cultural or affective dimension and a cognitive dimension. Only in recent years have the uses and gratifications approach been extended to studies of new media technologies. Gratification Studies of the New Media: __Cablfi and the V CR. Despite the call for uses and gratifications research applied to the new communication technologies (Palmgreen, 1984; Palmgreen, Wenner & Rosengren, 1985; Williams, Phillips & Lum, 1985) only a few studies exist. Only two technologies have been investigated: cable television and the VCR. Shaver (1983) used focus groups to determine audience motivations 1 7 for cable viewers. Her study found two primary motivations for using cable television, that of variety of program choices and more control over viewing time. Sparkes (1983) and Sparkes and Delbel (1989) used a panel design to assess perceptions and reactions to the adoption of multi-channel cable TV service over different time periods. This series of studies found that subjects responded less favorably to cable service over time, possibly due to inflated expectations which the "new" cable service did not provide. Umphrey (1986) found that viewers perceived cable as more of an adult medium than regular television, and most viewers used cable for entertainment, rather than for informational purposes. Scholarly interest in the uses of the VCR have produced several interesting studies (Levy, 1989). Levy and Fink (1984) suggest consumers using the VCR for both time-shifting and tape rental purposes represent an "active" form of audience participation in the mass communication process. This concept of audience activity, based on the needs and goals of the audience, has been the central focus of VCR studies by Levy and Windahl (1984,1985), Levy (1987), and Rubin and Bantz (1987). Their findings suggest owners are active, selective, and involving in their orientations to using the VCR. The findings of these studies support the evaluation by Williams, et al. (1985, p. 246) who suggest "a new media technology may offer not 1 8 only new gratifications, but may make traditional gratifications (e.g. viewing of TV shows, theatrical movies) more easily obtainable." A recent study on children's uses and gratifications with the VCR suggests that the VCR has not achieved any special priority in terms of its ability to gratify the needs of young people (Cohen, Levy & Golden, 1988). The authors speculate that children have not yet found a separate identity for the relatively new VCR technology. Other studies have been undertaken to determine how new media technologies impact the network television audience. An example of this type of research is a study by Walker (1987), which examined inheritance or lead-in effects associated with the new media upon the network primetime audience. Walker found that broadcast network inheritance levels (thought of as the percentage of audience members that are duplicated from one program to the next) decreased as cable, VCR, and remote control tuning devices were adopted by consumers. Pav Cable and Pav Per View Studies. In terms of pay cable, a number of studies describe the viewing patterns and characteristics of pay cable audiences. Many of these studies have compared pay cable subscribers to basic cable subscribers. Krugman and Ekrich (1982) found pay cable subscribers to be younger and more affluent with a greater 1 9 desire for unedited movies than subscribers to basic cable. Ducey, Krugman & Ekrich (1983) found that preference for pay cable was a major influence in the decision to adopt basic cable service, particularly for younger families with children. Rothe, Harvey and Michael (1983) found subscribers desired more movies and variety in selecting pay cable channels. Webster (1983) reviewed Arbitron audience ratings in 24 different television markets to determine the impact of cable and pay cable channels on local television viewing. Webster found that the introduction of cable and pay cable channels caused fragmentation of the local television audience. Reagan, Ducey and Bernstein (1985) found pay cable subscribers were more likely to be younger, more affluent, own their own home, and have children in the household. Murray and White (1987) surveyed VCR owners and their use of pay cable channels. Overall, viewing of movies on pay channels tended to increase in households with the acquisition of a VCR, but some VCR owners (27% of the sample) indicated they would cancel their pay cable channels since acquiring a VCR. Only one study has examined the pay per view audience and how pay per view compared with pay cable and the VCR
(Childers Sl Krugman, 1987). A field test indicated pay per view was perceived by VCR owners to be more convenient, easier to operate, provide more individual control, and offer 20 higher quality and value. No significant differences were found between pay cable subscribers and nonsubscribers in their perceptions of pay per view. Despite the wide range of research on pay cable channels and their audiences, no studies have been identified which examines the uses and gratifications associated with either pay cable or pay per view services. These areas merit investigation, as Williams, et al. (1985, p. 244) suggest these new communication technologies should be examined to learn "how, or if, gratifications change with media characteristics." Niche Theory and Media Gratifications The combination of the ecological theory of the niche with the uses and gratifications approach provides a unique method to quantify and measure competition between media industries. Niche dimensions can be defined by extracting the factors underlying the gratifications obtained from the different media industries. The dimensions may then be utilized to produce measures of niche breadth and niche overlap, which provide descriptive indices of the similarity and diversity of different media in their ability to satisfy audience needs. The competitive superiority measure indicates the relative superiority among the media in serving the needs of the audience across the gratification niche dimensions. 2 1
A number of studies combining the uses and gratifications approach with the ecological theory of the niche to analyze different aspects of media competition have been undertaken in a program of research by Dimmick and colleagues. The earliest study (Dimmick, Dobos & Lin, 1985) examined the competition among the newspaper, radio, broadcast and cable television mediums to satisfy audience needs for general news content. A factor analysis determined a two dimensional, affective-cognitive need structure represented the underlying gratification items. This study also introduced a new measure to define the concept of competitive superiority, an index which graphs the relative superiority of one medium over another medium across the gratification niche dimensions. Niche breadth and niche overlap offer descriptive information on competition between two mediums, while the superiority measure indicates the degree of superiority or equivalence between two media forms. Competitive Superiority. A measure of competitive superiority developed by Dimmick (1985) was used to determine which of two mediums provided greater audience gratification. A measure of superiority based on the magnitude of the individual respondents ratings was calculated for each pair of mediums using the gratifications obtained items for each dimension. Competitive superiority was determined by a 22 significant correlated t-tcst procedure on the Sm measures, while a non-significant result indicated similarity or equivalence between the two media, i.e. no differences in need gratifications derived from either medium. Overall, consistent results were obtained in ten of the twelve pairwise comparisons. Newspapers, broadcast and cable television were all found to be superior to radio in satisfying audience needs for general news content. Other Niche Studies. Dobos (1986) examined managerial need gratifications among the population of general and specialized news media offering business news content. The factor analysis procedure produced two parallel dimensions of gratifications sought and obtained tied to what Dobos refers to as the macro and micro business environments. The principle findings indicated that managerial gratifications from business news content were homogeneous and tied to social role expectations, and that the print medium's superiority over the electronic media were related to the cognitive aspects of the macro and micro factors, along with time constraints. In the only study to focus on the entertainment needs of the audience, Dimmick, Gordon, Musgrave and Dobos (1987) studied competition among broadcast television, cable television, and the VCR. In the early phases of the project the authors conducted a pilot test to ascertain the gratifications 23 associated with the media. The pilot test produced a number of items, including several related to a variety of entertainment choices and flexibility in time scheduling. Originally, these items were assumed to be gratifications. When the scales were later analyzed using dimension reduction techniques, the choice and time use items did not load on either the cognitive or affective factors that emerged from the data. The authors found these items formed a single, unidimensional scale when entered into a separate factor analysis. Dimmick, et al. (1987) concluded that the audience's ability to have a variety of choices and greater control over their individual time use were important characteristics the audience associated with the new media. Thus, a separate dimension, which the authors labeled as gratification opportunities, were a unique trait of the new media environment. Gratification Opportunities. The conceptualization of the gratification opportunities dimension is consistent with the earlier work by Carlstein (1982) who argues that human time is a resource which must be budgeted. Carlstein's research, rooted in the work of Swedish geographer Torsten Hagerstrand, is based on the simple fact that people--as both individuals and members of groups—change location over time. All activities cannot be completed at once, but instead enacted in a sequential manner. Hence, the notion of time as a limited 24
human resource results in the conceptualization of a population time budget. While Carlstein's work centers on the time- budget at the population level, it is much more useful to think of household or individual time budgets regarding media use for the purpose of explicating the idea to gratification opportunities. Traditional media, such as broadcast television, movies, and radio have established rigid time schedules the audience must conform to in organizing their leisure activities. Dimmick and Wallschlaeger (1986, p. 9) observe, "the new media offer greater choice, more control over consumption, or both." Stated another way, the new entertainment media offer a greater number of gratification opportunities for consumers. Principal findings of the study (Dimmick, et al., 1987) indicated that cable television and the VCR was superior to regular television across sixteen of the eighteen magnitude comparisons on the three dimensions (cognitive, affective, gratification opportunities). The VCR was found to be clearly superior to both broadcast and cable television in providing gratification opportunities to the audience. The authors summarize their findings by suggesting the measures of niche breadth, overlap, and superiority are useful to "define the niches of the video entertainment industries (Dimmick, et al. 1987, p. 16)." 25
In a later study Dimmick, Albarran and Rupcl (1989) found that gratification opportunities were important predictor variables in determining individual preference for the video entertainment media. In this study preference was indicated by respondents selecting which entertainment medium (regular TV, cable or the VCR) they would keep if they could only have one form of entertainment. The use of a discriminant procedure determined the affective variables to be somewhat important in predicting preference for the new media, while demographic items (e.g. age, income, size of household) were found to be of no importance to the model in determining individual preference for a particular medium. Conclusion and Overview of Subsequent Chapters In summary, several studies have demonstrated the advantages of merging the uses and gratifications perspective with the ecological theory of the niche. This study extends the work on competition in the video entertainment industries by combining the theory of the niche with the uses and gratifications approach in order to assess the dimensions on which the video entertainment industries compete with one another. Industries examined in this study include broadcast TV, basic cable channels, premium or pay cable channels, pay per view channels, and the VCR. 26
Chapter II will discuss the specific procedures used in collecting and analyzing the data for the study. Chapter III reports the results of the factor analysis procedure, which identified three niche dimensions of gratifications related to audience entertainment needs: affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities. Chapter IV reviews the findings related to niche breadth and overlap for the dimensions under investigation. Chapter V presents the results of the pairwise comparisons of media superiorities and the associated power analysis of the affective, cognitive, and gratification opportunities dimensions. Chapter VI will summarize and discuss the findings of the research, the limitations of the study, theoretical implications of the findings and suggestions for future research. CHAPTER II
METHODS
The present study seeks to combine knowledge from niche theory with the uses and gratifications approach as a framework to quantify and measure the level of competition among traditional and new forms of video entertainment: broadcast TV, basic cable television, pay cable, pay per view, and the VCR, Previous research merging the uses and gratifications perspective and niche theory have been the focus of several studies (Dimmick, et al. 1985; Dimmick, et al. 1987; Dobos, 1986). The proposed study will utilize the gratification niche dimensions as a method to determine competition among the video entertainment industries. The study seeks to address the following research questions: 1. What gratifications do audience members seek from new video technologies such as pay cable and pay per view channels? How are these gratifications different from other forms of video entertainment? How are these gratifications similar to other forms of video entertainment? 2. What are the dimensions which underlie audience needs? How many dimensions are there? Are the dimensions the
27 28
same across the different forms of video entertainment, or do they vary? How important is the concept of gratification opportunities in satisfying needs for pay cable and pay per view audiences? 3. Which media provide the widest range, or broadest niche of gratifications? Which media provide a narrow range, or smaller niche of gratifications? 4. Which forms of media serve similar needs? Which forms of media serve different needs? What is the degree of overlap between the different forms of media? 5. Are some forms of media superior to others? Are conditions for displacement met? Overview of Research Methods This portion of the chapter will offer a brief summary of the specific methods used to research the questions guiding this study. More detail on each area will be offered later in the chapter. First, a systematic probability sample was drawn from Franklin county households. Next, a pilot study was administered via telephone to 150 heads of households who were subscribers to cable television using open-ended questions to obtain information regarding audience needs and uses of the video entertainment media. The data from the pilot study were then content analyzed to categorize the needs identified by the respondents. These categories were used to 29 construct the gratification items for the questionnaire used in the main study. The pilot study also determined the ability to reach households that subscribe to pay cable and/or pay per view program channels. Third, the questionnaire to be used in the study was designed, pretested, and then administered to approximately 400 heads of households using quota controls to insure equal representation of males and females. Finally, quantitative data analysis was conducted to analyze the data. In addition to computing descriptive and inferential statistics and reliability assessments, the study used exploratory factor analysis to assess the dimensions underlying respondents answers to the gratification items. Niche breadth and niche overlap measures were calculated to determine the diversity and similarity of need gratifications across the different media. Indices of superiority or equivalence were determined using pairwise comparisons of gratifications obtained across dimensions. As an internal validity check one item asked the respondents to identify which medium they preferred the most to other video entertainment mediums they used on a regular basis. The remainder of this chapter will elaborate on the different stages involved in the study: (1) sampling method, (2) pilot study and qualitative analysis, (3) pre-test of the questionnaire, (4) survey administration and (5) quantitative data analysis procedures. 30
Sampling Method The population sampled in this study was defined as heads of households in cable television homes in Franklin County, Ohio. Cable television households were necessary to reach subscribers to premium pay cable channels and pay per view programming. Further, competition for audience gratifications was perceived to be most intense in cable households. Once the respondents were screened for eligibility (cable subscribership and head of household) questions regarding minimum use of broadcast TV, basic cable, pay cable, pay per view, and the VCR were addressed. Minimum use in the study was operationalized to mean the respondent had to use a medium at least once a month to be eligible to answer items regarding that particular medium. To insure adequacy of the study and to minimize error, sample sizes of 150 was established for the pilot and 400 for the main study; hence the study used a total sample size of 550. In order to assure representativeness that each household has an equal and/or known chance of being selected a systematic probability sampling method was deemed appropriate. The study used a computer generated sampling procedure which selected a five-digit telephone exchange from those assigned by the telephone company, and a set of randomly generated two-digit suffixes for each stem. This 3 1 procedure was necessary to reach unlisted phones in the sampling area. Each stem and set of random digits is referred to as a cluster or a "hit," and the number of clusters needed for the sample are determined by proportional estimates of sample attributes and cooperation rates. Telephone surveys typically use some form of cooperation rate, drawing a sample three to five times larger than the desired sample size to allow for disconnected phones, busy signals, initial refusals, and "no answers." A telephone survey was used because of the high penetration of phones in U. S. households (approximately 97%) and the ability to gather the data efficiently (Frye, 1989). Cable penetration in the Franklin county area is approximately 51%. Defining the population as heads of households with cable television enabled the study to reach eligible respondents in an efficient manner. Coupled with the cooperation rate, it was estimated that a sample of 10,000 telephone numbers assembled into 670 clusters containing fifteen numbers each would be adequate to reach the completion goal established for both the pilot and the main study. The computer program used to generate the telephone sample prints one stem with fifteen numbers per page. As soon as any telephone number within a cluster produced a completed interview, that page was "retired" for the remainder 3 2 of the study. Each telephone prefix in a cluster represents a similar geographical area, hence respondents are more alike. Strict adherence to this procedure was used to prevent over- representation of any stem in the sample. Once the sample base of 670 hits was constructed a subsample of 170 hits were randomly selected for use in the pilot study. In the following section the research design, administration and results of the pilot study are discussed. The Pilot Study As a precursor to the main study, the pilot study had two purposes: (1) to identify the audience needs for entertainment programming and (2) to determine the effectiveness of the sample in reaching qualified respondents. The needs identified in the pilot study were used to construct the gratifications obtained items for the main study questionnaire. Additionally, the pilot study determined the ability of the sampling technique to reach households subscribing to pay cable channels, and the ability to reach respondents who used pay per view programming. Pilot Design and Administration. The pilot study used an open-ended, qualitative approach to obtain information on audience needs for entertainment programming. This approach allows respondents the freedom to use their own interpretations rather than responding to a set of researcher 33 i/nposed items which may omit relevant audience needs (Christians & Carey, 1981). Further, Blumler (1985, p. 52) suggests "uses and gratifications researchers should return more often to the qualitative drawing board before settling on dimensions, items and scales for quantitatively measuring media motivation." The Miller and Cannell (1977) technique, which emphasizes respondent accuracy and clarity, was selected for the administration of the pilot study. This method has been successfully used in a number of gratification studies (Dimmick et al., 1985; Dimmick, et al., 1987; Dobos, 1986). The Miller and Cannell approach encourages respondents to take their time and think carefully prior to answering. To insure specificity of answers interviewers also use probe questions which ask respondents to think again, clarify, or recall any other details which pertain to the topic until completeness of the response is met. Neutral reinforcer statements like "I see" and "uh-huh" are used to encourage respondents to take their time. Positive reinforcer statements, such as "You are giving us valuable information” and "This is going very well" are only used when the respondent provides complete and detailed answers. The utilization of the Miller and Cannell approach required careful attention to the designing of the pilot instrument and administration by well-trained and 3 4
experienced interviewers. Six undergraduate students with previous telephone interviewing experience were trained by the investigator in the logic of the Miller and Cannell approach and the pilot instrument. A pretest of the questionnaire indicated respondents were able to clearly understand the pilot questionnaire and their responsibilities as interviewees, and that the instrument could be completed in a relatively short time period. (See Appendix A for a copy of the pilot instrument.) The pilot questionnaire consisted of four sections. After a brief introduction stating the purpose of the study, two screen questions identified the eligible respondents as subscribers to cable television and head of the household. Respondents were first asked to think about the channels or programs they used on a regular basis for entertainment purposes. Next, respondents were to identify the specific channels or programs they watched for video entertainment purposes. Interviewers then used a probe question to determine "anything else?" Neutral reinforcers were used during the interchange, and a positive reinforcer was used once the question was answered completely. The same techniques were used throughout the administration of the pilot instrument: introduction of the question, a brief pause, a restatement of the question, a probe 3 5 question, and finally a positive reinforcer. The second section asked the respondent to identify the needs that were met by watching particular channels or programs identifed in the first section. In the event the respondent described his/her needs in general or vague terms, the interviewer used section three to specify the respondent's answer in order to obtain a complete response. This part of the instrument was optional depending on the specificity of answers obtained during the second section. The fourth and final section of the pilot asked respondents to identify any unmet needs that were not served by the entertainment media, and also allowed respondents the opportunity to discuss any other items they felt were important. Respondents were also asked if they subscribed to any premium or pay cable channels and if they had ever purchased any type of pay-per-view program. In order to complete the second objective of the pilot study monitoring procedures were used to determine if the cooperation and completion rates were within acceptable limits. Interviewers were instructed to record the results of each call attempt on the telephone sample sheets. These results were compiled to yield the number of clusters required to complete an interview. The pilot study was conducted over a five day period in July, 1989. 36
Pilot Results. A total of 150 pilot interviews were completed during July of 1989, equally balanced between male (n=75) and female (n=75) respondents. A total of 501 specific need statements were recorded by the interviewers during the survey period. Each need statement was written on an index card and four coders independently sorted the cards into conceptual categories. The coders were graduate students trained by the reseracher. The coders were instructed to sort the cards into as many topics as necessary, and then combine topics into conceptually similar groups. Coders were also asked to attach a conceptual label to each category of cards. Table 1 summarizes the results of the content analysis by the four coders and generally shows good agreement across categories. Intercoder reliability was calculated at .87 using Holsti's formula. All four coders identified the following five categories: entertainment, relaxation, information, identification with characters, and family viewing time. Three of the coders agreed on seven other categories: escape, variety of entertainment options, sports, nostalgia, weather information, understand other people, and learn about things. Two coders agreed on the categories of involvement with the programs, games and competition, movies, and music. Six other categories were identified only once by one of the coders: 3 7
Table 1 Pilot Study Categories of Video Entertainment Needs Coder A Cotter-B Coder C Coder D
Entertainment Entertainment Entertainment Entertainment Relaxation Relaxation Relaxation Relaxation Escape Pass time Escape Escape Information Information Information Information Involvement Involvement Variety Variety Variety Variety Competition Games Games Competition Family time Family time Family time Family time Identification Identification Identification Identification Sports Sports Sports Understand Understand Understand People People People Nostalgia Nostalgia Relive past Weather info. Weather info. Weather info. Movies Movies Music Music Fantasy Fitness Self-help Realism Romance Thrill seeking 38
fantasy, realism, romance, self-help, physical fitness, and thrill seeking. Based on the general agreement across these categories, a total of twenty-four items were constructed for use in the main questionnaire to operationalize the gratifications obtained from the video entertainment media. Categories that were identified only one time were dropped, as were the categories of music and movies due to the low number of mentions the two categories received by the pilot respondents. Table 2 presents the twenty-four items as they were conceptualized across three anticipated dimensions of gratifications obtained from the video entertainment media. While the three projected dimensions were thought to be similar to previous niche studies (Dimmick, et al., 1987), the pilot study produced new categories not identified in earlier studies (e. g. nostalgia, weather information, fitness and self- help). Further, the main study would feature two entertainment mediums which had not been previously studied in this manner: premium cable and pay per view. Hence, exploratory, rather than confirmatory procedures were warranted. Eight items were prepared for each anticipated dimension. The first dimension consists of "affective" items which represent individual feelings and emotional states (e.g. 39 Table 2
Anticipated Gratification Dimensions-Video Entertainment
Affective Dimension
1. To help you relax. 2. To occupy your time. 3. To put your mind at ease. 4. To relive past times. 5. To forget your everyday cares. 6. To relieve boredom. 7. To help you unwind. 8. To eliminate stress.
Cognitive Dimension
1. To learn about people in other places. 2. To figure out plots and stories. 3. To know characters as if your friends. 4. To solve puzzles and games. 5. To witness the competitive challenge of sports. 6. To learn about things that interest you. 7. To improve your life. 8. To help you understand other people.
Gratification Opportunities
1. To give you a variety of choices. 2. To fit your busy schedule. 3. To view programs at the same time every day. 4. To fit your free time. 5. To spend time with the family. 6. To give you a number of choices. 7. To give you programming at convenient times. 8. To help plan your daily activities. 4 0 to help unwind, relieve stress, relax, etc.) The second dimension consists of items related to acquiring and processing information (e.g. understand other people, learn about things, improve self) which suggests a "cognitive" label. The first two dimensions are consistent with the theoretical findings from much of the gratifications literature, which emphasizes both the affective and cognitive domains and their importance in analyzing audience needs and wants (McGuire, 1974). McQuail (1984) has also identified the affective-cognitive domains as important, although he projects the two as independent dimensions where earier niche studies (e.g., Dimmick, et al. *987) have found the affective-cognitive domains to be moderately correlated. The third and final dimension consists of the gratification opportunities items discussed in Chapter 1. which are related to time usage and number of choices (e.g. variety of choices, fit your schedule, family time, etc.). In addition to identifying the audience needs associated with the video entertainment media, the pilot study was also concerned with the ability of the sample to reach eligible respondents who subscribed to pay cable channels, as well as usage of pay per view programming. The three cable systems operating in the Franklin County area all offer pay cable and pay per view channels to their customers, yet both of these parameters were unknown. While pay cable penetration was 4 1 expected to be reasonably strong, the extent of pay per view usage in the market was unknown. Hence, the pilot study was used to estimate these parameters for the main study, particularly to see if enough respondents had used pay per view to justify inclusion of the medium in the main study. Table 3 displays the use of pay cable and pay per view channels by the pilot respondents. Pay cable channels were found in 55% of all households in the sample, with 16% having two or more channels. Home Box Office was the most popular premium channel, followed by Showtime, Cinemax, Disney, and The Movie Channel. When asked if the respondent had ever used pay per view programming for entertainment, 31% of the sample indicated they had used PPV on at least one occasion. While the pay per view parameter estimate had to be interpreted with caution due to the degree of sampling error associated with just 150 interviews, the use of pay per view in this sample indicated it was appropriate to include the medium in the main study. The montoring of the sampling procedure indicated no eligible respondent in 12% of the clusters. One hundred fifty clusters yielded an eligible respondent who completed the pilot survey. Twenty clusters failed to produce a completed pilot interview, which suggested approximately 60 of the 500 clusters for the main survey would not yield a completion. Table 3 Pilot Study Use of Pav Cable and Pav Per View Channels Use of Pav Cable Channels Channel N%
Home Box Office 82 55 Showtime 30 20 Cinemax 20 1 3 Disney Channel 1 4 9 The Movie Channel 1 3 9 2 or more channels 24 I 6
Use of Pay Cable Channels Ever Used PPV? N %
Yes 4 7 3 1 No 103 6 9
This was considered acceptable given the completion goal of 400 interviews for the main study. Main Study This section of the chapter will review the questionnaire design, pretesting and administration of the main study. The questionnaire consisted of four sections: (1) pupose of the survey, screeening and media usage, (2) respondent identification of different types of media content, (3) the gratifications obtained items, and (4) demographic variables. 4 3
The survey was administered under supervision during a two- week period in October, 1989 by 36 trained interviewers in a central location. (See Appendix B for the final draft of the survey instrument used for the main study.) Questionnaire Design. The introductory section of the questionnaire slated the purpose of the survey and used the same screen questions contained in the pilot study to identify the head of the household in cable homes. Respondents were then asked questions regarding their use of the five video entertainment mediums under examination. The minimum use criterion for regular TV, cable TV, VCR, and premium channels was established as once per month. The minimum use criterion for pay per view was established as one time during the past six months. Data analysis required respondents to use at least two mediums on a regular basis in order to continue the interview, since pairwise comparisons were required for niche overlap and competitive superiority measures. If the respondent used at least two mediums regularly, the interview proceeded to the second section where respondents were asked to identify specific programs or channels they regularly watched for entertainment purposes. Respondents answered for each medium they used on a regular basis. 44
The third section consisted of the gratifications obtained items, and asked respondents to indicate how well each medium they used satisfied their entertainment needs. Respondents were reminded to think about the different media and content they used when answering each question. The items were presented in a closed-ended format and randomly rotated. Respondents were asked if the individual mediums were "very helpful, somewhat helpful, a little helpful, or not at all helpful." The fourth and final section of the questionnaire included a set of demographic variables and an internal validity check item for use in the data analysis. The demographic variables included the respondent's household income, number of members in the household, age and sex. Internal Validity. A forced choice question asked the respondents. "Now, if you could keep only one medium for your entertainment needs, which one would you choose?" This response will be used to check internal validity using compensatory and non-compensatory choice models applied to gratification scales by Lin (1985). Briefly, a decision model is simply a procedure which specifies how information--in this study the respondent's ratings of the video entertainment media on the gratification scales--is used to make the choice of a medium. 4 5
A compensatory model allows for high levels of one attribute, such as a gratification niche dimension, to compensate for low levels on another attribute or dimension. In the compensatory model each attribute of an alternative or medium is given a value and these values were combined additively to arrive at an overall value for each alternative. The alternative with the highest value is the alternative actually chosen. One example of a compensatory model is the expectancy value model developed by Palmgreen and Rayburn (1982). The non-compensatory models do not make the assumption that choice is made on an additive, linear process. Instead, the choice of alternatives may be made on the basis of the attribute most important to the respondent. Because it is impossible to know the type of model being used by the decision-maker, both the compensatory and non-compensatory models were examined in the validation process to determine if different choice models were in some way associated with differences in the validity of the superiority measures (Dimmick, et al., 1987). Pretesting and Administration. A pretest of the questionnaire was used to identify: (1) any problems associated with the questionnaire and (2) the amount of time necessary to complete an interview. Following training on the instrument, five interviewers administered the pretest and monitored the length of the interviews. The respondents (N=25) were drawn from a set of clusters prepared for the main study. A debriefing session with the interviewers indicated no modifications were needed with the instrument. Interviewers reported the respondents were able to follow the instructions without difficulty. The length of the interviews ranged from twelve to eighteen minutes; the longer interviews were attributed to the respondent using all five mediums on a regular basis. Thirty-six students in an upper division course in electronic media audience analysis administered the survey as part of their course requirement during a ten day period in October, 1989. Interviewers were trained on the survey instrument by the researcher prior to thestart of the main study. The training session covered the results of the pilot study, an intensive discussion of the instrument, and a practice and debriefing session. One problem emerged with the administration of the survey at the conclusion of the seventh day. Tallies kept by the supervisors indicated the completion goal of 400 surveys would be met before the students had completed their required hours of telephone interviewing. To alleviate this 47 problem, an additional set of 200 clusters of telephone numbers were ordered so the survey could continue through the scheduled time frame. This additional set of clusters was a continuation of the same program which generated the original clusters, therefore any duplication of numbers wr , unlikely. A total of 464 interviews were completed during the survey period. Quantitative Data Analysis The current study combined the uses and gratifications approach with concepts drawn from the ecological theory of the niche in order to determine the ability of the video entertainment media to satisfy audience needs in cable television households. Measures of gratifications obtained were used to construct formulations of the concepts of niche dimensionality, niche breadth, niche overlap and competitive superiority. The following procedures were used in the data analysis: (1) principal axis factor analysis to extract the underlying need dimensions of gratifications obtained, (2) calculations of niche breadth, niche overlap and superiority for each need dimension and (3) estimates of reliability and validity. The results of the factor analysis procedure which define the gratification niche dimensions in the study are reported in the next chapter, along with their corresponding alpha 4 8 reliabilities. Later chapters define the formulas for niche breadth, niche overlap and competitive superiority, and discuss the Tesults. Validity concerns are addressed in the final chapter. In summary, telephone survey research and sampling procedures were utilized in the pilot study and the main survey. The pilot study followed an open-ended qualitative approach to derive audience needs for video entertainment and used specialized telephone interviewing techniques to aid in respondent recall and accuracy. The main study used a structured, closed-ended format consisting of gratifications obtained items based on the results of the pilot study. A total of 464 interviews were completed for the main study representing cable households that used at least two video entertainment mediums on a regular basis. Factor analysis was used to identify the underlying niche dimensions, while niche breadth and niche overlap were used to describe the degree of functional diversity and similarity across media forms. Superiority measures were used to determine which medium was the more successful competitor. Finally, reliability and validity assessments were conducted. In Chapter III the niche dimensionality results are presented which identifies the specific factors or dimensions related to the audience video entertainment needs for each of the five mediums examined this study. CHAPTER III RESULTS: GRATIFICATION NICHE DIMENSIONS
This chapter presents the ecological niche dimensions on which the video entertainment media compete with one another to satisfy audience entertainment needs. As discussed in Chapter II, the gratifications obtained (GO) by the audience members from the video entertainment media define the resource space and resource utilization of the different media forms. This chapter reports the results of the study which are used to identify the gratification niche dimensions in the resource space. Later chapters will use these dimensions to calculate measures of niche breadth, niche overlap, and competitive superiority among the video entertainment media examined in the study. Introduction As discussed in Chapter I, audience members use the entertainment media to satisfy different needs by selecting among the different population of media forms. Similarity and differentiation may occur as the video entertainment media with generalist and specialist domains provide similar or
5 0 5 1 different sets of gratifications obtained by the individual audience members. The uses and gratifications approach in combination with the ecological theory of the niche provides a means to assess the dimensional structure of the gratifications obtained from the video entertainment media in satisfying audience needs. Resource partitioning of the gratifications obtained may differ across audience dimensions. Identifying these dimensions provides the necessary foundation for further analysis. The measures used to quantify the level of competition among the video entertainment media in this study--niche breadth, niche overlap, and competitive superiority--are computed on a dimension by dimension basis. Thus, it is necessary to first define the gratification niche dimensions for subsequent analysis. Hence, the first step towards identifying these niche dimensions required the use of a factor analysis procedure to extract the underlying dimensional structures from both the gratifications and the gratification opportunities items. Factor Analysis Procedure Responses to the questions related to gratifications and gratification opportunities for each video medium were submitted to a SAS iterated principal axis factor subroutine to determine the number of dimensions undergirding the 5 2
respondents' answers. In the initial attempt to run the gratifications factor subroutine, two items produced inconsistent loadings across all five video mediums. The two items were "To help you relive events and feelings from the past, how helpful is . . and "To help you forget about everyday cares, how helpful is . . The first item was designed to reflect the nostalgia category identified in the pilot study. The second item, drawn from the escape and relaxation categories, was the last gratification item in the questionnaire. Respondent fatigue may have contributed to the unstable responses for the second item. When these two items were later dropped from the factor procedure, the analysis resulted in more consistency in the loading of the variables, as well as higher alpha reliabilities for each of thefactors. Hence, the factor solutions reported in this chapter are based on the submission of fourteen gratifications obtained (GO) items. Squared multiple correlations were used as communality estimates. Initially the program was instructed to retain zero factors. Scree plots of eigenvalues were reviewed for an indication of the number of factors to retain and the discontinuity rule was applied to determine the cut-off point between the last factor and the leveling of the plot. The criteria indicated a two-factor solution was appropriate for the gratification items, while a single factor was 5 3
appropriate for the gratification opportunities items. The data were then submitted to a subroutine specifying a promax (oblique) rotation, due to the moderate correlations observed between the factors (see Rubin, 1983). The criteria for item loadings were set at .30 (rounded) with a minimum difference of .15 on other factors and a minimum of three items loading on a factor (Kim & Meuller, 1982). Reliabilities, computed using Cronbach's alpha, ranged from .79 to .87 for the gratifications obtained factors. Reliabilities for the gratification opportunities factor produced similar results, ranging from .77 to .86. In the following sections the results of the factor procedures are presented and discussed in more detail. Factor Analysis; GO Dimensions The two factor solution derived from the gratification items was comparable to that reported in earlier niche studies (Dimmick, et al., 1987; Dimmick & Dobos, 1988; Dimmick, et al., 1989) and suggests an affective-cognitive dimensional need structure underlying audience entertainment needs. The first factor extracted across all five video mediums consisted of items which represent individual feelings and emotional states (e.g. to help you unwind, to help you relax, to relieve stress). Thus, this factor was labeled as "affective" or affective control (McGuire, 1974). The second factor, which also showed a similar pattern across mediums, consisted of items relevant to 5 4 informational processing (e.g. to learn about new things, to understand other people, to figure out plots and stories). Hence, this dimension was given a "cognitive” label (McGuire, 1974). The two factor principal axis solutions for each video medium explained 100% of the common variance. In the following paragraphs the factor loadings are presented for each video entertainment medium examined in this study, along with their reliabilities and interfactor correlations. TV GO Factor Results. The factor loadings for the respondent ratings for the regular television gratification items are presented in Table 4. The pattern reflects a simple structure, with a clear subset of items with high loadings on one factor and low loadings on the other factor. All of the gratification items exceed the minimum loading criteria, with six items comprising the affective factor and eight items forming the cognitive factor. The highest loading variables on the affective factor include "to help you unwind” and "to relieve stress". The variables with the strongest loadings on the cognitive factor include the items "learn about new places and things" and "figure out plots and stories". The interfactor correlation for the two factors was moderately strong at .614. This is consistent with the interfactor correlations reported in 5 5
Tabic 4
Principal Axis Factor Solution for TV GQ (N=441)
Factor 1 Factor 2
Help you unwind ,838 .009 Relieve stTess ,772 -.012 Relax from daily pressures ,676 .012 Help occupy time .541 .081 Put mind at ease .148
To pass time .429 .184 Understand other people -.082 .741
Figure out plots & stories .134 ,595 Learn about new places .084
Improve your life .131 ,552 Sports and games .001 .507 Solve puzzles .122 .491 Know characters as friends .225 .468 Learn about things .148 ,451
Reliability .83 .82
Common Variance Explained 100% Interfactor Correlation .614 56 previous competition studies, which also found mid-range relationships between the affective and cognitive factors or dimensions (see Dimmick, et al., 1987; Dimmick, et al., 1989; Dimmick & Dobos, 1988). Cable GO Factor Results. The factor solution for the cable television items are presented in Table 5. One item, "to give you the opportunity to solve puzzles" failed to load on either factor. The variable "to put your mind at ease” loaded on both the affective and cognitive dimensions. A third item, "to help you learn about things" failed to meet the separation criterion of .15 between factors. Hence, the affective factor for the cable gratification items consisted of five variables, while the cognitive factor consisted of six variables. While the cable factor pattern is generally similar to the regular TV solution reported earlier, some subtle differences are found in the variable loadings. The variables with the highest loadings on the affective dimension are "relax from daily pressures" and "to relieve stress". On the cognitive dimension the variables with the highest loadings include "understand other people" and "to improve your life”. The interfactor correlation for the cable solution was .650, the strongest correlation found in any of the five mediums examined in the study. Table 5
Principal Axis Factor Solution for Cable TV GO (N=443)
Factor 1 Factor
Relax from daily pressures .701 -.074 Relieve stress .695 .060 Help you unwind .693 .055 Help occupy time .611 .057 To pass time .504 .157
Put mind at ease^ .376 .311 Learn about things^ .352 .258 Solve puzzles .276 .249
Understand other people -.030 .752 Improve your life .131 .601 Sports and games -.054 .570 Figure out plots & stories .130 .557 Know characters as friends .208 .502 Learn about new places .244 .397
Reliability .81 .80
Common Variance Explained 100% Interfactor Correlation .650
♦Item double loads ♦♦Item does not meet criterion of .15 between factors 5 8
VCR GO Factor Results. Table 6 presents the factor pattern for the VCR gratification items. The affective items all loaded consistently on the first dimension, with the variables "to relieve stress" and "to help you unwind” exhibiting the highest loadings. One item, "to know characters as if they were your friends" double loaded on both factors, while the item "to figure out plots and stories" failed to meet the criterion of .15 difference between factors. On the cognitive dimension a total of six variables loaded cleanly. The items "to learn about new places and things" and "to improve your life" achieved the highest correlations. These two variables suggest the VCR is used by some of the respondents as an information utility. In particular, the use of prerecorded exercise and other self-help programs by some respondents may account for the high loading of the "improve your life" item on this factor. The interfactor correlation for the VCR factors was .540. While this correlation also indicates a moderately strong relationship among factors, the VCR interfactor correlation was the lowest of any of the five mediums examined in this study. Premium Cable GO Factor Results. The factor loadings for the premium cable gratification items are presented in Table 7. Although a two factor solution emerged, the premium cable medium exhibited some instability with three different Table 6
Principal Axis Factor Solution for VCR GO (N=330)
Factor 1 Factor 2 Relieve stress ,767 -.013 Help you unwind ,737 .012 To pass time ,70? -.116 Relax from daily pressures ,640 .050 Help occupy time .582 .070 Put mind at ease ,?26 .090 Know characters* .344 .1 1 2 Figure out plots & stories** .315 .201 Learn about new places -.059 ,718 Improve your life .016 a n Understand other people .128 ,382 Solve puzzles -.048 * 1 6 2 Learn about things .075 .557 Sports & games .065 .472
Reliability .83 .79
Common Variance Explained 100% Interfactor Correlation .540
*Item double loads **Item does not meet criterion of .15 between factors Table 7
Principal Axis Factor Solution for Premium Cable GO (N=264)
Factor I Factor 2
Help you unwind .826 -.084 Relieve stress .721 .023 To pass time .612 .030 Relax from daily pressures .563 .063 Help occupy time .447 .093
Put mind at ease .467 .109 Figure out plots*** .413 ,122 Know characters** .355 .294 Learn about things* .378
Learn about new places -.002 .733 Improve your life .097 .711 Solve puzzles -.095 .705 Understand other people .198 .650 Sports & games .121 .478
Reliability .80 .80
Common Variance Explained 100% Interfactor Correlation .624
*Item double loads **Item does not meet criterion of .15 between factors ***Item does not load consistently 6 1 variables. The item "to learn about things" double loaded on both the affective and cognitive dimensions. The cognitive item "to know characters as your friends" had the highest loading on the affective factor, but did not meet the separation criterion of .15 between factors. Finally, the item "to figure out plots and stories" loaded unexpectedly on the affective factor. The affective dimension for premium cable was very similar to the pattern extracted for the VCR. The items "to help you unwind" and "to relieve stress" were the highest loading ’ ariables on the affective dimension. Five cognitive items appeared on the second factor, with the items "learn about new places and things" and "improve your life” exhibiting the strongest loadings. The interfactor correlation for the premium cable factors was .624. Pav Per View GO Factor Results. The factor loadings for the pay per view gratification items are presented in Table 8. While the procedure indicated a two factor solution was again in order, this solution should be interpreted with caution given the low number of pay per view users identified in the sample. A total of 121 valid cases (cases with no missing variables) were used in the factor procedure. The affective factor consisted of five items which met the loading criteria. The variables "to occupy time" and "relax from daily pressures" showed the strongest loadings on the affective Table 8
Principal Axis Factor Solution for Pav Per View GO (N=121)
Factor 1 Factor 2
Help occupy time .832 -.145 Relax from daily pressures .772 -.012 Relieve stress .757 .127 Help you unwind .683 .143 To pass time .649 .069
Put mind at ease+ .300 .408 Figure out plots & stories^ .375 .268 Learn about things .284 .218
Understand other people -.114 .851 Learn about new places .092 .705 Solve puzzles .075 .613 Know characters as friends .132 .609 Sports & games -.027 .584
Improve your life .220 .519
Reliability .87 .84
Common Variance Explained 100% Interfactor Correlation .596
♦Item double loads ♦♦Item does not meet criterion of .15 between factors 63 dimension. The cognitive dimension consisted of six items. The items with the highest loadings were "to understand other people" and "learn about new places and things". One item, "to figure out plots and stories" did not meet the difference of .15 between factors, while the item "put your mind at ease" double loaded on both factors. Finally, the item "to learn about things that interest you" failed to load on either factor. The interfactor correlation for the pay per view dimensions was .596. Summary of GO Factor Results. Overall, the factor analysis of the gratifications obtained items for each medium produced rather consistent results, as evidenced by a review of the individual factor tables and their corresponding reliabilities. Some minor variation in factor loadings were found in the solutions, similar to that reported in earlier niche studies (see Dimmick, et al., 1987; Dimmick, et al., 1989). Although the gratification niche dimensions are substantially the same for the video entertainment media, a limited number of items did not meet the loading criteria consistently across mediums and some items double loaded across dimensions. These items were later dropped when computing measures of niche breadth, overlap and competitive superiority. This procedure was necessary from both a practical as well as a theoretical standpoint to include only 64 those items on a niche dimension which met the criteria established for the factor procedure (Dimmick, 1985). Thus, two dimensions underlie audience entertainment needs for the gratifications obtained (GO) items across the video entertainment media. The affective and cognitive dimensional structures characterize part of the resource utilization patterns of gratifications obtained by the audience. In the following section of the chapter, the results of the gratification opportunities factor procedure are presented, which identifies a third niche dimension important to understanding the gratification niche dimensions for the video entertainment media. Factor Analysis: __Gratification Opportunities Dimension The eight gratification opportunities items were submitted to a separate iterated principal axis factor subroutine for each video entertainment medium. As with the gratifications obtained factor procedure the program was initially instructed to retain zero factors, then repeated to retain one, two, and three factors to confirm the appropriate factor solution. A single factor emerged for each medium, with all eight items loading consistently. The factor loadings for the gratification opportunities items are presented in Table 9, along with their alpha reliabilities, and proportion of common variance explained by each factor. 65 Table 9
Factor Loadings for Gratification Opport unities Dimension
TV Cable VCR Prem. PPV
Variety of choices .OIL *.480 125 .556 .562 Fits your schedule *637 *551 .681 .630 .632 Convenient times *620 *111 .625 .649 .721 Same time daily *560 ,511 .543 *600 .6 8 1 Plan daily activities .377 .405 A l l .480 ,52.2 Number of choices .643 >522 .670 .661 .742 Time with family *422 *515 .403 .516 .602 Fits your free time .716 .607 .652 .700 .735
Reliability .80 .77 .78 .82 .86
Common Variance 1 00 l 00 100 1 00 1 00
N 44 1 443 330 264 1 2 I 66
Several interesting findings were noted from the gratification opportunities factor analysis. First, all of the gratification opportunities items exhibited strong loadings across all five video entertainment mediums. The variables with the highest loadings across mediums included "to give you entertainment that fits in with your free time" and "to offer entertainment at times that are convenient for you". The gratification opportunity items produced a clear and consistent loading pattern across each video entertainment medium examined in the study. Further, the gratification opportunities items showed strong internal consistency as indicated by an examination of their alpha reliabilities. The results of the factor procedure identified "gratification opportunities" as the third gratification niche dimension in this study of the video entertainment media. As Dimmick, et al. (1989, p. 13) observed in their study of variables which influenced individual preference for video entertainment, the gratification opportunities "were of paramount importance . . . clearly, these items play a central role in media choice". In summary, the factor analysis procedure identified three gratification niche dimensions which underlie audience entertainment needs. An affective-cognitive dimensional structure was derived from the fourteen gratification obtained (GO) items, while the eight gratification opportunities items combined to form the gratification opportunities dimension. Having established the gratification niche dimensions of the video entertainment media, the next chapter will examine the diversity and similarity among the media by reporting and interpreting measures of niche breadth and overlap. CHAPTER IV RESULTS: NICHE BREADTH AND OVERLAP
This chapter describes the ecological pattern of organization among the population of video entertainment media in serving the need gratifications of the audience. The previous chapter identified the three gratification niche dimensions underlying audience entertainment needs as affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities. Having identified the gratification niche dimensions, the next step is to describe the diversity and similarity among the video entertainment media in serving audience needs. Niche breadth and niche overlap measures are used to assess the diversity and similarity in audience gratifications along the affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions. Introduction As discussed in Chapter I, the theory of the niche helps explain how a set of populations in an ecological community compete and coexist with one another for an available set of resources in order to survive. When the ecological concept of the niche is combined with the uses and gratifications approach, a niche breadth measure can be used to determine
68 69 the diversity of a video entertainment medium in providing gratifications across the niche dimensions identified in the resource space. In the current study, the gratifications derived by the audience members from the video entertainment media constitute the resource space and resource utilization of the different media forms. The gratifications obtained provide an indication of each medium's helpfulness in satisfying audience needs across different niche dimensions, and is indexed by the breadth and overlap measures. The niche overlap measure is used to determine the amount of similarity between two media forms in providing audience gratifications along the niche dimensions. In the next section of the chapter the breadth and overlap formulas used in the study are defined and discussed. Defining the Breadth and Overlap Measures. Traditional bioecology formulations of niche breadth and niche overlap are based on proportional utilization of resource categories (Levins, 1968). Thus, the original ecological indices are based entirely on categorical data. The extension of niche theory to media uses and gratifications research required redefinition of both the breadth and overlap measures to accommodate the interval level measurement scales used in most gratifications studies. In an earlier paper, Dimmick (1985) reformulated the niche breadth and overlap measures for this purpose. The breadth and overlap measures are defined as arithmetic means 7 0
(Dimmick, 1985). The formulas used in this study are presented in Figure 1. The niche breadth measure provides a ratio of niche occupancy on a given dimension to the available space on a resource dimension of gratification obtained items. As shown in Figure 1 niche breadth was defined as the ratio of the GO sum, corrected by the number of scale items on each dimension, to the number of scale items multiplied by the difference between the upper and lower bounds of the scale. When all respondents rate all scale items at the lower bound, breadth would equal zero. When the respondents rate the medium at the upper bound on all of the GO scales on a particular dimension, breadth would equal one. Dimmick (1985) suggests the upper bound of the breadth measure indicates maximal generalism. while lower values represent decreasing generalism for a particular media form. The niche overlap measure indicates the amount of common occupancy of the resource space along a dimension of gratification obtained items. The overlap measure is mathematically defined in Figure 1 as the root mean square of the sum of the differences between GO ratings for each item on a dimension. Overlap, as in the original Levins (1968) measure, is an inverse measure where low values indicate high similarity in gratifications obtained from two mediums, while 7 1
NICHE BREADTH
N K NB = X [ (X GO„ ) - Kl] n=l k sJ ______k(u-i)
N Where: u, 1 = the upper and lower bounds of a scale (e.g. 4 & 1) GO =a gratification obtained rating on a scale N = the number of respondents using a medium n = the first respondent K - the number of scales on adimension k = the first gratification scale
NICHE OVERLAP
N Where: i, j = medium i and medium j GO = a gratification obtained rating on a scale for i and j N = the number of respondents who use both i and j n = the first respondent
Note: From "Formulas for computation of niche breadth, niche overlap, and competitive superiority using gratification measures." Copyright 1985 by John Dimmick. Used with permission.
Figure 1. Formulas for Niche Breadth and Niche Overlap. 72
high values denote dissimilarity between two mediums. An overlap measure of zero indicates that the gratification niches of mediums i and j completely overlap with one another; hence the two niches are identical. The upper limit of the measure is reached when respondents rate one medium at the upper bound on all scales and the other medium at the lower bound of all scales. It is important to emphasize that low overlap values may occur because respondents' ratings are at either the low or high end of the scale items. Thus, it is necessary to review the means for each medium to consider the substantive meanings and interpretation of the overlap measures for each pair of mediums. The breadth and overlap measures for each niche dimension reported in this chapter were based on items which met the loading criteria established by the factor procedure. Items which failed to meet the criteria, or items which double loaded or loaded inconsistently (as was the case in the premium cable factor procedure) were dropped when calculating breadth and overlap measures for each niche dimension. This practice was only utilized with the affective and cognitive dimensions. All of the gratification opportunities items loaded properly on the gratification opportunities 7 3
dimension. In the following sections of the chapter the niche breadth and overlap results are reviewed and discussed. Niche Breadth The niche breadth measure reformulated by Dimmick (1985) is a simple arithmetic mean which ranges in value from zero to one. Low values indicate less diversity, while high values indicate greater diversity in serving audience need gratifications. Recall that niche breadth equals zero when all respondents rate all scale items at the lower bound. Niche breadth will equal a value of one when the respondents rate all items at the upper bound. The niche breadth results for each video entertainment medium examined in the study are presented in Table 10. On the affective dimension the breadth values ranged from a high of .560 for the VCR to a low of .258 for pay per view. Cable shows the second highest range of diversity with a niche breadth of .493. Broadcast television and premium cable cluster closely together (.425-.437) on the affective dimension. These results indicate the VCR and cable television are best at serving a diversity of affective entertainment need gratifications as measured in this study. On the cognitive dimension, regular television has the highest niche breadth at .583, while pay per view shows the 74
Tabic 10 Niche Breadth Results
Gratification Affective Cognitive Opportunities
TV (N=455) .437 .583 .575 CABLE (N=450) .493 .522 .646 VCR (N=343) .560 .303 .781 PREM (N-277) .425 .321 .599 PPV (N=134) .258 .241 .292
lowest breadth at .241. Cable television has the second highest breadth measure (.522) on the cognitive dimension while premium cable and the VCR show an intermediate range from .303-.321, In terms of serving cognitive needs, regular television achieves the widest niche breadth followed by cable television. The gratification opportunities dimension found the VCR the most diverse entertainment medium with a breadth measure of .781, with pay per view the least diverse at .292. Cable television also shows a relatively high degree of diversity 7 5
with a breadth measure of .646, followed by premium cable (.599) and regular television (.575). Clearly the VCR exhibits the broadest niche on the gratification opportunities dimension, evidenced by the respondents high ratings of the VCR’s utility in serving needs related to time usage and a variety of entertainment options. Across the three gratification niche dimensions cable television exhibited the broadest niche in serving audience entertainment needs, followed by broadcast television. The VCR showed a high level of generalism on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions, but a very low degree of diversity on the cognitive dimension. These findings are consistent with previous studies in this market by Dimmick and colleagues (see Dimmick, et al., 1987; Dimmick, et al., 1989) which focused on three entertainment mediums: broadcast television, cable, and the VCR. In terms of premium cable, the highest breadth measure was found on the gratification opportunities dimension. Given the repeat scheduling practices of movies and other types of programming currently used by the premium cable channels this was not an unexpected finding. Premium cable is perceived to be moderately diverse on the affective dimension, while the lowest degree of diversity for premium cable was found on the cognitive dimension. 7 6
Pay per view was the least diverse entertainment medium as evidenced by its low breadth measures. While the number of respondents using pay per view in this study was small, it appears pay per view was perceived by these respondents as satisfying a very limited range of audience entertainment needs, given its low breadth values across the gratification niche dimensions identified in this study. Sum m ary. While the niche breadth measure indicates the relative diversity of resource utilization by each video entertainment medium, the extent of ecological similarity--or niche overlap--provides an indication of the competitive relationships between the video entertainment mediums. The more any two competitors rely on the same resources, the greater the intensity of the competition. The more separation and resource partitioning among competitors will result in lower overlaps and thus lower competition. Niche Overlap Niche overlap measures the degree of similarity in serving audience need gratifications between two populations or mediums. The higher the similarity in serving the need gratifications of the audience then the greater the competition between the two populations or mediums. Thus, the niche overlap measure indicates the extent to which two different media forms depend on the same resources. 7 7
In order to measure niche overlap, a total of thirty pairwise comparisons were calculated between the five video entertainment mediums for the affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions. Recall that niche overlap is an inverse measure, where low values represent high overlap and higher values indicate low overlap. Since the overlap measure was designed to reflect the degree to which the respondents rate both mediums the same, the measure could range from zero to three, i.e., the maximum distance between the low and high scale points used in the study. Hence, although theoretically possible, an overlap score of zero will be obtained only when all the respondents rate both mediums the same on all scales on any one dimension. Similarly, an overlap score of three will occur only when all respondents rate one medium at the low end of the scale, and the other medium at the high end of the scale on all items on a niche dimension (Dimmick, 1985). The niche overlap measures are presented in three separate tables corresponding to the gratification niche dimensions. In the first column of each table the two mediums used to calculate the overlap measure for that row are listed using the following abbreviations: broadcast TV-TV; cable television-CTV, the videocassette recorder-VCR; premium cable-PREM; and pay per view-PPV. In the second column the 7 8
N in the tables represent the respondents who used both mediums in each pair. The means for each medium are also included respectively in the last two columns of the tables, and can be used in conjunction with the overlap values to determine whether the similarity is a function of high or low levels of need gratification. As discussed earlier, the overlap measure could reach zero under two conditions, when respondents' ratings are at either the low or high end of the scale items. A review of the means can assist in interpreting the similarity between media populations. Affective dimension. The results for the pairwise media comparisons on the affective dimension are listed in Table 11. Overlap values below 1.0 (the median score for the distribution of overlap measures across the niche dimensions) are found on seven of the ten comparisons along the affective dimension. In contrast, values above 1.0 are found on only three of the media comparisons in the table, and each of these include the pay per view medium. Overall, this suggests more perceived similarity in need gratifications between broadcast TV, cable TV, the VCR, and premium cable on the affective dimension. However, a closer examination reveals more intense competition exists among certain media pairs. The highest degree of overlap on the affective dimension is found between broadcast TV and cable TV (.652), followed Table 11 Niche Overlap Measures-Affective Dimension
Mediums N Overlap Means Means
TV - CTV 43 1 .652 2.60 2.81
TV - VCR 326 .961 2.62 2.87
CTV - VCR 328 .785 2.91 2.94
TV - PREM 252 .916 2.61 2.61
TV PPV 1 1 7 1.277 2.74 2.10
VCR-PREM 1 94 .868 3.42 3.11
VCR - PPV 9 2 1.143 2.90 2.13
PREM- PPV 9 4 .816 2.65 2.1 1
PREM-CTV 263 .749 2.68 2.95
CTV - PPV 116 1.317 3.07 2.1 1 80
by premium cable and cable TV (.749). An examination of the means indicates respondents rated cable TV higher in both of these comparisons. Intense competition is also noted between cable television and the VCR, as indicated by the overlap measure of .785. A review of the means for each medium shows virtually identical respondent ratings, with the VCR (2.94) only slightly higher than cable television (2.91). Strong measures of overlap are also found when comparing premium cable to pay per view (.816), the VCR (.868), and broadcast TV (.916). Premium cable was found to be very similar to pay per view in serving the need gratifications along the affective dimension. This is not surprising given the fact that both services provide similar types of programming in the form of movies and special events, which may contribute to the perceived similarity of the two entertainment mediums by the respondents. A review of the means indicate respondents rated premium cable higher than pay per view (2.65 to 2.11). Broadcast television also appears to be involved in strong competition with the VCR along the affective dimension, with an overlap measure of .961. In reviewing the means, respondents rated the VCR higher than broadcast TV (2.87 to 2.62). In fact, in every mean comparison on the affective 8 1
dimension, respondents rated the VCR higher over the other entertainment mediums. This finding lends support to the niche breadth findings reported earlier in the chapter, which found the VCR the most diverse entertainment medium on the affective dimension. In terms of dissimilarity, the lowest levels of niche overlap where found when comparing the pay per view medium to broadcast television (1.277), cable television (1.317) and the VCR (1.143). In all three comparisons respondents rated pay per view lower than the other mediums on the affective dimension. However, these low intensity overlap measures may permit pay per view to exist alongside the other video entertainment media in the same resource space. The low overlaps indicate little direct confrontation, and thus more competitive avoidance. The low overlap measures may eventually secure the survivability of the young pay per view medium, given its perceived dissimilarity with other video entertainment mediums. Cognitive dimension. The pairwise comparisons on the cognitive dimension are presented in Table 12. The comparisons were evenly divided with five overlap measures below 1.0 and five measures above 1.0. The most intense competition between media forms on the cognitive dimension was found between premium cable and pay per view with an 82
Tabic 12 Niche Overlap Measures -Cognitive Dimension
Mediums N Overlap Means Means
TV - CTV 43 1 .6740 2.59 2.65
TV - VCR 3 2 6 1.248 2.58 2.02
CTV - VCR 3 2 8 1.182 2.72 1.96
TV - PREM 25 2 1.144 2.64 2.04
TV - PPV 1 1 7 1.428 2.69 1.66
VCR-PREM 194 .691 1.91 1.96
VCR - PPV 9 2 .716 1.94 1.66
PREM- PPV 94 .589 1.93 1.62
PREM-CTV 263 .999 2.09 2.77
CTV - PPV 1 1 6 1.221 2.75 1.71 8 3 overlap measure of .589. Other comparisons which produced strong measures of similarity were between the VCR and premium cable (.691), and the VCR and pay per view (.716). Apparently, respondents in this study view the VCR, premium cable channels, and pay per view as being very similar in serving the cognitive need gratifications of the audience. A review of the breadth measures for the three mediums confirms this position, as all three mediums show a narrow range of diversity on the cognitive dimension, which would suggest some similarity or substitutability may exist among these media forms in serving the need gratifications of the audience. One other comparison on the cognitive dimension indicates a relatively high level of media competition. Respondent ratings for broadcast television and cable television yielded an overlap measure of .740. The two mediums also have similar means, with cable (2.65) only slightly higher than broadcast TV (2.59). In all other comparisons on the cognitive dimension, broadcast television was found to have a higher mean rating than other mediums, and face lower levels of competition. A comparison of premium cable and cable television produced an overlap measure of .999. Broadcast television and pay per view showed the highest level of dissimilarity (1.428) on the cognitive 84 dimension. Lower overlaps and thus less intense competition were found when comparing broadcast TV to the VCR (1.248), cable television to pay per view (1.221), cable television to the VCR (1.182), and broadcast TV to premium cable (1.144). Further, broadcast television and cable television obtained higher means than each of the other mediums in these comparisons. These findings suggest that while broadcast television and cable television were found to be competitors with one another on the cognitive dimension, the two mediums are clearly dissimilar in serving the cognitive need gratifications of the audience when compared to the VCR, premium cable, and pay per view. For broadcast television, the diversity and dissimilarity from other media populations along the cognitive dimension is particularly important, as it may help to insure broadcast television’s ability to compete with the new media for andience need gratifications. Gratification Opportunities Dimension. The overlap measures for the pairwise media comparisons along the gratification opportunities dimension are presented in Table 13. Only three comparisons found overlap measures under the median score of 1.0, while all other comparisons produced measures above 1.0. The highest level of similarity, and thus the most intense competition on this dimension, was found between broadcast 8 5
Table 13 Niche Overlap Measures-Gratification Opportunities Dimension
Mediums N Overlap Means Means
TV - CTV 428 .813 2.58 2.78
TV - VCR 3 1 9 1.256 2.60 2.95
CTV-VCR 3 1 7 1.035 2.79 2.95
TV - PREM 248 1.1 13 2.62 2.47
TV - PPV 1 08 1.321 2.62 2.07
VCR-PREM 191 1.031 2.95 2.41
VCR - PPV 86 1.338 2.93 2.10
PREM- PPV 88 .823 2.45 2.06
PREM-CTV 259 .985 2.83 2.48
CTV - PPV 89 1.332 2.94 2.06 8 6
television and cable television (.813). Means for each medium found respondents rated cable television somewhat higher (2.78) than broadcast television (2.58). Broadcast television is handicapped by its rigid scheduling practices in terms of providing gratification opportunities to the audience, as was indicated earlier in the chapter by the low range of diversity reported for broadcast television on the niche breadth measure. The other comparisons which found high levels of competition on the gratification opportunities dimension were between premium cable and pay per view (.823), and premium cable and cable television (.985). In both cases respondents rated premium cable higher than either pay per view or cable television. As discussed previously on the overlap comparisons on the affective dimension, the repeat scheduling practices common to the premium cable channels makes the medium ideally suited to serving the gratification opportunities of the audience. While pay per view offers some repeat scheduling practices for the audience the programming is usually scheduled fewer times than would be found on a premium cable channel. This suggests pay per view as a medium needs to deliver more programming which is different from offerings available on the premium cable channels. 87
Lower levels of competition, and thus more dissimilarity, were found when comparing the VCR to premium cable (1.031), cable television (1.035), broadcast television (1.256), and pay per view (1.338). In each of these four comparisons, the respondents mean ratings for the VCR were higher than the other mediums. These measures support the VCR's strong niche breadth measure of .781 reported earlier in the chapter. Further, these findings are consistent with previous niche studies on entertainment (Dimmick, et al. 1987; Dimmick, et al. 1989), which showed the VCR to have a high degree of niche breadth and strong dissimilarity when compared to broadcast television and cable television on the gratification opportunities dimension. Other overlap measures also showed lower levels of media competition. Pay per view was found to be dissimilar when compared to both broadcast television (1.321) and cable television (1.332). Mean ratings for pay per view were lower in each case. One other comparison which yielded a low overlap measure was found between broadcast television and premium cable (1.113). In this comparison broadcast television obtained a slightly higher respondent rating than premium cable. Sum m ary. The niche breadths and niche overlaps further elaborated the affective-cognitive-gratification opportunities dimensional nature of diversity and similarity in the study. On the affective dimension, the VCR had the broadest niche, but was also found to be similar to cable television, premium cable, and broadcast television in serving the affective gratification needs of the audience. The cognitive dimension found broadcast television with the widest niche breadth. Broadcast television was most involved in competition with cable television on the cognitive dimension, while being the least similar when compared to the VCR, premium cable, and pay per view. The gratification opportunities dimension showed the VCR to again have the widest range of diversity, and be involved in less intense competition with the other video entertainment mediums. Across dimensions, premium cable and pay per view were found to be the most intense competitors with one another. Premium cable had both higher niche breadths and higher respondent ratings than pay per view across dimensions. The perceived similarity between premium cable and pay per view may ultimately pose additional competitive problems for pay per view if the medium continues to offer similar programming to that found on premium cable channels. Broadcast television and cable television were also found to be strong competitors with one another on all three dimensions, as were premium cable and cable television. 89
In terms of dissimilarity, the lowest levels of competition found across all three gratification niche dimensions were noted between pay per view and broadcast television, and pay per view and cable television. The VCR was found to be involved in less competition with regular television and cable television on both the cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions. Further, broadcast television and premium cable were less involved in direct competition with one another on the cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions. These results suggest that the entertainment needs of the audience may support a diverse range of media competitors through a complex pattern of resource partitioning among the affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities niche dimensions. More niche separation may allow two mediums to coexist with one another by avoiding direct confrontation with each other. When two video entertainment mediums share similar resources, however, the choice of one medium over another is a matter of either functional equivalence or relative superiority of one medium over another. Two mediums may coexist in a multi-dimensional resource space, if the two mediums are superior to each other on different dimensions. Coexistence can also be possible, when one medium is at least equivalent to the other on one dimension. While the overlap measures describe the intensity of the competition among the 90 video entertainment media, they do not identify which medium is the superior competitor in serving the gratification needs of the audience. The next chapter will present and discuss the results of the pairwise comparisons of media superiorities for the affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions. CHAPTER V RESULTS: COMPETITIVE SUPERIORITY
The niche breadth measures and overlaps reported in the previous chapter assist in understanding the intensity of competition between media forms. However, the measures do not indicate which medium in each pair is the superior competitor. In order for a medium to survive in a population competing for limited resources, it would seem appropriate to hypothesize that the medium must acquire some margin of superiority or at least equivalence with another member of the population on at least one gratification niche dimension. This chapter examines the superiorities among the video entertainment media as they serve the underlying affective, cognitive, and gratification opportunities dimensions of the audience need structure. Defining the Superiority Measure. The superiority measure used in this study was formulated by Dimmick (1985) to indicate which of two mediums is rated by the respondents to be superior to one another. The superiority measure, used in conjunction with interval level measurement scales, indicates the magnitude of the rating of one medium over another and is expressed by the 9 1 92 symbol Sm. The formulas used to calculate competitive superiority for a pair of mediums are detailed in Figure 2. The competitive superiority measures presented in Figure 2 are used to determine which of any two mediums under examination provide the greater gratification to the respondent. The Sm (magnitude) measure was defined as the sum of the GO scale items on which a respondent rated one medium higher than the other medium. The measures were calculated for comparisons of medium i > medium j and medium j > medium i to determine whether the magnitude of superiority favors medium i or j. The Sm measures eliminate any items which were rated equally by the respondents and retain only those GO items on which one medium is rated higher than the other. Pairwise Comparisons of Competitive Superiority. The superiority measures are expressed as arithmetic means, and differences in superiority between two means on a gratification dimension can be tested for statistical significance using a t- test procedure for correlated groups. A significant result was interpreted as superiority of one medium over another on a particular gratification niche dimension. A non-significant difference indicated neither medium was superior to one another on that gratification niche dimension. The Sm measures sometimes vary across the gratification niche 9 3
SUPERIORITY Sm,>j
N K Sm = X L (m j>j) i>j n=1 k = 1
N
SUPERIORITY Sm^i
N K Sm = X Z (m j>i) j>i n=l k= 1
N
Where: i, j = mediums i and j m = value of a respondent's rating for scale items on which i>j or j>i (sum of the actual values) K = number of scales on a dimension k = the first gratification scale N = the number of respondents who use both i and j n = the first respondent
Note: From "Formulas for computation of niche breadth, niche overlap, and competitive superiority using gratification measures." Copyright 1985 by John Dimmick. Used with permission.
Figure 2. Formulas for Competitive Superiority, 94 dimensions. When one medium is superior to another on the same number of GO scales, a non-significant difference may be obtained for the measure. On the other hand, the GO ratings for one medium may be rated higher on the scale items than the other medium, and Sm may indicate a significant difference in the superiority measure. Obviously the acceptance and rejection of the null hypothesis of no differences between the mediums carries both practical and theoretical importance. Statistical power analysis can therefore be applied to significance tests (Cohen, 1977; Kraemer & Thiemann, 1987). In addition to planning for power and sample size, Kraemer and Thiemann (1987, p. 23) explain "a statistical test defines a rule that, when applied to data, determines whether the null hypothesis can be rejected, i.e., whether the evidence is convincing beyond reasonable doubt." Power is determined by three criteria: the size of the sample or cell, the critical effect size and the significance level. Increasing the sample size and effect size increases power. Stringent significance levels require large samples. The effect size for non-directional t-tests is calculated as the difference between means divided by their standard deviation. Cohen (1977) suggests .2 represents a small effect size, .5 a medium effect and .8 a large effect. Direction of a significance test is also important with power considerations, as two-tailed tests 9 5 require twice the power in order to reject the null hypothesis. Hence, t-tests and power analysis for correlated groups were used to test the null hypothesis of equivalence between entertainment mediums given the cell size and effect size for each pairwise comparison. The superiority results will be given for each of the three gratification niche dimensions: affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities. The possible outcomes of each pairwise comparison on a given dimension are as follows: (1) the measures are significant and the same medium is superior across all three dimensions, (2) the measures are significant but one measure shows medium i as superior on one dimension while another indicates medium j is superior, (3) one measure is significant while another is not. and (4) neither medium is superior; i.e. there is no difference between the quantities. In addition to the superiority measures presented in the chapter, a separate table is included for each gratification niche dimension which lists the results of the effect size (ES) and power analysis for each pairwise comparison. The effect size and power calculations for two-tailed correlated t-tests were conducted at an alpha level of .05. Affective Dimension As discussed previously in Chapter 111, the affective niche dimension consists of items which represent the feelings and 96 emotional states of the audience. Table 14 lists the superiority results for the pairwise comparisons on the affective dimension. In each of the superiority tables the columns labeled as Sm lists the superiority values for each media pair in the first column, along with the results of the correlated t-test procedure. For example, in Table 14, cable television is superior to broadcast television (CTV>TV) on the affective dimension; the Sm measure for cable television is 4.18, while the Sm measure for broadcast television is 1.80. The t value of 6.44 indicates a significant difference between the measures beyond p < .05. The comparisons on the affective niche dimension found statistically significant differences in the Sm measures on eight of the ten media comparisons. The VCR was found to be superior to all other forms of video entertainment on this dimension. Cable television was superior to all mediums with the exception of the VCR. Broadcast television was found to be superior only to pay per view, while premium cable was superior only to the pay per view medium. Two comparisons yielded non-significant results indicating equivalence between media forms. Respondents found the VCR to be equivalent to cable television in terms of satisfying affective gratification needs, while broadcast television was found to be equivalent to premium cable channels on the affective dimension. Tabic 14
Affective Dimension Media Pair Superiorities
N Sm
CTV>TV 44 2 4.18 6.44* 1.80 VCR>TV 339 6.64 5.30* 3.64 VCR=CTV 33 2 4.29 1.79 3.41 TV=PREM 27 2 5.36 1.45 4.46 CTV>PREM 27 2 5.34 7.52* 1.87 VCR>PREM 207 6.62 6.59* 2.36 TV>PPV 13 1 8.38 7.72* 2.02 CTV>PPV 1 3 1 10.29 13.28* 1.04 VCR>PPV 10 1 8.71 9.90* .84 PREM>PPV ! 04 5.87 7.78* .61
*p < .001 98
Table 15 reports the effect size (ES) and power analysis for two-tailed correlated t-tests with alpha level of .05 on the affective niche dimension. Low power indicates a high probability of a beta error {1-power), while moderate power values suggest a 50-50 chance of accepting the null hypothesis of equivalence between media forms. Low effect sizes resulted in non-significant t-tests, while larger effect sizes accompanied significant pairwise differences which produced higher levels of power. On the eight comparisons where significant differences were found power was above .995. Cognitive Dimension Table 16 presents the results of the superiority measures on the cognitive niche dimension. As on the affective dimension, eight of the ten comparisons found significant differences between the Sm measures calculated for each medium. Broadcast television and cable television were found to be superior in their ability to provide cognitive need gratifications to the respondents when compared to the other video entertainment mediums: the VCR, premium cable, and pay per view. However, when compared to one another, broadcast television and cable television were found to be equivalent. Recall that in Chapter IV a high degree of overlap was found between broadcast television and cable television on 99
Tabic 15 Effect Size (ES) and Power Analysis (Alpha - ,05) for Affective Dimension N ES Power
CTV>TV 44 2 .63 >.995
VCR>TV 339 .82 >995
VCR-CTV 332 .17 5 7
TV-PREM 27 2 .16 2 0
CTV>PREM 272 .58 >.995
VCR>PREM 207 .60 >.995
TV >PPV 131 .94 >.995
CTV>PPV 131 1.00 >.995
VCR>PPV 101 1.00 >.995
PREM>PPV 104 .86 >.995 100 the cognitive dimension, indicating intense competition between the two mediums. Interestingly, in the superiority measure the two mediums are deemed to be equivalent to one another in serving the cognitive need gratifications of the audience. In the other comparisons on the cognitive dimension, premium cable was again found to be superior to pay per view. The VCR and premium cable were found to be equivalent to one another as indicated by a non-significant t-test. The effect size and power analysis for the cognitive niche dimension are reported in Table 17. As expected, low effect sizes and thus lower power accompanied the non-significant comparisons, while moderate to strong effect sizes and power levels above .99 were found on the comparisons with statistically significant differences. Gratification Opportunities Dimension Table 18 presents the results of the superiority measures on the gratification opportunities dimension. All ten comparisons yielded significant differences between media forms. The VCR was found to be superior when compared to the other four video entertainment mediums in providing gratification opportunities to the audience. This is not surprising given the niche breadth measure reported for the VCR in Chapter IV on the gratification opportunities dimension. 101
Table 16
Cognitive Dimension Media Pair Superiorities
N Sm
CTV=TV 442 3.75 .93 3.43 TV>VCR 339 8.86 13.59* 2.65 CTV>VCR 332 6.54 16.98* 1.07 TV>PREM 272 9.06 7.41* 1.90 CTV>PREM 27 2 6.84 18.72* .52 VCR-PREM 207 2.56 .24 2.46 TV >PPV 131 12.24 17.95* .72 CTV>PPV 131 10.35 18.89* .49 VCR>PPV 101 3.98 5.20* 1.17 PREM>PPV 104 3.77 6.84* .53
*p < .001 102
Table 17 Effect Size (ESI and Power Analysis (Alpha = .051 for Cognitive Dimension N ES Power
CTV-TV 442 .07 32
TV>VCR 3 39 1.00 >.995
CTV>VCR 332 1.00 >.995
TV>PREM 27 2 1.00 >.995
CTV>PREM 272 1.00 >.995
VCR-PREM 207 .03 7
TV >PPV 13 1 1.00 >.995
CTV>PPV 131 1.00 >.995
VCR>PPV 101 .65 99
PREM>PPV 104 .75 >.995
♦Power is above .995 103
Tabic 18
Gratification Opportunities Dimension Media Pair Superiorities
N Sm t
CTV>TV 442 6.06 5.16* 3.74 VCR>TV 339 10.18 8.29* 5.08 VCK>CTV 332 8.16 4.77* 5.29 TV>PREM 272 9.01 6.39* 4.58 CTV>PREM 272 9.57 12.47* 2.38 VCR>PREM 207 15.47 8.1 1* 1.64 TV >PPV 1 3 1 12.80 6.65* 3.01 CTV>PPV 1 3 1 15.47 8.11* 1.64 VCR>PPV 101 15.22 12.65* 2.35 PREM>PPV 104 7.82 7.56* 1.45
*p < .001 104
Cable television also showed strong superiority on the gratification opportunities dimension. Cable television was found to be superior to broadcast television, premium cable, and pay per view in its ability to provide gratification opportunities to the respondents. Broadcast television was found to be superior to both premium cable and pay per view, while premium cable was found to be superior only topay per view. Table 19 presents the effect size and power analysis for the comparisons on the gratification opportunities dimension. The significance tests were in most cases accompanied by strong effect sizes. A moderate effect size (.43) was found between broadcast television and cable television. In all ten comparisons on the gratification opportunities dimension power exceeded .995. Sum m ary. In order to clarify the results of this chapter a summary of the media superiorities along the three gratification niche dimensions (affective, cognitive and gratification opportunities) are presented in Table 20. In the four comparisons where the two mediums were found to be equivalent (i.e. no significant difference between mediums on the Sm measure) the cells are designated "NS". As shown in Table 20, the affective and cognitive dimensions each produced eight of ten significant superiority 105
Table 19 Effect Size (ESI and Power Analysis (Aloha - .051 for Gratification Opportunities Dimension N ES Power
CTV>TV 44 2 .43 >.995
VCR>TV 3 3 9 .88 >.995
VCR>CTV 33 2 .76 >.995
TV>PREM 27 2 .77 >.995
CTV >PREM 27 2 .94 > 005
VCR>PREM 20 7 1.00 >.995
TV >PPV 1 31 1.00 >.995
CTV>PPV 1 3 1 1.00 >.995
VCR>PPV 1 0 1 1.00 >.995
PREM>PPV 104 .79 >.995 106
Tabic 20
Summary n f Media Superiorities Across Gratification Niche Dimensions
Affective Cognitive Gratification Opportunities
CTV-TV c r v NS CTV
VCR-TV VCR TV VCR
VCR-CTV NS CTV VCR
TV-PREM NS TV TV
CTV-PREM CTV CTV CTV
VCR-PREM VCR NS VCR
TV-PPV TV TV TV
CTV-PPV CTV CTV CTV
VCR-PPV VCR VCR VCR
PREM-PPV PREM PREM PREM 107
measures, while all ten comparisons were significant on the gratification opportunities dimension. Of the thirty comparisons cable televison (9) and the VCR (8) scored the most superiorities across dimensions, followed by broadcast television (6) and premium cable (3). Pay per view was not found to be superior to any other medium on any of the three gratification niche dimensions. A closer examination of each of the dimensions indicates a somewhat complex pattern of organization among the population of media forms. On the affective dimension, cable televison and the VCR were found to be superior to all other mediums but equivalent to one another. Broadcast televison and premium cable were both superior to pay per view on the affective dimension, but were equivalent when compared to each other.The cognitve dimension produced another complex pattern of coexistence among the video entertainment media. Here broadcast televison and cable television were found to be superior to all other media forms, but were found to be equivalent when compared to one another. Premium cable and the VCR were both superior to pay per view on the cognitive dimension, yet were also found to be equivalent to each other. The gratification opportunities dimension was dominated by the VCR and cable television. The VCR was found to be superior when compared to all other media forms. Cable 108
television was superior to broadcast television, premium cable, and pay per view on the gratification opportunities dimension. Broadcast television was superior to both premium cable and pay per view, while premium cable was only found to be superior when compared with pay per view. It is important to recognize one cannot speak of winners and losers in the competitive relationships among a population of organizational forms such as the video entertainment industries, since the survival depends on the matter of relative superiority or at least equivalence with other competitors in the resource space. One must consider the multi-dimensional niche both within and between the niche dimensions. As the results of the superiority measures indicate four outcomes are possible: (1) one medium is superior across all three gratification niche dimensions, (2) a medium may be superior on one dimension but not on another dimension, (3) a medium may be superior on only one dimension, and (4) neither medium is superior to one another on any of these dimensions. Together, these results help to illustrate the variation in the relative superiorities in serving audience need gratifications among the video entertainment industries. However, these findings must be interpreted in light of the niche breadth and overlap measures. The next chapter summarizes the breadth, overlap and superiority measures in a 109
multidimensional interpretation of the gratification niches of the video entertainment media. The chapter will also discuss the limitations of the study, the implications of the findings and suggestions for future research. CHAPTER VI
RESULTS: SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
This chapter will first present a summary of the results of the study followed by a discussion of validity and reliability concerns, the limitations and strengths of the research, the theoretical and practical implications of the findings, and suggestions for further research. The following sections of the chapter will summarize and then synthesize the major findings of the study as they pertain to the gratification niche dimensions, the niche breadth and overlap measures, and the media superiorities. By combining the ecological theory of the niche with the uses and gratifications approach, the study sought to address the overall question of how the video entertainment media compete and coexist with one another in their ability to satisfy audience needs, and to further determine which media forms were perceived to be superior across the different gratification niche dimensions. Summary:__Gratification Niche Dimensions. A total of fourteen gratification and eight gratification opportunities items generated from an open-ended pilot study 1 10 111 were factor analyzed to identify the gratification niche dimensions underlying the audience need structure for video entertainment. The factor procedure extracted two dimensions from the gratification items, an affective dimension and a cognitive dimension. The gratification opportunities items were analyzed in a separate factor procedure and yielded a single factor. Six of the eight affective items formed the affective dimension in the resource space and reflected individual feelings and emotional states. These items included relaxing from daily pressures, helping to unwind, and using the media to pass time. The two items which were eliminated were "to relive past times" and "to forget everyday cares". The cognitive dimension consisted of eight items related to information processing and acquisition. These items included learning about new places, figuring out plots and stories, and solving puzzles. The gratification opportunities dimension consisted of eight items related to time use and variety of choices. Among the items on the third gratification niche dimension were spending time with family members, finding programs which fit individual schedules, and media which provide a variety of entertainment options. The affective, cognitive, and gratification opportunities niche dimensions identified in the factor procedure were consistent across all five video entertainment mediums examined in the study. Because the gratification and gratification opportunities items represent the extent to which each medium utilizes the resources available on the affective, cognitive, and gratification opportunities niche dimensions, the items were used to calculate the niche breadths, niche overlaps and superiority measures for each gratification niche dimension. Summary; Niche Breadth. The niche breadth measure indicates the diversity of a video entertainment medium in providing audience need gratifications across the niche dimensions. On the affective dimension the VCR produced the strongest measure of diversity and thus the broadest niche, followed by cable television and broadcast television. Broadcast television had the broadest niche on the cognitive dimension followed by cable television. On the gratification opportunities dimension the VCR was found to be the most diverse medium, followed by cable television and premium cable. Cable television showed relatively strong diversity across the three gratification niche dimensions, as did broadcast television. The VCR niche breadth was very high on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions, but was low on the cognitive dimension. Premium cable was found to 1 1 3
be most diverse in terms of providing gratification opportunities to the audience, while lower breadth measures were observed for premium cable on the affective and cognitive dimensions. The niche breadth for pay per view was low across all three dimensions, as respondents indicated pay per view served a very limited range of audience needs. Summary; Niche Overlap The niche overlap measure provides an indication of the competition between media forms for the same resource dimensions. The higher the similarity in serving the need gratifications of the audience, the greater the competition between two media forms. Pairwise comparisons were calculated to measure niche overlap between the five video entertainment mediums along the affective, cognitive, and gratification opportunities niche dimensions. Niche overlap is an inverse measure, where lower values indicated intense competition for resources, while higher values indicated dissimilarity between media forms and thus less competition. Means for each medium were also analyzed to determine whether the similarity was a function of high or low levels of need gratification. Competition between the video entertainment media was found to be the strongest on the affective dimension, where seven of the ten comparisons showed strong indications of 1 1 4
niche overlap (values lower than 1.0). The most intense competition observed was between cable television and broadcast television, followed by premium cable and cable television, and cable television and the VCR. Lower levels of competition were observed when pay per view was compared to broadcast television, cable television, and the VCR on the affective dimension. On the cognitive dimension intense competition was found on five of the ten pairwise comparisons. Premium cable and pay per view were found to be very similar in terms of serving cognitive need gratifications and were the most intense competitors, followed by comparisons between broadcast television and cable television and the VCR and premium cable. Higher overlap values, denoting less intense media competition, were found when comparing pay per view to both cable television and broadcast television as well as cable television compared to the VCR. Competition between media forms was the weakest on the gratification opportunities dimension, where only three comparisons showed strong similarity between media forms. The most intense competition was found when comparing cable television to broadcast television, and when comparing premium cable to both cable television and pay per view. In terms of dissimilarity and thus higher overlap, lower levels of 1 1 5 competition were found when comparing the VCR to the other four video entertainment mediums. Pay per view was also found to be dissimilar to broadcast television, cable television, and the VCR on the gratification opportunities dimension. Across the gratification niche dimensions the strongest pairwise competition was found between premium cable and pay per view, broadcast television and cable television, and premium cable and cable television. Lower levels of competition were observed when comparing pay per view to broadcast television, and pay per view to cable television. The overlap measures indicate the entertainment needs of the audience support a diverse range of media competitors through a somewhat complex pattern of resource partitioning along the three gratification niche dimensions. While the overlap measure describes the intensity of the competition among the video entertainment media, measures of competitive superiority were utilized to determine which medium in each pair is the superior competitor in serving the gratification needs of the audience. Summary:___Media Superiorities A measure developed by Dimmick (1985) lor use with interval level gratification scales was used to calculate the competitive superiority of one medium over another using the magnitude of the respondent's ratings for each medium. The 1 1 6 superiority (Sm) measures for each medium were then tested for statistical significance using a t-test procedure for correlated groups. Results were then reviewed in regards to effect size and power analysis. Four different patterns of superiority emerged in the superiority analysis: (1) dimensional superiority by the same medium across all three gratification niche dimensions, (2) bidimensional superiority on two of the dimensions, (3) dimensional reversal on superiority, where medium i>j is superior on one dimension while medium j>i is superior on another dimension, and (4) no superiority on any dimension. There were no comparisons which found superiority of one medium over another limited to only one dimension. In earlier studies of video entertainment using broadcast television, cable television and the VCR, broadcast television was only found to achieve superiority on the cognitive dimension (Dimmick, et al., 1987; Dimmick, et al., 1989). In this study broadcast television did achieve superiority on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions, but only when compared to premium cable or pay per view. The results of these patterns of superiority are explicated in the following paragraphs. (1) Dimensional superiority across the three gratification niche dimensions were found in five of the ten pairwise comparisons. Cable television was found to be superior when 1 1 7
compared to both premium cable and pay per view. The niche overlap comparisons indicated cable television and premium cable were involved in strong competition with oneanother on all three dimensions, although premium cable was rated slightly higher by the respondents on just one dimension—that of gratification opportunities. In terms of cable television and pay per view, the niche overlaps showed little competition between mediums, and cable was clearly superior to pay per view based on respondent ratings. Cable television’s higher niche breadth obviously helped the medium achieve competitive superiority over premium cable and pay per view. Broadcast television, premium cable and the VCR were all found to be superior to pay per view when compared across dimensions. In each case the respondents rated payper view lower than the other mediums on each of the gratification niche dimensions. The niche overlaps did find intense competition between premium cable and pay per view as the respondents apparently perceived both mediums as offering similar types of entertainment programming. However, premium cable's higher niche breadth helps account for the medium's superiority over pay per view. The niche overlap for broadcast television and pay per view indicated little competition between the mediums, as did the overlap comparison for VCR and pay per view. In both cases broadcast television and the 1 1 8
VCR had higher niche breadths than did the pay per view medium. (2) Bidimensional superiority (superiority on two of the three gratification niche dimensions) were found on three comparisons. Cable television was superior to broadcast television on the affective and gratification opportunities dimension, but the mediums were found to be equivalent (i.e.. no difference in the Sm means) on the cognitive dimension. The niche overlaps showed strong competition between broadcast television and cable television on all three dimensions. Cable's niche breadth was higher than broadcast television on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions. Broadcast television was superior to premium cable on the cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions, while the mediums were found to be equivalent on the affective dimension. The niche breadth measures for broadcast television and premium cable on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions were very similar to one another, with broadcast television showing slightly higher diversity on the affective dimension. Premium cable showed somewhat higher diversity on the gratification opportunities dimension. The overlaps showed competition the strongest on the affective dimension, where no difference in superiority was found. 1 1 9
Finally, the VCR was found to be superior to premium cable on both the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions, while no difference in the Sm measures were found on the cognitive dimension. The niche overlap measure found the VCR and premium cable to be strong competitors on the affective and cognitive dimensions. In each case the VCR had the higher niche breadth and was also rated higher by the respondents. The low breadth values for both the VCR and premium cable on the cognitive dimension suggest the two mediums offer little diversity in serving the cognitive need gratifications of the audience. A review of the item means for each medium confirmed this assumption as low levels of need gratification were reported by the respondents. Apparently, respondents in this study found the VCR and premium cable provided little in the way of cognitive need gratifications to the audience, and thus were perceived as similar to one another. (3) Two comparisons found dimensional reversal in superiority; i.e. superiority on only one or two dimensions. The VCR was found to be superior to broadcast television on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions, while broadcast television was superior on the cognitive dimension. These findings parallel the niche breadths for each medium. The VCR showed higher breadth than broadcast television on the same dimensions while broadcast television had a higher 120
breadth measure on the cognitive dimension. Competition between the VCR and broadcast television was the strongest on the affective dimension, yet the VCR achieved superiority in the comparison. The other comparison which showed dimensional reversal involved the VCR and cable television. Cable television was superior on the cognitive dimension, while the VCR was determined the superior competitor on the gratification opportunities dimension. The mediums were found to be equivalent to one another on the affective dimension. The niche overlaps showed low overlap and thus strong competition on the affective dimension, while little competition was observed on the cognitive and gratification opportunities dimension. (4) As noted in the previous paragraphs only four of the thirty pairwise comparisons found the mediums to be equivalent to one another resulting in a non-significant finding. On the affective dimension the VCR and cable television were found to be equivalent to each other, as were broadcast television and premium cable. On the cognitive dimension cable television and broadcast television were found to be equivalent to one another, as were the VCR and premium cable. In sum, when the niche overlaps were higher between the broader and narrower niched entertainment mediums one I 2 1 medium was generally superior across the three niche dimensions. Likewise, when the niche overlaps were lower the medium with the broader niche was generally superior to the narrow niched form. When overlap was relatively low and accompanied by nearly identical niche breadths no superiority emerged. Overall, these findings suggest the audience supports a diverse population of media providing video entertainment through a complex arrangement of broad and narrow niched organizational forms which have varying degrees of niche separation across the three gratification dimensions. Dimmick (1985) suggests the competitive superiority measures represent different micro-theories concerning how respondents rate and evaluate the video entertainment media as choice alternatives. Thus, the reliability and validity of the niche breadth, overlap, and competitive superiority measures are of great importance because the measures may be utilized in attempting to assess the probability of displacement or exclusion by another medium. The following section of the chapter discusses measurement reliability and validity as they were assessed in the study. Reliability and Validity. The reliability coefficients for the gratifications obtained and gratification opportunities dimensions were of vital importance to this study because the individual items were 1 2 2 used to define the ecological measures of niche breadth, overlap and superiority. The reliability coefficients (alphas) calculated for the affective and cognitive dimensions ranged from .79 to .87, and indicated high internal consistency for all five video entertainment mediums. The coefficients for the gratification opportunities dimension also showed strong inter- item consistency, ranging from .77 to .86 across the five mediums. As an interna] validity check, respondents were asked to select which medium they would keep if only allowed one choice of video entertainment in a forced choice question. Specifically, respondents were asked "now suppose you could keep only one of the media you use for entertainment—if you had to choose, which one would you keep?" Internal validity was determined using the responses to this question in three different ways. First, the frequencies to the question were reviewed as an indication of construct validity. Second, the individual gratification and gratification opportunity items were used in conjunction with compensatory and non-compensatory decision models employed by Lin (1985) to validate gratification scales. Finally, the forced-choice item was used as the categorical variable in a discriminant analysis to determine how effective the individual variables were in predicting responses to the 123
"keep" question. Each of these efforts to assess validity are discussed in the following paragraphs. The individual responses to the forced-choice question are listed in Table 21. A total of 453 respondents answered the question. The responses to Table 21 indicate most of the respondents would prefer to keep either broadcast television or cable television if they could only retain one form of video entertainment. Given the high niche breadths observed for both broadcast television and cable television across the three niche dimensions these results appear plausible. Further, the
Table 21 Responses to Internal Validity Item
Medium N Percent
Broadcast TV 1 87 41.3% Cable TV 1 75 38.6% VCR 7 1 15.7% Premium Cable 1 9 4.2% Pay Per View 1 0.2% lower niche breadths and poor levels of superiority achieved by premium cable and pay per view would suggest these mediums would not be the choice of most respondents, as the table indicates. Finally, while a small number of the respondents indicate preference for the VCR (15.7%), the responses corroborate the findings of other studies which suggest the VCR is used primarily as a complementary device for entertainment in many television households for both time shifting and the viewing of rental and borrowed materials (e.g. Levy, 1989; Murray & White, 1987). Nunnally (1967) argues that one does not validate a measure in general, but, more specifically, validates the use of a measure for a particular purpose. In this case the responses to the forced-choice question can be used as one way to assess possible displacement of one entertainment medium over another. Hence, the responses to this question constitute one assessment of the construct of displacement. Although Table 21 provides some value in terms of construct validity, a more systematic approach is warranted. Thus, compensatory and non-compensatory decision models utilized by Lin (1985) to assess the validity of gratification scales were also used to validate the findings. While these models were first introduced in Chapter II, a more detailed 125 explanation is needed to understand how validity was assessed using the two choice-models. In the compensatory model an individual respondent assigns values, either objective or subjective, to each attribute of available choice alternatives. Each medium used regularly by the respondent was given a value (the score on the individual gratification items) and these values were then combined additively to arrive at an overall value for each medium. Under the assumptions of the compensatory model, high levels of gratification on one or more niche dimensions may compensate for lower levels on another dimension. If the individual items are valid indicators, then the responses to the gratification and gratification opportunities items should be higher for the chosen medium than for the other media the respondent used on a regular basis. Thus, whenever the medium with the largest sum was the same as the medium identified by the respondent as the form of video entertainment the respondent would retain a ’’match" or "fit” was scored for the compensatory model. The non-compensatory model does not make the assumption that choice is based on an additive, linear process. Instead, the choice of alternatives may be made on the basis of the attribute most important to the respondent. Thus, respondents may choose an alternative even though there are 1 26 one or more niche dimcnsion(s) on which the chosen alternative is inferior to other alternatives. The model used in the study examined individual differences in the respondent's ratings of a medium's ability to satisfy needs on each gratification niche dimension, and to determine if there was at least one dimension on which the chosen medium was rated higher than the other video entertainment mediums. If at least one dimension was identified it was accepted as the most important decision for the individual and a match was tallied for the non-compensatory model. The use of both the compensatory and non-compensatory models were necessary because it was impossible to determine which decision model was being utilized by the respondent. Responses to the gratification and gratification opportunities items were tallied as indicated and used to tabulate the number of matches for both classes of choice models. The results are compared in Table 22. As Table 22 illustrates the non-compensatory model provided a higher number of matches and more consistency across mediums than did the compensatory model. In earlier studies (Dimmick, et al., 1987; Dimmick, et al., 1989) of video entertainment involving broadcast television, cable television, and the VCR some variation in the models 1 27 Table 22
Comparison of Compensatory and Non-Compensatorv Models
Medium N Compensatory Non*
Compensatory
Broadcast TV (187) 64% 93% Cable TV (175) 74% 94% VCR (71) 38% 93% Premium Cable (19) 37% 89%
Pay Per View (1) 100% 100%
were noted. In the earlier study (Dimmick, et al., 1987) the results compare very favorably with the present study in that the non-compensatory model achieved a higher percentage of matches than did the compensatory model. Further, the values for the compensatory model in the earlier study are also similar to the current study for broadcast and cable television and the VCR. In the later Dimmick, et al. (1989) study the reverse was true--the compensatory model produced a slightly higher number of matches than did the non-compensatory model. The most notable difference from these findings and the two earlier studies is the high percentage of matches found 1 28 with the non-compensatory model. Whether these results are an anomaly in the research process or an indication that the non-compensatory model provides a higher measure of validity is a question which should be addressed in future research. A final procedure to assess validity involved the use of the same forced-choice item as the categorical variable in a discriminant analysis to determine how effective the individual gratification and gratification opportunity variables were in predicting responses to the "keep" question. Again, if the individual items are valid indicators then they should be able to offer some predictive ability of group membership (Klecka, 1980). In this analysis the interest was on the classification power of the gratification and gratification opportunities items as a means to assess discriminant validity. The discriminant analysis correctly classified 63.97% of all cases. The variables were the most effective at classifying respondents into either broadcast television (74.9%) or cable television (66.3%) retainers. Given the high number of respondents (79.9%) in the sample that indicated their preference for either broadcast television or cable television in a forced-choice environment, the discriminant procedure provides another indication of measurement validity. Each of these three validation approaches provide support that the measures used in the study were valid. The 129 use of the compensatory and non-compensatory models offer the most systematic analysis of validity, but a review of the responses to the forced-choice question and the results of the discriminant analysis classification procedure also help in addressing validity concerns. In order to assess external validity, the demographic variables of age and income were compared to available statistics for the general population of the Franklin county area to determine the representativeness of the sample. In terms of age, 44% of the sample were below age 35, 34.5% were between 36 and 50, and 22.5% were age 51 or older. The median age for the sample was 31-35, while the median age for Franklin County residents was 30.27 (Statistical Abstracts, 1989). In terms of household income 36% of the sample earned less than $30,000, 38.4% reported household income between $30,001 to $50,000, and 25.6% of the sample reported income over $50,000. The median income for the sample was $30,001-$40,000, while the median household income for Franklin County residents was $32,983 (Statistical Abstracts, 1989). While reliability and validity estimates were acceptable for the study, they must be interpreted within the limitations of the research which are discussed in the next section of the chapter. 1 3 0
Limitations of the Study The limitations of the study are primarily related to the descriptive nature of the study and the ability to generalize the findings. The study represented an attempt to measure audience need gratifications for video entertainment in an effort to determine which media forms were superior to one another across the gratification niche dimensions identified in the research. Additionally, the study marked the first attempt to measure audience gratifications for the premium cable and pay per view mediums. While the telephone survey research methodology and sampling procedures were appropriate to address the questions guiding the study, the findings are adequate only for describing the current state of competitive relations at one point in time. The broadcast industry, as well as the newer video industries, may well make structural changes in order to compete more effectively with one another. As such, it is difficult to accurately predict how competition between the video entertainment industries will continue to evolve. The study was conducted in a single television market, therefore making it difficult to generalize the findings to other areas. Further, this study was limited to cable television households where competition was preceived to be the most intense. Non-cable 1 3 1
households may produce patterns of competitive relationships between the video entertainment media. Implications and Areas for Future Study The uses and gratifications approach in combination with the ecological theory of the niche aided in conceptualizing the competitive relations that exist between the video entertainment media examined in this study. The affective, cognitive, and gratification opportunities niche dimensions derived from the factor analysis procedure defined the resource space on which the video entertainment media compete with one another. The ecological measures of niche breadth, overlap, and competitive superiority illustrate the patterns of organization among the media that have both theoretical and practical implications. In the following sections these implications are discussed as they pertain to each medium examined in this study. Broadcast Television. While much has been written about the eventual demise of the national television networks and local television stations (e.g., Rice, 1984; Sparkes & Del be], 1989; Walker, 1988; Webster, 1983), the results of this study indicate broadcast television still occupies an important place in cable television households and continues to serve a variety of audience needs. Slightly more respondents indicated a preference for broadcast television than the other video 132 entertainment media in regards to the forced-choice item used to check validity. As an entertainment medium, broadcast television exhibited a relatively broad niche across the three gratification niche dimensions, with the highest measure of diversity found on the cognitive dimension. In terms of direct competition, broadcast television’s closest competitor is clearly cable television. The broadcast networks have found audience shares drop by nearly thirty points in the past decade due primarily to the competition from cable television (Beville, 1988). The niche overlaps found strong competition between broadcast and cable television on all three dimensions, while the superiority measures showed respondents preferred cable television to broadcast television on both the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions. On the cognitive dimension the two mediums were found to be equivalent to one another with neither medium achieving superiority. Dimmick and Rothenbuhler (1984a, 1984b) found that high overlap coupled with superiority of one medium over another were conditions which eventually resulted in the competitive displacement of one medium over another for advertising resources. Whether or not cable will eventually displace broadcast television at the level of audience gratifications is a question that can only be answered by future 133 studies of this nature. From a purely practical standpoint, broadcast television stations as an industry have failed to capitalize on their ability to serve local markets with programming geared to their local community in order to meet the competitive challenge presented by cable. Nationally, broadcasters appear more concerned with efforts to reregulate cable television and seem satisfied promoting an image of "free" television (Broadcasting, 1990). Despite the challenges posed by cable television, broadcast television appears to be well positioned when compared to the VCR, premium cable, and pay per view, although these newer forms of video entertainment are not dependent on advertising for survival. Generally, low levels of competition exist between broadcast television and these newer forms of video entertainment. Broadcast television was found to be superior to pay per view on all three niche dimensions, superior to premium cable on the cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions, and superior to the VCR on the cognitive dimension. One of the areas for continuing research will be to assess the impact of the new video technologies on broadcast television, particularly at the level of audience gratifications. Cable Television. As an entertainment medium, cable television displayed a broad niche and a high degree of media 1 34 superiority across alt three gratification niche dimensions. Cable was found to be most heavily involved in competition with the other video entertainment media on the affective dimension, where cable competes primarily with broadcast television, the VCR, and premium cable for audience gratifications. On the cognitive and gratification opportunities dimensions cable was less strongly involved in competition with other media. Overall, cable's primary competitors were broadcast television and the VCR. However, cable was superior to most other forms of video entertainment. Specifically, cable was superior to premium cable and pay per view across all three niche dimensions, superior to broadcast television on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions, and superior to the VCR on the cognitive dimension. Cable was found to be equivalent to broadcast television on the cognitive dimension and equivalent to the VCR on the affective dimension. Cable's diverse programming schedule and channels devoted to one type of programming (news, sports, weather, children, etc.) make the medium particularly attractive in serving a variety of audience needs across different demographic groups. These findings are particularly interesting given the rapid rise of cable television during the 135
1980's. Had this study been conducted ten years ago the findings would have probably shown broadcast television to be superior in providing audience gratifications ajross the niche dimensions. As a medium cable television has made great advances in competing with broadcast television for audience gratifications as the results of this study indicate. Future studies could assess competition among specific cable channels in serving audience needs, rather than categorizing all the cable networks into one general category as was done in this study. Different patterns of niche breadth, overlap, and superiority may emerge if specific cable channels were evaluated in a separate manner in future research. The VCR. The study illustrates the unique role the VCR has achieved in many television households—that of being an important source of satisfaction for affective need gratifications, as well as the ability to provide different types of gratification opportunities to the audience. This is evident given the high niche breadth calculated for the VCR on the affective and gratification opportunities dimensions. The only dimension where the VCR shows a low level of diversity is on the cognitive dimension. In terms of competition with other entertainment media, the VCR has strong competitors on the affective dimension in the form of cable television, premium cable, and broadcast 136 television. In regards to superiority, the VCR was found to be superior to premium cable and broadcast TV, while gaining equivalence to cable television. Intense competition was also noted on the cognitive dimension between the VCR and premium cable and pay per view. However, a review of the item means indicated each medium provided low levels of need gratification to the audience and the VCR was found to be superior across the comparisons. The VCR dominated all of the superiority comparisons on the gratification opportunities dimension. No doubt the VCR's ability to record and playback different types of program material at times suitable to the respondents help establish the VCR as a leader in providing gratification opportunities to the audience. Overlap values on the gratification opportunities dimension showed the VCR to be involved in little competition with other media, thus validating its complementary nature in most cable households. As VCR penetration reaches maturation in the United States, it will be interesting to see if different patterns of usage occur among adopters. There is conflicting information in the literature concerning habits of VCR use. Some studies find less audience usage of the VCR as the period of ownership lengthens, while other studies find no difference in usage among early and late adopters (e.g., Klopfenstein, 1989; Levy, 137
1989; Rubin & Bantz, 1987). In any event, one strategy broadcasters and cable channels can continue to employ is to encourage the audience to tape their programs for later consumption, which recognizes the complementary role of the VCR in serving entertainment needs. Further, the broadcast and cable channels must continue to provide original programming to the consumer which cannot be acquired for rental or purchase at different video outlets. Premium Cable. The growth of the premium cable channels in the 1980’s had a great influence on the growth of cable television (Gershon, 1986). The advent of services such as Home Box Office and Showtime raised viewer awareness of cable's potential as an entertainment medium and encouraged subscriptions. During the past few years the premium cable audiences have declined, due in large part to the similarity of program material (i.e., movies and specials) also available for home video (Albarran, 1988; Fanning, 1988). In this study premium cable was similar to the VCR in that the medium was most effective in serving affecme needs and providing gratification opportunities to the audience. Like the VCR, premium cable served very low levels of need gratification on the cognitive dimension. In terms of competition, premium cable's primary competitors are pay per view, the VCR, and cable television. However, premium cable 138 could only achieve superiority when compared to one other medium—pay per view. The strong competition between premium cable and pay per view pose problems for the mediums as both forms of entertainment were perceived to be similar to one another by the respondents. The similarity between premium cable and pay per view may be tied to the fact that both services depend primarily on movies for program content, thus a high degree of perceived duplication may explain the low overlap values. One of the challenges facing premium cable is developing a program schedule which emphasizes more original programming and less dependence on feature films which are already available on home video (Albarran, 1988). The premium cable services must also find some way to lower costs in order to remain competitive with home video (Murray & White, 1987). If subscriptions to premium cable channels continue to decline, we may find one or more of the services will cease to exist as happened with the Playboy Channel. Pay Per View. The number of users who had experienced pay per view in this sample was very limited (N-134) therefore the conclusions are drawn with caution. The relatively new pay per view medium, touted by many analysts (Hawkins, 1989; Yarrow, 1988) as the wave of the future for 139 video entertainment programming, did not fare well in this study. Overall, pay per view was found to provide a very narrow niche in serving audience entertainment needs and was not found to be very competitive with the other forms of video entertainment. As noted previously, pay per view’s closest competitor was premium cable, where overlap values were found to be the lowest on the affective and cognitive dimensions. Pay per view was the only medium which failed to achieve superiority over another medium on at least one niche dimension in the study. Respondents rated pay per view low across all gratification niche dimensions, and seemed to be generally unsatisfied with the performance of the service. The perceived dissatisfaction with the pay per view service may have been related to a number of different factors including the cost of the programs, confusion over how to obtain the service, the types of programming offered by the services, and the lack of stronger marketing by the local cable systems. Some respondents volunteered they were unhappy with the service because they felt "cheated", having paid a substantial price to watch a championship boxing match held earlier in the year that was over in the first round. In any event, more research will be needed with a larger sample base to determine more accurately the audience 140
perceptions associated with pay per view as the medium continues to diffuse in cable television households. A number of new program packages are being introduced to pay per view customers on a regular basis. In fact, NBC recently announced that part of the 1992 Summer Olympic Games provided by the network will only be available in this country on a pay per view basis (Kneale, 1990). New and original programming will help attract audiences to pay per view and should help facilitate the potential of pay per view as an entertainment medium. To date, the most successful events on pay per view have been special event programs such as boxing, wrestling matches and rock concerts (Hawkins, 1989). In the years ahead pay per view will no doubt emphasize this type of programming in their marketing and promotion strategies along with the major appeal of convenience in providing first-run entertainment programming. Conclusion This study combined the ecological theory of the niche with the uses and gratifications approach as a means to measure and quantify the competition among the video media in serving audience needs for entertainment programming. While the results are limited in the sense that the findings are drawn from a single market conducted at one point in time, the 14 1
study docs makes several important contributions to understanding media competition and audience gratifications which are discussed in the final paragraphs. First, it appears that there are no "new" gratifications associated with the premium cable and pay per view mediums. The factor procedure produced the same niche dimensions (affective, cognitive, and gratification opportunities) across all five video entertainment mediums. This finding is important given the fact that this is the first study to have examined uses and gratifications for premium cable and pay per view services. This study found audience gratifications were similar at the level of the medium, although gratifications for individual channels and services (e.g. Cable News Networks, Home Shopping Channels) may in fact differ. Obviously this question needs to be addressed in future gratification studies of specific cable channels. Secondly, the use of the ecological measures of niche breadth, niche overlap, and competitive superiority are descriptive tools which gauge the competition between the video entertainment media. The measures help to identify the complex pattern of competitive relations that exist for audience gratifications, and offer insight into how the video entertainment media examined in this study coexist with one another on limited resources in an ecological community. 1 42
Third, the study may prove to be beneficial in that the findings may offer strategies the entertainment industries may want to consider for programming and marketing purposes. Such information would be useful not only to the newer video mediums such as premium cable and pay per view, but also to the traditional broadcast stations and cable networks. The findings offer an audience-based explanation for the current decline of the broadcast networks, as well as the rise of cable television and the VCR as entertainment mediums. In conclusion, the study describes the state of media competition among the video entertainment media using the ecological theory of the niche in combination with the uses and gratifications approach. The ecological measures used in this study illustrate the competitive relationships among the video entertainment media. Future studies will indicate how these patterns of competition may change over time due to possible variations in industry structure, economics, policy, and consumer preferences for entertainment programming. 143
LIST OF REFERENCES
Abelman, R. (1987). Religious television uses and gratifications. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. 31.(3) 293-307.
Albarran, A. B. (1988, April). Competition in the pay cable industry. Presented to the Southern States Communication Association, Louisville, Kentucky.
Aldrich, H. (1979). Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Berelson, B. (1949). What missing the newspaper means. In P. F. Lazarsfeld and F. N. Stanton (Eds.) Communications Research 1948-1949 (pp. 111-129). New York: Harper & Row.
Beville, H. M. (1988). Audience ratings: Radio, television, cable. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Blunder, J. G. (1979). The role of theory in uses and gratifications studies. Communication Research. 6. 9-36.
Blunder, J. G. (1983). The social character of media gratifications. In K. Rosengren, L. Wenner & P. Palmgreen (Eds.) Media Gratifications Research: Current Perspectives (pp. 41-59). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Blunder, J. G. & Katz, E. (1974). The uses of mass communication. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Broadcasting. (1987). "Commerce department sees bright future for advertising," January 5, pp. 160-162. 144
Broadcasting. (1989). "Three-network viewing falls below 70%," April 17, pp. 29-30.
Broadcasting. (1990). "By the numbers 2," April 9, p. 15.
Carlstein, T. (1982). Time resources, society, and ecology. The Royal University of Lund.
Carveth, R. & Alexander, A. (1985). Soap opera viewing motivations and the cultivation process. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. 29. 259-273.
Chan-Olmsted, S. & Litman, B. R. (1988). Antitrust and horizontal mergers in the cable industry. Journal of Media Economics 1. 63-74.
Childers, T. & Krugman, D. (1987). The competitive environment of pay per view. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. 31 (3), 335-342.
Christians, C, G. & Carey, J. W. (1981). The logic and aims of qualitative research. In G. H. Stemple, III & B. H. Westley (Eds.) Research methods in mass communication, (pp. 342-362). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Chronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psvchometrica. 16. 297-334.
Cohen, A. A. , Levy, M. R. & Golden, K. (1988). Children's uses and gratifications of home VCR’s. Communication Research. 15. 772-780.
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.
Colwell, R. K. & Futuyma, D. J. (1971). On the measurement of niche breadth and overlap. Ecology. 52 (41. 567-576. 145
Coe, S. (1988, August 22). Picture brightens for pay cable. Broadcasting, pp. 34-37.
Dimmick, J. (1985). Formulas for computation of niche breadth, niche overlap, and competitive superiority of communication media using gratification measures. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Communication, The Ohio State University.
Dimmick, J., Albarran, A. & Rupel, R. (1989). Gratifications and gratification opportunities as predictors of choice of the new media. Unpublished manuscript. The Ohio State University.
Dimmick, J., Dobos, J. & Lin, C. (1985). The niche and media industries: A uses and gratifications approach to measuring competitive superiority. Presented to the Internationa] Communication Association, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Dimmick, J., Gordon, D., Musgrave, R. & Dobos, J. (1987). The niche dimensions of communication industries and competition in video entertainment. Presented to the International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada.
Dimmick, J. & Rothenbuhler, E. (1984a). The theory of the niche: Quantifying competition among media industries. Journal of Communication. 34. 103-119.
Dimmick, J. & Rothenbuhler, E. (1984b). Competitive displacement in the communication industries: New media in old environments. In R. Rice & Associates. The new media: Communication, research and technology. (pp. 287-304). Beverly Hills: Sage. 146 Dimmick, J. & Wallschlaeger, M. (1986), Measuring corporate diversification: A case study of new media ventures by network parent companies. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. 30. 1-14.
Dobos, J. (1986). A social ecology study of media competition and managerial gratifications from business news. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University.
Dobos, J. & Dimmick, J. (1988). Factor analysis and gratification constructs. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. 32 (3), 335-330.
Ducey, R., Krugman, D. & Eckrich, D. (1983). Predicting market segments in the cable industry: The basic and pay subscribers. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. 27 (2), 155-161.
Fanning, D. (1988, October 17). The best part of the show is over. Forbes, pp. 101-105.
Frey, J. H. (1989). Survey research bv telephone. 2nd Ed. Newbury Park: Sage.
Gershon, R. A. (1986). Pay cable television: Historical development and selected case studies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University.
Hannan, M. T. & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology. 82. 929- 964.
Hawkins, R. (1989, June 1). The new face of pay per view. Cable Television Business, pp. 48-54.
Hawley, A. H. (1950). Human ecology: A theory of community structure. New York: Ronald Press. 147
Herzog, H. (1944). Motivations and gratifications of daily serial listeners. In P. F. Lazarsfeld and F. N. Stanton (Eds.) Radio Research 1942-1943 (pp. 3-33). New York: Duel, Sloan and Pearce.
Hur, K. Y. & Robinson, J. P. (1981). A uses and gratifications analysis of viewing of Roots in Britain. Journalism Quartgllx^ 582-588.
Hutchinson, G. E. (1957). Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology. 22. 415-427.
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G. & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.) The uses of mass communications (pp. 19- 32). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Katz, E., Gurevitch, M. & Haas, H. (1973). On the use of mass media for important things. American Sociological Review. 38. 164-181.
Kim, J. & Mueller, C, W. (1978). Factor analysis: Statistical methods and practical issues. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Science, 07-014. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Klecka, W. R. (1980). Discriminant analysis. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Science, 07-019. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Klopfenstein, B. C. (1989, November). Loking toward future VCR Usage: An examination of VCR use in four household adopting groups. Presented to the Speech Communication Association, San Francisco, California.'
Kneale, D. (1990, February 12). NBC plans Olympics on pay TV. Wall Street Journal, p. B1-B2. 148
Kraemer, H. C. & Thiemann, S. (1987). How many subjects? Statsitical power analysis in research. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Krugman, D. & Eckrich, D. (1982). Differences in cable and pay-cable audiences. Journal of Advertising Research. 2 1 (4), 23-29.
Kumit, S. (1987, August 17). Monday memo. B roadcasting, p. 30.
Levins, R. (1968). Evolution in changing environments: Some theoretical explorations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Levy, M. R. (1987). VCR use and the concept of audience activity. Communication Quarterly. 35. (3) 267-275.
Levy, M. R. (1989). The VCR age. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Levy, M. R. & Fink, E. (1984). Home video recorders and the transience of television broadcasts. Journal of Communication. 34. 56-71.
Levy, M. R. & Windahl, S. (1984). Audience activity and gratifications: a conceptual clarification and exploration. Communication Research. 11. 51-78.
Levy, M. R. & Windahl, S, (1985). The concept of audience activity. In K. Rosengren, L. Wenner & P. Palmgreen (Eds.) Media Gratifications Research: Current Perspectives (pp. 109-122).. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Lin, C. (1985). New media choice and gratifications: An application of expectancy value and lexiographic models. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University. 149
Lucas, J. (1986, December 15). Selling pay per view: Make it simple. Cable Television Business, pp. 62-66.
Mac Arthur, R. (1972), Geographical ecology. New York: Harper and Row.
McCombs, M. E. (1972). Mass media in the marketplace. Journalism Monographs. 24.
McGuire, W, J. (1974) Psychological motives and communication gratification. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.) The uses of mass communications (pp. 167-196). Beverly Hills: Sage.
McKelvy, B. & Aldrich, H. E. (1983). Populations, natural selection, and applied organizational science. Administrative Science Quarterly. 28. 101-128.
McQuail, D. (1984). With the benefit of hindsight: Reflections on uses and gratifications research. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 1. (2) 177-193.
Mendelsohn, H. (1964). Listening to radio. In L. Dexter and D. White (Eds). People. Society and Mass Communications. Clencoe: Free Press.
Miller, P. V. & Cannell, C. F. (1977). Communicating measurement objectives in the survey interview. In P. M. Hirsch, P. V. Miller, & F. G. Kline (Eds.) Strategies for communication research (pp. 127-152). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Murray, M. J. & White, S. E. (1987). VCR owners' use of pay cable services. Journalism Quarterly. 64. (1) 193-195.
Nunnally, J. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1 50
Owen, B. M., Beebe, J. H. & Manning, W. G. (1974). Television economics. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath.
Palmgreen, P. (1984). Uses and gratifications: A theoretical perspective. In R. Bostrom, (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 8 (pp. 20-55). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Palmgreen, P. & Rayburn, J. D. II. (1979). Uses and gratifications and exposure to public television: A discrepancy approach. Communication Research. 6. 155- ISO.
Palmgreen, P. & Rayburn, J. D. II. (1982). Gratifications sought and media exposure: An expectancy value model. Communication Research. 9. 561-580.
Palmgreen, P. & Rayburn, J. D. II. (1985). An expectancy value approach to media gratifications. In K. Rosengren, L. Wenner,& P. Palmgreen, (Eds.) Media Gratifications Research: Current Perspectives (pp. 61-72). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. & Rayburn, J. D. II. (1980). Relationships between gratifications sought and obtained: A study of television news. Communication Research. 7. 1 6 1 -1 9 2 .
Pfeffer, G. & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
Pianka, E. R. (1983). Evolutionary ecology (3rd Ed.) NY: Harper & Row.
Reagan, J., Ducey, R., & Bernstein, J. (1985). Local predictors of basic and pay cable subscribership. Journalism Quarterly. 11, 397-400, 1 5 1
Rice, R. & Associates (1984). The new media: Communication, research and t 2chnologv. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Ricklefs, R. E. (1973). Ecology. New York: Chiron Press.
Rosengren, K., Wenner, L. & Palmgreen, P. (1985). Media Gratifications Research:___Current Perspectives. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Rosse, J. N. (1980). The decline of direct newspaper competition. Journal of Communication. 30. (2) 65-72.
Rothe, J., Harvey, M. & Michael, G. (1983). The impact of cable television on subscriber and nonsubscriber behavior. Journal of Advertising Research. 23 (4). 15-23.
Rubin, A. M. (1981a). A multivariate analysis of 60 minutes viewing motivations. Journalism Quarterly. 58. 529-534.
Rubin, A. M. (1981b). An examination of television viewing motivations. Communication Research. 8. 141-165.
Rubin, A. M. (1983). Television uses and gratifications: The interactions of viewing patterns and motivations. Journal of Broadcasting 27. (1) 37-51.
Rubin, A. M. & Bantz, C. R. (1987). Utility of videocassette recorders. American Behavioral Scientist 30. (5) 471- 4 85.
Shaver, J. L. (1983). The uses of cable television. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Kentucky.
Sparkes, V. (1983). Public perception of and reaction to multichannel cable television service. Journal of Broadcasting 27. (2) 163-175. 152 Sparkes, V. & Delbel, J. P. (1989). United States: Changing perceptions of television. In L. B. Becker & K. Schoenbach, (Eds.) Audience Responses to Media Diversification: Coping With Plenty (pp. 333-352). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Statistical Abstracts (1989). Franklin County, Ohio: Woods & Poole Economics Inc.
Umphrey, D. W. (1986). An audience approach to the question of cable television's identity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Walker, J. (1988). Inheritance effects in the new media environment. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 32. (4), 391-401.
Webster, J. (1983). The impact of cable and pay cable on local station audiences. Journal of Broadcasting. 27 (2), pp. 1 1 9 -1 2 6 .
Wenner, L. (1985). Transaction and media gratifications research. In K. Rosengren, L. Wenner,& P. Palmgreen, (Eds.) Media Gratifications Research: Current Perspectives (pp. 73-92). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Wenner, L. (1986). Model specification and theoretical development in gratifications sought and obtained research: A comparison of discrepancy and transactional approaches. Communication Monographs 53. 160-179.
Whittaker, R, H. (1975). Communities and ecosystems (2nd Ed.). Nt*w York: MacMillan. 153 Williams, F., Phillips, A., & Lum, P. (1985). Gratifications associated with new communication technologies. In K. Rosengren, L. Wenner,& P. Palmgreen, (Eds.) Media Gratifications Research:___Current Perspectives (pp 241- 254). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Wolfe, K. M. & Fiske, M. (1949). Why children read comics. In P. F. Lazarsfeld and F. N. Stanton (Eds.) Communications Research 1948-1949 (pp. 111-129). New York: Harper & Row.
Yarrow, A. (1988, November 14). PPV TV is ready for takeoff. New York Times, p. D9. APPENDIX A: VIDEO ENTERTAINMENT PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE
Hello, my name is ( ). I am calling from the Department of Communication at the Ohio State University. We are conducting a survey of people's use of entertainment media in homes with cable television. Are you a subscriber to cable television?
(IF NO, TERMINATE) I see. Our survey concerns those audience members who subscribe to cable television. Since you are not a subscriber to cable television the questions won't apply to you. But thank you very much, and have a good afternoon/evening.
(IF YES) I am interested in speaking with the male/female head of the household. May I please speak with the person who fits this description? (REPEAT INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW PERSON ON THE LINE IF NECESSARY)
Your phone number was randomly selected for participation in our study. All of your answers will be anonymous and confidential. Would you be willing to take a few minutes to answer some questions?
(IF NO) Would there be another more convenient time we could call you back? (RECORD DATE AND TIME FOR APPOINTMENT ON CALL SHEET)
(IF YES) Thank you. That will be very helpful to our study. We want to learn more about how people in cable television households use the entertainment media. We will be asking you some questions about your entertainment needs, and how the different forms of media satisfies these needs.
154 1 5 5 USES OF ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA
On this first question I would like you to take your time, think carefully, and try to recall some of the specific programs or cable channels you find entertaining. I will let you think a few moments about which programs, and channels you normally watch for your entertainment needs. (PAUSE ABOUT 5 SECONDS)
1. Please tell me which programs and channels you find entertaining. (RECORD ON ANSWER SHEET. ONLY USE NEUTRAL REINFORCERS SUCH AS "I SEE’ OR "OK*' AFTER RESPONSE)
(PROBE) Are there any other programs or channels you watch to meet your entertainment needs? (RECORD ON ANSWER SHEET. USE NEUTRAL REINFORCERS AFTER EACH RESPONSE.) (NOW USE POSITIVE REINFORCER) Thank you. You're giving us very helpful information.
ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA NEEDS
Now we are also interested in the specific needs you have for entertainment. Most of us choose activities, including our use of the media for entertainment, because these activities satisfy some needs in our lives. One way to think about what needs are satisfied is to think about a particular program or channel you use. What does this program or channel do for you—or what do you get out of the program or channel? In describing these entertainment needs, please use any words or phrases that are meaningful to you.
2. (REPEAT AS NEEDED) How would you describe the needs you have that are satisfied by (INSERT NAME OF PROGRAM OR CHANNEL HERE) ? (RECORD ON ANSWER SHEET. USE NEUTRAL REINFORCER AFTER EACH RESPONSE SUCH AS "YES" OR "I SEE" UNTIL RESPONSDENT STOPS) 1 56
(AFTER COMPLETING LIST OF PROGRAMS/CHANNELS THEN PROBE)
Now I would like you to think one more time about the entertainment needs you have, that are satisfied by these programs and channels. Are there any other needs you can think of that you haven't mentioned so far? (RECORD ON ANSWER SHEET, REINFORCE RESPONSES)
(USE POSITIVE REINFORCER) Ok. Thank you. This is really very helpful. This is exactly the kind of information we want.
SPECIFICATION OF NEEDS (OPTIONAL
(THIS SECTION MUST BE USED IF THE RESPONDENT HAS DESCRIBED NEEDS IN VAGUE OR GENERAL TERMS.)
Now I've asked you to describe, in general, the needs that you have that are served by the entertainment media. Next, I'd like you to describe, in more detail, some of the needs so that I can be very clear about what you mean.
(REFER TO LIST OF NEEDS GIVEN IN ANSWER TO QUESTION 2. REPEAT THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS UNTIL EACH GENERAL OR VAGUE NEED HAS BEEN CLARIFIED. RECORD ALL NEED CLARIFICATIONS IN QUESTION 3 COLUMN NEXT TO QUESTION 2 COLUMN. RESPONDENT ACCURACY IS VITAL HERE, SO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY.)
Now you indicated that (NEED 1, 2, 3, ETC.) was one of the needs served by the entertainment media. I would like you to think for a moment , then explain in more detail what you mean by (NEED 1,2, ETC.) (PAUSE 5 SEC.) 1 5 7 3. Now, would you please explain in a little more detail what you mean by (NEED 1, 2,ETC.) ? Feel free to think out loud. (USE ONLY NEUTRAL REINFORCERS HERE)
(PROBE 1—IF RESPONSE IS STILL VAGUE) I’m not sure what you mean. Could you explain what (NEED 1,2,3, ETC.) means more specifically to you? (RECORD ANSWERS)
(PROBE 2-EF RESPONSE IS STILL NOT SPECIFIC) I’m still not sure I understand what you mean. (RECORD ANSWER)
(TERMINATE ATTEMPT TO CLARIFY THIS NEED AFTER THE 2ND PROBE, AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT NEED TO BE CLARIFIED)
(WHEN EACH NEED HAS BEEN SATISFACTORILY CLARIFIED OR TERMINATED, THEN USE A FULL POSITIVE REINFORCER) Very good. This is just the kind of information we're looking for.
UNMET NEEDS
4. Are there any entertainment needs that you feel programs or channels in the media could satisfy for you that are not currently bc.ng met? (RECORD ON ASWER SHEET. USE NEUTRAL REINFORCERS)
5. Is there anything else that you would like to add about the programs, channels or needs we have discussed? (RECORD ANSWERS)
Just two more short questions and we'll be finished.
6. Do you currently subscribe to any premium cable channels such as HBO, Showtime, The Disney Channel, Cinemax or The Movie Channel? (RECORD ANSWERS) 1 5 8 7. Have you ever ordered any movie or special event program on a pay-per-view channel like Request Television or Cable Video Store offered by your cable system? (IF RESPONDENT DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT PAY-PER-VIEW IS THEN EXPLAIN, AND RECORD ANSWERS)
Thanks very much. The help you have given us this afternoon/evening will help us better understand how people in cable television households use the media to satisfy their entertainment needs. Thanks again and have a good afternoon/evening.
(CIRCLE SEX OF RESPONDENT ON ANSWER SHEET) APPENDIX B: VIDEO ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA QUESTIONNAIRE
ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA USE STUDY OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION AUTUMN 1989 ALAN ALB ARRAN/DR JOHN DIMMICK 29:- 3-100
‘DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE) VAR a x o x e
RESPONDENT CODE ( ____ i i i t —
CARD NUMBER i ___ i ( ______t i _____ >
AFTER COMPLETING INTERVIEW)
RESPONDENTS TELEPHONE NUMBER) I ____ i i ______i i ___ ^__i
YOUR INTERVIEWER NUMBER ( ) < > i '
Hello, my nune it ( I t am calling (ram the Deportment of Communication tt the Ohio State University We art conducting a survey of peoples use of enienaiMncnl media m hornet with cable television Are you a tubacrtber to cable te let moo 7 (yea/noi
IF NO. TERMINATE) I tec Well, out survey concern people a uae of media including cable television lor entertainment purposes Since you are not a cable television subscriber, the quesiinns won t apply to you But thank you very much Have a good aftemooo/everting
‘IF Y ES i I in interested in speaking with the lmale/remale) bead of the household May I plcave tpeak with the person who fits thia description ’ ■ REPEAT THE INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW PERSON ON THE LINE IF NECESSARY)
Your phone number was randomly selected for participation in our study All of your aniwen will he anonymous and confidential Would you be willing to take about 10 minutes of your time to answer some questions?
(IF NO) Would (here be soother, more convenient lime we could cell you back? (PUT SPECIFIC DATE AND TIME ON CALL SHEET) Thank you very much. Have a good afternoon/evening
159 1 60
(IF YE5) Very food That will be helpful. We mac to learn aon about bow people use tbe media to sauafy tbeir emeriti amsst seeds Wa an interested in the me of regular television which include* Channels 4, 6. 10. It, » d J*. the use of tegular sod premium cable television channels. and tbe use of video Cassette Recorders. or VCRs.
Please answer all of the following questions in ten** of yourself If I ask about you I am asking about your own personal use of a medium, not about bow other mtmbert of your household might use it.
I . Do you personally view entertainment programming on the VCR at least once a month ’
* i Y et
Bl No
III Do you personally view entertainment programming on regular TV at least once a month ’ Here we are reiemng to nations like WCMH. Channel 4 and WBNS. Channel 10
A i Yes
I ______! ‘ * ______Bl No
111 ' Do vou personally view entertainment programming on cable TV at least once a month’ Etsmplet ot cable channels are ESPN. Cable News Network. MTV etc \ i Ye* J t_____ ! ' ____ I B l No
!V> Do you personally view entertainment programming on any premium cable channel >uch a* HBO, Showtime, The Movie Channel or The Dimey Channel at least once a month’ A l Yea __I Bl No v p Have vou ever watched a pay-per-view event offered by your cable system during the past in months’ Psy per view programming includes first run movie* and special event program* such a* boa tug matches or concerts for which you pay a lee in addition to your monthlv c sable bill to see the program A i Y et <____ i i______j *_____ B) No
■ CONTINUE ONLY IF AT LEAST TWO OF THE ABOVE hCDIA ARE USED AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH IF A RESPONDENT USES ONLY ONE MEDIUM TERMINATE THE INTERVIEW SAY j I sec. Well, our turvev l one eras those who use at least two of tbs throe medieaaj I just asked about, so the rest of the survey will not apply to you. Thank you very much for your time and have a good t fter noon/evening 1 6 1
i tF AT LEAST TWO OF THE MEDIA AJIE USED AT LEAST ONCE PE* MONTH. CON TIN UE) We we *i»o inieiejied in the ipaaflc CONTENT of the media yoa uat for entertainment. Some example* of entertainment cos lea i would include:
* particular TV PROGRAMS you watch * eiample* of tit tap you watch oa a VCR: * particular cable TV CHANNELS OR PROGRAMS you wamh: * particular program* you watch ou your premium cable channel or pay per view
i READ ONLY THOSE MEDIA WHICH ARE VIEWED FOR ENTERTAINMENT PROGRAMMING tT LEAST ONCE A MONTH.!
v i i F o r ______and ______REPEAT NAMES OF MEDIA WHICH ARE USED AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH i pi earn name tome example* of TV pro|rami. cable channel*, or kind* of lape* you look for to iau*iv vour entertainment need* y . MEDIA CONTENT REGULAR TELEVISION
fli MEDIA CONTENT CABLE TELEVISION
C. MEDIA CONTENT VCR.
D i MEDIA CONTENT: PREMIUM CABLE/PAY PER VIEW
Thii ii fotag very well. 1 6 2
Now l o aunm < m bow well yoa think the madia SATISFIES wbw yarn look for id cmcnaiam«*i. la thia aacuoa. I'U read a liw of naiaaaau . aad I'll aak yoa to tell me bow helpful each media* it in tauafyiag yoar eawnaiaeeai aaadi --- the choicer arc not at all. only a liule, i owe what. or very balpfa). Ftaaaa knap la miad tba (pacific media coaieni you meniincd earlier for tba eniertaiameat madia*a yoa regularly uae.
Anv queautma? (IF YES. CLARIFY. IF NO, SAY. . ) OK. lei'a begin. Remember we warn vou 10 arower lor ______aad aad aad __ _ (NAME MEDIA MEETING MINIMUM USE REQUIREMENTS) aad we waat you to keep in mi ad tba apecific media coaieni you named
V|[ i |) To give vou a vanctv of caieruiameai cboicca. bow helpful n i READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Sol Lillie Some Very
j i Regular TV ______i____ . ( ____ : i _____ h i Cable l V ______i > i .! i ____ c i VCR ______(____ i I____ i ( ____ J i Premium Cable ______t j t i i ____ ci Pay Per View ______( i ( _____ I ___
) To help vou feet lesa tenac. how hciptui n READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Lmlr Some Very ri Regular TV ______i > i , t . h i Cable TV ___ - ___ _ t i i i ____ . ■ VCR ______i i i i i Ji Premium Cable ______i > i ____j i _____ ■ ci Pay Per View ______< ) <____; <_____ >
; j To leaia mote about ihiaga that in it real vou penooallv. bow helpful n READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Lillie Some Very j > Regular TV ______i ) i ____i i _____ . h > ('able TV ______t . i ____,_( _____ . . i vcR ______( i i___i i____ It Premium Cable ______i > i ____ j i ____ ci Ply Per View ______i ) i ____ ■._<____ j
r j teti vour ability to aaawer qutattoaa or wive puxalea or myttenea. how helpful n READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Nol Little Some Very j i Regular TV ______i ; i ____i r_____ hi Cabin TV ______( i \ ____ i i ____ . i VCR ______( , (____ i_( ____ i Ji Premium Cable ______( i (____ j (____ i ci Pay Per View ______( I (____ |_(____ i 1 6 3
j) To help occupy your time, bow helpful i* (READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Net Little Some V ery < t Repuiar TV ______b i Cable TV ______v cs ______J i Premium Cable ______? ; Pay Per View ______bi five vou entertainment that fin into your bury Kbedulc. bow helpful n READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Noi Little 5omc V erv
11 Rcfular TV b i Cable TV VCR J i Premium Cable r i Pay Per View
To ibelp vou relieve m ic u , bow helpful n , READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) N ot Lnilc Some V erv R efulat TV _ J (. Cable TV } t
VCR (. Premium Cable _ J L Pay Per View L
, To help you learn bow io improve your life, bow beipful n READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) N ot Little Some Very Rcfular TV Cable TV VCR Premium Cable Pay Per view 1 6 4
9) To offer n iin iiiin i you penoully * m i at time* ihai etc convenient for you bow helpful it . . (READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) N ot L illie Som e V e ry
11 Regular TV ______b ) Cable TV______J L c i VCR ______d i Premium Cable ______c i Pav Per view ______
101 To help vou unwind. bow helpful it ■READONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Lillie Some V ery a i Regular TV b i Cable TV i VCR J i Premium Cable e i Pay Per View
The information you re giving ui it very important to our turvey
! ] i Tj help you undcrttand new and/or diffcrcm people, placet or ibinga. bow helpful i READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Lilile Some V ery a i Regular TV h i Cable TV VCR J i Premium Cable e ' Pay Per View
::i T.t can time there it nothing eltc to do. how helpful it READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY I Noi Little Some V ery Regular TV b i Cable TV . i VCR J i Premium Cable Pay Per View 1 6 5
13) To supply ( S iu u u m u yoa * > u liui ii available at lime every day. how helpful is . . (READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Linlc Some V ery Regular TV b i Cable TV i i VCR J i Premium Cable e ) Pay Per View
; J To help vou plan vour daily aciiviues. how helpful u READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not L m lc Som e V erv j i R egular TV - . Cable TV J 1. VCR -j I, 1 > Premium Cable e i Pav Per View
' * To lei vou understand whv people act the way they do. how helpful is READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Nol LmJe Some Very j i Regular TV < f < ____ > - : Cable TV ( i (____ | VCR ( ) {____ ) j ' Prem ium Cable ____ ( ) (____ ) : i Pay Per View _____ ( ) (_____ )___
To five vou ibe opportunity io fl|ute out plots aad characters, bow helpful is READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) N ol Linlc Soma Very j ■ Regular TV Cable TV VCR j i Premium Cable Pay Per View 1 66
17 > Tu live you a um ber of different emenaianieot choices, bo* helpful it iR£AD ONLY THOSE THAT APTLY) Not Little Some V ery ai Regular TV ______b) Cable TV ______c i VCR ______i J i Premium Cable ______; i P»y Per V ie* ______
IKt To make you feel it if you arc participating in die competitive itruggle of people playing tpont or lines, bo* helpful it READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLYl Not Little Some V e rv
11 Regular TV ____ b i Cable TV ____ .■ ■ VCR ____
1 ) Premium Cable ____ e i Pav Per Vie* ____
1 9 1 To give vou ao opportunity to spend lime wnb otber family members, ho* helpful it READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLYl Nol Little Some V erv i > Regular TV b i Cable TV VCR J i Premium Cable e i Pav Per Vie*
20 i To give vou the opportunity to f t live events and feetmgi from the past, ho* helpful >t READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLYl Not Lillie Some Very i > Regular TV b i Cable TV c I VCR
1 1 Premium Cable
4 i Pay Per View 167
21) To balp put year wad « mm. how it . : READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY} N ot Little Some V ery 11 Regular TV ____ b ) Cabk TV ___ c > VCR ____ d i Premium Cable ____ e j Pay Per View ____
To give vou entertainment that fita in with your i"* l ee time, bow helpful it READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Little Some V ery j i Regular TV ____ ii t Cable TV ____ VCR ____ j > Premium Cable ____ c i Pay Per View ____
To let you get to know character! and/or peruoaaJiuce at if they wen your friendi. 1iow helpful II READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Little Some Verv Regular TV Cable TV VCR Premium Cable Piy Per View
To help vou forget about datly caret, bow helpful it READ ONLY THOSE THAT APPLY) Not Little Some Very Regular TV Cable TV VCR Premium Cable Pav Per View 168
This it going very well. Just o n final k i of quesuoat to help ui protest ibe information yoa have give* ut tad we II be done
2 5) Now. typpote yo* coaid keen only ONE of the media you use for entertainment If yoa bad to choose. would you KEEP ______or or ______(READ ONLY THE MEDIUMS WHICH APPLY TO THE RESPONDENT i j ) Regular TV < j (______> i . h i Cable TV c i VCR J i Premium Cable i i Pay per view
VIII
16 1 Which of (he following income categories would best deter be vour rotal household income.' I will read you a Im of categories. Please slop me wtiea I reach you! iota! household income level Keep in mind that your answers are coelidenusl and anonvmoui
J 1 under $10,000 r> i between $10,000 and $20,000 . t between $20,001 sod $30,000 J i between $30,001 and $40,000 C t between $40,001 and $30,000 i i between $30,001 and $60,000 ( > between $60,001 aad $70,000 n i between $70,001 and $10,000 > i between $•0,001 sod $90,000 i between $90,001 sod $100,000 t > between SI00.001 sod $130,000 between $130,001 and $200 000 n i more than $200,000 -r i Jon t know/no answer
: ’ . How many people live in vour household1 - IF ONE. CIRCLE (A> BELOW IF MORE THAN ONE. CIRCLE (T>)1 a i single.penoa household ( ____ >______r _____ b i multi-perion household IF b. ASK THE FOLLOWING QLESTIONI
IS i Are the rendents of the household a Family1
Yes NO I 69
29) Aad finally, what u your t |« . pieman? ______
(IF RESPONDENT HESITATES OR REFUSES) Let M read yon a list of categories. n e w t stop me whaa I teach yowr age troop (CIRCLE THE CORRECT CATEGORY) a i under I I y e a n („ ____ ) (______) ( ______) b > 18 to IS ci 26 to 30 J i 31 to 3J e i 36 to *0 I i -ii to <3 j i 1A ia M i i 51 to 35 : i ? ft to 60 i i 61 to 63 V ) 66 to 70 I i '1 to 75 m i 76 to 80 n i 81 to 85 o i over 86
Thank vou very much. The help you ve given u» itui afternoon/evening will enable ui :o better uaderttand the wayi people uie entenaiMncnt media. Thanfct again and have a afternoon/evening.
’0. i CIRCLE SEX DO NOT ASK) j i Male ( _____ ,i (______,i i _____ j 7 1 Fem ale
OTHER REMINDERS Mark "C* for completed interview on yonr call ibeet. Return to pigs I and Fill in reapondema telephone number, and your interviewer number for verification purposes ' Look o ver questionnaire io m ake lure you circled only one answer for each question lor coding accuracy.