Political Entertainment Media and the Elaboration Likelihood Model: A Focus on the Roles of Motivation and Ability Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Heather Lyn LaMarre, MPA, MA Graduate Program in Communication The Ohio State University 2009 Dissertation Committee: R. Lance Holbert, Advisor David Ewoldsen Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick Michael McCluskey Copyright by Heather Lyn LaMarre 2009 Abstract This dissertation extends the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) to the study of political communication. In particular, the project focuses on the role of ability and motivation, relative to contact with a variety of political entertainment media messages, on cognitive elaborations. Two studies were conducted to examine these political entertainment processes and effects. The first study was a 2 (ability: low, high) x 2 (media stimuli: The Daily Show, Anderson Cooper 360o) between-subjects design that examined individual-level cognitive elaboration and attitudes about the AIG executive bonus scandal involving government bailout funds. The second study was a 2 (motivation: high, low) x 2 (media stimuli: Sicko, Sicko and An American Carol) between-subjects design that examined individual-level cognitive elaboration and attitudes concerning nationalized healthcare. Results replicated traditional ELM findings. Ability and motivation had direct effects on individual-level elaboration. The main effects of ability and motivation were also found for issue-relevant and positively valenced thoughts. Message directly influenced individual-level elaborations, including total and issue-relevant thoughts. Additionally, interactions between message and ability were found for source credibility, counter-arguments, and media engagement. Results are interpreted and a discussion relevant to the findings is offered. Finally, suggestions for bridging divides between narrative and rhetorical persuasion theory within the context of political entertainment research are outlined as future research. iii Dedications This dissertation is lovingly dedicated to my family for their continued support, encouragement, and unconditional love: My husband, Brian LaMarre; My two children, Sedona and Kade LaMarre; and My father and mother, Marvin and Mollie Wolpert iv Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge my advisor, R. Lance Holbert, to whom I owe my deepest gratitude and admiration for his unwavering commitment, support, and encouragement. I would also like to acknowledge my advisor‟s family, Rachel, Lee, and Gray for their continued sacrifice of time through this process. I give special thanks to my entire committee for their on-going advice, mentorship, and encouragement, as well as their tireless dedication to my research endeavors. There are not enough words to express my deepest thanks to my two children, Sedona and Kade for their continued support and sacrifice. Without the endless support and encouragement of my children none of this would be possible. I give my husband, Brian, special thanks for his support, love, and encouragement. The road has been tough, but the journey has been wonderful. Finally, and most importantly, I thank my father who has dedicated his life to ensuring mine is successful. I am eternally grateful to my father who has also played advisor, mentor, and counselor throughout my life. Thank you, Dad. This is truly for you. v Vita 1994 Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, The Ohio State University 1998 Master of Public Administration, The Ohio State University 2008 Master of Communication, The Ohio State University Publications LaMarre, H. L., Landreville, K. D., and Beam, M. A. (2009). The irony of satire: Political ideology and the motivation to see what you want to see in The Colbert Report. International Journal of Press/Politics, 14, 212-231. Holbert, R. L., LaMarre, H. L., and Landreville, K. D. (2009). Fanning the flames of a partisan divide: Debate viewing, vote choice, and perceptions of vote count accuracy. Communication Research, 36, 155-177. Fields of Study Major Field: Communication Minor Field: Social Psychology vi Table of Contents Abstract ..............................................................................................................................iii Dedication ..........................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgments...............................................................................................................v Vita .....................................................................................................................................vi List of Tables ...................................................................................................................viii List of Figures ....................................................................................................................xi Chapter 1: Introduction and Literature Review.................................................................01 Chapter 2: Method………………………………………….. ..........................................67 Chapter 3: Results...…………………………...................................................................91 Chapter 4: Discussion...…………………………………….. ........................................109 References .......................................................................................................................145 Appendix A: Coding Sheet ……………….................................................................... 189 Appendix B: Code Book …….………………………...….……………………………190 Appendix C: Study One Ability Manipulation Articles…..............................................192 Appendix D: Study Two Motivation Manipulation Articles ..…………………………194 Appendix E: Stimuli URLs …………………………………………………………….196 Appendix F: List of Hypotheses and Research Questions……………………………...197 vii List of Tables Table 1 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Counter-Arguing For Limited Pay for Ability* Message Interactions ………………………………………………160 Table 2 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Counter-Arguing Against Limited Pay for Ability* Message Interactions ………………………………………………161 Table 3 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Total Thoughts for Ability and Message ………...…………….……………………………………………………….162 Table 4 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Relevant Thoughts for Ability and Message ………..……..…….………………………………………………………….163 Table 5 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Positive Relevant Thoughts for Ability and Message …………………………………………..………………………….164 Table 6 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Negative Relevant Thoughts for Ability and Message ..…………………………………………..……………………….165 Table 7 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Counter Argue for Limited Pay for Ability and Message …………………………………………………………………166 Table 8 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Counter Argue Against Limited Pay for Ability and Message …..……………………………………..………………167 Table 9 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Source Attitude for Ability* Message Interaction ……………………………………………………………………168 viii Table 10 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Engagement for Ability* Message Interaction ……………………………………………..……………………..169 Table 11 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Source for Ability and Message ………………………………………………………………………………..170 Table 12 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error AIG Bonus Attitude for Ability and Message ………………………………………………………….………….171 Table 13 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Negative thoughts for Motivation*Message Interaction …………………………………………………………………...172 Table 14 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Total Thoughts for Message and Motivation .………………………………………………………………………………173 Table 15 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Relevant Thoughts for Message and Motivation ………………………………………………………….……….174 Table 16 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Positive Relevant Thoughts for Message and Motivation…………………………………………………………………….175 Table 17 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Negative Relevant Thoughts for Message and Motivation………………………………………………………………..176 Table 18 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Counter Arguing for Message and Motivation …………………………………………………………………..177 Table 19 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Source for Message and Motivation……………………………………………..…………………….178 ix Table 20 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Discussion for Message and Motivation …………………………………………………………….…….179 Table 21 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Engagement for Message and Motivation …………..………………………………………………………..180 Table 22 Adjusted Mean and Standard Error Healthcare Attitude for Message and Motivation ………….…………………………………………………….…181 x List of Figures Figure 1: A Typology for the Study of Entertainment TV and Politics ………….........182 Figure 2: Ability-by-Message Interaction for Counter-arguing Against Stated Position………………………………………………………………………….………..…183 Figure 3: Ability-by-Message Interaction for Source Perceptions………………….…184 Figure 4: Ability-by-Message Interaction for Media Engagement…………………….185 Figure 5: Post-hoc Analysis of Ability-by-Message Interaction on Counter-arguing for the Stated Position /……………………………………………………...186 Figure 6: Post-hoc Analysis of Ability-by-Message Interaction for Congress Attitude……………………………………………………………………...187 Figure 7: Message-by-Motivation Interaction on Negative Thoughts ………………...188 xi Chapter 1: Introduction and Literature Review Entertainment-oriented media is a staple in today‟s political media environment (Prior, 2005), ranging from fictional narratives (e.g., Frost/Nixon,