 Selection and Enjoyment of Media

 Selection and Enjoyment of Media Entertainment
In considering the myriad of ways that individuals interact with media entertainment, the vast majority of research has focused on two particular questions: (a) What variables predict viewers’ entertainment selections and preferences? and (b) What variables and concepts play pivotal roles in viewers’ enjoyment of entertainment?

ENTERTAINMENT USES, PREFERENCES, AND SELECTION
Uses and gratifications. Perhaps one of the most basic and widely used approaches to studying media entertainment is via uses and gratifications (see Rubin, Chapter 10, this volume). In brief, uses and gratifications (U&G) conceives of audience members as “active” media users, with individuals choosing to consume media on the basis of their felt needs and the degree to which the media can successfully address these needs (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973). A wide variety of needs exist, including instrumental needs, such as information seeking; needs related to social connection; and needs related to social status, among others (Rubin, 2002). With the breadth of possible media gratifications in mind, however, this section focuses on gratifications related to media entertainment specifically.
Some of the earliest studies on entertainment specifically employed what might arguably be characterized as a U&G approach. For example, Herzog’s (1944) research on radio soap operas discussed listeners’ gratifications related to problem solving, escape, and emotional release. Likewise, Lazarsfeld’s (1940) analysis of a radio quiz show found that listeners enjoyed the program for testing self- knowledge, for engaging in competition, and for the perception that the shows were educational. Subsequently, Katz, Gurevirch, and Haas (1973) highlighted the importance of media for purposes of entertainment in their study in which approximately a quarter of their respondents reported that media consumption was better able than all other means to address needs relating to overcoming loneliness, escaping from reality of everyday life, killing time, and being entertained.
Since these earlier studies, a large body of research has examined the variety of uses and gratifications that individuals have for a diversity of entertainment forms. Some of these analyses have examined the uses of given mediums or channels of communication in general (e.g., why people use television, the Internet, or motion pictures overall). Here, the uses and gratifications of television viewing have arguably garnered the greatest amount of attention, with some of the more common uses (e.g., amusement, relaxation, passing the time) clearly pertinent to entertainment related behaviors (Rubin, 1983). Likewise, studies of the Internet per se reveal similar entertainment-like gratifications, including pleasure, amusement, and thrill, among others (Ferguson & Perse, 2000).
In addition to examining gratifications across different mediums, a large body of research has also examined specific entertainment genres or content characteristics. Typically, studies with this focus provide insights into the types of individual differences that may be useful predictors for variation in entertainment selection and gratifications. For example, research on consumption of media violence generally suggests such content is more frequently viewed by individuals higher on such traits as aggressiveness, sensation seeking, or psychoticism (Aluja-Fabregat & Torrubia Beltri, 1998; Zuckerman & Litle, 1986). Likewise, one study of horror films revealed gratifications such as thrill seeking and gore watching, with these motivations associated with higher levels of sensation seeking and lower levels of empathy, respectively (Johnston, 1995) Similar findings were also revealed in Reiss and Wiltz’s (2004) study of reality-show viewing, with higher levels of viewing more evident among individuals with greater needs for social status and for vengeance.
Clearly, U&G has been a fruitful avenue for many theorists interested in media entertainment. At the same time, though, this perspective has received a fair amount of criticism. For example, scholars have questioned the broad characterization of the audience as necessarily ‘active,” have suggested that the theory is more descriptive than predictive or explanatory, and have argued that U&G conceptualizations are often only vaguely defined (for an overview, see Ruggiero, 2000). In terms of methodology, scholars have also criticized U&G’s assumption that individuals are aware of or are willing to articulate their motivations for media consumption, thereby questioning the validity of the self-report measurements typically employed (Zillmann, 1985; Zillmann & Bryant, 1985). In part as a result of these criticisms, additional models of entertainment—namely mood management—have focused on more narrow and testable models that employ experimental methods and that make use of behavioral measures in addition to self-reports.
Mood management. As the name implies, mood management argues that one factor influencing entertainment selection is individuals’ tendencies to arrange their environment to manage their moods or affective states (Oliver, 2003; Zillmann, 1988, 2000). Insofar as this theory presumes that hedonistic concerns are important motivations for many behaviors, individuals are predicted to select media entertainment that is successful in prolonging or intensifying positive moods, and (perhaps more important) diminishing or terminating negative moods. Further, this theory does not assume that individuals are necessarily aware of the motivations for their behaviors, but rather that they act in accordance with behaviors that were successful in the past. Consequently, as mentioned previously, this theory has often been tested via experimental procedures in which positive and negative mood states (including boredom and stress) are first induced, and measures of media selection are then assessed.
There are a host of media characteristics that are thought to aid in individuals’ attempts to regulate their moods (Zillmann, 1988). For example, the arousing potential of media portrayals is predicted to assist individuals in avoiding unpleasant states of overarousal (stress) and underarousal (boredom). Likewise, individuals who are in negative moods are predicted to avoid content that has a negative hedonic valence (sad, negative content) or that is high in behavioral affinity (is similar to the context or reason for the individual’s state). At the same time, negative mood states may lead to greater attraction to media content high in its absorbing potential, as such content may successfully distract the individual from his or her negative mood.
Support for mood management’s basic assumptions has been obtained for a variety of content and in a diversity of settings. For example, in one earlier test of this theory, Bryant and Zillmann (1984) found that overaroused individuals ere less likely than underaroused individuals to choose “calming” content, such as nature shows and soothing musical concerts, over more exciting fare such as a sporting event or a game show playoff. Likewise, Meadowcroft and Zillmann (1987) found that women in the premenstrual phase of their menstrual cycles were more likely than women in other phases to report preferences for viewing comedies. More recently, mood management has been tested in the context of online musical selections (Knobloch & Zillmann, 2002), with individuals in negative moods more likely than individuals in positive moods to select upbeat and joyful music over more somber selections.
With these supportive studies in mind, though, refinements to mood management have been made to help accommodate some findings that appear at odds with the basic assumptions of the theory. For example, in one early study, Zillmann, Hezel, and Medoff (1980) found that contrary to expectations, individuals in negative moods actually avoided television comedies. However, a closer examination of the nature of the comedic presentations revealed that they focused on hostile humor—a characteristic that may have been too similar to the context of the participants’ bad moods (e.g., high on behavioral affinity). Likewise, other studies have often reported gender differences in entertainment selections as a function of mood, leading scholars to suggest that under some circumstances (e.g., when retaliation against the source of the negative mood is possible), individuals may opt to prolong rather than diminish their negative affect (Biswas, Riffe, & Ziflmann, 1994; Knobloch-Westerwick & Alter, 2006). indeed, Knobloch (2003) has expanded upon this idea to suggest that rather than using media to necessarily engage in mood management, individuals may use media as a means of adjusting their moods to be appropriate for the context or situation, even if those moods are not necessarily positive (see also Erber & Erber, 2000, for a similar argument). Likewise, Nabi, Finnerty, Domschke, and Hull (2006) recently argued that under some circumstances, individuals may select negatively valenced content that is high on behavioral affinity because it ultimately serves their coping needs.
These refinements and additions to mood management are important developments to a theory that has enjoyed a great deal of empirical support. At the same time, though, additional “counterevidence” has presented challenges that have yet to be fully resolved. Namely, a number of studies have reported that contrary to predictions, individuals in negative or sad affective states often appear to have a preference for somber or mournful entertainment, including both movies (Strizhakova & Krcmar, 2007) and music (Gibson, Aust, & Zillmann, 2000). A variety of different explanations have been suggested for these findings, including the idea that such preferences reflect information seeking, needs for feeling “understood” (Zillmann, 2000),