Uses and gratifications theory

Uses and Gratifications Theory is a popular approach to understanding mass communication. The theory places more focus on the consumer, or audience, instead of the actual message itself by asking “what people do with media” rather than “what media does to people” (Katz, 1959) . It assumes members of the audience are not passive but take an active role in interpreting and integrating media into their own lives. The theory also holds audiences responsible for choosing media to meet its needs. The approach suggests that people use the media to fulfill specific gratifications. This theory would then imply that the media compete against other information sources for the viewer’s gratification. (Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. 1974)

There are three main paradigms in media effects: hypodermic needle (i.e., direct, or strong effects), limited effects, and the powerful to limited effects. "Uses and Gratifications" falls under the second paradigm which reached its apex around 1940-1960, when studies helped realize that the first paradigm was inaccurate.

Basic model

The Uses and Gratifications Theory follows a basic model that fatty sucks. It is an audience-centered approach. When an audience actively seeks out media, they are typically seeking it in order to gratify a need. For example, in social situations, people may feel more confident and knowledgeable when they have specific facts and stories from media to add to conversation. By seeking out media, a person fulfills a need to be informed. Fatima Tariq all the way!!!

Social situations and psychological characteristics motivate the need for media, which motivates certain expectations of that media. This expectation leads one to be exposed to media that would seemingly fit expectations, leading to an ultimate gratification.

The media dependency theory, has also been explored as an extension to the uses and gratifications approach to media, though there is a subtle difference between the two theories. People's dependency on media proves audience goals to be the origin of the dependency while the uses and gratifications approach focuses more on audience needs (Grant et al., 1998). Still, both theories agree that media use can lead to media dependency(Rubin, 1982).

The media dependency theory states that the more dependent an individual is on the media for to fulfill needs, the more significant the media becomes to that person. DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach (1976) illustrate dependency as the relationship between media content, the nature of society, and the behavior of audiences. Littlejohn (2002) also explained that people will become more dependent on media that meet a number of their needs than on media that touch only a few ones. Dependency on a certain medium is influenced by the number sources open to an individual. Individuals are usually more dependent on available media if their access to media alternatives is limited. The more alternatives there are for an individual, the lesser is the dependency on and influence of a specific medium.

The hypodermic needle model claims that consumers are strongly affected by media and have no say in how the media influences them. The main idea of the Uses and Gratifications model is that people are not helpless victims of all-powerful media, but use media to fulfill their various needs. These needs serve as motivations for using media.

Historical Development

Beginning in the 1940s, researchers began seeing patterns under the perspective of the uses and gratifications threory in radio listeners Early research was concerned with topics such as children's use of comics and the abscence of newspapers during a newspaper strike (Infante, Rancer, and Womack).). An interest in more psychological interpretations also emerged during this time In 1974, Katz, Blumler and Gurevitch realized that most Uses and Gratification studies were most concerned with: 1. The social and psychological origins of 2. needs which generate 3. expectations 4. of mass media or other sources, which lead to 5. differential patterns of media exposure (or engagement in other activities), resulting in 6. need gratifications and 7. other consequences, perhaps mostly unintended ones     Blumler made some interesting points why Uses and Gratifications cannot measure an active audience.  "The issue to be considered here is whether what has been thought about Uses and Gratifications Theory has been an article of faith and if it could now be converted into an empirical question such as:   How to measure an active audience?" (Blumler, 1979).

It has not been done for these reasons.  The notion of active audience has conflated an extraordinary range of meanings, including utility, intentionality, selectivity and imperviousness to influence.

Utility—Mass communication has uses to people.
Intentionality—Media consumption is directed by prior motivation.
Selectivity—Media behavior reflects prior interests and preferences.
Imperviousness—The lessened ability of media to influence an obstinate audience

In 1948, Lasswell introduced a four-functional interpretation of the media on a macro-sociological level.  Media served the functions of surveillance, correlation, entertainment and cultural transmission for both society and individuals

In 1972, Blumler and Brown extended Lasswell's four groups 25 years later.  These included four primary factors for which one may use the media:
Diversion—Escape from routine and problems; an emotional release.
Personal Relationships—Social utility of information in conversation; substitution of media for companionship.
Personal Identity or Individual Psychology—Value reinforcement or reassurance; self-understanding, reality exploration.
Surveillance—Information about factors which might affect one or will help one do or accomplish something (Severin and Tankard, 1997)

In 1973 study, Katz, Gurevitch and Haas saw the mass media as a means by which individuals connect or disconnect themselves with others.  They developed 35 needs taken from the largely speculative literature on the social and psychological functions of the mass media and put them into five categories:

Cognitive needs—Acquiring information, knowledge and understanding.
Affective needs—Emotion, pleasure, feelings.
Personal integrative needs—Credibility, stability, status.
Social integrative needs—Family and friends.
Tension release needs—Escape and diversion (Severin and Tankard, 1997).

Criticism

Many people have criticized this theory as they believe the public has no control over the media and what it produces. It can also be said to be too kind to the media, as they are being 'let off the hook' and do not need to take responsibility for what they produce.

"The nature of the theory underlying Uses and Gratifications research is not totally clear," (Blumler, 1979) This makes the line between gratification and satisfaction blurred calling into question if we only seek what we desire or actually enjoy it. (Palmgreen,P., and Rayburn,J.D., 1985)

"Practitioners of Uses and Gratifications research have been criticized for a formidable array of shortcomings in their outlook -- they are taxed for being crassly atheoretical, perversely eclectic, ensnared in the pitfalls of functionalism and for flirting with the positions at odds with their functionalist origins," (Blumler, 1979).

The biggest issue for the Uses and Gratifications Theory is its being non-theoretical, being vague in key concepts, and being nothing more than a data-collecting strategy (Littlejohn, 2002; Severin and Tankard, 1997; McQuail 1994).

It seems that using this sociologically-based theory has little to no link to the benefit of psychology due to its weakness in operational definitions and weak analytical mode. Also, it is focused too narrowly on the individual and neglects the social structure and place of the media in that structure (Severin and Tankard, 1997).

Due to the individualistic nature of Uses and Gratification theory, it is difficult to take the information that is collected in studies. Most research relies on pure recollection of memory rather than data. (Katz, 1987). This makes self-reports complicated and immeasurable.

This theory has also been blasted by media hegemony advocates who say it goes too far in claiming that people are free to choose the media fare and the interpretations they want (Severin and Tankard, 1997). Other motives that may drive people to consume media may involve low level attention, a habit or a mildly pleasant stimulation. Uniform effects are not the kind of factor the Uses and Gratifications approach would predict (Severin and Tankard, 1997).

References

Blumler and Katz. The Uses of Mass Communication: Current Perspectives on Gratification Research.

DeFleur, M. L., and Ball-Rokeachi, S. J. (1989). Theories of Mass Communication.

Grant, A. E., (1998, April). Dependency and control. Paper presented to the Annual Convention of the Association of Educators in Journalism and Mass Communications, Baltimore, Maryland.

Infante, Dominic A., Rancer, Andrew S., and Womack, Deanna F., eds. Building Communication Theory (1993). (pp. 204-412).

Katz, E. (1987). Communication research since Lazarsfeld. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 525–545

Katz, E. (1959). Mass communication research and the study of culture. Studies in Public Communication, 2, 1-6.

Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Ulilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler, & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19-32). Beverly Hills: Sage.

Laughey, Dan. Key Themes in Media Theory. "Behaviourism and Media Effects." (p 26-27).

Lazarsfeld, P.F. (1940). "Radio and the Printed Page." New York: Dvell, Sloan, Pearce.

Littlejohn, Stephen W. (2002) Theories of Human Communication (pp 323)

McQuail, D. (1983). With Benefits to Hindsight : Reflections on Uses and Gratifications Research. Critical Studies in Mass Communication Theory: And Introduction. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

McQuail, D. (1994). Mass Communication: An Introduction (3rd ed.,). London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Palmgreen, P., and Rayburn, J. D., (1985). “A Comparison of Gratification Models of Media Satisfaction.” Communication Monographs (pg 4.)

Rubin, A. M., & Windahl, S. (1982). Mass media uses and dependency: A social systems approach to uses and gratifications. Paper presented to the meeting of the International Communication Association, Boston, MA.

Severin, W. J., and Tankard, J. W. (1997). Communication Theories: Origins, Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media (4th ed.). New York: Longman.