Some mass communications scholars have contended that uses and gratifications is not a rigorous social science theory. In this article, I argue just the opposite, and any attempt to speculate on the future direction of mass communication theory must seriously include the uses and gratifications approach. In this article, I assert that the emergence of computer-mediated communication has revived the significance of uses and gratifications. In fact, uses and gratifications has always provided a cutting-edge theoretical approach in the initial stages of each new mass communications medium: newspapers, radio and television, and now the Internet. Although scientists are likely to continue using traditional tools and typologies to answer questions about media use, we must also be prepared to expand our current theoretical models of uses and gratifications. Contemporary and future models must include concepts such as interactivity, demassification, hypertextuality, and asynchroneity. Researchers must also be willing to explore interpersonal and qualitative aspects of mediated communication in a more holistic methodology.

/pdf/uses-and-gratifications-theory-in-the-21st-century-123uck608n.pdf

Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century

A second‐order meta‐analysis was conducted to assess the implications of using college student subjects in social science research. Four meta‐analyses investigating response homogeneity (cumulative N > 650,000) and 30 meta‐analyses reporting effect sizes for 65 behavioral or psychological relationships (cumulative N > 350,000) provided comparative data for college student subjects and nonstudent (adult) subjects for the present research. In general, responses of college student subjects were found to be slightly more homogeneous than those of nonstudent subjects. Moreover, effect sizes derived from college student subjects frequently differed from those derived from nonstudent subjects both directionally and in magnitude. Because there was no systematic pattern to the differences observed, caution must be exercised when attempting to extend any relationship found using college student subjects to a nonstudent (adult) population. The results augur in favor of, and emphasize the importance of, replicating r...

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/323732

On the Use of College Students in Social Science Research: Insights from a Second‐Order Meta‐analysis

The present research proposed a theory of news habit formation based in the uses and gratifications paradigm and applied it to emerging patterns of news consumption among college students. Five distinctive patterns emerged: hometown newspapers, comedy news, cable news, Internet news, and broadcast news. A sixth consumption pattern included diverse sources specializing in depth news coverage. Surveillance and escapism gratifications were the most consistent predictors of news consumption behavior across these patterns. However, habit strength was the most powerful predictor of news consumption overall. Consumption of depth and hometown newspaper sources were related to current events knowledge.

Getting Hooked on News: Uses and Gratifications and the Formation of News Habits Among College Students in an Internet Environment.

Scale development involves numerous theoretical, methodological, and statistical competencies. Despite the central role that scales play in our predictions, scholars often apply measurement buildin...

Ten Steps in Scale Development and Reporting: A Guide for Researchers

In this study, we report the results of a meta-analysis concerning the third-person effect's perceptual hypothesis. The hypothesis predicts that people judge the media to exert greater persuasive influence on other people than on themselves. Thirty-two published and unpublished studies with 121 separate effect sizes were examined. The overall effect size between estimated media effects on self and on others was r = .50. Among the 8 moderators investigated (source, method, sampling, respondent, country, desirability, medium, and message), 3 (sampling, respondent, and message) yielded significant effect size variations. Third-person perception in nonrandom and college student samples was significantly larger than in random and noncollege student samples. From a theoretical perspective, these findings may have been due to student participants perceiving themselves to be smarter than other people. A more disturbing explanation would attribute these findings to researchers relying on student samples.

The Third-Person Effect: A Meta-Analysis of the Perceptual Hypothesis

Scholars who write about the paradigms influencing mass media research differ in their speculations This study was conducted to provide an empirical analysis by examining six characteristics of mass media research articles published in eight major communication journals The social science paradigm was found to account for over 60% of the studies, while the interpretive paradigm accounted for about 34% and the critical paradigm less than 6% It was concluded that the social science paradigm, while being the majority paradigm in the mainstream journals, could not be considered a dominant paradigm in the research field Also, even though most of the research emulated the social science paradigm in purpose, it failed to meet scientific standards of theoretical orientation leading to quantitative data gathered by probabilistic sampling methods

The Three Paradigms of Mass Media Research In Mainstream Communication Journals

It is widely asserted that qualitative methods have re-emerged in mass media research during the last 15 to 20 years (Hall, 1989; Lindlof, 1991; Moffett & Dominick, 1987; Pauly, 1991). A stream of recent books (Anderson, 1987; Jensen & Jankowski, 1991; Lindlof, 1987; Nielsen, 1990; Sigman, 1987), a monograph (Pauly, 1991), and a journal article (Lindlof, 1991) devote themselves to qualitative applications and techniques. This interest is felt in U.S. mass communication programs as the number of courses in qualitative methodologies appears to be growing (Lindlof, 1991; Pauly,1991).The apparent rise in qualitative methods heightens the continuing debate over quantitative and qualitative research and has important ramifications for students and mass media education.First, the variety of methods and data-gathering skills needed today appear to be increasing in number and complexity. One requirement for most graduate students at major institutions in the United States is the completion of a series of courses in research methodology. About 20 years ago, quantitative research methodologies reached their peak in the United States and provided the primary focus of methodology courses. However, this has apparently expanded to include non-quantitative methods in recent years (Lindlof, 1991; Lull, 1990). Young scholars, thus, will be exposed to additional methodological tools and may even consider using multi-method strategies more frequently.Second, the addition of qualitative methods in mass media programs may mean students will study different phenomena from different perspectives than in the past. Yet, educators and young scholars have little indication of which topics and procedures are actually used in quantitative and qualitative research. This study provides this information by reporting on the uses of these methodologies in eight major communication journals from 1965 to 1989.THE DEBATETo count or not to count is not the fundamental question in the debate about quantitative and qualitative methodologies. The terms appear to function more approximately as an expression of the chasm that exists between research philosophies, rather than containing some intrinsic meaning. The phrase "qualitative" has been cited as a purposeful alternative to a natural science model of the social sciences (Christians & Carey, 1989).(1) Nevertheless, "quantitative" and "qualitative" appear to be the most common ways to distinguish "interpretive" approaches in the social and human sciences from the so-called "quantitative" approaches (Anderson, 1987; Christians & Carey, 1989; Nord, 1989; Lindlof, 1991).Most importantly, the terms highlight the intellectual dilemmas that stem from a differential set of foundational assumptions that often induce a heated debate within the research community. These dilemmas involve: (a) the purpose of research, (b) the procedures that should be used to gather data, (c) the use of theory, and even (d) the nature of reality itself (or the ability to "know"). It is in these areas that much of the debate rests. Although a number of texts illuminate these differences (Anderson, 1987; Lincoln & Guba, 1985), below we provide a very brief summary of the basic characteristics of each method in order to develop a rationale for this study.Quantitative researchers seek to explain and predict behavior by measuring variables, which can then be submitted to statistical analysis (Wimmer & Dominick, 1991). The quest is for universal generalizations that will describe the characteristics, practices, causes, and consequences of human behavior (Anderson, 1987). This perspective sees the world as orderly, stable, and connected, and attempts to uncover commonalities from a stance of neutrality that is context-free. It is a very formal, conservative process that uses theory as part of a deductive process to produce hypotheses and make predictions.Qualitative research, by contrast, examines the construction of meaning in everyday social phenomena (Anderson, 1987). …

A Status Report on Methods Used in Mass Communication Research

Audience duplication is recognized as a major component of program choice models and a fundamental aspect in understanding television viewing patterns This study evaluates the utility of a specific set of ratings‐based audience theories developed over the past 25 years, and critiques their future relevance in an increasingly dynamic, complex media environment An integrated model of audience duplication is presented as a way to assess the ability of current structural theories to explain audience behavior in the future Recommendations are given for the direction of this research

The status and future of audience duplication research: An assessment of ratings‐based theories of audience behavior

This study tested the structural factors that determine audience exposure to television using syndicated programs from 50 randomly selected U.S. markets. The results indicate that a program's lead‐in and lead‐out were the strongest predictors of a program's rating. However, channel factors, the level of concentration in a market, and the level of cable penetration also influenced exposure to television programs.

An expanded, integrated model for determining audience exposure to television

The purpose of this study is to investigate women's scholarship in mass communications from 1965 to 1989. A content analysis was conducted to examine the percentage of mass media research published...

Roger Cooper

Papers

The Three Paradigms of Mass Media Research In Mainstream Communication Journals

A Status Report on Methods Used in Mass Communication Research

The status and future of audience duplication research: An assessment of ratings‐based theories of audience behavior

An expanded, integrated model for determining audience exposure to television

A Content Analysis of Women's Published Mass Communication Research, 1965–1989: