|
College Students' Stereotypes of Different Ethnicities in Relation to Media
Use:
What Are They Watching?
By
Moon J. Lee,* Ph.D.
Washington State University
Edward R. Murrow School of Communication
P.O. Box 642520
Pullman, WA 99164-2520, USA
Tel: (509) 335-4225
Fax: (509)335-1555
[log in to unmask]
Meagan S. Irey, Research Assistant
Heather M. Walt, Research Assistant
Alana J. Carlson, Research Assistant
Washington State University
Edward R. Murrow School of Communication
Murrow 241 BA
Pullman, WA 99164, USA
Tel: (509) 335-1717
[log in to unmask]
Submission to the 2003 Association of Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication Conference
College Students' Stereotypes of Different Ethnicities in Relation to Media
Use:
What Are They Watching?
By
Moon J. Lee, Ph.D., Meagan S. Irey, BA, Heather M. Walt, BA, Alana J.
Carlson, BA
This study examined how college students in two regions stereotyped
different ethnicities in relation to their television viewing
patterns. Students were asked to rate six ethnic groups based on a brief
version of the Big-Five Personality Traits. The purpose was to investigate
whether heavy television viewing affects individuals' stereotypes. In
particular, how television exposure of different programming types
influences individuals' ratings of ethnic groups. A survey was conducted
with 450 college students from two universities, one in the northwest
region and one in the southwest region. This study investigated the
perceived personality traits of the different ethnic groups and how they
are influenced by media use. Different stereotypes of ethnicities were
identified and they were varied by heavy exposure to different genres of
television programs.
INTRODUCTION
Positive and negative stereotypes exist in our society. Although
stereotypes are often assumed to be negative, the reverse is also true even
though positive stereotypes are rarely identified as a problem. Ashmore
and Del Boca (1981) identified the term "stereotype" as descriptive rather
than derogatory, which may be positively or negatively valenced. Some
argued that stereotypes are a by-product of human natural cognitive
tendency to categorize the internal and external world for simplification
(Hamilton, 1981; Hamilton & Trolier, 1986). Ashmore and Del Boca (1981)
defined a stereotype as one group's generalized and widely accepted beliefs
about the personal attributes of another group; in essence, the perception
of a group as generic rather than being made up of individuals.
Others argued that stereotypes tend to be created as a by-product of human
limited experience with an unknown world and vicarious experiences through
other mediums such as television or movies (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981; Berry
& Mitchell-Kernan, 1982; Dates & Barlow, 1990; Fujioka, 1999; Gandy, 2001;
Gerbner, 1998;Gilens, 1996; Graves, 1999; Hawkins & Pingree, 1982; Leifer,
Gordon, & Graves, 1974; Tan, Fujioka, & Lucht, 1997; Taylor & Stern,
1997). Therefore, media scholars continually criticize media's portrayals
of minority groups as an attributing factor for existing negative stereotypes.
This study focused on ethnic stereotypes and how media viewing patterns
influence individuals' stereotypes. The process of stereotyping involves
stretching individual personality traits to describe entire groups of people.
In this study, stereotypes were measured in terms of the Big Five
personality traits in order to investigate whether heavy television viewing
affects individual's stereotypes of ethnic groups. In particular, the
focus was to examine how exposure to different genres of television
programs influence individuals' stereotypes of different ethnicities.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Existing Stereotypes of Different Ethnicities
Several studies identify existing stereotypes (Dates, 1990; Fisher, 1994;
Mendez-Morse, 2000; McAneny, 1993; Niemann, Jennings, Rozelle, Baxter, and
Sullivan, 1994; Smith, 1991; Tan, et al., 1997; Taylor & Stern, 1997). The
following attributes have been identified regarding different ethic groups.
Identified stereotypes of African Americans include, but are not limited
to, inferior, lazy, dumb, dishonest, comical, unethical, and crooked
(United States Commission for the study of Civil Rights, 1977). Dates
(1990) added insolent, bestial, brutish, power-hungry, money hungry and
ignorant to the above list. Niemann et al (1994) found common stereotype
elements for African Americans to be athletic, dark-skinned and
antagonistic. African American males were reported to have muscular
appearance and criminal activities. African American females were
stereotyped to be loud speakers, pleasant/friendly, and unmannerly (Niemann
et al, 1994). There seems to be a common theme of violence and antagonism
in the stereotype elements used to describe African Americans. An opinion
poll by McAneny (1993) reported that more than one-third (37 percent) of
African American and Caucasian adults viewed African Americans as "more
likely" than any other ethnic group to commit crimes.
Fisher (1994) found the profile of Asian Americans to be affluent, highly
educated, holding managerial/professional occupations- and rapidly growing
in number. Niemann et al (1994) found the top stereotype elements listed
for Asian Americans to be intelligent, soft speakers, and short. Asian
American males were reported as achievement oriented, and hard workers,
while Asian American females were reported as pleasant/friendly (Niemann et
al, 1994).
Caucasians are most commonly stereotyped as intelligent, egotistical, and
pleasant/friendly (Niemann et al, 1994). In addition to these traits,
Caucasian males are also considered upper class and racist, while Caucasian
females are rather considered attractive. From a list made up of
Caucasians, African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans, Smith (1991)
found that Caucasians received the highest scores in all traits measured
(work ethic, wealth, dependency, violence, intelligence, and patriotism).
It was found the top stereotype elements listed for Mexican Americans to be
dark skinned and lower class; Mexican American males to be hard workers,
antagonistic, and non-college educated; and Mexican American females to be
dark haired, attractive, pleasant/friendly, and overweight (Niemann et al,
1994). Mendez-Morse (2000) described Mexican American females (Latinas) as
being stereotyped as dominated by men and their primary responsibility is
to be a wife and a mother, having limited access to education and
employment (Mendez-Morse, 2000).
Tan et al. (1997) found that some popular stereotypes of Native Americans
include: alcoholics, lazy, out of work and on welfare, uneducated, and that
they live on reservations because they are unable to "make it" in
mainstream America. Tan et al also found that Native Americans are
commonly perceived as having "super citizen status" in that they receive
checks from the government just because they are Native Americans.
Stereotypes and Media Use
Several mass communication theories attempt to explain a link between
existing stereotypes and media portrayals.
The cultivation theory (Gerbner, 1998) explains that viewers cumulatively
internalize messages of television as a result of massive exposure to
television's uniform messages. Gerbner argued that viewers are more likely
to accept portrayals as valid and real when television is watched
frequently. In addition, the cultivation theory discussed the correlation
between television content and the viewer's perception of the world as a
mean and dangerous place (Gerbner, 1998). It has been expanded to include
discussions of the correlation between television exposure and the
construction of the viewer's social reality. However, Tan et al. (1997)
argued that cultivation is not a by-product of mere media exposure, but
occurs when viewers generalize the realities they have learned from
television to their own social environments.
Berry and Mitchell-Kernan (1982) postulate that television informs us of
where each ethnic group fits into social structure and presents societally
prevailing attitudes toward ethnic minority members. For example, Gilens
(1996) found that "network television news and weekly newsmagazines portray
the poor as substantially more black than is really the case" (p.
515). African Americans made up 62% of the people in pictures accompanying
stories about poverty and welfare, more than twice their true proportion of
29%. He found that the more sympathetic groups of poor pictured (very old,
very young, disabled, etc.) were shown as less black while the least
sympathetic group (physically able to work) were shown as made up
completely of African Americans. Gilens (1996) argued that the racial
composition of the poor has remained constant since the 1960s, but the
media have increasingly shown blacks as making up the majority of the
poor. He further argued that mass media influence public perceptions and
attitudes in a manner that the race of people pictured in media is a
salient aspect of the story for many viewers. In turn, changes in media
portrayal over time alter public perception.
Hawkins and Pingree (1972) argued that heavy television viewing shapes
viewers' beliefs and conceptions of reality (Hawkins & Pingree,
1972). Through heavy exposure to the symbolic world of television the
televised images may eventually appear to be authentic in the eyes of the
viewer (Bandura, 1994).
Some argued that the omission of certain content can also create distorted
views toward meanings about perceived realities (Graves, 1999; Taylor &
Stern, 1997). When television content includes diverse groups, specific
examples of physical, psychological, social, cultural and economic
characteristics of each group are offered. In contrast, when diverse
groups are not included in television content, there is a message that the
missing groups are unimportant and powerless (Graves, 1999).
Fujioka (1999) found that television plays a greater role in influencing
stereotypes when direct contact is lacking. She studied the effects of
television portrayals of African-Americans by surveying two groups. One
group was Caucasian college students who would have had direct contact with
African Americans. The other group was Japanese international students who
would have had little to no direct contact with African Americans. Fujioka
found that stereotypes were affected by respondents' evaluations of
television portrayals (+ or -) rather than the number of television
programs seen. Exposure to television programs alone did not directly
affect respondents' perceptions across samples. The results suggest that
learning theories seem to explain relationships between vicarious contact
(television exposure) and respondents' stereotypes of African Americans
better than cumulative exposure. The study provided some evidence that
television messages had a significant impact on viewers' perceptions when
first-hand information was lacking.
Tan et al (1997) hypothesized that television acted as a socializing agent
by allowing novices to learn about socialization (observation via
television), evaluate the observed event (in terms of realism and
functionality), internalize the functional evaluation of the observed event
(projection of the functionality of an observed event to the individual's
own reality), and assimilating the socialization requirements. He found
that adolescents accepted values observed in television when they
recognized them as values and when they considered those values to be
important to success in the United States (recognition and functionality).
Social cognitive theory explains how behaviors, attitudes and values can be
learned vicariously through observation of others (Tan et al,
1997). Bandura (1994) said cognitive factors partly determine what events
are observed, what meaning will be assigned to the observed events, whether
the events leave any lasting effects, how they will motivate the observer,
what emotional impact they will have and how the information they convey
will be used in the future.
For example, Graves (1999) said, "televised role portrayals and
interracial interactions, as sources of vicarious experience, are relevant
to the creation of cognitions about racial groups (stereotypes), the
development of negative attitudes toward these groups (prejudice), and the
performance of exclusionary behaviors (discrimination)" (p. 708). Graves
went on to say that television could influence children by providing
examples of people with or without prejudice, settings in which racial
discrimination is condoned or rejected, and diverse social groups with
positive or negative ambiance.
Tan et al (1997) described how learning occurs when the observer perceives
the events to be functional and feels competent in performing them
(efficacy). These cognitive conditions are often found in
television. Through this process, viewers learn about minorities through
television portrayals. For some people with limited direct contact with
other ethnic groups in social settings, television becomes a tool with
which to observe minority groups (Tan et al., 1997).
The media uses-and-gratifications model shifts the focus from how media
influence individuals' perceptions to how individuals actively use media
for different purposes. In this aspect, this model explains that media
messages that are intended to persuade individuals, actually reinforce
existing stereotypes (Rubin, 1994). The perspective shifts the focus from
direct media effects on the receiver to how the receiver uses the
media. Gandy (2001) said that people who look favorably upon people of
their own race are more likely to prefer media content that enables
interaction, even indirectly, with people in their own group.
Introducing Five Personality Factors in Stereotype Research
Numerous studies, using a variety of methodologies, have been conducted to
determine common stereotype elements associated with different ethnic
groups. For example, Niemann et al (1994) used free response and cluster
analysis to determine the stereotypes of eight groups while Tan et al
(1997) used a 7-point scale to determine stereotypes of Native
Americans. Other methodologies include opinion polls (McAneny, 1993) and
content analysis (Taylor & Stern, 1997). In this study, the Big Five
personality traits were used to measure individuals' perceived personality
traits (stereotypes) of ethnic groups.
The Big Five, or five-factor model of personality, has been well analyzed
(Buss, 1996; Digman, 1996; Goldberg, 1992; Goldberg and Kilkowski, 1985;
Kenny, 2002; Saucier, 1994; and Shafer, 1999). While the literature
addresses individuals' personality traits, little has been done to
determine the personality traits of stereotypes of ethnic groups and how
these stereotypes are affected through media use.
The Big Five have often been used to describe the personality traits of
individuals. The five factors match up well with established personality
assessments such as Myers-Briggs, the California Q-Set, and the Personality
Research Form (Digman, 1996).
Costa and McCrae (1985) identified the Big Five personality factors as
agreeableness, conscientiousness (or dependability), neuroticism (or
emotional stability), extroversion (or surgency), and openness (or culture
or intellect). These are the trait names used today.
According to Goldberg's 1992 scale, the factors measure the
following: Extroversion, as the first factor, is a measure of traits such
as extroversion, energy, silence, boldness, activity, spontaneity,
assertiveness, adventurousness, and sociableness. The second factor,
agreeableness, measures warmness, kindness, cooperation, selfishness,
politeness, agreeableness, trustfulness, generosity, flexibility, and
fairness. Factor three, conscientiousness, measures organization,
responsibility, dependability, conscientiousness, practicality,
carelessness, laziness, thrift, caution, and
seriousness. Conscientiousness has been linked to employment success
(HRZone, 2002). Goldberg found the fourth factor, neuroticism, to measure
anger, relaxation, nervousness, stability, contentedness, security,
emotion, guilt, and moodiness. Factor five, openness, measures
intelligence, perceptiveness, analysis, reflectiveness, curiosity,
imagination, creativity, culture, refinement, and sophistication (Goldberg,
1992, p. 31).
Saucier (1994) derived a brief set of Big Five Markers from Goldberg's
(1992) scales. Saucier's markers consist of single trait-terms presented
with no term for a contrasting trait. However, Goldberg and Kilkowski
(1985) suggested that pairs of trait-terms more clearly specify the meaning
of the rating dimensions and therefore reduce participant's
misinterpretations. Following Goldberg and Kilkowski's suggestion, Shafer
(1999) developed a bipolar scale to clarify the meanings (shy-outgoing,
calm-anxious, etc.).
In order to assess the effects of media use on personality traits of
stereotypes, the study design must address all three aspects: perceived
television portrayals of stereotypes of each ethnicity, television viewing
patterns, and individuals' held stereotypes.
This study examines whether heavy television viewing and program choice has
an effect on college students' ethnic stereotypes in terms of the Big Five
personality traits. It also measures whether differences in stereotypes
exist between the northwest and southwest regions in America.
METHOD
A self-administered survey was distributed to undergraduate students at a
university in the northwest region and a university in the southwest
region. Using a systematic random sampling technique, every third class
was selected in each major from the fall 2002 course schedule to represent
a probability sample. The survey took approximately 15 minutes to
complete. Surveys were distributed in class and participation was
voluntary. The participants were informed of the nature of the survey and
its purpose.
Two hundred seventy eight surveys were completed at the university in the
northwest. However, seven cases were discarded from the original set due
to their inconsistent patterns[1]. Therefore, 271 participants took part in
the study (n = 271). At the university in the southwest, 179 surveys were
completed (n = 179).
Survey Design
The survey was designed to assess college students' perceptions of various
ethnic groups. The survey also included questions pertaining to students'
consumption of media and the types of media sources used.
Participants were asked to rate how they felt the media portrayed certain
ethnic groups using a scale adapted from the Big Five Personality Traits
from Shafer (1999). The survey measured stereotypes of African Americans,
Asians, Caucasians, Latinos/Hispanics, Middle Easterners and Native
Americans. The seven-point semantic differential scale asked participants
to rate whether members of a racial group are closer to one or the other of
two bipolar adjectives. The measure included ten brief markers (Shafer,
1999).
The participants were then asked to report their media use and the types of
programs watched on television. The program types included in the survey
were drama (ER, Chicago Hope, etc.), soap operas (All My Children, Days of
Our Lives, etc.), news magazines (60 minutes, 48 hours, etc.), sitcoms
(Friends, Frasier, etc.), sports, reality based programs (Fear Factor,
Survivor, etc.) and educational programming (PBS). Using a Likert scale,
the participants were then asked to record how often they accessed
television, national and local newspaper, the Internet, magazines and
radio. This section also asked participants what they felt their main
source of news information was.
Participants were then asked to fill out the same scale from the first
section again, only this time it measured their own personal perceptions of
the same ethnic groups rather than media portrayal of the groups.
The final section asked basic demographic information about the
participant, such as gender, ethnic background, religion and political
ideology.
Developing indices for media viewing patterns
Eighteen different types of television programs were included in the
survey. By using a rotated component matrix, five categories were
identified: entertainment, drama, information, education, and reality
programs. The entertainment category included comedies, music television,
and movies on television. Drama included drama, emergency drama, and crime
drama. The information category was made up of local and national
news. The educational category included educational programming, nature
programs, and game shows. The final category, reality programs, was made
up of reality shows and news magazines.
Initially, these five categories included all the programs included in the
survey. However, due to inconsistencies between total viewing patterns and
individual university viewing patterns, two additional categories, soap
operas and sports, were added to the list. Late night talk shows, daytime
talk shows and shopping shows were not included in the factor loadings.
Summed factor scores were used to create indices for media viewing
patterns. Once the categories were established, frequency tables were used
to determine light viewers versus heavy viewers. In most cases, light
viewers consisted of approximately 60-75 percent of the total sample.
Profile of Participants
Of the 450 participants, 39% (n=177) were male and 58% (n=259) were
female. Fourteen respondents did not report their gender. Seventy-nine
percent (n=356) identified themselves as Caucasian, 5% (n=23) identified
themselves as Asian, 4% (n=18) identified themselves as African American,
4% (n=19) identified themselves as Chicano/Latino, 0.4% (n=2) identified
themselves as Middle Eastern, and 1% (n=5) identified themselves as Native
American. Thirteen respondents left the question blank and 14 respondents
chose "other" as their answers.
FINDINGS
Regional differences
Through independent T-tests, it became apparent that differences in
stereotypes exist between the southwest region and the northwest
region. In general, the university in the northwest holds a less negative
perception of ethnic minorities. In only two instances (Caucasian
conscientiousness and Native American conscientiousness) did the university
in the southwest report less negative stereotypes than the northwest
university.
Personal stereotypes
Television Viewing
Heavy television viewing (Table 1) appears to have a negative impact on
the stereotypes of Native Americans and a positive impact on the
stereotypes of Caucasians. Heavy viewers rated Native Americans as less
open (p < .01; Heavy: n=112, M = 9.03, s. d. = 3.20; Light: n=292, M =
9.89, s. d. = 2.98), less extroverted (p < .05; Heavy: n = 112, M = 5.60,
s. d. = 2.46; Light: n = 293, M = 6.23, s. d. = 2.71), and less
conscientious (p < .05; Heavy: n = 114, M = 8.02, s. d. = 3.03; Light: n =
292, M = 8.73, s. d. = 4.01) than light viewers. Caucasians were rated as
more emotionally stable, or less neurotic, by heavy viewers than light
viewers (p < .05; Heavy: n = 115, M = 7.50, s. d. = 2.69; Light: n = 294, M
= 7.99, s. d. = 2.49).
Table 1. Stereotypes versus General Television Viewing[2]
[--- WMF Graphic Goes Here ---]
Entertainment Viewing
In general, heavy entertainment viewers reported more negative stereotypes
than light entertainment viewers (Table 2). Heavy viewers of entertainment
rated African American agreeableness (p < .01; Heavy: n = 134, M = 6.14, s.
d. = 2.67; Light: n = 284, M = 6.77, s. d. = 2.59), Asian conscientiousness
(p < .05; Heavy: n = 134, M = 10.63, s. d. = 2.91; Light: n = 285, M =
11.12, s. d. = 2.46), Middle Eastern conscientiousness (p < .01; Heavy: n =
132, M = 8.00, s. d. = 3.07; Light: n = 276, M = 8.64, s. d. = 2.51), and
Native American openness (p < .01; Heavy: n = 132, M = 9.13, s. d. = 3.31;
Light: n = 276, M = 9.89, s. d. = 2.92) more negatively than light
entertainment viewers. Caucasians and Middle Easterners received lower
neuroticism scores (Caucasian: p < .05; Heavy: n = 134, M = 7.48, s. d. =
2.92; Light: n = 280, M = 8.04, s. d. = 2.33; Middle Eastern: p < .01;
Heavy: n = 132, M = 8.38, s. d. = 3.11; Light: n = 275, M = 9.16, s. d. =
2.68), which translate into higher emotional stability scores.
Table 2. Stereotypes versus Entertainment Viewing
[--- WMF Graphic Goes Here ---]
Drama Viewing
Heavy viewers of drama showed only one significant difference in the
stereotypes they hold as compared to light viewers of drama. Heavy viewers
rated African American openness higher than light viewers (p < .05; Heavy:
n = 96, M = 9.97, s. d. = 2.53; Light: n = 321, M = 9.26, s. d. = 2.88).
Information Viewing
Heavy viewers of information programs reported more positive stereotypes
for African Americans and Caucasians and more negative stereotypes for
Asians and Native Americans (Table 3). African American openness (p < .01;
Heavy: n = 138, M = 9.91, s. d. = 2.89; Light: n = 279, M = 9.19, s. d. =
2.75), Caucasian conscientiousness (p < .01; Heavy: n = 138, M = 10.14, s.
d. = 5.48; Light: n = 278, M = 9.22, s. d. = 2.47), and Caucasian openness
(*near significance; p = .05; Heavy: n = 137, M = 9.61, s. d. = 2.41;
Light: n = 276, M = 9.21, s. d. = 2.47) all received higher scores from
heavy information viewers. Heavy viewers rated Asian extroversion (p <
.01; Heavy: n = 138, M = 4.89, s. d. = 2.77; Light: n = 280, M = 5.58, s.
d. = 2.79) and Native American extroversion (p < .01; Heavy: n = 133, M =
5.50, s. d. = 2.51; Light: n = 276, M = 6.33, s. d. = 2.67) lower than
light viewers.
Table 3. Stereotypes versus Information Viewing
[--- WMF Graphic Goes Here ---]
Education Viewing
There are less positive stereotypes of African Americans, Asians, and
Caucasians and more positive stereotypes of Middle Easterners associated
with heavy viewers of educational programs than those associated with light
viewers (Table 4). Heavy educational program viewers rated African
Americans as less extroverted (p < .05; Heavy: n = 91, M = 10.95, s. d. =
2.51; Light: n = 327, M = 11.43, s. d. = 2.43), Asians as more neurotic (p
< .01; Heavy: n = 91, M = 8.78, s. d. = 2.43; Light: n = 326, M = 8.10, s.
d. = 2.61) (less emotionally stable), and Caucasians as less conscientious
(p < .05; Heavy: n = 90, M = 8.81, s. d. = 2.51; Light: n = 326, M = 9.72,
s. d. = 4.02). Middle Eastern extroversion (p < .01; Heavy: n = 90, M =
6.30, s. d. = 2.69; Light: n = 317, M = 5.47, s. d. = 2.61) was rated
higher by heavy educational program viewers than by light viewers.
Table 4. Stereotypes versus Education Viewing
[--- WMF Graphic Goes Here ---]
Reality Viewing
Heavy viewing of reality programs resulted in more positive stereotypes of
African Americans and more negative stereotypes of Middle Easterners and
Native Americans (Table 5). African American neuroticism (p < .01; Heavy:
n = 132, M = 7.14, s. d. = 2.79; Light: n = 285, M = 7.92, s. d. = 2.68)
was rated lower (higher emotional stability) by heavy viewers than by light
viewers. Middle Eastern openness (p < .05; Heavy: n = 129, M = 6.99, s. d.
= 2.73; Light: n = 276, M = 7.57, s. d. = 2.73) and Native American
extroversion (*near significance; p = 0.05; Heavy: n = 129, M = 5.74, s. d.
= 2.82; Light: n = 280, M = 6.21, s. d. = 2.55) were rated lower by heavy
viewers than by light viewers.
Table 5. Stereotypes versus Reality Viewing
[--- WMF Graphic Goes Here ---]
Soap Opera Viewing
The only effect that heavy viewing of soap operas had on stereotypes was
that heavy viewers rated Asians as less extroverted (p < .01; Heavy: n =
119, M = 4.87, s. d. = 2.62; Light: n = 299, M = 5.54, s. d. = 2.85) than
light viewers.
Sports Viewing
Heavy sports viewers overall held more negative stereotypes than light
sports viewers (Table 6). Only Caucasian emotional stability (p < .01;
Heavy: n = 100, M = 7.21, s. d. = 2.76; Light: n = 314, M = 8.06, s. d. =
2.44) and Latino/Hispanic agreeableness (p < .05; Heavy: n = 101, M = 7.64,
s. d. = 2.72; Light: n = 310, M = 7.04, s. d. = 2.42) were rated higher by
heavy viewers than by light viewers. Asian conscientiousness (p < .01;
Heavy: n = 103, M = 10.42, s. d. = 3.07; Light: n = 316, M = 11.14, s. d. =
2.44), Asian agreeableness (p < .05; Heavy: n = 103, M = 8.73, s. d. =
2.88; Light: n = 315, M = 9.35, s. d. = 2.77), Latino/Hispanic extroversion
(p < .01; Heavy: n = 100, M = 8.56, s. d. = 2.88; Light: n = 310, M = 9.36,
s. d. = 2.71), and Middle Eastern conscientiousness (p < .01; Heavy: n =
101, M = 7.89, s. d. = 2.89; Light: n = 307, M = 8.61, s. d. = 2.64) were
all rated lower by heavy viewers than by light viewers.
Table 6. Stereotypes versus Sports Viewing
[--- WMF Graphic Goes Here ---]
DISCUSSION
In this study, an attempt was made to investigate whether heavy exposure to
different genres of television programs (including general TV viewing)
influences individuals' stereotypes of different ethnicities. In
particular, perceived personality characteristics of the different ethnic
groups based on the Big-Five personality traits were measured and how they
were influenced by heavy exposure to different television programs.
In summary, the heavy viewers of drama, information, and reality programs
rated African Americans more positively than the light viewers
did. However, the heavy viewers of both entertainment and educational
programs rated African Americans more negatively. The heavy viewers of
entertainment, information, education, soap operas, and sports programs
expressed a less positive stereotype toward Asians. On the other hand, the
stereotypes of Caucasians were more positively rated by the heavy viewers
of entertainment, information, and sports programs (including overall
television viewing) except for education programs. Latino/Hispanics are
considered to be less extroverted but more agreeable by heavy sports
viewers. Middle Easterners are considered less conscientious but more
emotionally stable by heavy entertainment viewers. They are seen as more
extroverted by high education viewers, less open by heavy reality program
viewers, and less conscientious by heavy sports viewers. Native Americans
received more negative ratings from heavy television viewers as well as
heavy entertainment, information, and reality program viewers.
In sum, the regional different stereotypes of different ethnicities and how
these stereotypes relate to individuals' use of different TV programs were
identified. This exploratory study simply exhibited statistical differences
detected based on self-administered surveys. Therefore, it should not be
considered that the data support a causal link between simple media
exposure of different programs and individuals' stereotypes. There are
several limitations in this study that should be considered carefully.
First of all, due to the sensitive nature of researching stereotypes based
on race, several issues about the validity of the data were considered. For
example, some respondents gave only the median answer on the scales
measuring their perceptions of ethnic groups and made it difficult to
identify the person's stereotypes. Also, it is possible that regardless of
their stereotypes, some might provide all median answers to avoid their
conscious effort to exhibit their stereotypes. Even though some cases were
excluded from the original data for this reason, it is still difficult to
ensure that we obtained individuals' true feelings about other races and
ethnicities.
Also, there were some difficulties in determining program categories and
light versus heavy viewers. The rotated component matrices for the
northwest university and the southwest university came out slightly
differently. This exhibited regional differences in TV viewing
patterns. For this reason, sports and soap operas were treated as separate
independent program types rather than combining them with other programs.
Because only college students were targeted in the study, applying these
findings to the general public should require careful, further
investigation. College students' social, economic, and geo/political
backgrounds should be considered in relation to the implications of this
study's findings.
To avoid possibilities of setting off one's defensive response or cognitive
recognition of the nature of the study (measuring their stereotypes), the
participants were asked first about how they perceived media portraying
each ethnicity. Their personal perceptions of each ethnic group were
measured later. It was noted that some respondents said they filled out
the same scale twice, meaning that they did not distinguish that the
questions were asking two different things: The first scale measured
perceived media portrayals of different ethnicities and the second scale
measured personal perceptions of each ethnic group. If some respondents
believed that both scales measured the same thing and gave the same
answers, it could be either some didn't read the question carefully or some
might have projected their own personal stereotypes through their
perceptions of media portrayals of a particular group. In fact, for this
reason, the original questionnaire design contained the first set in asking
their perceptions of media portrayals of ethic groups based on the
assumption that this type of a question fosters more honest answers. In
fact, the correlation analysis of these two sets shows a strong positive
correlation and in turn indicates it might have been the case.
This paper started with recognizing different theories about how media
influences people's perceptions (stereotypes) or vise-versa. The
cultivation theory postulated that general accumulation of media exposure
itself influences how individuals in a society shape their own views of
each ethnic group. However, the assumption that the mere exposure of media
has a strong influence was criticized heavily by other scholars who
recognize complicated human learning processes and the influence of other
factors such as direct interactions with members of different ethnic
groups. In that aspect, Social Cognitive Learning theory gives a direction
of how and when individuals internalize what they see or watch to shape
their stereotypes. However, it is also possible that individuals use media
to reinforce their own exiting views though choices and omissions of
certain programs, as the Uses and Gratification Model might suggest.
It is important how individuals' exposure to some existing genres of
television programs influences their shape of stereotypes. However,
understanding how individuals shape different stereotypes of different
ethic groups is a multifaceted process in that one single approach should
not be considered as the sole factor. Carefully designed scientific
inquires should continue to investigate how different factors interact in
shaping individuals' perceptions toward ethic groups and what roles media
play in the process.
REFERENCES
Ashmore, R. D. & Del Boca, F. K. (1981). Conceptual Approaches to
Stereotypes and Stereotyping. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive
Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior (pp. 1-35)
Bandura, A. (1994). Social Cognitive Theory of Mass Communication. In J.
Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research
(pp. 61-90)
Berry, G. L. & Mitchell-Kernan, C. (1982). Introduction. In G. L. Berry &
C. Mitchell-Kernan (Eds.), Television and the Socialization of the Minority
Child (pp. 1-11) New York: Academic Press
Buss, D. M. (1996). Social Adaptation and Five Major Factors of
Personality. In J.S. Wiggins (Ed.), The Five Factor Model of Personality:
Theoretical Perspectives (pp. 180-207). New York: Guilford Press
Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1996). Toward a New Generation of Theories:
Theoretical Contexts for the Five-Factor Model. In J.S. Wiggins (Ed.), The
Five Factor Model of Personality: Theoretical Perspectives. New York:
Guilford Press
Dates, J. L. & Barlow, W. (1990). A war of images. In J. Dates and W.
Barlow (Eds.), Split Image: African Americans in the mass media (pp. 1-25).
Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press
Dates, J. L. & Barlow, W. (1990). Conclusion: Split Images and Double
Binds. In J. Dates and W. Barlow (Eds.), Split Image: African Americans in
the mass media (pp. 455-459). Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press
Digman, J. M. (1996). The Curious History of the Five-Factor Model. In
J. S. Wiggins (Ed.), The Five-Factor Model of Personality: Theoretical
Perspectives (pp. 1-20). New York: Guilford Press
Fisher, C. (1994) Demographic Trends: Marketers Straddle Asia-America
Curtain. Advertising Age, 65, S-2, S-18, S-19
Fujioka, Y. (1999). Television portrayals and African-American
stereotypes: Examination of television effects when direct contact is
lacking. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 76 (1), 52-75
Gandy, O. H., Jr. (2001). Racial Identity, Media Use, and the Social
Construction of Risk among African Americans. Journal of Black Studies,
31, 600-618
Gerbner, G. (1998). Cultivation Analysis: An Overview. Mass Communication
and Society, 175-194
Gilens, M. (1996) Race and Poverty in America: Public Misperceptions and
the American News Media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60, 515-541
Goldberg, L.R. (1992). The Development of markers for the Big Five Factor
Structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 29-42
Goldberg, L.R. & Kilkowski, J. (1985). The Prediction of Semantic
Consistency in Self Descriptions: Characteristics of Persons and Terms that
affect Consistency of Responses to Synonym and Antonym Pairs. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 82-98
Graves, S. B. (1999). Television and Prejudice Reduction: When does
Television as a Vicarious Experience Make a Difference? Journal of Social
Issues, 55(4), 707-725
Hamilton, D. L. (1981). Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior: Some
Thoughts on the Cognitive Approach. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive
Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior (pp. 1-35)
Hamilton, D. L. & Trolier, T. K. (1986). Stereotypes and Stereotyping: An
Overview of the Cognitive Approach. In J.F. Dovidio and S.K. Gaertner
(Eds.), Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism (pp. 127-63). Orlando:
Academic Press
Hawkins, R.P. & Pingree, S. (1982). Television's Influence on Social
Reality. In D. Pearl, L. Bouthilet, & J. Lazar (Eds.) Television and
Behavior: Ten Years of Scientific Progress and Implications for the
Eighties, 2, 224-247
HRZone (2002). Universal Predictors of Employee Success: Five Factor
Personality Model. Retrieved October 21, 2002 from
http://www.hrzone.com/articles/five_personality.html
Kenny, D. A. (2002). Acquaintance and Personality. Retrieved January 13,
2003 from http://users.rcn.com/dakenny/acqpp.htm
Leifer, A. D., Gordon, N. J. & Graves, S. B. (1974). Children's
Television: More than Mere Entertainment. Harvard Educational Review,
44(2), 213-245
McAneny, L. (1993). The Gallup Poll on Crime: Racial Overtones Evident in
Americans' Attitudes about Crime. Gallup Opinion Poll Monthly, Dec. 1993,
37-42
Mendez-Morse, S. (2000). Claiming Forgotten Leadership. Urban Education,
35, 584-596
Niemann, Y. F., Jennings, L., Rozelle, R. M., Baxter, J. C., & Sullivan, E.
(1994). Use of Free Response and Cluster Analysis to Determine Stereotypes
of Eight Groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 379-90
Rubin, A. M. (1994). Media Uses and Effects: A Uses-and-Gratifications
Perspective. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media Effects: Advances in
Theory and Research (pp. 417-436). Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates
Smith, T. (May 1991). Ethnic Images in the United States. The Polling
Report, 7, 1-5
Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-Markers: A Brief Version of Goldberg's Unipolar
Big Five Markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 506-516
Shafer, A. B. (1999). Brief Bipolar Markers for the Five Factor Model of
Personality. Psychological Reports, 84, 1173-1179
Tan, A., Fujioka, Y., & Lucht, N. (1997). Native American Stereotypes, TV
Portrayals, and Personal Contact. Journalism and Mass Communication
Quarterly, 74, 265-284
Taylor, C. R. & Stern, B. B. (1997). Asian-Americans: Television
Advertising and the 'Model Minority' Stereotype. The Journal of
Advertising, 26, 47-61
United States Commission for the study of Civil Rights (1977). Window
Dressing on the Set: Women and minorities in television.
[1] Some respondents gave only the median answer.
[2] For all tables; AF = African American, AS = Asian, CA = Caucasian, LH
= Latino/ Hispanic, ME = Middle Eastern, NA = Native American, AG =
agreeableness, NE = neuroticism, CON = conscientiousness, OPEN = openness,
and EX = extroversion.
|
