uses and gratfications theory-Review

8/7/2019 uses and gratfications theory-Review

1/24

Media Uses and Gratifications:A R eviewBy Bernard Nnamdi E m e n y e o n u

AbstractThe is su es of how the m edia affect people, and w ha t people dowith th e media have presented perennial and perplexing qu es-tions for comm unication scho lars. Some of the rese arch res ultsin these areas are more controversial than useful. Uses andgratification stu die s strad dle th e two dom ains of media effectsan d people's employm ent of th e media. The field of gratificationsresea rch holds great promise in the co ntinual search for com pre-hensive knowledge on how and why we use the media. D rawingfrom a wide rang e of local an d in terna tiona l literature , thi s u n itpresen ts cop ious evidence to show th a t gratifications researchh as un iversal application in m any contexts, including develop-ment communication.

Bernard Nnamdi Emenyeonu is a lecturer at the Department of MassCommunication University of Nigeria, Nsukka.90


2/24

Util i te et Satifaction Threes desMedias: RevuePar Bernard Nnam di Em enyeonu

R6sum6Les problem es de savoir l'effet qu 'on t les media su r les gens et ceque les gens font des media ont toujours et de facon em barrassan terete nu l 'attention des specialistes de la com munication. Certainsresultats de recherche dans ces domaines sont plus objet depolem iques qu'utiles. Des usag es et des etud es d ev alua tiontouch en t les deux do m aines a savoir l'effet des med ia et l'emploide s medias pa r le public. Le dom aine de la recherche / evaluationest tres promettant dans la recherche permanente pour savoira fond com ment et pourquoi n ou s utilisons les m edia. A pa rtird'un large eventail de docu m ents p rod uits au x niveaux local etinterna tional, cet article presente suffisamment de preu ves quimontrent que la recherche / evaluation. Peut etre appliqueeuniversellement dans beaucoup de situations, y compris encommunication au service du developpement.

Bernard Nnamdi Emenyeonu est Professeur au Departement de Com-munication des Masses, Universite du Nigeria, Nsukka.91


3/24

IntroductionFollowing widespread disillusionment and disagreement overthe primordial communication paradigms which, for the mostpart, probed what the com munication media did to people, andconc lusions th at the people were a m ass of monolithic, passiveand gullible receptacles of any communication cue that cametheir way, the limited effects model emerged as a more accept-able explanation of communication effects, influence andbehaviour. As a sh arp depa rture from th e past, one of the newmodels that were to emerge under the limited effects schoolproffered a new profile of th e receiver as a n active an d discerningm em ber of th e audience who selectively resorted to com m unica-tion s and media which are most likely to fulfill h is /h e r com mu-nication ne ed s (Lometti, Reeves an d Bybee, 1979).

The m as s m edia, especially in an era of a rapid rate of mediasaturation, cannot afford to be homogeneous in structure andquality of contents of programmes of each medium as Health(1968) noted, are m ost likely to give it a un ique personality. Dueto the se distinguishing charac teristics, the aud ience is providedwith an opportunity to m ake a wide range of m edia selections.Such choices could be between one newspaper and another,between a gossip magazine an d a n elite new s magazine, betweentwo or more radio stations, between radio and television, andam ong various television sta tion s in a locality or among va riou scontents in a medium.This approach to the study of the m edia behaviour of individualswhich posits that people bend the media to their needs morereadily than the media overpower them, (Katz, Gurevitch andHaas, 1973) and which is known as the Uses and GratificationResearch is the subject explored in this paper. The aim is topresen t a th orough review of th e body of literature available inuses and gratifications research beginning from the earliestresearch efforts to the present day approaches with a view to

9 2


4/24

highlighting th e methodological evolutions in this area of com-munication theory formation.A ntecedents in the Evolut ion of the Uses and GratificationModel of Communica t ion ResearchStudies wh ich can be incontrovertibly referred to a s the forerun-ners of the uses and gratifications research were largely func-tionalist and psychological in content and devoid of any inten-tion to measure media or communication gratifications. Thefunctionalist studies were, for the most part, aimed at merelyeliciting media functions from respondents through the use ofopen-ended questionnaires. Herzog (1941), for example, re-quested a sample of television viewers to list the benefits theyderived from watching soap operas while Suchman (1942)investigated h is resp on de nts' motives for developing interest inseriou s m usic p rogram m es on radio. In their own study , Wolfean d Fiske (1949) focused on children an d why they ha d a n avidapp etite for comics. Yet un der th e functionalist app roach,Berelson (1949) studied th e functions of new spaper reading . Ineach of these enquiries , a list of roles played by certa in specificcon tents or media (as m entioned by respondents) w as recorded.The modal repo nses a t th at time included obtaining informationor advice for daily living, providing a framework for one's day,preparing oneself for th e dem an ds of upward m obility, an d beingreassured about the dignity and usefulness of one's role (Katz,Blumler and Gurevitch,1974).

From the psychological front came studies such as those ofFrom m (1941) which cam e ou t with th e psychological functionsof "cat and m ouse" movies, an d W arner an d Henry (1948) whoreported the status-giving functions of soap operas. The morecomplex of these psychological stu die s dwelt on a n investigationbetween m edia use an d psychological or social attr ibu tes su chas social st a tu s, social integration or isolation and psychologicaldisposition. For example, Rileys (1951) showed that childrenwho were well integrated w ith their peers used adv entu re stories

93


5/24

differently from their m ates who were socially isolated . Also onthis plane, Friedson (1953) and Johnstone (1961) in theirseparate studies reported that relative force of attachment topar ents an d peers could influence differential pat te rn s of m ediapreferences. In some other resea rches wh ich were carried o ut atdifferent times but with similar objectives, Riaccoby (1954),Schram m , Lyle an d Parker (1961) an d Himmelweit, Oppenheimand Vince (1958) investigated the level of association betweenchild acceptance (at home and school) and patterns of mediaexposure. Furthermore, Horton and Wohl (1956) tried to de-term ine th e para-social functions of the media for isolated peoplewhile Katz an d Lazersfeld (1955) suggested th a t opinion lead ershad great attentiveness to the media, largely for purposes offulfilling th e ex pectation s of the ir followers' va lue or ien tatio ns .

Of all these antecedents to the real Uses and Gratificationsstudies, Atkins (1973) seem s to have come m ost closely to te rm swith the functionalist perspective of communication behaviourwhen he proposed the "Instrumental Utilities and InformationSeeking" model. In it he deposed th a t "an individual will selecta media message when the perceived reward value is greaterth an th e efforts expended in gaining it".A common denominator of these early research efforts wasth a t they suggested tha t people with different value orien tationswere likely to us e th e m edia differently. T hus, tho ug h they werenot elementally designed to measure gratifications, and werefraught with serious methodological constraints (as will beexamined later), these stu die s were enormously inspirational tothe m odern-day enq uirers of media use s and gratifications.Uses and Gratification Studies Today: A Compendium ofMethodological InnovationsThe floodgate to a flurry of deliberate em pirical enquiries on theuse s an d gratifications paradigm w as opened by the pioneeringworks of Elihu Katz, Ja y B lumler and Michael Gurevitch in theearly 1970s (Katz, 1979). Ever since the n, tha t flurry h as spread

94


6/24

apace to vario us p ar ts of the world.A broad overview of the stud ies reveals a pred om inan t con-centration in the areas of media use or functions as well asprogramme choice. Some other studies have investigated rela-tionships such as those existing between programme type ormedium and uses, between specific needs and extent of grati-fication, as well as between demographic and psychographicvariables on one hand, and viewing or reading habits, on theother hand.Apparently seeking new route s to media gratifications research,som e resea rch ers have evolved the novel methodological designwhereby gratifications soug ht by individuals are correlated w ithgratifications they obtained while others have taken the "dep-rivation approach" by which they aim at indirectly measuringgratifications through deprivations suffered in the absence ofthe relevant media or co nten ts. In addition to all the above, the reare studies on factors intervening in individual programmeselection.The typology of uses and gratifications studies is not easilyexh austible. For the purpose of this paper, a n attem pt will bem ad e to reflect m ost of the identified typologies in the review t h a tnow follows, if only as a n insight into th e vas t an d fecund fieldof gratifications research.Media Usage or Function and Content ChoiceThe curiousity over why people patronize the mass media orw ha t benefits they seek from m edia us e ha s generated enorm ou sempirical activism amo ng com m unication resea rch ers.Way ba ck in the 1940s, Reader (1941) undertoo k a survey ofsubscribers of two US rural magazines - The Farm ScienceReporter and Iowa Farm Economist - in which 7 0 per cen t of hisrespondents indicated their preference for illustrated articles,th u s establishing th e p opularity of pictures on pu blications. Asimilar finding emerged from Swanson's (1955) study of USdailies reade rs, u sing th e co nten ts of 130 US dailies. He grouped

95


7/24

all newspaper contents under two broad classes of form -w hethe r the content was a photograph, a cartoon, a feature, anadvert etc. - an d subject m atte r topics su ch a s hea lth, crime,science etc. He found th a t relative to form, cartoon s and p ho to-graphs were most read while literary materials, general newsand non-news information were the least read. Under subjectmatter, it was found that the following topics were read: war,defence, fire disasters, human interest, weather, individuals,major crimes, social significance, consumer information andscientific inform ation, in th a t order of preference. The least readsubjects were finance, agriculture, country correspondence,religion/church/morals, minor crimes, governments, sports,fine art/music/literature, social relation and taxes.

Berelson (1954) had also identified the following as specificreas on s why people read new spapers:- information an d in terpre tation, especially in public affairs,- practical aid to living- escape (through comics and human interest materials)- general vicarious feelings derived from sen sationa l s tories,scandals and gossip.In a similar investigation of the utilitarian underpinnings ofmedia use, Atkin (1972) reported that the conversational use-fulness in new s stories for purposes of interac tion with family,friends, co-workers and acquaintances was prominent amongother interperso nal factors tha t motivated m edia expo sure am ongm ost med ia use rs . The study done by W ang (1977) ha d similarre su lts . She exam ined factors responsible for differential selectionof newspaper contents among readers and discovered thatpeople tend to read the item s which they perceived to be of mostutility to them . Specifically, he r findings indicated th a t hospitalreports, obituaries, local news and grocery advertisements, inthat order, were perceived by the respondents she studied to

have the g reatest utility. National and in ternation al new s itemsread were those the reade r related to himself, his relations or hislocality. Feature articles were read for information and enter-tainment .9 6


8/24

Beside the gratifications so far identified in the above stu dies ,people patronize th e m as s m edia for guidance. Th is w as dem on-strated in a study of the input of information to economicdevelopment am ong a sam ple of Columbia farmers (Grunig, 1960).This study suggested that information-seeking among the re-spon de nts was associated with problem-solving, decision-makingand good management.Adopting a new methodological conceptualisation in thede term ination of functions of m edia use , Jeffers (1975) devidedth e goals of m edia behaviour into three, n am ely:a) M edia-seeking goal - the situation in which th e individualis merely attracted to the media for th e m edia's own sake w ithou tregard to content, ne ed s or any other rea son.b) Content-seeking goal - media behaviour influenced byspecific contents.c) Non-seeking - where the individual makes no deliberateattempt towards media consumption. (What he gets is thrust

upon him by relations and associates in daily interactions).Two specific re su lts em erged from Jeffer's an aly sis . Televisionviewing was found to be three-quarters content-seeking whiletwo-thirds of newspaper reading was motivated by media-seeking (just for th e sak e of new spap er reading). Fu rthe rm ore ,a larger percentage of younger people were found to exposethem selves to the m as s m edia for media-seeking while middle-aged people tended toward mixed pa tte rn s of m edia-seeing an dcontent-seeking. The elderly people tended most consistentlytoward content-seeking.Another research which involved a similar methodologicalpatt er n of isolation of m edia variables was carried ou t by R ubinand Pearse (1987). In a s tudy of "Audience Activity an d TV NewsGratification", they established two basic pat te rn s of m edia use ,namely:a) Ritualized/No n-serious u se s - m edia us e out of m ere hab itfor pu rpos es su ch as relaxation, time-filling an d p ass- tim e. Th is,according to their findings, was common among children andsocially apathetic adults.

97


9/24

b) In stru m en tal/s eri ou s u se - intentional, selective and pu r-posive use of th e media for specific goals su ch as excitem ent o rentertaining information.Perh ap s the m ost com prehensive list of motives for med ia u seamong people was derived from Blumler and McQuail's (1968)stud y. They reported th a t media use is motivated by some or allof th e following gratifications: surveillance, guidance, anticipatedcommunication, excitement, reinforcement and so on. Theap pa ren t lapse in suc h a listing is th at th e dom inant gratificationis no t conclusively determ ined.As if taking u p the challenge to plug th at hole, Becker (1978)sought to determine which gratifications were rated highest orm ost salient among media user s. Such gratifications as m entionedby th e respo nd en ts he studied were surveillance and guidan ce.O ther grat if icat ions l ike reinforcem ent, e xcitem ent a n dcommunicatory utility received less rating.The investigation of interaction between personal needs andmedia use emerged as a more complex method of generatingreliable data on media use or functions. The novelty in thisdesign w as to determine no t ju s t w ha t gratifications motivatedmedia use but to trace which media were used to obtainsatisfaction for which needs by what group of people. Theproponents of this approach, Wilhoit and de Bock (1980) un-dertook a survey of 786 American and 413 Dutch residents,using well-structured questionnaires aimed at measuring the

saliences of va rious need s, the mo st preferred m edium for eachneed, frequency of media use to gratify needs and levels ofsatisfaction obtained from the mass media.They found t h at th e urge to keep tab s on issue s and th e needfor relaxation were the m ost salient for bo th American a nd D utchsam ples. Among the Du tch respo nden ts, these two need s wereclosely followed by the need to be entertained and the need tomonitor other people's opinions. In the American sample, theneed to have influence ranked second after the first two needs.Furthermore, television was found to be the most frequentlyused in search of gratification of four out of six needs in the

98


10/24

Dutch sample and four out of nine needs in the American. Interm s of the need to monitor other's opinions, the D utch reliedon television while the Americans chose both television andnew spapers . Conversely, Am ericans use d bo th new spapers a ndtelevision for the need to have influence while the Dutch usednewspapers only. Generally, television was found to be moresoug ht after for satisfaction of cognitive an d persona l iden tity inthe N etherlands th an in the United States.Larsen 's (1982 ) stu dy of media us e w as also designed afterWilhoit and de Bock's approach. In the study which dwelt onuniversity students, he reported that newspapers took a pre-em inent position a s a source of information to the s tu den ts onnational news; the phonograph was the primary medium forrelaxation and enjoyment while television ranked highest as asource of information on internationa l news and a s a m edium forexcitement, entertainment, companionship and escape.The Media Deprivations ApproachUses and gratifications re search which used media deprivationfora to explore its implications for functionality and mediadependence seems to have been triggered by Berelson's (1949)stud y of w ha t New Yorkers m issed w hen their favourite new spa-pe rs were no t on the new sstand s. Newspapers, according to hisdiscovery, served more diversionary purposes than cognitiveones. This conclusion was based on th e finding th at the re spo n-dents could not point fingers to specific content which theym issed . They could only explain how disoriented they were d ueto the absence of the favoured papers. Other works whosemethodology followed the deprivation approach were done byKimball, 1959; Tan, 1977; de Bock, 1980; and Cohen, 19 81 , an dW indahl, Hojerback and Hedinsson (1986). Seizing the opportu-nity offered by striking media workers in Sweden, the triostudie d th e degree of dependence on and affinity for television ofadolescents in the city of Vaxjo. About 62 per cent of theirresp on dents indicated they were deprived by the strike.

99


11/24

D e m o c r a t i c / P s y c h o g r a p h i cProgramme Choice Factors and Patterns of

The investigation of patterns of programme choice by viewersbased on certain factors constitutes another area of profoundresearch interest in the entire uses and gratifications studies.The mediating factors include demographic and psychog raphicvariables, availability of viewers for pro gram m es they prefer, th eviewer's environment and the scheduling patterns of televisionstations.Of all these, there have emerged two dom inant perspectiveson programme choice. The one is premised on the uses andgratifications approach - the assumption that "programmechoice is a rational action m otivated by expectancy of gratification"(Ogunmodede, 1988). In other words, programme selectionwould be influenced by programme con tents which be st satisfyspecific needs. The other dwells on models of choice in which

individual choice is influenced by available program me conten t.Following loud protests over the lack of an empirically es-tablished causal link between program me preference a nd choice,Webster and Wakshlagn (1982) diverted their own attention tothe province of factors intervening between individual prefer-ence an d final choice (in th e context of viewing program m es). Thetwo researchers analyzed the influence of group viewing onprogram me choice by identifying and isolating bo th solitary andgroup viewing and by examining the effect of each pattern onprogramme type loyalty. (Programme type loyalty entails atendency for viewers to either seek out or avoid programmes)they found th at g roup viewing alone did not ab ate program m etype loyalty. However, when hea ds of ho useho lds viewedprogram m es with a group whose composition varied, programm etype loyalty decreased . In a related study, Tereza Domzal an dJerom e Kernan (1983) soug ht to determ ine the im pac t of televi-sion audience segmentation according to need gratificationinstead of dem ographics on programm e choice. The as sum ptio nhere wa s th at program m e choice w as contingent on information

100


12/24

about what needs television fulfilled and what satisfaction itbro ug ht. They re-established th e existence of three classe s ofviewers already predicted by Glick an d Levy (1962). Th eseclasses are tho se who accomm odate it.Ea ch of thes e classes selected program m es differently tho ug hth e entire sample embodying all three classe s w as hom ogeneous.Contributing to the body of findings in this area, McDonald(1986) hypothesized that other household members would in-fluence the individual's choice of television program m es watchedby an individual. In the study, viewing pat te rn s a s well as factorspred icting television viewing were exam ined. Also exam inedwere factors such as extent of peer co-viewing and viewing-inertia. The an alys is showed th a t viewing w as m ore likely donewith people similar to one eg. m ate s or peers . The conclusion,therefore, w as th a t co-viewing may be a salient factor in viewingpattern or programme selection.Still on the psychographic perspective, some researchershave devoted efforts to the investigation of the influence of thelifestyle on viewing pa tte rns. Stud ies such as thos e done byEas tm an , 1979 and 1986 analyzed how the psychographic vari-able of light/heav y viewing affects w ha t is viewed or is affectedby already set patterns of viewing.Factors Affecting Individual Media Use or Content Selectio nResearch endeavours in this direction were inspired by earlierstud ies, especially in the 1930s, wh ich found n on -us e of mediaamong people of lower socio-economic status (Gallup, 1930;Nafzinger, 1930). This situation was explained to have arisenfrom the lack of resources and cognitive skills due to lowedu cation an d the lack of social con tacts an d leisure time on th epar t of th e low socio-economic people. Sch ram m and W hite(1949) confirmed the above result. In their analysis of factorsinfluencing newspaper readership, they reported that, in gen-eral readership had a positive association with education, agean d economic s ta tu s. Other stud ies by Katz et al. 1973, 1974;

101


13/24

Okpata, 1980, an d Burgoon 1980, all generated sim ilar findings.But Chaffe an d Choe (1981) disagreed w ith th e foregoing resu lts .They contended that the traditional structural factors havebecome inade qu ate explanations of new spaper reade rship, w asdeclining simultaneously with a remarkable rise in levels ofeducation and economic prosperity. Based on their analysis,they suggested thre e "dynamic" factors which e ither individuallyor co-jointly determined m edia u se and n on -u se. Th ese were:

a) Traditional structu ra l factors - those which arose from th eindividual's location within the social struc tur e and w hich weregenerally beyond his control, for example, income, age, andeducation.b) Transitiona l factors - those which arose from the individual'slife cycle changes such as marital status, parental status,residence etc. Those whose pa ttern of m edia use were no tinfluenced by structura l ch an ges (a) above m ight be affected bytransitional variables.c) Self-imposed factors - these were residing in the individual'spersonality, relating in particular to his interest or apa thy in th eservices offered by th e m ass m edia.The environmental factor a s a d eterm inant of m edia u se w as

introduced by Cobb (1986). She reported that environmentalfactors were the most influential in newspaper usage amongyoung persons. For adolescents, the following predictors ofnewspaper readership were listed: Perception of time to read the newpaper. Availability of new spap er in th e h om e. Usage of other media. Perception of tim e spen t by pare nts in new spape r read ing. Newspaper-related attitudes. D emographics (race, sex an d grades).Contrary to po pu lar findings in th is area , Jeffers' (1975 )

102


14/24

of functions of media behaviou r found am ong other thin gs th a teducation, age, sex an d m arital sta tu s did not app ear to be validindicato rs of individual media consum ption p at te rn s in severalm edia. Th is 'iconoclastic' finding conflicted directly with re su ltsof Lyness (1952) and Schramm and White (1949). The formerreported th a t attention given to the m as s media increased w ithage and that boys and girls showed a marked preference fordifferent subject m at ter s ac ross different m edia while th e la ttershowed that age strongly determined preference for differentmedia contents.Gratifications Sought Versus Gratifications ObtainedEmploying th e discrepancy m odel which ho lds tha t exposu re toa m edium is depen dent on the absolute discrepancy between th egratifications which the individual is seeking and the extent towhich he believes he is obtaining them, Palmgreen et al (1979)led the way in the "Gratifications Sought - Gratifications Ob-ta ined (G.S. - G.O) model of gratifications research . The first inth e series of G.S - G.O s tudie s wa s the stud y of exposu re to theKentucky Educational Television (KET). Listing eight gratifica-tions said to be of salience to most television viewers, theresearchers asked their subjects to assess the extent to whichKET ha d provided or satisfied tho se needs for them . Those whoha d not been viewing KET were asked to indicate the exten t towh ich they tho ug ht it would satisfy thos e need s. Both viewersan d non-viewers said they were getting less th a n they expectedfrom KET especially in terms of relaxation, forgetting of prob-lems, passing time and companionship. Thus, from this ap-proach, it w as concluded th at people do no t at all times get theam oun t of gratification they seek from television.

Taking a cue fron this study but inculcating some modifica-tion s in relation to type of program me, political com m unicationan d specific programm es, other measu rem en ts including thoseof th e p rop on en ts have yielded a n av alanche of findings in th e GS- G.O model. Su ch stud ies include Palmgreen an d R ayburn,1980; Palmgreen, Ray burn and W enner, 1981; McLeod, Bybee103


15/24

and D urall , 1982; Palmgreen and Rayburn, 1982,1983;W enner,1982; and Rayburn, Palmgreen and Acker, 1984.Local StudiesThe review presented so far reveals a preponderance of studiesdone abroad, the United States in particular. This h a s been donedeliberately as a m ea ns of isolating indigenous re sea rch effortswith a view to giving the m a special play which c an enable oneto as ses s how fertile o r fetid th e ar ea is .Osadolor et al (1984) investigated media use among urbanyouths in Nigeria. Generally, the youths preferred television tonewspaper or radio. In all the media, however, the contentsmostly cherished by the yo uth s were curr ent affairs, new s andpolitical debates.Another urban-based study of uses and gratifications wasdone by Nwuneli (1984) who so ught to probe media usage by theu rb an poor. A major finding of this survey w as th a t income an deduca tion were associated with media exposu re. In particu lar,film viewing and education had no association.In his own stud y, Olumuyiwa (1986) surveyed readership ofevening new spapers am ong reside nts of Lagos Sta te an d foundth at cartoo ns rated highest on a scale of 21 new s and featurei tems.Still on audience preference of media contents, Egbuonu(1986), using subject matter as criteria, reported that amongincome staff, (USS 09 and above) people on campus prefernewspaper matters dealing with government, politics and eco-nomics in that order. Science, medicine, law, technical andfinancial m arket reports were least preferred. In the sam e vein,Am adi (1986) stud ied m agazine preferences am ong studen ts ofth e University of Nigeria. The k inds of articles m os t enjoyed bythe s tu den ts were found to be news and in terpretation of tre nd sand events, repo rts on industry and comm erce, and suggestionson how to do thing s. Con trary to expectations, rom ancem agazines were not preferred to serious new s m agazines.Investigating us es and gratifications of th e prin t media seem s104


16/24

to have attracte d the fancy of m any local rese arch ers as c an b eseen from the foregoing. Enem uo (1988) added to th is area withhis analysis of economic news items and needs gratification ofnew spaper reader s. Like Berelson, he aske d th e question, W hatwould newspaper rea de rs m iss if all economic news co nte nts ofthe newspapers were expunged? Labour and employment at-tracted the highest readership by respo ndents and the re aso nsfor reading economic items were indicated in this order ofpreference: To know wha t is happening (surveillance), to be ab leto discuss with family and friends (communicatory utility), toknow w ha t to gain personally (personal utility), to feel th a t theeconomy is picking up (reinforcement).Nwanruo (1989) in her own study sought to determine theneeds reade rs expect to satisfy by perusing religious publications,using The Leader as an example. TheLeader, she discovered w aswidely read with a majority of the se readers indicating tha t theyenjoyed reading religious news content. This item was followedby news on government and politics. As to whethe r these n eed sare satisfied by the new spaper, Nwanruo concluded tha t the factth a t a majority of the reade rs expressed loyalty to the paper andalso indicated they would feel a loss any time they missed it,meant that The Leader satisfied those needs.Anazonwu (1989) also analyzed readers' attitudes to maga-zines in te rm s of wha t gratifications they seek from specie of theprin t media. Most significant in h is findings were the associa -tions between age, socio-economic status and gender withreadership of magazines in Nigeria.So far for the print media. Turning the search-light on theelectronic media, Amu-Nnadi et al (1986) analyzed the soapopera, "Mirror in the S un" and found t ha t a generality of Nigerianuniversity students derived satisfaction from the programmewith more of the females than the males rating it as highlyentertaining.In a more detailed study, Ogunmodede (1988) explored theviewing hab its of Nigerian ad ults. Nigerian adu lts , she discov-ered, p u t television to th e following use s: knowing w hat othersthink, entertainment, obtaining up-to-date information, relax-105


17/24

ation, fighting loneliness, pass ing time an d having influence inth a t order. The gratification manifestly obtained from televisionprimarily a s en terta inm en t medium . Most of them also activelyseek variety on their sets by frequently moving their dials toothe r statio ns w here they perceive their needs are be tter served.Finally, she found that a majority of her respondents had apositive attitude tow ards s tate television stations bu t a negativeone tow ard s NTA.The most recent stud y on us es a nd gratifications seem s to beOyinatumba's (1992) examination of gratifications sought byread ers of Shell Development Com pany ho us e jou rn al. Usingfive gratifications state m en ts, a simplified version of Becker's(1974) adaptation of the original Blunder and McQuail model,she found th at surveillance (to know w ha t is hap pen ing in thecompany) ranked highest among management and non-man-a g e m e n t staff, fo llowed by gu id an ce , r e in forc em en t ,com m unicatory utility and excitement in th at order.Some of the reso und ing weaknesses identifiable in use s an dgratifications studies are as follows:1) Most uses and gratifications studies were contented withmerely eliciting sta tem en ts abo ut m edia gratifications fromrespond ents, using un structu red instrum ents. No at-tem pt was m ade to explore the links between the gratifica-tions so detected and the psychological or sociologicalorigins of the need s satisfied. Added to th is is th e lapse th a t

there has been much investigation on the inter-relation-ships among the various media gratifications have notbeen valid enoug h to formulate theoretical sta tem en ts.2) In m os t stud ies , the gratifications associated w ith va riousmedia were merely inferred not explored.3) A majority of studies have simply listed catalogues ofgratifications without conclusively determining the domi-nant ones among the lot4) The fact that people are active rather than passive inconsum ption of m edia fare seem s to be und er-estim ated oreven totally ignored in most uses and gratifications de-signs. There are attempts to investigate, identify and106


18/24

explain the way in which persons use and interpret thecontent of messages and if these interpretations result inexpected gratifications.5) Still on the active audience, the notion of "activeness"presupposes utility (that mass communication has usesfor people), intentionality (that media consumption isdirected by prior motivation) and selectivity (that mediabeh aviour reflects prior inte res ts an d preferences). Thesethree m ilestones have not been fully explored in concert orseparately w ith a view to explaining the ir im plications forthe media in uses and gratifications studies.6) Related to the above, the qu estion of th e differential level ofmedia aud ience activity h a s no t been answ ered. In otherwords, it h a s no t been possible to say with precision whichm edium offers or ind uc es a high level of "audience active-ness" th an the others and in w hat contexts.7) A major co nceptua l weakness in us es an d gratificationsm easurem ents is tha t wh at consti tutes or are com ponentsof the uses and gratifications are largely shrouded inambivalence. Major concepts such as gratification, need,m edia u se , for example, are not clearly operationalized inmost studies.8) Moreover, the relationship between message content andneed satisfaction has not been cast in a testable format.These and other w eakne sses have attracted scathing criti-

cism s to use s an d gratifications research . Becker (1979)for example, dismissed u se s and gratifications res earch a sboth an unexamined methodology and atheoretical list ofneed s an d values because n o attem pt was m ade to identifythe gratification directly traceable to those needs in addi-tion to the fact th a t the u se s and gratifications stu die s lacka discernible theoritical framework. Another critic, Blum ler(1979) saw the theory as "an accounting system", whileSw anson (1979) described it a s a jum ble of nom enclatu rerandomly employed and which fails to pursue its basicprinciple to its logical conclusion.

107


19/24

Regardless of its methodological constraints and the ensuingcriticisms, u se s and gratifications research can no t be imm edi-ately consigned to the w asteb in. Even when it is fraught withimperfections, the theory has some practical relevance in bothmedia management and development communication, espe-cially in developing nations.Relative to media management, the theory facilitates com-pa risons am ong different m edia and types of con tent in aud iencerelated term s rather th an in technological, ideological, a estheticor othe elitist term s.Fu rtherm ore, in so far as th e theory simply aims a t explainingthe way in which individuals use communication among otherresources to satisfy their needs or to achieve their goals, usesand gratifications studies offer highly instructive lessons tom edia m anage rs an d information policy-m akers. Realising th a taudiences are active, these communication designers cannotb u t strive to give th e aud ience w ha t will be of benefit or utility toit. The need to do th is ha s been all the m ore acce ntua ted by th epresen t climate of sporadic p rivitisation of the m edia in devel-oping nations and the corresponding competition.More than ever before, the global community predicted byMarshall McLuhan several decades ago is fastly becoming areality in the p resent day. This is due largely to the preponderanceof new com m unication technologies. The satellite disc forexam ple, h a s invaded all crann ies of developing co un tries . Verysoon, th e foreign p rogram m es it carries will also invade ho m es,leaving our local stations and programmes a desolate endan-gered species. Throu gh uses and gratifications surveys, thisdisas ter can be averted. By having a firm grasp of the p ecu liarnee ds of read ers, listeners and viewers in their various locations,m ainly u rb an and rura l, local media can th en strive to providesuch needs.

In terms, of effective use of the media for developmentcommunication, uses and gratifications results are equallyrelevant. As Leuven (1981) h a s noted, a com parison of th evalues profiles of the target audience makes it possible to108


20/24

unde rs tand how different m essage categories appea r to special-ize in the enh anc em ent of certain values. This in turn , lead s toth e conside ration of th e relative suitability of different m edia fordifferent targ et audien ce. And th is offers a very essen tialstrategy for both development agents and development com-munication policy-makers.Finally, even if it is largely a listing of audience preference formedia, contents, needs felt, gratifications sought for, depriva-tion s suffered, use s and gratifications research, at least crea tedthe aw areness tha t how m essages and media are used consti-tu te s a n intervening variable in the process of effects. Th is is onelesson development comm unicato rs cannot ignore in the ir pro-fuse dissemination of development ideas through the massmedia.ReferencesAmadi, M.O (1979) "Magazine Preferences of UNN Students".Unpublished B.A project, U.N.N.Amu-Nnadi, C.N., Keshi, J.U., and Onwuanyi, C.E. (1986) "TheUses and Gratifications Analysis: A Study of the NTA SoapOpera, "Mirror in the Sun," Unpublished B.A Project, U.N.N.Anazonw u, V.O., (1989) "Uses and Gratifications: An Analysis ofReader's A ttitudes to Magazines in En ugu , Anam bra State",Unpub lished M.A Project, U.N.N.Atkins, C. (1972) "Anticipated Com m unication an d M ass MediaInformation-Seeking". Public Opinion Quarterly, 36: 188 -199.Becker, L.B. (1978) "Measurement of Gratifications", Communi-cation Research, 53:28 -33Blumler, J.G. and McQuail, D (1968) Television in Politics: ItsUses and Influence, London: Faber and Faber.Chaffe, S.H. and Choe, S.Y. (1981) "Newspaper Readership inLongitudinal Perspective: Beyond Structural Constraints",Journalism Quarterly, 58: 201-211.Cobb, C.J. (1986) "Patterns of Newspaper Readership Among

109


21/24

Teenagers", Com munication Research, 13: 299-32 6Cohen, B.C. (1963) The Press, the Public and Foreign Policy.Princeton: Princeton University Press.de Bock, H. (1980) "Gratification Frus trat ion du ring a Newspa-per S trike and a Television Blackout", Journalism Quarterly,27: 6 1 - 66 .E as tm an , S.T. (1979) "Uses of Television Viewing and Con sum erLifestyles: A Multivariate Analysis", Journal of Broadcasting,23: 491 - 500Eg bounu , R.U. (1986) "Newspaper Readership P atte rns Amongthe Elite University of Nigeria", Unpublished B.A Project,U.N.N.Enem uo , I.N., (1988) "Economic News Item s an d N eeds G ratifi-cations of Newspaper Readers", Unpublished M.A. Project,U.N.N.Friedson , E . (1953) "The Relation of the Social Situation Co ntac tto the Media in Mass Communication". Public Opinion Quar-terly, Vol. 17

Glick, I.O. and Levy, S.J (1962) Living with Television Chicago:Aldine Pu blishing Co.Grunig, J. (1969) "Information and Decision-making in Eco-nom ic Development:, Journalism Quarterly 46: 566-575.Health, R.B. (1968) Newspapers: The M ass Media, Bodley Head .Jackson-Beeck, M. and Sobal, J. (1980) "The Social World ofHeavy Viewers", Journal of Broadcasting, 24: 5-11.Jeffers, L. (1975) "Functions of Media Behaviour", Communica-tion Research, 2: 137 - 163.Jo hn sto ne, J.W. (1961) "Social Str uc ture and P atter ns of M assMedia Consumption". Ph D Dissertation, University of Chi-cago.Katz, E, G urevitch, M. an d H aas, H. (1973) "On the Use of M assMedia for Im portant Things", American SociologicalReview.Katz, E., Blummer, J.G. and Gurevitch, M. (1974) "Uses andGratifications Research", Public Opinion Quarterly, 23 : 389 -398.Larsen, H. (1982) "Pa tterns of Media Usage Related to Gratifica-

110


22/24


23/24

U.N.N.Palmgreen, P. and Rayburn, J.D. (1981) "Gratifications andExposure to Public Television: A Discrepancy Approach".Communication Research, 6:155-179Palm green, P., W enner, L. an d R ayburn J.D (1981) "GratificationDiscrepancies and News Programm e Choice" CommunicationResearch, 8: 451-156Riley, M.W. and Riley, J.W . (1951) "A Sociological Approach toCommunication Research", Public Opinion Q uarterly Vol. 15Reader, H. (1941) "Research Methodology Tests M agazine ReaderPreferences", Journalism Quarterly 18: 179-182.Rubin, A an d Pearse, E. (1987) "Audience Activity and TV NewsGratification", Com munication Research, 14: 58 .Schramm, W, Lyle, J. and Parker, E. (1961) Television in theLives of Our Children, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Suchman, E. (1942) "An Invitation to Music", Radio Research,New York: Duell, Sloan an d Pearce.Tan, A.S. (1977) "Why Television is Missed: Functional Analy-sis". Journal of Broadcasting, 21:371-380Tankard, J.W an d Harris, M.C. (1980) "A Discriminant Analysisof Television Viewers and Non-Viewers". Journal ofBroad-casting, 24: 399 - 409 .Tereza, D.J. and Kernan, J. (1983) 'Television Audience Seg-m en tat ion According to Need Gratification." Journal of Adver-tising Research , 23 : 37 - 49 .

W ang, G. (1977) "Information Utility as a Predictor of NewspaperReadership" Journalism Quarterly, 54: 791 - 794.W akshlag , J .J . and Webster, J.G . (1982) "The Imp act of GroupViewing on Patterns of TV. Programme Choice". Journal ofBroadcasting, 26: 445-455Wenner, L.A. (1982) "Gratifications Sought and Obtained inProgramme D ependency: A Stu dy of Network Evening NewsProgram and 60 minutes'" Com munication Research, 9: 539 -560.Wolfe, K.M. and Fiske , M. (1949) "Why Children Read Com ics",

112


24/24

Com munication Research, New York: Harper.Wilhoit, W. and De Bock, H. (1980) "Personal Needs and MediaUse in the N etherlands and the United States". Gazette, Vol.26Windahl, S. Hojerback, I. and Hedinson, E. (1980) "AdolescentsW ithout Television: A Study in Media Deprivation". Journal ofBroadcasting and Electronic Media, 30: 47 - 63 .

Documents

uses and gratfications theory-Review