Abstract
The present article discusses the problem of separating the motivation conceptempirically from other relevant concepts in research on mass media audiences.For about half a century, audience researchers use questionnaire items with adistinct format as measurements of motivations for media exposure. It isargued that these motivation items grammatically reflect the nature of themotivation concept as a theoretically intermediate variable between behaviourand its social or mental background, thus constituting the most plausibleindicators of the concept. However, it is also argued that these questionnaireitems are double-barrelled and that any measurement of motivations based onthe items can largely be considered an ambiguous mixture of behaviour and itssocial or mental origin. A study is presented that provides empirical support for this position.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arts, C., Hollander, E., Renckstorf, K. & Verschuren, P. (1990). Grootschalig onderzoek naar mediauitrusting, media-exposure en mediagebruik in Nederland 1989 [A survey on media equipment, media exposure and media use in the Netherlands 1989]. Nijmegen: ITS.
Babrow, A. S. (1988). Theory and method in research on audience motives. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 32: 471-487.
Babrow, A. S. & Swanson, D. L. (1988). Disentangling antecedents of audience exposure levels: extending expectancy-value analysis of gratifications sought from television news. Communication Monographs 55: 1-21.
Bantz, Ch. R. (1982). Exploring uses and gratifications. A comparison of reported uses of television and reported uses of favorite program type. Communication Research 9: 352-379.
Becker, L. B. (1979). Measurement of gratifications. Communication Research 6: 54-73.
Belson, W. A. (1981). The Design and Understanding of Survey Questions. Aldershot: Gower.
Blumler, J. G. & McQuail, D. (1968). Television in Politics: Its Uses and Influence. London: Faber & Faber.
Boomsma, A. (1996). De adequaatheid van covariantiestructuurmodellen: een overzicht van maten en indexen [The adequacy of covariance structure models: a survey of measures and indices]. Kwantitatieve Methoden 17: 7-52.
Browne, M. W. & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research 21: 230-258.
Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin 52: 281-302.
Greenberg, B. (1974). Gratifications of television viewing and their correlates for British children. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (eds). The Uses of Mass Communication. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Hendriks Vettehen, P. (1998). Conceptualisering en operationalisering van het begrip 'motief' in Uses & Gratifications onderzoek [Conceptualization and measurement of the motivation concept in Uses & Gratifications research]. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nijmegen, 1998). Nijmegen: ITS.
Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (1993). Lisrel 8: User's Reference Guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G. & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (eds). The Uses of Mass Communication. Beverly Hills: Sage.
McLeod, J. M. & Becker, L. B. (1974). Testing the validity of gratification measures through political effects analysis. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (eds). The Uses of Mass Communication. Beverly Hills: Sage.
McQuail, D. (1979). The Uses & Gratifications approach: past, troubles and future. Massacommunicatie 7: 73-89.
Messaris, P. (1977). Biases of self-reported functions and gratifications of media use. Et cetera: A Review of General Semantics 34, 316-329.
Oppenheim, A. N. (1966). Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement. New York: Basic books.
Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. A. & Rayburn, J. D. (1980). Relations between gratifications sought and obtained: a study of television news. Communication Research 7: 161-192.
Palmgreen, P. & Rayburn, J. D. (1982). Gratifications sought and media exposure. An expectancy value model. Communication Research 9, 561-580.
Palmgreen, P. & Rayburn, J. D. (1982). An expectancy value approach to media gratifications. In K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner & P. Palmgreen (eds). Media Gratifications Research. Current Perspectives. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. A. & Rosengren, K.E. (1985). Uses and gratifications research: the past ten years. In K.E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner & P. Palmgreen (eds). Media gratifications Research. Current Perspectives. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Payne, S. (1951). The Art of Asking Questions. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Perse, E. M. (1994). Uses of erotica and acceptance of rape myths. Communication Research 21: 488-515.
Roe, K. (1996). The Uses & Gratifications approach: a review of some methodological issues. Journal of Behavioral and Social Sciences 81-96.
Rosengren, K. E. (1974). Uses and gratifications: a paradigm outlined. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (eds). The Uses of Mass Communication. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Rubin, A. M. (1981). An examination of television viewing motivations. Communication Research 8, 141-165.
Rubin, A. M. (1983). Television uses and gratifications: the interactions of viewing patterns and motivations. Journal of Broadcasting 27: 37-51.
Rubin, R. B., Palmgreen, P. & Sypher, H. E. (1994). Communication Research Measures: A Sourcebook. New York: The Guilford Press.
Rubin, R. B., Perse, E. M. & Barbato, C. A. (1988). Conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication motives. Human Communication Research 14: 602-628.
Verschuren, P. J. M. (1991). Structurele modellen tussen theorie en praktijk. [Structural modeling between theory and praxis]. Utrecht: Het Spectrum.
Zeller, R. A. & Carmines, E. G. (1980). Measurement in the Social Sciences. Cambridge [etc.]: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hendriks Vettehen, P.G., Van Snippenburg, L.B. Measuring Motivations for Media Exposure: A Thesis. Quality & Quantity 36, 259–276 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016076505379
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016076505379