Parasocial interactions and relationships

Psychology of Entertainment

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 291-314

  Klimmt, Christoph ^a   Hartmann, Tilo ^a   Schramm, Holger ^b  

^a University of Music and Drama   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85079821316     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (94)

1. Ashe, D. D., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2001). Shyness, loneliness, and attitude toward celebrities. Current Research in Social Psychology, 6, 124-133.
2. Auter, P. J. (1992). TV that talks back: An experimental validation of a parasocial interaction scale. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 36, 173-181.
3. Auter, P. J., & Palmgreen, P. (2000). Development and validation of a parasocial interaction measure: The audiencepersona interaction scale. Communication Research Reports, 17, 79-89.
4. Babrow, A. S., O'Keefe, B. J., Swanson, D. L., Meyers, R. A. & Murphy, M. A. (1988). Person perception and children's impression of television and real peers. Communication Research, 15, 680-698.
5. Baldwin, M. W. (1992): Relational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461-484.
6. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology, 3, 265-299.
7. Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., & Petersen, A. (Eds.). (2002). Virtuelle Realitäten [Virtual realities]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
8. Boon, S. D., & Lomore, C. D. (2001). Admirer-celebrity relationships among young adults: Explaining perceptions of celebrity influences on identity. Human Communication Research, 27, 432-465.
9. Bosshart, L. & Macconi, I. (1998). Defining Entertainment. Communication Research Trends, 18 (3), 3-6.
10. Brewer, M. B. (1988): A dual process model of impression formation. In T. Srull & R.Wyer (Eds.), Advances in social cognition Vol.(1,1-36)pp. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
11. Bryant, J. (2004). Critical communication challenges for the new century. Journal of Communication, 54, 389-401.
12. Byrne, A., Whitehead, M., & Breen, S. (2003). The naked truth on celebrity endorsement. British Food Journal, 105, 288-296.
13. Caughey, J. L. (1984). Imaginery social worlds: A cultural approach. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
14. Caughey, J. L. (1986). Social relations with media figures. In G. Gumpert & R. Cathcart (Eds.), Inter/Media. Interpersonal communication in a media world. New York: Oxford University Press.
15. Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 366-375.
16. Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication & Society, 4, 245-264.
17. Cohen, J. (2003). Parasocial breakups: Measuring individual differences in responses to the dissolution of parasocial relationships. Mass Communication and Society, 6, 191-202.
18. Cohen, J. (2004). Parasocial break-up from favourite television characters: The role of attachment styles and relationship intensity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 187-202.
19. Cole, T., & Leets, L. (1999). Attachment styles and intimate television viewing: Insecurely forming relationships in a parasocial way. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 495-511.
20. Conway, J. C., & Rubin, A. M. (1991). Psychological predictors of television viewing motivation. Communication Research, 18, 443-463.
21. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
22. Dohle, M., Klimmt, C., & Schramm, H. (2004, May). Rationality in media selection processes: Analyzing the match between motivations, expectations, and ex-post evaluations. Presentation to the 54th conference of the International Communication Association (ICA), May 27-31, 2004, New Orleans.
23. Ellis, G. J., Streeter, S. K., & Engelbrecht, J. D. (1983). Television characters as significant others and the process of vicarious role taking. Journal Of Family Issues, 4, 367-384.
24. Fabian, T. (1993). Fernsehen und Einsamkeit im Alter. Eine empirische Untersuchung zu parasozialer Interaktion [Television and Loneliness in elder people. An empirical investigation of parasocial interactions]. Münster: LIT.
25. Festinger, L. (1954): A theory of social comparison process. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
26. Fiske, S. T., Lin, M., & Neuberg, S. L. (1999). The continuum model. Ten years later. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 231-254). New York: Guilford Press.
27. Flora, C. (2004). Seeing by starlight. Psychology Today, 37 (4), 36-41.
28. Fritchie, L. L., & Johnson, K. K. (2003). Personal selling approaches used in television shopping. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 7, 249-258.
29. Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction:Areviewof the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4, 279-305.
30. Giles, D. C., & Maltby, J. (2004). The role of media figures in adolescent development: Relations between autonomy, attachment, and interest in celebrities. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 813-822.
31. Gleich, U. (1997). Parasoziale Interaktionen und Beziehungen von Fernsehzuschauern mit Personen auf dem Bildschirm: ein theoretischer und empirischer Beitrag zum Konzept des aktiven Rezipienten. [Parasocial Interactions and relationships of television viewers] Landau: Verlag Empirische Pädagogik.
32. Gleich, U. (1999). Parasoziale Bindungen zu Politikern? In P.Winterhoff-Spurk & M. Jäckel (Eds.), Politische Eliten in der Mediengesellschaft [Political elites in media society] pp.(151-168). München: R. Fischer.
33. Grant, A. E., Guthrie, K. K., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1991). Television shopping. A media system dependency perspective. Communication Research, 18, 773-798.
34. Groeben, N., & Vorderer, P. (1988). Leserpsychologie: Lesemotivation-Lektürewirkung. [The psychology of readers: Reading motivation-effects of reading]. Münster: Aschendorff.
35. Hartmann, T., Klimmt, C., & Vorderer, P. (2001). Avatare: Parasoziale Beziehungen zu virtuellen Akteuren [Avatars: Parasocial relationships with virtual actors]. Medien-und Kommunikationswissenschaft, 49, 350-368.
36. Hartmann, T., Schramm, H., & Klimmt, C. (2004 a). Vorbereitende Überlegungen zur theoretischen Modellierung parasozialer Interaktionen im Prozess der Medienrezeption. [Preliminary considerations on modelling parasocial interaction in the process of media consumption]. Retrieved 01/10/2004 from http://www.ijk.hmt-hannover .de/psi/.
37. Hartmann, T., Schramm, H., & Klimmt, C. (2004 b). Personenorientierte Medienrezeption: Ein Zwei-Ebenen-Modell parasozialer Interaktionen [Person-oriented media reception: A two-level model of parasocial interactions]. Publizistik, 49(1), 25-47.
38. Henning, B., & Vorderer, P. (2001). Psychological escapism: Predicting the amount of television viewing by need for cognition. Journal of Communication, 51, 100-120.
39. Hoerner, J. (1999). Scaling the web. A parasocial interaction scale for world wide web sites. In D.W. Schumann & E.Thorson (Eds.), Advertising and the world wide web (pp. 135147). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
40. Hoffner, C. (1996). Children's wishful identification and parasocial interaction with favorite television characters. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 40, 389-402.
41. Horton, D.,&Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observation on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215-229.
42. Houlberg, R. (1984). Local television news audience and the para-social interaction. Journal of Broadcasting, 28, 423-429.
43. Kanning, U. P. (1999): Die Psychologie der Personenbeurteilung [The psychology of person judgments]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
44. Katz, E., & Foulkes, D. (1962). On the use of mass media for escape: Clarification of a concept. Public Opinion Quarterly, 26, 377-388.
45. Klimmt, C. (2003). Dimensions and determinants of the enjoyment of playing digital games: A three-level model. In M. Copier & J. Raessens (Ed.), Level Up: Digital Games Research Conference (pp. 246-257). Utrecht: Faculty of Arts, Utrecht University.
46. Konijn, E. A., & Hoorn, J. F. (2005). Some like it bad: Testing a model for perceiving and experiencing fictional characters. Media Psychology, 7 (2), 107-144.
47. Krotz, F. (1996). Parasoziale Interaktion und Identität im elektronisch mediatisierten Kommunikationsraum. In P.Vorderer (Eds.): Fernsehen als "Beziehungskiste". Parasoziale Beziehungen und Interaktionen mit TV-Personen [TV as relationship machine: Parasocial relationships and interactions with TV personae] (pp. 73-90). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
48. Lee, K. M. (2004). Presence, explicated. Communication Theory, 14 (1), 27-50.
49. Levy, M. R. (1979). Watching TV news as parasocial interaction. Journal of Broadcasting, 27, 68-80.
50. Levy, M. R.(1979). Watching TV news as para-social interaction. Journal of Broadcasting, 27, 68-80.
51. Maltby, J., Houran, J., Lange, R., Ashe, D., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2002). Thou shalt worship no other gods-unless they are celebrities: The relationship between celebrity worship and religious orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1157-1172.
52. Mares, M. L., & Cantor, J. (1992). Elderly viewers' responses to televised portrayals of old age: Empathy and mood management vs. social comparison. Communication Research, 19, 459-478.
53. McCutcheon, L. E., Ashe, D. D., Houran, J., & Maltby, J. (2003). A cognitive profile of individuals who tend to worship celebrities. The Journal of Psychology, 137, 309-322.
54. Neumann, R., & Strack, F. (2000). "Mood contagion": The automatic transfer of mood between persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 211-223.
55. Nordlund, J. (1978). Media interaction. Communication Research, 5, 150-175.
56. Omdahl, B. L. (1995). Cognitive appraisal, emotion, and empathy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
57. 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.
58. Papa, M. J., Singhal, A., Law, S., Pant, S., Sood, S., Rogers, E. M., & Shefner-Rogers, C. L. (2000). Entertainmenteducation and social change: An analysis of parasocial interaction, social learning, collective efficacy, and paradoxical communication. Journal of Communication, 50, 31-55.
59. Perse, E. M.,&Rubin, A. M. (1988). Audience activity and satisfaction with favorite television soap opera. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 368-375.
60. Perse, E. M., & Rubin, R.B. (1989). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships. Communication Research, 16, 59-77.
61. Perse, M. P. (1990). Media involvement and local news effects. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 34, 17-36.
62. Raney, A. A. (2003). Disposition-based theories of enjoyment. In J. Bryant, D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen, & J. Cantor (Eds.), Communication and emotion: Essays in honor of Dolf Zillmann (pp. 61-84). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
63. Ritterfeld, U., Klimmt, C., Vorderer, P., & Steinhilper, L. K. (2005). The effects of a narrative audio tape on preschoolers'entertainment experience and attention. Media Psychology, 7, 47-72.
64. Rosengren, K. E., Wenner, L., & Palmgreen, P. (Eds). (1985). Media gratifications research: Current perspectives.Beverly Hills Sage.
65. Rubin, R. B., & McHugh, M. P. (1987). Development of parasocial interaction relationships. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 31, 279-292.
66. Rubin, A. M., & Perse, E. M. (1987). Audience activity and soap opera involvement: A uses and effects investigation. Human Communication Research, 14, 246-292.
67. Rubin, R. B., & Rubin, M. (2001). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships. In V. Manusov & J.H. Harvey (Eds.), Attribution, communication behavior, and close relationships (pp. 320-337). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
68. Rubin, A. M., & Step, M. M. (2000). Impact of motivation, attraction, and parasocial interaction on talk-radio listening. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 44, 635-654.
69. Rubin, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Powell, R.A. (1985). Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155-180.
70. Schramm, H., Hartmann, T. & Klimmt, C. (2002). Desiderata und Perspektiven der Forschung über parasoziale Interaktionen und Beziehungen zu Medienfiguren [Desiderata and perspectives of research on parasocial interactions and relationships with media figures]. Publizistik, 47, 436-459.
71. Schramm, H., Hartmann, T., & Klimmt, C. (2004). Parasoziale Interaktionen und Beziehungen mit Medienfiguren in interaktiven und konvergierenden Medienumgebungen. Empirische Befunde und theoretische Überlegungen. In U. Hasebrink, L. Mikos, & E. Prommer (Eds.), Mediennutzung in konvergierenden Medienumgebungen [Media usage in convergent media environments] München: Fischer.pp.(299-320)
72. Shapiro, M. A. (1994). Think-aloud and thought-list procedures in investigative mental processes. In A. Lang (Ed.), Measuring psychological responses to media (pp. 1-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
73. Slater, M., Henry, K. L., Swaim, R. C. & Anderson, L. L. (2003). Violent media content and aggressiveness in adolescents: A downward spiral model. Communication Research, 30 (6), 713-736.
74. Stuke, D., Hartmann, T., & Daschmann, G. (2005, May). Parasocial Relationships with Drivers Affect Suspense in Racing Sport Spectators. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association (ICA), May 26-30 2005, New York.
75. Teichert, W. (1973). "Fernsehen" als soziales Handeln II [Watching television as social action]. Rundfunk und Fernsehen, 21, 356-382.
76. Thallmair, A., & Rössler, P. (2001). Parasoziale Interaktion bei der Rezeption von Daily Talk shows. Eine Befragung von älteren Talk-Zuschauern. In C. Schneiderbauer, (Eds.), Daily Talk shows unter der Lupe [Looking at daily talk shows] (p. 179-208). München: Fischer.
77. Todorov, A., & Uleman, J. S. (2002). Spontaneous trait inferences are bound to actors' faces: Evidence from a false recognition paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1051-1065.
78. Trepte, S., Zapfe, S., & Sudhoff,W. (2001). Orientierung und Problembewältigung durch TV-Talk shows: Empirische Ergebnisse und Erklärungsansätze [Orientation and coping through TV-talk shows: Empirical findings and explanations]. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 13, 73-84.
79. Tsao, J. (1996). Compensatory media use: An exploration of two paradigms. Communication Studies, 47, 89-109.
80. Turner, J. R. (1993). Interpersonal and psychological predictors of parasocial interaction with different television performers. Communication Quarterly, 41, 443-453.
81. Visscher, A. & Vorderer, P. (1998). Parasoziale Beziehungen von Vielsehern. In H. Willems & M. Jurga (Eds.), Inszenierungsgesellschaft [The staged society] (pp. 453-469). Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
82. Vorderer, P. (1992). Fernsehen als Handlung: Fernsehfilmrezeption aus motivationspsychologischer Perspektive. [Watching TV as action: TV film consumption from the perspective of motivation]. Berlin: Edition Sigma.
83. Vorderer, P. (1996). Picard, Brinkmann, Derrick & Co. als Freunde der Zuschauer. In Vorderer, P. (Eds.), Fernsehen als "Beziehungskiste". Parasoziale Beziehungen und Interaktionen mit TV-Personen [TV as relationship machine: Parasocial relationships and interactions with TV personae ] (pp. 153-171). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
84. Vorderer, P. (1998). Unterhaltung durch Fernsehen: Welche Rolle spielen parasoziale Beziehungen zwischen Zuschauern und Fernsehakteuren?. In G. Roters, W. Klingler, & O. Zöllner (Eds.), Fernsehforschung in Deutschland. Themen, Akteure, Methoden [TV research in Germany. Issues, agents, methods] (pp. 689-707). Baden-Baden: Nomos.
85. Vorderer, P., & Knobloch, S. (1996). Parasoziale Beziehungen zu Serienfiguren: Ergänzung oder Ersatz? [Parasocial relationships to TV series characters: Completion or replacement?] Medienpsychologie, 8, 201-216.
86. Vorderer, P., & Knobloch, S. (2000). Conflict and suspense in drama. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeal (pp. 59-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
87. Vorderer, P., & Klimmt, C. & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication Theory, 4, 388-408.
88. Wallace, W. T., Seigerman, A., & Holbrook, M. B. (1993). The role of actors and actresses in the success of films: How much is a movie star worth? Journal of Cultural Economics, 17, 1-27.
89. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548-573.
90. Wulff, H. J. (1992), Fernsehkommunikation als parasoziale Interaktion: Notizen zu einer interaktionistischen Fernsehtheorie [TV communication as parasocial interaction: Notes on an interactional television theory]. Semiotische Berichte, 3, 279-295.
91. Wulff, H. J. (1996). Parasozialität und Fernsehkommunikation [Parasociality and TV communication]. Medienpsychologie, 8, 163-181.
92. Zillmann, D. (1988). Mood management through communication choices. American Behavioral Scientist, 31, 327-340.
93. Zillmann, D. (1996). The psychology of suspense in dramatic exposition. In P. Vorderer, H.Wulff, & M. Friedrichsen (Eds.), Suspense: Conceptualizations, theoretical analyses, and empirical explorations p.(199-231). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
94. Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (Eds.). (1985). Selective exposure to communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.